p. 8 | Signs of the Times, Vol. 12, No. 19. (5/20/1886)

Earlier text: The Visigoths in the Western Empire

Some One-Thousand-Dollar Reasons for Keeping Sunday.

By Editor

WE come now in this one-thousand-dollar prize-essay to the discussion of the change from the seventh to the first day of the week in the observance of the Sabbath. It is true that, as shown last week, the author of this essay leaves no room for any change; nevertheless he insists that there has been a change, and insists on giving "reasons" for it. And as reasons to be worth $1,000 ought to be pretty good, we shall, as far as in us lies, give our readers the full benefit of them. To get a full and fair statement of the question before us, we shall quote again a passage referred to last week, as follows:—

“Accepting the conclusion that the Fourth Commandment is still in force, it may very properly be asked, Why, then, do not Christians obey it by keeping holy the seventh day of the week as it directs? By what right is this plain precept disregarded and the first day of the week observed? This question is a natural one, and unless a satisfactory answer can be given, the Christian world must stand convicted of error.”

Now we are prepared to hear what he proposes shall be the “satisfactory answer,” and which we have good reason to suppose the American Sunday-school Union considers “a satisfactory answer,” seeing they paid $1,000 for it. Mr. Waffle’s first effort at “a satisfactory answer” is the following: “The fact that the observance of the first day of the week is so nearly universal and has been of such long continuance, is very significant.”

That certainly is not a satisfactory answer. In fact, it is no answer at all. It is simply a begging of the question. But he says it is “very significant.” Significant of what? Why this:—

“It suggests that there must have been some good and sufficient reason for the change.”—P. 184.

That is to say: The “plain precept” of God has been disregarded by nearly everybody for a long while. Therefore there must be some good and sufficient reason for it. In other words: It must be right because nearly everybody does it. But he knows that such doctrine as that will never do, even in a one-thousand-dollar prize-essay, so he immediately adds this caution:—

“Too much should not be made of this, for the church has sanctioned many false doctrines, and been tainted by many corrupt practices.”

That is the truth. And one of the falsest of her many false doctrines, and one of the most corrupt of her many corrupt practices, is the disregard for the “plain precept” of God as laid down in the Fourth Commandment, and the substitution for it of the observance of the heathen institution of Sunday, in defense of which Mr. A. E. Waffle writes, and the American Sunday-school Union prints, this one-thousand-dollar prize-essay.

His next attempt at a satisfactory answer is this: “We have taken the custom of keeping the Sabbath on the first day of the week as we found it; and while this does not exempt us from the duty of inquiry, it throws upon those who question our course ‘the burden of proof.’”—P. 185.

Can anything be too absurd to find a place in a prize essay on the Sunday-sabbath? Here is a proposition that is contrary to the commonest kind of common sense, as well as to the rules of logic and of evidence. Says Dr. Carson: “It is self-evident that in every question the burden of proof lies on the side of the affirmative. An affirmation is of no authority without proof. It is as if it had not been affirmed. If I assert a doctrine, I must prove it; for until it is proved, it can have no claim to reception. Strictly speaking, it exists only on its proof; and a mere affirmation of it is only an existence on affirmation. If I obstinately refuse proof, I leave my doctrine without foundation, and a simple denial of it is sufficient. No man can be called upon to disprove that which alleges no proof. It is a truth as clear as the light of the sun, that, in every instance, proof lies with the affirmative, or with the holders of the doctrine or rite. If presumption has the privilege of casting the burden of proof on the other side, then every man has a right to decline defending his own opinions, and to cast the burden of proof upon those who dispute them. Can anything be more monstrous?” Yet in this grand prize-essay, this monstrosity is just what is presented as “a satisfactory answer” to the question, “By what right is the plain precept of the Fourth Commandment disregarded and the first day of the week observed?”

One other statement he makes in this connection, which we wish to transcribe. He says:—

“It is not claimed that the apostles began to keep the Sabbath on the first day of the week immediately after the death of Christ.”—P. 189.

Then on what day did they keep the Sabbath immediately after the death of Christ? Did they keep it on the seventh day, or did they keep no Sabbath at all between the death of Christ and the time when they began to keep the first day of the week? In either case, is there not just as much apostolic example for not keeping the first day of the week as there is for keeping it? There certainly is.

