Review and Herald, Vol. 21, No. 14. (3/3/1863)

Review and Herald

Mar 3, 1863

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Mar 3, 1863

The Bible no Refuge for Slavery.

(Continued.)

The Old Testament, no refuge for Slavery.

It has been proved in a series of arguments that the Bible condemns slavery; yet some may contend that other portions of the sacred volume justify the principle of slavery, and tolerate the practice of slave-holding. This cannot be true; if any portion of the Bible, really condemns slavery, no other portion can justify it, without an obvious self-impeachment of the record. No doubt, most persons, on a candid perusal of the arguments in support of the position that the Bible condemns slavery, will judge them of sufficient strength in themselves to settle the question, and warrant the conclusion that no part of the Bible can justify slavery; yet as some who profess to believe the scriptures, contend for slavery, jure divina, and as others who may never be able to believe slavery right, may be confused and perplexed by pro-slavery assumptions and glosses, it is deemed proper to attempt an examination of those portions of the Bible which have been considered the stronghold of slavery, and see if the monster sin cannot be driven from within the lids of the sacred volume.

This undertaking is of more importance than may be supposed by some, at first sight, for so long as there is a lingering suspicion that slavery finds any shelter in the Bible, the public conscience can never be roused fully to feel its enormity. Notwithstanding, there may be much infidelity and skepticism in the land, it is a fact that the Bible is generally felt to be the standard, by which the right or wrong of human conduct must be tested. The almost universal circulation of the Scriptures, the fact that all the truly religious and prayerful hold them to be given by inspiration of God, and the manner in which they are appealed to by all successful debaters in our legislative halls, proves how strong a hold they have upon the public confidence. It is true, there are a few persons who openly repudiate the Scriptures, and represent them as teaching almost every wicked and corrupt thing, and slavery among the rest, not to justify slavery, but to condemn the Bible. The writer has met with a few persons, who contended that the Bible is a pro-slavery book, as a means of rendering the Scriptures contemptible. But such are very few, and frequent developments have proved that men who profess to disbelieve the Scriptures, and who treat them with contempt, often do it in violation of their own convictions of right. While they rail against the Bible, they have an internal and often illy suppressed conviction, that it is the word of God, and that they must be judged by it. It appears safe to conclude, that even the infidel feels more at ease in the practice of slavery, while he is made to believe that the Scriptures justify his conduct, than when he is convinced that the Bible is against him. How important is it then, to examine the subject, and cut slavery off from all claim to support from the sacred volume? Let it be felt that nothing like slavery was tolerated by the law of Moses, and let all be made to feel there is nothing in the teachings of Jesus Christ to justify slavery, that slave catchers are not following the example of St. Paul, and that no example of slave-holding can be traced out in the history of the Apostolic Church, and all who mean to be Christians, will not only abandon it, but oppose it as they oppose any other sin. There is too much light, and too great a love of consistency, for any class of men, long to justify the practice of slave-holding, after they are constrained to admit that it is a crime against God. The conclusion is so undeniable that if men may practice one great sin, they may practice any and every great sin, as interest or inclination may dictate, that but few if any will occupy the position who admit that there is a difference between right and wrong. It is only necessary then to drive slavery from the Bible, expel it from the pulpit, and chase it from the altars of religion, and it will find but little quarter in the world.

