Review and Herald, Vol. 20, No. 6. (7/8/1862)

Review and Herald

Jul 8, 1862

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jul 8, 1862

REVIEW OF A. N. SEYMOUR.

By J. M. Aldrich

(Concluded.)

"50. Where is there any evidence that the covenant commanded (See 1 Chron. xvi, 15-18. Ps. cv, 8-12. Gen. xvii, 1-3. Acts vii, 8. Rom. iv, 11, 12,) to a thousand generations, is the covenant of ten commandments? Let the un-visioned, un-prejudiced, un-sectarianized, un-creedised, humble student of the precious word of life, determine the truthfulness of this enquiry, by comprehending the above references to Scripture facts. It will not do for men to assert and re-assert without giving proof to substantiate what they affirm. The thing must be proved by plain, incontrovertible facts. Now the above testimony will convince all men who are wedded to truth more than to party, that the covenant commanded to a thousand generations, is the covenant of circumcision. But for the arguments sake, I am willing to admit that it is the covenant of ten commandments. Now then, it is claimed by Sabbath keepers, that there has been only about 100 generations since creation, consequently, the decalogue must be observed 900 generations yet, and they all this while believing that all generation is soon to cease by the coming of Christ. Oh, consistency thou art a precious jewel! Let me carry this thought a little farther, for the benefit of those who already think that they are invulnerable, infallible, and diplomised in reference to the Sabbath. Are not all the commandments, statutes, judgments, even the entire law commanded to a thousand generations? Yes, or in other words throughout their generations, for the last expression signifies the whole of their generations. Consult the following testimony, and all the candid will surely say yes. Deut. vii, 9, 11; viii, 1, 11; x, 12, 13; xi, 1, 8, 22, 32. Lev. xxiii, 14, 21, 31. Eph. ii, 15. Col. ii, 14-17. Rom. x, 4. Gal. v, 4, 8, 9."

I heartily subscribe to one sentiment contained in the foregoing, namely: "It will not do for men to assert and re-assert without giving proof to substantiate what they affirm." And one prominent assertion made therein, forcibly impresses my mind with the importance of giving special heed to the truthful remark above expressed. Had the author of "fifty unanswerable arguments" faithfully heeded the same, his tract had been beautifully less than what it is now; and surely there had been no place therein for any such wild assertion as that to which I allude, viz., "that the covenant commanded to a thousand generations is the covenant of circumcision." And you, Eld. S., have the effrontery to say, substantially, that the testimony which you have produced "will convince all men who are wedded to truth," that the above is the true doctrine. To this remark I will simply say, that no one who is wedded to common sense, and is not "un-visioned," (i. e., blind,) will ever be convinced of any such thing. But let us examine carefully the "testimony." Your first three references, 1 Chron. xvi, 15-18. Ps. cv, 8-12. Gen. xvii, 1-3, all speak plainly of God's covenant made with Abraham; but not one word therein is said, nor allusion therein made, to "the covenant of circumcision," and from the first two references aforesaid, we learn that God had commanded his covenant with Abraham, to a thousand generations. Surely then, your "testimony" thus far, proves nothing for you. In your next reference, Acts vii, 8, an incidental allusion is made to God's act of giving to Abraham the rite of circumcision, which, indeed, is here called the covenant of circumcision; but not one word is said about this covenant being commanded to a thousand generations. And it is also worthy of remark that this covenant of circumcision is not said to have been made with Abraham, but given to him. See reference: "He gave him the covenant of circumcision;" and this is in harmony with what Paul says of the same matter in Rom. iv, 11, which is your next and last reference: "He, (Abraham) received the sign of circumcision," &c. From one of these texts we learn that God gave to Abraham the covenant or sign of circumcision, and from the other that Abraham received it; also that the word covenant in the former text, is used in an accommodated sense, and corresponds exactly with the word sign in the latter text. But now it is proper to inquire, of what was the rite of circumcision a sign? The answer to this question furnishes the key to the whole matter. By turning to the 17th chap. of Genesis, which gives the original account of the matter under consideration, we find the answer. We there learn that the rite of circumcision which was given to Abraham, was a sign or token of the covenant made with him. See Gen. xvii, 11, "And it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you." Then, indeed, if circumcision is the token or sign of the covenant which God made with Abraham, it cannot be the covenant itself. Therefore, your "testimony" totally fails to prove what you affirm.

