Review and Herald, Vol. 18, No. 19. (10/8/1861)

Review and Herald

Oct 8, 1861

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Oct 8, 1861

Is Slavery Sanctioned by the Bible?

Restrictive Laws.

(Concluded.)

BUT lest oppression should trample upon the rights of the laboring classes, and aim at their enslavement,—which actually happened afterward, and was one of the principal items of God's indictment (Jer. xxii, 3; xxxiv, 8-22) against the Jews prior to their destruction by Nebuchadnezzar,—three special enactments were made to prevent such iniquity, and break up any attempt at chattel slavery in the nation.

First. The law against kidnapping.—Ex. xxii, 16. "He that stealeth a man and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death." Thus the one great means of obtaining slaves is forbidden. He who (no matter where) seizes a human being (no matter whom), and reduces him to involuntary servitude, shall die; for he seeks to take away the rights and privileges of freedom, all that goes to make up life; seeks to make property of man, to extinguish the man in the chattel.

"But," it is said, "this only refers to stealing slaves." Mark the logic: a man could seize and enslave another with impunity; but if, afterward, the father, brother, or friend of the enslaved should attempt to rescue him, he must die! Glorious argument for slaveholders and slavecatchers! It is also said this refers to Hebrews, not strangers. Let God answer. Lev. xxiv, 22: "Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger as for one of your own country; for I am the Lord your God." This is his interpretation of the breadth of the law given in the preceding verse, "He that killeth a man, he shall be put to death." The law, therefore, is unrestricted and universal; Hebrew or heathen, he that killeth a man and he that stealeth a man shall alike die; thus putting slavery and murder on the same footing, as equally criminal. Now, if God sanctioned slavery, why did he make such an inconsistent law as this forbidding it?

Second. The law concerning fugitives. Deut. xxiii, 15, 16: "Thou shalt not deliver to his master the servant which is escaped from his master unto thee; he shall dwell with thee, even among you in that place which he shall choose in one of thy gates where it liketh him best; thou shalt not oppress him."

There is no equivocation here; "thou shalt not deliver unto his master." It is imperative; they were to receive him among them as a citizen, and, if need be, protect him from his master; mark, not a "heathen" or "Hebrew" servant, but the "servant," heathen or Hebrew, whoever should fly from the ill treatment or injustice of a hard master. Compare for a moment the Hebrew and American fugitive laws. The Hebrew says, "Thou shalt not deliver to his master the servant that is escaped." The American says, "Thou shalt deliver him up to his master, or be fined one thousand dollars, and suffer six months' imprisonment." The Hebrew says, "He shall dwell with thee . . . thou shalt not oppress him." The American law says, "The commissioner who tries the case shall get five dollars if he fails, and ten if he succeeds in 'delivering to his master' the fugitive, on the simple affidavit of the former that he is his slave."

What are the deductions from this law of Moses? The return of stray property is expressly commanded in Deut. xxii, 1-3; the return of servants is expressly forbidden here; the servant could leave a hard master at any time, and the State could not compel him to return: it did not recognize the condition of forced, but only voluntary servitude, and thus render the existence of chattelism impossible.

The third great protective law was that of the Jubilee.—Lev. xxv, 10-55: "And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim LIBERTY throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof; it shall be a jubilee unto you, and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man to his family." . . . Here the expression is emphatic, no reservations are made, no restrictions allowed. As the sound of Yoval, Yoval, sounded through the land, and was echoed back from hill and village, from hamlet and town, the cry was taken up, and borne along by the laboring thousands of Israel, many of whom had been toiling under contract for years, by the unfortunate debtor, and those whom poverty had compelled to part with "the old house at home," all returned, all were free. "Liberty, liberty!"

It is vain to assume that the benefits of the Jubilee were restricted to a particular class. To what class? Not the six years' servants; they were freed in the seventh. Not to debtors; there was no law compelling them to serve at all; therefore they could only serve voluntarily to pay their debts. Not to thieves; they could only be compelled to make restitution of the thing stolen, or its value; that paid, they were free. The only other classes to whom the law could apply were "all the inhabitants of the land" who served the longest time, the Hebrew "forever" servants, and the heathen servants, thus preventing the possibility of the rise and growth of a servile class, the curse of any country. In this way only can we account for the fact that Jewish history never mentions the existence of a large servile class, or a servile insurrection in Israel, so common and disastrous an occurrence in the history of ancient slaveholding communities.

