Your ShelfYour Projects

Review and Herald, Vol. 52, No. 15.

THE TWO COVENANTS

Review and Herald

Oct 3, 1878

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Oct 3, 1878

THE TWO COVENANTS.

By J. G. Matteson

BY ELD. J. G. MATTESON.
(Concluded.)
2. How the new covenant was made and ratified: Christ was made flesh, and dwelt among us. He is not the mediator of the old, but of the new covenant. Heb. 8:6. He confirmed the new covenant with many during one prophetic week. Dan. 9:27. Seven prophetic days symbolize seven years. Eze. 4:6: “I have appointed thee each day for a year.” Christ established the new covenant with many of the house of Israel in Palestine, first by his own labor during the three years and a half in which he preached, and afterward by his apostles during the following three and a half years. After that time his disciples commenced to labor among the Gentiles, as they suffered “great persecution” and were “scattered abroad.” Acts 8:1, 5, 14.
That night when Christ was betrayed, the new covenant was especially entered into in the most solemn manner by the apostles, who were present as representatives for all the believers of the house of Israel.
Jesus took bread, and gave it unto them, saying, “This is my body which is given for you; this do in remembrance of me.” Luke 22:19. All partook of this, and showed thereby that they were members of the new covenant and partakers of “the communion of the body of Christ.” 1 Cor. 10:16. Then he gave the cup to them, saying, “This cup is the new testament [or covenant] in my blood, which is shed for you.” Luke 22:20. They all partook of the cup, and thus entered into the new covenant.
On the next day the new covenant was ratified, or sealed, as Christ died on the cross, and poured out his own precious blood for the sins of men. And from that day the new covenant is of force, and it is not in the power of man to add anything or to change that covenant, or testament, which our Saviour thus sealed with his own blood. Heb. 9:16, 17; Gal. 3:15. Please notice that the words testament and covenant are translated from one word in the original (diatheke). They denote one and the same thing.
Ponder well this great truth. Those principles, laws, ordinances, and promises which our divine Mediator has introduced, or recognized, in the new covenant, are necessary to salvation, and those only. When the covenant was sealed, it could not be moved nor changed by the apostles, neither by any other man. It is therefore a great mistake to set aside the testimony of our Saviour, his example and ordinance, under the pretence that he lived under the old covenant. His ministration on earth did not have reference to the old but to the new covenant. Our Saviour came to this earth as the mediator of the new covenant. Heb. 8:6. And he that tries to set aside this great truth, resists the word of God. Christ prepared the believing children of the house of Israel in three years and a half to become worthy members of the new covenant, and then he sealed it with his own blood at his death. And the third day he rose from the tomb, thus proving his divine mission.
After that the apostles gained many believers who entered into the covenant. This was done in the following manner: They preached the gospel of the death and resurrection of Christ; they exhorted the people to repent and believe on the Son of God. Those who believed and obeyed the good news were baptized and added to the church. Afterward they were instructed in keeping all the commandments of God. And the power of God was with them. Matt. 28:18–20; Mark 16:15–20; Acts 2:38, 41; 8:12, 36–39; 10:40–48.
3. What the new covenant contains. This we have already partly considered, but we will now more particularly notice each point which the Lord has introduced in the great sum of the new covenant. This contains four things:—
(1) “I [the Lord] will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts.”
(2) “And I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people.”
(3) “And they shall not teach every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord; for all shall [or they shall all] know me, from the least to the greatest.”
(4) “For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.” Heb. 8:10–12.
The very first proposition in the new covenant is to love the law of God, the ten commandments. This proves clearly, that those believers who preach or write against the holy law of God, or speak of it lightly, or set it aside, have gone astray. They have turned aside from the true order of the divine covenant.
But how do you prove that the ten commandments are the law of the Lord, and that they are given to convince of sin under the new covenant?
They are the only law which the Lord has spoken publicly with his own voice and written with his own finger. Deut. 4:12, 13; 5:22. They were separated from all other laws. Ex. 25:10, 16, 21; 26:33. And they are that law which the apostles pointed to in the New Testament in order to convince men of sin. “Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law; for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.” Rom. 7:7. “Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, . . . which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law. Thou, therefore, which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? Thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? Thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?” Rom. 2:17–22.
None can misunderstand that the apostle in these two texts speaks of the ten commandments. And this is the very law which even under the new covenant stops every mouth, and makes all the world guilty before God. Rom. 3:19, 20. The same is proved by James 2:10, 11.
This law the Lord now proposes to write in the hearts of his believing children, that they may be able to love the law of God. Then it is not a yoke of bondage unto them to obey the Lord; for they have “received the spirit of adoption,” and can say with the apostle, “This is the love of God, that we keep his commandments, and his commandments are not grievous.” 1 John 5:3.
Those who thus with the mediator of the new covenant learn to say, “I delight to do thy will, O my God; yea, thy law is within my heart” (Ps. 40:8), are the children of God. They are the children of the covenant; Acts 3:25; the Israel of God; Gal. 6:16; the people of God, and the Lord “will be to them a God.” Heb. 8:10.
The next condition in the new covenant, which is just as necessary to salvation as the first, is to know the Lord. So soon as our faculties are developed, and we have personal responsibility, so soon must we seek personal fellowship with the Father and the Son in order to be saved. 1 John 1:3. Thus testifies our Saviour: “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” John 17:3. And the prophet testifies of the children of the new covenant: “And all thy children shall be taught of the Lord; and great shall be the peace of thy children.” Isa. 54:13; Gal. 4:26.
With this agree the words of the beloved apostle: “I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. . . . I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father.” 1 John 2:13. The children of the new covenant need not teach one another to know the Lord; for no one can become a member of the new covenant until he knows the only true God and believes in his Son, our Saviour. Heb. 8:11.
Then follows the last blessed proposition in the new covenant,—God “will be merciful to their unrighteousness.” Heb. 8:12. This blessed promise belongs certainly to those who love the law of the Lord, and believe in his dear Son, those who “keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.” Rev. 14:12.
May the Lord bless his word in your heart, kind reader, and make it a living word by his good Spirit. And may you willingly open the door to Him who stands and knocks, that you may overcome, even as he also overcame (Rev. 3:20, 21), and soon with the “Israel of God” receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.” 1 Pet. 5:4.

