Signs of the Times, Vol. 11, No. 25. (6/25/1885)

Signs of the Times

Jun 25, 1885

International Tract and Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Jun 25, 1885

General Articles.

By Ellen G. White

The Waldenses.

BY MRS. E. G. WHITE.

AMID the gloom that settled upon the earth during the long period of papal supremacy, the light of truth could not be wholly extinguished. In every age there were witnesses for God,—men who cherished faith in Christ as the only mediator between God and man, who held the Bible as the only rule of life, and who hallowed the true Sabbath. How much the world owes to these men, posterity will never know. They were branded as heretics, their motives impugned, their characters maligned, their writings suppressed, misrepresented, or mutilated. Yet they stood firm, and from age to age maintained their faith in its purity, as a sacred heritage for the generations to come.

No church within the limits of Romish jurisdiction was long left undisturbed in the enjoyment of freedom of conscience. But in lands beyond the jurisdiction of Rome, there existed for many centuries bodies of Christians who remained almost wholly free from papal corruption. They were surrounded by heathenism, and in the lapse of ages were affected by its errors; but they continued to regard the Bible as the only rule of faith, and adhered to many of its truths. These Christians believed in the perpetuity of the law of God, and observed the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. Churches that held to this faith and practice, existed in Central Africa and among the Armenians of Asia.

But of those who resisted the encroachments of the papal power, the Waldenses stood foremost. For centuries the churches of Piedmont maintained their independence; but the time came at last when Rome demanded their submission. After ineffectual struggles against her tyranny, the leaders of these churches reluctantly acknowledged the supremacy of the power to which the whole world seemed bowing down.

A considerable number, however, refused to yield to the authority of pope or prelate. They were determined to maintain their allegiance to God, and to preserve the purity and simplicity of their faith. A separation took place. Some of the protesters crossed the Alps, and raised the standard of truth in foreign lands. Others retired into the more secluded valleys among the mountains, and there maintained their freedom to worship God.

The religious belief of the Waldenses was founded upon the written word of God, the true system of Christianity, and was in marked contrast to the errors of Rome. But those herdsmen and vine-dressers, in their obscure retreats, shut away from the world, had not themselves arrived at the truth in opposition to the dogmas and heresies of the apostate church. Theirs was not a faith newly received. Their religious belief was their inheritance from their fathers. They contended for the faith of the apostolic church,—"the faith once delivered to the saints."

Among the leading causes that had led to the separation of the true church from Rome, was the inveterate hatred of the latter toward the Bible Sabbath. As foretold by prophecy, the papal power cast down the truth to the ground. The law of God was trampled in the dust, while the traditions and customs of men were exalted. The churches that were under the rule of the papacy were early compelled to honor the Sunday as a holy day. Amid the prevailing error and superstition, many even of the true people of God, became so bewildered that while they observed the Sabbath, they refrained from labor also on the Sunday. But this did not satisfy the papal leaders. They demanded not only that Sunday be hallowed, but that the Sabbath be profaned; and they denounced in the strongest language those who dared to show it honor. It was only by fleeing from the power of Rome that any could obey God's law in peace.

The Waldenses were the first of all the peoples of Europe to obtain a translation of the Scriptures. Hundreds of years before the Reformation, they possessed the entire Bible in manuscript in their native tongue. They had the truth unadulterated, and this rendered them the special objects of hatred and persecution. They declared the church of Rome to be the apostate Babylon of the Apocalypse, and at the peril of their lives they stood up to resist her corruptions. While, under the pressure of long continued persecution, some compromised their faith, little by little yielding its distinctive principles, others held fast the truth. Through ages of darkness and apostasy, there were Waldenses who denied the supremacy of Rome, who rejected image worship as idolatry, and who kept the true Sabbath. Under the fiercest tempests of opposition they maintained their faith. Though gashed by the Savoyard spear, and scorched by the Romish fagot, they stood unflinchingly for God's word and his honor. They would not yield one iota of the truth.

Behind the lofty bulwarks of the mountains,—in all ages the refuge of the persecuted and oppressed,—the Waldenses found a hiding-place. Here the lamp of truth was kept burning during the long night that descended upon Christendom. Here for a thousand years they maintained their ancient faith.