Some object here, that the term "inhabitants" implies "all the Hebrews," and excludes the strangers, Canaanites, &c.; but by admitting that "all the Hebrews" were freed at the Jubilee, they admit that those who, in Ex. xxi, 6, are servants "forever," are also freed, and thus to serve "forever" only implies till the Jubilee. If, then, "forever" means only till the Jubilee in one case, it means no more in the other. And if we show that the strangers and Canaanites were considered "inhabitants of the land," then the Jubilee referred to Hebrew and stranger alike, and both were free. In Ex. xxxiv, 12, 15, "Take heed to thyself, lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land whither thou goest;" and Lev. xviii, 25; Num. xxxiii, 52-55, Moses calls the heathen "the inhabitants of the land;" and as he was likely to understand the meaning of the term pretty well, he either refers in the Jubilee law to Hebrews, Canaanites, and all, or he meant Canaanites and heathen alone, which is still more decisive. Again, in 2 Sam. xi, 2-27; xxiii, 39, we find one of these strangers, Uriah the Hittite, not only an "inhabitant" of Jerusalem, but one of David's best officers, and his wife becoming queen of Israel and mother of Solomon; and in 2 Sam. xxiv, 18-25, another, Araunah the Jebusite is a householder, and more, is praised as acting like a king toward king David, who bought property of him whereon to build an altar; and yet, forsooth, they were not inhabitants!

But, as if to prevent equivocation, Moses defines the phrase "all the inhabitants;" "Ye shall return every man to his possession, and ye shall return every man to his family." Not every Hebrew, but every man, the same generic term as in the law against killing or stealing "a man;" it is unqualified and universal. Thus with one blow this noble law strikes down the two principal sources of social oppression—monopoly of land and monopoly of labor. All who had by poverty been compelled to part with the old farm and homestead received it back; all claims of service against any person, however mean and humble, were canceled; and the land and its inhabitants were again free as God had made them.

These accumulated arguments, each separately weighty and forcible, but collectively insurmountable, we think prove conclusively that the form of servitude among the Israelites was not chattel slavery, and that there is no sanction or authority for it in the Mosaic laws and regulations.

Thus in Jewish history we see the Israelites groaning under Egyptian bondage, and God's arm outstretched to rescue them when fugitives, and punish their pursuers—a warning to all such thereafter; we see laws enacted to prevent the existence of chattelism among them, by restricting the master's power, and securing the servant's freedom at regular intervals, and the opposite doctrine of equality among men asserted; we see the Israelites disobeying these commands, and adopting, with the idolatry of their neighbors, their slavery also, and God's fiery wrath denounced on them for it by Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, and fulfilled by Nebuchadnezzar in the destruction and captivity of the state.

NEW TESTAMENT.

Teachings of Christ.

Ages pass, the Jews are restored to their land, but the Roman eagle overshadows it and all the civilized world. Despotism is enthroned; and the idea that the world and its people are the property of Rome and its citizens is questioned only in murmuring whispers. All the relations of Roman life partake of this idea of absolutism; slavery is everywhere, liberty nowhere. Then the glad tidings of Messiah's coming is announced to an expectant world. Whom will he side with

—the crushed and despairing millions, or the aristocratic and haughty few? Will he adopt and develop the idea of equality found in Jewish law, or the principle now ascendant,—"Might makes right,"—the Roman slave law? Let him answer.

Standing in the synagogue at Nazareth, the home of his boyhood, amid his expectant friends and relations, he reads (Luke iv, 16-21) from Isaiah, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the broken hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord. And he closed the book and sat down, . . . and began to say to them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears." There is his commission and the constitution of his kingdom. Can anything be more explicit?

Christ himself comes with glad tidings for the poor, to destroy slavery and oppression, and establish liberty. Rejoice, ye poor, taught hitherto that ye were made only for the service of the rich; there is glad tidings for you. Rejoice, captives and slaves, "bruised" with the lash and fetter; God comes "to preach deliverance to the captives, liberty to them that are bruised, and the acceptable year (the Jubilee) of the Lord."

