Review and Herald, Vol. 39, No. 13.
THE WALDENSES, ALBIGENSES, OR VAUDOISPage 1
THE WALDENSES, ALBIGENSES, OR VAUDOIS
By M. E. Cornell
Testimony of Eminent Authors.—No. 1.
THE WALDENSES, ALBIGENSES, OR VAUDOIS.
It is conceded by church historians generally, that the class of people known by these names, retained the truth, as held by the apostles, more free from corruptions than any other class whatever. Many Baptist authors claim a succession from John the Baptist through the Waldenses down to the Baptist church of this day, and that they only can go back to the apostles, outside of the Catholic church. But if the Waldenses were genuine Baptists, there has been a wonderful apostasy; for the Baptists of to-day, very many of them, are antinomians, teaching the abolition of the law of ten commandments. But the Waldenses taught the perpetuity of the entire decalogue. THEIR ANTIQUITY AND PURITY.
Bishop Claude, of Turin, A. D. 817, bears witness that the gospel was preserved among this people in the mountains, in its native purity and glorious light.” Dr. M'Crie says: “As for the Waldenses, give me leave to call them the very seed of the primitive and pure church.”—Hist. & Progress, &c. Theo. Beza says: “They have preserved the Christian doctrine and worship in evangelical purity and simplicity, while the most profound darkness covered the rest of Europe. It is from the apostles, or their immediate successors, that they have received the gospel.” “It is true, the Vaudois have departed more or less from their former simplicity since the Reformation.”—Preface, p. 94. Benedict says: “Their enemies confirm their great antiquity,” and “being, as it were, by natural walls, as well as by God’s grace, separated from the rest of the world, never partook of the overflowing corruption.” In the preface to the French Bible, the translators say that “they have always had the full enjoyment of the heavenly truth contained in the Holy Scriptures, ever since they were enriched with the same by the apostles; having, in fair manuscript, preserved the entire Bible in their native tongue, from generation to generation.”—Hist. Bap. Denomination, pp. 21, 33, 293. Baird says: “In the valleys of the Alps, by pure, visible churches, the ancient faith of Christianity has been preserved through all the middle ages of innovating superstition, sound and uncontaminated.”—Baird’s Hist., p. 123. Cassini, an Italian Priest, said he found it handed down, that “the Vaudois were as ancient as the Christian church.” Campain, the Jesuit, said: “They were said to be more ancient than the Roman Church.” The Catholic Bishop, Claude de Seyssel, made the following charges against the Vaudois: “They will receive only that which is written in the Old and New Testaments; nay, they say that the Roman Pontiffs and other Bishops have degraded the sacred text, by their doctrine and false commandments.”—Hist. Vaudois, p. 108. Bishop Claude affirms: “The Vaudois are without reproach before men, and do their utmost endeavors to keep the commandments of God.” The French Historian, De Thou, says: “The Vaudois keep the commandments of the decalogue.” The Waldenses’ Confession of Faith, Art. V, reads as follows: “That Christ is that promised to the [our] fathers who received the law. So that by the law, having a just idea of their sins and their want of justice and insufficiency, they desired the coming of Christ to make satisfaction for their sins.” The Vaudois Catechism of the 12th century, has, “Question. By what art thou enabled to know that thou believest in God?” “Answer. I know his commandments, and keep them.” “Question. How many commandments of God are there?” “Answer. Ten; as is shown in Exodus, &c.”—Hist. Vaudois, pp. 233, 234. In their Noble Lesson, they say: “Christ changed not the law, that it should be abandoned, but renewed it, that it might be the better kept.” In their Confession to the Parliament of Turin, A. D. 1556, they say: “We abide by the ten commandments of God, contained in the twentieth chapter of Exodus.” A woman testified before the tribunal, that she heard the Vaudois say, “They were the men who had, by God’s commandments, learned how to serve him.”—Baird’s Hist., p. 71. On image worship, the papists plead for excuse: “It is in commemoration and in honor of our Saviour, that we serve, honor, and adore the cross.” But the Vaudois minister replied: “God commands one thing; and these people do the contrary. God commands us to bear our cross, not to worship it.”