We are now prepared to consider the covenant which God made with Abraham, and which was commanded to a thousand generations. God's covenant, strictly speaking, consisted only of what he had commanded; but in what is termed the Abrahamic covenant, there were mutual considerations existing, there being embraced therein God's promise to Abraham and his seed, of the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession. Gen. xvii, 8. 1 Chron. xvi, 18. Ps. cv, 11. The faithful performance of God's covenant proper, being the basis or consideration of his promise of the land of Canaan. This view looks reasonable and is in perfect harmony with the reason which God assigned for renewing his covenant with Isaac, "Because that Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments my statutes and my laws." Gen. xxvi, 5. But we notice that God's covenant which was commanded to a thousand generations, was also confirmed unto Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant. This law and this everlasting covenant we will now proceed to identify, which being done, will of course identify the covenant commanded to a thousand generations.

We pass along down through the patriarchal dispensation, from Abraham to Isaac, thence to Jacob and his descendants, and then on a noted occasion we hear the Lord saying to Moses, "Come up to me in the mount and be there, and I will give thee tables of stone and a law and commandments which I have written." Ex. xxiv, 12. Here we find the law of ten commandments about to be confirmed unto Jacob, (his descendants.) Afterwards we hear Moses speaking unto Israel, thus: "And the Lord spake unto you out of the midst of the fire; ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude, only ye heard a voice. And he declared unto you his covenant which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments, and he wrote them upon two tables of stone." Deut. iv, 12, 13. Here we discover that the same law of ten commandments which the Lord promised to give Moses in the mount, is identified as God's covenant, is a covenant commanded. Again we hear Moses saying to Israel, "But because the Lord loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers, . . . know therefore, that the Lord thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him, and keep his commandments to a thousand generations."

Deut. vii, 8, 9. Here is a plain reference to God's covenant with Abraham, and from this text, it is clear that God's commandments here spoken of, are identical with the covenant that was commanded to a thousand generations. Therefore from the various texts which I have quoted and referred to, I cannot possibly avoid the conclusion, that the ten commandments constitute the covenant commanded to a thousand generations.

But Eld. S., for "arguments sake," you very graciously admit my conclusion. But alas for such arguments! It is claimed, forsooth, "by Sabbath-keepers, that there has been only about 100 generations since creation, (I am not aware that any such claim is peculiar among Sabbath-keepers,) consequently the decalogue must be observed 900 generations yet, and they all the while believing that all generation is soon to cease by the coming of Christ!" Did it occur to Eld. S., before he admitted so much for "arguments sake," that he also was an advent believer, and that he professes to believe "that all generation is soon to cease by the coming of Christ!" What would he propose to have done with his covenant of circumcision (which he says is commanded to a thousand generations) during the 900, or unexpired generations yet to come! If we are in a dilemma, is he not in a worse one? But I am pleased to inform our friend that under the new covenant, God's law is to be written in the hearts of his people; and consequently it will be their pleasure to observe the same, not only during the comparatively short period represented by 900 generations yet to come, but still onward thence through the rolling ages of eternity, adinfinitum. Think not that, although "all generation" is to cease by the coming of Christ, that therefore a given period of duration,—which perchance may be represented by a certain number of generations,—must also of necessity cease at the same time! I have no doubt that every child of God, when gathered home into his kingdom, will be inspired by a sentiment akin to that which inspired the heart of David, when he said, "I delight to do thy will O my God; yea thy law is within my heart."