THE NEXT WAR.

The correspondent of the Boston Herald, writing from Paris, Aug. 6, 1878, says, that in December, 1877, it was the opinion of well-informed political students in Germany that England did not wish to fight Russia; that a declaration of war by Russia would have been the only casus belli, and this England wished, on no account, to provoke. The secret memorandum signed by Count Schouvaloff and Lord Salisbury contained a clause to the effect that, if the Congress failed, it by no means implied hostilities between England and Russia. The war agitations were carefully engineered, and Beaconsfield secured what the government desired,—a popular support. When the plenipotentiaries returned from Berlin, nothing was wanting to make the triumph complete save the reality of the so-called benefits. For the “peace with honor” is little better than a European farce in three acts, and the Beaconsfield policy is based upon too narrow a foundation, upon principles too poor, to live against modern ideas of the relations of the government to the governed. He has always struggled for the supremacy of the monarch as opposed to the welfare of the people, and he will continue to do so. Ten years from now, the English will bitterly regret the cheers for their premier the present summer. For what has the policy of the last three years procured the English people?
What Great Britain gains by the Cyprus burglary is only trouble. I say burglary; for she entered the Turk’s house when he was too weak to say no, and seized Cyprus under the flimsy promise of protection to its owner against enemies. Such protection is the old fable of the camel asking permission to bring its head within the folds of the Arab’s tent. The policy which finally won India will be revived until the whole of Asia Minor and Egypt is under the “Dieu et Mon Droit” government. This must be the termination of the Disraeli policy, or England dwindles to a position of absolute political worthlessness among nations, a second, but richer, Holland. With Cyprus, she sinks or swims, and the policy by which the burglary was consummated will leave her no friends. All possible efforts were made by her to prevent the assembling of the peace Congress. England would never consent to enter the Radziwill palace so long as a single line of the San Stefano treaty lay hidden in the Russian portfolios. Honor demanded that everything should be open and above-board on the part of Russia. British integrity was, of course, sufficiently pure and disinterested not to allow of any secret agreements on her part. The noble Jew at the head of Her Majesty’s government was incapable of duplicity; he had outgrown the traditions of his race. And, with this feeling, this implied promise that the parties to a mutual bargain were bound by the same reciprocal restrictions, the Congress met at Berlin. The moment the end of the Russian concessions was reached, the gentlemen who made “peace with honor” allowed the fact to escape, that, in defiance of principles exacted from others, they had carefully buttered their bread beforehand. No more was heard of the broad principles of humanity, the welfare and the law of nations that demanded an honorable frankness. Can one wonder that Monsieur Waddington, when approached by the British premier touching the giving of Palestine to France, drew himself up and replied, with a dignified manliness that was once British, “I desire to return with clean hands.”
The Russians went home gratified at the gains for their war, and unanimously delighted at the clever way England had supported the ultimate aim of Russian diplomacy. Italy retired from the halls empty-handed, but materially strengthened, tofeed on her next misfortune. Germany received Russia’s receipt for the debt due since 1866. Lords Beaconsfield and Salisbury crossed the Channel to walk on roses, to receive the plaudits of the multitude, and to take from the hand of their sovereign their answer to all critics,—the golden letters on the band: “Honi soit qui mal y pense.” To Austria was given the legacy of the Congress, the next war. The peace with honor is the first prelude to the war of disgrace. And of those who signed the death warrant of Austria no one will in the future be accorded a greater share in the ignoble act than the punctilious guardian of England’s public honor, the man who shouted “thief” while in the act of stealing.
The next war will be the death blow of Austria. The long-persisted-in policy of Russia is coming rapidly to a conclusion. For years it has been her desire to erect a wall of Pan-Sclavonic States from the Baltic to the Ægean, a broad strip of people united on the ground of common Sclavonic origin, and forever a barrier to western interference. Behind such a wall of race prejudice, the designs of the czar could be worked to a conclusion, undisturbed by the wishes or will of Western Europe. The dissolution of the Austrian-Hungarian monarchy is absolutely necessary to this step. The machinery for such dissolution is ready upon the ground; it needs but a touch upon the button and the explosion follows. The fundamental idea that possesses Prince Bismarck being the completion of the “old German empire,” or the weakening of his neighbors, and the popular agitation in Italy being “Italia irredenta,” or some spoils, Russia has no fear that parties interested will thwart her designs or place the military veto upon her projects. Germany will help France in passive helplessness. England has taken her goods in out of the wet, and will make no effort to stop the deluge. All others are active conspirators.