After having begged the question of “a satisfactory answer” through more than five pages, he comes to the discussion of the question of reasons for the change. This he introduces with the question:—

“Was there any reason for such a change?”—P. 190.

And in answer to his own question he again begins at once to beg the question thus:—

“If the apostles were guided by the Holy Spirit when they made it, we need not ask for the reason.”

This might be readily enough allowed if the apostles had anywhere told us that they did make the change. But when, as Mr. Waffle himself says, “So far as the record shows, they did not give any explicit command enjoining the abandonment of the seventh-day Sabbath, and its observance on the first day,” and when men insist upon palming off upon us by the authority of the apostles something that the apostles knew nothing at all about, we insist that we do need to ask for the reason.

But Mr. Waffle continues to beg his question. He says:—

“But since the reality of the change is disputed, we may say that if good reasons for it can be discovered, they furnish presumptive proof that it really took place under divine direction.”

But if reasons were discovered which should seem to us good, does it follow that these would be good reasons in the sight of God? Does it follow that these reasons will bear the test of the Judgment? And if, without any command of God, reasons should be discovered which seem to us good for the performance of what we deem religious duties, and we insist upon men’s performing these supposed duties, then what is that but to make human reason, instead of the word of God, the standard of human duty? And what is that but to usurp the

prerogative of God? And what is that but to imitate the papacy? This is just what is done by Protestants when they insist upon the observance of Sunday, when, even as they admit, so far as the record of God shows, there is no command for it. Though they number to the one hundredth figure their so-called reasons for it, we care not. If there be no command of God for it, there can be no reason for it.

At last, by the help of all this beating about, Mr. Waffle actually reaches the place where he introduces the “reasons” which he has begged so hard may be admitted. The first of these is this:—

“One such reason can undoubtedly be found in the abuses which had gathered around the Jewish Sabbath. Christ would not burden his church with such a Sabbath as the rabbis had made; and the easiest way to get rid of these abuses was to change the day.”—P. 190.

The second reason is:—

“The Gentile churches would never have accepted the Sabbath of the Jews as they had come to observe it.”—Id.

The third reason is:—

“Christians were not to observe the Sabbath precisely as the Jews had kept it before these abuses arose and while they were acting in accordance with the divine law.”—P. 191.

To take the space to refute such puerile “reasons” as these, seems to us an imposition upon the good sense and intelligence of our readers. As for the first, if there be any truth at all in it, we should be obliged to believe that Christ changed almost every precept of God; for there was scarcely one which the rabbis, the scribes, and Pharisees had not made void by their traditions and abuses. As for the second, it really has no place; for the great Author of Christianity never asked the Gentile churches, nor any other churches, to accept “the Sabbath of the Jews as they had come to observe it.” But he does ask all to accept the Sabbath of the Lord as he himself observed it, and as he taught that it should be observed. For this cause he swept away the traditions and abuses that the Jews had heaped upon it. As for the third, what is said there, is, in fact, that “Christians were not to observe the Sabbath in accordance with the divine law” (), which is simply abominable.

But such are the “reasons” for disregarding the plain precept of Jehovah. It was for such “reasons” as this that the American Sunday-school Union, “after a painstaking and protracted examination,” paid a prize of $1,000. There is, however, just one redeeming feature of this subject. That is, the author of these “reasons” relieves the apostles from all responsibility for them. He says:—

“We do not say that the apostles saw these reasons, and were governed by them. We offer them in explanation of the fact that they were led by the Spirit to make the change, and as suggesting a probability that it would be made.”—P. 192.

We think Mr. Waffle does well to relieve the apostles from the folly of any knowledge of these preposterous “reasons.” And we are certain that all will do well to remain just as far from seeing and being governed by these “reasons” as were the apostles. In this we have an instance of “apostolic example” that we can all safely follow. J.

The Church and Boycotting.

By W.

THE Fresno Democrat thinks that Judge Sawyer’s decision that boycotting is conspiracy, is not just, and says:—

“A peaceful boycott against them [the Chinese] and those who employ them was recommended by the Sacramento convention. This is clearly lawful, and even were it not, no number of statutes could prevent it. If this style of boycott is declared against the laws, where will the matter end? Church organizations may be prosecuted for declaring war against theaters, dancing-halls, and the like, and temperance organizations may be held to answer for putting the whisky-shops under their ban. Such strained construction of the law will lead us into foolish and dangerous straits.”