But right here, Eld. S., you seem to have a prolific "thought," and desire to carry the same "a little farther," for the benefit of those who are "diplomised," &c., with reference to the Sabbath. Now as I am not familiar with the meaning of the word diplomised, I presume I am not fully prepared to appreciate the force of your "thought!" Doubtless you are able to define the term, though I think Webster says nothing about it. The product of your thought, however, seems to be, that all the commandments, statutes, and judgments, and even the entire law, are commanded to a thousand generations, or in other words, as you say, "throughout their generations;" thus making the expression, "throughout their generations," synonymous with "a thousand generations." Though your thought results in such a statement, and though you have appended thereto several Scripture references as vouchers for the same, I have to say that the proof is still wanting. Your texts utterly fail to furnish the key to your conclusion; and I know of no rule by which we are to determine that a thousand means any less than ten hundred. Thus I leave your fiftieth and last "unanswerable argument" against the Sabbath; and now present to the reader your closing remarks.

"These important questions and remarks are submitted to the candid consideration of all our brethren everywhere, and especially to that class who observe the fourth commandment. My prayer and earnest exhortation to all of our brethren in the ministry, as well as the lay members of the church is to thoroughly canvass the Sabbath question; for when you shall have done this, you will have learnt to your entire satisfaction, that there is not one particle of evidence shining from God's precious word, which impresses seventh-day Sabbath-keeping upon christians. Some of our brethren are fully posted upon this question, but many are not. Those that are, their whole being rests in the assurance that they are right in the matter, and fear not to meet the issue any where, nor with any person. Dear brethren, you who have this great truth burning upon the altar of your hearts, do not neglect to carry this present truth among the Sabbath congregations everywhere! Go to head quarters, to Battle Creek, and implore them in the name of Jesus Christ and the holy apostles, to open their doors, their church, the columns of their paper, and their hearts, for the reception of the truth. They have had a great zeal, a zeal too, that is not according to knowledge, for our conversion. Now then, let us return the favor with a zeal and power that is according to knowledge. They will, and must feel the force of facts, and every honest soul must forsake that sandy foundation, or be lost eternally. Some may suppose that this cutting remark is very uncharitable; but when I take into consideration the testimony of God's word, and the spirit which it inculcates in its adherents, the conclusion is unavoidable. These are my honest conclusions, after years of faithful investigation."

Comments on the above remarks are unnecessary. I have only to say, that it is a matter of deep regret, that any man, whom God has endowed with an ordinary intellectual capacity, should, "after years of faithful investigation," be led to adopt as his "honest conclusions," such views and sentiments as are put forth with so much assurance by Mr. Seymour in his tract. As for myself, I am not yet prepared to believe that God's moral law of ten commandments is such a "sandy foundation" as that "every honest soul must forsake" it, or be "lost eternally!" Neither am I prepared to believe that there is danger of being "lost eternally" on account of a strict and holy observance of the Lord's Sabbath. Although my "years of faithful investigation" of the matter in controversy, may have been considerably less than Eld. Seymour's, yet, I am thankful that, during a comparatively short period of such investigation, I have been able to see and learn the falsity of the doctrine, that God's moral law has "ceased its obligations upon the world!" I am thankful also for the light of "present truth" in regard to the Sabbath; that, although the dust and tradition of centuries have been thrown around it by the "man of sin," God in his providence has caused and is causing light from the heavenly sanctuary to shine thereupon.

Reader, I have finished my task. I have written much more than I intended when I commenced, yet have endeavored to be brief. And though I have presented scarcely a tithe of the evidence at hand, in favor of the perpetuity of the Lord's Sabbath, yet I trust I have not failed to show clearly to all,—except those who are determined to doubt and cavil,—that there is no soundness whatever in the so called "fifty unanswerable arguments against Seventh-day Sabbath-keeping."

May the Lord lead us, dear reader, into all truth, and help us to be obedient unto all his commandments, that we "may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city."

J. M. ALDRICH.

GENTLY CHIDE.

GENTLY chide thy erring brother, Speak not in reproachful strains; Cruel words will only smother All the good that yet remains.

Do to him as you would ever Have him do to you and yours: Gently chide, for you can never Know the trials he endures—

You can never know the sorrow That attends his daily life; Hoping joy the coming morrow, Finding naught but care and strife.

Struggling on 'mid grief and sadness, Fighting vice from day to day; Driven at length almost to madness, Wildly he has gone astray.

