Signs of the Times, Vol. 30, No. 21.
GOD, THE WONDERFUL CREATORPage 1
Earlier text: JoshuaOUR LONDON LETTER.
By M. Ellsworth Olsen
Canon Hensley Henson on the Future of the Bible.
(From Our Own Correspondent.) Hardly have the echoes of the enthusiastic Albert Hall meeting of the British and Foreign Bible Society died away, before an article appears in one of the leading English reviews (The Contemporary Review, April, ’04), giving a radically different view of the whole matter at issue. The writer, Rev. H. Hensley Henson, is Canon of Westminster, and Rector of St. Margarets; he is, moreover, a man of no mean ability, whose sermons are widely quoted, and whose influence upon London religious thought is perhaps second to none. It is, therefore, no ordinary attack upon the Bible that we have to deal with; in fact we can hardly call it an attack; it seems more in the nature of a frank statement of the light in which the Holy Scriptures are viewed by the generality of professing Christians of to-day and a tentative inquiry into the position which they will occupy in the near future. The author says that the Albert Hall meeting was a most impressive and remarkable demonstration, and that any celebration which can combine so many religious interests has “obvious claims to the attentive study of thoughtful observers of contemporary life.” But, while yielding due admiration to the greatness of the undertaking and the actual results which the society has achieved, he has his misgivings, and thinks that now, with the celebration itself in the past, the question may properly be asked, “What will be the place of the Bible in the future?” To this question he gives a partial answer in the words: “It can not for one moment be questioned that many causes have conduced to work something like a revolution in educated Christian thought with respect to the sacred writings of Christianity.” Then follows some further strictures on the Bible, more especially what he calls the older Scriptures, which he considers contain “absurdities and moral crudities,” to which the Christian conscience must take exception. But the reader will understand the real animus of the article best by a quotation. Referring to the work of the higher critics and the demand for a general revision of belief on various points, he says: “Teachers of the young are continually clamoring for some escape from the difficulties in which they find themselves placed when they handle the Old Testament, and some praiseworthy attempts are being made to satisfy the new and ever-growing demand. A well-known head master has just published an Old Testament history for schools, which provides an interesting example of the attitude toward the Scriptures which now obtains. It is hardly too much to say that Dr. Fry systematically and effectually strips the narrative of its supernatural element. He does not anywhere in so many words deny the Biblical miracles, but he invariably adopts a mode of speech which suggests that the miracles did not happen. Thus we are continually told that such and such were the beliefs which the Israelites had about themselves and their history. Whether the beliefs are true is not stated, and yet sometimes the beliefs in question might almost be called the cornerstones of dogmatic fabrics, which it is hard to banish from the Christian sphere.” In order that his readers may have a clear understanding of the kind of teaching which this “praiseworthy” book contains, the canon quotes the following paragraph, describing the giving of the law from Sinai:— “When they came to Sinai, Moses went up into the mount to speak with Jehovah; and when he came down, the people were kept from touching the sacred mountain, lest they should perish or gaze upon God; for this was what ancient people thought possible. And Jehovah, the God of the Storm Clouds, came down amidst thunderings and lightnings; but only Moses and Aaron were suffered to go up onto the mount. It was believed that Jehovah Himself at Sinai gave Moses the Law. We read of a visit to the Holy Mount paid by Moses, Aaron, and Abihu, with seventy elders. These, the story says, actually saw God, and suffered not. These are very primitive thoughts.” Such is the teaching which a high official in the Church of England says is the spiritual milk provided for babes in orthodox seminaries of to-day, and for which he asks public recognition. Could we have a more striking fulfilment of those solemn, prophetic words, “When the Son of Man cometh, shall He find faith on the earth”? Truly it is a sad commentary on the popular religious life of the day when such statements from the highest sources go entirely unchallenged. It is hardly