p. 57 | Signs of the Times, Vol. 16, No. 4. (1/27/1890)

A VISIT TO THE MALAY SECRETARY.

By Stephen Nelson Haskell

THE Malays are very numerous in some portions of Africa, especially in the north. It is estimated that in Cape Town and vicinity there are from seven to eight thousand of them, besides considerable numbers in the East Province, and higher up that coast. There are among them, as among all other people who claim civilization, many of refinement and intelligence. These are men of influence in the community where they live. They believe much in their set seasons for prayer, and the most conscientious are strict in observing them. In those places where they have a mosque, they frequently repair there, instead of worshiping at home. Those of them upon whom the influence of the gospel has had the least effect, often, like the heathen, sink into the lowest depths of degradation; but to judge the body by this class would be to misrepresent them as a people.

They are the cab-drivers of Cape Town, and their horses generally indicate hard usage, but there are some who are noble exceptions. While the law regulates the price of carrying a passenger in the city, if the passenger be ignorant of this, he may find that the only limit to the price charged is the amount that can be obtained by the ruthless driver.

They put forth no missionary effort to convert others to their faith; this is not their mission; but at the same time there are many professed Christians who turn Mohammedans. Missionaries have less success among the Mohammedans than they do among the lowest classes of the heathen. They have no more of a desire to assimilate than have the Chinese. They are, and always will remain, a distinct race of people.

There was an enactment passed in 1642, found in an old law book, relating to their religion, as follows: "No one shall trouble the Amboinecese about their religion, or annoy them, so long as they do not practice it in public, or venture to propagate it among Christians or heathens. Offenders to be punished with death. But should there be among them those who have been drawn out by God to become Christians, they are not to be prevented or hindered from joining the Christian church."

At the present time they have a number of places of worship both at Cape Town and Port Elizabeth. The religious services are, on the whole, fairly attended by the male portion of the community, but the females usually are excluded from the mosques. The reason offered is because the sight of them inspires in them unholy thoughts, when they come to worship before God. A considerable number have of late years made pilgrimages to Mecca, and they still continue to do this, which step no doubt tends to strengthen them in their faith; and they are particularly proud of being designated as "Hadjes" on their return from such pilgrimages.

The language of the Cape Malays is the Dutch, mixed with a number of Malay words. Some of them speak English quite well, and are continually making progress in this respect. Since this connection with Mecca has been going on, they are becoming more versed in the Arabic. Many of them when they return from their pilgrimage speak that language quite fluently.

The first necessary qualification in order to become a priest is to be able to read the Koran, which is written in Arabic, with fluency. They have at Cape Town schools where the Arabic is taught. For the sciences the children go to the Christian schools.

The Mohammedans are the most exclusive people in South Africa. The difficulty seems to lie in the fact that they are intelligent, and have a system of faith in direct opposition to any that bears the name of Christ. The first and the chief cornerstone of their faith is a denial that Christ is the Son of God. They believe that Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Christ, and Mohammed were prophets. Mohammed, they hold, is the greatest of them all. They believe that Daniel was a prophet, and also some others, but that they are inferior to the first-named.

We formed an acquaintance with the chief secretary of this people, for the cape, Mr. Abdol Burns. He was a Christian until twenty-nine years of age, and then he turned Mohammedan. It was with some difficulty that we made his acquaintance, so as to be invited to his house, although recommended to him by one of their priests. But when he once took me into his house, in true Arabian style he said, "Now you are my friend, my room, my library, and myself are all at your disposal." We have called on him a number of times since, and have ever received a hearty welcome. He manifests the greatest freedom in relating any information desired, concerning them and their customs, habits, modes of living, and so forth. He is firm in the belief that all their wars in the past were the battles of the Lord. I asked him, providing there were a majority of their people, what would become of the Christians. To this he replied, "Unless they would turn Mohammedan we would be obliged to kill them." To this I replied, "What, then, would become of our friendship?" "Unless you break the friendship by shooting my people, I would be obliged to befriend you," said he. They accept the Koran instead of the New Testament. The church service is conducted in the Arabic. When the name of Daniel is mentioned, the congregation respond, "Nabic, Alley, Salaam," i. e., "Prophet Daniel, great blessing be upon him." The same response is made when the names of the other prophets whom they acknowledge as such, are mentioned. They observe Friday, the sixth day of the week, because Adam was created thereon, and because he had to thank the Lord for his creation.

