p. 3 | Review and Herald, Extra (4/14/1874)

The Debate.

By John Norton Loughborough

Having listened to the debate just closed, between Eld. Grant and Eld. Canright, we feel it to be our duty to the public to state some facts concerning it. The question was, “Do the Scriptures teach that the Sabbath of the fourth commandment of the decalogue is now binding on mankind?” Eld. Canright affirmed, and Eld. Grant denied. Bro. C.’s first speech was a clear and able argument from Matt. 28: 19, 20, and chapter 5.

Eld. Grant’s first words were a direct appeal, not to the word of God, but to the prejudice of the people. Said he, “If all who work on Saturday are sinners, and are to be damned; if nobody but a few Seventh-day Adventists and Seventh-day Baptists are to be saved, then this is an important question.” This statement he made many times, and closed up with it in his last speech. Did he do this because there was really any truth in the statement, or soundness in such reasoning? Certainly not. He knew, as Bro. Canright often stated, that we held no such views.

People will be condemned only when they reject light. We should search the Scriptures for the truth, then teach it, and bring the people up to it as fast as we can. We neither judge nor condemn any one. God is the judge. We believe there are many good Christians who are not now keeping the seventh day. Why then did Eld. G. repeat this statement so often in the debate? Manifestly to place us in a false light before the people, and thus create prejudice against us. No honorable opponent would condescend to such unfair means to accomplish his ends.

Again, Eld. Grant urges that as many had lived and died, and would be saved without keeping all the ten commandments, the Sabbath especially, therefore that law was of no account, and need not be kept. Thus he exactly reverses God’s order; for he judges God’s law by the actions of the people. But in the Judgment, God will judge the actions of men by his law. Eccl. 12: 13, 14; James 2: 8–12. This same mode of arguing, from the old Pharisees down, has always been used by time-servers against every reformation. “Our fathers,” said they, “believed and practiced thus and so. They were good men and God blessed them. Therefore they were right, and any other doctrine must be false.” This was the strong argument of the Roman Catholics against Luther, and of the English priests against Wesley. To these great reformers they said, “If the new doctrines which you are preaching be true, then all before you will be damned, hence your doctrines must be false.”

But it is especially astonishing that Eld. Grant should use this same old hackneyed argument against us. The popular churches everywhere he goes use this very argument against him, and his favorite doctrine of the sleep of the dead, and destruction of the wicked. “This is a new doctrine,” say they, “and all our pious forefathers believed in the immortality of the soul, and God blessed them in preaching it. Hence Eld. Grant’s doctrine must be false.” This argument he has answered scores of times, and shown its utter fallacy. But now when it will serve his own purpose, he turns square about, and uses it against us! Thus he blows hot or cold, just as will best suit his purpose, without any apparent regard for the soundness or truthfulness of his argument.

Another fact will illustrate this trait in him. In the early part of the debate, as an objection to keeping the seventh day, he urged that as the world was round it was impossible to keep a definite day of twenty-four hours, and travel around the world. We could not keep the same day here which they had in Asia, as it was noon here when it was midnight there. Neither could we keep a definite day at the north pole where the sun could not be seen for weeks. Bro. C. easily answered these objections, showing that a definite day could be kept all over the globe. But near the close of the debate, when Eld. Grant came to defend the first day, he said that Sunday was the very day of the week upon which Adam rested in Eden, as near as we can ascertain, the same day upon which Christ arose from the dead, in Palestine, and was a definite day of twenty-four hours, as definite as our seventh day, and begun and ended at the same time of day that ours did. Then Bro. C. turned Eld. Grant’s objection upon him, and pressed him to tell how he could keep his definite first day on the round world, and at the north pole. He said that he could keep it just as Eld. Canright had shown that he could keep the seventh day!

Thus he not only contradicted himself, but showed that he had raised an objection where he knew there was no difficulty, his object being to confuse the people by any means, fair or foul.

Frequently he took occasion to tell how holy he was, how honest, how much of the love of Jesus he had, what peace of mind, and what confidence in his secret devotions,—all this, too, said he, while breaking the fourth commandment. From this he argued that the keeping of the Sabbath was of no account, thus using his assumed sanctification as an argument in the debate. It shows the egotism and self-righteousness of the man.