necessary to quote further from the article in question, which occupies six closely-printed pages, and deals with various phases of the subject. The author says that for its literary beauties, the Bible will always retain a hold on the people. It is also the best corrective of ecclesiastical corruption, and as a manual of practical morality. But as to the divine revelation to man of his duties in this life and the glories of the life to come, this accredited minister of the Gospel has not one word to say. In fact, he scouts the idea entirely. The Bible is to him evidently a mere human collection of books, some of which contain great literary beauties. There is crying need, he urges, of a thorough-going revision of the lectionary. Portions of Scripture are now read in the church service which are utterly unsuitable, according to the author, who is pleased to characterize some portions of the Bible as “a pack of lies too gross for toleration.” The present indiscriminate reading of the Scriptures in public, he would have us believe, is “an extremely perilous proceeding.” On the other hand, he advocates the reading of other religious works in the pulpit as affording a pleasing variety and calculated to make the service more spiritually helpful. These are, in brief, the canon’s views, and, while they have been widely quoted and referred to, there has been but little comment on them. This goes to show that the article voices the sentiment of a large class of church-going people, and is therefore a striking revelation of the utter want of living faith which is characteristic of the professed Christianity of to-day. London, Eng., Apr. 29, ’04. In the bishop’s address read before the Methodist Episcopal General Conference at Los Angeles, Cal., there occurred this paragraph:— Romanism does not employ in this country the methods which have stamped its history with infamy in Spain, Mexico, South America, Porto Rico, the Philippines, and elsewhere. Yet its insidious efforts to control the secular press, its adroit influence in politics, and its tireless assaults on one of the chief bulwarks of the republic, the public-school system, demand the sleepless vigilance of all Protestants and patriots. Its malign influence in countries where it has for centuries held unobstructed sway demonstrates its essential character, and furnishes many of the most frightful object-lessons which history records. To these lessons we can not close our eyes, because of any mawkish plea for religious toleration. What in Romanism is morally and religiously good we not merely tolerate, but welcome; but what in it is erroneous and evil, subversive of individual rights and of national safety, we must evermore expose and combat as Luther did. According to the Record, the matter “spread like wildfire through the local Catholic Church,” and resulted in vigorous attempts at refutation by the vicar-general of the district and other priests. In defending the address, Rev. J. M. King, of Philadelphia, said: “If Protestantism is anything it is a protest against the iniquities of Romanism. We insist upon it that Catholicism shall keep its hands off the public schools; its hands off municipal affairs.” The Record’s report of proceedings further says: “Dr. King was followed by others, who deplored the alleged ‘ills of Romanism,’ but heartily commended the wide-spread good in which the Catholic Church has been a chief administrator. After more than one unsuccessful attempt to smooth the matter over, and drop it, the conference voted to refer the whole question to the committee on state of the church. The general sentiment of the conference seems to favor an out-and-out policy toward Catholicism.” If the Methodists and other professed Protestant churches had always maintained an “out-and-out policy” against Romanism, instead of adopting so many of her tenets and tactics, Rome’s influence in political affairs, as also in public-school matters, could not have become nearly so potential as they are at present. But most of them have gone too far in “heartily commending,” by precept and practice, many of the so-called “good things” handed down by the Papacy. They have gone so far in that direction that they will hardly find it possible to retrace their steps. From the position which most of them occupy, they can not consistently assert, nor possibly maintain, a really Protestant “protest against the iniquities of Romanism.” But some individuals may have their eyes opened by the agitation of the subject. THE NEW ALIGNMENT IN EUROPEAN POLITICS.
What the Oakland “Tribune” Has to Say of the European Kaleidoscope—the Uncertainty of the European Outlook from a Human View-point.
