Seventh-day Adventist Missionary Society · Oakland, Cal. · Feb 23, 1882
Constitutional Amendment.
By Eld. W. H. Littlejohn
BY ELD. W. H. LITTLEJOHN.
TURNING from the secular phase of this subject, let us regard it for a moment from the religious stand-point.
Is there anything in the purpose itself which is worthy of the cost at which alone it can be realized? In other words, since the object aimed at is ostensibly that of bringing the nation up to the point of a general regard for the first day of the week as a Sabbath, would such a result be one which should be profoundly desired?
We reply that this will depend altogether upon circumstances. In this case, as in the first, mere cessation from labor on that day, which is not prompted by a regard for the will and approval of Jehovah, could afford no relief to a nation which is seeking to avert divine displeasure, since there is no element in the act itself calculated to recommend it to the favor of Heaven. To illustrate: The individual sentenced to solitary confinement in the State's Prison is precluded from the possibility of laboring on the Sunday; will any one therefore argue that there is any merit in his inaction on that day? Again: The heathen nations, in common with the majority of the Christian world, have many of them regarded the Sunday as a sacred day; should we presume, therefore, that they are looked upon by the Almighty more complacently on this account? You answer No; and urge, as a reason for this reply, that they have been engaged in a false worship, and have not been actuated by any regard for the true God. Where, then, is the line? Manifestly, right here: The men who honor God by the keeping of any day must be prompted by the conviction that they are doing it in strict and cheerful obedience to a divine command.
Here, then, is the crucible in which we will try the metal of this modern movement. If, when their grand design shall be accomplished—as the result of many labors and toils—and, even though before their purpose is attained, it shall be found necessary for them to reach their object through a conflict intensely bitter and impassioned on the part of the opposition, we shall witness the spectacle of a nation bowing submissively to the law and will of God in the humble and fervent observance of a weekly rest of divine appointment, it will be the grandest triumph which history has recorded. No treasure of gold—we were about to say no sacrifice of life—would be too great a price to pay for so glorious a victory. Let it be understood, however, that this must be a voluntary and intelligent worship on the part, at least, of the mass of the people.
But will this be true, should our friends compass the great object of their ambition? Let us inquire once more after their intentions. What is it they advocate? The answer is, A universal regard for the first day of the week, as the Sabbath of the Lord.
But what is the authority upon which the majority of them rest their argument for the proposed observance? Is it merely pecuniary advantage? No, say they, it is out of a sincere regard for the God of Heaven, and a conscientious desire to fulfill his law. But this implies religious duty. So far, so good. It also clearly sets forth the fact that God has a law, and a Sabbath which it enforces. The appeal, therefore, must inevitably be to that law, as the proper instrument from which to instruct the people.
To that they must be brought, again and again. Its import must be patiently taught, its sacredness must be thoroughly inculcated. Let them but be satisfied by sound logic that the divine statute is explicit in its demands for a strict observance of the first day of the week, let them be thoroughly educated into the idea that they are under its jurisdiction, and let them be instructed that this whole movement proceeds upon this religious conviction, and you have laid a foundation which will uphold a structure of imposing dimensions and enduring character, the corner-stone whereof is the fear of God, and an acknowledgement of his presence in the affairs of men. But how is it in the case in question? Is the commandment of a nature such as to support, in every particular, the tenets presented by the reform under consideration? This is really the vital point. Let it speak for itself. It is the fourth of the decalogue which is urged. "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it."
If this is not a Sabbath law, then there is none in existence; for, mark it this is the only instance in all the Scriptures in which it will be claimed by any one that we have a positive command for the observance of the Sabbath. So far, therefore, as the first day of the week is concerned, its friends have this advantage, that, if they but succeed in resting it upon this commandment, their labor is ended; for it—i. e., the commandment—has no rival. All that is needed, consequently, is a clear, pointed exegesis showing that the day in question is the one, the observance of which the divine Lawgiver has required. But, unfortunately, such an exegesis would be beset with difficulties. To begin with, Who shall be able to harmonize the declaration which the commandment contains in these words, "The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work," with the utterance of those who, on the contrary, say that the first day is the Sabbath of the Lord and must be observed as such? The divine Lawgiver—as if determined that there shall be no room for debate in regard to the day which he had in his mind—has identified it in a manner such as to leave no room to dispute. In the first place, he announces his willingness that six days of the week should be devoted to secular employment, "Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work:" then follows the disjunctive, "but—the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work." Here it is made plain that it is the "Sabbath of the Lord" upon which we are to rest.
