Signs of the Times, Vol. 11, No. 33. (8/27/1885)

Signs of the Times

Aug 27, 1885

International Tract and Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Aug 27, 1885

General Articles.

By Ellen G. White

The Impending Conflict.

BY MRS. E. G. WHITE.

THE greatest and most favored nation upon the earth is the United States. A gracious Providence has shielded this country, and poured upon her the choicest of Heaven's blessings. Here the persecuted and oppressed have found refuge. Here the Christian faith in its purity has been taught. This people have been the recipients of great light and unrivaled mercies. But these gifts have been repaid by ingratitude and forgetfulness of God. The Infinite One keeps a reckoning with the nations, and their guilt is proportioned to the light rejected. A fearful record now stands in the register of Heaven against our land; but the crime which shall fill up the measure of her iniquity is that of making void the law of God.

Between the laws of men and the precepts of Jehovah will come the last great conflict of the controversy between truth and error. Upon this battle we are now entering,—a battle not between rival churches contending for the supremacy, but between the religion of the Bible and the religion of fable and tradition. The agencies which will unite against truth and righteousness in this contest are now actively at work.

God's holy word, which has been handed down to us at such a cost of suffering and blood, is but little valued. The Bible is within the reach of all, but there are few who really accept it as the guide of life. Infidelity prevails to an alarming extent, not in the world merely, but in the church. Many have come to deny doctrines which are the very pillars of the Christian faith. The great facts of creation as presented by the inspired writers, the fall of man, the atonement, and the perpetuity of the law of God, are practically rejected by a large share of the professedly Christian world.

Thousands who pride themselves upon their wisdom and independence regard it an evidence of weakness to place implicit confidence in the Bible, and a proof of superior talent and learning to cavil at the Scriptures, and to spiritualize and explain away their most important truths. Many ministers are teaching their people, and many professors and teachers are instructing their students, that the law of God has been changed or abrogated; and they ridicule those who are so simple-minded as to acknowledge all its claims.

In rejecting the truth, men reject its Author. In trampling upon the law of God, they deny the authority of the Lawgiver. It is as easy to make an idol of false doctrines and theories as to fashion an idol of wood or stone. Satan leads men to conceive of God in a false character, as having attributes which he does not possess. A philosophical idol is enthroned in the place of Jehovah; while the true God, as he is revealed in his word, in Christ, and in the works of creation, is worshiped by but few. Thousands deify nature, while they deny the God of nature. Though in a different form, idolatry exists in the Christian world to-day as verily as it existed among ancient Israel in the days of Elijah. The god of many professedly wise men, of philosophers, poets, politicians, journalists,—the god of polished fashionable circles, of many colleges and universities, even of some theological institutions,—is little better than Baal, the sun-god of Phoenicia.

No error accepted by the Christian world strikes more boldly against the authority of Heaven, none is more directly opposed to the dictates of reason, none is more pernicious in its results, than the modern doctrine, so rapidly gaining ground, that God's law is no longer obligatory upon men. Every nation has its laws, which command respect and obedience; and has the Creator of the heavens and the earth no law to govern the beings he has made? Suppose that prominent ministers were publicly to teach that the statutes which govern our nation and protect the rights of its citizens were not obligatory,—that they restricted the liberties of the people, and therefore ought not to be obeyed; how long would such men be tolerated in the pulpit? But is it a graver offense to disregard the laws of states and nations than to trample upon those divine precepts which are the foundation of all government? When the standard of righteousness is set aside, the way is open for the prince of evil to establish his rule in the earth.

It would be far more consistent for nations to abolish their statutes, and permit the people to do as they please, than for the Ruler of the universe to annul his law, and leave the world without a standard to condemn the guilty or justify the obedient. Would we know the result of making void the law of God? The experiment has been tried. Terrible were the scenes enacted in France when atheism became the controlling power. It was then demonstrated to the world that to throw off the restraints which God has imposed is to accept the rule of the cruellest of tyrants.

Wherever the divine precepts are set aside, sin ceases to appear sinful, or righteousness desirable. Those who refuse to submit to the government of God are wholly unfitted to govern themselves. Through their pernicious teachings, the spirit of insubordination is implanted in the hearts of children and youth, who are naturally impatient of control; and a lawless, licentious state of society results. While scoffing at the credulity of those who obey the requirements of God, the multitudes eagerly accept the delusions of Satan. They give the rein to lust, and practice the sins which called down judgments upon the heathen.

