Earlier text: General ArticlesThe Ostrogoths and the Visigoths.
By A. T. Jones
"The scarcity of facts and the uncertainty of dates oppose our attempts to describe the circumstances of the first invasion of Italy by the arms of Alaric. His march, perhaps from Thessalonica through the warlike and hostile country of Pannonia, as far as the foot of the Julian Alps [A. D. 400-403]; his passage of those mountains, which were strongly guarded by troops and intrenchments; the siege of Aquileia, and the conquest of the provinces of Istria and Venetia, appear to have employed a considerable time. Unless his operations were extremely cautious and slow, the length of the interval would suggest a probable suspicion that the Gothic king retreated towards the banks of the Danube, and re-enforced his army with fresh swarms of barbarians before he again attempted to penetrate into the heart of Italy. Since the public and important events escape the diligence of the historian, he may amuse himself with contemplating for a moment the influence of the arms of Alaric on the fortunes of two obscure individuals, a presbyter of Aquileia and a husbandman of Verona. The learned Rufinus, who was summoned by his enemies to appear before a Roman synod, wisely preferred the dangers of a besieged city; and the barbarians, who furiously shook the walls of Aquileia, might save him from the cruel sentence of another heretic, who, at the request of the same bishops, was severely whipped, and condemned to perpetual exile on a desert island. "The old man, who had passed his simple and innocent life in the neighborhood of Verona, was a stranger to the quarrels both of kings and of bishops; his pleasures, his desires, his knowledge, were confined within the little circle of his paternal farm; and a staff supported his aged steps, on the same ground where he had sported in his infancy. Yet even this humble and rustic felicity (which Claudian describes with so much truth and feeling) was still exposed to the undistinguishing rage of war. His trees, his old contemporary trees, must blaze in the conflagration of the whole country; a detachment of Gothic cavalry might sweep away his cottage and his family, and the power of Alaric could destroy this happiness, which he was not able either to taste or to bestow. 'Fame,' says the poet, 'encircling with terror her gloomy wings, proclaimed the march of the barbarian army, and filled Italy with consternation;' the apprehensions of each individual were increased in just proportion to the measure of his fortune; and the most timid, who had already embarked their valuable effects, meditated their escape to the island of Sicily or the African coast. The public distress was aggravated by the fears and reproaches of superstition. Every hour produced some horrid tale of strange and portentous accidents; the pagans deplored the neglect of omens and the interruption of sacrifices; but the Christians still derived some comfort from the powerful intercession of the saints and martyrs. "The Emperor Honorius was distinguished above his subjects by the preeminence of fear as well as of rank. The pride and luxury in which he was educated, had not allowed him to suspect that there existed on the earth any power presumptuous enough to invade the repose of the successor of Augustus. The arts of flattery concealed the impending danger till Alaric approached the palace of Milan. But when the sound of war had awakened the young emperor, instead of flying to arms with the spirit, or even the rashness, of his age, he eagerly listened to those timid counselors who proposed to convey his sacred person and his faithful attendants to some secure and distant station in the provinces of Gaul [A. D. 403]. Stilicho alone had courage and authority to resist this disgraceful measure, which would have abandoned Rome and Italy to the barbarians; but as the troops of the palace had been lately detached to the Rhætian frontier, and as the resource of new levies was slow and precarious, the general of the West could only promise, that, if the court of Milan would maintain their ground during his absence, he would soon return with an army equal to the encounter of the Gothic king. "Without losing a moment (while each moment was so important to the public safety), Stilicho hastily embarked on the Larian Lake, ascended the mountains of ice and snow, amidst the severity of an Alpine winter, and suddenly repressed, by his unexpected presence, the enemy, who had disturbed the tranquillity of Rhætia. The barbarians, perhaps some tribes of the Alemanni, respected the firmness of a chief who still assumed the language of command, and the choice which he condescended