THE last annual session of the California Sabbath-school Association, held at Stockton, Cal., in connection with the camp-meeting, was one of unusual interest. More time had been set apart to be devoted to this branch of the work than ever before, and it was all well employed in listening to reports, giving instructions as to the best method of carrying forward the work, and laying plans for future labor. We regret that more could not have had the benefit of the meeting.
We are glad to report that the past year has been one of marked prosperity. The Lord has seemed to bless the efforts put forth, and advance steps have been taken all along the line. According to the yearly report, there are now 42 schools in this Conference, with a total membership of 1,797, an increase of 526 during the past year. Eighteen new schools have been organized, and three dropped, making an increase of 15 new schools. The class contributions this year amount to $1,814—nearly double what they were last year. As nearly as we can ascertain, the lessons have been learned better, and all have seemed to take a deeper interest in this branch of the work, than ever before. We feel that we have every reason to be thankful, and take courage.
Now, another year is before us, and we fear the tendency will be to settle down satisfied with what we have done. This is just what the enemy would like; but I trust we shall arouse ourselves, and take hold of the work unitedly, and press it more vigorously during the coming year than ever before. The Sabbath-school is the life of the church, and I believe that wherever we find a live Sabbath-school we shall find a working church.
We have been very much pleased with the promptness with which some of the schools have reported. The last two quarters we have received a report from every school in the State. This is as it should be, and I trust that all will be as faithful during the coming year.
Our plan of class contributions was indorsed by the General Conference and General Sabbath-school Association about seven years ago, and has been adopted in nearly every State. It has seemed to work well wherever introduced; but we think the object held out has been too narrow, and therefore we have endeavored, during the past year, to carry the mind beyond the idea of giving simply to support the school, to that of donating to some missionary enterprise. In this we have been very successful, and our schools have responded nobly. We think it would be well for each school to donate a part or all of their class contributions each quarter to some missionary enterprise.
Being acquainted with the wants of the cause in general, we would recommend to all our schools in this Conference that for the present quarter, ending December 31, donations be made to the San Francisco City Mission. A great and good work has been done by this mission. Publications have been placed on board of hundreds of ships, and thus the present truth has been carried to all parts of the world. But this mission is in need of means, and the work is liable to suffer unless something is done. What an encouragement it would be to the workers there to know that all our people, both old and young, were trying to do something to carry forward the work. The Lord has said: "Cast thy bread upon the waters; for thou shalt find it after many days." Eccl. 11:1.
Parents should instruct their children that giving is a very essential part of the worship of God. Giving is worship; and we are admonished: "Honor the Lord with thy substance, and with the firstfruits of all thine increase." Prov. 3:9. We can, and do, honor him by giving, and let us remember, "God loveth a cheerful giver."
The amount to be given should be carefully laid aside during the week, ready for the Sabbath, and then we can follow the instruction of the psalmist, "Bring an offering, and come into his courts." Ps. 96:8. Let every offering be accompanied with a prayer to God that his blessing may attend the work.
At our last annual meeting, steps were taken to have some one visit our churches to labor in behalf of the Sabbath-school work. We do not know how soon this can be brought about, but we would like to hear from those schools that feel that they need, and would like, labor of this kind. We hope to see advance steps taken in all branches of the work during the coming year. The Lord has committed a sacred trust to our hands, and we hope that each school and each member of the school will feel the responsibility resting upon them, and that we may be able to report still greater advancement at our annual gathering next year.
C. H. JONES,
Pres. Cal. S. S. Association.
The Great God and King
“THE Lord is a great God, and a great King above all gods.”
The Principle Involved.