Again passing over the intermediate space, we come to the close of the commandment, in which86he sets forth three important transactions by which that was constituted the Sabbath, and by which it may ever be recognized. He says, "For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it." That is, the day which we are to keep as the Sabbath of the Lord is the one upon which he rested, which he blessed, and which he hallowed. Therefore, before the first day of the week can, with any show of reason, be kept in fulfilment of this commandment, i. e., before it can be regarded as the "Sabbath of the Lord," it must be shown that, at some time, God has rested upon it, blessed, and hallowed it. But this would be a difficult task; for not only are the Scriptures silent, so far as the affirmation of this fact is concerned with reference to the first day of the week, but, on the contrary, they positively declare that it was the very day upon which Jehovah entered upon the stupendous undertaking of making a world. Should additional evidence be required on this point, i. e., that the last day of the week, and not the first, is the one which Jehovah intended to sanctify, we have but to cite the intelligent reader to the fact that Moses, the prophets, the Lord himself, the holy women after his death, and the whole Jewish nation—in whose language the decalogue was given—are, and have been, unanimous in placing this construction upon the Sabbatic law.
Should any, however, perceiving the dilemma into which they are thrown by the effort to enforce their view in the use of the law, as it was originally given, seek relief in the position that it was so far amended in the days of Christ as to admit of the substitution of the day of his resurrection for that of God's rest at the end of creation week, we reply, If such a fact can be clearly made out, it would certainly furnish the very help which is needed just at this juncture, and without which, confusion must inevitably characterize the movements of those who feel the necessity of a Sabbatic law for the keeping of Sunday.
Let us, therefore, investigate this most important point. Is it true that the Son of God did so change the phraseology of the commandment of the Father that, from his time forward, its utterances have not only justified the secularizing of the last, but have also enforced, by the penalty of eternal death, a strictly religious regard for the first day of the week, on the part of both the Jewish and Gentile world? Now this, if accomplished, was no trifling affair, and could not have been done in a corner; since it involved the guilt or innocence, the life or death, of countless millions of men and women, whose condemnation in the day of Judgment for the violation of Sunday sanctity would turn, of necessity, upon the words of one who both had the power to change, and had brought the knowledge of that change clearly before them. Certain it is, therefore—since God does not first judge, and legislate afterward—all the light which is necessary for the proper elucidation of this subject is now to be found in his written word. To this, then, we turn; and with a profound conviction that the language of Christ was true in its largest sense, "If any man will do his will he shall know of the doctrine"—we inquire, Where is it stated, in so many words, that God made the amendment in question?
