Signs of the Times, Vol. 5, No. 43. (11/13/1879)

Signs of the Times

Nov 13, 1879

Pacific Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Oakland, California · Nov 13, 1879

General Articles.

By Ellen G. White

CHRISTIAN COURTESY.

BY MRS. E. G. WHITE. (Concluded.)

THERE is a very great want of sympathy and love and tender consideration among professed Christians. The good qualities which they may possess are hidden, and they repulse instead of attracting souls to Christ. If these persons could see the influence of their uncourteous ways and unkind expressions upon unbelievers, and how offensive is such conduct in the sight of God, they would reform their habits; for a lack of courtesy is one of the greatest stumbling-blocks to sinners. Selfish, complaining, sour Christians bar the way, so that sinners do not care to approach Christ.

Could we look beneath the surface of things, we should see that half life's misery is created by frowns and unkind speeches, which might be prevented as well as not. Many make a hell upon earth for themselves and for those whom they might comfort and bless. These are not worthy of the name of Christian. These will not dwell in Heaven, in the society of pure angels who are always kind, courteous, and considerate of others. Such ones have made hell enough upon earth, without carrying their unhappy character to spoil the bliss of Heaven.

I call upon these dissatisfied, mourning, fretting ones to reform before it shall be too late. There is still time for you to learn of Christ. You have greatly injured his cause, you have kept many souls from the kingdom of Heaven; but you may yet repent and be converted. Lay off the yoke which you have placed upon your own neck, and accept the yoke of Christ. Many are sensible of their great deficiency, and they read, and pray, and resolve, and yet make no progress. They seem to be powerless to resist temptation. The reason is, they do not go deep enough. They do not seek for a thorough conversion of the soul, that the streams which issue from it may be pure, and the deportment may testify that Christ reigns within.

All defects of character originate in the heart. Pride, vanity, evil temper, and covetousness proceed from the carnal heart unrenewed by the grace of Christ. If the heart is refined, softened, and ennobled, the words and actions will testify to the fact. When the soul has been entirely surrendered to God, there will be a firm reliance upon his promises, and earnest prayer and determined effort to control the words and actions.

Some persons speak in a harsh, uncourteous manner, that wounds the feelings of others, and then they justify themselves by saying, "It is my way; I always tell just what I think;" and they exalt this wicked trait of character as a virtue. Their uncourteous deportment should be firmly rebuked; it is something of which they ought to be ashamed,—a cruel practice, which is born of Satan, and is not in the least akin to Heaven. Paul had great boldness in preaching Christ, but he was not harsh and impolite. He had a tender heart, and was ever kind and thoughtful of others. A cold, unfeeling nature needs to be aroused from its torpor by the quickening influence of divine grace. Unless this change shall take place, persons of such a character cannot recommend the truth of God. They may be respected and feared, but they are seldom loved.

Paul attracted warm hearts wherever he went; his soul was linked to the soul of his brethren. When he parted with them, knowing and assuring them that they would never see his face again, they were filled with sorrow, and so earnestly besought him to still remain with them that he exclaimed, "What mean ye to weep and to break mine heart?" His sympathetic heart was breaking as he witnessed and felt their grief at this final separation. They loved him, and felt that they could not give him up. What Christian does not admire the character of Paul? Firm as a rock when standing in defense of the truth, he was affectionate and gentle as a child when surrounded by his friends. But his rebuke of sin was terribly severe, especially to those who professed to believe in Christ, and yet dishonored their profession. His heart was aglow with love, and yet when duty demanded he could be stern with holy indignation. Let the example of Paul, whose life was in accordance with the life of Christ, be a lesson to us.

Those who make a profession of sanctification are frequently the most proud and selfish and overbearing. What an account will such have to render to God for their influence? They profess that their conduct is in harmony with Heaven, while they manifest the evil promptings of their natural heart. They in no way resemble Enoch, Joseph, Daniel, Paul, or Jesus Christ, the perfect pattern. They bring Bible sanctification into contempt. Their course of conduct is uncourteous, and many times really unkind and uncouth. Such are like the sign-boards at cross roads, which mislead the traveler by pointing in the wrong direction.