By Editor
A LETTER has been received at this office from a friend who writes in a kind spirit, and who evidently has full faith in the correctness of his positions. He accepts the Sabbath, but does not accept our views of immortality. His views of certain texts we do not notice, only because expositions of them have been so often given. We choose to strike at the root of the matter, and show that there is a principle involved which the writer seems to have entirely overlooked. He says:—
"It will not alter the facts in the case, it will not change the order or decrees of the Supreme Ruler, whether I believe that the spirit of Jesus comes to take each of his children home as they die, or whether they all lie dormant until the resurrection. Nor would it make any difference if all the preachers in the universe should advocate either the one doctrine or the other. It is not on these that our hope of immortality depends, but in coming to Christ, and taking him at his word."
To the first part of this paragraph we can assent. Our belief on this subject will change neither the facts in the case nor the decrees of the Supreme Ruler. But, unfortunately for his position, this assertion can be applied with equal force to any and every doctrine of the Bible. It will not alter the facts in the case one particle whether or not we believe that Jesus is the Christ of God, for God will be true if we are all liars. It will not change a single decree of the Almighty if we deny entirely the inspiration of the Scriptures, as our correspondent has in part, as we will presently show. God's truth does not depend upon our acceptance of it, or our action in relation to it. But our acceptance with God does depend upon our acceptance of his truth, and our action in regard to it. And it is our imperative duty to accept it as he has revealed it, and not as we would wish to have it.
From his next proposition we dissent. He says it would not make any difference if all the preachers in the universe would advocate either one or the other of these doctrines. But if the one is true, and the other is false, then it would make a material difference. Or will he insist that it does not make any difference whether preachers advocate truth or falsehood? Both doctrines cannot be true. Are the truth of God and falsehoods equally valuable and equally innocent? The tendency of the age is toward accepting this proposition, but we denounce it as heretical and dangerous. Dangerous to the keeping of the Christian faith in purity, and dangerous to the souls of those who accept it; for we are sanctified through the truth of God, and not through error. John 17:17. The idea that "it does not make any matter what you believe if you are only honest," is a delusion and a snare; it is the vestibule to the temple of infidelity.
We believe it is essential to take Christ at his word; and his word—his own very words—are found in Luke 14:14: "Thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just." And, therefore, they who believe and teach that we shall be recompensed at some other time, contradict the word of Jesus, and exalt themselves and their words above Christ and his word. Can they do this and be innocent? We will let our correspondent judge.
"It would seem to me very unreasonable that God, by whom all things were created, should create so many devils that there were even legions of them in Christ's time!"
It is appropriate that the writer placed an "exclamation point" at the end of this sentence, which, as we learned it, is "a mark of wonder and surprise."
We hold that it is equally unreasonable that God should create any devil at all. It is equally unreasonable to believe that he created thieves, adulterers, and murderers. We commend to our correspondent our argument on this subject in our book on "Modern Spiritualism." The question we should ask is this: Does our correspondent deny that legions of devils or demons existed in Christ's time? If not, then we ask, Has he better reason to believe that they were the spirits of dead folks, than we have to believe that they were "the angels who kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation" (Jude 6), and sinned? 2 Peter 2:4. See also Matt. 25:41. Further he says:—
"Again it would seem unreasonable to me that the good, whose time is so precious here, should sleep so long when there is so much to do. While you may not agree with me that the saints are angels, I think it cannot be proved by the Scriptures that they are not. In speaking of the angels (Heb. 1:14), Paul says they are all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister unto them which shall be heirs of salvation. I believe also that there is work for the saints; that none are idle nor asleep in Paradise."
There are several points in the above which demand notice.
1. He thinks it is unreasonable that the saints should sleep, when there is so much to do. And (1) the Scriptures positively say they are asleep. Here we may safely apply his first principle: It does not matter what he believes about it; that cannot alter the facts. The Scriptures saying that they sleep makes it certain that they do, whether or not it looks "reasonable" to him. All the Scriptures appear unreasonable to some people, but that does not destroy their truthfulness. The saints in death "sleep in Jesus." 1 Thess. 4:14. This is equivalent to the expression in verse 16, "the dead in Christ." In A. D. 59, Paul said that some of the witnesses of Christ's resurrection were "fallen asleep." 1 Cor. 15:6. He also said that, if the dead rise not—if there is to be no resurrection of the dead—"then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished." Verse 18. And the sleeping saints shall awake—not when they die! but—when "the Lord himself shall descend from Heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God;" 1 Thess. 4:16; "when Christ, who is our life, shall appear." Col. 3:4.