How did he fulfill this commission and pledge? No code of laws and dogmas, terse and dry, were issued by him for the government of his kingdom; but the great principle was proclaimed of a common brotherhood as children of God our Father, and of love to him as such. In his sermon on the mount, the parables of the lost sheep and silver piece, the good Samaritan, the prodigal son, the Pharisee and the publican; in his private teachings to his disciples; and, above all, by his daily example he taught and illustrated, as the leading characteristics of his kingdom, love to God, the brotherhood of man, the rights of all, however poor, degraded, or despised.

More, he makes this idea of brotherhood and equality even with himself, the great test in the judgment. Matt. xxv, 40, 45: "And the king shall answer, and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." What will those who now boast of their large churches, composed almost entirely of slaves, Christian ministers, and church members, bought, sold, lashed, and treated like cattle, answer the King in that great day?

But to return: the result of such teachings was soon evident. "The common people heard him gladly," hung on his steps and words by thousands, and hailed him as deliverer; while Scribes and Pharisees, priests and rulers, denounced him as "a friend of publicans and sinners," only seeking popularity among the masses, to disturb the public peace, and revolutionize the government. Mark, it was not simply religious, but political interference and teaching they charged him with, and on this charge they finally compassed his death.

In his private teachings to his disciples he strongly inculcated this truth. Striving among themselves for the supremacy, he charges them, Matt. xx0, 26-28 [Note: xx, 26-28], and many other places, "It shall not be so among you; but whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant; even as the Son of man came not to be ministered to, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many." The law thus explicitly laid down, and in John xiii, enforced by his example, is the very opposite of chattelism. In his church, none were to claim supremacy over others, much less enslave them; none to despise labor and the laborer, much less condemn others to it while themselves lived in idleness.

Thus Christ, so far from sanctioning chattelism or property in man in any shape or form, by precept and example taught the opposite, the dignity of labor and the laborer, the common brotherhood of man, and consequent equality, political and religious. Did his apostles indorse this doctrine, or, fearing the result, did they side with the all-prevalent system of class legislation and slavery?

Teachings of the Apostles.

The result of their teaching in Judea is given in Acts iv, 32-35: "And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and one soul; neither said any of them that ought of the things he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. Neither was there any among them that lacked; for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold and laid them down at the apostles' feet, and distribution was made to every man according as he had need." They not only believed in "liberty, equality, and fraternity," but practised its extreme—not only equality of rights, but equality of property, among the brotherhood.

But this was comparatively easy in Judea, where the principle of equality was already partly recognized, and the existence of chattelism prevented by the action of the Mosaic code. The apostles only fairly came in conflict with the spirit of caste and slavery when, filled with love and the Spirit, they entered heathen countries, "preaching the glad tidings of the kingdom," and establishing everywhere the glorious brotherhood of humanity, whose primary law is, "A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another as I have loved you. By this shall men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another." John xiii, 34-35. And Paul expounds it to the Gentiles, 1 Cor. xii, 13: "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free, and have been all made to drink into one Spirit." Gal. iii, 26-28. "Ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus; for as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female; for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." Again, Col. iii, 11: "There is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, barbarian nor Scythian, bond nor free; but Christ is all and in all."

Can language be more express and conclusive than this? The distinctions here dissolved by the waters of baptism, and blended into "one in Christ Jesus," are not, as our Southern brethren assert, simply religious, but NATIONAL, POLITICAL, AND SOCIAL—slavery, and the spirit of caste and clan which upholds it, alike forbidden, and liberty, equality, and fraternity, social, political, and religious, proclaimed as the rule of Christ's kingdom.

Principles like these came upon the world like the morning sunlight, scattering the mists of superstitious ignorance, melting the icy pride and selfishness of the mighty, permeating all classes and relations of society with their secret influence, and blending all into one harmonious brotherhood of love and peace. Apparently they were subject as others to the laws of the state, but in secret were bound by stronger ties, and governed by higher, nobler laws, than the world outside dreamed of.