—Hist. Vaudois by Henri Arnaud. Jones, in his Church Hist., chap. V, sec. iv, says, that “Louis XII, King of France, being informed by the enemies of the Waldenses inhabiting a part of the province of Provence, that several heinous crimes were laid to their account, sent the Master of Requests, and a certain doctor of the Sorbonne, who was confessor to his majesty, to make inquiry into this matter. On their return, they reported that they had visited all the parishes where they dwelt, had inspected the places of worship, but they had found there no images, nor signs of the ornaments belonging to the mass, nor any of the ceremonies of the Romish church; much less could they discover any traces of those crimes with which they were charged. On the contrary, they kept the Sabbath day, observed the ordinance of baptism according to the primitive church, instructed their children in the articles of the Christian faith, and the commandments of God. The king, having heard the report of his commissioners, said, with an oath, that they were better men than himself or his people.” The Comprehensive Commentary, on Rev. 12:17, makes the following important statement: “Some think hereby are meant the Albigenses, who were first by Dioclesian driven into barren, mountainous places, and afterward cruelly murdered by popish rage and power, for several generations; and for no other reason than because they kept the commandments of God, and held the testimony of Jesus Christ.” When we reflect that in making much of the commandments of God, we are in harmony with the purest church that existed, from the time of the apostles, we may say with the psalmist, “Then shall I not be ashamed, when I have respect unto all thy commandments.” Ps. 119: 6. Foggy Lawyers.
By D. H. Lamson
A LAWYER once said that if a point is not clear, then go to work and make it so foggy that you cannot see head or tail to it. This our opposers seem determined to do on the law question. For a long time in the past, they have been unwilling to admit any distinction between the so-called ceremonial law and the decalogue, or ten commandments. But in the Advent Christian Times, of June 13, 1871, this distinction is acknowledged. And in addition to these, another code is brought forward, called the law of faith, between which and the ten-commandment law, a distinction is claimed to exist; but in the explanation it is clearly to be seen that there is no difference between them. So, instead of two laws, we have three; the third, however, unnecessary, as it is just like the second; and thus our whole claim is at last admitted; for, says the writer, stealing, adultery, murder, &c., are forbidden by the law of the Spirit. This “&c.,” of course, includes the remaining seven commandments not quoted. But error cannot go straight; for this admission is directly contradictory to a preceding statement and semblance of an argument on 2 Cor. 3: 7–11, making no distinction between the ministration of the law and the law itself. The law as a whole, and in each of its parts, demanded the death of the wilful transgressor. Under that ministration, the penalty was immediately carried out, and the death penalty was attached to all the commandments, as all can see who will take the trouble to examine. And further, the death penalty is still attached to the law of God, and it will be ministered to the finally incorrigible. I refer the earnest seeker after truth to the following scriptures which clearly prove it: 2 Pet. 2: 9; Job 21: 30. The transgressors of these three commandments, which this writer expressly says belong to the law of the Spirit, will be punished with death. See Rev. 22: 15. Notice carefully the characters mentioned here; and these are to be destroyed by devouring fire. See Rev. 20: 9. What, then, is the meaning of the expressions in 2 Cor. 3: 7–11? Evidently this: Paul is contrasting the two ministrations—the ministration of righteousness, and the ministration of death; the ministration of life and of condemnation. A practical illustration of this may be found in John 8: 4–11. Now Jesus does not mean to teach that the violation of the seventh commandment is not a crime, or that it is not deserving of punishment. See his comment on the same in Matt. 5: 28; but he means to give this woman space for repentance. This is the glory of the gospel ministration. In the old ministration, there was no exemption; no means of pardon to the wilfully guilty, though it should be sought carefully and with tears. But in the new, repentance and remission of sins is preached in the name of Jesus, Luke 24: 47; and the testimony of our Saviour in John 8: 11, “Go, and sin no more,” covers all the ground. Remission of sins that are past does not include indulgences for the future, but presupposes a life of willingly-rendered obedience. Then it is the ministration of condemnation and the ministration of pardon which are here contrasted; but pardon only ultimately to the penitents, as the impenitent are reserved to the