to make, of a select number of their bravest youth, was considered as a mark of his esteem and favor. The cohorts who were delivered from the neighboring foe, diligently repaired to the Imperial standard; and Stilicho issued his orders to the most remote troops of the West, to advance, by rapid marches, to the defense of Honorius and of Italy. The fortresses of the Rhine were abandoned; and the safety of Gaul was protected only by the faith of the Germans and the ancient terror of the Roman name. Even the legion which had been stationed to guard the wall of Britain against the Caledonians of the North, was hastily recalled; and a numerous body of the cavalry of the Alani was persuaded to engage in the service of the emperor, who anxiously expected the return of his general. The prudence and vigor of Stilicho were conspicuous on this occasion, which revealed, at the same time, the weakness of the falling empire. The legions of Rome, which had long since languished in the gradual decay of discipline and courage, were exterminated by the Gothic and civil wars; and it was found impossible, without exhausting and exposing the provinces, to assemble an army for the defense of Italy. "When Stilicho seemed to abandon his sovereign in the unguarded palace of Milan, he had probably calculated the term of his absence, the distance of the enemy, and the obstacles that might retard their march. He principally depended on the rivers of Italy, the Adige, the Mincius, the Oglio, and the Addua, which, in the winter or spring, by the fall of rains or by the melting of snows, are commonly swelled into broad and impetuous torrents. But the season happened to be remarkably dry; and the Goths could traverse, without impediment, the wide and stony beds, whose center was faintly marked by the course of a shallow stream. The bridge and passage of the Addua were secured by a strong detachment of the Gothic army; and, as Alaric approached the walls, or rather the suburbs, of Milan, he enjoyed the proud satisfaction of seeing the emperor of the Romans fly before him. Honorius, accompanied by a feeble train of statesmen and eunuchs, hastily retreated towards the Alps, with a design of securing his person in the city of Arles, which had often been the royal residence of his predecessors. "But Honorius had scarcely passed the Po before he was overtaken by the speed of the Gothic cavalry; since the urgency of the danger compelled him to seek temporary shelter within the fortifications of Asta, a town of Liguria, or Piedmont, situate on the banks of Tanarus. The siege of an obscure place, which contained so rich a prize, and seemed incapable of a long resistance, was instantly formed, and indefatigably pressed, by the king of the Goths; and the bold declaration which the emperor might afterwards make that his breast had never been susceptible of fear, did not probably obtain much credit, even in his own court. In the last and almost hopeless extremity, after the barbarians had already proposed the indignity of a capitulation, the Imperial captive was suddenly relieved by the fame, the approach, and at length, the presence, of the hero, whom he had so long expected. At the head of a chosen and intrepid vanguard, Stilicho swam the stream of the Addua to gain the time which he must have lost in the attack of the bridge; the passage of the Po was an enterprise of much less hazard and difficulty; and the successful action, in which he cut his way through the Gothic camp under the walls of Asta, revived the hopes and vindicated the honor of Rome. "Instead of grasping the fruit of his victory, the barbarian was gradually invested on every side by the troops of the West, who successively issued through all the passes of the Alps; his quarters were straitened; his convoys were intercepted; and the vigilance of the Romans prepared to form a chain of fortifications, and to besiege the lines of the besiegers. A military council was assembled of the long-haired chiefs of the Gothic nation; of aged warriors, whose bodies were wrapped in furs, and whose stern countenances were marked with honorable wounds. They weighed the glory of persisting in their attempt against the advantage of securing their plunder; and they recommended the prudent measure of a seasonable retreat. In this important debate, Alaric displayed the spirit of the conqueror of Rome; and after he had reminded his countrymen of their achievements and of their designs, he concluded his animating speech by the solemn and positive assurance that he was resolved to find in Italy either a kingdom or a grave."—Decline and Fall, chap. 30, par. 5, 6, 7. (To be concluded next week.) The Bible in India.