The above simply shows how terribly muddled political journals are apt to become when they attempt to enunciate principles of religion. Boycotting the Chinaman, who has as much right to protection from this country as any other person has, and boycotting those who refuse to boycott the Chinese, is no more to be compared with the opposition of the church to theaters, saloons, etc., than Herr Most’s incendiary speeches are to the preaching of the gospel.

Any man, or any number of men, may decline to deal with any other person or number of persons. No one has a right to compel them to trade where they do not wish to; and by the same rule they have no right to try to compel others not to trade where they may wish to. This last is just what boycotting is; and any candid man must admit that it is not straining a point in the least to say that for a number of men to combine to ruin another’s business is conspiracy.

The opposition of the church and the temperance society to theaters, saloons, etc., has no such characteristics. Christians are by their profession pledged to abstain from all evil; and knowing that theaters and saloons are only evil in their nature, they shun such places. They also endeavor to induce others to shun evil places and associates. But no Christian boycotts either the saloon-keeper or his victim. One who follows the teachings of Christ will be as ready to assist a saloon-keeper if he is in distress as he will one who is in a respectable business; and while rendering this assistance, the Christian will try to turn the man from the evil of his ways. Much less does the Christian refuse all intercourse with the man who may patronize the theater or the saloon. His very profession requires him to “do good unto all men;” and the Master has set the example of kindness to the erring. Therefore when a man compares the work of the church with that of boycotting leagues, he shows that he has no knowledge whatever of Christianity.

We have said that no Christian boycotts either the saloon or the theater. Much less will a Christian boycott one who is pursuing a legitimate business, and is doing no injury to any one. But we are compelled to admit that many people who profess Christianity, and whose names are on some church roll, do advocate the boycott. We have heard the boycott advocated from the pulpit, and the Chinese were not the ones against whom the boycott was to be directed. Neither were the saloons and theaters to be boycotted, unless they kept open on Sunday. In fact, it was urged that all who did any business on Sunday, no matter how legitimate that business might be, should be boycotted. The lack of Christianity in this proposed boycott was manifest from the fact that the foulest dives were not to be molested if they kept closed on Sunday.

We believe that erelong a large part of the professed church of Christ will go into this business of boycotting. The beloved apostle, looking in prophetic vision to near the end, saw a decree go forth “that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.” Rev. 13:17. But of one thing we are certain, that no Christian will ever engage in any such business. When the keeping of Sunday is made a test of citizenship, as is desired by the Religious Amendment Party, then hypocrisy will be at a premium; then the church and the world will be identical; and then boycotting and other kindred abominations may be carried on under the name of religion.

Mesmerism.

By John Harvey Kellogg

It has been supposed by some that the “three unclean spirits like frogs,” Rev. 16:13, are mesmerism, psychology, and Spiritualism. Whether this be correct or not, there can be no reason given why these three forms of Satanic deception are not combined in the work ascribed to “the spirits of devils.” In the Old Testament every form of witchcraft is given in the enumeration of “the abominations of the heathen.” Deut. 18:9-12. They are different members of the same family, or different phases of the same work.

Mesmerism prepared the way for psychology, as psychology prepared the way for Spiritualism. Mesmerism was claimed to be a veritable “science,” yet its phenomena were never satisfactorily accounted for. While it had enough of the appearance of the supernatural to excite the wonder of mankind, its operators claimed enough for it as a science to put people off their guard as to its origin and influence. Psychology presented many of the same characteristics, yet it outdid mesmerism by its wonders, and in the almost complete control which the operators had over the subjects, while both asleep and awake. The first was exercised by “manipulating” the subject; the other by “passes.” The effects in both cases were very much alike. The resemblance was so strong that they who watched them with care became satisfied that they were closely allied to each other.

Spiritualism was just about as much in advance of psychology as that was in advance of mesmerism. But that they are also allied to each other is shown in that mediums are known to exert control over others by the same means resorted to by psychological operators. The mediums themselves are as truly “mesmerized” as was ever a “subject” by a human “operator.”