Mr. Burns has one wife and three children, although the laws allow for this people a plurality of wives. But in case of litigation after the death of the husband, where there is property, the law does not recognize that the marriage is legal. If there be no will, then the master of the Supreme Court calls an assembly, investigates the matter, and declares who the nearest heir is. Mr. Burns has two boys and one girl. They are educated in the

English, Dutch, and Arabian languages. The following is their confession of faith: "Lah illah ha il Allah Mahomet Rasoul Allah," i. e., "No other God, and Mohammed, prophet of God." This must be publicly affirmed.

We gave Mr. Burns a brief synopsis of our faith, stating that we observed the seventh day as the Sabbath, believed in the coming of the Lord, the resurrection of the dead, judgment, reigning with Christ a thousand years, the restoration of the earth, etc. He looked at us in perfect astonishment and exclaimed, "You are a class of Christians we are not to kill, or in any way to injure." Then, to prove it, he went to his library and took down a book, even "Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation," and read these words of Abubaker, in his circular letter to the tribes of Arabs in Arabia:

“When you fight the battles of the Lord, quit yourselves like men, without turning your backs, but let not your victory be stained with the blood of women and children. Destroy no fruit-trees, nor burn any fields of corn, nor do any mischief to cattle, unless you kill to eat. When you make any covenant or article stand to it, and be as good as your word. As you go on you will find some religious persons, who live in retired monasteries, and propose themselves to serve God that way. Let them alone; neither kill them, nor destroy their monasteries. And you will find another class of people, that belong to the synagogue of Satan, who have shaven crowns; be sure you cleave their skulls; give them no quarter, till they either turn or pay tribute.”

He claimed that these were the Romanists, which were Christians only in name, but in reality were idolaters. These they were to kill, because they had changed the Bible, and the Sabbath. Because we keep the seventh day their religion forbids them to kill us, or do us any harm. It was so with those that the historian referred to. They claim to believe in the coming of Christ, and the resurrection of the dead. He seemed to regret that their people were so unprincipled. They have united with the English in putting down the natives, in the rebellion in the past. He himself had received some weapons that were used by the Bushmen, as trophies of victory. Some of these relics he gave me. We had previously presented him with "Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation." There is a faint hope in our mind that he may yet embrace Christianity, and become a source of light to his people. Some of that people we believe will be saved in the kingdom of God. One thing is certain, that the truth will find its way to all classes and all peoples. There are those among the Malays that appear to be conscientious in their faith.

Africa has a large number of inhabitants, of almost every kindred and tongue, especially those who are the least enlightened by the truth of God. It will be a desirable thing to see gathered from these some souls in the last generation, as the final triumph of the grace of Christ. It will be the most remarkable company ever gathered from any one generation. It will be the final triumph of the grace of Christ, and as a special crown of jewels they will shine with Christ forever, even ever and ever.

S. N. H.

TWO PRINCIPLES—TWO PARTIES.

By M. C. Wilcox

THE National Reformers in their efforts to place "all Christian laws, institutions, and usages on an undeniable legal basis," are, whether they realize it or not, working upon a purely selfish principle. Their demands, if enacted into laws, would grant liberty to those in harmony with the demands, but bondage and hardship to everyone that such laws would condemn as a criminal, simply because he does not worship God as National Reformers think he ought, and does have conscientious convictions of his own, to which he is bound to give adherence.

