p. 295 | Signs of the Times, Vol. 11, No. 19. (5/14/1885)

Earlier text: The Uncertainty of Geological Science

Judging Others' Misfortunes: Who Is to Blame?

By H. Clay Trumbull

“THEY said, . . . No doubt this man is a murderer, whom . . . vengeance suffereth not to live.” How easy it is to be sure that other people deserve punishment, and are getting it. If we are in trouble, we wonder why God afflicts us. At all events we are not to blame for our misfortunes. If the trouble is at our next-door neighbor’s, it is plain enough where the fault lies. If their house is robbed, there is “no doubt” that they were very careless in leaving their doors and windows unfastened. If their children are disobedient or graceless, there is “no doubt” that the parents sadly neglected them. If those neighbors lose their property, there is “no doubt” that they were always extravagant or shiftless. With what guileless simplicity the disciples came to Jesus, asking about the blind man, “Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?” After all, those Maltese barbarians were not so far different from the rest of us. “It is good enough for him,” or “It is what he might have expected,” is the judgment we too often pass upon one whom, without good reason, we esteem “smitten of” God, and afflicted.” “Who art thou that judgest another?”—H. Clay Trumbull.

A Flaw in the Cloth.

By Annie L. Jack

I WAS out shopping with a friend whose disposition seemed to be to search for and find a flaw in every piece of cloth she saw. I did not like the idea of thinking every shopkeeper a rogue, and would rather have taken their word; but her close observation seemed to discern something faulty in all the goods presented for her inspection. Sometimes it was a thin place where the warp had been stretched, then again a few coarse threads in the woof, or a broken edge along the side, always something that seemed to justify fault-finding.

I thought of it afterwards—how easy it is to find fault when one is in search of flaws either in circumstances or character. Fault-finding and discontent is often brought on by searching for the very things we complain of, and in each other's character how often we try to find the “thin place” or the “coarse threads” or the “broken edge,” without looking at the intricate workmanship and beautiful finish, or remembering the difficulties in the way. No one is perfect; if we were, it would be useless to have any aim; but it is sometimes wise to shut our eyes to the failings of others, and as we hope to be “done by” so to do. It is a cheapening process to mind and spirit, this of searching for flaws; as much so in our moral nature, or our spiritual, as in the every-day shopping. The cloth would wear as well and we should be happier if we did not search so earnestly for little short-comings.—Annie L. Jack, in Christian at Work.

Ruts and Rails in Sunday School Work

There are ruts, and there are rails. A plowman who always plows up the same furrow, is not much of a success as a plowman; but an engineer who runs his engine off the track at a dangerous curve, is still less of a success as an engineer. It is a great thing to know the difference between a rut and a rail; and no Sunday-school superintendent is fully qualified for his office until he has attained to that knowledge. Every superintendent ought to be fully persuaded in his own mind as to what are the things that ought to be run on rails in his school, and what are the things that ought not to be run in ruts. And he must see to it that in his anxiety to prevent the school from running in ruts, he does not end by running the school off the rails.—Sel.

Simplicity in Teaching Older Sunday-School Scholars

By Faith Lattimer

It is a mistake to suppose that primary classes are the only ones to be taught with the simplicity needful for little children. In many mission schools, in this and in other lands, there are teachers who use for older scholars the primary lesson notes from our Sunday-school papers.—Faith Lattimer.

Lay Up These Words in Your Heart

“THEREFORE shall ye lay up these my words in your heart and in your soul, and bind them for a sign upon your hand, that they may be as frontlets between your eyes. And ye shall teach them your children, speaking of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. That your days may be multiplied, and the days of your children, in the land which the Lord sware unto your fathers to give them, as the days of heaven upon the earth.” Deut. 11:18, 19, 21.

Two Great Compromises.

NEARLY two years ago we wrote several articles under the above heading, giving our view of what we termed “The American Compromise.” In them we gave proofs that the United States Government is symbolized by the two-horned beast of Rev. 13. The following were the main points examined on this subject:—

1. It is a wonder-working power. Among the nations of the earth America stands unrivaled as a wonderful power, and a wonder-producing power. But it is not its fertility of invention, its progress in the arts and sciences, its enterprise in improvements, that the prophecy notices. Its wonders are deceptive and miraculous. In the vision of John it is thus spoken of: “And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by those miracles which he had power to do.” Rev. 13:14. This is fulfilled now in part, but will be more completely hereafter, by modern Spiritualism, which had its rise in the United States, and by means of American mediums has gone to the ends of the earth.