It is interesting to note how Emperor William has completely reversed the foreign policy of Bismarck, and at the same time radically altered the political conditions resulting from the Bismarckian policy. Internal complications caused the repeal of the Falk anti-clerical laws and the resumption of intimate friendly relations with the Papacy, but entirely different motives have prompted the cultivation of friendly relations with Russia. The growing German antagonism to Great Britain is undoubtedly at the bottom of that. But, as Germany gets closer to Russia and the Vatican, France gets closer to the kingdom of Italy and England gets closer to France. While France is driving out the religious congregations, Germany is inviting the Jesuits to return. The emperor of Germany goes again to Canossa to make his peace with the supreme pontiff, and the president of France goes in state to visit the king of Italy, who is on ill terms with his holiness. It is like a fancy dance in which partners change and all waltz. After the fall of Paris and the crowning of William I. to be the emperor of the reorganized German Empire, Bismarck found England, France, and Russia mutually antagonistic. There was a hereditary antagonism between France and England that had existed since the days of the Plantagenets, and Russia had bitter feelings against both since the Crimean War. The Papacy was at outs with the kingdom of Italy on account of the seizure of the temporal dominions of the church and the sequestration of the property appertaining to the civil government of the papal states. Bismarck hated the church, which was closely allied to France. He desired to humble the successor of Hildebrand, and he also desired to keep France isolated. He was jealous of Russia, and looked forward to the dismemberment of Austria and the ultimate absorption of the German provinces of the dual monarchy by the newly-formed German Empire. So he constructed the Triple Alliance between Germany, Austria, and Italy, and bade defiance to the Papacy. By this stroke he isolated both France and Russia and hoped he had eliminated British influence from European continental politics. However, when he decided to humble Russia after the Balkan War, he found that he had to take Great Britain into partnership. Disraeli, a far-seeing opportunist, was the central figure at the Berlin Conference, and not the Iron Chancellor, and Great Britain emerged from the scene of Russia’s humiliation with greater prestige than Germany. It rankled in Bismarck’s mind to have the splendid diplomatic coup he had planned to redound to the greater advantage of England than Germany, and to9the greater glory of another statesman, but he was forced to be content. Russia on the east, as well as France on the west, was crippled and unable to resist German influence in European politics. France, defeated and humiliated, was still further embittered by being virtually ignored at the Berlin Conference. This was the situation till new alignments began to develop, and internal politics began to affect the external policy of the German Empire. Mutual hatred, and a common cause of grievance against Germany and Great Britain, caused France and Russia to forget their ancient differences and form an alliance to combat the combined German and British influence. Then the development of the German policy and commercial and colonial expansion created antagonism between Berlin and London. Next the rise of the Social Democratic party in Germany compelled the kaiser to placate the unbroken phalanx of Catholics in the Reichstag. The success of his foreign policy depended upon his ability to carry out his military and domestic policy. He was forced to treat with the clericals on their own terms, and it finally led him to go again, like his predecessor William the Fowler, to the feet of the Roman pontiff. This had its immediate effect on France and Italy. As Germany grew closer to the Vatican the French republic pulled away, and the king of Italy began to feel restive in the Triple Alliance. So France and Italy got together, and the former began a relentless crusade against the religious orders. As Germany grew antagonistic to England, she began to cultivate Russia to detach her from the French alliance, and King Edward promptly began to woo La Belle France as a counter move. So France, England, and Italy are completing a rapprochement which is distinctly antagonistic to Germany, Austria, Russia, and the Papacy. The situation is somewhat analogous to the time when the great Richelieu threw the weight of France in the scale in favor of Sweden, Denmark, and the Protestant princes of northern Germany against the empire and the church, and thus prevented the triumph of the latter. The Russo-French alliance still exists, but its force has been greatly weakened by recent events. Its necessity is disappearing, and the reverses of Russia in the Far East are making it evident that Russian aid is a broken reed for France to depend upon. So French sentiment cools toward the czar and grows warmer for perfidious Albion. Thus the international comedy is growing more mixed. DRIFTING AWAY.