By Christian Herald
IN India measures are in progress for giving to every one who passes an examination at any Indian university a copy of the Holy Scriptures, as one means of counteracting the infidel and impure literature so widely and systematically circulated there among the educated classes. From many parts of India we hear what single copies of the word of God have done. One Hindoo who obtained a copy of the Urdu Bible, and read it daily, expelled idolatry from his village altogether, and exhorts the surrounding villages to leave off worshiping idols. A missionary, in moving from one house to another, accidentally left a New Testament behind him. A Mohammedan, who had strongly opposed the preaching of the gospel, came to live in the house, found the Testament, and read it first to himself, and then to his friends. He became a Christian, and all ceased their opposition. A high official of the Nizam of Hyderabad, while in England on political business, received a copy of the Bible. He read it and was converted. Expecting to be dismissed by the Mohammedan Nizam if he owned himself a Christian, he determined to say nothing about his conversion, when his eye fell on the text: "Whosoever shall confess me before men, him will I confess before my Father which is in Heaven; but whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I deny also before my Father which is in Heaven." He confessed Christ before the Nizam, and, contrary to his expectation, was retained in his service, and permitted not only to hold, but to propagate, his religion. A church with seven hundred adherents is now the result. Counsel on Churchgoing and Integrity
"Our forefathers," says Tupper, "had clocks put on the outside of churches that they might not be late in getting to service; we put the clocks inside of the churches, lest we be late in getting out." If you cannot pray over a thing, and cannot ask God to bless you in it, don't do that thing. A secret that you would keep from God is a secret that you should keep from your own heart. Systematic Bible-Reading.
THERE is a gain in systematic and thorough Bible study; there is a gain in intelligent Bible-reading, topically or by a single book at a time; there is also a gain in the regular daily reading of the Bible, chapter by chapter, in course, throughout the year. This latter reading may, at times, be perfunctory, but it has its practical value even then. Those men who are most familiar with the Bible in all its parts are commonly those who have been in the habit of reading the Bible through, in course, year after year, and who have thereby become gradually familiar with portions of the Bible which they would not have looked up in ordinary topical reading or study. Nor does this formal reading of the Bible interfere with more earnest and thorough occasional Bible-reading. On the contrary, it makes that kind of reading all the more satisfactory when it is undertaken. It is a good thing to read a chapter in the Bible at the close of the day's work, even though its reading be somewhat irksome, and the temptation to sleep be a strong one for the hour. But that should not be one's only way of Bible-reading; nor is it likely to be.—Sel. A DISCUSSION is going on in the daily press in regard to the immorality of the stage which has a peculiar interest from the fact that the participants are actors and stage managers. A leading manager recently denounced as vile and demoralizing the most popular dramatic entertainment now given in the theaters of Broadway. His verdict was confirmed in the Herald of February 4 by an interview with "an actor of the old school," a man whose name has been a familiar one in public print for many years. His opinion of the theater we cannot quote in full. Speaking of a number of popular burlesques now upon the New York stage, he says: "They are disgustingly indecent, besides being absolute trash. When I was disengaged the last time, I went to see some of them, and regretted it. To be sure I laughed when I was there. It was funny at times; but it is a very easy matter to turn things and men into ridicule, and that's all they do. . . . The degrading nature of such entertainments should be cried down. These exhibitions can have but one effect—a disastrous one to the morals of the community, an encouragement to lewdness. . . . A great many people say, 'Oh, well, we are no worse off than before; for the old comedies used to be very much broader than we would stand now.' That is not so at all. The moral tone of the modern play is as much lower as vice is than virtue. Hardly one but that . . . tells stories that, if in books, we would not let our daughters read. They may point a moral lesson, tell a pitying tale; but the fact remains that it is done in an immoral way. . . . From the days of the 'Black Crook' it has steadily been getting worse and worse, until a noble profession is now shamed by being a panderer to the lowest passions of men. . . . The stage to-day in general offers but little of pure drama, but many beautiful pictures and indecent pictures, many plays that are vicious and many that are mere rubbish. The general result must be evil." He says, further, that our theaters are worse than those of Paris and London; for in those cities are some theaters which will not admit the worst class of plays, while here no distinctions seem to be made. "Here it is all mixed up." We have not been sparing in our condemnation of the theater as an agency for the promotion of vice and immorality; but we have never arraigned it more severely than does this "veteran actor." When the morals of the stage have sunk to that degree that men who have "trod the boards" for years revolt against them, and declare the modern drama to be an unmitigated evil, what more need be said? As to the London stage, one of the latest numbers of The Athenaeum reviews a play now on the boards of one of the leading fashionable theaters, and describes it as surpassing the worst realism of the infamous French school of novel writers. We have never in these columns said one word in regard to the theaters more severe than has frequently been said by the most distinguished actors and actresses.—New York Observer. The True Amulet.