We have believed from first to last that the whole work, in whatever phase it presents itself, is of Satanic origin. While many in various churches, both of the clergy and lay members, believe in mesmerism and accept the claims of Spiritualism, namely, that the dead can and do communicate with the living, Adventists have, to a great extent, rejected Spiritualism on the ground that “the dead know not anything,” and therefore have not the power to communicate. And as all these workings seem to be so nearly allied, they have rejected the whole as only evil. So well agreed have all classes of Adventists been on this point that I have known only one Adventist minister who ever openly advocated the claims of mesmerism.

Some even now think that because mesmerism is claimed to be a science, and comes in a form so much milder than Spiritualism, or mediumship, it is not dangerous. But careful investigation will convince them that the effects of mesmeric control and of mediumship are just alike in kind, if not in degree. A subject who is frequently operated upon by a mesmerizer becomes nervously affected, and loses will power. And this is the general effect of mediumship. For this reason a good mesmeric subject is decided to be a good medium, or susceptible to the control of “the spirits.”

And for this reason “clairvoyant physicians,” and manipulating or mesmerizing doctors of all kinds, should be carefully avoided. They who are prostrated by sickness are, generally, easily operated upon by such practitioners; but the danger to the nervous system is great. The greatest danger, however, is in this, that the patients are left in a condition to easily become subjects of “spirit control.”

“We are not ignorant of Satan’s devices.” Yet no amount of knowledge will secure us against the influence of “the spirits of devils.” We have known those who were well acquainted with the theory of Bible truth, and looked upon Spiritualism as evil in its nature and satanic in its origin, and yet the evidence was too strong to reject, that they were involuntarily, or unconsciously, mediums. They who have watched this matter with carefulness are aware that mediums are far more in number than is generally supposed. Many are really mediums who are neither reputed to be such, nor are they aware of the fact. A holy life is the only security against Satan’s wiles and power.

“The Lord knoweth them that are his,” and he will keep them. But we must remember that it is not every one that says to Jesus, “Lord, Lord, that shall enter into the kingdom of Heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in Heaven.” J. H. W.

An Apologue.

By Editor

QUESTION.—“Would it not be wrong, in teaching by allegory or parable, to use one founded on a superstition or false conception of facts, without showing its falsity? Did our Saviour ever use such an allegory or parable? W. M. R.”

An answer to the second question would render the first unnecessary; for if Christ did make use of such a parable it would be evidence that the thing was not wrong. We have no knowledge, however, that our Saviour ever based any of his teachings on superstitions or false theories. The story of the rich man and Lazarus is not strictly a parable, but an apologue, like that found in Judges 9:7-15. An apologue is the relation of supposed actions of brutes or inanimate objects, and does not convey any wrong impression, because the hearers, knowing that the things referred to cannot do or say the things credited to them, readily understand that some moral truth is intended to be impressed by it.

REPORT OF LABOR.

	THIS QUARTER	LAST QUARTER	INCREASE
Members. . . . . . . .	1,027	1,000	27
Reports returned. . . . . . .	498	407	91
Families visited. . . . . .	1,970	2,697	. . . . . .
Ships visited. . . . . . .	291	230	61
Letters written. . . . . .	3,417	2,870	547
Pages distributed. . . . .	1,204,643	662,103	542,540
Periodicals distributed. . . .	65,529	58,717	6,812
SIGNS taken in clubs. . . . .	2,715	2,689	26
New subscribers obtained. .	469	357	112
Cash receipts. . . . . . . .	$1,365 57	$1,917 60	. . . .

NOTE.—It will be noticed that the cash receipts last quarter are more than this quarter. This is owing to the fact that the camp-meeting receipts were added to that report.

Elder Haskell related some of the circumstances that led to the organization of the Tract Society, and gave a brief account of its early history. He referred to the time in 1864 when a few sisters met together to pray for the progress of the work. In 1869, at his first visit to Battle Creek, a vigilant society was organized, consisting of about a dozen members. The next year, what is known as the Tract Society was formed, and from that time the work grew so rapidly that within three years every Conference in America had a Tract Society, and now the Tract Society embraces the whole world. There is no nation on the globe where its influence is not felt; and no nation, excepting Switzerland, where the truth was not first planted through this medium. The work has prospered since its rise. First only papers were sent out, but now there is scarcely a phase of the work but what is connected with the Tract and Missionary Society.