The agitation for this war has already begun in the Russian papers; the Sclav races are not slow to understand the part they are to play. The moment war is declared, there will break out all over the empire agitations against the government, and at this the Magyars will assist. The recent elections testify to the growing dissatisfaction prevailing in the Hungarian half of the kingdom. These agitations will render the task of the Russian troops far easier. Italy will ally herself with Russia as soon as the czar declares war. With Italy and Russia opposed, while Germany keeps all other dogs off, who can doubt the result for Austria? The pretext for the war will arise in the difficulties of the Austrian occupation. Montenegro will never give up one foot of the territory conquered in the late struggle, and will, with her immediate neighbors in Bosnia and Herzegovina, resist to the death. It will be impossible for Austria to remain beyond her borders without provoking hostilities with Servia. An Austrian attack on Servia or Montenegro will furnish the Russians with a pretext. Italy will find her pretext for allying herself with the czar in the violence of internal agitations in favor of recovering her rightful territory. Germany, as master of ceremonies, with an eye on the seaport of Trieste, will manage all rivals or friends, and take her reward at the close of the contest.
Austria dissolved, a movement for the reconstruction of Poland will at once be begun in Russia. This will be accomplished and on a Pan-Sclavonic basis, and the triumph of Russian diplomacy will be complete. The Eastern question will then first have a settlement as far as Western Europe is concerned. The wall of Sclavonic prejudices, of Sclavonic temper, of Sclavonic solidarity, will be erected. On the one side of this will be Russia, on the other Germany, and every anxious inquirer as to the condition of any nation or the designs of holy Russia will be met with the time-honored check: “What are you going to do about it?”
Probably many of your readers will call this an alarmist’s view of the situation, and will instantly suggest a thousand reasons against such a chapter of events and consequences; but it is the opinion of several men well calculated to predict, including a correspondent of the London Times, who knows all the East as a book, and a careful study of the telegrams and newspapers shows how everything is working to the end suggested. Russian papers, Italian papers, Austrian and Eastern journals, are bristling with disgust, and urging on the beginning of the end, the commencement of the last act. The English people have always been noted for a steadiness that in the end recovers any balance momentarily lost. This will not fail them now. They have already begun the sober second criticism that looks beneath enthusiasm, and peers behind excitement to the facts beyond. This is the way a London paper, a paper by no means habitually inimical to the government, summarizes the debate in Parliament on the treaty of Berlin:—
“The plea of the ministers was: ‘It is true that we have introduced a new system of concealing from Parliament our policy until it is too late for it to protest; it is true that we have frequently conveyed a false impression by our utterances; it is true that we addressed a dispatch to Lord Odo Russel before we knew that our agreement with Count Schouvaloff would see the light, which was intended to hoodwink the nation; it is true that we promised the Greeks to defend them, and then threw them over; it is true that we protested against secret treaties, and then entered into one ourselves; it is true that we vowed our mission was to maintain the integrity of the Ottoman empire, and that we have carried out our mission by depriving her of more than she lost by the treaty of San Stefano; it is true that we have aroused the jealousy of France and Italy; it is true that we have assumed most serious responsibilities in Asia Minor of questionable advantage to the nation; but—we have imperial instincts instead of insular instincts, we are in favor of a greater England instead of a lesser England, therefore cease to carp and criticise. We have the approbation of our sovereign, and we have the support of a majority in the House of Commons, therefore waste no further time in protesting against the mode in which we have carried into effect our instincts, but prepare to pay the bill for them.’”
This is not the last of such utterances. France, in the person of M. Gambetta, has announced her intention to form alliances, and naturally, in view of the impending troubles. When the storm will break it is not so easy to say, but those who have given me their prognostications will be very much surprised if a year from now does not either see the next war in violent progress, or a peace in process of birth. But come it will, and come soon; perhaps the Christmas snow will be stained in blood; perhaps the May flowers. But when it comes it will be for Disraeli and England, disgrace; and for Andrassy and Austria, the fulfillment of the remark by Metternich, “Après moi le déluge.”