2. It makes an image to the first beast, the papal power. The papacy is a hierarchy; a Government ruled by ecclesiastical power; just what is understood by “Church and State” union. The determined efforts which are now being made to nominally Christianize our Government by a religious amendment to the Constitution, if successful, will cause a complete fulfillment of this prophecy. And we believe they will be successful. There is every indication that this prophecy will be fulfilled in this nation, and that in this land there will be a union of church and State—an image to the beast.

3. The first beast—the papacy—restrained the worship of God as it is commanded in the Scriptures, and for the precepts of the Bible substituted tradition and human institutions. In like manner we find the avowed object of those who wish to change the form of our Government in order to establish and regulate religious usages and institutions, to be the enforcing of the observance of “the venerable day of the sun”—the Sunday—to the exclusion of the Sabbath of the Lord—the seventh day.

4. As the Sunday institution is given by the Catholic Church as the evidence or sign of its power “to institute festivals of precept, and command them under sin,” therefore to enforce the Sunday by law (an institution unknown to the Bible) is to enforce the sign or mark of the beast. For evidence that sign and mark signify the same thing in the Scriptures, compare Eze. 9:4–6, and Rev. 7:1–3. The scripture here under consideration (Rev. 13:11–18) unmistakably points to religious oppression coming in this land.

The word of God not only points out the fact that such oppression will come; that they who will not worship the beast and his image shall be deprived of the most common privileges of citizenship; that men shall neither buy nor sell unless they will bow to the sway of the image of the beast; but it shows how God regards such a transaction, by warning all against such worship, and uttering the most severe threatenings against those who join in the false worship. The following are the words of God's message in relation to these matters:—

“And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb; and the smoke of their torment ascendeth up forever and ever; and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. Here is the patience of the saints; here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.” Rev. 14:9–12.

This message is called that of “the third angel,” of course two preceded this. The first of the three announced, “Fear God, . . . for the hour of his judgment is come.” The procuring of a favorable judgment in behalf of his people is the last work of our High Priest and Advocate upon the throne of his Father. The announcement of the decision of the judgment upon the people of God is made at the coming of the Lord to raise the righteous dead, to change or translate the righteous living, when the reward of immortality or eternal life is given to them. But the decision itself is made at the throne of God before the Saviour comes, while his priesthood yet continues. In this judgment, before the advent of the Lord, the sins of God's people are blotted out; the dread record is canceled by the blood of the priestly Redeemer. In the Old Testament this work is called “cleansing the sanctuary.” See Lev. 16:15–19. But this scripture shows the type; the antitype is in “the sanctuary and true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man,” where Jesus, our High Priest, officiates. Heb. 8:1–5. As in the type, there was an appointed day for making atonement by cleansing the sanctuary, so in the antitype, there is an appointed time for the cleansing of the sanctuary; Dan. 8:13, 14. But the atonement, or blotting out of sin, is according to a judicial decision; it is the work of judgment. Hence, when the “two thousand and three hundred days” of Dan. 8:14 expire, then the hour of judgment has come. This period of two thousand and three hundred days (years) is the longest prophetic period given in Daniel, and expired at a later point than any other prophetic period. We say “expired,” for we feel the fullest assurance that it has expired, ending in 1844. It is for this reason that we confidently affirm that the time of the Lord's coming cannot be known—it is not revealed in the Scriptures. No prophetic time remains to be fulfilled.