Some conferences have felt the burden of the work in their own localities, while others have extended their labors to the whole world. Those that have expended the most means and labored the hardest to send the truth abroad, have had the greatest influence and have accomplished the most good at home. We should not be shut up to ourselves; according as our heart goes out to others, so will we be blessed. The force of this statement is shown by the prosperity of the cause in California. No other Conference has had a greater interest in foreign missions, especially in that of Australia, and in no other is the work more prosperous at home. This is evident from the past quarter's report, and also from the following table, which gives the workings of the society for the past six years and the increase from year to year. Those present at this meeting were supplied with the table as given here:—

	1879.	1880.	INCREASE	1881.	INCREASE	1882.	INCREASE	1883.	INCREASE	1884.	INCREASE	1885.	INCREASE	INCREASE
No. of members. . . . .	440	511	71	599	88	637	38	699	62	821	122	935	114	495
Reports returned. . . . .	858	962	104	1,004	42	942	47	1,143	200	1,250	108	1,562	312	704
Families visited. . . . .	1,547	1,708	161	2,555	847	4,907	2,352	9,783	4,876	8,522	1,250	25,946	17,424	24,399
Ships visited. . . . . . .	250	389	139	389	. . .	480	91	1,113	633	1,200	87	1,713	513	1,463
Letters written. . . . . .	2,589	4,564	1,975	4,945	381	5,012	67	3,946	1,066	5,934	1,988	7,151	1,217	4,562
Pages distributed. . . .	1,071,986	920,141	. . .	976,584	56,443	1,088,474	111,890	1,195,366	106,892	1,071,170	. . .	2,786,839	1,715,669	1,714,853
Periodicals distributed. .	40,234	71,183	21,682	82,770	11,587	84,479	1,700	158,564	74,085	153,906	. . .	221,659	67,753	181,375
SIGNS taken in clubs. . . .	655	1,148	493	1,370	222	1,560	190	2,184	60	1,803	. . .	2,544	741	1,889
New subscribers obtained. .	774	774	553	872	98	969	97	1,215	60	1,859	157	2,544	175	1,411
Cash received. . . . . . .	$1,366 23	$3,336 23	$1,970 00	$4,417 09	$1,080 86	$4,459 59	$42 50	$5,005 53	$545 94	$6,296 79	$1,291 26	$6,362 05	$65 26	$4,995 82

NOTE.—While each successive year has witnessed the growth of the work, as shown by this report, the increase has not been so perceptible at times. In the spring of 1879, Elder Haskell, who was elected president of the society the following fall, came to this coast. As the result of his personal efforts put forth among the societies that time until his departure for Europe early in the year 1882, there was a marked advancement. Between the years 1881 and 1883 the increase was not so great, owing to the absence of personal labor. During the year 1883 Elder Ings became actively engaged in this branch of the work, and since that time the interest has rapidly grown, until we find that the increase of the year 1885 far exceeds that of any previous year since the organization of the Tract Society.

The surest test of progress in the missionary work is the number of letters written, SIGNS taken in clubs, and the cash receipts. In these particulars there has been a steady increase from the first, but a single exception, that of the number of letters written in 1883.

The number of visits made, and of pages and periodicals distributed, is largely affected by the number of letters written in the field. The Conference reports vary widely from year to year, and hence the individual work done by the members of the society at times appears to a disadvantage, and the actual increase is not apprehended, as the difference in the Conference reports makes an apparent decrease.

Elder Ings stated that our aim should be progression. It is astonishing how wonderfully the Lord has worked for us. When we walk out in his providence by faith, he will not disappoint. Elder Ings has had a special interest in the distributer work throughout the State, and reported that about 200 are now in use in the Conference, including those on ships that are supplied at San Francisco. The cost of filling those owned by the city mission alone is about $1,078 a year. Great favor has been shown this work by many officials of the railway and steamer lines. The Central Pacific and Southern Pacific Companies, including all their branches and leased lines, have granted the privilege to place an unlimited number of distributers on their roads, and for the sum of $10 a year have guaranteed protection to all that may be put up.

Elder Loughborough referred to his early labors in California. During the first years of his work here there were ready sales but no systematic plan by which others than those directly engaged in selling our publications, could circulate our reading matter. As they were trying to obviate this difficulty, news came from the East that the Tract Society had been started, and thus a way was opened by which all could work.