We could mention many contradictions, evasions, and unfair tricks to which he resorted to carry his points, but must leave the reader to judge from the sample given. It was astonishing to see how coolly he would assume and boldly assert, that he had proved important points for which he had not even attempted to produce the least evidence, though called upon and urged to do it.

At the sixth session he ran out of talk from the Bible, and said that he should now go to history to prove that the first day of the week was the Lord’s day. Eld. Canright objected to his going to history, urging that the question which they had both agreed upon was, “Do the Scriptures teach”? &c., and not what does history teach. This was a Bible question, which they had agreed to settle by the Bible. Bro. C. offered to go with him to history and discuss it to his heart’s content, after they had finished the discussion from the Bible. But no; Eld. G. persisted that he must go to history now to prove his position.

Bro. C. appealed to the chairman, who decided that he should not go out of the Bible for proof. So Eld. G. had to give it up for that evening. But at the last session he said that notwithstanding that the chair had decided against him, he should now read his history. Eld. Canright again objected to this as unfair, unjust, and a violation of the rules of honorable debate.

Eld. Grant then instead of allowing the chairman to inquire of the congregation, “Shall the decision of the chair be sustained?” according to parliamentary usages, took the matter into his own hands, and appealed to the congregation whether he should bring in his history. And amid the cheers of that class, who usually occupy the back part of the house, Grant led off the mob spirit, and cried out, “All who are opposed to my going to history, raise your hands!” None raised their hands, though we had scores of brethren and friends there. Neither did we ourselves, for we all felt that it was wholly out of order, unjust, and simply an appeal to a mob spirit, with which we would have nothing to do. Grant then called on those to raise their hands who favored his going to secular history. Of course there were those ready to sustain him.

Thus he broke his agreement to debate the question as stated, setting aside the decision of the chairman, and violating the parliamentary rules of honorable discussion. Eld. Grant rode right over the chairman, and put the question to suit himself, calling for the negative first, a thing of itself entirely out of order. The reader can judge from the foregoing of the unprincipled tricks which this man will resort to, when closely pressed, in order to defeat his opponent.

J. N. LOUGHBOROUGH*

Read This,

By M. E. Cornell

AND COMPARE IT WITH ELD. GRANT'S COURSE AT THE SPRINGFIELD CAMP-MEETING.

While conducting a tent-meeting in Chelsea, Mass., in 1869, I was several times interrupted while speaking with questions and objections by Eld. Miles Grant, he even claiming the right to argue his points before the people in my meeting. On one occasion, he continued to interrupt until many were wearied and disgusted, and it was not until he was sharply reproved, and we had appealed to the audience for the right to speak under our own canvass without molestation, that he was prevailed upon to keep quiet and allow me to go on with my lecture.

And, because I insisted that he should wait until I had finished my discourse, he very impatiently charged, that I “wanted to gag him down lest he should overthrow my positions.” During the same series of lectures, one of their preachers came to the tent and circulated opposition tracts in our congregation. This was done very boldly and defiantly, but we made no objection. M. E. CORNELL.

Our Views of Spiritual Gifts.

As Eld. Grant charges sister White with being possessed by the spirit of a demon, not because of any wicked thing in her life, or in her teaching, but simply because she has visions which we regard as from the Spirit of God, we here present a brief statement of our reasons, from the Scriptures, for believing in the perpetuity of spiritual gifts.

Once, man walked with God in Eden. With open face he beheld the glory of the Lord, and talked with God, and Christ, and angels, in Paradise, without a dimming veil between. Man fell from his moral rectitude and innocency, and was driven from the garden, from the tree of life, and from the visible presence of the Lord and his holy angels. Moral darkness, like the pall of death, has since cast its shadows everywhere, and everywhere the blight and mildew of sin has been seen. And amid the general gloom and moral wretchedness, man has wandered from the gates of Paradise for nearly six thousand years, subject to sickness, pain, sorrow, tears, and death. He has also been subject to the temptations and wiles of the devil, so much so that it is the sad history of man, throughout the entire period of his fallen state, that Satan has reigned with almost universal sway.