By S. Cornelius, D. D.
An amulet is defined by Webster as "an ornament, gem, scroll, or the like, worn as a remedy against evils or mischief, such as diseases and witchcraft, and generally inscribed with mystic forms or characters." The same thing is popularly known as a charm. Many people have had a superstitious regard for a ring or a locket, or some family heirloom, the wearing or keeping of which they have thought would surely bring them good fortune. Wear in your bosom the pearl of great price, and you will surely have good fortune. Cherish with faith and love the sacred heritage of God's word, and no serious ill can befall your soul. Such thoughts have come to my mind in seeing so much display of the favorite charm, the horse-shoe. This, or some resemblance of it, is to be seen almost everywhere, hanging on the wall, or lying on the mantel or the table, or worn upon the person, "for good luck." There is an amulet, which, if we wear it in the right place, will bring us good luck indeed. It is described by David when he says: "Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee." Men have always been seeking immunity from evil, escape from trouble and grief, and deliverance from the awful consequences of sin and folly. The Bible alone furnishes the needed relief; we seek it elsewhere in vain. Would you wish, amidst your daily cares and worries, and sudden and strong temptations, to find a preventive from falling? You have it in your Bible. Get some lesson from it every morning to be pondered and prayed over through the day, and you will find that it will strongly uplift and illuminate your soul. Not only will it avert impending evil if you use it aright, but it will secure present and eternal good. The mere ownership of a Bible will not do this, but the believing appropriation of its truths will do it. The word of God has been so written as to give us great and glorious thoughts in few and simple but sublime words. Some texts, in particular, are at once as portable and as brilliant as diamonds, the brightest gems of heaven compressed into the smallest compass. Thus such texts as John 3:16 and 1 Timothy 1:15 have been well called "little Bibles" because they contain so much. It is a very slight burden for the memory to carry such brief passages, and they flash new light into the soul the more we look at them. They are at once indispensable aids to devotion, and mighty guards against temptation. The old superstition was that a horse-shoe would keep off witches; we know that the word of God is a weapon with which we may drive away the wicked one. Luther conceived that the devil once came to him in his chamber. Luther threw his Bible at the foul fiend, and was at once rid of his baneful presence. Instead of the malign presence of Satan, the great enemy of the Bible, we may have the gracious presence of the Holy Spirit, the glorious author of the Bible. In order to have this, it is only necessary to plead the promises with a believing heart.—S. Cornelius, D. D., in Baptist Flag. Forgiveness and Compassion
By Margaret Fuller
Does any man wound thee? Not only forgive, but work into thy thought intelligence of the kind of pain, that thou mayst never inflict it upon another spirit.—Margaret Fuller. One Royal Law.