day of Judgment to be punished; and the manner of this punishment, and the means by which it is in part accomplished, are clearly and graphically delineated in such scriptures as the following: Job 38: 22, 23; Isa. 28: 17; Rev. 16: 21; Isa. 30: 30. May the Lord preserve us from this fearful storm. There is one peculiarity common to nearly all the opposers of the law of God; they take no position, neither do they define the rule of life, except in a general sense; for instance, by quoting the great commandments in the law, or Micah 6: 8. They are similar to characters whom Spurgeon sometimes catechizes in social meetings. They testify of themselves that they are great sinners, and he questions them in the following manner: “What have you been doing? Stealing? No. Covetous? No. Been killing anybody? No.” And thus he passes through the whole decalogue, and generally succeeds in convincing himself that they either are sinners or they are not; a point under the circumstances very difficult to determine. So it is with the arguments produced against the ten commandments. We are left undecided whether there is a law, or whether there is none; or, if there is, how to determine its length and breadth, or to find the exact scale by which all our actions shall be weighed. This one and principal thing is left entirely in the dark. The law of God is compared to the Constitution of the United States; and, as that is susceptible of, and even liable to, change, yet preserving its validity, so might the constitution of God’s government, the ten commandments, be repealed or changed in part, leaving out some portions and adding others, and yet remain intact. To this, there can be but one answer given. The Constitution of the United States may change, if it should be found to curtail the rights of citizens; or, if in any degree it should deprive them of God-given privileges, it ought to be amended. Being framed by fallen men, men of imperfect judgment, it has doubtless been necessary to reconsider some of its provisions. But the law of God can never change. If God could change, or abrogate, his law, the ten commandments, he would cease to be God, and would be a being entirely unworthy of worship or reverence. In short, he could not make a law relating to, or defining, moral duties, that would either need, or under any circumstances be susceptible of, change. How men can thus compare the perfect law of God with their own imperfections, is indeed a mystery. “We have, then,” says Dobney, “in the essential character of God, a guarantee that the law which issues from him shall be neither deficient nor superfluous; his work is perfect.” To which just and wise conclusion we ought to say, Amen. It is well, in the examination of any passage of Scripture, to consider, if an address is made, the class of persons to whom it has an application, and their peculiar circumstances. Failing to do this, very often leads us into difficulties. Rom. 7: 6, reads as follows: “But now we are delivered from the law, being dead [margin] to that wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.” Great emphasis is placed on the word “were” to convey the impression that the Romans were not then under obligation to keep the law of God. This no doubt was the very furthest from the apostle’s intention. The Romans were once sinners, now Christians; once under condemnation, now under grace. The law once held them subject to death, but now had Christ made them free from its curse; not given them liberty to transgress, but a free pardon for all the past, and ability to render, through grace, acceptable obedience in the future. Now they should serve (the law of God) in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. We can keep the letter of a law and not its spirit; but we cannot keep the spirit of the law and not the letter. Then what answer shall we make to the following questions? Having been delivered from the law, shall we try to obey it? Suppose you had committed the crime of murder, been tried by your peers, convicted and sentenced to death or imprisonment for life.98The law imposes these terrible penalties. It holds you in its dread embrace. It will not be satisfied but with your life. There is but one hope—a pardon from one in whom the power to grant it is vested. It is presented to you, and you are free—free from what? Free from the law. And now what will you do? try to obey it in the future? or would you commit again the crime of murder? If you were wise you would try to be obedient. “Shall we go on in sin
Because thy grace abounds,
And crucify the Lord again,