By Thoro Harris
A CORRESPONDENT in Chicago sends us, under the Act of May 5, the following from the Chicago World-Herald:— Latter-day critics of the books of the Bible were scored to-day by Prof. Howard Osgood, D. D., of the Rochester Theological Seminary, in a paper read before the American Bible League, by Dr. Gregory. Dr. Osgood declared the criticisms advanced nothing new, and proved that they were mere parrot-like repetitions of the teachings of Voltaire, Diderot, and Paine. He gave references from Paine’s “Age of Reason,” published in 1792, showing that many of the arguments were taken bodily from that work. Rev. Dr. Robert Russell Booth, once moderator of the Presbyterian General Assembly, participated in the discussion. “For nineteen centuries the Christian Church has seen the church persecuted, and the church militant,” declared the speaker. “Now we must fight treason in our midst. Men are using their positions on our pulpits and chairs of learning to disseminate treason. Church collections, salaries, endowments are being used to support those who talk Higher Criticism, and spread heresies.” A minister in this city, as prominent as there is in the land, reads his Apostles’ Creed: “Jesus, so, they say, was born of the Virgin Mary; Jesus, so, they say, was raised after the third day.” No wonder men find excuse for easy virtue, when ministers ordained of God insert “they say” in the Apostles’ Creed. “If this continues, the time must come when there will be but one refuge, and that will be the Roman Catholic Church, which, whatever it has added to the Word of God, has taken nothing from it.” Our correspondent remarks: “Note (1) the perversion of the Apostles’ Creed by the insertion of ‘they say,’ making the facts concerning the life of Jesus mere myths; (2) the confidence expressed in the Roman Church ‘as our only refuge’—the one conservator of Biblical religion.” “The Apostles’ Creed is an elegant and beautiful summary of Christian faith, and its truths have heretofore been regarded as facts, not fictitious speculations. The expression, ‘I believe in . . . the forgiveness of sins,’ was that which brought Luther out of the slough of despondency, and prepared the way for the glorious Reformation. But the Apostles’ Creed is too scriptural for modern criticism.” “A piece of literature is not necessarily to be condemned because it originated just a little later than the apostles’ day. The ‘Te Deum’ is a grand hymn, notwithstanding the use made of it in connection with St. Bartholomew’s massacre; and the hymns written by St. Bernard can not be surpassed for expressing love to Jesus.” “Surely the drift of Protestant sentiment is away from the Word of God.” WHILE no great battle has occurred during the week, the Japanese are pressing on toward the concentrated forces of Russia. The latter continue to withdraw toward their base, and the scouting parties of both powers are in constant touch. Small skirmishes are frequent. The Russians have blown up the principal structures in the city of Dalny, in order to impede the landing of the Japanese at that place, and because Dalny would have made an excellent base for the Japanese in their operations against Port Arthur. The great docks and wharves and public buildings there were among the structures destroyed. They were erected by the government at a cost of many millions of dollars. Dalny was really built by the Russian Government after securing from the Chinese the lease of the Liao Tung peninsula, and was designed to be the chief terminal of the great Russian railroad. While the Japanese were dragging the harbor for torpedoes and mines, a mechanical mine placed by the Russians was exploded, sinking a Japanese torpedo boat, and causing the death of seven men. This is the first war vessel lost by Japan since the war began. The Japanese continue to land on both sides of the Liao Tung peninsula. They have destroyed seventeen miles of the Port Arthur railroad, so that that port is now completely cut off from railway and telegraph communication with the Russian army and government. The abandonment of Nienchwang by the Russians is now practically complete, and other governments are reported to be sending war-ships to that port to preserve order during the time intervening between Russian abandonment and Japanese occupation. Organized bands of Chinese bandits are threatening the city. The latter have attacked the Russians at different places, and there is grave fear that the Chinese will take the offensive against both Russians and Christians. China is doing her utmost to preserve neutrality, but she seems unable to control these wandering organized bands. The Chinese seem much more favorable to the Japanese, while the Koreans are showing more sympathy with the Russians, and in some cases are impeding the operations of the Japanese. —The San Francisco Examiner, in speaking of prohibition, says:— The teetotaler may advise the man who drinks, and the moderate drinker may advise the teetotaler, but the teetotaler has no more right to say to another man, “You shall not drink whisky,” than the whisky drinker has to say to the teetotaler, “You shall not drink water.” We wish to make especially clear the fact that this newspaper has not the slightest desire to coerce any man, and that it has no sympathy whatever with the interests of those that seek to influence others by force. We try to appeal to the common sense of our readers, and especially to young men. Now will the Examiner hold to