By R. F. Cottrell
MANY persons claim that the teaching of the New Testament, is that Christians are under no obligation to keep the ten commandments, but that they are under the law of faith (Rom. 3:27), which they call the "law of Christ" (Gal. 6:2), "the royal law" (James 2:8), and "the law of liberty" (James 2:12). But let us briefly examine this position. 1. The new commandment of Christ is that his disciples should love one another. The bearing of one another's burdens fulfills this law; for it is the proof of real love. So also the proof of our love to God is that we keep his commandments. 1 John 5:3. But the commandment to love our neighbor as ourselves was not new in the days of Christ. It was "an old commandment" which had come down from the beginning. 1 John 2:7, 8. In Lev. 19:18 we read: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." The most pious disciple of Christ could do no more than this. What, then, sustains its character as new? The example of Christ, which furnishes a new motive to obedience. Said he, "This is my commandment, that ye love one another, as I have loved you." John 15:12. 2. The royal law—the law of liberty. A royal law proceeds from royalty; in other words, it is the law of a king. That of which the apostle speaks is the law of the King eternal. This law is perfect. "But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty." James 1:25. God's law in ancient times was perfect. Said David, "The law of the Lord is perfect." Ps. 19:7. A perfect law cannot be improved. The slightest change would make it imperfect. And there cannot be two perfect rules of moral action differing from each other. Therefore the perfect law of David and that of James is the same law precisely. The apostle teaches his brethren to "fulfill the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Instead of writing a new law for this dispensation, he goes back to the Scriptures of the Old Testament for his authority. We have quoted the particular scripture to which he refers.—Lev. 19:18. It contains the grand principle, or sum, of the last six commandments of the ten. To have respect of persons violates this principle; and to violate this principle is to violate this portion of the law which teaches us our duty to our fellow-men. Therefore the apostle says, "But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors." This is harmonious. "Sin is the transgression of the law"—the law convicts of sin. And he teaches obedience to the whole law. Says he, "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." Of what law is he speaking? The next verse reveals it. He continues: "For he that said [margin, that law which said], Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill." These two precepts are a part of the law of ten commandments; and the apostle expressly inculcates the keeping of the whole law of which these are a part. This is the royal law, the "perfect law of liberty." It is the only standard of morals. By this law all men, both ancient and modern, are to be judged. How strange that men can be so blinded, their reasoning powers so perverted, that they can refer to this text as proof that the ten commandments have been abolished and superseded by a vague, undefinable something which they call the law of liberty, which they vainly fancy gives them the liberty to break one of those precepts the "whole" of which the apostle so emphatically requires! How sad to be awakened by the decisions of the Judgment to the fact that they have taken unwarrantable liberty with the law of God, instead of so speaking, and so doing as they who are to be judged by it! The Law of Ten Commandments.
By Editor
ONE of our Oakland missionary workers has handed us a long letter which was received from a correspondent in an Eastern State. The writer intimates that it may be published; but we have no idea of giving it the room. We have no doubt that the writer believes that the letter contains strong and unanswerable arguments, while we are equally firm in the conviction that it is replete with unwarranted assumptions. Only one, and a material point we hold it to be, we will notice. Thus it speaks:— "But this instrument, document, code, decalogue, or whatever men please to designate it, is never called law." This statement is made in order to deprive the ten commandments of the benefit of certain expressions in the Bible concerning the completeness, the perfection, and the perpetuity of the law. And when this statement is disproved, what a fund of inference is rendered unavailable. To prove that the word of God calls the ten commandments, not only law, but the law, is not a difficult matter. The writer suffers himself to be needlessly misled by his idea of the word "covenant." It is very broad in its signification, embracing a variety of things. As used in Gen. 9, to Noah, it is a promise only; in Gen. 21 : 22-32, by Abraham and Abimelech, it is a mutual agreement; in Ex. 19 : 5-8, it is an agreement with conditions; in Deut. 4 : 12, 13, referring to that which God spoke on Mount Sinai, it is a law,—a covenant which he commanded them to perform; and in 2 Kings 23 : 2, 3, it is both an agreement and a law; the people made a covenant (an agreement) to keep the covenant (the commandments and testimonies) written in the book. The reader will please turn to this text and mark it well. The definition of the word "covenant," as given in the lexicons, covers all these. Hence, a law is always a covenant, while a covenant may be a law. "A law" is one definition of covenant. Now we notice a few Scripture facts. 3. He wrote the ten commandments in two tables of stone; and he wrote them only on those tables. See texts given above, and Ex. 31 : 18; 32 : 15, 16, etc. Bear in mind that the commandments which God spoke are specified as ten; Deut. 4 : 13; called "the ten words," see margin of Ex. 34 : 28. From this expression, ten words, comes the word decalogue. The word decalogue, as applied to the ten commandments, is strictly Biblical. 