When all was lost in Adam, and the shades of night darkened the moral heavens, there soon appeared the star of hope in Christ, and with it there was established a means of communication between God and man. In his fallen state, man could not converse face to face with God, and with Christ, and with angels, as when in his Eden purity. But through the ministration of holy angels could the great God speak to him in dreams and in visions. “If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.” Numb. 12:6.

The manifestation of the spirit of prophecy was designed for all dispensations. The Sacred Record nowhere restricts it to any particular period of time, from the fall to the final restitution. The Bible recognizes its manifestation alike in the patriarchal age, in the Jewish age, and in the Christian age. Through this medium God communed with holy men of old. Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied; and so extensive was the range of his prophetic vision, and so minute, that he could look down over long ages, and describe the coming of the Lord, and the execution of the last Judgment upon the ungodly. Jude, verses 14, 15.

God spake to his prophets in the Jewish dispensation in visions and in dreams, and opened before them the great things of the future, especially those connected with the first advent of Christ to suffer for sinners, and his second appearing in glory to destroy his enemies, and complete the redemption of his people. If the spirit of prophecy nearly disappeared from the Jewish church for a few centuries toward the close of that dispensation, on account of the corruptions in that church, it re-appeared at its close to usher in the Messiah. Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist, “was filled with the Holy Spirit, and prophesied.” Simeon, a just and devout man, who was “waiting for the consolation of Israel,” came by the Spirit into the temple, and prophesied of Jesus as “a light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of Israel.” And Anna, a prophetess, “spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem.” And there was no greater prophet than John, who was chosen of God to introduce to Israel “the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world.”

The Christian age commenced with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and the manifestation of various spiritual gifts. Among these was the gift of prophecy. After commissioning his disciples to go into all the world and preach the gospel, Jesus says to them, “And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.” Mark 16:17, 18. On the day of Pentecost, when the Christian dispensation was fully opened, some of these gifts were manifested in a wonderful manner. Acts 2:1–11. Luke, in giving account of his travels with Paul and others, when a quarter of a century of the Christian age had already passed, after speaking of entering into the house of Philip the evangelist, says: “And the same man had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy. And as we tarried there many days, there came down from Judea a certain prophet, named Agabus.” Acts 21:9, 10. Again, still later, we see the beloved John, in the Isle of Patmos, imbued with the spirit of prophecy in all its fullness. The wonderful Revelation was given unto him when more than half a century of the Christian age had passed. And here the New-Testament record leaves us without a single intimation that the gifts of the Spirit should cease from the church till the day of glory should be ushered in by the second appearing of Jesus Christ.

Since the great apostasy, these gifts have rarely been manifested; and for this reason, professed Christians generally suppose that they were designed to be limited to the period of the primitive church. But from the time of the primitive Christians to the present, there have been manifestations among the most devoted followers of Jesus, which have been recognized by nearly all of the leading denominations as the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Then should not the errors and the unbelief of the church be assigned as reasons why these manifestations have been so seldom, rather than that God has taken these blessings from the church? When the people of God attain to primitive faith and practice, as they most certainly will under the last message, the latter rain will be poured out, and all the gifts will be revived. The former rain was given at the commencement of the Christian age, in the time of the sowing of the gospel seed, to cause it to germinate and take good root. Then the church enjoyed the gifts. And when the latter rain shall be poured out at the close of the dispensation, to ripen the golden harvest for the garner of God, then will the gifts of the Holy Spirit be manifested in all their fullness.

To this agree the words of the prophet, as quoted by Peter: “And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams. And on my servants, and on my handmaidens, I will pour out in those days of my Spirit, and they shall prophesy. And I will show wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come.” Acts 2:17–20. The spirit of prophecy is here seen among the especial signs of the last days. Its revival in the last days was to constitute one of the most noted signs of the approaching end. This is evident from its being classed with the most prominent signs, in the sun, in the moon, and in the stars, and such wonders in the heavens above, and in the earth beneath, as blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke.

Of all the blessings which God has bestowed upon his people, the gift of his Son excepted, none have been so sacred, and so important to their welfare, as the gift of his holy law, and his Holy Spirit. And none have been so well calculated to thwart the plans of Satan, and, consequently, to stir his rage, as these. And when that people should arise in the last generation of men, who should be observing all ten of the precepts of God’s holy law, and should recognize the revival of the spirit of prophecy, they might expect to feel that bitterness from their opponents, which can arise only from the direct inspiration of Satan. “And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” Rev. 12:17.