Instead of the Roman law of marriage, regarding the wife as the husband's slave, he must love her as himself; more, as Christ loved the church. Instead of the tyranny on one side, and the retaliating disobedience on the other, of the Roman parental relation, it became the image of our heavenly Father's love, and our trusting obedience to him. The relation of slave, "pro nullo, pro quadrupedo, pro mortuo (as a nobody, a quadruped, a dead man), to his master, became the relation of brethren, the one to render true and faithful service, Eph. vi, 5, the other never to threaten, Eph. vi, 9, much less punish; not to regard them as chattels, as under the Roman law, but to give them just and equal compensation for their service, Eph. vi, 9; Col. iv, 1, "knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven," "neither is there respect of persons with him." The legal deed of manumission was unnecessary; for as, when master and slave land in England, they may remain connected as master and free servant, never as master and slave, so, on admission into the brotherhood of the church, the waters of baptism, as shown above, dissolved the relation of slavery, and substituted that of freemen and brethren.

Again, believers were members of Christ's body. He dwelt in them; and therefore every indignity and injury done to them was done to him in their person. To enslave, buy, and sell them was to enslave, buy, and sell Christ himself. "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." Who, then, would dare hold a brother Christian as a slave? What! make merchandise of the person of Christ? Never! the cry of Judas would ring around them as they were driven ignominiously from the church.

"Why," it is objected, "did not the apostles preach immediate emancipation, instead of indorsing slavery by defining the duties—'Servants, obey your Masters,' &c.? and Paul even sent back a slave." 1. The primary object of the apostles was not simply "to preach liberty to the captives;" this was but a branch of the tree planted "for the healing of the nations." Their object was to sow the principles of faith, love, justice, and equality, well knowing that, when these took root and flourished, among the first fruit would be "liberty to all the inhabitants of the land." 2. Had this been their great object, they took the best and speediest plan for its accomplishment. Attacking the system directly, the appearance of the Christian missionary would have been the signal for servile war and untold bloodshed, the slave against the master, the poor against the rich; and the heathen rulers, eager for a pretext to crush them, would have denounced them as lighting the torch of rebellion and war; and the further spread of the gospel would have been drowned in the blood of its founders. But they took the very course which God adopted among the Israelites in regard to servitude, not directly prohibiting it, but inculcating principles of social equality and progress, restricting the master's power, and protecting the servant's rights, till, master and slave blended in one, the name of slave was lost in that of Christian. 3. The relation and duties of master and servant are defined by the apostles exactly as they might be to-day in England or the free States—as those of men, never as owner and property; on the contrary, all ownership of man by other than God is expressly denied. 1 Cor. vi, 19, 20: "What! know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own. For ye are bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's." There the ownership is clearly asserted; how can man claim it; "Render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's, and to God the things that are God's," lest you be found robbing God himself. Again, 1 Cor. vii, 21, 23: "Art thou called, being a servant? care not for it; but, if thou mayest be made free, [dyvathai genesthai, canst become free] use it rather." What can be more explicit than this? First, ownership of man is denied even to himself, much more to another. Next, the exhortation to slaves is, if they cannot get free from this great wrong, to bear it as such, but, if they can, "use it rather;" and the reason given is followed by a rule of action to be adopted wherever possible. Verse 23: "Ye are bought with a price; be not ye the servants of men." If this be not express prohibition of chattelism, and command to slaves to free themselves from it, then the language is totally contradictory and unintelligible.

Contrast these laws of Paul with the laws of most of the Southern States, forbidding even the master to free his slaves, while States and Congress unite in hounding back to whip and task the poor slave who dares obey that command; nay, offer large rewards for men, even Christian ministers, when attempting to obey it. "But Paul sent back Onesimus to his master, and therefore sanctioned the sending back of fugitives."

We answer, there was no sending back at all; Paul, a prisoner, could not send him back; a Jew, he was forbidden by his religion to do so. Deut. xxiii, 15. It was simply a recommendatory letter sent with Onesimus, returning voluntarily to Colosse and his master. Let us look at the letter. Verse 8 begins: "Wherefore, though I might be much bold in Christ to enjoin thee that which is convenient, yet, for love's sake, I rather beseech thee. I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, . . . which in time past was to thee unprofitable, but now profitable to thee and to me; whom I have sent again, . . . not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved," &c. Here Onesimus is described as having been, while heathen, an "unprofitable" trouble to his master, and had either run away or been sent away by him. Converted at Rome, Paul heard his story, and in his letter, instead of thinking he is doing Philemon a favor, has to earnestly "beseech," almost command, his reception as a favor to himself. Not one word of property or right in him, save the right of love as one of the brotherhood. "NOT NOW AS A SERVANT, but above a servant, a brother beloved, especially to me, but how much more to thee!" Onesimus had left the "slave" in his heathenism; in Christ he became the "brother" of Philemon and Paul. Instead of sanctioning chattelism, it positively denies it by affirming voluntary service, the equality of men as brethren, to be loved as Christ himself.