WHAT IS MAN?

By Eliza H. Morton

What is man but mortal dust, Low and weak and vile, Full of all unrighteousness, Stained with sin and guile?
What is man or son of man? Shadow, bubble, dew,— All show forth the startling truth That his days are few.
What is man, O God, that thou Shouldst in mercy say, “Come to me, and I will turn Darkness into day”?
What is man?—A living soul; Seraphs close allied. God the Father hears his cry; Angels near abide.
What is man?—A stranger here, Seeking peace and rest; Toiling, weeping, longing for Joys that wait the blest.
What is man?—An heir to wealth Wonderful to view: Land, and home, and city grand, Wait the faithful few.
What is man?—An agent free Life or death to choose; Awful thought! the “game of life” Man can win or lose.
Fellow-man, the warning heed, Light is sown for thee; In the Judgment none can say, “Naught was done for me.”
ELIZA H. MORTON.
Allen’s Corner, Me.

THE BIBLE CHRISTIAN.

WHAT A CHRISTIAN SHOULD BE.

He should be always mindful of the covenant of the Lord, the word which he commanded to a thousand generations. 1 Chron. 16:15.
He should be in the fear of the Lord all the day long. Prov. 23:17.
He should be perfect, even as his Father which is in Heaven is perfect. Matt. 5:48.
He should be ready; for in such an hour as he thinks not, the Son of man cometh. Matt. 24:44.
He should be merciful, as his Father also is merciful. Luke 6:36.
He should be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Rom. 6:11.
He should be kindly affectioned. Rom. 12:10.
He should be fervent in Spirit, serving the Lord. Rom. 12:11.
He should be patient in tribulation. Rom. 12:12.
He should be steadfast, unmovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as he knoweth that his labor is not in vain in the Lord. 1 Cor. 15:58.
He should be separate, and touch not the unclean thing. 2 Cor. 6:17.
He should be renewed in the spirit of his mind. Eph. 4:23.
He should be a follower of God as a dear child. Eph. 5:1.
He should be filled with the Spirit. Eph. 5:18.
He should be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might. Eph. 6:10.
He should be sincere and without offense, till the day of Christ. Phil. 1:10.
He should be blameless and harmless, a son of God, without rebuke in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation. Phil. 2:15.
He should be careful for nothing. Phil. 4:6.
He should be patient toward all men. 1 Thess. 5:14.
He should be an example of the believers in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity. 1 Tim. 4:12.
He should be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2 Tim. 2:1.
He should be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient. 2 Tim. 2:24.
He should be sober, grave, temperate, sound in faith, in charity, in patience. Titus 2:2.
He should be careful to maintain good works. Titus 3:8.
He should be a follower of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises. Heb. 6:12.
He should be content with such things as he has. Heb. 13:5.
He should be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath. James 1:19.
He should be a doer of the word, and not a hearer only, deceiving himself. James 1:22.
He should be patient unto the coming of the Lord. James 5:7.
He should be holy. 1 Pet. 1:16.
He should be pitiful and courteous. 1 Pet. 3:8.
He should be a follower of that which is good. 1 Pet. 3:13.
He should be ready always to give an answer to every one that asketh him a reason of the hope that is in him, with meekness and fear. 1 Pet. 3:15.
He should be sober and watch unto prayer. 1 Pet. 4:7.
He should be sober and vigilant, because his adversary, the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour. 1 Pet. 5:8.
He should be diligent, that he may be found of him (Christ) in peace, without spot and blameless. 2 Pet. 3:14.
He should beware, lest he also being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from his own steadfastness. 2 Pet. 3:17.
He should be watchful and strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die. Rev. 3:2.
Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life. Rev. 2:10.