And open all his wounds?” God forbid. How shall we that are dead to sin live any longer therein? But to the question propounded above, viz., “Shall we try to obey the law?” another answer is returned by those who oppose the law of God by utterly wresting from their proper bearing the following words of the apostle Paul in Gal. 5: 1: “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.” The ten commandments are claimed to be a yoke of bondage, and Christians are not even to try to obey them. What a horrid doctrine and perversion of scripture is this? The only logical conclusion is, that Christians may lie, steal, commit adultery, murder, and break the Sabbath, and not be guilty. Surely this may be classed with the doctrines of devils; and it deserves no better name. If Christians only have such liberty, let us pray that they be few. But we have not so learned Christ. Let us rather say, in the language of C. H. Spurgeon in a sermon on the first and great commandment, “When God says, Thou shalt have no other Gods before me, nor make a graven image; when he says, Thou shalt not take his name in vain, and that we must remember to keep holy the Sabbath, he does but instance particulars which are all contained in this great commandment.” And again, in the closing part of this same sermon, speaking of the freeing of the sinner from the thralldom of sin, from the condemnation of the divine law, he says, “Shall I now break this law from which I have been made free by the blood of Christ? God forbid! but may I evermore, by his grace, from the heart keep its every requirement.” I quote from memory. These words have the loyal ring. Let every true Christian say, Amen. Says the Union Bible Dictionary: “To the soul that is in Christ, the law is no longer the arbiter of his doom; yet it is still the appointed teacher of that will of God in which he now delights.” It condemns him no longer, but is a witness of his righteousness. The scriptures most commonly used against this view are the following, and those of like import: Rom. 6: 14, 15; 7: 4, 6; Gal. 3: 13, 25; 5: 18. The first and last are most commonly used and strangely perverted. These passages certainly mean one of two things: Either that to be under the law means to be condemned by it, or to be under obligation to keep it. Which is correct? These words are spoken of a certain class of Christians; and the law referred to, it is claimed by all classes of opposers, includes, if it does not mean exclusively, the ten commandments. Ye, Christians, are not under the law, but under grace. Which shall we say? that the law does not now condemn the Christian? or that he is not now, as a Christian, under obligation to keep it? Can the Christian violate moral precepts which the sinner is bound to observe? If so, then every villain that cannot brook restraint should become a Christian. Indeed, men are found almost as plenty as the leaves of autumn, who justify all manner of iniquity; and it is attributable in a great measure to just such lax teaching as this, that the law of God is abolished, or that we, as Christians, are not amenable to it. Tell me, ye opposers of God’s law, How wide is the difference between you who seek to abolish it, and they who say that “the natural and proper use of the ten commandments is in their violation.” However far it may be in practice, in faith it is but a hair’s breadth. But, says one, if to be under the law means to be under its condemnation, then under grace means to be under the condemnation of grace. None but the spiritually blind could so wrest this passage from its true signification. It is the province of the law to condemn the guilty; of grace, to pardon; as far apart in their design as can well be imagined; and yet men lose sight of the beautiful truth taught in Rom. 6: 14. The Christian is under grace, under favor. It is the grace of God that brings salvation—salvation from sin, as also from the punishment which might justly be inflicted upon us on account of it. Let us say with the poet, “We will be slaves no more,
Since Christ hath made us free,
Hath nailed our tyrant to his cross,
And bought our liberty.” It does not require much acuteness of intellect to foresee the drift of all the arguments against the law. They generally terminate in a grand assault upon the fourth commandment. And if that were not a part and parcel of it, they would let it alone; but with that in it, it is the old covenant, a covenant of works, the law of sin and death, the letter, a yoke of bondage, carnal, shadowy, burdensome. Just take out the Sabbath, put Sunday in its place, and although it does change the truth of God into a lie, mirabile dictu! it becomes the new covenant, the law of faith, the spirit, &c. So they make the letter of the law to be the ten commandments with the Sabbath in them; but the spirit of the law, the ten commandments with Sunday in them. SUSTAIN THE GOSPEL.