The American Sabbath Union and those associated with them are supporting that which will logically and inevitably result in the same thing—persecution for conscience' sake, or unjust prosecution. It will result in freedom and exaltation to one class, those who sincerely or hypocritically give support to Sunday, but bondage and degradation to those who may religiously and sincerely oppose it. It will readily be seen that should such a law be enacted, the time-serving and hypocritical would outwardly favor it, and thereby be exalted, while the sincere and conscientious who opposed the law from motives of duty, would by the law be correspondingly abased. The above is one side, one principle, one party, to the demands for religious legislation now before this country.

The friends of religious liberty and equal rights are working, not for liberty for themselves alone, they are working for liberty for all. Their bitterest opposer would enjoy that liberty equally with themselves. They demand that others shall be granted all that they themselves ask, the privilege of worshiping or not worshiping God, according to the dictates of their own conscience and their understanding of his will. This privilege of worshiping or not worshiping they do not understand includes incivility to their fellow-men. The life, property, reputation, and chastity of all, so far as the agis of law can protect, should be protected. The friends of religious liberty and equal rights not only believe in the right to think and act for themselves (always in the bounds of proper civility, of course), but they demand the right of the other party to think and act for themselves on the same basis. This is the other side, the other principle, the other party to the demands for religious legislation now before this country.

Which is the better principle, that which does no one any wrong, but grants to all equal rights, or that principle which exalts one class at the expense of another?

By which principle will the greater good to the greater number be conserved?

Which is the better and more Christian principle?

Which party is engaged in the nobler work?

Which is the more worthy of Him who said, "All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them"?

Under which principle, in which party, will you, reader, be found? M. C. W.

CHURCH UNION.

In San Lorenzo, Alameda Co., Cal., they have a church that is practically run on the church-union principle. It has been in existence about sixteen years, and was organized because no one denomination felt strong enough in the small village to maintain an organization. At first the church comprised persons attached to six different creeds—Presbyterian, Congregational, Methodist, Baptist, Unitarian, and Episcopal; but there have since been added Lutherans, Swedenborgians, and Universalists. Their first ministerial supply was Rev. Dr. Poor, a professor in the Presbyterian Theological Seminary, San Francisco; then they had Rev. Dr. Holbrook, Congregational. After him came Rev. Mr. Merrill, now of Southern California, who acted as pastor. The present incumbent is Rev. George B. Allen, who was formerly an Episcopal minister, but now Congregational. He began to supply the “Protestant Union” last November, but has accepted a call as permanent pastor. The church owns a chapel building and a parsonage, and it is said that no sectarian differences have ever troubled them. Following is the confession of faith, or church covenant:—

“We do hereby confess one faith in God our Father, and Jesus Christ our Saviour, and the holy Ghost our Comforter and Sanctifier, trusting that God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven us our sins and through grace divine helping us, we will strive to live as becomes the followers of the meek and lowly Saviour, conforming to his example, cultivating within us his Spirit, and studying his life and teachings, that we may know the path of duty and be governed by the principles of the inspired word.”

The curious feature of such a society is its restriction to a “Protestant union.” Why not let in the Catholics also? The anomaly would not be any more striking than a theological compact of Baptists, Swedenborgians, and Unitarians.

ONLY “IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CIVIL LAW”!

By W. N. Glenn

A WASHINGTON dispatch says that Delegate Caine, of Utah, is distributing an official declaration of the Mormon Church, signed by several leading authorities, which is addressed “to whom it may concern.” The document affirms that “the Mormon Church views the shedding of human blood with the utmost abhorrence.” This is probably the reason why their Endowment House oath requires the faithful to avenge the death of Joseph Smith upon the United States Government, from the President down.

Again it says: “We regard killing human beings, except in conformity with the civil law, as a capital crime, which should be punished by the shedding of the blood of the criminal after a public trial before a legally-constituted court.” That exception, “in conformity with the civil law,” is not very soothing when we imagine the civil law to be enacted by a people whose most sacred obligation is the Endowment House oath, and supposing the legally constituted court to be composed of like material.