Though these persons claim perfection, they know not experimentally what it means. No one is attracted to them, and made better by their example. Those who say sanctification, and do not the requirements of God, have not put on Christ; they do not wear the grace of humility, and exhibit Christ in words and actions till men shall be charmed by his perfections and be led to glorify God by seeing their good works.

Christ is pleased with his followers when they show that, though human, they are partakers of the divine nature. They are not statues, but living men and women, whose warm hearts, invigorated by the dews of divine grace, open and expand as the beams of the Sun of Righteousness shine upon them. The light which falls upon them they reflect upon others in works which are luminous with the love of Christ. Cold, professedly sinless Christians are like icebergs; they seem to freeze up the cheerfulness of all who are connected with them. Their influence upon the cause of Christ is always deleterious. Nothing is so offensive to God as the atmosphere of those who profess holiness of heart, but whose lives have a bad flavor. Unsavory actions make the Christian repulsive.

Instead of isolating themselves, Christians should associate together. Their influence upon one another may be salutary. We should learn lessons of Paul, who was often found relating his experience. There is too little conversation upon the facts of religious experience, and the mercy and goodness of God. Love and gratitude are not cherished in the heart as they should be. Little, delicate acts of courtesy are sadly neglected. Words of cheer and encouragement to one another might be spoken with the best of results. There is great need of individual sanctification to God, but we have no sympathy for the spurious article.

True sanctification is carried into all the business of life. Pure thoughts, noble aspirations, clear perceptions of truth, elevated purposes of action, yearnings to attain to perfection, will be the experience of every real Christian. These have fellowship with the Father and with the Son. They are constantly increasing in the knowledge of God. They grow in reverence and trust and love; but while they are coming nearer and nearer to perfection of character, they will feel more and more deeply their unlikeness to Christ, and have greater distrust of themselves and greater dependence upon God. As these are growing up to the full stature of men and women in Christ Jesus, they will be sought to by others, and will be a help and blessing to all with whom they associate. The most Christ-like professors are those who are the most kind, pitiful and courteous; their convictions are firm and their characters strong; nothing can swerve them from their faith or allure them from their duty.

A Christian will cultivate a meek and quiet spirit, calm, and considerate of others, happy in temper, that sickness will not make irritable, the weather or circumstances shall not disturb. We want to cherish that charity which is not easily provoked, which suffereth long and is kind, which hopeth all things, endureth all things. If this grace be in you, if you are ruled by the spirit of Christ, all who see you will take knowledge of you that you have been with Jesus; and your words and actions will testify that your religion is full of good fruits. To do good and to communicate, the children of God never forget. They have the spirit of Christ; it is spontaneous with them; for God has transformed their natures by his grace. Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit.

Belief Influenced by the Heart.

By Henry Seymour

In a letter recently received from a gentleman who stands high in the medical profession, he says: "You speak as though it is in a man's power to believe a thing or not, just as he pleases. Now, it is evident to me that the will has nothing to do with believing. We believe or disbelieve because we cannot help it. Convictions are the result of evidence which we cannot resist. Such facts and evidence may be brought to bear upon the mind with such power, that the man is compelled to believe, whether he will or not, or rather whether it is agreeable to him or not."

With all due deference to my learned friend, I affirm that the state of a man's heart has much to do with his belief, and especially so in respect to religious matters. It modifies and moulds his opinions, and oftentimes to a large extent. Here are two men of equal mental endowments. They are alike capable of judging of evidence. And yet, when the evidence is presented, one believes and the other doubts. Why is it so? What makes the difference? It does not lie in their mental capacities nor in the facts in the case, but wholly in the state of their hearts. One is open to conviction. He loves the truth and is willing and desirous to know it. The other is unfavorably biased. He is prejudiced against the truth. He does not love it. He does not wish to believe. Let him have a new heart, a right heart. Let the love of God be shed abroad in his heart by the Holy Spirit, and, all else remaining the same, he will believe just as the other man believes. He will then see the truth as with new eyes, and he will wonder that he did not so see it before.