(2) There is, indeed, "so much to do," but the living, not the dead, do this work. See Ps. 6:5; Eccl. 9:10; Isa. 38:18, 19. And Jesus said: "The night cometh, when no man can work." John 9:4. This is taking Jesus at his word, but there is no place in the theory of our friend for this text.
2. We think it can be proved that the saints are not the angels; but not a word or hint of proof can be given that the spirits of the dead are angels. Jesus said: "They which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage; neither can they die any more; for they are equal unto the angels." Luke 20:35, 36. Now it would be an absurdity in science to say that a thing is equal to itself; hence it is the truth that equality disproves identity. And hence the words of Jesus, that the saints shall be equal to the angels, disproves the assertion that the saints are the angels. If this is disputed by any, will they give some evidence—not a supposition—that the converse is true?
3. Our correspondent says that he believes that the saints (meaning the dead) have a work to do. It is quite a stretch of the signification of belief. Many assert that they have faith when they only have conjecture or opinion. "Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Hence, where the word of God is silent, there can be no faith; it is only conjecture. And this is true in all matters of belief concerning Scripture questions. We may believe what the Scriptures say; we have no ground for belief when they are silent. But on this question they are not silent; only they contradict the opinion of our friend, for they assert positively that the dead do not praise God, and know nothing and can do nothing.
One more point we must notice, and then make the application of the whole. Our friend, referring to what is written in Job, David, etc., in the Old Testament, says:—
"But we have good reason to believe that Christ knew more of the next world than either Job or David."
We are not disposed to deny the fact as stated, but we emphatically deny the inference intended to be drawn from it. It is not whether Christ knew more than Job and David, but did he know to the contrary of what they wrote? The indorsement of these Old Testament worthies in the New Testament proves that they spoke by inspiration. The professor of mathematics may know a thousand times more of numbers than the little boy who has to count by his fingers; but when the little boy learns, by counting his fingers, that two and two make four, can the professor disprove the result by his superior knowledge? Peter said that David was a prophet, and Christ said he spoke in the Spirit. Acts 2:30; Matt. 22:42-45. Job was indorsed by Jehovah in Eze. 14:14, 20; and in James 5:10, 11. We consider it no virtue to have "charity" for or patience with the prevalent custom of arraying one part of the Bible against another; of determining "by feeble sense" which part of the word of God is most highly inspired, and which is less reliable. We fully assent to what Paul says in 2 Tim. 3:16, 17. We know it is counted worthy of the "advanced Christian thought" of the age to make concessions to infidelity by reducing the reliability of certain parts of the Scriptures; but we hope never to be found a party to such a transaction. We invite our correspondent to review his ground, and see if he has not, in a measure, belittled the work of God's Spirit by instituting a comparison of the value of its utterances.
Now as to the practical bearings of the question. We believe that Spiritualism is the monster delusion of the age; this is conceded by thousands of intelligent Christian teachers, and, what is far more important, is proved by the Scriptures. Now our friend concedes everything that the Spiritualists claim as the foundation of their system, and denies or discredits those scriptures which prove that their claim is unfounded. Is this a matter to be covered by the plea of "charity"? We think not. The reliability of God's word, and the safety of "the elect" (Matt. 24:23, 24), are involved in the question, and we cannot hold our peace.