The Bible does not and cannot be made to justify slavery in practice, even if the principle of slavery be found in it, for want of a specific rule to govern the application of the principle in reducing it to practice. If the Bible justifies slavery, it must be as a general principle, without restriction in regard to the persons or classes to whom pertains the rights of slavery, on one hand, and the obligations of slavery on the other; or it must be in view of some specific rule which defines who shall be the master and who shall be the slave. If the Bible does not justify slavery in one or the other of these aspects, it does not and cannot justify it in any sense. On the first of these positions but little need be said. But few if any will contend that slavery is right as a general principle, without reference to race, class, condition or distinction of persons, who possess the right to hold slaves, and upon whom rests the obligation to submit to slavery. If slavery be right, as a general principle, in the absence of a specific rule, defining who shall be the master and who shall be the slave, every man must be at liberty to enslave whom he can. To insist that slavery is right in the absence of any specific divine law, which clearly defines who shall be the master and who shall be the slave, is to say that the right to hold slaves is inherent in all men, and that each man is at liberty to exercise the right whenever he finds himself in possession of the power to seize upon, hold and control his fellow being. It is also to say that the obligation to submit to be a slave, pertains equally to all men, and that each is bound to respond to it the moment a hand is laid upon him sufficiently strong to hold him. If this be so, a man can have a right to liberty only so long as he possesses sufficient power to maintain it against all aggression. This makes right depend upon might. For a man to contend that slavery is or can be right upon such a principle, is to say that it would be right to make him a slave, if a party could be found, possessing the requisite power. But the thing is too absurd to need a refutation. All acts and conditions are determined to be right or wrong by some rule or law, which relates to the subject. In this case the Bible is that rule or law for the question is, does the Bible justify slavery? The rule must then be produced from the Bible, and it must be so clear and specific as to determine who shall be the slave and who the master. Suppose the Bible said, One man may hold his fellow man as a slave; one man can acquire the right of property in his fellow-man; it could not justify slaveholding in any given case, unless it should at the same time point out the person who might hold slaves, and the persons whom he might hold. A man, with his Bible in one hand, lays his other hand upon his fellow, and says, you are my slave. Not so fast, says the other; where is your authority for claiming me as a slave? The first, opening his Bible reads the text which affirms that man can hold property in man, supposing there were such a text. The other replies, the law does not name you sir, as the man owner, nor me as the man owned; if it justifies slave owning and holding, it will as clearly justify me in owning and holding you, as it will you in holding me. There is no way to settle the dispute but by the law of force, the stronger will prove himself to be the slaveholder.

There can then be no sanction of slavery found in the Bible, in the absence of a specific rule, defining clearly and certainly who shall be the master and who shall be the slave, and appropriating to one his rights, and to the other his obligations. Now it is denied that any such rule exists, and it is believed that no sane mind will attempt to point out such a rule upon the sacred page. It is proposed to examine the several texts supposed to support slavery, in which examination, two points will be kept distinctly in view; first none of the texts furnish the above rule; and secondly, they do not even sanction the principle of American slavery.

I. The curse that was pronounced upon Canaan is the oldest bill of rights slaveholders are wont to plead.

"Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall be unto his brethren. Blessed be the Lord God of Shem, and Canaan shall be his servant." Gen. ix, 25, 26.

If I had not heard Rev. Divines quote the above curse pronounced upon Canaan, in support of slavery, I should never have thought of replying to arguments founded upon it. As it is, I reply as follows:—

1. The colored race which are the victims of slavery in this country, are not the descendants of cursed Canaan. It must be admitted by all, that the curse did not fall upon Canaan in his own person, but that it was prophetic of the condition of the descendants of Canaan, and on them alone; if, therefore, the colored race are not the descendants of Canaan, it cannot justify their enslavement. The colored race have descended from Ham, through Cush, and not through Canaan. The name, Ham, signifies heat, hot, brown; and the name Cush, signifies black; while Canaan, signifies a merchant, or trader. When it is considered that Hebrew names were descriptive of actions, quality or character, and that they were often prophetically given, there is force in these names as above defined.

It is further proved that the colored race are not the descendants of cursed Canaan, by the only history we have of the family of Noah. The descendants of Canaan first settled the following countries, as is recorded, Genesis x, 15-19.

"And Canaan begat Sidon his first born, and Heth, and the Jebusite, and the Amorite, and the Girgashite, and the Hivite, and the Arkite, and the Sinite, and the Arvadite, and the Zemarite, and the Hamathite; and afterward were the families of the Canaanites spread abroad. And the border of the Canaanites was from Sidon, as thou comest to Gerar unto Gaza, as thou goest unto Sodom and Gomorrah, and Admah, and Zeboiim, even unto Lasha."