Let the restraint imposed by the divine law be wholly removed, and human laws would soon be disregarded. Because God forbids dishonest practices, coveting, lying, and defrauding, men are ready to trample upon his statutes as a hindrance to their worldly prosperity; but the results of banishing these precepts would be such as they do not anticipate. If the law were not binding, why should any fear to transgress? Property would no longer be safe. Men would obtain their neighbor's possessions by violence; and the strongest would become richest. Life itself would not be respected. Those who disregard the commandments of God sow disobedience to reap disobedience. The marriage vow would no longer stand as a sacred bulwark to protect the family. He who had the power, would, if he desired, take his neighbor's wife by violence. The fifth commandment would be set aside with the fourth. Children would not shrink from taking the life of their parents, if by so doing they could obtain the desire of their corrupt hearts. The civilized world would become a horde of robbers and assassins; and peace, rest, and happiness would be banished from the earth.

Already the doctrine that men are released from obedience to God's requirements has weakened the force of moral obligation, and opened the flood-gates of iniquity upon the world. Lawlessness, dissipation, and corruption are sweeping in upon us like an overwhelming tide. In the family, Satan is at work. His banner waves, even in professedly Christian households. There is envy, evil surmising, hypocrisy, estrangement, emulation, strife, betrayal of sacred trusts, indulgence of lust. The whole system of religious principles and doctrines, which should form the foundation and frame-work of social life, seems to be a tottering mass, ready to fall to ruin. The vilest of criminals, when thrown into prison for their offenses, are often made the recipients of gifts and attentions, as if they had attained an enviable distinction. The greatest publicity is given to their character and crimes. The press publish the revolting details of vice, thus initiating others into the practice of fraud, robbery, and murder; and Satan exults in the success of his hellish schemes. The infatuation of vice, the wanton taking of life, the terrible increase of intemperance and iniquity of every order and degree, should arouse all who fear God, to inquire what can be done to stay the tide of evil.

Courts of justice are corrupt. Rulers are actuated by desire for gain and love of sensual pleasure. Intemperance has beclouded the faculties of many, so that Satan has almost complete control of them. Jurists are perverted, bribed, deluded. Drunkenness and revelry, passion, envy, dishonesty of every sort, are represented among those who administer the laws. “Justice standeth afar off, for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter.”

The iniquity and spiritual darkness that prevailed under the supremacy of Rome were the inevitable result of her suppression of the Scriptures; but where is to be found the cause of the wide-spread infidelity, the rejection of the law of God, and the consequent corruption, under the full blaze of gospel light in an age of religious freedom? Now that Satan can no longer keep the world under his control by withholding the Scriptures, he resorts to other means to accomplish the same object. To destroy faith in the Bible serves his purpose as well as to destroy the Bible itself. By introducing the belief that God's law is not binding, he as effectually leads men to transgress as if they were wholly ignorant of its precepts. And now, as in former ages, he has worked through the church to further his designs. As the religious organizations of the day have refused to listen to unpopular truths plainly brought to view in the Scriptures, they have sown broadcast the seeds of skepticism. Clinging to the papal error of natural immortality and man's consciousness in death, they reject the only defense against the delusions of Spiritualism. Nor is this all. As the claims of the fourth commandment are urged upon the people, popular teachers find that the observance of the seventh-day Sabbath is there enjoined; and as the only way to free themselves from a duty which they are unwilling to perform, they declare that the law of God is no longer binding. Thus they cast away the law and the Sabbath together. As the work of the Sabbath reform extends, this rejection of the divine law to avoid the claims of the fourth commandment will become well-nigh universal. Upon those religious leaders whose teachings have opened the door to infidelity, to Spiritualism, and to contempt for God's holy law, rests a fearful responsibility for the iniquity that exists in the Christian world.

(Concluded next week.)

I KNOW I LOVE THEE.

By New York Observer

I KNOW I love thee, blessed Lord, For thou hast died for me! I would believe thy loving word That I thy face shall see.

And while I journey to the end Oh keep me hour by hour! And in thy love wilt thou defend My soul from Satan's power.