The Failure to Interpret Scripture
By Editor
THE Old Testament Student, speaking of different schools of Biblical interpretation, notices the fact that there is very little exposition of the Bible given from the modern pulpit, and plainly intimates its belief that in less than one-twenty-fifth of the preaching is the proper interpretation of the text given. It then says: "Nor can this failure to make the correct use of Scripture be attributed to any other cause than to a failure to employ common sense. For the men who make this fatal mistake are the educated as well as the uneducated. They have within their reach all needed helps for ascertaining the true meaning. They doubtless often make use of these helps. And still they fail. These men have the judgment needed, the common sense required, but they, somehow or other, neglect to employ it. Why? It is for them to answer." We would suggest that if they cannot tell, the Bible may throw some light on the matter. Perhaps Isa. 29:13, 14 gives the correct answer.
Some Facts about Roman Catholicism.
By Editor
A FEW weeks ago we received the following letter from a gentleman in Livermore, Cal., with an accompanying request that it be published at our convenience. Accordingly we give it publicity, as a matter of interest to our readers:—
“EDITOR OF THE SIGNS OF THE TIMES: Having received a few numbers of the SIGNS from a friend here, I have been reading some of Mrs. E. G. White’s articles, and had begun to think that much good would accrue to Christians, as argued from her religious stand-point. But when, in the issue of August 20, in an article entitled ‘Protestantism and Catholicism Uniting,’ that lady assailed that ancient ark of truth, the church of Rome, I must say that the writer stepped ‘down and out’ of her sphere of usefulness, and lowered her pen to the trickery of Pixley and the fiction of Eugene Lawrence; and, moreover, I charge her with violating one of God’s commandments.
“Another charge that stands against such writings is that of desiring to menace the peace of our country by stirring up the demons of religious prejudice and bigotry. It is insulting to the intelligence and liberality of the age we live in, for Protestant writers to use such methods of argument against that large body of Christians who acknowledge and follow the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. What does the writer mean by the following rather mysterious sentence in the article I refer to: ‘The people of our land need to be aroused to resist this dangerous foe to civil and religious liberty’? I challenge the writer for an explanation of how, when, and wherein is Catholicism a foe to civil and religious liberty. Facts, not fiction, are wanted.
“Another sentence that may well bring the blush to the cheek of intelligence: ‘A prayerful study of the Bible would show Protestants the real character of the papacy.’ The truth, Mr. Editor, needs not the support of dark insinuations and mysteriously clouded sentences. It is an easy matter for these Protestant writers to erect imaginary gibbets, and manufacture imaginary instruments of persecution and torture, and array them as the work of the dim and distant ages of the past, with which to terrify and intimidate the weak minded of this world; but for the earnest seeker after truth, nothing but naked facts and the ever-unchanging truth will stand the test of investigation.
“I agree with the writer when she says that ‘Rome never changes.’ Her principles, founded on the Holy Scriptures, never change. The truth does not change.
“In regard to the Bible, there is another charge made frequently against the Roman Catholic Church, that of ‘banishing the Bible from the Christian world.’ What a preposterous idea! Comment is unnecessary, since the Bible can be seen in every Catholic house,—the only pure and unadulterated word of God. I would ask Mrs. E. G. White, Who is responsible for the recent revision of the Bible? Was this Rome’s doings? Why is the sacred book curtailed, perverted, assailed, and, I may say, torn asunder leaf by leaf? Is the pope doing this? Why is even the divinity of Christ being denied in your modern Protestant pulpits? and even it is taught that the ten commandments are to be disobeyed. The charge I lay at the doors of your modern Protestantism.”
The above is the entire letter, with the exception of the last paragraph, which contains no new statement. We have given it, in order that we may have the opportunity of once more showing the reason why we are uncompromisingly opposed to Catholicism. But first we would say that the writer cannot have given Mrs. E. G. White’s writings a very careful reading, or he would not charge her with using “dark insinuations and mysteriously clouded sentences.” As a rule, her writings are characterized by clearness and directness of expression, and concerning the Catholic Church she has given most decided utterance. Now to a consideration of the letter. The point over which the writer seems to be aggrieved is, that Catholicism is a foe to civil and religious liberty. We therefore quote a few facts, not fiction.