God had provided for his people a sanctuary of awful grandeur, befitting the mighty truths committed to their trust. To those faithful exiles the mountains were an emblem of the immutable righteousness of Jehovah. They pointed their children to the heights towering above them in unchanging majesty, and spoke to them of Him with whom there is no variableness nor shadow of turning, whose word is as enduring as the everlasting hills. God had set fast the mountains, and girded them with strength; no arm but that of infinite power could move them out of their place. In like manner had he established his law, the foundation of his government in Heaven and upon earth. The arm of man might reach his fellow-men and destroy their lives; but that arm could as readily uproot the mountains from their foundations, and hurl them into the sea, as it could change one precept of the law of Jehovah, or blot out one of his promises to those who do his will. In their fidelity to his law, God's servants should be as firm as the unchanging hills.

The mountains that girded their lowly valleys were a constant witness of God's creative power, and a never-failing assurance of his protecting care. Those pilgrims learned to love the silent symbols of Jehovah's presence. They indulged no repining because of the hardships of their lot; they were never lonely amid the mountain solitudes. They thanked God that he had provided for them an asylum from the wrath and cruelty of men. They rejoiced in their freedom to worship before him. Often when pursued by their enemies, the strength of the hills proved a sure defense. From many a lofty cliff they chanted the praise of God, and the armies of Rome could not silence their songs of thanksgiving.

Pure, simple, and fervent was the piety of these followers of Christ. The principles of truth they valued above houses and lands, friends, kindred, even life itself. These principles they earnestly sought to impress upon the hearts of the young. From earliest childhood the youth were instructed in the Scriptures, and taught to sacredly regard the claims of the law of God. Copies of the Bible were rare; therefore its precious words were committed to memory. Many were able to repeat large portions of both the Old and the New Testament. Thoughts of God were associated alike with the sublime scenery of nature and with the humble blessings of daily life. Little children learned to look with gratitude to God as the giver of every favor and every comfort.

Parents, tender and affectionate as they were, loved their children too wisely to accustom them to self-indulgence. Before them was a life of trial and hardship, perhaps a martyr's death. They were educated from childhood to endure hardness, to submit to control, and yet to think and act for themselves. Very early they were taught to bear responsibilities, to be guarded in speech, and to understand the wisdom of silence. One indiscreet word let fall in the hearing of their enemies, might imperil not only the life of the speaker, but the lives of hundreds of his brethren; for as wolves hunting their prey did the enemies of truth pursue those who dared to claim freedom of religious faith.

The Waldenses had sacrificed their worldly

prosperity for the truth's sake, and with persevering patience they toiled for their bread. Every spot of tillable land among the mountains was carefully improved; the valleys and the less fertile hillsides were made to yield their increase. Economy and severe self-denial formed a part of the education which the children received as their only legacy. They were taught that God designs life to be a discipline, and that their wants could be supplied only by personal labor, by forethought, care, and faith. The process was laborious and wearisome, but it was wholesome, just what man needs in his fallen state, the school which God has provided for his training and development.

While the youth were inured to toil and hardship, the culture of the intellect was not neglected. They were taught that all their powers belonged to God, and that all were to be improved and developed for his service.

(Concluded next week.)

BURDENED.

WE ofttimes wonder why our hearts are burdened, And crushed and bowed 'neath such a weight of care; Why others seem so brave, and strong, and joyous, While we have scarcely strength to do and bear.

The secret is—ye murm'ring Christians, hear it!— Not that we've failed to go to God in prayer, But having taken every trouble to him, We failed to loose our hold and leave it there.

We did not say, "Thy will be done," O Father! And then and there let every burden rest; Ah, no! or else our hearts must have been lighter, For well we know God's ways are always best.

When we can trust alike in light or darkness, When all our will is lost in the divine, Then shall our faith be ever strong and joyous, And we can say, God's will be done, not mine. —Sel.

Roman Catholic Baptism.

THE discussion in the Presbyterian Assembly at Cincinnati on the validity of Roman Catholic baptism was unusually vigorous. Judge Drake, of Philadelphia, introduced a resolution against it.