But such a condition is in perfect keeping with all civil government under control of church dictation. All the blood of martyrs,—whether shed by instigation of the Jews in the days of Christ, or by pagan persecutors in the early centuries, or by papal Inquisition in the Dark Ages, or by Covenanter rule in Great Britain, or by Puritan sway in New England,—was poured out “in conformity with civil law.” And the imprisonment of seventh-day Christians in Arkansas, Tennessee, and Georgia, within the past four years, for quiet, unobtrusive work on Sunday, has all been “in conformity with civil law.”

And when the way shall have been opened for religious legislation by Congress, through such measures as the Blair Sunday-Rest bill and the proposed religious amendment to the Constitution, what shall we expect? It has been truly said that history repeats itself, because human nature is always the same. All that any class of religiousists desire political power or influence for is that they may be able to shape civil legislation to suit their religious ends.

The Catholics have many peculiar dogmas which in this country are practically dormant for want of civil power to enforce them. The Protestants, notably the Reformed Presbyterians, or Covenanters, who are foremost in the misnamed National Reform movement, have also pet schemes which the present Constitution has its foot upon. And the Mormons find themselves cramped by embarrassing circumstances of a like nature. Let any or all of these have the kind of civil law they want, and they can carry on any extravagant or intolerant measure they may choose “in conformity” thereto.

To what extremes any of these religious bodies would go if they had the power, is amply illustrated in their past history. Then with a combination of all upon any one scheme in which they might unite in the name of religion, there is reason to fear a crusade of intolerance commensurate with their established character. Protestants and Catholics could and do unite in the adoration of Sunday, and in the desire for the enforcement of a national Sunday law. Mormons are believers in Sunday sacredness, and would no doubt throw their influence in favor of a Sunday law for policy’s sake, if for nothing else.

Leading Sunday-law preachers demand a law “characterized by small exemptions and large penalties.” Of course their object in having a law is that it may be enforced. They seek a national law as an impetus to the enforcement of State laws already in existence, some of which are stringent in the extreme. Some of these, handed down from colonial days, have lain for years unavailable because their oppressive provisions were repulsive to the liberal spirit of a progressive republic. But with the aggressive influence of an awakened spirit of church dictation in civil affairs, encouraged by an overconfidence of the people in the supposed invulnerable character of republican institutions, these old relics of bygone fanaticism may be brought into full force at any time.

The religious enthusiasm that would be aroused in the churches by the power placed in their hands through the enactment of a national Sunday law, would set all the demons of persecution to work resurrecting these old sleeping terrors and enforcing them upon the defenseless heads of dissenters. Some people call us alarmists who intimate that the time will ever come in this country when Sunday laws will compel people to go to church on that day; but such laws already exist, notably in South Carolina, and only await the time when Sunday zealots, feeling sure of the power, will aim to enforce these oppressive provisions upon offenders. Nor will it then be deemed persecution, but the action will be merely “in conformity with the civil law.”

Herein lies the danger of placing civil power in the hands of the church. No church or ecclesiastical organization wants to control the government or indicate its policy except for the purpose of advancing church interests, enforcing its dogmas upon the people at large, and for the embarrassment of opponents. All religious legislation is designed for the purpose of making people religious, or for the satisfaction of punishing them if they decline to so act. The most that can be accomplished by such action is to make hypocrites at the expense of true religion.

HUMBUGS.

By John Norton Loughborough

A FEW days ago I heard a man say he “thought many people loved to be humbugged.” I do not think so. There are persons who are anxious to get as large returns from a small investment of means as possible, or to secure a great amount of information with little or no study, or to recover health speedily without the process of climbing the declivity they have gone down. Such may “bite at the bait” of the charlatan or trickster who has some “wonderful remedy” that will “almost cure with the first bottle,” or who can impart to them in a fortnight, by some remarkable process, if they take their lessons, the information that otherwise might require months of study. Those who have had experience, and have thereby learned that naught of value in this world is honorably obtained without toil and effort, are not caught by the pleasing

bait of 'great gains with no pains.'