Still below his mental blindness, Lingers yet a little flame, Which, by words of love and kindness, Might be made to blaze again.

Gently chide him; O remember You have often gone astray; Rouse him softly from his slumber, Lead him on in virtue's way.

JUDSON'S LETTER ON DRESS.

By A. Judson

To the Female Members of the Christian Churches in United States of America.

DEAR SISTERS IN CHRIST: Excuse my publicly addressing you. The necessity of the case is my only apology. Whether you will consider it a sufficient apology for the sentiments of this letter, unfashionable, I confess, and perhaps unpalatable, I know not. We are sometimes obliged to encounter the hazard of offending those whom, of all others, we desire to please. Let me throw myself at once on your mercy, dear sisters, allied by national consanguinity, professors of the same holy religion, fellow pilgrims to the same happy world. Pleading these endearing ties, let me beg you to regard me as a brother, and to listen with candor and forbearance to my honest tale.

In raising up a church of Christ in this heathen land, and in laboring to elevate the mind of the heathen converts to the standard of the gospel, we have always found one chief obstacle in that principle of vanity, that love of dress and display (I beg you will bear with me) which has in every age and in all countries, been a ruling passion of the fair sex, as the love of riches, power, and fame has characterized the other. That obstacle lately became more formidable, through the admission of two or three fashionable females into the church; and the arrival of several missionary sisters, dressed and adorned in that manner which is too prevalent in our beloved native land. On my meeting the church after a year's absence, I beheld an appalling profusion of ornaments, and saw that the demon of vanity was laying waste the female department. At that time I had not maturely considered the subject, and did not feel sure what ground I ought to take. I apprehended also, that I should be unsupported and perhaps opposed by some of my coadjutors. I confined my efforts therefore to private exhortation, and with but little effect. Some of the ladies, out of regard to their pastor's feelings, took off their necklaces and ear ornaments, before they entered the chapel, and tied them up in a corner of their handkerchiefs, and on returning, as soon as they were out of the mission house, stopped in the middle of the street to array themselves anew.

In the mean time I was called to visit the Karens, a wild people, several days' journey to the north of Maulmein. Little did I expect there to encounter the same enemy, in those "wilds, horrid and dark with o'er-shadowing trees." But I found that he had been there before me, and reigned with a peculiar sway, from time immemorial. On one Karen woman I counted between twelve and fifteen necklaces, of all colors, sizes, and materials. Three was the average. Brass belts above the ankles, neat braids of black hair tied below the knees, rings of all sorts on the fingers, bracelets on the wrists and arms, long instruments of some metal perforating the lower part of the ear, by an immense aperture, and reaching nearly to the shoulders, fancifully constructed bags, inclosing the hair, and suspended from the back part of the head, not to speak of the ornamental parts of their clothing, consisting of the fashion and the tone of the fair Karenesses. The dress of the female converts was not essentially different from that of their country women. I saw that I was brought into a situation that precluded all retreat—that I must fight or die.

For a few nights I spent some sleepless hours, distressed by this and other subjects, which will always press upon the heart of a missionary in a new place. I considered the spirit of the religion of Jesus Christ. I opened to 1 Tim. ii, 9, and read these words of the inspired apostle: "I will also that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety, not with broidered hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array." I asked myself, Can I baptize a Karen woman in her present attire? No. Can I administer the Lord's supper to one of the baptised in that attire? No. Can I refrain from enforcing the prohibition of the apostle? Not without betraying the trust I have received from him. Again I considered that the question concerned not the Karens only, but the whole Christian world; that its decision would involve a train of unknown consequences; that a single step would lead me into a long and perilous way.

I considered Maulmein and the other stations; I considered the state of the public at home. But, "What is that to thee? follow thou me," was the continual response, and weighed more than all. I renewedly offered myself to Christ, and prayed for strength to go forward in the path of duty, supported or deserted, successful or defeated, in the ultimate issue.