its principles in labor-union matters? It is a well-known fact that labor-unionists restrict the number of men in the union by debarring those who wish to join, and by limiting apprenticeships. They seek not only to persuade men not to work unless members of the union, in harmony with the union, but they seek to prevent them from working, and prohibit their employment by others. They seek to coerce employers into employing only union men. They seek to limit the length of a day's work on government matters, pertaining purely to the public, and to prevent, by law, the employment of those who are not authorized by the union. And with the unions has the Examiner stood early and late, through thick and thin. Now are we to understand that the Examiner has been converted to the principle of American freedom, or is it talking for political effect among the whisky men? Heroism and Financial Reward
Mr. Carnegie, the noted millionaire, has set apart a large sum of money as a fund from which to reward recognized heroism. He is reported to have said that he hopes this fund will have the effect of bringing out the best there is in our civilization. Upon this hope the Commoner remarks that “Mr. Carnegie’s intentions may be all right, but if he had given the matter thoughtful consideration, he would have realized that the hope of financial reward never brought out the best there is in humanity. The reverse is quite true. The best in humanity is brought out by brotherly love and sympathy, and freely given without thought or hope of reward.” Witnesses Before the Pure Food Commission
Witnesses before the United States Commission to Establish Standards for Pure Foods, which is sitting at New York, declare that jellies and jams are generally adulterated. One witness, speaking for the manufacturers, declared that sixty per cent of the jellies manufactured in the United States are imitations, composed of glucose and coloring matter. Another witness declared that if the manufacture of everything but unadulterated fruit jellies and jams were prohibited, seventy-five per cent of the establishments now manufacturing jellies and jams would have to close. This is a striking commentary on our times. Wireless telegraphy has been again brought to the attention of the world by the arrival at New York of Marconi, who conducted experiments in long-distance wireless telegraphing while crossing the ocean. Mr. Marconi claims that he was in constant connection with the wireless station at Poldhu, England, until the vessel had covered 1,700 miles, and that had the station at Cape Breton been in working order, he would have been in wireless touch with the shore all the way across. He expects to begin wireless communication across the ocean again as soon as the station at Cape Breton, N. S., has been repaired. The committee that is inquiring into the cause of physical degeneracy of the British people has examined 100,000 English children. One of the signs of degeneracy reported by the committee is that the heads of the children are smaller than they should be. This, says the committee, is particularly noticeable in children who live in, or in the vicinity of, tall buildings, and is attributed to the want of light and air. As it is the tendency all over the world to increase the height of buildings, we may expect to see this condition increasing all over the world. Turkey is renewing her raids on the Armenians while Russia is preoccupied in the Far East. The Armenians have evidently been expecting something of the kind, for they were prepared to resist the slaughter of their families. The report of the Turkish attack upon their villages states that the Armenians lost about 900 and the Turks about 700. The foreign representatives of several other nations have proceeded to the scene of operations to ascertain the true state of affairs and protest against Turkish excesses. The uncompromising attitude of the Filipino Moros was shown at the St. Louis Fair on May 12, when the Moros held a feast and war-dance because of the slaughter of American soldiers in the island of Mindanao on May 8. The Americans were surrounded by several hundred Moros, and of the thirty-nine men in the detachment seventeen were killed. The Moros at the fair were overjoyed at the news, and demanded a roast slave to celebrate the occasion. The British expedition to Tibet has halted at Gyangtse, and is there besieged by a large force of the Tibetans. An attempt was made by the latter to surprise the British and massacre the expedition; but the attempt failed, and the attacking Tibetans lost a large number. British authorities now declare that the mission must push on to Lhasa. The expedition is awaiting the arrival of re-enforcements. Probably the most valuable ship and cargo that ever sailed from an American port sailed from New York on May 12. The ship was the French liner La Loraine, valued at $4,000,000, carrying a general cargo valued at $1,000,000, and in addition $9,300,000 in gold bars and specie. The latter was one of the payments to the Panama Canal Company. Natives of British Borneo recently surprised the foreign colony at the railway station of Kawang, and murdered 130 persons. After the massacre they set fire to the village. Only a half dozen from the little colony escaped. It is reported that between 5,000 and 7,000 American soldiers, who saw service in the Spanish-American War, are going to China within a few weeks as officers in the Chinese army. ALL A PART IN THE HOME WORK.