WHAT A CHRISTIAN SHOULD NOT BE.

He should not be among wine-bibbers, or among riotous eaters of flesh. Prov. 23:20.
He should not be proud. Prov. 16:17.
He should not be hasty in his spirit to be angry. Eccl. 7:9.
He should not be afraid of speaking for God. Isa. 40:9.
He should not be afraid of the reproach of men, nor of their revilings. Isa. 51:7.
He should not be afraid of them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. Matt. 10:28; Luke 12:4, 5.
He should not be ashamed of Christ and of his words in this adulterous and sinful generation. Luke 9:26.
He should not be conformed to this world. Rom. 12:2.
He should not be slothful in business. Rom. 12:11.
He should not be wise in his own conceit. Rom. 12:16.
He should not be overcome of evil. Rom. 12:21.
He should not be puffed up. 1 Cor. 13:4.
He should not behave himself unseemly. 1 Cor. 13:5.
He should not be easily provoked. 1 Cor. 13:5.
He should not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. 2 Cor. 6:14; Deut. 7:3.
He should not be entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Gal. 5:1.
He should not be desirous of vain glory. Gal. 5:26.
He should not be weary in well-doing. Gal. 6:9.
He should not be idle, a tattler, or a busybody. 1 Tim. 5:13.
He should not be a partaker of other men's sins. 1 Tim. 5:22.
He should not be high-minded, nor trust in uncertain riches. 1 Tim. 6:17; Rom. 11:20.
He should not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord. 2 Tim. 1:8.
He should not be a brawler. Titus 3:2.
He should not be of them who draw back unto perdition. Heb. 10:39.
He should not be forgetful to entertain strangers. Heb. 13:2.
He should not be carried about with divers and strange doctrines. Heb. 13:9.
—Selected.

French Court Upholds Illegitimacy of Priest's Children

By Editor

A RECENT decision of the Court of Cassation in France shows how far Popish ideas are still dominant there. Thirty years ago, during the revolution of 1848, a priest renounced his vow of celibacy, abandoned the priesthood, and was married. Four children were born to them. Last year the husband and father died, and the local court decided that the children were illegitimate, and could not inherit the father's estate. From this decision an appeal was taken to the Court of Cassation, and that tribunal affirmed the decision. The judges based their rulings upon the terms of the Concordat, and upon the Roman Canon Law; and they pointed out that the civil code expressly states that unfrocked priests must not marry. Such a decision would not be possible in any country where the civil law is not held in bondage to the spiritual despotism on the banks of the Tiber. The Catholic Review, of New York, however, declares this “a most sensible and logical decision.” We can infer what havoc Catholic supremacy would make with the best established features of American law.

THE RUST OF RICHES.

Unused instruments grow rusty. And rusting is chemically a slow but sure form of burning. It eats in deeper and deeper until the instrument is damaged, or the metal consumed.
Riches are an implement; they are the means of applying and utilizing power. Rightly used, they are blessings. Misused, they are deadly instruments of destruction. Unused, they are rusting tools, doing good to none, and testifying against the indolence, or incapacity, or selfish churlishness, or miserliness, of the owner.
A little wealth, rightly used, is more of a blessing to humanity than vast riches unused. A single homely plow, kept bright by making many furrows, is better than a great steam gang-plow rusting in idleness. A “nimble sixpence,” kept shining by constant circulation, is better than a “slow shilling,” that gathers black rust in the miser’s strong box.
But there is this strange peculiarity about the rust of riches. It not only frets and blackens the gold and silver with stealthy corrosion or slow dimming before the unsatisfied eyes of the selfish holders, but the slow burning rust has, figuratively,a mysterious power of transferring itself to those who are culpably responsible for its gathering there; and it will also be a sharp accusing witness against their distrust of God and their cold unlovingness toward man. St. James says, “Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire.”
Strange words, too little thought upon, but full of deep and terrible significance. Hands that might have been beautiful and clean, through timely gifts, wise production, and bountiful expenditure, are now blackened and foul with the tormenting, slow-eating rust of the riches they loved too well. And the slow-devouring heat of the rust of riches no tears can quench.
Therefore it were well to give earnest, timely heed to the inspired injunction: “Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not high-minded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy; that they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate; laying up for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.”—Selected.