The Rev. Dr. W. C. Alexander, of the Theological Seminary of San Francisco, said the resolution was useless, inasmuch as, if it were passed, it would be the mere expression of opinion of those who voted for it. "It is mischievous. If we pass this resolution, we make ourselves the laughing stock of the world. By a single stroke of the pen we propose to cut off from the privileges of Christ's kingdom two hundred millions of people. It is more papal than all the popes combined. It denies the validity of the baptism administered to millions of persons who have come into the Protestant church from the Roman Catholic Church and never received any other baptism."

The Rev. Dr. Schaff offered an amendment which reads: "Resolved, That it is the deliberate and decided judgment of this assembly, in full accord with the Reformed Confessions, and the theory and practice of all the Reformers and Westminster divines, that the Roman Catholic Church, though corrupt and teaching many unscriptural errors, yet retaining the Holy Scriptures and ancient creeds with all the fundamental truths of Christianity, is still a branch of the visible church of Christ, and therefore, that the sacrament of baptism administered by her, in the name of the Holy Trinity, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and with the intention to baptize, is true and valid Christian baptism, which cannot and ought not to be repeated."

In the support of this amendment Dr. Schaff said: "Baptism is a sacred rite of initiation into the privileges and duties of church membership, requiring three conditions absolutely necessary for its validity, namely; baptizing in the name of the Trinity; with the intention to baptize, and by the application of water. The Roman Catholic Church comes up to every one of these conditions. It cannot be repeated any more than the new birth can be repeated. The Roman Catholic Church forbids rebaptism."

A later dispatch from Cincinnati dated May 26, says:—

No more exciting scene at a session of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church has been witnessed since the reunion of the Old and New School Churches at Pittsburg in 1870, than that of this afternoon during the discussion of the resolution of Judge Drake against the validity of Roman Catholic baptism. The Rev. Dr. G. P. Hays held the floor from yesterday, and spoke to the original resolution, and against the amendment of the Rev. Dr. Schaff.

"The plea is made," he said, "that a minimum of truth being retained in the Roman Catholic Church, the corruptions which overlie it do not invalidate that minimum. The church may teach this, but her action in sending missionaries to labor among Catholics disproves the theory. The same argument used by Dr. Schaff in favor of Roman Catholic baptism, would apply equally well to that of the Mormon Church."

Against the proposition that the Roman Catholic Church does not rebaptize, the testimony of a missionary from New Mexico was cited, to the effect that every one of the proselytes to Catholicism in that country is rebaptized. The speaker went on to say that this church had thoroughly apostatized, urging in support of this statement its practice in image and saint worship.

The Rev. C. T. Burnley, of Sennett, N. Y., urged the inexpediency of passing the original resolution. Dr. Alfred Yeomans, of Orange, N. J., offered an amendment as follows:—

Resolved, That it is the decision of the General Assembly that its last deliverances on the subject of Roman baptism, leaving the question of rebaptism to the discretion of the session in which the question may arise, does recognize the validity of such baptism; and while it does not enjoin upon the session the admission of Roman Catholics into their communion with rebaptizing, this assembly reaffirms the decision of 1875 as its deliverance at this time.

The action of 1875 was then read. It is, that the decision of this, the question, be left to the judgment of the church session, guided by the principles governing the rules concerning baptism as laid down in the standards of our church."

The Rev. Dr. J. M. Worrall, pastor of the Thirteenth Street Church, of New York, protested against the intimation that the literati only were competent to judge of this matter. The pastor, who has practically to deal with this subject, is equally entitled to an opinion. But he would not admit that all the learned men were on the opposite side. The names of recognized men of ability were cited. Among them that of the Rev. Dr. J. H. Thornley, of South Carolina, the author of the deliverance in 1845, to which the Rev. Dr. Schaff had referred, and of whose paper at that time the Rev. Dr. Breckenridge had said it was "the most crushing argument" he had ever heard. The Reformers themselves held that the Roman Catholic Church was not a church, but as Luther said, on his return from Rome, "She is hopelessly apostate." The Rev. Dr. C. A. Dickey, of Philadelphia, did not like Dr. Yeoman's amendment because it declared that the church recognized the validity of Romish baptism and took the ground that the deliverance of the General Assembly on the subject, as well as the unanimous decision of this assembly, which has sustained a church session in its right to decide on the validity of Romish baptism in a particular case, left the matter with the session, and that suggests the best guide for action at the present time. The impression made by this speech was so strong that the Rev. Dr. J. I. R. Brownson, of Washington, Penn., moved to lay the whole matter on the table, which was unanimously carried amid the greatest excitement. Applause was three times renewed, notwithstanding the continual efforts of the Moderator to repress it. The applause having ceased, the confusion was so great that for several moments it was impossible for a member to be heard in his efforts to get the floor.