It is the inexperienced ones who are 'taken in,' not because they love to be humbugged, but because they are lured by the thought of getting so great returns with so little investment. They feel just as badly as other folks when they find they have been the dupes of some first-class humbug, and perhaps learn to keep a sharper lookout the next time. A good rule was given to me by a pious aunt of mine, when I was a boy. It has served me so well through life that I wish to pass it on for the benefit of others. She used to say, 'John, always remember, when people propose to give you some great thing for little or no investment on your part, to say to them, 'The people who gave away so much for nothing all died some time ago.''

One of the latest humbugs I have met was the case of a person proposing to give instructions in the rudiments of vocal music so full and complete that in twelve lessons, which he could give in six evenings, for $5.00 a scholar, anyone, even though they had known nothing of music before, could sing anything at sight, and take the lead in singing. Those who had made a study of music for years, of course, hung their heads and looked wise as rats. Those who had never been over the road thought it too rare a chance to let slip, and so 'at it they went.' Their teacher got on so well, however, that he concluded to cut this valuable course short one evening, and at the close announced the graduating song. His class were called upon to give the key, when, to those who were so proficient as to be leaders named almost any letter as the key but the right one, their teacher calling out, 'Guess again!'

The next morning he had a sudden call for another part of the country. His disgusted class would much prefer their money to what little information they received in the music-line, although they may be wiser in some other respects. The better plan is for all to keep a keen lookout for all such as profess to perform such wonderful feats. Don't expect to get rich without labor, or too much knowledge without corresponding study. Give those a wide berth who profess such great exploits, however high their profession.

J. N. LOUGHBOROUGH.

The Sabbath-School.

By W. N. Glenn

Notes on the International Lesson.

JESUS BROUGHT INTO THE TEMPLE.

(February 2; Luke 2:25-35.)

THE present lesson describes an occurrence forty days later than the previous lesson, that of last week pertaining to the birth of Jesus, and this to his presentation in the temple. Edersheim, a writer on the life of Christ, and also on the temple and its services, remarks as follows: "When Jesus was forty days old the family went up from Bethlehem to perform two ceremonies required by the Jewish law. The first was that of the ceremonial purification of Mary, described in Leviticus 12. For this, two offerings were required,—a lamb for a burnt-offering, and a turtle-dove or young pigeon for a sin-offering. But any poor person might substitute another turtle-dove or young pigeon for the lamb, as we see that Mary did. Luke 2:24. This was distinctly called the poor's offering (Talmud), and shows the moderate circumstances of the family. A lamb was worth seventy-five cents (or the wages of five ordinary days' work), while a turtle-dove was worth about eight cents, and sometimes was as low as two cents. The other ceremony was the redemption of the first-born, commonly in the case of Jesus called 'the presentation in the temple,' though this was not necessary, but it could be performed by any priest."

"EVERY first-born male child, like the first-fruits of the farm, was consecrated to God,—belonged to him, because the first-born of the children of Israel had been preserved from the destroyer who slew the first-born of all the Egyptians. Ex. 13:2, 13-15. The first-born sons would therefore become the priests and religious teachers of the people. But God afterward chose the tribe of Levi for these services, instead of the first-born. Num. 3:12, 13. In recognition of this, the first-born son was consecrated to God, and then redeemed by the payment of five shekels, about $2.75. Num. 3:44-48; 8:16."—Peloubet.

REV. E. M. MYERS, in a work entitled "The Jews, Their Customs and Ceremonies," describes the modern custom of redemption of the first-born son, as follows: "The friends being assembled, a cowhine (co-hene), one of the hereditary descendants of Aaron, who has been selected, accepts the child from its mother as consecrated to God's service. The father then expresses his desire to redeem him, and the cowhine, assenting, receives from the father a certain sum of money, representing the proper amount of Jewish shekels, which is mostly devoted to religious or charitable purposes, and the child, being thus redeemed, is returned to him by the cowhine."