“The testimony of Jesus,” said the angel to John, “is the Spirit of prophecy.” Rev. 19:10. It is the keeping of the commandments of God, and the recognition of the revival of the spirit of prophecy by the remnant of the church, or the Christians of the last generation, that stirs the ire of the dragon.

The Jewish age, notwithstanding its apostasies, opened and closed with special manifestations of the Spirit of God. And it is not reasonable to suppose that the Christian age, the light of which, compared with the former dispensation, is as the light of the sun to the feeble rays of the moon, should commence in glory, and close in obscurity. And since a special work of the Spirit was necessary to prepare a people for the first advent of Christ, how much more so for his second advent.

God has never manifested his power to his people simply for their gratification; but according to their necessities has he wrought for them. Then we may safely conclude that, as his people are passing the perils of the last days in the final struggle with the aroused powers of darkness, when false prophets shall have power to show great signs and wonders, insomuch that, if it were possible, they would deceive the very elect, our gracious God will bless and strengthen his fainting people with the gifts, as well as the graces, of the Holy Spirit.

We have seen that the manifestation of the spirit of prophecy in dreams and in visions became necessary in consequence of man’s being separated from the visible presence of God. But when the tabernacle of God shall be with men, and he shall dwell with them, and God himself shall be with them, then, Rev. 21:3; when Christ shall come again with all the holy angels, and receive his people unto himself, that where he shall be, there they may be also, John 14:3; and when man redeemed shall walk and talk with God, and Christ, and angels, in Eden restored; then there will be no further need of the spirit of prophecy.

When man in Eden stood in all the perfection of his manhood, before the blight of sin had touched anything that God had made for him, and with open face beheld the glory of the Lord, he could have no need of the spirit of prophecy. But when Eden was lost in consequence of transgression, and man was doomed to grope his way from the gates of Paradise, enshrouded in the moral gloom that resulted from the curse and the reign of Satan, he needed the light of the spirit of prophecy. And his need in this respect will continue, more or less urgent, until the restitution, when the redeemed shall walk and talk with God, and with Christ, and with the holy angels, in Eden restored.

The apostle to the Corinthians clearly sustains this position. He introduces the subject by stating, “Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.” 1 Cor. 12:1. He deemed the subject of too great importance to leave the church at Corinth in ignorance respecting it. He proposes to instruct them. We shall do well to avail ourselves of the benefit of his teachings.

In this chapter the apostle introduces the human body, with its several members acting in harmony, one dependent upon the other, as an illustration of the Christian church, with its members, and the several gifts God has set in the church. He then makes the application of the figure thus: “Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular. And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.” Verses 27 and 28.

Let it be borne in mind that God has set prophets, miracles, and gifts of healings, in the Christian church as verily as he has teachers, helps, and governments. And this expression, “God hath set” them in the church, means more than that he would communicate with this people by his Holy Spirit in the Christian age the same as he had in former dispensations. It conveys the idea that God had especially endowed the Christian church with them. He had established them in the church, to remain until the return of her absent Lord. This was done because the church needed them. Did the primitive church need them? So did the true church need them to light her pathway during the dark period of her persecutions and martyrdom. And much more does the church need the gifts in making her course through the perils of the last days, and in making ready to receive her soon-coming Lord.

The design of the gifts, and also the time of their continuance in the church, are definitely expressed by the apostle to the Ephesians: “And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ; till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.” Chap. 4:11–13.

It cannot be shown that the church did, in the lifetime of Paul, reach the state of unity, knowledge, and perfection, here mentioned. And certainly the church did not enjoy these during her apostasy, 2 Thess. 2:3, and the period of her flight into the wilderness, Rev. 12:6. Nor has she reached this state of unity, knowledge, and perfection, since the labors of Martin Luther. The church to-day is almost infinitely below this state of unity, knowledge, and perfection. And not until the Christians of the last generation of men shall be brought to the enjoyment of it by the last warning message, and all the means God may employ to prepare them to be translated to Heaven without tasting death, will the ultimate design of the gifts be realized.