So was it with Saul of Tarsus. And so has it been with thousands and tens of thousands in other instances. The state of many a man's heart blinds his mind to the truth, as in the case of the Jews with respect to Christ. They have no desire to believe that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah. And being filled with prejudice, they are in no state to investigate the facts. They are not open to conviction. They have no heart to pray to the "Father of light" that he would open their eyes, and lead them into the knowledge of the truth. They are in this regard like Paine, and multitudes of his disciples. In the distress of his last sickness he frequently called out, "Lord Jesus! help me." And when he was asked whether, from his so often calling upon the Saviour, it was to be inferred that he believed the Gospel, he replied: "I have no wish to believe on that subject."

Infidels as a class have no wish to believe. They prefer not to believe. And, instead of examining the evidences with candor, as they ought to do in a matter of so vast importance, they wilfully close their eyes against them, and seek to confirm themselves more strongly in their unbelief. The great corrective of infidelity is a right heart. It springs from an "evil heart." Let the heart be made right toward God, let a man love him, and desire to know and do his will, as all should, and his infidelity will soon be put to flight, as has been seen in thousands of instances. It is not men of weak minds alone that are believers. Men of the most gifted minds that the world has known have been believers. Daniel Webster was one of this class. As he approached his end he strongly affirmed his belief in the Bible, and dictated amongst others the following words to be engraven on his tombstone: "My heart has always assured and reassured me that the Gospel of Jesus Christ must be a Divine reality."

The Saviour regarded unbelief as having its seat in the heart, or he would not have characterized it as a sin. Speaking of sending the Comforter, He said: "And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment. Of sin, because they believe not on me." Not to believe on Christ is a sin, and one of the greatest of sins, because the evidence is so abundant and clear. It is so abundant and clear, that a man who has a heart to believe cannot doubt.—Rev. Henry Seymour, in Christian at Work.

THE PRAYER OF LOVE.

By National Baptist

"Perfect love casteth out fear."

Is it for me, dear Lord, to pray That thou wilt love me day by day? When was the time thou lov'dst not me? When, in the long eternity?

Thou canst not more, thy heart is full; Thou canst not less, All-Merciful; What shall I ask then, if I must? Nay, Father, nay, just let me trust!

Aye, love! Thou canst not more nor less; Thy fullness meets my neediness; Thy thought, forerunning every care, Anticipates the troubled prayer!

I know not, in such peace I rest. I would, like John, lean on thy breast, And not so much seek else above, As simply listen, lean, and love.

I'll tell thee, though, my little needs, My foolish faults, my sinful greeds, Yet, O my Lord, all murmurings still, And let me only will thy will.

So this I ask, dear Christ, that I May simply on thy grace rely, And be soul-filled with love of thee Now and henceforth, eternally.

I ask not cross, crown, grief, or glee; I choose all these to leave with thee; Repentance give, wash out my sin, And let me just love thee. Amen.

—National Baptist.

Reaping What We Sow

WHAT a man soweth shall he also reap.

A Governor Refuses a Liquor Pardon

Gov. GEAR, of Iowa, was lately asked to pardon a convicted rumseller, and replied:—

“While I have great sympathy for Mr. Newton, I also have great sympathy for the wives and children who have been made sufferers by the sale of whiskey to the fathers and husbands, by Mr. Newton. The petition cannot be granted.”

These words have the right ring. Other men are responsible for their acts, why not liquor sellers? A druggist must know for what purpose he sells arsenic, but arsenic never made a man commit murder, burn a barn, or beat his family. If the liquor traffic does no harm, then no damages can be collected, and the dealers are safe.—Ex.

"Till He Come."

Among the sights of Venice may be seen a very beautiful monument, in the form of a pyramid. A full-length figure of a sleeping maiden reclines at the foot, leaning against the partially opened gates of the tomb. Beside her stands an angel, with eyes intently gazing into the distance, and holding in his hand a trumpet. Lo, he watches the first approach of our coming Lord, in order to raise the trumpet to his lips, and peal forth such a loud triumphal sound as shall awaken those who are sleeping "till he come."

What reflections crowd the mind when gazing on this work of art! Are we waiting for the return of our Lord? Are we living as if we expected his coming? Are our lamps burning, and oil in our vessels with our lamps? "Till he come" was the simple yet pregnant inscription on a tombstone. Well did it express the faith, hope, and love of the departed!