And this is confirmed by Rev. 10. The angel with one foot upon the sea and one upon the earth, indicating the extent of his proclamation, had in his hand a little book open (Gr. opened), and he swore “that there should be time no longer.” This does not refer to the close of time absolutely, as of days, and months, and years, for the angel proceeded to instruct the prophet concerning time and events then yet future. It refers to the time written in the book which he held in his hand; evidently the time sealed up in the prophecy of Daniel (chap. 12:5–10), which was to be understood only in “the time of the end.” This declaration of the ending of time is parallel to the message of the first angel of Rev. 14:6, 7, “the hour of his judgment is come.” As before noticed, this indicates the ending of a long prophetic period in Daniel; so does Rev. 10:6. In both cases, that which seems to end all things on earth is followed by events on earth while probation is yet extended. It is generally supposed that nothing pertaining to a probationary state can succeed the coming of the hour of judgment. But in Rev. 14 it is shown that two messages to the inhabitants of the earth do succeed that event; the last being one of both warning and duty. Also, it is generally supposed that nothing pertaining to probation can succeed the oath of the angel that “there shall be time no longer.” But in Rev. 10 two important events do succeed that oath of the angel, namely, the bitter disappointment of the church (of which John stood as the representative in the fulfillment of these prophecies), and the declaration, “Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.” The parallel between these chapters is complete.

Now we are prepared to consider an important question which was much agitated among Seventh-day Adventists some thirty years ago. Seeing that the Third Angel's Message of Rev. 14 is so largely related to the making of an image to the first beast, which must be fulfilled in the dominion of the two-horned beast, the United States, the question was raised whether this message would ever be preached to any considerable extent outside of the United States. According to the view here presented of the parallel between Rev. 10 and 14:6–12,—a view always held by Seventh-day Adventists,—the third message must be preached as extensively as was the first. The first was sent “unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people.” The closing prophecy must go likewise unto “many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.” This is so plainly revealed that, looking upon it in its clearness, we are led to marvel that it was for a moment entertained as a question. But the reader must bear in mind that the full blaze of all the truth does not shine out upon a people or generation all at once. Only patient, prayerful searching will make it all plain.

In further confirmation of this we notice that the Third Angel's Message warns against the worship of the beast, as well as against the worship of his image. While that part of the warning and the threatening which pertains to the image relates to the New World, the worship of the beast and the receiving of his mark is that which is sure to bring the unmixed wrath of God upon the worshiper or receiver, and this relates to the Old World full as much as to the New. The worship of the beast is adherence to that system, or to some prominent parts of that system, of religion which emanated from Rome. And what nation on earth, professing any regard for the Christian religion, is beyond the reach of all danger in this respect? From the days of Constantine, when the primacy was given to Rome; or from the days of Justinian, when all were subjected to the will of the pontiff—soon becoming the “Sovereign Pontiff”—all nations were compelled to receive their religion from Rome, as they received their laws from Rome under the empire. And more so; for the empire allowed nations to retain their own laws and customs to a great extent, only giving their allegiance to the emperor. But Rome papal was not so complaisant; her rites and her institutions had to be accepted and practiced under penalty of the severest tortures and of death. “And all the world wondered after the beast.” Rev. 13:3.

A query has no doubt arisen in many minds, why we have so long delayed the conclusion of our articles on the “Two Great Compromises.” The reason we now give. In writing out our views of “The American Compromise,” we took ground common to all believers in the Third Angel's Message. If all points had not been understood in their relations, they were yet such as all must receive when presented. But in regard to facts in the Old World the case was different. We felt assured that our brethren generally were not prepared to accept the views which we held in regard to the future of the papal power. We have been engaged in this work nearly thirty-five years. We stood side by side with those whom we felt assured the Lord had set forth to develop the present truth. With that tried company “the unity of the faith” was esteemed more highly than life itself. All were careful to avoid “doubtful disputations.” And we wish that all who have assumed the position of teachers of the present truth had always been imbued with the same spirit. With this in view we concluded to drop the subject for a

season, and not give our views of the compromise in Europe until we were assured that it would not injure the feelings of our brethren. But the action taken at the last General Conference has entirely changed the position of affairs, and we are not only free to write upon these things now, but we have been called upon to do so. We shall not cease to pray that the Lord may guide to the advancement of his truth and to his own glory.

The Cause in California Conference.

By Stephen Nelson Haskell

IT is now three weeks since I arrived in California, and I have had the privilege of attending the annual meetings of the College, the Publishing Association, and the Health Retreat, and the quarterly meeting of the State Tract and Missionary Society. By these meetings I have been enabled to obtain a general idea of the condition of the cause in this State. It is evident that the providence of God is over the work in California, and from the stand-point of those who believe in the solemn warning of Rev. 14:9-12, we are upon the eve of far greater changes in the work of God than we have seen in the past.