By M. H. A.
How can we still hope that our souls are new-born,
And muzzle the oxen which tread out the corn?
Did God care for oxen? or did he say thus,
Designing to give some instruction to us? Saint Paul has explained it, and told what to do:
“Who preaches the gospel must live of it too;”
Some say, Were we able, we’d give with delight;
But think of the widow who cast in her mite. What though we’ve no money to pamper our pride,
She kept not a penny for wants unsupplied,
Yet Jesus beheld her, and sanctioned the deed,
And promised in future to shield her from need. Cast your bread on the waters, obey the command;
The Lord will restore it; his promise will stand.
Who give unto these, in the name of the Lord,
A cup of cold water, shall have their reward. The Saviour's Personal Appearance.
By R. M. KILGORE
That there once appeared a personage whom the Christian recognizes as Jesus Christ, the Son of God, but few deny. Our claim of his divinity, many at the present time choose to dispute; while all are willing to admit his superiority as a man. When he was upon the earth and appeared among men, he was a wonder and an astonishment to those who would not receive him, while his followers revered him, saying, “We believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.” John 6: 69. While his enemies regarded him as an imposter and a “deceiver,” those who were best acquainted with him esteemed him a Prophet whom the Lord had raised up unto them, from their midst, like unto Moses. Deut. 18: 15, 18; John 1: 45. As he taught them, in the temple, the “Jews marveled, saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never learned?” The officers acknowledged that “Never man spake like this man.” John 7: 15, 46. And as some who were almost persuaded inquired, “Do the rulers know indeed that this is the very Christ?” the Pharisees would answer, “Are ye also deceived?” His life, as well as his teachings, was a constant rebuke to them, and they murmured against him. As he went about doing good, healing the sick, giving eyes to the blind, opening the ears of the deaf, strengthening the weak and lame, and raising the dead, his enemies were filled with envy, and they tried to catch him in his words, to impeach him as a transgressor of the law, said they would not have him to rule over them, and, clamoring for his innocent blood, cried, “Crucify him, crucify him.” Though he took upon him the form of a servant, yet his mien was commanding and graceful, and his features beautiful, for he had the “form of God,” and was the “express image of his person.” His own testimony is, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.” Differing from others of royal ancestry, he “made himself of no reputation;” was found in the company of the poor of this world who were “rich in faith;” and, to all, he extended the gracious invitation, “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.” Matt. 11: 28, 29. Of his life and acts of benevolence, Spiritual Gifts speaks as follows: “He restored the sick to health, healed the lame, and caused them to leap in the gladness of their hearts, and glorify God. He gave sight to the blind. He raised the dead to life, and they glorified God for the mighty display of his power. The life of Christ was full of benevolence, sympathy, and love. He was ever attentive to listen to, and relieve the woes of, those who came to him. But few could endure to be governed by his sober, self-denying life. They saw him in love and tenderness speak encouragingly to the weak and afflicted. They also heard him, in a voice of authority, rebuke the power of Satan.” Vol. 1, p. 37. The Historian Josephus, writing of the same personage, says: “Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that had loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him.”—Antiq. Book 18, chap. 3, ¶ 3. The following purports to be a description of the Saviour by one who lived at that time. It may be of interest to the reader, but we give no opinion in regard to its authenticity. “The following is a description of the person of Jesus Christ, as it was found in an ancient manuscript sent by Publius Lentulus, President of Judea, to the Senate of Rome: “There lives at this time in Judea a man of singular character, whose name is Jesus Christ. The barbarians esteem him a prophet, but his followers adore him as the immediate offspring of the immortal God. He is endowed with such unparalleled virtue as to call back the dead from their graves, and to heal every kind of disease with a word or touch. His person is tall and elegantly shaped—his aspect amiable, reverend. His hair flows in those beautiful shades which no united colors can match, falling in graceful curls below his ears, agreeably crouching on his shoulders, and parting on the crown of his head, like the head-dress of the sect of the Nazarites. “His forehead is smooth and large, his cheeks without spot save that of a lovely red; his nose and mouth are formed with exquisite symmetry; his beard is thick and suitable to the hair of his head, reaching a little below his chin, and parting in the middle like a fork; his eyes are bright, clear and serene. He rebukes with majesty, counsels with mildness, and invites with the most tender and persuasive language. His whole address, whether in word or deed, is elegant, grave, and strictly characteristic of so exalted a being. No man has seen him laugh, but the whole world behold him weep frequently; and so persuasive are his tears, none can refrain from joining in sympathy with him. He is very moderate, temperate, and wise. In short; whatever this phenomenon may turn out in the end, he seems at present a man, for excellent beauty and divine perfections, every way surpassing the children of men.” Hooper, Neb., Feb. 23, 1872. “Out of the Abundance of the Heart the Mouth Speaketh.”