When we awake in the morning how blessed to have our first thoughts on the Lord Jesus, to be able to look on God's face without a cloud or shadow to mar our communion with him; to live during the day, moment by moment, with a conscience void of offence toward God and man. Should anything disturb our joy in God, to flee at once to him with a full confession, to receive full restoration, and to lay ourselves down at night with a heart that does not condemn us. — Christian Herald.

The Immortality of the Soul—History of the Doctrine.

(Continued.)

THE reason why that heathen doctrine spread so widely and so rapidly in the church, is shown by the following from an eminent historian: "Many from the different sects of philosophers, especially from the Platonists, and also from among the rhetoricians, embraced Christianity; and they were honored for their erudition and talents by being made bishops and presbyters." (Mosheim's Commentaries, vol. ii. cent. iii. sec. 26, p. 140.) The learned Platonic Christians, being now made teachers and ministers in the various churches, soon disseminated their Platonic doctrine of the soul everywhere throughout the Christian church.

And the same author says: "In fact, there are but few points of Christian theology which the teachers who were inflamed with this eager desire to produce a union between Christianity and Philosophy left untouched." (Ibid., vol. i. cent. ii. sec. 34, p. 373.) Another historian bears this testimony: "Very soon after the rise of Christianity, many persons who had been educated in the schools of the philosophers becoming converts to the Christian faith, the doctrines of the Grecian sects, and especially of Platonism, were interwoven with the simple truths of pure religion. As the Eclectic philosophy spread, heathen and Christian doctrines were still more intimately blended, till at last both were almost entirely lost in the thick clouds of ignorance and barbarism which covered the earth." (Enfield's Hist. of Phil., p. 8.) Of the Eclectic school he says: "The muddy waters sent forth from this polluted spring were spread through the most celebrated seats of learning, and were even permitted, as we shall afterward see, to mingle with the pure stream of Christian doctrine." (Ibid., book 3. chap. ii. sec. 4. p. 331.) Once more of the teachers of the church, he says: "Through several centuries they partook of the spirit of the Alexandrian school, and the Eclectic method of philosophizing Plutonized Christianity." (Ibid., book vi. chap. ii. p. 453.)

Though this is astonishing beyond measure, yet we readily see how it was accomplished. All the sects of heathen philosophers except the Platonic denied any future life to man; but Plato strongly contended for a future state of rewards and punishments. This naturally led the Christians to regard the Platonists as friends and allies upon this great question of the fact of a future life, though they differed as to how it was to be obtained. Christians rested their hope upon the resurrection of the dead as promised in the Bible. At this the heathen philosophers mocked as being unreasonable and unphilosophical, as they cared nothing for what the Bible said. See their answer to Paul at Athens in Acts 17. Now the Platonists came in with their philosophical argument to meet their antagonists, and prove a future life by means of the soul's immortality. In this way reason and philosophy could be made to support the hope of the simple-minded Christians, which before rested solely upon the promise of the Scriptures. The promise of relief and help, and of having a more philosophical faith, was a very flattering one. As Eve listened to, and was beguiled by, the serpent, so they listened to these philosophers, were flattered with their praises, accepted their help, adopted their notions, and finally united with them.

Reader, here is the origin of the present orthodox doctrine of immortal souls, disembodied spirits, ghosts, eternal hell, etc. Thus the learned commentator on Cudworth's Intellectual System says: "The Platonic philosophy, indeed, which was approved by the ancient Christians, has been abandoned, and another substituted in its place; but the dogmas and conclusions derived from it have been retained by most men in all their pristine integrity; and any one conversant with the ancient philosophy, might write a long and copious commentary upon the relics of the Platonic philosophy among Christians. Thus happens it with mortals. The primary and fundamental doctrines of a sect are very often repudiated by those who preside over communities; while they either are unwilling to interfere with the consequences and institutions that proceed from them, owing to their ignorance of their origin, or are unable to do so, because the people are not easily prevailed upon to abandon inveterate customs. In the course of time, many opinions and rites are held sacred, which those who are addicted to them would hold in far different estimation if they were thoroughly aware of their origin." (Cudworth's Intel. Syst., vol. iii. p. 265, note.)