On Dec. 8, 1864, Pope Pius IX. published the Papal “Syllabus of Errors.” This document, although issued by his sole authority, became in an especial manner the utterance of the Catholic Church, when, less than eight years later, Pius IX. still being pope, the doctrine of papal infallibility was declared. In this Syllabus there are eighty distinct propositions, each of which is held by the Catholic Church to be an error. We quote two of them:—
“77. In the present day, it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion shall be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of other modes of worship.
“78. Whence it has been wisely provided by law, in some countries called Catholic, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own worship.”
To men who love liberty these propositions seem just, but the Catholic Church declares them to be errors, and thus plainly teaches that none but Catholics ought to be allowed to enjoy public worship. If this does not show that the Catholic Church is the foe of religious liberty, what would?
In the reign of Hildebrand, the priests were bound by an oath of obedience to the pope, of which the following are a few clauses:—
“I will be faithful and obedient to our lord the pope and his successors. . . . In preserving and defending the Roman papacy and the regalia of St. Peter, I will be their assistant against all men. Heretics, schismatics, and rebels to our same lord, I will prosecute and attack to the utmost of my power.”—Decretum Greg. IX., lib. 2, tit. 24.
That certainly does not bear the stamp of liberty. That the Roman Church is a foe to liberty is also shown by its enmity to the Bible. This charge the gentleman calls a falsehood, but we repeat it, and offer facts for proof. After Luther had posted up his famous “Theses,” directed especially against the sale of indulgences, Tetzel, the agent of the pope, came out with some counter propositions, among which is the following:—
“Christians should be taught that there are many things which the church regards as certain articles of the Catholic faith, although they are not found either in the inspired Scripture or in the earlier Fathers.”—Seckendorf, Hist. Lutheran., lib. 1, sec. 12.
If the Catholic Church is a friend to the Bible, how is it that, previous to the Reformation, not only the laity, but also the vast majority of the clergy, had never seen a Bible? Why was it so sedulously kept from the people that even very few priests had ever seen a copy of it? The fact is, that Wycliffe was condemned as a heretic and a sacrilegious man, simply because he gave the Bible to the people of England; and in 1408, an English council, with Archbishop Arundel at its head, enacted and ordained “that no one henceforth do, by his own authority, translate any portion of Holy Scripture into the English tongue, or any other, by way of book or treatise, nor let any such book or treatise now lately composed in the time of John Wycliffe aforesaid, or since, or hereafter to be composed, be read in whole or in part, in public or in private, under pain of the greater excommunication.” Thus this popish council decreed that not only should Wycliffe’s translation be taken from the people, but that in no coming age should they have any portion of the Bible in any living language.
But Bibles were printed in spite of papal anathemas, and soon the land was filled with them. Now what did the Roman Church do? It would have brought upon itself the condemnation of all virtuous people if it had continued its outspoken denunciation of the Bible, so, while pretending to exalt that book, it began to weaken its influence. Any one who possesses a Catholic catechism will find there a plain statement to the effect that common people are at full liberty to read the Bible, provided they do so in the original! That is, the farmer and the hod carrier, the brick layer and the errand boy, may read the Bible in Greek and Hebrew! This amounts to actual prohibition.
But this is not all. The Catholic Church gives her children a version of the Bible, but in it she has not scrupled to alter the text to suit her own dogmas. As an instance we quote Gen. 3:15 as it stands in the Douay Bible, and also in the Vulgate: “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; she shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise her heel.” In this manner a prophecy concerning Christ is made to uphold the Catholic worship of the Virgin Mary.
Speaking of the Virgin Mary, we will notice one or two points which show the papal disregard for the Holy Scriptures. In Deut. 27:15, we read these plain words: “Cursed be the man that maketh any graven or molten image, an abomination unto the Lord, the work of the hands of the craftsman, and putteth it in a secret place.” In the face of the second commandment, and this curse, a book entitled “Glories of Mary,” published with the approval of the Archbishop of New York, on page 658 contains the following:—
“Father Thomas Sanchez never returned home until he had visited some church of Mary. Let us not be weary, then, of visiting our queen every day in some church or chapel, or in our own house, where it would be well for that purpose to have in some retired place a little oratory, with her image, adorned with drapery, flowers, tapers or lamps, and before it also the litanies, the rosary, etc., may be said.”