THE man Simeon, who came into the temple when Jesus was presented, was "just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel." The fact of his waiting would indicate that he was ready for the event, and his quick recognition of the infant Messiah showed that, through the Holy Spirit, he thoroughly understood the subject. His devout life, and consequent enlightenment in regard to the advent of the Christ, leaves the Jewish people who rejected Jesus, utterly without excuse. If there was a proper understanding of the Scriptures relating to this event on the part of one, the same opportunity was before the nation as a whole, especially of the priesthood and the scribes, who were foremost in his rejection.

JUST so it will be at the second advent. There will be those who will say, "Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him, and he will save us." Isa. 25:9. As in the case of Simeon, their waiting will be proof of their understanding of the prophecies, their godly lives, and their readiness for the great event,—the culmination of their salvation. At the first advent but a few of the professed people of God, with all their boasted wisdom, knew the things that belonged to their peace. Luke 19:42. Shall it be so when he comes again to make up his jewels? "Strive to enter in at the straight gate; for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able." Luke 13:24. "Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city." Rev. 22:14.

IT was revealed to Simeon by the Holy Ghost that he should not see death before he had seen the Lord's Christ. This would hardly have been done if he had not been manifesting a deep interest in the event, and searching the scriptures which testified of Christ. John 5:39. Simeon evidently had his heart set on the "consolation of Israel." So at the second coming, the salvation, the crowns of righteousness, will be for them that "look for him," and "love his appearing." See Heb. 9:28; 2 Tim. 4:8.

"MINE eyes have seen thy salvation." Through faith Simeon saw salvation in the infant, and confessed Jesus. Then what comes of the popular idea that the Jewish dispensation was one merely of law, and that faith came after the cross. Should the popular churches of this dispensation manifest the same spirit of faith that Simeon and many others of that dispensation possessed, there would be no calling for the aid of civil law to supplement the present lack of spiritual power. Nehemiah was ashamed to ask the Persian king for troops to protect his expedition through a dangerous country to Jerusalem, after telling him of the power of his God. So should every Christian be.

SIMEON saw, through his faith in the salvation of Christ, "a Light to lighten the Gentiles, and the Glory of thy people Israel." John the Baptist came to bear witness of this Light, that all men through him might believe. John 1:7-9. Jesus says of himself, "I am the light of the world; he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life." John 8:12. And in harmony with this, he says of his disciples, "Ye are the light of the world." Why has he allowed his mantle of light to fall upon them? Matt. 5:16 tells why: "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven."

THERE are differences of opinion regarding Simeon's prophecy, "Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel." Some construe it to mean the fall and rise of the same individuals, while others think it refers to the fall of some and the rise of others. "Barnes' Notes" says that "the word again is not expressed in the Greek. It seems to be supposed in our translation that the same persons would fall and rise again; but this is not the meaning of the passage. It denotes that many would be ruined by his coming, and that many others would be made happy, or be saved." The word again is omitted in the Revised Version.

"AND for a sign which shall be spoken against." The prediction is not only sustained by sacred and secular history, but is corroborated by the words of Jesus himself. He plainly warned his followers: "They shall put you out of the synagogues; yes, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service." John 16:2. And the leading Jews at Rome, who visited Paul on his arrival there a prisoner, testified that "concerning this sect, we know that everywhere it is spoken against." Acts 28:22. To be a follower of Christ means the enmity of the world; yes, and of many who sit in the popular "synagogues." W. N. GLENN.

Letter to the Hebrews.

CHAPTER 9:1-7.

(Lesson 19, February 8, 1890.)