Soon after coming to this conclusion a Karen woman offered herself for baptism. After the usual examination, I inquired whether she could give up her ornaments for Christ. It was an unexpected blow! I explained the spirit of the gospel, I appealed to her own consciousness of vanity. I read the apostle's prohibition. She looked again and again at her handsome necklace (she wore but one), and then with an air of modest decision, that would adorn beyond all outward ornaments any of my sisters whom I have the honor of addressing, she took it off, saying, I love Christ more than this. The news began to spread. The Christian women made but little hesitation. A few others opposed, but the work went on.

At length the evil which I most dreaded came upon me. Some of the Karen men had been to Maulmein, and seen what I wished they had not. And one day, when we were discussing the subject of ornaments, one of the Christians came forward in my face, and declared that at Maulmein he had actually seen one of the great female teachers wearing a string of gold beads around her neck!!!

Lay down this paper, dear sister, and sympathize a moment with your fallen missionary. Was it not a hard case? Was it not cruel for that sister thus to smite down to the ground her poor brother, who, without that blow, was hardly able to keep his ground? But she knew it not. However, though cast down, I was not destroyed; though sorely bruised and wounded, I endeavored to maintain the warfare as well as I could. After some conflict the enemy left the field, and when I left those parts, the female converts were, generally speaking, arrayed in modest apparel.

On arriving at Maulmein, and partially recovering from a fever which I had contracted in the Karen woods, the first thing I did was to crawl out to the house of the patroness of the gold beads. To her I related my adventures—to her

commiseration I commended my grief. With what ease and truth too, could that sister reply, Notwithstanding these beads, I dress more plainly than most ministers' wives and professors of religion in our native land. Those beads are the only ornament I wear; they were given me when quite a child by a dear mother, whom I never expect to see again (another hard case); and she enjoined it on me never to part with them as long as I lived, but to wear them as a memorial of her! O ye Christian mothers, what a lesson you have before you! Can you, dare you, give injunctions to your daughters directly contrary to apostolic commands? But to the honor of my sister be it recorded, that as soon as she understood the merit of the case, and the mischief done by such example, off went the gold beads. She gave decisive proof that she loved Christ more than father or mother. Her example, united with the efforts of the rest of us at this station, is beginning to exercise a redeeming influence in the female department of the church.

But notwithstanding these favorable signs, nothing, really nothing, is yet done. And why? This mission and all others must be sustained by continual supplies of missionaries, male and female, from the mother country. Your sisters and daughters will continually come out to take the place of those who are removed by death, and to occupy numberless stations still unoccupied. And when they arrive they will be dressed in their usual way, as Christian women at home are dressed. And the female converts will run around them, and gaze upon them, with the most prying curiosity, regarding them as the freshest representations of the Christian religion, from the land where it flourishes in all its purity and glory. And when they see the gold and jewels pendant from their ears, the beads and chains encircling their necks, the finger rings set with diamonds, and rubies, the rich variety of ornamental head dress, "the mantles and the wimples and the crisping pins," (see the rest in Isa. iii), they will cast a bitter, reproachful, triumphant glance at their old teachers, and spring with fresh avidity to repurchase and resume their long-neglected elegancies. The cheering news will fly up to the Dahlgyaing, the Laing-bwai, and the Sal-wen;—the Karenesses will reload their necks and ears and arms and ankles; and when, after another year's absence, I return and take my seat before the Burmese or the Karen church, I shall behold the demon of vanity enthroned in the center of the assembly, more firmly than ever, grinning defiance to the prohibitions of apostles, and the exhortations of us who would fain be their humble followers. And thus you, my dear sisters, sitting quietly by your fire-sides, or repairing devoutly to your places of worship, do, by your example, spread the poison of vanity through all the rivers and mountains, and wilds of this far distant land; and while you are sincerely and fervently praying for the upbuilding of the Redeemer's kingdom, are inadvertently building up that of the Devil. If, on the other hand, you divest yourself of all meretricious ornaments, your sisters and daughters who come hither will be divested, of course; the further supplies of pride and vanity will be cut off; and the churches at home being kept pure, the churches here will be pure also.

Dear Sisters,—Having finished my tale, and therein exhibited the necessity under which I lay of addressing you, I beg leave to submit a few topics to your candid and prayerful consideration.