But Paul, in 1 Cor. 13, has distinctly shown when the gifts would cease. In the first part of this chapter the apostle discourses upon the pre-eminence of love (improperly translated charity) over the gift of tongues, gift of prophecy, faith, liberality to the poor, and courage to give one’s body to be burned. These, in absence of love are valueless. He then describes the virtues and riches of love, closing with these words: “Charity [love] never faileth; but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.” Verse 8.

While love is not only the crowning Christian grace here, but will reach forward to all eternity and be the crowning glory of the redeemed, the gifts will cease with faith and hope. At the glorious appearing of the Lord, faith will be lost in sight, hope in fruition, prophecies will fail to be any longer a light to the church, tongues will cease to be a sign, and the faint knowledge of the present dim night will vanish before the perfect knowledge of the perfect day as the dim rays of the moon vanish before the light of the rising sun.

Next come the forcible words of verses 9 and 10: “For we know in part, and we prophesy in part; but when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.” We still wait for that which is perfect to come. And while we wait, may our dear, absent Lord manifest himself to his waiting people through the gifts. “For,” says Paul, speaking of the present imperfect state, “We know in part, and we prophesy in part.” How long shall the spirit of prophecy serve the church? When will it be done away? Answer: “But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.” This should settle the question of the perpetuity of the gifts in the Christian church.

The popular view, however, is this: The gifts were given to the primitive church, to remain only during the lifetime of Christ’s first apostles. At their death, the gifts were to be removed from the church. But let it be remembered that a great change takes place when the gifts are to cease, and that change is from an imperfect state to that which is perfect; from the dimness of night to the glory of perfect day. We need not inquire if such a change took place at the death of the first apostles; for all who have any knowledge of the history of the primitive church, know that whatever changes did take place in the church about the time of the death of the apostles, were not for the better, but decidedly for the worse. Even in Paul’s day, the mystery of iniquity already worked in the church. 2 Thess. 2:7. And the apostle, addressing the elders of the church at Miletus, says: “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.” Acts 20:29, 30. But if we apply this great change to the close of the present dispensation, and the introduction of the eternal day of glory, all is plain. Here we have the clearest proof that the gifts were not to be done away until the second appearing of Christ.

Paul continues with an illustration of the present imperfect state, and the future state of perfection and glory: “When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things.” Verse 11. His childhood represents the present imperfect state; his manhood, the perfection of the immortal state. This is evident. Now suppose we are wrong, and that Paul’s childhood represents the church in his day, endowed with the gifts; and that his manhood represents the church after his death, stripped of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and fast sinking away toward the great apostasy! Absurdity!

And still the apostle continues with another beautiful illustration of the change from the present dispensation, during which the church was to enjoy the comparatively dim light of the gifts, as she walked by faith and hope, to the open glories of the world to come, when the redeemed shall walk with God in Eden restored, and talk face to face with Christ and angels. He says: “For now we see through a glass darkly; but then, face to face.” Verse 12. To view that the gifts were to cease at the death of the first apostles, and that with their death came the glorious change illustrated by these words of the apostle, we need only to repeat, Absurdity!

The truth of God upon this subject is consistent and harmonious with itself, and with all divine truth. The spirit of prophecy, in consequence of the fall and man’s separation from the visible presence of God, became a necessity. This necessity has not been obviated by any past change of dispensation. And no dispensation needs the gifts of the Holy Spirit more than the Christian age; and at no time in the long period of man’s separation from God’s visible presence, have they been so much needed as amid the perils of the raging tempests of the last days. But when the Redeemer shall come, the controversy be ended, the saint’s rest given, and they, all immortal, meet around the throne with angels, and face to face behold the glory of God and the Lamb, the spirit of prophecy will be numbered among Heaven’s choicest blessings of the past.

The Two Classes.

No doubt the S. D. Adventists on the one hand, and Eld. Miles Grant and some of his law-abolished friends on the other, are both acting a part in reference to the following emphatic declaration of Scripture:—“Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.”

Here are two distinct classes. One are commandment-keepers, the other commandment-breakers. And it is a very natural inference that the latter make and love lies concerning the former. It also appears that while some are manufacturing, others are peddling. But the case of the editor of the Crisis seems to be of that incurable sort, or his love for some false and slanderous statement concerning Seventh-day Adventists is so intense, that he will not quit after being repeatedly corrected in a public manner during the period of many years.