This clearly points out the nations that were dispossessed by the Israelites, when they came out of Egypt and took possession of the Land of Canaan; and in this transaction was fulfilled the curse pronounced upon Canaan. The curse pronounced upon Canaan, and the blessing pronounced upon Shem, were prophetic.

"Blessed be the Lord God of Shem, and Canaan, shall be his servant." The Israelites descended from Shem, and the Canaanites, embracing the several nations named as the Girgashites, the Hivites, &c., descended from Canaan, and when the Israelites came out of Egypt, they drove out the Canaanites, destroyed some of them and made servants of others, and they possessed their land, and thus was this prophetic curse accomplished. How plain is all this, and how forced and unreasonable must be the construction which makes it a justification for American slavery.

The Cushites, the other branch of Ham's family, from whom descended the colored race, settled another section of the country. Like the Canaanites, they were a seafaring people, and sooner arrived at civilization than did the other branches of Noah's family. The first great empires of Assyria and Egypt were founded by them, as were also the republics of Sidon, Tyre and Carthage. Our colored race are the descendants of the people who founded and sustained those early empires and republics. But the point in this argument is, the race now in slavery, are not the descendants of Canaan, upon whom the curse of servitude was pronounced, and, of course, that curse is no justification of slavery as now existing.

2. The present slaveholding race are not the descendants of Shem, to whom was appropriated the service of Canaan. "Canaan shall be his servant;" not the servant of some other race. If the text authorizes any thing, it authorizes the descendants of Shem to use the service of the descendants of Canaan; it does not authorize any other race to enslave them; nor does it authorize the Canaanites to enslave each other. Who then are the present race of slaveholders? Are they Shemites? It cannot be proved. The Jews and the Arabs or Ishmaelites, are the only people on the face of the earth who can with any certainty claim to have descended from Shem. The slaveholders of this country are more likely to be the descendants of poor Canaan who was cursed. The Canaanites were not all destroyed by the Israelites: indeed they left many nations unsubdued, and were mingled with them and were corrupted by them. Repeated and bloody wars raged between them for many centuries. Where are the descendants of these nations now? I answer as follows:—

The people called Canaanites in the Scriptures, are known in history by the name of Phoenicians, and it is said of them that they began to colonize in the time of the Hebrew Judges, and their first settlements were Cyprus and Rhodes; thence they pushed into Greece, Sicily, Sardinia and Spain. See Taylor's History. It is then probable that the Anglo-Saxon race came originally from the Canaanites or Phoenicians of profane history, and these are the people upon whom the curse was pronounced.

This presents slaveholders as taking advantage of a curse pronounced upon themselves, as a justification for enslaving another race.

3. Waive the facts set forth above, and admit that the curse imposes slavery, and that it involves the colored race, and still consequences will follow sufficient to overthrow the whole argument built upon it in support of American slavery.

(1.) In such case it would justify enslaving the whole race. If the argument proves it right to enslave any part of the race, it proves it right to enslave the whole. It would be right, therefore, to enslave every free colored person in this land, and in every other land; it must be right to plunder Africa of all her sons and daughters until the last descendant of Ham is chattelized.

(2.) It must follow that this nation is fighting against God, and legislating against the fulfillment of divine prophecy.

If the whole race were devoted to perpetual slavery by a judicial act of Jehovah,—and the whole were thus devoted if any were,—why does this nation find fault by declaring that it is piracy upon the high seas to fulfill that supposed judicial decree of Jehovah. She has done it in a law of Congress, which declares that to bring a slave from Africa shall be judged piracy and punished by death.

Has this nation conspired with England to defeat the decrees of God, punishing with death those who do what he has made it right for them to do?