By Mrs. L. D. Avery-Stuttle
BY MRS. L. D. AVERY-STUTTLE. “And the eye can not say to the hand, I have no need of thee; nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.” I Cor. 12:21. There was a great hubbub in the back yard where the children were playing, and Cousin Fannie stepped to the window just in time to see two little faces flushed and excited, and to hear a sharp voice cry angrily:— “Mother, Elizabeth Ann says she won’t bring in the night’s wood. She must, mama, mustn’t she? I did it last night, and now it’s her turn.” “Look here, mama,” protested Elizabeth Ann, “I brought the water last night, and to-night too, and I’m not going to do all the chores for a lazy boy like Thomas Jefferson Brown—there now!” “Tommy Brown, I’m ashamed of you! quarrelling with your sister already, before Cousin Fannie has been here a week; and you both promised that you would be good children all the while cousin stayed. I should not wonder if she went right back home. She doesn’t love you one bit, nor Libbie either, when you’re naughty, I know she doesn’t.” “It’s too bad to tell them that,” said Cousin Fannie. “I’m sure I love the little ones very much; but I should be sorry for them to have no higher object in doing right than simply to please me.” “I don’t care,” pouted Tommy, “‘Lizabeth Ann called me lazy, and I’m ever so much smarter than she is,—I do most all the chores, always.” “I don’t know what to do with the children, Cousin Fannie, they always quarrel when it’s chore time; at other times they are quiet and loving toward each other. I’m so ashamed! I wish I had your knack. You always seem to know just how to manage children.” “I will tell you, my dear, where I think the trouble lies: I have watched the children since I have been here, and I am sure neither are lazy, or dislike work of itself. But both have a strong sense of justice, and each imagines the other selfish and unjust—that is all, I think.” “Will you tell me, cousin, how you manage at home? Your family is much larger than mine, and I have always noticed that everything moves off pleasantly.” “I will tell you: Almost as soon as my children learned to walk, I gave them certain little tasks to perform every day. They soon learned that these duties were expected to be done by them alone, and they soon grew to take an honest pride in doing them well and promptly.” “But you have so much patience with your children. I’m afraid I never could bother to teach baby to help me, it’s as much as I can do to see that the older children do not shirk their tasks.” “I think if they were taught not to regard them as tasks, but rather as pleasant duties, they would be much more easily accomplished.” “Well, I wish you would talk with Tommy and Libbie; I believe you could do them good.” The next afternoon, at Cousin Fannie’s request, both children left their play to spend a half hour in her room. “Did you ever think, my dears, how sad it would be if any member of your bodies should refuse to perform the work for which God made it?” “That would be going on a strike, wouldn’t it?” asked sturdy little Tom. “I am sure it would. Suppose, for instance, that when I called you up to my room, your feet had refused to bring you. Suppose they had said: ‘We are tired of carrying these little bodies around. We took them to school to-day and yesterday, and the day before, and we have given them a fine ride in the meadows after spring flowers, and here these ungrateful children are asking more favors still! It’s time the hands or the arms did some of our tasks for us; they must be very lazy, we think!’” “O, how queer, cousin! just think of our hands doing what our feet do! Why, they couldn’t,” laughed Libbie. “Well, then, suppose your eyes should declare they were tired of being used.” “Why, we would be blind, cousin.” “And suppose the little stomach should rebel, and declare that it had done so much work that it was unwilling to do any more.” “We would starve to death, cousin.” “I know what you mean, now, I’m sure,” declared Tommy. “I suppose we ought to be as willing to do chores to help mama, as our feet, and hands, and stomachs are to work for us.” “I’ll tell you what we’ll do, Thomas Jefferson,” declared his sister pompously; “I’ll be the feet, and you may be the hands, and I guess we’ll get along without any more bother,”—as indeed they afterwards did, much to the delight of mama and Cousin Fannie, who declared it was always best to appeal to the better judgment of children. “O, well,” says some one, “that’s all right where there is a small family of children; but suppose there are old people in the household,—what then? Surely it would not do to expect or ask them to help any in lifting the burdens of the family?” Well, I have always found it to