A recent advance step taken in this work is the organization of the Rivulet Societies. Much good resulting from these has already been seen in the increasing love for the truth that is manifested by those children connected with them. By this means a principle is being implanted in their hearts, the fruits of which are already visible.

Elder N. C. McClure has been for a time visiting the city mission in Chicago. They have not, as yet, succeeded in putting up many distributers in that city, but are doing a noble work in holding Bible-readings. He thought it would be advisable if we could connect the Bible-readings with our missionary work to a greater extent. Other reports from different parts of the field were given relating to this feature of the work.

Although it was impossible for Elder Haskell to secure in Australia suitable places for the distributers, an excellent substitute presented itself in the shape of fence-posts, that are found in the most frequented parks. The posts are so formed with an opening at the top as to afford a receptacle for the papers. These are supplied near the close of the day, just before the return of the business men to their homes. These distributers are well patronized. The Lord is carrying forward this work, and invites us to go with it. He wants those who consider it a privilege and not a burden. Elder Haskell closed his remarks by saying: "Let me have a part in this work, although the way may be thorny and rough, and my foot-prints be marked with blood all along the way."

The following Committee on Resolutions was appointed: Elders Wm. Ings, E. J. Waggoner, and J. N. Loughborough.

The second meeting was called at 2:30 P. M., April 27. The Committee on Resolutions submitted the following:—

WHEREAS, It is evident that the time has come for us, as a people, to enter the cities and introduce our views by the means of colporter work; therefore,

1. Resolved, That we recommend that a training school be commenced immediately at the mission rooms in San Francisco, under the management of Elder N. C. McClure.

WHEREAS, The city training school will be to the interest of the cause on this coast, and as there will be considerable cost in conducting the same; therefore,

2. Resolved, That we especially invite our brethren throughout the Conference to make donations of provisions, bedding, etc., to this enterprise, and that all such donations be sent to N. C. McClure, 914 Laguna Street, San Francisco.

WHEREAS, The College was established on this coast to educate young men and women to fill places of responsibility in carrying the Third Angel's Message to the world.

3. Resolved, That we, as missionary workers, do all in our power to encourage worthy young people who give any promise of usefulness in the cause, if properly educated, to attend the College.

WHEREAS, The "National Reform Association" is active and untiring in its efforts to procure an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, so that the popular religion may be made a test of citizenship, and the indications are that in a very short time this will be the leading question of the day, and

WHEREAS, The American Sentinel, which has recently been started, is devoted to the "preservation of the United States Constitution as it is, so far as regards religion, or religious tests, and the maintenance of human rights, both civil and religious," and is especially adapted to meet the best class of minds, and through this vital issue to lead them to an understanding of the Third Angel's Message, therefore,

4. Resolved, That we urge our members to give this paper a hearty and liberal support, and to circulate it wherever the influence of the National Reform Association is exerting an influence.

5. Resolved, That in order that the work done by our missionary societies may be as permanent as possible in its results, the members should redouble their diligence in procuring yearly subscriptions to the SIGNS OF THE TIMES.

WHEREAS, The Lord has gone before us in opening the way for our distributers to be put up in depots and other public places where the traveling public can secure our reading matter; therefore,

6. Resolved, That we will extend this branch of the work throughout this Conference.

These resolutions were acted upon separately and adopted. The first was freely discussed. Strong reasons were given in favor of both San Francisco and Oakland as the location of the training school. After considering all the circumstances the decision was made in favor of the resolution as presented.

Elder Butler gave much valuable instruction in regard to the management of these schools. If properly conducted much good may be accomplished. He holds that it is just as requisite that the one having charge of a mission school be as thoroughly qualified for his position, as is the one superintending a college.

The third resolution was spoken to at some length. Professor Brownsberger set before us the object of the College. It is not only to keep our children from the influences of the world, but to educate workers in the cause. In order that this institution may fulfill its mission, material is required. Our college has no agents who make this a specialty, and hence the necessity of our ministers and missionary workers feeling a responsibility in this matter.

Under the fourth resolution it was stated that the question is often asked why we oppose the National Reform Association, if we really believe that their object will be gained. The Sentinel is not expected to defeat this movement, but to show the fallacies of their reasoning, to bring the light of truth before the people, and thus win souls to Christ.