1. Let me appeal to conscience, and inquire, What is the real motive for wearing ornamental and costly apparel? Is it not the desire for setting off one's person to the best advantage, and of exciting the love and admiration of others? Is not such dress calculated to gratify self-love, to cherish sentiments of vanity and pride? And is it not the nature of these sentiments to acquire strength from indulgence? Do such motives and sentiments comport with the meek, humble, self-denying religion of Jesus Christ? I would here respectfully suggest that these questions will not be answered so faithfully in the midst of company as when quite alone kneeling before God.

2. Consider the words of the apostle quoted above from 1 Tim. ii, 9: "I will also that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness, and sobriety, not with broidered hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array." I do not quote a similar command recorded in 1 Pet. iii, 3, because the verbal construction is not quite so definite, though the import of the two passages is the same. But cannot the force of these passages be evaded? Yes, and nearly every command in scripture can be evaded, and every doctrinal assertion perverted, plausibly and handsomely, if we set about it in good earnest. But preserving the posture above alluded to, with the inspired volume spread open at the passage in question, ask your hearts in simplicity and godly sincerity, whether the meaning is not just as plain as the sun at noon-day. Shall we then bow to the authority of an inspired apostle, or shall we not? From that authority shall we appeal to the prevailing usages and fashions of the age? If so, please recall the missionaries you have sent to the heathen; for the heathen can vindicate all their superstitions on the same ground.

O Christian sisters, can you hesitate and ask what you shall do? Bedew those ornaments with the tears of contrition; consecrate them to the cause of charity. ...... We shall soon appear before the judgment seat of Christ, to be tried for our conduct, and to receive the things done in the body. Will you then wish, that in defiance of his authority, you had adorned your mortal bodies with gold, and precious stones, and costly attire, cherishing self-love, vanity, and pride? Or will you wish that you had chosen a life of self-denial, renounced the world, taken up the cross daily and followed him? And as you will then wish you had done, do now.

Dear Sisters,

Your affectionate brother in Christ.

A. JUDSON.

Maulmein, Oct., 1831.

MORAL COURAGE.

THAT was a noble reply when the Sultan of Turkey offered Kossuth wealth and power if he would embrace the Moslem faith; “Welcome, if need be, the ax or the gibbet; but curses on the tongue that dares to make to me so infamous a proposal!” He was a refugee in the domains of the Sultan, and to refuse compliance with his wishes might be death; but the great Hungarian had resolved that, come what might, his conscience should be free. The words of Zwingle, when emolument was offered him if he would adhere to the Romish tenets, were as noble: “Do not think that for any money I will suppress a single syllable of the truth.”

No one can fail to admire the moral courage that prompted these replies, or the strong language of the replies themselves. Moral courage never uses weak words. The Saviour enunciated the principle of true moral courage when he said, “Let your communication be yea, yea; nay, nay; for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.” A man's strength of character may be correctly measured by the manner in which he answers an opponent. “I have been bullied,” wrote the Countess of Dorset to Sir Joseph Williamson, who had nominated to her a candidate for the borough of Appleby, “by an usurper. I have been neglected by a court, but I will not be dictated by a subject—your man shan't stand!” We need nothing more to tell us that the Countess was a strong woman. When President Lincoln, while on his way to the capital, asked the Democratic Legislature of New Jersey if they would sustain him should it be necessary “to put the foot down firmly,” it understood him, and applauded. He did not say that “if he should be reduced to the dire necessity of resorting to coercion to uphold the principles of constitutional liberty for which the fathers,” etc., but should it be necessary “to put the foot down firmly.” These few meaning words showed that he had moral stamina. The plain Saxon of his Inaugural sent to the winds the schemes of compromisers. In blunt, bold words, he thrust the principles of equity and of the Constitution into the face of the nation, and declared that he would stand by those principles. The people took heart—their sense of justice woke—they knew their man, and re-echoed his voice.

There are comparatively few who, under all circumstances, dare speak their real sentiments. Let one glance over The Congressional Globe for the last decade, and he will see how lamentably the truism is verified. Our Charles Sumners and Andrew Johnsons can hardly be called representative men. They are

“Like Druid rocks, Or spires of land that stand apart, Cleft from the main.”