And let it be my only aim Thy perfect will to do; And in thy love do thou my strength From day to day renew.

Then may I mount on eagle's wing, Pursue the pilgrim's way, Till in the light "eye hath not seen" I find the perfect day.

The Sabbath—A Review.

By H. F. Courter

SOME time ago a sermon was delivered in Gilroy, Cal., by Mr. U. S. Urmy, of the M. E. Church. His subject was: "Reasons why we keep the first day of the week instead of the seventh." As the speaker expressed a desire to arrive at the truth, and apparently had a good deal of kindly feeling towards those who differ with him, I feel sure no one will take offense at an examination of the scriptures on this subject. My remarks will therefore be upon what was said, rather than upon the speaker, believing that people differ most frequently either from a want of proper investigation or from prejudice.

The speaker said: "Christians are under no obligations to keep the Jewish Sabbath."

I object, first, to the application of the term "Jewish Sabbath" to God's Sabbath, as being unscriptural. The Bible use of God's Sabbath is shown in two of the passages quoted by the speaker, as follows: "Moreover also I gave them my Sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they may know that I am the Lord that sanctify them. And hallow my Sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between me and you, that ye may know that I am the Lord your God." Eze. 20:12, 20. Isaiah (58:13, 14) says: "If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day, . . . then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord; and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth." Jesus said, "The Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath." Mark 2:28. John says, "I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day." Rev. 1:10. Now if Isaiah was speaking of the seventh-day Sabbath in chapter 1, verse 13, as the speaker would have us believe, then God must have changed his mind wonderfully by the time he inspired Isaiah to pen the words of verses 13 and 14 of chapter 58, quoted above.

Our second objection is to Mr. Urmy's attempt to show that the decalogue was done away, or superseded by the new covenant, and in fact he himself objected to it, for at the same time he said, "We don't want to abolish the ten commandments." The speaker would have expressed himself more clearly if he had said: "I think these scriptures teach that the fourth commandment—can't we manage some way to get rid of the—that is I wish—don't you think that these teach that Christ substituted 'first day' for 'seventh day' in the fourth commandment?"

The speaker claimed that the two commandments of which Christ spoke in answer to the lawyer's inquiry, "Master, which is the great commandment in the law?" were outside of and greater than the ten commandments. See Matt. 22:34-40. But a careful examination will show that the two commandments given by Jesus in answer to the lawyer were a summing up of the commandments on the two tables of stone. The first four refer to our duty to God, and may be briefly summed up in the words of Christ: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind." The last six have reference to our duty to our fellow-man, and are properly summed up in these words, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." The first four commandments were doubtless written on one stone and the last six on the other; else, what were the use of the two tables of stone? Christ summed up these laws or commandments as the lawyers do our laws; for instance, we have a "school law," "civil law," a "criminal law," and an "international law." Is there any one that does not know that under each of these heads there are many laws? So Jesus, by summing up his Father's commandments, shows that all are important.

The speaker said, "Christ broke the Sabbath," and he cited John 5:18 in proof.

The Scriptures show plainly that this accusation of the Jews was not correct; but Christ disregarded their traditions concerning the Sabbath. Jesus kept his Father's commandments (John 15:10), and did no sin. 1 Pet. 2:22. Neither of these passages would be true if the speaker's and the Jews' assertion that "Christ broke the Sabbath" were correct; "for sin is the transgression of the law." 1 John 3:4. Paul says, "I had not known sin, but by the law." Rom. 7:7. Christ justified acts of mercy in saying, "It is lawful to do well on the Sabbath days." It could not have been lawful and at the same time contrary to law. Those who accused the Saviour of breaking the Sabbath also accused him of having a devil. John 7:20. They accused John the Baptist of having a devil, and they accused Christ of being a glutton and a wine-bibber. See Matt. 11:18, 19. Shall we take what the Jews said about Christ in preference to what Christ said about himself? Nay, "let God be true, but every man a liar." Rom. 3:4.

Mr. Urmy said: "Christ appeared to his disciples on at least seven occasions—all on the first day of the week."

Now the first time Christ met his disciples after his resurrection was on the day of his resurrection. See John 20:1, 14, 19; Mark 16:2, 9, 12, 14; Luke 24:1, 13, 34, 36.