(3.) The argument, if allowed, would not justify American slavery, as it is not now confined to the colored race; there are mixed and white slaves. The argument would justify the enslavement of none but the descendants of Canaan, if they were the colored race, which is not the fact.

But whose descendants are the mixed breed? One third of all the slaves in this country have Anglo-Saxon blood in their veins, and many of them are as white as the fairest of the white. Others have descended from Indians. Are these the children of Canaan upon the assumptions of the arguments? And does the curse pronounced upon Canaan include their enslavement?

(4.) This view of the subject, if allowed, would subvert all the support for slavery, attempted to be derived from the New Testament. The New Testament argument rests upon the assumed fact that slavery existed where Jesus Christ and his apostles preached and founded Christian churches, and that it was not condemned by them, but that persons were allowed to hold their slaves after being converted and received into the church. The reply to all this is, that if slavery existed where those churches were planted, to whom the epistles were addressed, it was not the slavery of the African race, for that did not then exist, and consequently, their sanction was not based upon the curse pronounced upon Canaan. If slavery be right independently of the curse pronounced upon Canaan, as must be the case if the apostles sanctioned the slavery of their time and place, the right of it must depend upon something besides that curse, and to contend that slavery is right independently of the curse pronounced upon Canaan, is to abandon that as a ground on which to justify human bondage.

4. It was not American slavery nor yet any thing like it, that the posterity of Canaan was subjected to by the curse pronounced upon a hapless father. The curse was political subjection, political servitude, and not chattel slavery. It was shown under the first division of this argument, that the prediction was fulfilled in the overthrow of the Canaanites by the Israelites, who were the Shemites when they came out of Egypt, and none of these transactions were analogous to American slavery, nor can they be plead as a justification of the system. The Gibeonites were made hewers of wood and drawers of water, but this was not chattel slavery. It was public service; no Israelite owned one of them, nor had he any personal interest in one of them, and they were still personally free, possessing their own lands, living in their own city, occupying their own houses, and possessing their own wives and husbands, and children. See the transaction as recorded Joshua ix. 3-27. They still existed and flourished in the days of David, as may be seen by reference to 2 Sam. xxi, 1-6. From this last reference, it is seen that these Gibeonites were flourishing in possession of political rights, with power to make their own treaty with the King of the Israelites. This proves that they were not the subjects of chattel slavery after the American pattern, and it follows that the curse pronounced upon Canaan was not such slavery.

It has now been shown first, that the victims of American slavery are not the descendants of Canaan; secondly, that the present race of slave-holders are not the descendants of them, in whose favor the curse of servitude was pronounced upon Canaan; thirdly, that consequences would follow, if the above points were yielded, which would be fatal to American slavery as it exists; and fourthly, that the curse pronounced upon Canaan, did not involve chattel slavery or any thing analogous to it. In the face of these points so clearly established, slavery must seek elsewhere for a sanction, or withdraw its claim for scriptural support.

(To be continued)

He Leadeth Me Beside Still Waters.

"He leadeth me!" O! blessed thought, O! words with heavenly comfort fraught, Whate'er I do, where'er I be, Still 'tis God's hand that leadeth me! He leadeth me! He leadeth me! By his own hand he leadeth me.

Sometimes 'mid scenes of deepest gloom, Sometimes where Eden's bowers bloom; By waters still, o'er troubled sea— Still 'tis his hand that leadeth me! He leadeth me! He leadeth me! By his own hand he leadeth me.

Lord, I would clasp thy hand in mine, Nor ever murmur nor repine— Content, whatever lot I see, Since 'tis my God that leadeth me. He leadeth me! He leadeth me! By his own hand he leadeth me.

And when my task on earth is done, When, by Thy grace, the victory's won, E'en death's cold wave I will not flee, Since God through Jordan leadeth me. He leadeth me! He leadeth me! By his own hand he leadeth me. — Watchman and Reflector.

"God's Anger."