The financial prosperity which has attended the office of publication during the past year vindicates the sacrificing efforts of those who have labored in connection with it. The number of laborers who go out from the College, and many encouraging features in the annual reports, also show that God's providence is over this branch of the work, and that he has regarded the efforts of his people to prepare individuals to labor in his cause. The Tract and Missionary Society gives evidence of marked prosperity, showing that the blessing of God has rested upon this Conference.

The result of the prosperity which has attended the work makes it necessary to enlarge in many directions, but these improvements are not for any worldly business. It is not necessary that there be improvements in the property of the Association which will call at once for an increased outlay of means. Those who attended the annual meeting of the Association felt well satisfied with the improvements of the past year, and while the present increase of business would call for greater facilities, it is not expected that further improvements will be made for doing outside business.

We are thankful that there is now, to a greater extent than ever in the past, a demand that the facilities which have heretofore been devoted to outside work be devoted to our own denominational work. This will not bring the pecuniary profit to the Association that outside business would, but our brethren will be pleased to make up any deficiency which may arise as the result of publishing the truth for which the building was erected.

The fact that the church in Oakland has so increased in numbers that it is necessary to have a larger house of worship, must be a source of encouragement to all who are interested in the work. The same may be said with reference to the church in Healdsburg. Steps have already been taken to erect a house of worship in that place; one which will accommodate about 1,000 persons. These new enterprises indicate real growth in numbers and spirituality, for as these steps are being taken there is a hearty co-operation on the part of our brethren and sisters. It is evident that if the brethren and sisters on the Pacific Coast are faithful to the trust God has committed to them, he will yet do great things for them. It is a privilege that God gives his people, to bear responsibilities in his work; and if we are faithful, our reward will be in proportion

to the amount of responsibility that we bear. God's providence never lays responsibilities upon us without imparting grace to bear them. The greater the difficulties which we may have to meet, in the discharge of the duties which may devolve upon us, the greater the victory when the conflict is over. We should possess more zeal than did the apostles and early Christians, and we should have no less devotion to the service of God. The interest taken in foreign missions also shows that the Spirit of God is moving upon the hearts of the people in this Conference as well as in others. We look forward, not to a time when there will be less responsibilities to be borne and less sacrifices to be made. There will be greater responsibilities, and greater sacrifices required in the future than have ever yet been made. All have the privilege of having a part in the cause, and of making sacrifices for its advancement; but should any neglect to discharge the duties resting upon them, or fail to walk in the light because of the difficulties which they have to meet, they will be the losers, but the cause will go on.

Now is the time to put forth special efforts for the spread of the truth. There never was a time when labor and means would tell more for the work of God than the present. A thousand dollars now are worth as much as ten thousand will be in a few years from this. Missions at home and abroad are demanding our especial attention. Hearts are prepared to receive the truth everywhere. There are pressing calls for canvassers, colporters, ministers, and laborers of all kinds. If our laborers were multiplied by ten we could not fill the openings for labor.

The future of this Conference depends altogether upon the course of those who profess to believe in these solemn truths. If God calls men to give of their means and they withhold, his providence will not prosper them. But their resources will dry up. “Riches certainly make themselves wings; they fly away as an eagle toward heaven.” “Ye looked for much, and, lo, it came to little; and when ye brought it home, I did blow upon it. Why? saith the Lord of hosts. Because of mine house that is waste, and ye run every man unto his own house. Therefore the heaven over you is stayed from dew, and the earth is stayed from her fruit.”

Those who are faithful God will honor with his blessing in their basket and in their store. There are many to whom he has intrusted talents; some with means, others with ability to canvass, to preach, or to labor in other respects. What account will we give of the use we have made of these talents lent us? To put them out to usury, is to invest in the cause of Christ. To bury them in the earth, is to have them where they only add to our personal interests. It is daily my prayer that God may bless this Conference, and his divine leading be seen in this, his own work. S. N. H.

Our Sunday; Whence and What?