Should the response be returned, as it certainly must be, that such a statement is not to be found within the lids of the Bible, we answer that this is a concession which, most assuredly, will greatly embarrass our friends in the proposed reform. Sagacious men will not be slow in discovering its bearing upon the subject, and it will be very difficult to explain such an omission to the satisfaction of cautious and reflecting minds. Should it be suggested, however, that—notwithstanding the fact the change has not been set forth in so many words—it has nevertheless occurred, and is therefore binding, we answer: Although the transaction upon the face of it, to say the least, would be a singular one, if an alteration has really been made, the next thing to be ascertained is its precise nature. We have already seen that the first law was very explicit in its statements; and all are conversant with the fact that to it was given the greatest publicity, and that it was uttered by the voice, and written by the finger of God, under the most imposing circumstances. Now, if Christ—whose power to do so we shall not question here—has really undertaken the task of adding to, or taking from, this most sacred precept, will some one furnish us with an authentic copy of the statute, as amended? Now this is a reasonable and just request. To declare simply that a change has occurred, without making known precisely what that change is, is but to bewilder and confuse. Conscious of this fact, the State is always extremely careful to give to its citizens—in the most public manner—every variation which is made in its enactments, lest the loyal man should be incapable of proving his fidelity by obedience, or the disloyal justify his violation upon the plea of necessary ignorance. Shall man be more just than his maker? Shall Christ—who, in every other respect, has, in matters of duty, furnished us with line upon line, and precept upon precept—be found, at last, upon this most important point, to have been unmindful of the highest interests of his followers? Most assuredly not. He that never slumbereth nor sleepeth, He that knoweth the end from the beginning, He who hath said, "Where there is no law there is no transgression," has certainly never required his people to occupy a position in the face of their enemies so extremely embarrassing as that in which they would be compelled to ignore the plainest dictates of reason and Scripture, by seeking to condemn in the world a practice which is not necessarily immoral in itself, and against which there is no explicit denunciation of the Bible. Who, then, we inquire again, will furnish us from the sacred page the precept so remodeled as to meet the exigencies of this case? Is it larger or more condensed than before? Does the first clause read, "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy?" If so, it is well. Is the second in order expressed in these words, "Six days shalt thou labor and do all thy work?" This, again, is good. But how is it with the third, "The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work?" Here, unquestionably, the change must begin. Who among us, therefore, can produce the divine warrant for a reading of this passage which shall make it harmonize with the keeping of Sunday? Who dare declare, upon his veracity, that he has ever discovered in the sacred word an instance in which it has been so re-written as to read, "But the first day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work?"
Furthermore, passing over the instructions in regard to sons, daughters, stranger, etc., what has the pen of the divine remolder done with the reason of the commandment as found in the words, "For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it?" Has that been stricken out altogether? Or, is there a glaring inconsistency in the remodeled statute, by which it is made to state that the first day of the week, instead of the seventh, is now the Sabbath of the Lord our God, because of the fact that in the creation of the world, God rested upon, blessed, and hallowed, the latter? These are weighty questions. Upon them, virtually, turns the issue of an amended law. For, to amend, is so to change or alter as to vary the duty of a subject; and if no one is capable of informing definitely and particularly in regard to the precise variations of the phraseology, then, of course, no one is able to decide just how far our course of action should deviate from what it has been hitherto, in order to meet the demands of the divine will as now expressed, in a rule which has never been seen, and which no hand would venture to trace with any claim to exactitude. Who, then, we inquire again, is sufficient for this task? Not one among the millions of Protestants who are so earnestly clamoring for the sanctity of the day in question, will seriously lay claim to the ability to perform that which would at once elevate him to a position—in view of the relief which it would bring to thousands of troubled minds—more exalted than that of any saint or martyr who has ever lived.
Nor is this all; behind all this pretentious claim for an amended law are very many indications of a wide-spread conviction—though undefined and hardly recognized by the individuals themselves—that the fact upon which they place so much stress, is after all, one in regard to which there are serious doubts in their own minds. As an illustration of this, we have but to call attention to two things. First, on each Lord's day, so-called, thousands of congregations—after devoutly listening to the reading of the fourth commandment of the decalogue, word for word, syllable for syllable, letter for letter, precisely as it was written upon the table of stone by the finger of God—are in the habit of responding with solemn cadence to the utterances of the preacher, "O Lord, incline our hearts to keep this law." Now this prayer means something, or nothing. It is either an expression of desire, on the part of those employing it, for grace to enable them rightly to observe the commandment as it reads—seventh day and all—or else it is a solemn mockery, which must inevitably provoke the wrath of Heaven. These people, therefore, judging from the most charitable standpoint, are witnesses—unconscious though they may be of the fact—of a generally pervading opinion that the verbiage of the fourth commandment has not been changed, and that it is as a whole as binding as ever. Second, nor is it simply true that those only who have a liturgy have committed themselves to this idea. It is astonishing to what extent it has crept into creeds, confessions of faith, church disciplines, and documents of a like nature. But among the most striking of all evidences of its universality, when properly understood, is the practice of nearly all religious denominations, of printing, for general distribution among the Sunday-school scholars, verbatim copies of the decalogue, as given in the twentieth chapter of Exodus. Yet this practice would be a pernicious one, and worthy of the most severe censure, as calculated to lead astray and deceive the minds of the young, if it were really true that this code, in at least one very important particular, failed to meet the facts in the case, as it regards present duty. In view of these considerations, a change of the base of operations becomes indispensable. A commandment, altered in its expressions so as to vary its import, and yet no one acquainted with the exact terms in which it is at present couched—and all, in reality, being so skeptical upon the point that even its most ardent advocates reason as if it had never occurred—would certainly furnish a foundation altogether insufficient for the mighty superstructure of a great reform, which proposes, ere the accomplishment of its mission, to revolutionize the State.