The second time was after eight days from the first. John 20:26. A good many first-day observers have a peculiar faculty for counting this so as to make "after eight days" come on the next first day. Should the school-teachers of any State adopt such methods of counting, their certificates would be revoked forthwith.

Christ appeared the "third time" at the Sea of Tiberias; for John says: "After these things Jesus showed himself again to the disciples at the Sea of Tiberias" (John 21:1); and in verse 14 he says: "This is now the third time that Jesus showed himself to his disciples, after that he was risen from the dead." Notice that John testifies that this was the third time. Now as we have but one more meeting given, and that was when he ascended, forty days after the resurrection, where can Mr. Urmy get his "seven appearances on the first day of the week"?

It is evident that the speaker must have great power of contracting and expanding the Scriptures to suit his purposes; for he could only count the "after eight days" by contracting it to just seven, and he could only count the "forty days" to the day of ascension by expanding them to forty-three; and then, too, he would have to expand these "four times" a considerable degree to make "seven."

Paul's meeting the disciples to break bread was given as proof that the first day of the week is a holy day. Christ's words concerning this ordinance were as follows: "This do in remembrance of me" (Luke 22:19); and, "for as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come." 1 Cor. 11:26. It was to commemorate his death and not his resurrection that it was given; besides, it was administered on different days. Acts 2:42-46 says: "And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread. . . . And they, continuing daily with one accord, . . . breaking bread from house to house."

We would now invite the reader's attention to the following assertions made by Mr. Urmy. He said: "It cannot be proved that the apostles kept the seventh day after the resurrection. In the Acts of the apostles we find nothing of its observance."

Let us call in the apostles themselves as witnesses in regard to what was considered the Sabbath after Christ's crucifixion and resurrection.

Matthew takes the witness stand some ten years after the resurrection and says: "In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week." Matt. 28:1.

Mark, who wrote about thirty-three years after the resurrection, testifies: "And when the Sabbath was past." Mark 16:1, 2.

Luke, twenty-nine years afterwards, testifies: "And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment." Luke 23:56. "Now upon the first day of the week." Luke 24:1.

From these witnesses, then, we learn that the apostles considered the day before the first day of the week, the Sabbath, and that they still thought it was according to the commandment. From these we shall know what day is meant by the term Sabbath in any of the apostles' writings. In Acts 13:14-16, 42-44, we learn that Paul and his company went into the synagogue on the Sabbath and sat down; and after listening to the law and prophets, Paul, upon invitation, preached to the Jews and Gentiles two Sabbaths in succession. Again, while Paul and his company were in Philippi, Luke testifies to their attending prayer-meeting on the Sabbath. Acts 16:13. And at Thessalonica, Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures. Acts 17:2. It seems to have been Paul's manner to preach on the Sabbath. But at Corinth, where Paul stayed one year and six months, we have the fullest account of how he regarded the Sabbath. The record says: "And because he [Paul] was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought, for by their occupation they were tent-makers. And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks." "And he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them." Acts 18:3, 4, 11. We see that he worked at tent-making week days, and preached every Sabbath. Here the inspired writer gives us an account of seventy-eight Sabbaths of worship, in succession.

Was the speaker correct when he asserted that "it cannot be proved that the apostles kept the seventh day Sabbath after Christ's resurrection"? or, that "in the Acts of the apostles we find nothing of its observance"? Reader, what do you say?

We now come to another of the speaker's reasons for keeping Sunday. He said: "We are keeping the old Sabbath or day that God rested on and blessed, by keeping the first day of the week; because the Sabbath was evidently set back a day when the manna commenced to fall." In proof of this assertion Mr. Urmy read Ex. 16:1-26, the first verse of which says: "The children of Israel came into the Wilderness of Sin . . . on the fifteenth day of the second month;" and the fourteenth verse says: "Upon the face of the wilderness there lay a small round thing, as small as the hoar frost on the ground;" and the twenty-sixth verse says: "Six days shall ye gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the Sabbath, in it there shall be none." "Here," said the speaker, "we find that the children of Israel came there on the fifteenth, the manna commenced falling the sixteenth and fell six days, and the next day, which was the twenty-second, was the Sabbath; now, they either broke the Sabbath on the fifteenth or else it was set a day backwards at that time."