4. In Ex. 24 : 12, that which was written on the tables of stone is called "the law." Literally it reads as follows: "And the Lord said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there; and I will give thee tables of stone, and the law, and the commandments, which I have written, that thou mayst teach them." The Revision follows the Hebrew literally, and renders the text as above. Thus the position of the writer of the assertion above quoted is abundantly disproved, and that by positive statements of the Bible. 5. And our point is further proved as follows. The Lord said to Israel, "For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices; but this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people." Jer. 7 : 22, 23. This refers to Ex. 19 and 20, in the first of which he used these words to them, through Moses, and in the second they heard his voice, the ten commandments, and hence knew to what he referred when he said, Obey my voice. Thus again are the ten words separated from other laws, such as those concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. 6. And again he said: "Hear, O earth; behold, I will bring evil upon this people, even the fruit of their thoughts, because they have not hearkened unto my words, nor to my law, but rejected it. To what purpose cometh there to me incense from Sheba, and the sweet cane from a far country? your burnt offerings are not acceptable, nor your sacrifices sweet unto me." Jer. 6 : 19, 20. Here is made precisely the same distinction that is made in chap. 7 : 22, 23. In that it was drawn between obeying his voice, and offering burnt offerings and sacrifices. Here the distinction is drawn between keeping his law, and offering burnt offerings and sacrifices. They brought their sacrifices and offerings, but rejected his law. Hence, that which he calls his law, that which he spoke with his voice, is distinct from offerings and sacrifices. His law was the ten commandments; the law of sacrifices he did not speak to them, but gave it through Moses. Considering how thoroughly people are indoctrinated in human traditions, and how inferences are accepted as proof, and positive statements are overlooked, we ought not to be surprised that people will deny that the decalogue—the ten words or commandments—is ever called "the law." But no one can possibly deny it who examines the Scriptures on the subject with any reasonable degree of care. Why did the Lord so separate the ten commandments from all other laws as to declare them himself, in the hearing of all the people? Why did he write them, and them only, on the tables of stone which he had prepared? Why did he put them, and them only, in the ark, and have them placed in the most holy place of the sanctuary? Why was the blood of the sin-offering sprinkled over the ten commandments which were deposited in the throne of God, and over no other laws? Will they who try to belittle and degrade God's holy, perfect law, and bring it down from its high position, consider these questions? We might go on and prove the same distinction which we have here shown, in the New Testament. Indeed, we have often done this in our paper and other writings. But if in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established, we need offer no more proof than is given in this article. Throwing the Bible Aside.
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
A LITTLE over a year ago (Jan. 8, 1885) the Christian at Work used the following language:— "The selection of Sunday, thus changing the particular day designated in the fourth commandment, was brought about by the gradual concurrence of the early Christian church, and on this basis, and none other, does the Christian Sabbath, the first day of the week, rightly rest." This is not very definite; for the "early Christian church" covers quite a space of time, including the time of Christ and the apostles; and people might be led to think that the Christian at Work claimed apostolic authority for Sunday observance. But that is not the case, as the following from the same paper, Feb. 18, 1886, shows:— "We hear less than we used to about the apostolic origin of the present Sunday observance, and for the reason that while the Sabbath and Sabbath rest are woven into the warp and woof of Scripture, it is now seen, as it is admitted, that we must go to later than apostolic time for the establishment of Sunday observance." Very true; and we knew it before the Christian at Work said it; for we have read the Bible. But here is a point for consideration. "The Sabbath and Sabbath rest are woven into the warp and woof of Scripture," we are told. Now what day is it that is thus identified in the Scriptures as the Sabbath? It is the seventh day, and no other. This the Christian at Work admits when it says that "the church" has taken the liberty of discarding the day designated in the fourth commandment, and that this was done this side the time of the apostles. We would ask, then, how it is possible to reconcile Sunday observance with reverence for the Bible. If a man takes the Bible, and that alone, as his guide, he must keep the seventh day of the week; and (according to the above quotations with which we agree), if he accept Sunday he must go directly against the Bible. It ought not to take any candid person long to decide what to do in this matter, for it is evident that "their rock is not as our rock, even our enemies themselves being judges." And, besides, one who was foremost among the apostles has said: "But though we, or an angel from Heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." E. J. W.