From the catechism ordered by the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, we give the following as the doctrine of the church of Rome on baptism:—

Q. What is baptism? A. Baptism is a sacrament which cleanses us from original sin, makes us Christians, children of God, and heirs of Heaven. Q. Are actual sins ever remitted by baptism? A. Actual sins and all the punishment due to them are remitted by baptism, if the person baptized be guilty of any. Q. Is baptism necessary to salvation? A. Baptism is necessary to salvation, because without it we cannot enter into the kingdom of Heaven. Q. Who can administer baptism? A. The priest is the ordinary minister of baptism; but in case of necessity any one who has the use of reason may baptize. Q. How is baptism given? A. Whoever baptizes should pour water on the head of the person to be baptized, and say, while pouring the water: I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Q. What do we promise in baptism? A. In baptism we promise to renounce the devil with all his works and pomps. Q. Why is the name of a saint given in baptism? A. The name of a saint is given in baptism in order that the person baptized may imitate his virtues and have him for a protector. Q. Why are godfathers and godmothers given in baptism? A. That they may promise, in the name of the child, what the child itself would promise if it had the use of reason. Q. What is the obligation of a godfather and a godmother? A. To instruct the child in its religious duties, if the parents neglect to do so or die.—The Converted Catholic.

Pour Out Your Heart Before Him.

IN approaching the Lord in prayer, he desires not the flippancy of lip service, the stateliness of oratory, or the precision of prescribed forms and memorized sentences; but he asks that they who worship him shall worship him in spirit and in truth; that they shall disclose the inmost secrets of their nature in his sight; that they shall reveal to him the real emotions of their hearts, their sorrows, their burdens, their trials, their afflictions, their temptations, and all the deep emotions that possess their souls. All these are to be, not suppressed, disguised, concealed, hinted, or intimated; but they are to be poured out before the Lord, into the ear of him who is touched with the feeling of our infirmities, who was tempted in all points like as we are; who was afflicted in all our afflictions; and who shall say to those who have helped or harmed his weakest, feeblest child, "Ye did it unto me." Why need we shut up in our own bosoms our most sacred thoughts? Why need we seek to hide from our heavenly Father those feelings which his own Spirit hath begotten within us? Why should we be ashamed of the "broken and contrite heart" which he "will not despise," or the tear of penitence which is so precious in his sight? Let us take courage at his gracious invitation; let us come boldly to the throne of grace; let us pour out our heart before him, assured that "the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto their prayers."—Sel.

A Crown of Righteousness

By H. Clay Trumbull

“THERE is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day; and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.” There is a crown for those who look for the coming again of their Lord. Our Saviour wants not only to be remembered gratefully for what he did while on earth, but to be looked for longingly in his re-appearing. There is such a thing as thinking too exclusively of the humiliation and suffering of Jesus, and too little of his exaltation and triumph. Jesus is to come again. We ought not only to admit that he is to return, but to “love his appearing.”—H. Clay Trumbull.

A Crown of Life

"And I will give thee a crown of life."

The Small Boy.