OUR PRAYERS
ART thou not weary of our selfish prayers,
Forever crying, "Help me, save me, Lord!"
We stay fenced in by petty fears and cares,
Nor hear the song outside, nor join its vast accord.
Is not the need of other souls our need?
After desire the helpful act must go,
As the strong wind bears on the winged seed
To some bare spot of earth, and leaves it there to grow.
Still are we saying, "Teach us how to pray."
O teach us how to love, and then our prayer
Through other lives will find its upward way.
As plants together seek and find sweet life and air.
-Selected.
Prominent Bible Doctrine.
By Silas Henn
If Christian professors were rightly instructed in reference to the coming of our Lord, we believe that much of the indifference and worldliness which at present prevails, would be put away. How could they regard Christ's appearing as certain, and the momentous event (as far as the best students of prophecy can ascertain) as near at hand, and yet be unconcerned and negligent? Belief in the truth of this doctrine, if, indeed, it is not allowed to swallow up their interest in other important doctrines, must have a salutary effect upon their minds. It must inspire them with a spirit of watchfulness and prayerfulness and holy expectation, and lead them to live in a state of constant readiness. And convinced of the terrible judgments that will come upon the ungodly, they would be led to increased fidelity and earnestness in the discharge of their obligations to a sin-blighted world. This great truth, therefore, should have due attention from every Christian teacher. Let none henceforth ignore this truth, or pass it by in silence. And let none, either through ignorance or prejudice, oppose it; but let all search the Scriptures that right views of this doctrine may be discovered, and when discovered, spread far and wide.
But there is a great tendency amongst some to try to fasten the charge of heresy on any who may venture to advocate views of Christian doctrine different from those which they have been taught in early life. But though we may get outside the theology of the sects, if we are still in the company of Isaiah, and Jeremiah, and Jesus, and Paul, what matter? Though we may get out of the beaten path a little, and walk in a way in which but few are found, if we are led there by light of reason and the light of divine revelation, what matter? Better hold the truth in company with the few than cling to error in company with the many. The truly wise, from the beginning until now, have been in the minority. The fact that the greater part of Christendom may believe certain doctrines does not stamp them as infallible.
Because some students of prophecy have been foolish enough to fix the date of the second advent, and time has proved that they were wrong, many sneer at the subject and try to turn it into ridicule. But is this wise? Is it not indeed trifling with what is sacred? Christ declares that he will come again, but with equal plainness he declares that the day and the hour of his coming are unknown. Should the great truth, therefore, be sneered at or openly denied, because some, from various prophecies and signs of the times, have erred in trying to fix the time of his coming? But let it be remembered that to question or deny the second advent is a far graver error, and one attended with far more evil consequences, than the one which excites so much ridicule. They make merry with the blunders of a few writers who have given dates (and they are but few who have done this); but they make blunders themselves much greater and far more inexcusable.
The second coming of Christ is taught in various promises that are given to the church; it is clearly intimated in many of the threatenings to the wicked; and it is published in a multitude of prophecies. Persons who have not given attention to this subject have no idea of the great prominence which is given to it in the Holy Scriptures. They overlook, it may be unwittingly, numerous passages which refer to it.—Rev. Silas Henn, England.
"In Everything Give Thanks."