Again, the apostle Peter, speaking of Christ, said: “Neither is there salvation in any other; for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” Acts 4:12. But in the “Glories of Mary,” page 279, among other blasphemous things we find the following:—
“In the Franciscan chronicles it is related of Brother Leo, that he once saw a red ladder, upon which Jesus Christ was standing, and a white one, upon which stood his holy mother. He saw persons attempting to ascend the red ladder; they ascended a few steps, and then fell; they ascended again, and again fell. Then they were exhorted to ascend the white ladder, and so that he saw them succeed; for the blessed virgin offered them her hand, and they arrived in that manner safe in Paradise.”
Again, on page 177:—
“St. Bonaventure, moreover, says that Mary is called the gate of Heaven, because no one can enter into Heaven if he does not pass through Mary, who is the door of it.”
And again, we read on page 17:—
“If the assertion is true and incontrovertible, as I believe it to be, and as I shall prove in the fifth chapter of this book, that all graces are dispensed by the hand of Mary alone, and that all those who are saved, are saved solely by the means of this divine mother; it may be said as a necessary consequence, that the salvation of all depends upon preaching Mary, and confidence in her intercession.”
We might quote pages to the same effect, but these quotations are sufficient to show that Catholicism is essentially an anti-christian religion.
Now about those “imaginary gibbets” and “imaginary instruments of persecution and torture” with which Protestant writers are said to “terrify and intimidate the weak minded of this world.” Since facts are wanted on this point, we have selected the article on page 635, entitled “Tortures of the Inquisition.” The instruments there mentioned are not imaginary; and, since “Rome never changes,” and this very year Monsignore Capel has repeatedly defended (not apologized for) the Inquisition, and has contended that the heretic is as worthy of punishment as the thief or murderer, we are fully justified in saying that the papal church would as readily torture heretics to-day as she did three hundred years ago.
It is a matter of fact, not of fiction, that on the 23d of August, 1572, thousands of Huguenots were brutally murdered in Paris, by order of the Catholic king, Charles IX., who himself joined in the massacre, and that the massacre received the sanction of the pope.
It is a fact of history that on the 18th of October, 1414, the Emperor Sigismund sent to John Huss a safe-conduct to attend the Council of Constance and to return. The honor of the empire was pledged for his security. Yet on the twenty-sixth day after634the arrival of Huss, he was seized, in flagrant violation of the safe-conduct, carried before the pope and the cardinals, thrust into a filthy prison, and afterwards burned at the stake, without being allowed to speak in his own defense, simply because he denounced the iniquities of the papacy. This was done by order of the council, and the conscience of the emperor was pacified by the decree that “no faith is to be kept with heretics to the prejudice of the church.” This was the doctrine of the third Lateran Council, which affirmed that, “Oaths made against the interest and benefit of the church are not so much to be considered as oaths, but as perjuries.”
It is a fact that the “true character” of the papacy may be learned from a study of the sacred Scriptures. Its character is especially portrayed in Dan. 7:21, 25; 2 Thess. 2:3, 4; Rev. 13:1-7; and 17:3-6. These scriptures, together with the facts of history, compel us to coincide with the declaration of Luther, that “the papacy is a general chase led by the Roman bishop [pope] to catch and destroy souls.”
In writing thus, we have not the slightest personal feeling against any Catholic, and we can readily believe that a large proportion of them are sincere in their devotion. That many of the clergy are honest, is shown by the fact that we frequently hear of priests who are abjuring the Catholic faith. We expect to see many more honest souls leave that communion. It is a fact that comparatively few Catholics are acquainted with the real character and history of their church. These things are kept from them. And so our attack is not on any individual Catholic, but on Roman Catholicism—“the mystery of iniquity”—the monster of organized deception, superstition, and crime.