be true that old age is much happier to be useful than otherwise. Suppose a person has spent fifty, sixty, seventy years in useful labors for others, how must those busy hands ache with the awful weariness of enforced idleness! With what a shock must the consciousness come to him that he is no longer needed,—no longer a useful factor in society or in the family! It is only our most depraved criminals that are given nothing to do,—in solitary confinement. Think what it means to have absolutely nothing required of one who has so long borne the heat and burden of the day, but to sit with folded hands, and weary hearts, “waiting for the boatman.” Russell Sage, the multi-millionaire, tho past eighty years of age, still, unheeding the protest of his friends, continues to do many of his accustomed duties, the same as ever. Indeed, how often we notice that, just as a man accumulates enough of this world’s goods to “retire from business,” he retires from the stage of action almost simultaneously. Then let us apportion to the weakest in the family—to childhood and to age—some little task, the doing of which devolves on them alone, and for which they alone will be responsible; and let no one say, however gray their heads, or furrowed their brows, or bent their forms,—“The days of my usefulness are ended.” GOD'S PARABLES.
By Llewellyn A. Morrison
BY LLEWELLYN A. MORRISON. Every human life is a parable, and, if we could but interpret the essential truths illustrated, would be revealed as fraught with eternal verities. The common, simple, every-day happenings, too, are not only parts of this great whole, but are each, possibly, in themselves as full of heavenly imagery as that story of “the sower and the seed” told by the Lord as He sat in a fishing-boat by the shore of Gennesareth. One of the most precious promise chapters in the Old Testament is the forty-first of Isaiah; the sixteenth verse is at the core of the consolations and expresses the vitalizing faith—force of the song:— “I the Lord thy God will hold thy right hand, saying unto thee, Fear not; I will help thee.” Comforting, however, as it is in the King James Version, one of the readings of the American Revisers multiplies and manifolds the comforts. Listen to it:— “I, the Lord Jehovah, will hold thy right hand and keep saying unto thee, Fear not; I will help thee.” That I will “keep saying” is so full of sweetness and encouragement and comes so tenderly to my own heart that I can not help narrating a “parable” illustrating the verse, that memory culls from the treasure-trove of childhood recollections. My father’s home was in the wild woods of the township of Dummer, in Peterborough County, where I was born. It was a plain log cabin, situated in a stumpy clearing, with thick bush all around. Similar clearings by other settlers had been begun on other lots; but it was many years before these primitive openings were extended so as to meet. Then every settler was in a sense shut in and alone. At the beginning blazed paths through the woods connected one home with another; then a little later rough roads were laid out, following the level, around hills and across the swamps at the narrowest places, without reference to the concession lines, road allowance. These roads were but rough trails at first, with stones, roots, ruts, and mud-holes over their whole length. The compact growth of large trees shut out the light to quite an extent along these roads in the daytime; they were practically impassable at night. Very little visiting was done between the neighbors. There was no leisure for visiting because of the burden of hard work laid upon every one, even the children. Now and again calls had to be made on account of some urgent need, and it was an event with us little folks if we were permitted to go along. How we scampered ahead along the foot-paths or over the short cuts, barefooted, through the woods! How happy we were at the thought of meeting other children! Then if you could have seen us when we reached that other house, how bashful and shy we were until told to “run and play.” I remember such an occasion, when I went with my mother to Mrs. McConnell’s, during the forenoon of an early autumn day, when, to my unspeakable delight—and after sundry warnings to be a good boy—I was permitted to remain all day, so that father would come for me in the evening. There were two boys in that home: Robert, six months older than I, and Willie, about a year younger. I fancy it was the first time we boys had a whole day’s play together. It would be interesting to the little folks were I to tell of the games we played, for they were all our own, as we had no one to teach us. One thing we did, which fixes the time of the year, was to gather a lot of