1. WHAT does the apostle say that the first covenant had? Heb. 9:1.

Were these a part of that covenant? See Ex. 19:3-8; 24:3-8.
What is meant by ordinances of divine service? Ans.—Ceremonies of divine appointment. There is no divine service without divine appointment.
What is meant by a worldly sanctuary? Ans.—A sanctuary of the world, in distinction from the one in heaven.
Where is the only real sanctuary? Heb. 8:1, 2.
What relation did the worldly sanctuary and its services sustain to the heavenly? Verse 5.
How many apartments were in the tabernacle? Heb. 9:2, 3.
What were the two apartments called?—Ib. See note.
What was in the holy? Verse 2; Ex. 40:22-27.
What was in the holiest of all? Heb. 9:4.
What was in the ark? Compare Ex. 25:21; 1 Kings 8:9. See note.
What was the cover of the ark called? Heb. 9:5; Ex. 25:21.
Why was it called the mercy-seat? Ans.—It was there that mercy was dispensed. The sanctuary was God's dwelling-place; the ark represented his throne; and from his throne he dispenses grace, or favor, or mercy. See Heb. 4:16.
How often did the priests go into the sanctuary? Heb. 9:6.
How often was there service in the most holy? Verse 7.
Why was this service performed?
What alone is sin? 1 John 3:4.
What was the basis of the old covenant?
What, then, was it that made it necessary for that covenant to have ordinances of divine service connected with it?
Does the new covenant have ordinances of divine service? Heb. 9:1. The word "also" indicates that it had already been shown that the second covenant had ordinances of divine service. This was done in chapters 7 and 8.
Then what must be the basis of the second covenant?

NOTES.

HEBREWS 9:1 is a text that hinders many from seeing that all of God's blessings to man are gained by virtue of the second covenant, and not by the first. That text reads: "Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary." This, together with the fact that when men complied with these ordinances of divine service, they were forgiven (Leviticus 4), seems to some conclusive evidence that the old covenant contained the gospel and its blessings. But forgiveness of sins was not secured by virtue of those offerings; "for it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins." Heb. 10:4. Forgiveness was obtained only by virtue of the promised sacrifice of Christ (Heb. 9:15), the Mediator of the new covenant, their faith in whom was shown by their offerings. So it was by virtue of the second or new covenant that pardon was secured to those who offered the sacrifices provided for in the ordinances of divine service connected with the old or first covenant.

MOREOVER, those "ordinances of divine service" formed no part of the first covenant. If they had, they must have been mentioned in the making of that covenant; but they were not. They were connected with it, but not a part of it. They were simply the means by which the people acknowledged the justice of their condemnation to death for the violation of the law which they had covenanted to keep, and their faith in the Mediator of the new covenant.

IN brief, then, God's plan in the salvation of sinners, whether now or in the days of Moses, is: The law sent home emphatically to the individual, to produce conviction of sin, and thus to drive the sinner to seek freedom; then the acceptance of Christ's gracious invitation, which was extended long before, but which the sinner would not listen to; and lastly, having accepted Christ, and being justified by faith, the manifestation of the faith, through the ordinances of the gospel, and the living of a life of righteousness by faith in Christ.

THE Bible, to one who is in the habit of devotedly reading it, begets in the soul a consciousness that excludes all doubt as to its truth. To that consciousness it comes with a self-evidencing power that is both sufficient and conclusive. That man spontaneously believes, and really has no time, or taste, or place in his soul for doubts.

INDIA'S MILLIONS.

THE population of India equals the combined population of the following countries: Russia, United States, Germany, France, Great Britain, Turkey proper, and Canada.

If each person in India could represent a letter in our English Bible, it would take seventy Bibles to represent the heathen population of India, while the Christian population could be represented by the prophecy of Isaiah.

The people of India, holding hands, would reach three times around the globe at the equator.

Put the people into single file, allow three feet space for each to walk in, and walking at the rate of ten miles a day it would take them forty years to pass a given point; or walking five miles a day, with the present increase of population by birth rate, the great procession would never have an end.