THE small boy of the age sadly needs pruning. He is not only something of a nuisance at present, but he is not a promising citizen for the future. If the child be father of the man, it looks as if we are called upon to discipline the parent. The small boy of old was led to believe by his father and mother that he should be seen and not heard; that he was always a subject, only earning independence when he deserved it, and the fact was impressed upon him that there were a great many things he could not handle until he had grown to be a man. Nowadays the small boy puts on the man early. He is forward, not to say impertinent; he is encouraged to show his precocity, especially before strangers, and he is allowed to go out into the world and forage for amusement before he is well through his alphabet or has heard of the ten commandments. It is not alone independence of spirit he is taught; it is independence of all responsibility, moral and otherwise. The small boy of old knew that a good many of his father's habits were those of a grown up individual, which he could not assume until he had matured. He was led to respect old age—all people older than himself; he was educated to be civil and polite, and never under any consideration to be rude. Today the proud parent laughs over what may be rather funny, but is impertinence, and excuses dangerous exhibitions of depravity on the score that he "is only a boy." The first thing the small boy gets hold of, just as soon as he can borrow, or beg, or obtain money, is a pistol. He is accustomed to see his father every night take out a revolver from his pocket and put it somewhere handy. What his father does is good enough for him, and although he has sufficient sense to know that there is a danger of punishment and prison in shooting anybody, he still believes it manly to threaten his antagonist with a pistol, however slight the quarrel may be. There are fathers who go so far as to give their small boys a pistol as a Christmas present, and provide them with cartridges. Does it call for any argument that there is enough temporary insanity and transitory mania in ordinary human nature without training the young child to settle children's disputes with a pistol?

The small boy indulges in cigarettes. This is popularly supposed to be a harmless amusement. It is an accessory of the most dangerous dissipation. It is a habit that is not compatible with cleanliness in boys, or proper development of taste and self-respect. It simply trains a boy to the use of a weed that has its benefits, when judiciously used, but which in his case lays the foundation for stronger and more dangerous stimulants, when cigarettes have grown too mild for the system. There are small boys whose parents permit them to have a night off, when they may go down town and stay out all night if they feel so inclined. No questions are asked, and if they do come home in the middle of the night, drunk, they may be mildly admonished, but not seriously. They are only boys. But there is still a more serious side to the small boy. The bad language he is allowed to indulge in is bad enough. The freedom and license he enjoys are reprehensible in the extreme. But the small boy has his love affairs with the female sex at a very early age, and they are not innocuous. They are patent to disinterested people, but it is a curious freak of human nature that parents can see their boy's every-day companions indulging in very suspicious immorality without being able to suspect their own flesh and blood, and when, some day or other, the young hopefuls are caught in questionable devices the fond parent gives him a little lecture, which does not impress him that the thing is wrong, but that he is displaying bad taste. Then he solaces himself with the thought, "Boys will be boys," and seems to feel it nothing but justice that his boy should be allowed to indulge in depravity because other boys do it and other parents are equally reckless.

In a country so democratic as this there is a great danger to public morals in the careless bringing-up of boys. Where class rules, one material danger is avoided,—the risk of the dominance of the lowest forms of taste and vice. But where one man is as good as another, and social intercourse is untrammeled to a great degree, and where there is altogether greater and more generally possessed wealth, the natural tendency is to the development, not so much of crime, as moral depravity.—San Francisco Chronicle.

Old-Fashioned Preaching.

"WELL, I am thankful to hear such good old-fashioned preaching," she said, as she came out of church, after hearing a sermon on Luke 19: 10: "The Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost."

"But, auntie," I said, "why do you call it 'old-fashioned preaching'?"

"Because," she replied; "because, like good old Mr. Baxter's books, it makes one feel the awful guilt of sin, and the wonderful mercy of Christ in coming to save us from its condemnation and from its reigning power in our hearts and lives."

"But, auntie, is not almost all the preaching what, in that sense, you might call 'good old-fashioned preaching'? Does it not tell us of the sinfulness of sin, and the mercy of God, in Christ Jesus, to all who repent and believe on him?"

"No, Henry, I am sorry to say, it don't. There is too much preaching on the outskirts of the gospel instead of preaching the full gospel itself; and some, I am sorry to say, that don't seem to get even to the outskirts. Why, only six weeks ago I heard a minister in Massachusetts give a long essay, which he would probably call a sermon, on a possible probation after death for some who had not repented in this life. And though he did say that he supposed the doctrine referred particularly to the heathen, I could not but think that some who heard him might believe they stood just as good a chance as the heathen could, and so put off repentance now, while life and probation continue. And then the next Sunday I heard, from a young man, a sermon, I suppose he would call it, but I should call it a discourse or essay, on the beauties of autumn; and though it was well written and well delivered, there was no mention of Christ, or of sin, or of duty in it, and it might just as well have been given by some heathen moralist or poet as by him."