beech-nuts, which Mrs. McConnell boiled for us. It must have been late in the afternoon when we gathered the nuts, for, while we were busy in the house about them, and apparently before we were aware of it, a terrific rain and thunder-storm came on. I was immediately in trouble because of the storm, fearing that father would not come for me; and I could not get home alone. I remember Mrs. McConnell’s assuring me that she would take care of me and11our bunk was large enough for two extra boys, but I still felt uneasy, for I knew that I was “mother’s boy,” and she would feel badly if I were away. Night came down, dense and gloomy, which an occasional flash of chain lightning relieved for an instant only to intensify the blackness. The wind blew and the rain poured in torrents, so that not even the great blazing logs on the old-fashioned hearth could dispel the shadows which were on us little folks. Then I can distinctly remember my father coming out of the night with a great full-cloth ulster overcoat on, reaching down to his feet, and the water dripping from it as he shook himself and it before the fire. In one hand he had a round hickory stick about six feet long, sharpened at one end, which served the purpose of an “alpenstock,” and in the other hand a cedar bark torch which he threw on the fire, saying, “A torch is useless such a night as this.” Cedar bark torches were the lanterns of those days. After he had chatted a while he put on the roomy overcoat again. It was supposed to have been made waterproof by boiling the cloth in alum water, previous to making, and was undoubtedly very nearly so. I thought it strange as he put it on that he did not put his left hand into the sleeve but kept it inside the coat. Then he said to me:— “Stand up here beside me, my boy. Catch hold of my belt with one hand and take hold of my left hand with your other hand.” Then he buttoned up the coat, his arm forming a sort of arch to keep the coat out from me so that I could walk and yet be sheltered from the storm, and away we went into the boisterous night. The novelty of the thing made it start off pleasantly; but pretty soon one of my bare feet came whack against a stone, and my father seemed to know it, for he said: “Go carefully, and lift your feet. Hang on tight.” As we plodded through the awful darkness. How deep the ruts were, and how very slippery the road! For a while I said, “Father, can you see?” “Sometimes, but I know the way,” and then I thought it was nice that father always knew. I could feel his hand gripping mine and almost lifting me over the rough places, as he kept saying to me: “Don’t be afraid. Hang on to my belt. Lean hard to me. We will be home presently. Mother is watching, and has a light in the window for us.” And the lightning flashed, the thunder roared and echoed through the woods, and the rain poured down. We made slow progress, and I dare say an hour was consumed going a mile; up and down, backward and forward, in and out, and many a time, had it not been for father’s faithfulness, my hold of him and his hold of me, I would have gone down or given up, but I could do neither. Father was taking me home, and, although the way was rough, the footing uncertain, the tempest beating and the child quite unequal to it all, yet he had me in his holding. I could not see, but he knew, and so I stumbled along. That was faith, but I did not know it. Father and home were the terminals of hope, far away yet. The way became smoother, and then I knew we were in the clearing. Suddenly there came an awful thunder crash and downpour. Father quickly lifted me to his arms, at the same moment calling, “Here we are, mother.” The door and the coat came open together, and I was in mother’s arms and at home. The cheerful fire on the hearth gave light and heat. The pain and fear were gone and forgotten. Only the father’s sheltering care was remembered. Mother was a refuge for every ill. “Some day, with song and service done,
No one shall say me nay—
I’ll find the path and follow on
To be with her for aye.” SPRINGTIME
By Melissa Campbell Sallars
BY MELISSA CAMPBELL SALLARS. NATURE'S resurrection morning,
Gladsome springtime, now is here,
To our hearts she seems most welcome
Of all seasons of the year. Then we wander forth to meet her,
And behold her glad array,
Bursting bud, and peeping blossom,
Nature's resurrection day. Sleeping, sleeping, all were sleeping
Through the months of cold and snow.
Now they're waking, all are waking,
Mysteries we can not know. And she speaks to us, so truly,
Of another morning fair,
When the sleeping ones shall waken,
Rise, and meet Him in the air. This is why I love the springtime;
For in every plant I see
Tokens that my loved ones, sleeping,
Will return again to me.