This is the title of the anti-Sabbath pamphlet, written by a Baptist minister of Santa Barbara, of which we recently made mention. The title is truthfully suggestive,—“Our Sunday.” Jehovah said: “The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.” He calls it, “My holy day.” It is verily “the Lord’s day.” He sanctified it when he made the heavens and the earth. But no such expressions are found in the Scriptures concerning the Sunday. It is “our Sunday.” The Lord our God never claimed it as his day. The Scriptures contain not a hint that the first day of the week is the Lord’s day. No; it is just “our Sunday;” all our own man-made institution! Mr. Nisbet, the author of the pamphlet, is happy in his expression. He struck a rich vein of truth when he labeled it “our Sunday.”

This pamphlet is accompanied with a few testimonials from prominent men. We quote them in full:—

“C. A. Buckbee, D. D., ex-Pastor 1st Bap. Ch., San Francisco: ‘Your discussion of the Sunday question is able, convincing, admirable. Our Publication Society ought to put its imprint on such a volume as your MS. would make.’”

“A. J. Frost, D. D., Pastor 1st Bap. Ch., Sacramento: ‘I have read your MS. with profit and delight. You have effectually taken the ground from under the seventh-day observers; and, also, from those who claim that the day has been changed from the seventh to the first. I would heartily commend your little book to all lovers of clear views and sound doctrines.’”

“Prof. Joseph LeConte, University of California: ‘I have found your MS. very interesting and profitable. I fully agree with you as to the origin and nature of “our Sunday.” The Judaic observance of it has sadly obscured its true significance, and produced a revulsion which threatens its entire destruction. Your book is simple, clear, strong, conclusive, and I believe very timely.’”

With this indorsement before him, the reader will naturally be anxious to learn the position of the writer; how he has taken the ground away from observers of the Sabbath of the Lord God; and on what correct and firm basis he has established the observance of the first day; and the meaning of the “whence” contained in the title. Before presenting the evidence of the “little book” itself, we will state in brief its position. It is as follows:—

The Sabbath was not made as an institution for observance at creation, but when Israel came out of Egypt.
The seventh-day Sabbath was only a temporary institution, and therefore there was no change of the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day.
There is no divine institution of any sacred day under the gospel; hence, the Sunday is not kept by any divine authority. It is an ecclesiastical or church day, and purely a matter of choice with the church.
That there is both interpolation and forgery in the writings claimed to be those of the primitive fathers, and which are produced to prove the divine obligation of the Sunday.
But there is not only utility in, but necessity for, the observance of a recurring day of rest; that one day in seven is the proper proportion of time; that it is necessary both for our physical and spiritual well-being that such a day shall be observed; and that it is most fitting that it should be observed on the first day of the week.

And no better summary than the above can be given in brief.

From the above indorsements of the “little book,” it might be supposed that the difficulty which has rested upon the Baptists of California, as shown in the communications of Doctors Anderson and Tombes, in the Herald of Truth, has at last been happily adjusted. But not so; the “muddle” remains, and its proportions are enlarged. Dr. Abbott, the editor of the Herald of Truth, is an out-and-out Baptist. He is watchful over the interests of the denomination, and he has learned caution from the effects produced on the denomination by his learned correspondents. Accordingly, in his notice of Dr. Nisbet’s “little book,” he says:—

“We are, however, not satisfied that his denial of any Sabbath from Eden to Moses is entirely sustained. ‘God rested on the seventh day, and blessed and hallowed it,’ is a declaration that is not to be set aside by any reference of it to God himself solely. This looks to us like begging the question. The fact is, Moses speaks of God’s act as the sufficient ground for the observance by his people of the Sabbath themselves.”

The reading of the Bible on this point is very plain to all plain Bible readers. While Dr. Frost thinks that Dr. Nisbet has taken the ground from under the seventh-day observers, Dr. Abbott, with more caution, and with experience of the effects of such teachings, asserts that Dr. N. accomplished that wonderful feat only by “begging the question.” And so the “little book,” which Dr. Frost so highly commends, may prove like the “little book” eaten by the prophet, only sweet in the mouth and bitter in the stomach! We feel assured that the process of digestion had scarcely commenced with those Baptists who accepted this “little book” as a “sweet morsel.”