Thus Christ and his apostles, so far from upholding chattelism in their teachings, denounced the ownership of man by any but God, and inculcated its opposite—love, liberty, equality, and fraternity—by precept and example. And subsequent history showed the result.

Christ said of the teachings of the Pharisees, "By their fruits ye shall know them." Apply this test to the teachings of the apostles and the primitive churches in regard to slavery. When they went forth, "darkness covered the earth, and gross darkness the people;" slavery sat enthroned in might over Europe; and the cries of the oppressed millions had only a hearing on the battle field, or before the throne of God.

When the Reformation came slavery had disappeared in Europe; and the voice of the people was heard asserting their rights, feebly, indeed, at first, but ever since growing stronger and stronger "as the voice of many waters." What has caused this change?

Historians, Protestant and Catholic, ascribe it to the influence of the church, not by direct emancipatory decrees, but, following the example of God through Moses, by gradually restricting the master's power, and protecting the slave; by girdling the poison tree till it withered and fell, though, sad to say, the ruins still disfigure too much of the fair fields of Europe and America.

No fact is more patent in history than the truth expressed by Paul to the Corinthians: "Where the Spirit of the Lord is there is LIBERTY." The whole tendency of the Bible and true Christianity, direct and indirect, is to the liberty and advancement, never the slavery and degradation, of man; and those who have attempted to shield the monster curse of our country and age with the garb of the gospel may find too late, when that awful voice shall ring in their ears, "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me," that Christ came not only "to preach deliverance to the captives" and "to set at liberty them that are bruised," but also "the day of vengeance of our God."—Premium Tract.

Troubles Abroad.

It is no relief from our own national troubles to turn to those of other countries, but it gives us juster views and a more patient spirit to reflect that ours is no exceptional case, but that apprehension and disturbance constitute the rule among the nations of the earth, rather than security and tranquility.

To the south of us, Mexico lies in her chronic condition of internal warfare. Her capital, lately invaded, has been freed from the immediate danger of attack by hard fighting on all sides; but success in the field seems only to lead to feuds among the victors, so that security is never to be reckoned among the fruits of triumph. Farther on, New Granada has just gone through with a revolution, somewhat bloody but probably bootless. Among the States of South America there is hardly one but that has its internal troubles, although they are of so little concern to the rest of the world, as in general to pass unnoticed.

Looking upon Europe we behold the two great governments of England and France in a state of apparent peace and professed security—and yet the former is bristling with riflemen and steel-plated frigates, and the latter bears the tramp of more soldiers and armed horses than this country does at this moment, having added within twelve months six millions of dollars to her warlike expenditures. Some nations had rather be plunged into actual fighting than to be subjected to such onerous preparations.

The great empire of Austria is drifting upon dissolution, or upon the bloody assertion of its despotic claims. Of its thirty-five millions of subjects, sixteen millions refuse to accept the new constitution and to send members to the Imperial Council. Italy will wait no longer than spring for the release of Venetia, by sale or otherwise, from the grasp of the Hapsburgs; and if Hungary postpones open revolt to that period, it will only be from motives of policy. The estrangement seems to have gone beyond remedy, but the prospect of a combined attack on two sides of Austria is a great inducement to patience on the part of the Hungarian leaders.

In Italy, Cialdini is crushing out brigandage and reactionary demonstrations with a vigor which the friends of the Union in this country may well emulate. The Pope's troubles continue, and may be immensely aggravated some morning by the withdrawal of that staff of the French military support, on which he has hitherto leaned for his existence as a sovereign. In the north of Europe, the Russian difficulties with Poland threaten momentarily to break out into conflict, and the commotions excited by the emperor's emancipation scheme are unabated. The Holstein quarrel is so far from being composed, that it was noticeable that the last public declaration of the king of Denmark was the first implication of expected war that has passed his lips. In the eastern part of the continent, Omar Pasha is carrying on a vigorous warfare against the insurgents of Montenegro.