PERHAPS there is no command in the Bible that puts Christians more to the test than this. Life at best has much work and many burdens. By far the majority in the world, whether in the pulpit or the pew, the shop or the home, labor early and late with little compensation. For the mother it is the old round of daily care, the turning of dresses inside out, planning, hoping, working after the children are asleep; for the father it is the constant work at the bench, on the farm, or over the counter, amid the wearing competition of business, till the brain whirls and he longs for a place where he can sit alone for a moment and commune with himself. Life is not the rosy thing he looked out upon when he was a boy. He hardly finds time to look at a paper to see what the great busy world is doing around him. He is trying to do his duty. But is he giving God thanks? Is life a psalm of praise to him? Is he thankful for each day with its dark hours and struggles?
Perhaps we are in work that is thoroughly uncongenial as well as confining; and yet do we carry a merry heart that doeth good like a medicine? Perhaps we are with those who fail to appreciate our ability or effort. We find the world grasping and each one living for himself. Others step in to fill the places we hoped to obtain. Sickness, death even, comes to those who are dear to us; yet do we take all as from one who knows the end from the beginning, and do we in everything give thanks?
We are perhaps conscious of having made a failure on some public occasion where we had hoped to do ourselves great credit. Are we content to leave this with God if we have done our best? It is easy to be thankful for the successes of life, but it is poor Christian living that is not thankful amid its ills.
What a world this would be if Christians lived up to this high privilege, command even, to be constantly thankful. In such a state of mind there is no gloom, no fault-finding with the place where God puts us; no irritability, no envy that another has succeeded, no distrust, but sunshine and peace and hope. Let us take this for our motto, for one week at least; "In everything give thanks." It will be a short, blessed week, and God will be honored.—Congregationalist.
Overcoming Doubts Through Work
No Time For Doubts. When Dr. Marshman was a young man, and at home, he was frequently the subject of doubts and fears. On his return from India, after nearly thirty years' residence and labor there, William Jay said to him—"Well, Doctor, how about doubts and fears?" "Haven't had time for them," was the answer.
Rejoice in the Lord Always
"Rejoice in the Lord always."
Manners and the Bible.
By Richard Glover
THERE is no "model letter-writer" comparable to the New Testament. Let a young man study the letters of St. Paul, and it will have an infinitely better effect on his style than the letters of Lord Chesterfield, and this quite apart from the effect of their moral and spiritual influence. The mere intellectual atmosphere of them will be elevating and refining to an astonishing degree.
And here we may remark on the influence of the Bible on mere manners. It invariably makes its readers more courteous and polite, and just, too, in proportion to the degree in which they are imbued with its spirit and teaching. Let a rough boor become converted, and let him begin to read and love his Bible, and he grows upward toward the gentleman from that hour. "The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple." It cannot be otherwise, because the Bible brings his mind perpetually into "good society." He may be wholly cut off from this in the actual world—though a religious poor man has here an advantage over his irreligious compeer, for, at any rate, on Sundays he comes into contact with superior society in at least the pulpit of his church or chapel—but when he reads his Bible he is brought into the society of the highest and most refined minds that ever existed. And how can it but be that all this should, perhaps insensibly, but at the same time very certainly, elevate, polish, and refine? "He that walketh with wise men shall be wise;" or, as the Persian proverb beautifully expresses it, "Even the pebble will become fragrant if it lie beside the rose;" and he that thus enjoys the society of gentlemen can hardly fail to become one too.
Experience has shown this: other things being equal, as the acquaintance of men with their Bible, so their mien and manners in regard to the standard of mere gentility. Does a parent wish to introduce his child into "good society?" Let him introduce him into a love of his Bible. Are young men and young women ambitious of self-culture even in regard to manners? And would they like to enter a good school of deportment? Let them enter into the society of the characters of the Bible.
But does some sharp reader say, How is it, then, that instances of discourtesy occur among professing Christians? My reply is, first, that it is one thing to be a professing Christian, and another thing to be a real and worthy one; secondly, that it is quite possible to be a truly converted one, and yet be very far from being a model or a winsome one; thirdly, that even in the case of an uncourteous Christian, depend upon it the man's native bearishness would have been vastly more bearish if he had not been a Christian. In such a case, it is not the Christianity of the man that is to blame, but rather his defect of it. He is a defective Christian because he has neglected the special duty "to put off concerning the former conversation the old man"—in his case, that very ugly old man—and to put on by self-discipline, culture and prayer, gentleness and courtesy, and all the other graces of the new man.