Yes; the immortal-soul theory is a relic of Platonic philosophy which thousands would quickly drop did they know its origin.

PLATONISM OPPOSED.

But was all this heathen philosophy and pagan doctrine received into the church without opposition? No, indeed. Many, nay, all of the more pious men warmly opposed it, for they foresaw its effects. Mosheim records the controversy: "The rise, however, of this taste for philosophical speculation, and the ascendency which they perceived it gradually acquiring in the minds of so many of their teachers, became a source of the most poignant regret to all such as continued steadfastly attached to that ancient and simple species of piety which had been delivered down by the apostles and their disciples, inasmuch as they saw reason to fear that the cause of celestial truth might be thereby materially injured, as in reality proved to be the case, and that divine wisdom would not long retain either its proper value or dignity in the estimation of mankind. In consequence of this, the Christian church became divided into two parties, which opposed each other with the utmost warmth. . . . The issue of this dispute, which lasted for a considerable while, at length was, that victory declared itself in favor of the patrons of philosophy, and that those teachers came to be most respected, who, in unfolding the doctrines of religion, called in the aid of philosophical principles and precepts." (Commentaries, vol. i. cent. ii. sec. 21, pp. 343, 344.) This was the very thing against which Paul had warned the church: "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy." Col. 2:8. The better class of Christians remembered this, and were opposed to receiving this heathen philosophy into the church.

In his "Ecclesiastical History," Mosheim, after naming the class who were in favor of introducing Platonism into the church, adds: "But a great majority thought otherwise." (Vol. i. book i. part ii. chap. i. p. 115.) "But gradually the friends of philosophy and literature acquired the ascendency. To this issue Origen contributed very much; for, having early imbibed the principles of the new Platonism, he inauspiciously applied them to theology, and earnestly recommended them to the numerous youth who attended on his instructions. And the greater the influence of this man, which quickly spread over the whole Christian world, the more readily was his method of explaining the sacred doctrine propagated." (Ibid., p. 162.) Hence, in a short time, Bible truth and those who advocated it were put down and held in contempt. Says our author: "There were various persons of this sort in the fourth century, who were disgusted with the progress of superstition and of errors respecting the true nature of religion, and who opposed the general current; but the only fruit of their labor was, that they were branded with infamy." (Ibid., p. 274.) Rome came in and condemned them as heretics, and thus silenced all opposition.

ALLEGORICAL INTERPRETATION OF THE SCRIPTURES ADOPTED.

How could these Platonic doctrines be harmonized with the Bible? How could the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, conscious state of the dead, etc., be reconciled with the opposite doctrine everywhere taught in the Scriptures? This was, indeed, a serious difficulty; but the genius of these Platonizing teachers devised a mode of harmonizing the two. It was this: they assumed that all the Bible was to be understood, not literally, or according to its plain, obvious meaning, but allegorically, or as metaphors under which the truth was concealed. By this method, of course, they could make it teach any doctrine they pleased! Clement and Origen, especially the latter, were the chief movers in this work.

So plainly and fully has the learned Mosheim, in his Ecclesiastical History, treated this part of my subject, that I have only to quote him. He says: "One of the earliest evils that flowed from this immoderate attachment to philosophy, was the violence to which it gave rise in the interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. For, whereas the Christians had, from a very early period, imbibed the notion that under the words, laws, and facts recorded in the Sacred Volume, there is a latent sense concealed—an opinion which they appear to have derived from the Jews—no sooner did this passion for philosophizing take possession of their minds, than they began, with wonderful subtlety, to press the Scriptures into their service in support of all such principles and maxims as appeared to them consonant to reason; and at the same time most wretchedly to pervert and twist every part of those divine Oracles which opposed itself to their philosophical tenets or notions." Of Clement he says: "Whatever, therefore, appears to him just and consonant to reason in the maxims or tenets of the philosophers, is sure to discover laid down somewhere in the books of the Old Testament; and this leads him, not unfrequently, to strain and distort, in a most extraordinary manner, the words of Moses and the other sacred writers, in order to make them, apparently, speak one and the same language with Plato and the rest of the philosophers of Greece." (Eccl. Hist., vol. i. cent. ii. sec. 33, p. 368, and note 2.)