"But, auntie, you don't think all the preaching is like that, do you?"

"Well, I can't say all, by any means; but there is too much of it—too much that has no kind of gospel in it. Why, only last week I read an advertisement in the daily paper, by a minister in H—, that he would preach on 'Orange Peel on the Sidewalk,' and of another in F—, on 'Giving the Wink,' and of still another who in his sermon had seventeen quotations from the classics and the poets, and only three from the Bible! What do you suppose Paul, or Whitefield, or Brainard, or Edwards, or Nettleton would have thought of that?"

I was telling a friend afterward of all this, and he said, "I am sorry to say there is too much truth in what your good old aunt has been saying. If we had far more of the faithful and searching preaching of the law, like that of Nettleton and of Finney in his best days, we should see far deeper impressions of the exceeding sinfulness of sin and of the need of the grace which is offered in Christ Jesus, and the Christian character of many in our churches would be broader and more substantial, and more intelligent and serious than it now is." And he added, "There is great truth and wisdom in what Spurgeon says, and which I wish all our preachers would remember, viz.: Preach the law, that men may deeply feel their sinfulness; then the gospel, that they may be led to Christ for pardon; and then the law again, as the great rule of life, that they may so live as to obey and honor Christ, and that all may so take knowledge of them that they have been with Jesus as to be led to him as their Saviour." To all which I could but say, "Amen!"—The Presbyterian.

Speaking Truth in Love.

It is not uncommon to hear one who has just uttered a bitter remark, add, as if offering a sufficient excuse, "I'm a plain-spoken man, and I speak out exactly what I believe." Upon this habit of frankness many pride themselves, as if its justification were self-evident. To others, however, it savors of rudeness, sometimes even of brutality. There is a certain meanness in trying to clothe a harsh and unlovely action in the garb of a virtue. Christ certainly commanded truthfulness. That is beyond dispute. Were the importance of veracity generally disregarded, social chaos also would ensue, and in a very short time. If every one were to speak and act the truth, and only the truth, some of the worst evils of our age would be greatly diminished, if not wholly reformed.

But it must not be forgotten that Christ insisted upon kindness as positively as upon truthfulness. To sacrifice the former for the latter is as wicked as to neglect the latter for the sake of the former. But, in point of fact, it is not necessary to sacrifice either on account of the other. They are entirely and always mutually consistent. By "speaking truth in love," as the apostle expressed it in his letter to the Ephesians, the claims of accuracy and kindness both are honored. Love shows itself unmistakably in our tones and manner of speech. It does not tamper with truth. It neither prevaricates, nor omits anything which ought in honor to be mentioned. Sometimes it speaks with severity and in rebuke. But the good-will which is beneath and behind it always is evident. It has no tone of bitterness nor any, even the faintest, accent of Pharisaic exultation.

It always commands respect, therefore, and usually it wins regard also. Mere truthfulness does not necessarily secure either, for its possible harshness is too revolting. But the truth spoken in love always has a certain winsomeness, no matter how reluctantly we listen to it; and it is always spiritually helpful in recollection, if not in its immediate impression. To speak the truth merely, may be to throw away good influence and to repel others from the standards of life which we desire them to accept. But to speak the truth in love, is very likely to win both for ourselves, and for the truth, the respect and affection which are desired.—Congregationalist.

"In Everything."

"In everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God." "In everything!" All of us are ready to make known our requests unto God in some things; but who does in everything? We ask for forgiveness; we ask for strength against temptation; we ask for help in correcting our faults; we even ask for health and safety, and for wisdom in teaching and in daily duty-doing; but do we ask, in the same confidence, for help in securing a servant, in buying clothing, in finding a summer home, in selecting wall-paper for a bed-room, in arranging a bouquet, in playing a game with the children, in bearing ourselves wisely in an evening call? "In everything," is the Bible injunction. What isn't included in it?—Sel.

Continue reading: "Evolution" and Evolution