It needs but little examination to show that the editor of the Herald of Truth is on the safe side in his statement. And he falls far within the line of truth on the subject. Not only Moses but God himself “speaks of God’s act as the sufficient ground for the observance by his people of the Sabbath.” The commandment—Ex. 20:8–11—was not spoken by Moses, but by Jehovah. “In six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day; wherefore [for this reason] the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.” And this action of God in resting the seventh day, and of sanctifying it because he rested on it, is not only given by Jehovah “as the sufficient ground for the observance by his people of the Sabbath,” but it is given as the only ground of the institution. It is certainly begging the question, or even worse, handling the word of God deceitfully, to say that Gen. 2:3 only tells us what God did, without any reference to man’s action, or duty. The sole reason of the sanctification of the day is found in the fact that God, the Creator, rested that day; and the word sanctify signifies to set apart to a sacred use. That is, Jehovah separated the seventh day from the other days, and set it apart to a sacred use, because he rested on it from the work of creation. This embraces the entire process of making the Sabbath. And when the Saviour says it was “made for man,” set apart or consecrated and hallowed for man because God rested on it from the work of creation, it is the shallowest kind of sophistry to claim that this record has no reference to man’s action, or to his duty to observe it. The only reason why the writer of the pamphlet did not stand openly self-convicted in his use of Gen. 2:3 is because he did not examine the terms of the text upon which he professed to comment.

Dr. Frost is entirely mistaken in the first part of his assertion, namely, that Dr. Nisbet has taken the ground from under the seventh-day observers; Dr. Abbott is clearly in the right when he says that Dr. Nisbet begged the question on the point. But Dr. Frost is correct when he says that he has taken the ground from under “those who claim that the day has been changed from the seventh to the first.” On this point Dr. Abbott does not dispute him, and no one can successfully dispute him. He has most effectually taken away the foundation claimed for “the venerable day of the sun,” as we will show hereafter.

We will here suggest to Dr. Abbott that there are some conclusions to be logically drawn from the fact that the observance of the seventh-day Sabbath comes down from creation, and that it is based on the Creator’s rest from the creative work. We shall present them for his consideration in our further examination of the subject.

Council Called.

By Stephen Nelson Haskell

ALTHOUGH Huss had left Prague he was heralding the good news of salvation to thousands who flocked to hear him. He was also busy with his pen. The church at Prague was encouraged by his letters, and the popular movement in favor of the Reformation at that place began to attract attention throughout Christendom. It was discussed at Paris and Oxford as well as at Rome, and the most exaggerated reports were circulated in regard to it. God was kindling a fire by the dissemination of his word that the flood of the dragon could not quench. In the hearts of men desires were being begotten that could not be extinguished by papal denunciations. Three popes were contending for the supremacy. How to put an end to this schism in the church, and suppress the heresy that was springing up in all parts of the country, were perplexing questions. It was proposed that a general council be called and steps immediately taken to bring the disorder to a close.

John XXIII. wrote a letter to the king in which, referring to the sentence of Rome against Wycliffe, he urged the extermination from Bohemia of all who adhered to his doctrines. But all these measures failed to secure their object. Huss had left Prague and he only returned as duty and safety would permit. About this time Huss wrote a most elaborate treatise on the church. In this he freely discussed the importance of the Scriptures as the word of God, and maintained that they should be taken as a rule of faith, and that no appeal from them would be acceptable in God’s sight. He also set forth his faith, and laid down those principles that underlie all reformations. He took the position that all true Christians belonged to the true catholic church, and that Christ is the head of the church; that he himself is the rock, as he declared to Peter. He also showed when the church began to change its character, at what time in its history it began to apostatize. He was in spirit a true Protestant, a true Puritan, before these terms were known, and yet he held fast to certain so-called catholic dogmas, such as confession, purgatory, transubstantiation, etc.

The church party was not blind to the effects of the logical reasoning of Huss. His arguments were replied to by the papists and he defended them. Every attack and reply brought them back to the old battle-ground. The real question at issue was between the authority of the pope and the authority of the Scriptures. A synod met at Prague Feb. 6, 1413, to effect a compromise, but nothing was done by it but to pass prohibitions and say what must be done. The king then tried another expedient. He appointed a commission consisting of the archbishop, the rector of the university, who was a fast friend of Huss, and several other prominent persons. This also failed to accomplish the much desired end. The king became exasperated and banished three of the bishops. There were continued efforts to compromise the matter, but all to no effect. The word of God was the infallible criterion of the reformed party, and the traditions and decisions of the councils were the unyielding rule of the papists. In all of these efforts the reformers gained the ascendancy.