He also says they tried to make the Bible doctrine of the resurrection fit their immortal-soul theory. "The restoration, or resurrection of the dead, was so interpreted as to accommodate it to the tenets of the Grecian sages." (Commentaries, vol. i. cent. ii. sec. 34, note 1, p. 373.)

Origen, who lived in the close of the second and the first half of the third century, was a disciple of Clement, and also for a long time sat under the teaching of Ammonius. These teachers he followed, and carried their Platonic doctrines still further, especially with respect to the immortality of the soul.

The following quotations from Mosheim will clearly show all this: "Origen's new method of explaining and illustrating religious truths by means of philosophy, required also a new method of expounding the Sacred Scriptures; for, meeting with many things in the Scriptures repugnant to the decisions of his philosophy, he deemed it necessary to devise some method of removing this disagreement. And, as it would add confirmation to his opinions if he could make it appear that they were supported by the authority of Scripture, some plausible way was to be devised which should make his speculations appear to be taught in the holy Oracles." (Ibid., vol. ii. p. 165.) Hence, "perceiving that many of the facts and declarations of the Bible conflicted with the principles of his philosophy, he felt the necessity of resorting to some means of escaping their force; and he could find none more easy and effectual than this assumption: Whatever in the sacred books conflicts with my philosophy must not be taken literally, but must be converted into allegory. Safely posted behind this rule, he could easily resist whatever the Scriptures might oppose to his opinions." (Ibid., p. 170.) "I have," says Mosheim, "already touched upon the causes which led him to adopt this very dangerous rule for interpreting sacred history. They are obvious to every attentive reader. The statements of the Bible respecting the creation of the world, the origin of man, etc., were contrary to the precepts of his philosophy, and, therefore, he would sooner deny the truth of a portion of sacred history than give up his philosophy." (Ibid., p. 184.)

Was the Platonic, or Ammonian, doctrine of the soul among those errors which he wished to make the Bible uphold? Yes; hear our historian on this point: "The foundation of all his faults was, that he fully believed nothing to be more true and certain than what the philosophy he received from Ammonius taught him respecting God, the world, SOULS, demons, etc.; and therefore he, in a measure, recast and remodeled the doctrines of Christ after the pattern of that philosophy." (Ibid., p. 159, note 8.) Here we have the doctrine of Christ recast and remodeled, and the Bible distorted, to make them fit the heathen doctrine of the soul, and other errors. Our author continues: "He could not discover in the sacred books all that he considered true, so long as he adhered to the literal sense; but allow him to abandon the literal sense, and to search for recondite meanings, and those books would contain Plato, Aristotle, Zeno, and the whole tribe of philosophers. And thus nearly all those who would model Christianity according to their own fancy, or their favorite system of philosophy, have run into this mode of interpreting Scripture." (Eccl. Hist., vol. i. cent. iii. part ii. p. 181.) Behold here the origin of the figurative interpretation of the Bible. It was invented expressly to harmonize that book with Plato's doctrine of the soul.

(To be Continued.)

The Pulpit Use of Slang.

By The Standard

WHILE some defense may be found for the employment of unwonted methods of preaching, such as familiar and colloquial and anecdotal forms of utterance—partaking of the nature, if not, indeed, formed upon the model of the sensational; we insist upon it that there can be no excuse offered—or none admitted if offered—for the use of slang and slovenly expressions in the house and service of God. These we hear but too frequently, and while they are occasionally the outcome of defective education and taste, they are more frequently the affectation of young preachers who ought not to be allowed to plead ignorance in their defense. They probably would not do so, but would claim that the active force of slang phrases reaches the mind of the hearer quicker and more effectively than expression of a more sober and dignified tone. We grant that this may be true, but they reach the ear of all cultured persons to offend it, and of the majority of devout hearers, to produce the impression of a levity at utter variance with the solemnity of religious worship.