Our Defense.

By Editor

Seventh-day Adventists are for peace. The following words from one of our standard works, published in 1870, express the views and feelings of our people upon this point as they are to-day:—

“It is true that we differ in some respects with other religious bodies of the present time, and with most of them we differ widely. But we do not differ with others from choice. We do not love to differ for the sake of being odd. No, we choose to be in harmony, if possible, with our fellow-men, especially with those who revere God and his word. We believe it to be a sin to differ with others unless there be good reasons why we should differ.”

We solemnly believe that God has given to us a message of unpopular truth for the present generation. And we are no less confident that it is the will of God that we should proclaim it in such a manner as not to trample on the precious God-given rights of our fellows. We expect that the discussion of our religious sentiments will bring men and women, not only from the world, but from the ranks of other religious bodies. But while we present our views in a proper manner, and conduct ourselves as Christians, we should not be censured when God-fearing people, under deep convictions of duty, take up the heavy cross of observing the Sabbath of the Bible.

Seventh-day Adventists make sacrifices to teach and to observe the Sabbath, because they regard it as an important truth, and an important duty. He who will teach unpopular religious sentiments, and call persons from other religious bodies out upon a new platform, and form them into a new sect, and then tell the people that his new views and new positions are not essential to salvation, should be either marked as one who causes needless divisions among brethren, or be set down as a hypocrite.

We repeat it, Seventh-day Adventists are for peace. They do not disturb other religious assemblies; and they regard the rights of others. Our ministers do not cultivate the spirit of debate and strife, but avoid discussions as far as possible, on account of the spirit of strife which they gender, which is injurious to the cause of true religion.

Seventh-day Adventists have borne very much from their opponents. And their silence under repeated abuses has doubtless emboldened Eld. Grant to push his wicked, aggressive warfare to that extent to make the exposure in these columns necessary. Our brethren in Napa, Cal., did not provoke the discussion. The Sabbath question had recently been so fully agitated in that city by able men on both sides that there was no real call for a discussion. And at the time when Eld. Grant was pressing the matter, Eld. Cornell addressed him the following note:—

“Bro. Grant: I am inclined not to accept your ‘invitation,’ to debate before the public in Napa City, for several reasons.

“1. The Sabbath and Law question has just been quite thoroughly canvassed in lectures pro and con.

“2. The subject of the greatest interest in the public mind here now, is, what the clergy of Napa are pleased to term, ‘Materialism,’ or ‘Soul Sleeping.’

“3. Too many here would rejoice to see two Advent ministers in conflict, they are so bitter against Adventism in general. For my part, I do not feel like spending strength and precious time to gratify such motives.

“4. If the clergy here are anxious for debate, and would like to see Eld. Grant measure swords with some one, just let them bring their own men and try it on the Soul and Spirit question! They have talked very bold on that subject.

“Trusting that you will agree with me in these reasons and conclusions, they are submitted with due respect. Yours in haste, M. E. Cornell.”

But Eld. Grant pressed on the debate under these circumstances; and in his mad folly undertook to publicly blacken the reputation of a humble Christian woman who lives in the confidence of many thousand Seventh-day Adventists, and all others who know her self-sacrificing, godly life. When it comes to this, that a professed minister of Christ, under the garb of holiness, will deliberately stab the reputation of the innocent before the ungodly who are called out for the very occasion, it is time that the flimsy garb of pretended sanctity be torn off from him, that he may appear before the public in his true character.

With all respect for the inspired words of Paul would we handle such men. “If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.” Rom. 12:18. Here is a strong intimation that it is not possible to sustain peaceable relations with some men. They may presume upon your forbearance until it ceases to be a virtue. The common sinner may perhaps be guilty of slander without awakening general indignation. But when men who make high professions of godliness wantonly and persistently commit this great crime, all just men will unite in denouncing the wickedness of such vile conduct.

The intelligent reader, after becoming acquainted with the wicked course pursued by Eld. Grant toward the Seventh-day Adventists, will hardly expect the REVIEW to continue a controversy with him.