Could you put the women of India into a column eight deep and allow a foot and a half for each woman, thus walking in lock-step, you would have a column reaching eight times across the continent of North America.

Again, could you distribute Bibles to the women of India at the rate of twenty thousand a day, you would require seventeen years to hand each woman a Bible.

Could you put the children of India into a column four deep, and allowing a space of two feet for each child to walk in, you would have a procession reaching five thousand miles; and walking five miles a day, it would take them two and three-quarters years to pass a given point.

The widows of India would outnumber four cities like London, England. Give to each a standing space of one foot, standing ten abreast, and this closely-packed column would reach the full length of New York State.

One in every six of the females in India is doomed to a desolate and degraded life, and, in this awful proportion, to disgrace and crime.

The common term for widow and harlot in Bengal is the same.

The Indian Mirror, a vernacular paper published by a native in Calcutta, describing the degraded condition of the Hindus a few years ago, said:—

"A curious circumstance is brought to notice, showing to what depth Hinduism is degraded. Both in Madras and Bombay little girls are given in marriage to a deity, only that they may become 'licensed prostitutes,' or, rather, 'consecrated harlots.' They always have their dwellings close to the temple of the idol, and they offer themselves to the worshipers of the deity, and their gains are supposed to lead to the salvation of the worshipers! The deity to whom these girls are married in Bombay is styled Khundoba."

—Selected.

The Missionary.

By H. A. St. John

DEDICATION AT SAN JOSE.

LAST week's SIGNS contained a statement from the San Jose Daily Mercury with reference to the dedication of the new church building of our people in that city. I desire to make a few additional statements.

The San Jose church now numbers thirty-one members, with several more who will join soon. Now that they have a comfortable house of worship, we feel sure that if they dwell together in love, they will have frequent additions to their numbers.

At the time of the dedication, the ordinances of the Lord's house were celebrated. An important and harmonious business meeting was held. Two deacons were elected and ordained. All other officers needed in the church were chosen for a year, excepting an elder, and we think the time near that they will have an ordained elder. A leader was unanimously chosen for the present.

During the last quarter of last year, while they were straining every nerve to complete their house of worship without a debt, their tithes amounted to $222.05. Their T. and M. business for the same time amounted, I think, to about sixty dollars. Their Sabbath-school is prospering, and a good measure of brotherly love prevails among the believers, which we hope will increase and abound more and more. We have a regular appointment to meet with them the first Sabbath in each month, and this seems a matter of encouragement to them. As they meet from Sabbath to Sabbath in their new house, now dedicated to the worship of God, oh, may they never grieve away the Holy Spirit or holy angels, by irreverence, fault-finding, or frivolity!

H. A. ST. JOHN.

A METHODIST VIEW.

The average amount contributed by each member to missionary work is in some conferences as low as one cent a year. In some of the more wealthy conferences, such as New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore, it reached one dollar a year. The general average for the whole Methodist Church, including the generous rich men and the very poor, the very thoughtless and the very stingy, is between thirty-five and forty cents, or somewhat less than the price of a moderate lunch at a respectable eating-house; and yet at nearly every prayer-meeting prayers are made that the world may be converted to a saving knowledge of the truth as it is set forth in the gospel!—Church Helper.

MISSIONARY MURMURINGS.

GATHERED FROM VARIOUS MISSIONARY JOURNALS.

ANNAM'S 20,000,000 are yet without a ray of gospel light.

THERE are still over 10,000,000 square miles of unoccupied districts in various heathen lands, where missionaries thus far have never entered.

IF the present population of the heathen world could be equally apportioned to our present force of workers, lay and ordained, each would have over 165,000 souls.

MR. W. SPENCER WALTON says that at Kimberley, South Africa, five hundred black men on an average fall victims to drink every year. These natives come from the interior comparatively pure and sober, but they get contaminated by contact with the whites, and go back to their homes corrupted.

Continue reading: AUNT MATILDA'S BACK WINDOW