The meeting adjourned sine die. S. N. HASKELL, President. ANNA L. INGELS, Secretary.

The Missionary.

California Tract and Missionary Society.

A SESSION of the California Tract and Missionary Society was held in connection with the general meeting at Oakland, Cal., April 22-28, 1886. The first meeting convened on the 25th, at 9 A. M., and was called to order by the president, Elder S. N. Haskell. Prayer by Elder Loughborough. The reading of the minutes of the last session was waived, and the report of labor for quarter ending March 31 was read.

This Conference, including the States of California and Nevada, has thirty-eight organized societies. Of these three were added during the quarter,—Stockton, Santa Maria, and Selma. There are also a large number of scattered workers who, although deprived of association with other laborers, are among the most faithful to report. Notwithstanding the fact that the societies are not all represented, the amount of work reported is in advance of the previous quarter, as will appear in the following table:—

The Loaves and Fishes.

By Ellen G. White

JESUS, to obtain a little season of repose, and for the benefit of his disciples, proposed that they should go with him into a desert place and rest awhile. There were suitable places for such retirement beyond the sea from Capernaum, and they entered a boat to make their way thither. But some who were searching for Jesus saw him depart from the shore, and the anxious people gathered together watching the slowly receding boat. The news spread from city to city that Jesus was crossing the sea; and many who were eager to see and hear him flocked to the place where it was thought that his boat would land, while others followed him over the water in boats. So when Jesus and his disciples landed they found themselves in the midst of a multitude of people, pressing forward on all sides to meet them.

He was so pressed upon by the multitude that he went a little apart upon a grassy eminence, where he could be seen and heard by all the people. Here he taught them through the entire day, and healed all the sick and afflicted that were brought to him. . . . As the sun was setting, Jesus saw before him five thousand people besides women and children, who had been all day without food. He inquired of Philip concerning the probability of obtaining bread for so large a number, that they might not return to their homes unrefreshed nor faint by the way. This he did to test the faith of his disciples, for he himself was at no loss how to provide food. He who would not work a miracle to satisfy his own hunger in the wilderness, would not allow the multitude to suffer for lack of food.

Philip looked over the sea of heads and thought how impossible it would be to obtain sufficient food to satisfy the wants of such a crowd. He answered that two hundred penny-worth of bread would not be nearly enough to divide among them so that each one might have a little. Jesus inquired how much food could be found among the company. He was told that Andrew had discovered a lad who had with him five barley loaves, and two small fishes. But this was nothing among so many, and they were in a desert place, where no more could be obtained.

Jesus commanded that this meager store should be brought to him. This being done, he directed his disciples to seat the people upon the grass in parties of fifty and one hundred, to preserve order, and that all might witness the miracle he was about to do. This marshaling of five thousand people into companies, was at length satisfactorily accomplished, and they were all seated in the presence of the Saviour. He then took the loaves and fishes, and, having given thanks, distributed them to the disciples and to the multitudes, in quantities sufficient to satisfy their appetites.

The people had arranged themselves in the required order, wondering what was to be done, but their amazement knew no bounds when the problem was solved, and they beheld food portioned out to that vast assembly from the slender store scarcely sufficient for a score of persons. The food did not diminish, as Jesus handed it to his disciples, who in their turn served the people. As often as they returned to him for a fresh supply, it was furnished them. After all had been satisfied, he directed the disciples to gather up the fragments that nothing might be lost; and the broken fragments filled twelve baskets.

During this remarkable feast, there was much earnest reflection among those who were so miraculously served. They had followed Jesus to listen to words such as had never before fallen upon their ears. His teachings had sunk into their hearts. He had healed their sick, had comforted their sorrow, and, at last, rather than send them away hungering, he had fed them bounteously. His pure and simple doctrine laid hold of their minds, and his tender benevolence won their hearts. While eating the food he had provided for them, they decided that this was indeed the Messiah. No other one could do so mighty a miracle. No human power could create from five barley loaves and two small fishes, food sufficient to feed thousands of hungry people. His teachings and work of healing had already nearly convinced them of his divinity, and this miracle crowned their growing conviction with entire belief.—Mrs. E. G. White, in Spirit of Prophecy.

Continue reading: The Commentary