By Edwin R. Jones
How little we realize the effect of our words upon ourselves and others! A soft, gentle answer has great power to turn away wrath; while grievous, irritable words stir up anger and strife. Our words reveal what is in the heart. Our heart is the great fountain of which our words are the stream. It has been said that we cannot tell what is in a man’s heart; but if we may judge of a tree by its fruit, if we can judge of a fountain by its stream, so also may we judge of a man’s heart by the words which he speaks; “For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.” Matt. 12 : 34. It is not natural for a man whose heart is filled with evil to speak good words, any more than it is for figs to grow on thistles, or grapes on thorns. “A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things; and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.” Matt. 12 : 35. How quickly do the unchaste words of the licentious man tell of the loathsome corruption of his heart. How constantly do the words of the man of the world remind us that his heart is filled with love for earthly things and a desire to obtain them. But how different it is with the man whose heart is filled with love to God, and whose affections are set on the world to come. His conversation is in Heaven, from whence he looks for the appearing of his Saviour. He will speak of the love and mercy of God, and the glories of his kingdom. How often do we carelessly speak words to no profit, idle words, little realizing that a record is kept of them all, and that we shall have to give a strict account of them in the great Judgment day. Finally, our justification or condemnation will be according to the words we have spoken. Our Saviour has said “that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give an account thereof in the day of Judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.” If we could only feel the force of these words, how often and how earnestly would we pray, “Set a watch, O Lord, before my mouth; keep the door of my lips.” But how may we speak acceptable words? How may we order our conversation aright, so that we may see the salvation of God? Make the tree good, and his fruit will be good. Cleanse the fountain, and the stream will be pure. “Create in me a clean heart, O God.” Ps. 51 : 10. Blindness of Prejudice.
By M. W. Howard
In a leisure moment, I took up a child's Sunday-school book. Opening it at random, I read a few pages where first I opened. By a strange coincidence, I found the portion read to be a gratuitous fling at the doctrine of Adventism, striking back, in a story, to the disappointment of the tenth day of the seventh month. Doubtless the writer, who thus lugged in the incident, thought himself doing a praiseworthy act in erecting this beacon against so fanciful a theory. The book on which he hung his argument, or rather negation, for it was only a negation, was that passage in Nahum, claimed to be prophetic of the chariots of our day—the cars upon our railroads. He made his victim cite the passage, item by item, making his illustration as he cited,99till, in turn, he chose to refute; which he fancied he successfully did, by simply referring to the fact, that Nahum announced it, “The burden of Nineveh, a very ancient city, destroyed thousands of years ago.” Then quoting chap. 3: 2, as a complete extinguisher to his opponent, since he was not (by his—the writer's—showing) quite ready to understand “the noise of a whip, the prancing of horses,” and the “jumping of chariots.” So I thought I would turn to the passage and refresh my own memory, and was led to feel that there had been a jumping at conclusions, as well as of “jumping of chariots.” As I read the concluding verse of the first chapter, I recalled how often and how confidently the words are quoted, “Behold, upon the mountains, the feet of them that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace,” singling out a part of a verse, from an entire book, applying it to the present dispensation, making the bringers of good tidings the preachers of the gospel in our day. And as the author was for standing upon consistency, I felt like planting myself upon the same ground, and holding to immediate connections, since he had shown himself ready to draw inferences from connections separated by several verses, and portioned into other chapters. So I turned to Ps. 2: 8: “Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession,” which is so often triumphantly quoted in proof of a pet theory—the conversion of the world—but always with profound silence as regards the 9th verse, “Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel,” a silence that seems sacrilegious, to one of intelligent understanding of the true Bible teaching upon the subject. Turning, then, to that passage which is so persistently quoted, “A nation shall be born in a day,” I recall how thoroughly I once discomfited a Bible student, who had for very many years been a minister in an orthodox (?) church, by causing him to read the verse, after he had triumphantly misquoted that pet clause: for he could not fail to see that it affirmed just the contrary of what he had cited it to prove. As a dodge, he was quite sure that “that was not the only place where it was spoken of.” It is easy to attach odium to a name, easy to raise a dust and sarcastically pick an exposition to pieces, easy for “A shrug of scorn to do a mischief
That a lifetime can't undo.”