WE cannot suppose that God is angry like the man who is resisted and disobeyed. It is not revenge that moves him, but it is a fixed determination to prevent the evil which is being wrought. The active agency which is producing wrong, originates the active agency which resists it; and so "God casts upon the wicked, and does not spare." This he is impelled to do by his sense of

justice. Even we can see how evil, when it is let alone, grows apace, and, marching on with rapid strides, soon comes to be wasteful and destructive; but if we with our imperfect sense of the dependence of one thing upon another, perceive this, how much more He who sees the end from the beginning, and traces with infallible certainty every effect to its cause.

When God therefore, "casts upon the wicked and does not spare;" he acts as a just God not only, but also as a merciful ruler of moral agents. If he did not continue to resist and prevent, the evil would grow into destructive magnitude, and sweep away in its resistless course the last remnant of human enjoyment. This he prevents by the method which he adopts in dealing with it. Hence there is but one course which it is safe to pursue in order to avoid destruction, and that is what is recommended to us in Scripture, viz., to "break off sin by righteousness." Hence, too, there is such a loud voice of warning, uttering its fearful tones in our ears, when we see that judgment has begun. If we consider and understand that voice, it says to us, "Your sins have come up in memorial before God," and He has been impelled to begin to resist the evil which they are working; if they continue, this resistance will, of necessity, also continue, and will so increase in its destructive activity, that yourself will finally perish in the conflict of the opposing forces. "Repent!" the voice celestial cries. Delay is pregnant with danger. Sinner! God is armed against you, and he is sure to conquer. Perseverance is ruin. —Christian Intelligence.

To Mothers.

The first book read, and the last book laid aside by every child, is the conduct of its mother.

1. First give yourself, then your child to God. It is but giving him his own. Not to do it is robbing God.

2. Always prefer virtue to wealth—the honor that comes from God to the honor that comes from men. Do this for yourself. Do it for your child.

3. Let your whole course be to raise your child to a high standard. Do not sink into childishness yourself.

4. Give not needless commands, but when you command, require prompt obedience.

5. Never indulge a child in cruelty even to an insect.

6. Cultivate a sympathy with your child in all lawful joys and sorrows.

7. Do not expect to make your child perfect.

8. Be sure that you never correct a child until you know it deserves correction. Hear its story first and fully.

9. Never allow your child to whine or fret, or bear grudges.

10. Early inculcate frankness, candor, generosity, magnanimity, patriotism, self-denial.

11. The knowledge and fear of the Lord are the beginning of wisdom.

12. Never mortify the feelings of your child by upbraiding it with dullness; but do not inspire it with self-conceit.

13. Pray for and with your child, often and heartily.

14. Let no one interpose between your authority and your child.

15. Feed its mind, no less than its body, food convenient for it.

16. Encourage all attempts at self-improvement.

17. Let your child be, think, and speak as a child, but encourage it of its own accord to put away childish things.

18. Never deceive, nor break a promise to a child.

19. Reprove not a child severely in the presence of strangers.

20. Remember that life is a vapor, and that you and your child may be called out of time into eternity any day.—Sel.

Looking out for Slights.

There are some people always looking out for slights. They can not pay a visit, they can not receive a friend, they can not carry on the daily intercourse of the family, without suspecting some offense is designed. Their amour propre, like a porcupine, is ever ready to erect its quills. If they meet an acquaintance in the street, who happens to be pre-occupied with business, they attribute his abstraction to some motive personal to themselves, and take umbrage accordingly. They lay on others the fault of their own irritability. A fit of indigestion makes them see impertinence in everybody they come in contact with. Innocent persons, who never dreamed of giving offense, are astonished to find some unfortunate word, or some momentary taciturnity, has been mistaken for an insult.