THE METHODIST CHURCH SOUTH.

The Methodist Advocate gives a very melancholy, discouraging picture of the condition of the Methodist Episcopal Church South. It affirms that in the recent General Conference at Atlanta, there was manifestly a lack of faith and hope in the future of the denomination; that there was an utter failure “to measure up to the demands of the present, to say nothing of the future;” that “there seemed to be little apprehension of the magnitude and import of events transpiring around us, or of the requirements of Providence;” and that “the body was marked by extraordinary timidity,” “indifference, recklessness, or desperation,” in its treatment of the questions which came before it. The Advocate further says: “The history of the Methodist Episcopal Church South is not as flattering as might be supposed. It is not stronger in numbers, relatively, among the white people of the South, now, than it was at the time of its organization. It is affirmed that the strong Book Concern with which the church started in 1844, and which has since been paid $400,000 by our own Book Concern, is now in debt $100,000, more than it is worth; that intemperance prevails to an embarrassing extent; and that the abrogation of the probationary system, and lax discipline, have added many thousands of names to the records, but only, in many cases, to be burdens to the societies.” The Northwestern Christian Advocate adds: “If the condition of the Methodist Episcopal Church South is correctly represented by these statements, it is greatly to be deplored. The South needs to-day the bold, strong leadership of earnest evangelical Christianity, and in this leadership Methodism should be at the front. Is the absence of the moral and spiritual power which can alone qualify for such leadership, the explanation of the silence or weakness in utterance of the Southern Methodist press on the great questions which involve the moral well-being of the South? Is it timidity that causes silence, or is it blindness and indifference to the demands of the hour? The grandest opportunity given to any portion of the Christian Church is given the Methodist Episcopal Church South, at this hour; yet there is danger that her candlestick will be removed out of its place.”

“LIVED IN VAIN.”

By Eliza Thayer

The poetry under this heading which appeared in No. 25 of the Signs, caused many serious reflections; and lest some of our young friends may have passed it by unnoticed, we wish to call attention to it here as worthy of a careful perusal. Lived in vain! How much is comprehended in these three short words and what sadder testimony could be borne concerning those whose opportunities for repentance and reform have forever passed away! Life, the greatest of earthly blessings, was given, but vainly misspent, and nothing remains but just and certain retribution, rendered so much more bitter by the recollection of what might have been had the God-given powers been devoted to the Giver. No tongue can tell nor heart fully realize the remorse and anguish which will be experienced by those who have lived in vain, as they awake to a sense of their irretrievable loss.
And while we would shun their fatal mistake, let us seriously ask ourselves, Are we living in vain? What is our daily life-record in the courts of Heaven? Are we consecrated to God and his work? or are our time and talents employed principally in the interests and pursuits of earth, seeking our own comfort and happiness, while the love of God and of souls for whom Christ died has but a small place in our hearts? I fear that in too many cases our own hearts testify against us. But it should not be so. It is too late to be thus indifferent. Both the word and providence of God call plainly to us, “Son, go work to-day in my vineyard.” To-day laborers are needed, and an opportunity is presented to all to act some part in the harvest field. None need hesitate, though possessing but one talent. God will accept the services of any, however humble, who with a consecrated heart engage in his work. Though all cannot perform the same work, there is still work for all. Yes, if we will— “We can let some music in To the world of grief and sin; We can draw some spirit heavenward by the strain.”
Dear young friends, be not satisfied to live without a purpose. There is a blessing connected with the work of God which you cannot afford to lose. It is not all ease and pleasure. There are crosses and burdens to be borne, and toil and sacrifice are necessary; but with these there is a comfort and satisfaction not to be found when we are living for self. It is sweet to work for Jesus even now, and what will be the blessedness of knowing at life's close that we have not lived in vain, but that some souls have been saved from death and despair by efforts and sacrifices that we have made?
ELIZA THAYER.

Can We Keep the Sabbath as Jews Did?

You say we can't keep the Sabbath as the Jews were required to keep it. Could they keep it as they were required to? or were they required to do that which they could not do? If the last supposition is true, where is the justice? But if they could keep it as required, what is there to hinder us from doing the same? A mere excuse! poor and shallow too! Bad children say, I can't; good, I'll try.
Continue reading: BIBLE LESSONS FOR YOUTH