The speaker preferred to think that the Sabbath was set back a day. I shall show that neither conclusion is warranted by the Scriptures; but for the sake of examining his argument, we will suppose that the manna did commence falling on the sixteenth, as the speaker claimed, and fell six days, and then the twenty-second would be the Sabbath. Now I will leave it to my readers if it would not set the day forward instead of backward. Let any one who keeps the first day travel on Monday, letting it answer to the fifteenth of the month, on which the Israelites came into the wilderness; then let him work six days, corresponding to the time the manna fell in the wilderness, and he will find it will put his next rest-day forward to the next Monday; or, if he commences Tuesday, and labors seven days consecutively, it will throw the next rest-day on Wednesday of the following week.

But the most serious trouble with the speaker's argument is that he took for granted what needs to be proved, viz., that the manna commenced falling on the sixteenth, the very next day after they arrived. This cannot be proved, nor could it be, even if there had been no intervening verses between the account of their arrival as given in the first verse, and the falling of the manna as shown in the fourteenth; for, not unfrequently, there are many years separating events narrated in the same or adjoining verses. Genesis 4:2 reads: "And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground." According to Mr. Urmy's plan of interpretation, Abel and Cain went into business pretty young. Exodus 1:8, 11 reads: "Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph. . . . And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and Raamses." Surely these cities must have arisen like magic if they were built the next day after Pharaoh took the throne. Numerous incidents of similar character might be cited to show the absurdity of such a foundation.

The speaker placed a good deal of stress upon this fact: "Those who keep the first day are in the majority." I was not aware before that the majority were necessarily in the right, but if that is so we ought all to become Buddhists; for there are about 340,000,000 of them, while there are only about 292,000,000 Christians,—all denominations put together. The Scriptures inform us that the large majority were in the wrong just before the flood and that only eight persons were spared the terrible destruction that then came upon the world. Sodom was destroyed because there were not even ten righteous in that great city. The majority rejected Christ, and he utters these solemn warnings: "Enter ye in at the strait gate; for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in there; because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." Matt. 7:13, 14. Jesus says through John (Rev. 22:12, 14): "Behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be." "Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city." H. F. COURTER.

Giving Himself.

"Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity." Titus 2:14.

He gave himself to a life of toil, of self-sacrifice, and of suffering, and to a death of agony for us; that is, for every penitent, believing sinner. He gave himself as a perfect atonement, and a perfect righteousness for all who believe. If I am a believer, all my sins are forgiven, and I am looked upon as perfectly righteous in Christ. My personal righteousness, whatever that may be, is not regarded as the ground of my acceptance with God. Nothing but the perfect righteousness of Christ is taken into the account.

May I therefore sin with impunity? May I be content with an imperfect conformity to the will of God? God forbid! An inclination to do so would be convincing proof of the absence of a true faith in Christ! What a firm ground of assurance is furnished by the righteousness of Christ. If that is mine, my salvation is sure.

If salvation depended on my own perfect righteousness, I could not be saved. If it depended on a certain measure of righteousness, I could never be sure of salvation. Temptation might at any time cause me to come short of that measure. But, united to Christ and a partaker of his righteousness, I am safe forever.

What motive have I to cease from sin? to live to him who gave himself for me, that he might redeem me from all iniquity. He died to redeem me, not only from the consequences of sin, but from the power of sin—of all sin. Christ desires that I should be free from all sin, small as well as great—if any sins against him can be called small. If I do not desire deliverance from all sin, I am not a follower of Christ, my faith is vain.

Let me remember that Christ died to redeem us from all iniquity. I am under obligations to be holy as God is holy. So far as I give place to sin, so far as I fail to make diligent efforts to grow in holiness, I nullify the death of Christ.

Heavenly Father, I thank thee that thou didst give thy Son. I thank thee, O Christ, that thou didst give thyself that thou mightest redeem me from all iniquity. May thy work of redemption be perfected in me through the power of the Holy Spirit. May thy love constrain me to strive against every form of sin, and through divine grace to strive successfully. Cause me to strive more earnestly against sin, because assured of salvation by the perfect righteousness of Christ. The more perfect my reliance on that righteousness, the more earnest may my effort be to become meet for the inheritance of the saints in light.—Christian Advocate.