We wish also to inform our correspondent that we have no apology to make for the perversions and curtailments of Scripture by modern Protestants.
“Modern Protestant pulpits” are very different affairs from those of three hundred years ago. A great deal that is called Protestantism is not worthy of the name—it is so much like Catholicism. This is the great danger of the day. Professed Protestants, who laud the work of Huss, Jerome, Luther, and Knox, will call a man a bigot if he presumes to speak against the Catholic Church, forgetting that that church has the same character to-day that it had when Luther so boldly assailed it. A temporary loss of power is all the difference there is between the papacy now and the papacy then.
It is impossible for us to recount the evils of Romanism every time we speak of that communion, and therefore the reader will please take these few quotations, which might easily be multiplied a hundredfold, as an evidence that we know whereof we speak when we warn people against the papacy. We do not design to use “mysterious sentences,” but we hope ever to have grace and courage enough to speak boldly against that enemy of all civil and religious liberty—Roman Catholicism—and against all that savors of it, even though it sails under the banner of Protestantism. E. J. W.
The Missionary.
By William Clarence White
The Work in Europe.
BASLE, SWITZERLAND, September 18, 1885.
ELDER J. H. WAGGONER—Dear Brother: We have been about four weeks in England and Switzerland, and I will tell you something of our experience, and our impressions as to the work here. We were met at Liverpool by Elder Wilcox, editor of the Present Truth, Brother Drew, who has for two years been working there, and Brother O'Niel, of Southampton, who is assisting Brother Drew in the ship missionary work, and thus gaining an experience so that he may engage in the same work in London. The next day we went with Elder Wilcox to Great Grimsby. Here we met Brother and Sister Mason, of Woodland, Cal., and Elder Lane and wife, and Sister Thayer, formerly of Michigan.
Great Grimsby is a place of thirty thousand inhabitants. It is the greatest fishing port in England, and seems to be a strange place from which to issue our paper; nevertheless, there have been over nine thousand copies sent out monthly, and we know that they are moulding the opinions of many, and preparing the way for the living preachers. We were glad to learn that there are good openings for colporters to labor in all parts of England, and that there are quite a number who are entering this field, also that there are others who will engage in this work as soon as they are instructed how to work successfully. These colporters say that, in order to make their work a success, they ought to have some illustrated pamphlets and tracts, and that the paper should be issued oftener, and made of such a size that they can sell it for a penny (two cents), for this is the popular price of papers in England. If it should be decided to issue the paper semi-monthly, it would be much better for use in England and Australia.
Sabbath and Sunday we enjoyed good meetings with our people. There were about thirty-five present, including ten who came in from other places. Mother spoke to them twice each day. Friday evening she spoke to a small audience in Temperance Hall. It was a rainy evening. Sunday evening she addressed over a thousand in the town hall. Her subject was, "The Love of God." The people seemed deeply interested, and the sermon was reported, and published in the Grimsby News. We feel that our brethren have not yet done their best to present the truth in Grimsby. We believe that a large tent should be pitched here next summer, and a thorough effort made to warn the people of this place. We believe that in some parts of England tents can be as useful to our work as they are in America.
Tuesday evening mother spoke to the small company of Sabbath-keepers in Ulsby, and Wednesday evening to about four hundred persons in and around the tent at Risely. Here Elders Lane and Durland have been holding meetings in a tent for about eight weeks, and nine have begun to keep the Sabbath. Many others acknowledge the truths presented; but they have not the courage to obey their convictions, because it looks as though there would be no way to provide bread for their families if they kept the Sabbath. We have hope that many of these will sometime take their stand to obey the truth. The English people move cautiously. There are many now keeping the Sabbath who were convinced of its importance for months before they had courage to obey.