But, till a better explanation appears, I go with my discomfited Adventist, since the passage in Nahum is too graphic a description to be lightly set aside. And if those opposing could disarm themselves of prejudice, they must see that the fanciful expositions predominate on their side,—expositions that developing facts in the outworking of our world's history, are continually putting to fault by exposing their fallacy. And besides, they, more than others, sustain their theory by picked texts, and even by isolated clauses from many of these texts. Prejudice, or, the Little Push.
By E. GOODRICH
PREJUDICE seems quite a monster, with varied heads and horns, and changeable colors, ready at all times either to push, or to allure us from the path of duty. In quite an early day, there lived in the interior of New York State, a man having a large family of boys, nearly men grown; and having but a small farm of well-improved land, he resolved to sell out his small farm, and go away out West, as far as the Ohio Reserve, or the White Pigeon, where land was cheap, and where his boys could buy them land and settle together around him. And having sold his farm, and what he could not carry, the remainder was loaded into an ox wagon, and started for the great West. But it was the spring of the year, the roads were rutty and muddy, and it was several weeks before they arrived, with a jaded team, and tired bodies, upon the shore of Lake Erie where the present very beautiful city of Erie now stands. The season was fast advancing, and while they stopped a week or two to rest themselves and team, and to wait for the roads to become a little better, a controversy arose between the boys whether they should continue their present course or turn at right angles and find them homes in the nicely wooded valleys of French Creek. The more they talked and tried to settle the dispute, the more determined each party became, until it was finally agreed to decide the question by setting up a cane, and the way the cane fell should be the way that all would go. But here was a point. Who should set up the cane. This was determined by tossing up the cane as at ball-playing for the ins. The lot fell to one of the party who wished to settle in Northern Pennsylvania. And accordingly he placed the cane in an upright position on the ground, and when all parties interested were agreed that the cane was perpendicular, he took his finger from the top of the cane, and sure enough, it fell directly south, and the entire family followed. But the man who set up the cane, said as he ended the story forty years after the event, As I took my finger from the end of the cane, I gave it just a little push, and it fell the very way I wanted it to. This appears to be a fitting illustration of prejudice, it only needs “the little push” to throw us entirely out of the way of truth, humanity, and justice. We are prejudiced by our feelings, by our interests, and by forming an opinion in advance of the facts that ought to be taken as evidence in the case. There are a thousand ways in which the mind is prejudiced against men, things, and doctrines that we ought to believe, and practice, and perhaps there is no one entirely free in this matter, yet, so far as we can, we ought carefully to guard against “the little push.” E. GOODRICH. The Bible.