Men like Sumner are known as “radicals,” and men like Johnson as “renegades,” and such epithets are often but other words for saying that a man dare assert that his soul is his own. But, with all the abuse heaped upon them, such men are regarded with universal confidence; and they alone. When the calculating politician wishes to know on which side of a political question Sumner will be found, he secretly asks himself which side has the claim of humanity—he is confident that Sumner will not swerve from that.

The reply of Parson Brownlow, the Tennessee patriot, is an example of true independence of spirit. He was in prison, and had suffered severely from an acute disease. “Brownlow,” said an officer, “you should not be here. Take the oath of allegiance to the Confederate Government, which will not only entitle you to a speedy release, but will insure you protection.” “Sir,” said Brownlow, “before I would take the oath to support such a hell-forsaken institution, I would suffer myself to rot or die with old age!” The answer, though characteristically Southern, reminds one of Luther's famous remark about entering Worms. The noble Tennessean was ready to sacrifice ease, health, and life itself for a principle. He meant to be his own man, and dared assert his claim to his manhood in unmistakable words.

Principles are bulwarks intrusted us by God. If we fail to defend them, we are conquered, ruined. To defend our principles requires plain, truthful speech. “Let your yea, be yea; and your nay, nay;” says the sacred writer, “les ye fall into condemnation.” It requires moral courage to obey the injunction. We are prone to dissemble; considerations of kindness often lead us into deception; we must train ourselves to truth. A man trained to truth finds in truth his moral atmosphere, and his soul dilates and becomes godlike in the clear, pure air. His uncompromising words come forth in the day of trial as spontaneously as those of Kossuth, Zwingle, or Brownlow. He lives for his spiritual nature. He is willing to sacrifice everything temporal, so he may go pure and unshackled at last to the presence of his Maker.

“After time, And that full voice that circles round the grave, Will mark him nobly.”—Butterworth.

Big Words

BIG WORDS.—A clergyman, while composing a sermon, made use of the word "ostentatious man." Throwing down his pen, he wished to satisfy himself, before he proceeded, as to whether a great portion of his congregation might comprehend the meaning of these words, and he adopted the following method of proof.

Ringing the bell his footman appeared, and he was thus addressed by his master: "What do you conceive to be implied by an ostentatious man?" "An ostentatious man, sir," said Thomas; "why, sir, I should say a perfect gentleman." "Very good," said the vicar; "send Ellis (the coachman) here." "Ellis," said the vicar, "what do you imagine an ostentatious man to be?" "An ostentatious man, sir," replied Ellis; "why an ostentatious man means what we calls (saving your presence) a very jolly fellow." It is hardly necessary to add that the vicar substituted a less ambiguous word.

THE CULTIVATION OF PERSONAL RELIGION.

This is a subject of vital importance to every person professing to be a follower of the Redeemer. We deem it essential to the very existence of piety in the human heart, that its professor should strive mightily every day for the mastery over each besetting sin, and for the maintenance of a life of godliness. No real personal religion can be mantained without this daily struggle. We have been led to pen a few remarks on this subject, from the fear that some who profess and call themselves Christians, and who are members of churches, have lost sight of this truth. They seem to think that religion consists only in outward observances, instead of cultivation of that inner life, which is the motive power of all true action. Personal religion does not consist simply in zeal, knowledge, or an attendance on all the public means of grace. We can imagine that all these may exist while the inner life is languishing, or indeed there is an entire absence of genuine piety. The Apostle Paul, in a few comprehensive words, describes, personally, religion thus, "I am crucified with Christ; nevertheless, I live; yet not I, but Christ who liveth in me, and the life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." Again he says, "I follow after if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus." Personal religion is the great mystery of godliness; the life of God in the soul; which life is sustained and carried on by communion with God, and while God is the source of this life, yet it is obvious that it must be guarded and defended continually against all the assaults and interruptions incident to the present state of being. The failure of all who turn aside from vital godliness, is traced to the noncultivation of personal religion.—Sel.

Continue reading: THOUGHTS ON THE REVELATION