Christianity recognizes the fact that Christians have faults. But it does not allow them, and it urges us to correct them. "I speak this to your shame," said St. Paul to Christians. And there is much now that may be spoken to our shame; and we fear that want of courtesy and true graciousness is very conspicuous under this category. But when the Spirit of God says to us by St. Peter, "Adorn the doctrine of God your Saviour in all things," sure we are that he would have us specially remember that exhortation which he gives by the same apostle—"Be courteous."
From Winsome Christianity, by the Rev. Richard Glover.
John Bunyan as a Preacher.
THE world-wide fame of Bunyan as a writer has somewhat thrown into the shade his character as a preacher, but it is not less true that in the latter capacity he was distinguished by rare gifts and extraordinary success. When Charles II. once asked Dr. Owen (one of the greatest divines of that age), “How a learned man, such as he, could sit and listen to an illiterate tinker?” Dr. Owen replied, “May it please your Majesty, could I possess that tinker’s gift for preaching, I would most gladly relinquish all my learning.”
Bunyan often preached in the open air for the very good reason that the only available buildings were much too small to accommodate the crowds that flocked to hear him. His friend, Charles Doe, says: “When Mr. Bunyan preached in London, if there were but one day’s notice given, there would be more people come together to hear him than the meeting-house would hold. I have seen, to hear him preach, by my computation, about twelve hundred at a morning lecture by seven o’clock on a working day, in the dark winter time. I also computed about three thousand that came to hear him one Lord’s day in London, at a town’s end meeting-house, so that half were fain to go back again for want of room, and then himself was fain, at a back door, to be pulled almost over people to get up stairs to his pulpit.”
Even during his twelve year’s imprisonment in Bedford Jail he was not altogether debarred from preaching. By the favor of the jailor he was allowed to leave the prison, not merely to visit his family, but to undertake longer journeys to London, Reading, or elsewhere. It is said that during this period he visited the latter town and preached, disguised as a carter with a whip in his hand. Once when absent from jail he became so uneasy, that though the time had not arrived at which he had promised the jailor to return, he resolved to do so at once. As the hour was late, the jailor was surprised to see him and complained of being called out of his bed to re-admit him. But one of his enemies, suspecting the lenity with which Bunyan was treated, arrived shortly after, and demanded to know whether the prisoners were all safe. Being assured that they were, he went on to ask whether Bunyan was in custody. “Yes,” was the reply. “Let me see him.” Bunyan was called and appeared in reply to the sum-
mons. When the inquisitor had departed, the jailor said to his prisoner: “You may go out when you will, for you know better when to return than I can tell you.”
His vigorous Anglo-Saxon words, his intense earnestness, his command of Scripture illustration, his graphic description of the terrible consequences of sin, and his eloquent setting forth of the peerless glories and attractions of the Saviour of sinners, gave him, under God, ready entrance to the heart of his hearers. “Whoso can speak well is a Man,” said Martin Luther, and seldom has the saying been more finely exemplified than in the case of Bunyan.—Christian Herald.
“OUR FATHER.” “Not your Father alone, or mine, especially, but the Father of all the nations on the face of the earth. Acts 17: 26; Rom. 8: 15–17. “Who art in Heaven.” God has a home; he who has implanted a love of home in our hearts, certainly has a home of his own. See 2 Chron. 6: 21, 30. “Hallowed be thy name.” Reverence for God and all his attributes is one of the most important elements of worship and devotion. See Lev. 22: 32.
“Thy kingdom come.” The kingdom here especially referred to, is the kingdom of glory, to be established upon the earth made new. See 2 Peter 3: 13; Isa. 65: 17; Rev. 21: 1. “Thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven.” Never will this petition be realized to its full extent till the earth is made new. See Rev. 21: 1–5; Isa. 65: 17–25. “Give us this day our daily bread.” God alone can give us fruitful seasons and rebuke the destroyers of the fruits of the earth. He can keep us alive even in famine. Mal. 3: 11; Isa. 33: 16. We should not be over-anxious about to-morrow's supply. See Matt. 6: 34. “And forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors.” Here is the most difficult and hazardous of all petitions. Who would dare to even think or speak evil of any one, after making this petition to God. Often it is as if one would say, Let others attack me in my reputation and my estate, as I have dealt with theirs. What a terrible state of things would presently be inaugurated if God would literally answer this prayer. See Matt. 7: 12. When making this petition we should not forget to ask for help to love our enemies.