By Theodore Parker
The Bible is read of a Sunday in all the thirty thousand pulpits of our land. In all the temples of Christendom is its voice lifted up week by week. The sun never sets on its gleaming page. It goes equally to the cottage of the plain man and the palace of the king. It is woven into the literature of the scholar, and colors the talk of the street. The bark of the merchant cannot sail the seas without it—no ship of war goes to the conflict but the Bible is there. It enters men's closets, mingles in all the grief and cheerfulness of life. The affianced maiden prays God in Scripture for strength in her new duties; men are married by Scripture. The Bible attends them in their sickness; when the fever of the world is on them, the aching head finds a softer pillow if its leaves lie underneath. The mariner escaping from shipwreck, clutches this first of his treasures, and keeps it sacred to God. It goes with the peddler in his crowded pack, cheers him at eventide when he sits down dusty and fatigued, and brightens the freshness of his morning face. It blesses us when we are born, gives names to half Christendom, rejoices with us, has sympathy with our mourning, tempers our grief to finer issues. It is the better part of our sermons. It lifts man above himself; our best of uttered prayers are in its storied speech, wherewith our fathers and the patriarchs prayed. Timid man, about awakening from this dream of life, looks through the glass of Scripture, and his eyes grow bright; he does not fear to stand alone, to tread the way, unknown and distant, to take the Death Angel by the hand and bid farewell to wife, and babies, and home. Men rest on their dearest hopes.—Theodore Parker. Power of a Christian's Testimony.
By P. A. Roberts
I HAVE many times felt my whole being moved by the testimonies of brethren and sisters in the REVIEW; some of which may be from individuals as humble as myself, therefore I am encouraged to write, though it be but few words, humbly asking God that he will help the attempt to the good of some. Why are these testimonies so powerful? We come around the family circle after the labors of the day, or Sabbath after meeting, my companion takes the REVIEW, turns to the testimony and reads, first, perhaps, some one's conviction and reception of present truth, how God arrested the attention by a tract, a letter from a friend, suggesting inquiry on some point, possibly nothing but a picture of Nebuchadnezzar's image, thus turning the mind to prophecy; how the Spirit kept pressing these things on the attention, causing search, study, and prayer, till the clear light came, and the soul was filled with gladness and praise to God for his wonderful mercy and goodness to the children of men. Another alludes to deliverance from some severe trial, or how he has been brought through some dark place, and his heart goes out to his Deliverer full of joy and rejoicing. Again, some lonely one is made to rejoice by the evidence thus weekly given that God is preparing a remnant people to stand amid the trials of the last days, and finally to have a home in his everlasting kingdom and that he is learning the way to become one of the happy number, and his feelings swell with gratitude, his heart beats quicker with love to God and those of like faith. All this causes our hearts also to glow afresh with the same emotions of love and gratitude and praise, that our feet have been turned from the broad, to the narrow road, as we hope and trust, and that we are now trying to keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. At these times it seems God is especially near to us, subduing the power of sin, increasing our aspirations after holiness, and strengthening our resolutions to give ourselves more fully to his service. After this influence over us, we feel sure of being, at least, a little better prepared for the hard conflicts of the Christian warfare, to overcome sin in our hearts, and stronger, to resist the devices and temptations of the evil one. Now, why such power for good in these simple, broken testimonies? Is it not because God is in this work? because these humble individuals have learned of God and are enabled to take of the things of God and show them to others? This influence must be good for all that come under, and yield to, it. I often contrast this influence over us as a family with that which prevailed before we embraced present truth, some three years ago. Then stories such as we found in the N. Y. Tribune, Prairie Farmer &c., were most eagerly devoured, reserving Bonner's Ledger for Sunday, and often reading from dinner until midnight; and what did it all amount to? Not scarcely a sentence in a day's reading worthy the consideration of a being before whom eternal life is presented as an end for which to labor and strive in this world; and yet how fascinating! The whole being is bound and led captive by it. Dear friends, let not this influence prevail over us. I know, by experience there is more good and satisfaction to be derived from one of these hearty testimonies than from all the stories ever written. Pray for us that we may overcome all sin and finally have a home with you in that land where sin can never come.