Review and Herald, Vol. 38, No. 16. (10/3/1871)

Review and Herald

Oct 3, 1871

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Oct 3, 1871

Does the Bible Agree with Science?

By Eld. S. Pierce

BY ELD. S. PIERCE.

It has long been asserted by the enemies of the Bible that it does not agree with science. But we have never known any proof given for the truth of this assertion. Notwithstanding geology has of late raised its voice with such an emphatic declaration to the same effect, as to alarm some honest lovers of truth, it has been nothing more than assertions. I have never seen any proof of their claims in this direction. By this, I do not wish to be understood as repudiating science, unless it be such as Paul tells us of, science falsely so-called; for we believe the principles of true science to be founded in the nature of things, as much as any other of the laws of nature. But I do repudiate the idea of men just beginning to investigate a science unknown until within a few years, at once becoming wise above what is written.

Had the science of geology been under investigation for thousands of years, and a correct history of some of its particulars been handed down to us, then we might be able to judge very nearly what length of time would be necessary to produce this, that, or the other, ingredient of the earth. But as it now is, who can tell with any degree of certainty in regard to it? It is most astonishing that the learned advocates of this belief, will undertake to prove it by mere assertions, without giving the least evidence of the truthfulness of their declarations; only that they think—and that, too, without any experience in the matter—that it must have taken a much longer time to form certain portions of the earth, than the chronology of the Bible allows. I would here inquire if the experience of men in this science has been of sufficient duration to enable them to determine with any degree of certainty whether it would take millions of ages or only thousands of years to form any particular part of the earth as it is now found. If it has, then this science in its infancy must have become quite mature, or what is still more baffling to our credulity, we have men among us, compared with whom Methuselah would be but a mere child.

If on one side of a question there is nothing but assertions, and on the other, there is positive evidence, we can see at once which way the scale preponderates. We shall not undertake to prove by geology anything either one way or the other; for that science is still in its infancy, and not sufficiently developed or mature to prove anything for or against the question. The indefinite expression that “the Bible does not agree with science,” has been made use of in former years, as a thrust against the authenticity of this sacred book. Instead of this, why did they not come out in definite language, and aver that science proves it false? Doubtless they knew such a position would be untenable.

That the language of our translation of the Bible, in all particulars, is according to the rules of syntax, we shall not assert or undertake to prove. The unimproved state of the grammar, of an amalgamated dialect, formed from seven others, was doubtless the cause of so many grammatical inaccuracies as are found in our translation. But do all these errors go in the least degree to show the history of the Bible false, which is sustained by other authentic histories? Or do they go to prove those prophecies false which from time to time, in constant order, are being fulfilled before our eyes? Or do they in any possible sense prove its excellent moral principles, which all wise legislators have borrowed for the enactment of good and just laws, to be corrupt? If they do, then the truth of any history, or any book, depends altogether upon the grammatical elegance of its language. But on good authority, we assert, without fear of successful contradiction, that both the Hebrew and the Greek originals of the Old and New Testaments are entirely free from those grammatical errors so frequently found in King James’ translation; not that there are no grammatical difficulties to be found there, but these arise mostly from the comprehensive brevity of its language, and not from its erroneous construction. Why, then, should the errors of our translation be brought to prove that the Bible does not agree with science, when the originals, as they came from the pen of inspiration, were free from such errors? This shows either maliciousness or ignorant short-sightedness, which should be rebuked by every intelligent Christian.

We will now introduce the sciences of astronomy and geography. These have been investigated by the learned of almost every age; and for some centuries, with the greatest facilities for bringing them as near to perfection as their nature will admit. Learned astronomers have informed us that there are but a trifle more than three thousand stars, visible to the naked eye, above the horizon at one time. Hence all visible to the naked eye in every locality would not much exceed six thousand. Now compare this with what God said to Abraham. See Gen. 15:5. In verses 1–5, we are informed that the Lord was conversing with him in vision. Verse 5: “And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them; and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.” But says one, objecting to the idea of his being in vision, It would be difficult for Abraham or any one not acquainted with astronomy, to count those stars even visible to the naked eye. In reply, we would say, He was acquainted with astronomy, if Josephus was an authentic historian. And further, if Abraham was not in vision, but literally beheld such stars as could be seen with the naked eye, think of the deficiency of this promise; for if he was to be the father of many nations, as stated in Genesis 17:4, what kind of diminutive nations must they be, for many of them to consist of, at most, not much more than six thousand individuals. And consider also how it would diminish the number, and depreciate the promise, as described in chap. 13:16: “And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth; so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered.”