And so it is the world over—a world, if not "lying in wickedness," yet surely not exempt anywhere from troubles and all the dangers of blood-shed. Even the "gorgeous East" is passing through the ordeal of terrible revolution, Japan is the theatre of the conflict between the powers of darkness and seclusion and the powers of light and friendly intercourse. China is prolific in mysterious disturbances, and our last advices tells us of a new insurrection near Pekin, and of the breaking up of commerce beneath the fitful blows of imperial and rebel successes. While, then, we behold the nations of the earth subject to the extremes of afflicting plagues—to the fire running along the ground or the darkness that may be felt—why should we wonder that our long unexampled prosperity has at last been interrupted for a season?—Boston Journal.

Go Forward.

AWAKENED sinners can not stand still. They must go forward or backward. If they go backward, they lose all religious impressions, become more hardened in worldliness and sin, and less easily affected by gospel truth. Their plain duty is to go forward, groping their way, if need be, through thick darkness, and grappling with obstacles that may seem insurmountable. Rev. T. L. Cuyler, in the Christian Intelligencer, says:

It is the first step that costs. When the Israelites came up to the Red Sea, the command of God was, "Speak to the children of Israel that they go forward." But how? The Jewish leader might well cry out, We have no fleet to bear us over. Go forward! But Lord! we cannot ford the gulf before us. Go forward! Wouldst thou have us, Lord, to perish in the billows? Still the same answer comes—"Speak to the children of Israel that they go forward." The command is peremptory. It admits of no delay. And just as soon as Israel goes forth in obedience to Jehovah's voice, lo! the waves part asunder, and the mighty cavalcade marches through, dry shod! Unhesitating obedience to God always ensures a blessing.

Here is a lesson for troubled inquirers. To you comes the command of God, "Go forward." Death is behind you. Hell follows after you. There is no salvation in retreat. Heaven lies before you—not behind. No man ever saved his soul by relapsing into indifference. If you give up, you are lost.

Perhaps you say, "I have prayed many a time already, and no blessing has yet come." Will that bring an answer? As well might a voyager to Liverpool, when one hundred miles from port, put about helm, and steer back to New York; he is almost there; why does the foolish man retreat? How many a soul has quit praying when the door of mercy was just about opening to them! Go forward.

Another is kept back by fear of ridicule. He can not stand a laugh. There is a sneer waiting for him at his father's table, or a cutting sarcasm in his counting room. He wavers before it. He winces under the slightest word, and imagines terrible things in store for himself. Go forward; the sea will open to you, and so will many a heart to cheer you on. You will inspire respect in the very quarters from which you now expect opposition. He is a weakling, who is pushed back with a straw.

A third person complains, "I am in the dark; I can not see my way." Then go forward, and get out of the dark. The determination to do your duty will be attended by a luminous discernment of the path of duty. God will show the way; only go forward, looking for the cross.

Unbelief draws back a fourth. There is only one way to conquer doubt. It is—to believe. Then, instead of halting and shivering in an ague fit of indecision, take a bold, decisive step. End the torturing uncertainty by going forward, "looking unto Jesus."

The only way to do a thing is to do it. God only gives strength to the obedient. He has no promises for cowards, or double-minded, vacillating doubters. He bestows grace on those who try to do their duty. His grace is all-sufficient for you. The deepest sea of difficulties will divide its waters for your advancing footsteps, just as you determine to obey that voice which says to you, Go forward.

The Goodness and Grace of God

no Good ground, good seed, good weather, and a good crop, prove that we have a good God; but a good heart, good purposes, good works, and a good end, prove that we have a gracious God.

Powder-mill Piety.

SAID a little girl who had just been reading the newspaper account of an explosion, "Ma, don't you think that people who work in powder-mills ought to be pious?"

There was a great deal of human nature in that question. The world, like the little girl, thinks that all who are especially exposed, ought to be prepared for sudden death.

But is not the whole world a vast powder-mill? Is it not filled everywhere with the elements of destruction? The very air we breathe may become poisonous and slay us. The water we drink may contain some deadly ingredient which neither sight nor taste can detect.

We are encompassed ever by unseen dangers. We are never certain of to-morrow. Then should we not be prepared, whatever our age, our business, or our locality, for sudden death?

Continue reading: DOINGS OF THE BATTLE CREEK CONFERENCE, OCT. 5 & 6, 1861