To say the least, the habit is unfortunate. It is far wiser to take the more charitable view of our fellow beings, and not suppose a slight intended, unless the neglect is open and direct. After all, too, life takes its hue, in a great degree, from the color of our own minds. If we are frank and generous, the world treats us kindly. If on the contrary, we are suspicious, men learn to be cold and cautious to us. Let a person get a reputation for being touchy, and everybody is under more or less restraint in his or her presence; and in this way the chances of an imaginary offense are vastly increased. Your people who fire up easily miss a deal of happiness. Their jaundiced tempers destroy their own comfort, as well as that of their friends. They have forever some fancied slight to brood over. The sunny, serene contentment of less selfish dispositions never visits them.

Have you this suspicious tendency in your characters? Lose no time in eradicating it. Whether it comes from excessive sensitiveness or from a worse source, it will prove the bane of your life and the annoyance of your friends. You will always be in "hot water," to quote the old adage, while you retain such a weakness. Neither wife nor husband, parent nor child, friend nor acquaintance, can preserve for you an undiminished affection, if you continue suspicious, if you imagine slights that were never intended. It is both more prudent and Christian to err, if you err at all, by not seeing neglect that is intended. Often a bitter quarrel, a life long alienation, may be averted by overlooking conduct that is the result of temporary irritation. How worse than foolish, then, to see a slight where none was meant!—Sel.

The Good Shepherd.

By J. Clarke

"I AM the good Shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine." John x, 14.

This is a very beautiful figure, in which Jesus is the shepherd, and his people the flock of his pasture.

David, in Ps. xxiii, makes use of language conveying a similar idea: "The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want. He maketh me to lie down in green pastures, he leadeth me beside the still waters." Again, in Ps. lxxx, it is said, "Give ear, O shepherd of Israel, thou that leadest Joseph like a flock." Isaiah uses the same figure in chap. xi, 11: "He shall feed his flock like a shepherd; he shall gather the lambs with his arm, and carry them in his bosom, and shall gently lead those that are with young."

Many like passages are to be found in the Bible, indicating the care that Jesus has for his devoted followers.

His sheep know his voice: they have a correct ear, and they come at his call. Impostors (wolves) are shunned. The sheep are endowed with discernment, and while they shrink from the doubtful call of the hireling and stranger, they confidently come at the voice of King Jesus.

Let us examine this subject, and see why it is that the flock so love the good Shepherd.

First, he was with God in the creation and arrangement of earth's beauties, when Eden first smiled, when this earth was a paradise, faultless in the sight of Jehovah. "By whom also he made the worlds." Heb. i, 2.

Second, when Satan rebelled in heaven, Jesus was foremost in sustaining the law of Jehovah, and the order of heaven, and the well being of the universe.

Third, when our first parents fell, and thereby entailed disgrace, ignominy, and sin upon unborn generations, Jesus stood in the breach, and, taking the burden upon himself, made a way for the ransom of an innumerable company of Adam's posterity.

By his care and pleading, and by his self-denying labors, by his agonies and cruel death, a way is made for the total destruction of sin and Satan, and with this the destruction of many a captive.

Satan in his effort to deprive King Jesus of his immortality, thereby forfeited his own. This is his capital offense, and on account of this he must finally die. See Heb. ii, 14: "That through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is the Devil."

Satan once stood very high in heaven, and his fall brought with him very many who loved him, and the opportunity he has had (which has so developed the tendency of rebellion), of manifesting his true character, especially his attempt to annihilate Jesus Christ, must hereafter be abundant evidence to the universe, that God has acted with the greatest wisdom, in taking from this fallen angel and from his followers the blessed gift of life and reason.

God did not, as he might have done, at once fell the destroyer to the ground, and destroy him, but by allowing rebellion to culminate, he has showed to his universe of intelligences the awful nature of mutiny and discord, and forever shut out sympathy with rebels.

Perhaps had he struck Satan from existence at once, when he fell, some good, but weak, intelligent loving soul, might have said in his heart, Could not Satan have been reformed? Did not Jehovah act in haste? But no such thought will ever enter the mind of loving saint or angel. Why? Because time has so thoroughly developed the nature of his jealousy and rebellion, that the soul of every true-hearted being must recoil at the mention or rising thought of mercy for that arch traitor. And his followers, however young, would in time develop a like character. Thus it is proved to the universe, that the nature of rebellion is such, that all concerned must share his fate.