“And lead us not into temptation.” Here is where so many fail; they feel strong in themselves, and when tried by tempting baits they are trapped at once; defalcations, covetousness, lust, and all varieties of wickedness have each a trap or snare peculiar to themselves; and these are God's detectives. Reader, let us pray, that we may be forewarned, to detect the snare and flee the first appearance of evil. 2 Peter 2: 9.
“But deliver us from evil.” If all would daily and hourly present to God this petition, how many dreadful accidents by land and sea would be avoided, and how many lives of holiness would be, instead of the moral wrecks we see, everywhere in this world. See John 17: 15.
“For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory forever. Amen.” See Rev. 5: 13, 14.
Let us daily present this sublime, comprehensive prayer slowly, carefully, reverently, grasping as far as possible its far-reaching, elevating spirit, concentrating all our powers upon each petition.
JOSEPH CLARKE.
A Few Vulgarisms.
ASKING questions, private and personal, is one vulgar habit, and telling your own business, which no one wants to hear, is another. Asking the cost of a present that has been made to you; "pumping" a servant to hear what has been given by way of parting vail; loud talking in public; hard staring at table, insolent disrespect to husband, wife, sister or brother; showing temper in trifles and making scenes in public; showing an embarrassing amount of fondness and making love in public; covert sneers, of which people can see the animus if they do not always understand the drift; persistent egotism, which talks, itself, itself, itself, only itself, and cannot even feign the most passing interest in another; detraction of friends and it may be of relations—a husband telling of his wife's unpleasantness, a wife complaining of her husband's faults; the bold assumption of superiority, and the servile confession of infinite unworthiness; all these are signs and evidences of vulgarity—vulgarity of a far worse type than that which eats its fish with a steel knife, and says "you was" and "each of the men were." In fact, true vulgarity resolves into that central point of evil—selfishness. The unselfish can never be really vulgar. They may be uncouth, but they cannot be more; while the best top-dressing of manner to be found in the whole world cannot make the substance refined, where that one foul canker of egotism and indifference to others lies at the heart of things.—Ex.
Honoring Repentant Sinners
THE tendency of the church to fondle and pet persons brought from the lowest depths of wickedness, more than they do those who have never fallen into such disgrace, and thus to put a price on infamy at the expense of respectability, is thus commented on by a writer in the St. Louis Evangelist: “When Paul remembered his past sins of persecuting the church of Christ, he said he was not meet to be called an apostle. He did not think his sin was any credit to him. He confessed his sins with tears hot with repentance. He never referred to them with smiles and jokes, aiming to create laughter. He never hinted that he was a better preacher because he was such a bad sinner. Many of our modern reformers do these things, and many Christian people endorse them by listening to them and laughing at their rehearsals of drunkenness and dishonesty.—Selected.
Make Room for Strangers
As A lady and her daughter were passing out of the church door the child bade good-bye to a very poorly dressed little girl. "How did you come to know her?" inquired the surprised mother. "Why, you see, mamma, she came into our Sunday-school alone, and I made a place for her on my seat, and I smiled, and she smiled, and then we were acquainted." It would be a good rule for grown-up people in church. If you are in first, and a stranger enters, make room for him and smile, and then he will smile, and you will be acquainted.—Sel.
Let Your Light Shine
By Moody
It is a great deal better to live holy than to talk about it. We are told to let our light shine, and if it does, we won't need to tell anybody that it does. The light will be its own witness. Light-houses don't ring bells and fire cannon to call attention to their shining; they just shine.— Moody.
A Preacher’s Backhanded Compliment
A CERTAIN preacher was very warmly commended by one of his hearers: The flattered man was pleased, but he was taken down a peg when the flatterer added: "I don't believe in any preaching at all; and yours comes as near to none as any I have ever heard."