These scriptures, taken together, prove beyond all doubt that the stars then appeared to Abraham in all their real countless millions; increased as no magnifier can multiply them. With this conclusion, there is perfect harmony between this and all other scriptures on this subject; but without it there is a discrepancy.

The apostle, in Gal. 3:7, tells us who are Abraham’s seed: “Know ye therefore, that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.” Verse 29: “And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” John had a view of all that are Christ’s; and he calls them “a great multitude which no man can number, of all nations, and kindreds, and peoples, and tongues.” Rev. 7:9. This also is proof from the Scriptures that Abraham had a view of the stars in all their countless multitudes. Does this agree with science? Let astronomy answer: This science has developed the fact, by the aid of magnifiers which its necessities have invented, that there are countless millions of even those stars which are suns to other systems of worlds, without the possibility of ever discovering one of the planets which constitute those systems of their respective suns. David also, in Ps. 147:4, gives more than an intimation of the vastness of their number: “He telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names;” intimating that this is all beyond the reach of finite minds, either of men or angels. If it were not so, why did Inspiration introduce it in a manner that would show the Lord himself only able to do either? Again, in Ps. 8:3–4, he gives some additional thoughts in regard to the subject: “When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and stars which thou hast ordained; what is man that thou art mindful of him, or the son of man that thou visitest him?” Shall we believe this to be an obscure similitude between man and inanimate bodies? We think not. A comparison is always drawn between things that have strong points of resemblance. Hence, as we see no similarity between man and the heavenly bodies, and as there is a figure of speech in which the container is put for the things contained, we believe the comparative difference of their importance is drawn between man and the inhabitants of those other worlds, whose claims for God’s notice and care appeared to the psalmist in such a vast degree to surpass those of our race, on account of the immense superiority of their numbers. This certainly agrees not only with what modern astronomers have ascertained in regard to the multitude of other worlds, but also with what they have suspected in regard to their being inhabited.

As to geography, especially the position, structure and form of the earth, we know what geographers have told us. We are told in Job 26:7, “He hangeth the earth upon nothing.” We see how completely harmonious this is with all the information that modern geographers have given us on this particular.

Geography, as a science, has been known to the learned for thousands of years; yet we have no especial evidence that the form of the earth, which is one essential feature, was ever certainly known to geographers, till within about four hundred years. Though some of the ancients suspected that it might be round, they never, so far as we know, brought forward any reasons or evidence that it was so. They generally considered it to be a vast plane or level; though some held it to be cylindrical, or in the form of a drum. As geography is a description of the earth; and as one of the essentials in describing a body is to give its true form, we see how defective this science until within a few centuries. Modern science, however, has discovered its form and described it, giving evidences sufficient to satisfy the most skeptical respecting it.

When I came to learn from the blessed Bible that this fact was there revealed; in one instance almost three thousand years ago, and in another more than twenty-five hundred years ago, I was led to exclaim, “I rejoice at Thy word as one that findeth great spoil.” In Prov. 8:27, Wisdom is represented as saying, “When He prepared the heavens, I was there; when he set a compass [margin, a circle] upon the face of the depth.” Showing the surface of the sea or ocean to be circular. For depth or depths in the Bible is in many instances used in a sense to justify this conclusion. To satisfy the reader of this, we refer him to Exodus 15:8; Ps. 33:7; 77:7; and Jonah 2:5.

The other passage which proves the form of the earth is found in Isa. 40:22. “It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth; and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers.”

The passage in Proverbs 8 gives the circularity of the ocean’s surface; the one in Isa. 40 gives the general contour of the surface of the land. Or we may take the term earth in its more extended sense; meaning the whole globe which would do no injustice to the language. Thus we see how completely inspiration had revealed this fact, more than two thousand years before science had found it out, and which had lain concealed more than five thousand years, for aught that science had been able to do, during that time.

Tell us the Bible does not agree with science? Sooner tell us the springs have no connection with the fountains from whence they flow.

Let us take a geographical view of the world in connection with historic facts, and see how this matter stands. The Israelites, at the time that Solomon lived, had perhaps fifteen of the first books of the Bible. And according to the brief description there given of the splendor of his court, and its magnificent surroundings, the order and arrangement of things generally connected with it, there was then nothing on the earth to be compared with it. Even all other monarchs who visited there, were struck with amazement at the magnificence of the sight. Further there were specimens of architecture, especially those of the temple and the King’s palace, which were altogether superior to whatever had been, or was known for centuries after that time. But objectors will say, Greece and Rome outvied in splendor Solomon’s court.