We have heard preachers only recently use such slang phrase as "taking stock," "getting a square meal," "going the whole animal," "keeping his head level," "putting his foot in it," "getting a corner on brimstone," and many others, equally coarse and unfit for the pulpit—unless, indeed, the theory which some would set up is to be admitted, that the pulpit is no more sacred than the platform.—The Standard.

Assassinations of Royalty.

THE following has been given as a list of the attempts on the lives of royal personages and rulers during the last thirty years:—

The Duke of Modena, attacked in 1848; the Crown Prince of Prussia (now emperor William,) at Minden, in June, 1848; the late King of Prussia, in 1852; Queen Victoria (by an ex-lieutenant,) in 1852; an infernal machine discovered at Marseilles on Napoleon III.'s visit in 1852; Emperor of Austria, slightly wounded by Libenyez (a Hungarian) in 1853; attack on King Victor Immanuel, in 1853; on Napoleon III., opposite the Opera Comique, in 1853; Duke of Parma mortally stabbed in 1854. Napoleon III. fired at by Planori in the Champs Elysees in 1855; attack on Queen Isabella of Spain, by Fuentes, in 1856; King Ferdinand of Naples stabbed by Milano, a soldier, in 1856; conspiracy against Napoleon III. by three Italians in 1857; the Orsini plot against Napoleon III. in 1858; King of Prussia twice fired at, but not hit, by the student Beker, at Baden, in 1861; Queen of Greece shot at by the student, Brusios, in 1862; another conspiracy against Napoleon III. by three Italians in 1862; President Lincoln assassinated in 1865; the Czar attacked at St. Petersburg in 1866 and in Paris in 1867; Prince Michel, of Servia, assassinated in 1868; attempt on the Viceroy of Egypt in 1868; assassination of General Prim in Madrid in 1870; attempt on Senor Zorilla, Spanish Minister of Public Works, in 1870; assassination of Lord Mayo, Governor General of India, in 1872; attempts upon the Mikado of Japan in 1872; attempt on King Amadeus of Spain in 1872; General Melgarijo, Dictator of Bolivia, 1871; President Balta, of Peru, in 1872; attempt upon the life of the Emperor of Germany while visiting St. Petersburg, 1873; attempt upon President Pardo, of Peru, in 1874; President Ecuador in 1875; President Gill, of Paraguay, in 1877; attempts of Hodel and Nobeling upon the life of the Emperor of Germany, 1878; King of Spain, October 24, 1878; King of Italy, November 15, 1878, and the assassination of Prince Krapotkin, Governor of Khardoff, Russia, March, 1879.

To the above must now be added the late attempt on the life of the Czar. The frequency of these outbreaks reveals far more than a passing discontent with local administrations. Nor will any mere preference for republican over monarchial or aristocratic institutions account for this deadly and persistent assault upon the men clothed with authority. The cause lies deeper than the distinctions between various forms of Government. It is a malignant revolt against authority, and is aimed no more against those who inherit their offices than against those who are chosen by the suffrages of the people. Parental authority as well as civil goes down before it. It is the fulfilment of those prophetic intimations which tell how, in the last days, men shall be "boasters, proud, disobedient to parents," "despising government, presumptuous, self-willed, not afraid to speak evil of dignities." The Nihilism of Russia is its theory, the Paris Commune its typical form of social order. It is the deadly foe of religion, liberty and human progress, and must be resisted by the only weapons available in such a struggle—justice, charity, education, moral laws impartially enforced, and the influences of pure religion.—Christian Statesman.

India’s Famine Rats and Superstition

A CURIOUS superstition is exhibited in Western and Southern India, where the lands desolated by the famine of 1877 are now being ravaged by millions of rats. These animals have overspread the country like locusts, they destroy the crops almost as thoroughly, and are even more difficult to keep down. So grave has become the aspect of affairs that a "Rat Committee" has been appointed to inquire into the best means of getting rid of the creatures. The natives in some places refuse to destroy the rats, as they believe that the souls of the people who died in the famine have come back in the bodies of rats to get the food they should have had in their previous existence.—Ex.

Sweep Your Own Doorstep

LET every one sweep the drift from his own door and not busy himself about the frost on his neighbor’s door.

Continue reading: Modern Spiritualism