Man being Satan's victim, and not a voluntary participant in Satan's crime of rebellion, stands upon different ground in this offense from his seducer.

This being the case, God could consistently make a way for his ransom, could a sufficient redeemer be found. Heaven afforded but one character sufficient. Jesus did not hesitate, but undertook the task, and well has he done his work, without a flaw or error, and all who accept him, and break from their former allegiance to Satan, can be restored to their rightful Sovereign.

Glorious angels have at times appeared to good men, and they have often offered to worship these angels, but they have been forbidden. What then must be the character of Jesus, when all the heavenly host worship him?

We long to get a view of the glory and loveliness of Jesus, that our worship of him may be more deep and heart-felt, and that we may in spirit and in truth worship him as angels do.

He it is who is our rightful King. Then let us break all the cords that bind us down to this kingdom of Satan, for certain it is we cannot serve two masters.

He is the Wonderful, the Counsellor. He is always ready when we call upon him, to direct us, to defend and sustain.

He is the good Shepherd that giveth his life for the sheep. Soon he will come and gather his sheep from the living and the dead.

O what a glorious day will that be! Shall we be ready to answer his call?

J. CLARKE.

A Beecher on the Spirits

A BEECHER ON THE SPIRITS.—Dr. Edward Beecher, oldest brother of Henry Ward Beecher, and author of the "Conflict of Ages," lately preached to his people at Galesburg, Ills., a sermon on spirits, the substance of which is reported to us by one of his hearers. He declared the present system of Spiritualism with its mediums, table-tippings, etc., a satanic counterfeit, observing that often when God is about to put in operation some new agency for good, the Devil, perceiving it, manages to get in ahead a miserable counterfeit, as in this case, so that the genuine may be discredited. Undoubtedly, he said, spirits are witnesses of our affairs, and are more interested in this world than in their own, because, while all is safe and quiet there, here is the danger and the conflict between good and evil. Spirits not only have intercourse with men, but sometimes materially assist them in their extremity; besides the examples recorded in the Bible, instances of such aid have occurred in modern times, as in the wars between Protestantism and Papacy, and particularly in the sieges of places in Holland. But, he said, men have communication with good spirits only when they have become holy enough to be admitted to such society; and the man of God, living above his fellows and rebuking their wickedness, though he seem to be alone, may have such sympathy and companionship from the other world that he can say as did the prophet, "They that are for me are more than they that are against me."

Delight of Rectitude

By Channing

DELIGHT OF RECTITUDE.—There is an exhilaration, a hope, a joy, springing up within us when we will with power what we see to be good, when we are conscious of treading under foot the low principles and interests which would part us from God and duty, when we sacrifice firmly and unreservedly selfish desires or the world's favor to the claims of Christian rectitude. —Channing.

Forgetting His Errand

FORGETTING HIS ERRAND.—A person came to Mr. Langdon, of Sheffield, one day, and said: "I have something against you, and I am come to tell you of it." "Do walk in, sir," he replied; you are my best friend. If I could but engage my friends to be faithful with me, I should be sure to prosper. But, if you please, we will both pray in the first place, and ask the blessing of God upon our interview." After they rose from their knees, and had been much blessed together, he said: "Now I will thank you, my brother, to tell me what you have against me." "Oh," said the man, "I don't know what it is; it is all gone, and I believe I was in the wrong."

False Friends and Deceitful Professors

FALSE friends are always the most dangerous enemies, and a deceitful professor is not likely to be a true friend ; if he be false to God, can you expect him to be true to you ?

Thanksgiving Before New Favors

BE thankful for past mercies, before you plead for new favors; this is the way to plead successfully; he that offereth praise glorifieth God.

The Cause in Ohio.