The next Sabbath and Sunday we spent with Elder Durland at Southampton. There were about fifty of our people assembled. Mother spoke to them Friday evening and twice Sabbath. Sunday morning she was sick. A hard cold, which had been brought on by the dampness of the climate, and the draughts of wind, which it is almost impossible to escape in the European cars, now culminated in hoarseness and fever. Elder Durland had hired a large hall and advertised extensively that she would speak Sunday evening, and he felt that if the people were disappointed it would hurt our influence very much.
All was done that could be, to relieve the hoarseness and break the fever, but apparently it had no effect. She could hardly speak a loud word. We spent much of the afternoon in prayer; and, trusting that the Lord would help her, as in times past, mother consented to go to the hall and try to speak. There were about six hundred assembled in the hall, and when she began, in a hoarse voice, to address them, two or three left the hall. But in less than five minutes her voice cleared, and she spoke an hour, with more force than at any other meeting in England. We knew that God had answered our prayers. The audience listened with breathless attention, and the sermon was published in the Hampshire Independent.
While here, we were led to reflect upon the necessity of a more general distribution of our papers and tracts. These people will not decide in a hurry to obey unpopular truth. They must have time to weigh the matter; therefore it is important to force the matter upon their attention at the earliest opportunity. We have never seen a place where there were so many good places for tract distributors as at the watering-places of England, and never a place where this manner of distributing the reading matter offered so many advantages. There are many who will investigate and accept a new doctrine, who, like Nicodemus, do not wish it known that they are departing from the accepted traditions. And these will take tracts from a distributer when they would not receive them from a colporter.
There is another way of presenting the truth to the people which is almost overlooked, and that is through articles in the daily and weekly papers, all over the country. In England we believe there is a way to present some of the practical truths and duties for these times through the secular papers. I believe we ought to have a score of young men and women training themselves to be reporters and newspaper correspondents, that they may engage in this work. We are doing a great work in establishing presses of our own; but why not use other people's presses too, especially as this can be done at almost no expense to ourselves?
The present truth will be presented to the people of Europe, all the difficulties notwithstanding, and every means available must be employed. There will be needed not only ministers and colporters, but those who can be teachers in the printing and canvassing work, and those who can do first-class work as reporters, correspondents, and editors. Are any of our young people fitting themselves for this work?
W. C. WHITE.
Report from Lake River, W. T.
By H. W. Reed; W. C. Ward
THIS is a farming district seven miles north of Vancouver. An interest was awakened here while Brethren Starr and Ward were laboring at that place.
We commenced meetings here Sept. 10. Remained twenty-one days and held twenty-two meetings. The house was well filled with very attentive listeners. We have never witnessed better order. We found some very kind and hospitable people. The Lord blessed in presenting the truth. A Sabbath-school of twenty-one members was fully organized. A club of ten Instructors for one year was ordered, and money raised to nearly pay for them. Six signed the covenant. Our parting meeting was characterized by a deep moving of the Spirit of God.
We sold two Bibles, and two of the brethren635subscribed for our leading journals, Review and Herald and the Signs of the Times. We left them in good courage. Elder F. D. Starr will meet with them occasionally. May God save them is our prayer. H. W. REED, W. C. WARD.
The Conditions of Spiritual Blessing
By Interior
WHEN a blessing comes to the church, it will mean a surrender of old grudges, a forgiving of those who have wronged us, a wider Christian charity, a more patient endurance of sufferings for Christ's sake, a more self-sacrificing spirit of benevolence, a more complete separation from the world, a holier life, and an intenser service. And perhaps the revival is withheld until the church comes to the point where she shall seek it, not with a qualified, but an absolute surrender and a holy willingness to be and to do all that the Spirit shall command. We want a blessing—the shallowest experience can say that; but whether we want a searching and withering, an unsettling, it may be, of hopes long unquestioned, and a renewal of life when it means agony for souls and cross-bearing for Christ—that is a deeper question. —Interior.