The pope had excommunicated Huss and those who held the same views, and the city had been placed under an interdict. Everything of this kind that could be done to prevent the word of God having free course was done, and yet the cause of truth gained at every effort. There seemed to be an unseen power that controlled every attempt to stop the truth, and gave it a new impetus. The triumphant march of the gospel in the days of the apostles seems to have been repeated during the few years of prosperity in the days of Huss. The time was fast approaching when a general council must be called. There were many things that seemed to make it necessary. The schism which had rent the church, the profligacy and reckless ambition of rival popes, the wide and fearful corruption which had spread from the highest to the lowest dignitaries of the hierarchy, the alleged heresies of Huss and others, and the almost utter neglect of the authority of the church, combined to make the coming council of more than usual importance. The lack of union, and other serious obstacles, stood in the way of the council. These were finally overcome by the emperor, and the council was appointed to be held at Constance, commencing Oct. 30, 1414.

Pope John XXIII. had been driven from Rome by his enemy, King Ladislaus, and had taken refuge with Sigismund, the emperor of Germany. A general feeling existed throughout Europe that something must be done to improve the condition of things in the church. One of the gravest questions to be settled was, which was of the higher authority, the council or the pope. Should it be decided that the council was the higher authority, Pope John feared the consequence to himself. Should it be decided that the pope was the higher authority, then, Who is the pope? would be an interesting question, for there were three that claimed that honor, and each had excommunicated the others, claiming himself to be the true successor of St. Peter. Italy, France, Germany, Bohemia, Hungary, Poland, England, Denmark, and Sweden, made arrangements to be represented at this council. Sigismund had cited Huss to appear before the council and answer for his doctrines. The pope reluctantly summoned the cardinals and bishops. He had many forebodings concerning himself if he appeared there. His friends warned him that if he went he would come back a private man. He therefore took all the precaution possible by securing pledges from the emperor for his safety.

The friends of Huss desired him not to go, and he himself felt that should he go he would probably never return; still he regarded it his duty to obey the summons. The strong desire he had to confess Christ before the vast number of learned men who would appear on that occasion, inspired him to go in the name of the Lord. Nothing seemed to give him more courage than the opportunity to in some way make known the riches of the grace of God. Notwithstanding he was looked upon as a heretic, excommunicated by the pope, forbidden to preach, yet with a spirit free in God, he fearlessly proclaimed the gospel, wrote letters of consolation to his flock, and with the pen maintained his position against his enemies. He always considered himself a member of the catholic church. Since the Scriptures were the highest authority, no bull from the pope, and no condemnation of the church, could, in his estimation, sever him from it so long as his belief and preaching were in harmony with the sacred word. S. N. H.

Divine Love, Mercy, and Justice in Christ's Atonement

A CORRESPONDENT asks: “If God is a God of love, mercy, and justice, on what principle could he send his only begotten Son to die, the just for the unjust, and not tarnish his character?”

ANSWER: On the principle (a) of love. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” John 3:16. (b) Of mercy. “But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us.” Titus 3:4, 5. (c) Of justice. “To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness; that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.” Rom. 3:26. These are the only principles upon which it could be done; there are no others. No one who believes the Bible can deny that this is so, and every one who rejoices in the triumph of love, mercy, and justice must approve and adore the plan.

Preaching the Everlasting Gospel Versus Preaching Endlessly

The Holston Methodist says: “The preacher should stop when he is done; there is a difference between preaching the everlasting gospel and preaching the gospel everlastingly.”

Emporia, Kansas.

By Geo. H. Smith

I AM laboring here at present. There are forty new Sabbath-keepers in Emporia now, mostly the result of colporter work. We hold meetings Sabbath and first day regularly, which is confirming these precious souls in the faith. There are over fifty covenant members here, and we have a Sabbath-school of seventy-five to eighty members. Others are becoming interested in “the present truth.” Yours in Christ, GEO. H. SMITH.

April 20, 1885.

Continue reading: Vaudois Missionaries and Colporters