SABBATH and first-day, Feb. 21 and 22, we enjoyed a Conference with a few of the scattered friends of the cause, at Gilboa, Ohio. The notice of this meeting was brief, and the traveling dreadful, yet there was in attendance a very good representation from the little congregations of Seventh-day Adventists in the State. Our testimony was well received.

We stated that it would be a pleasure to us to make some statements relative to our connection with past difficulties in Ohio, and give some explanations which we believed would unburden many minds, and in a business meeting we were called upon to do so. We then stated that we could look back to only a few years when the cause seemed as strong and as prosperous in Ohio as in Michigan; that the cause in Ohio was no stronger now than then, while in Michigan it had increased fifty fold; and that we could assign no other reason for the languishing condition of the cause in Ohio, than the injudicious course pursued by some of those from other States who have labored in that State as teachers of the present truth. We then took up the course of different ones who had acted a part in distracting the cause in Ohio, and their influence, the particulars of which we forbear here to mention. We stated that similar influences had been exerted by certain preachers in Michigan, but they had been held in check so as to do comparatively but little harm. That while these influences had succeeded in destroying the confidence of nearly all of the brethren in Ohio in the Review, and the testimonies sent out by Mrs. W., they had failed to do this in Michigan, and now the real strength in Michigan compared with Ohio, is fifty to one.

Our statements and explanations relieved the brethren. Mrs. W. had a cheering testimony, and the brethren seemed greatly revived. Bro. T. J. Butler attended most of the meetings, and was much relieved by the explanations which we gave of the unhappy past with which he and we had been connected. His mind has been greatly abused by others, and he has spoken and acted as he would not have done under other circumstances. He arose in our midst and made remarks of the most candid and satisfactory character. We enjoyed a pleasant interview with him and his good wife at their home, and felt to pray that God would heal all the wounds which apparently had been inflicted through the folly of others, and bring him into the ranks again strong to stand in the defense of the truth. We parted as friends part. In fact there never has been anything between us of an unhappy personal nature. It has been the influence of others which has caused alienation, which we trust has ceased for ever. We now have such confidence in his integrity, and love for his frankness, that, should he never come into the ranks again, should we meet him again in this life we should hail him as a friend. We do not justify his past course in many things, neither need we undertake the task of pointing out his past errors; for we have reason to believe that he is ready to retrace every wrong step when in a Christian manner pointed out to him, and frankly confess on his part to those to whom confession is due. We wish we could say as much of some who have acted a part in casting him down.

This is the fitting up time, the time to make wrongs right. The truth was doing a good work for Bro. B., and had not the tongue of treachery in some, and a blind zeal in others, succeeded in separating him from the cause of the third message, he might now be standing free in defense of the truth in Ohio. Had we better understood matters in Ohio, we should not have given some statements in the Review, bearing heavily upon Bro. B. Again we repeat that we resolve to avoid as far as possible, introducing local and personal matters into the Review. We are often imposed upon by statements which represent persons in a wrong light, and in publishing them we are in danger of acting a part in oppressing those no more in the fault than the accusing party.

Did Bro. B. err in pressing the name, "Church of God?" his brethren erred equally with him and urged him on to be firm. When they saw their error, they should have been very sparing of their blame, and slow to talk of "secesh." Did Bro. B. err in introducing a plan to raise means to sustain the cause, different from the plan of systematic benevolence, being generally adopted? Then those ministers who assented to it at a certain conference also erred. Was he "secesh" in this? so were they. We say, let those who may find themselves liable to fall into error, above all others be slow to censure the erring. And may the misfortunes of the past teach all wisdom and true Christ-like forbearance. O God, bring again the wandering, and heal the wounds of thy people.

Bro. Waggoner is laboring in Ohio with some success. We hope for brighter days for the cause in that State. The financial committee more than paid our traveling expenses, being aware that preachers have some other expenses besides their R. R. fare.

Continue reading: Lessons for Bible Students