"BEHOLD HE COMETH." REV. 1: 7.

By J. H. Anthony

AN ACROSTIC, BY J. H. ANTHONY.

BEFORE the myriad worlds were framed and given a place; Ere the Creator hung them forth in boundless space, Honored and blest, the Son sat by his Father's side; O'er all the heavenly realm, his name was magnified. Loved by the Father; the angels' admiration; Divine beginning of God's vast creation.

He it was by whom the worlds were made. Earth he established, its foundations laid.

Created in God's perfect image, sinless man, O'er all the earth dominion held—air, sea, and land. Mindful of God's commandments just, he might have still Enjoyed this blissful state; but left to his free will, To Satan's power he yields; who tempts him with this lie: Handle and eat the fruit; thou shalt not surely die.

Woe worth the unhappy day! Woe worth the fatal deed! In whom shall man find help, in this his hour of need? To rescue him from death, some one must pay the cost, Heaven, immortal life, to him must else be lost.

Christ Jesus, Son of God, in pity for mankind, Leaves Heaven, and glory, power, and pleasure all behind— O wondrous love divine! O marvelous condescension! Unselfish, pure, and deep beyond our comprehension!— Descends to earth, assumes man's frail and feeble frame, Suffers reproach, temptation sore, insult, and shame.

A man of many sorrows; known to grief and pain; None seek him unrewarded; none follow him in vain. Death, full of shame, he suffers, on the accursed tree; Enters the gloomy tomb; rises triumphantly. Victorious o'er the grave; first fruits of those who sleep; Encouraging to those who for their lost ones weep.

Reclothed with heavenly light, he up to Heaven ascends. Yearning eyes behold his flight, a cloud his way attends.

Engaged in thought they look, when, lo, two angels cry: Ye men of Galilee, why do ye gaze on high? Ev'n as your Lord ascends amid the heavenly train, So in like manner shall he come to earth again.

Hail, glorious, heavenly King! Hail, glorious, happy day! All sorrow, care, and pain will then have passed away. Long have God's anxious people waited, watched, and prayed; Longed for the time when Christ in glory bright arrayed Shall come to take his weary people to their rest, Ever to be with him; to be forever blest.

Enable us, O Lord, all trials sore to bear; Help us, when Christ appears, the shout of joy to share: It is our Lord! Worthy of adoration! Most blessed One, we will rejoice in his salvation. Forestville, Cal.

Ungovernable Priests.

ENGLAND'S difficulties in Ireland are aggravated by unscrupulous and belligerent ecclesiastics. Their influence is boldly used for the encouragement of attacks upon the Government. Archbishop Croke in a recent speech at Kingstown, just after his return from Rome, denounced the civil authorities by name, as if they were the only criminal class in Ireland. In addressing the "Confraternity of the Sacred Heart of Jesus" at Fethard, he remarks:—

"If I were allowed to introduce anything profane into this matter, I should say that confraternities are the land league of Heaven."

Inasmuch as the Land League is a system of terrorism which has disgraced the century, inspiring crimes which have shocked the civilized world, it may be a fitting symbol of the organized power of Romanism. Three years ago it was supposed that the pope had condemned this Land League which an archbishop now celebrates as akin to the most cherished religious associations. Romanism everywhere is more a political than a religious danger. It will fight the same battles here which it has fought in Europe and the East, and here too it will be defeated unless the world revolves backward."—Sel.

The Chief Seats

THERE were those in the days of Christ who loved the chief seats in the synagogue, and there are many of the same character still. If they do not secure prominence, it is not because they do not seek it. Persons who thrust themselves forward are often the ones who should remain in the background. There is not near so much unappreciated talent in the world as many persons imagine. In most instances men fail to secure prominent positions because they are unfit to fill them. As a general thing, it is not the men who have the best opinion of themselves that stand highest in the estimation of others. Men of real worth are modest and retiring, and never officially put themselves forward. They prefer taking a lower seat until they are invited to go higher. When the proper qualifications for a position are possessed by any one, others are not slow in perceiving it. There is often a great rush for chief seats. What a pity that men do not show equal zeal in qualifying themselves to properly fill them!—Sel.

Continue reading: The Babylonian Empire