We will refer such to the best authority we can find, the Encyclopedia Americana, which informs us that even the alphabet and of course written language had not become common in Greece until about 450 years after Solomon; and although Homer, the prince of Grecian poets, lived one hundred years before him, yet his poems were not written for centuries after. And although the history of the Grecians reaches back three hundred years before the Israelites became a nation; still the Israelites had written language nearly five hundred years before Solomon, and nearly one thousand before the Grecians.

“In Homer’s time all knowledge, religion and laws were preserved by memory; and for that reason were put in verse, till prose was introduced with the art of writing.” The argument drawn from several ancient inscriptions on temples, Wolf has deprived of all its force. Thus we see when the sciences and arts were first introduced into Greece.

The above information leads us to inquire How came the poor Israelites, who emerged from the most abject slavery, centuries after the Greeks had become a nation, to be so much in advance of them in the arts and sciences? Because they had the light of inspiration, some part of the blessed book of truth, which cast its rays upon them; it being the great generator of all useful improvements among men. When the light of inspiration has shone upon any people, has heathenish darkness or ignorance been the consequence? Let the history of modern times, as well as ancient, answer.

Now we would ask in candor, Where, or among what people, are the highest attainments in the arts and sciences, civilization and refinement, and all the improvements of well-regulated society? Where the Bible has scarcely been known, or where it has been diffused for centuries, and some of its principles incorporated into their national

laws, because loved and revered by many of the inhabitants?

What is the condition of most of the tribes in Africa, New Holland, and most of the islands of the Pacific and Indian oceans, which have never, to our knowledge, had any of its enlightening influences at all? Oh! the darkness of the picture there. How is it among the nations of Asia, where its rays of light have been obscured for many centuries? It is but little better. How among the nations of Europe, where its ennobling principles for centuries, have been more or less diffused? Mark the contrast. And how is it among the free northern States of America? Mark the superlatively happy contrast between this and all other countries, where the Bible is unknown, in every respect that could be mentioned.

Daniel was told to shut up the words and seal the book even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.” Hebrew critics understand it to mean a knowledge of the Bible, and of its prophetic department especially. And this time of the end commenced at the close of the 1260 years, at the time papacy received its deadly wound; when the pope of Rome was taken prisoner by Berthier, and died a prisoner of war; which occurred in 1798.

Now we ask, When and where did the improvements of the present century in the arts and sciences, take their rise? And in what country did they most progress? The first steamboat was made and put into effective operation in 1807 on the Hudson river. Where were the first reapers, thrashers, mowers, and a multitude of other agricultural implements invented? And last, where was Morse’s magnetic telegraph introduced, the most remarkable and ingenious of them all? Answer: In the free Northern States of America. There the rays of Bible truth during some of this period, have shone with more resplendent brilliancy than at any time since the apostles lived.

Did not the Southern States, the land of slavery and oppression, participate in these inventions? Not to any great extent, to our knowledge. Why not? Because ignorance and injustice reigned; for the principles of the Bible were trodden under foot, the golden rule rejected, and horror and abuse triumphed.

Did not some of these improvements originate in any of the countries of Asia, Africa, or Australia? Not one? Why not? Because, says the objector, heathenish darkness reigns there. But how came it there? We answer, Because the Bible had not been received there to any great extent. And where that is not received, there heathenish darkness is, and must be.

Tell us that science and the fountain of truth are forever hostile, without the possibility of any harmonious union? Rather tell us of all the beauties of poetry, the higher strains of eloquence and oratory, and the elevated figures of rhetoric, found from Genesis to Revelation with all their beauties blending richly in, as occasion requires, with all the soul-enlightening teachings of that blessed book, harmonious as the language of Heaven could make them, and you move a chord that has thrilled with delight the hearts of some of the greatest statesmen, theologians, philanthropists, mathematicians and philosophers, that have lived for centuries in the past.

When will slanderous ignorance hide its deformed head? or catch a glimpse of the radiant beauties of the richest gift ever bestowed upon fallen man?

TIME FLIES.

By Mary E. Guilford

The moment that's passing is all we can claim; Then let us be faithful our work to perform. Encourage the weak ones, the erring reclaim, That all may find shelter from earth's coming storm.

The days of probation will soon have an end, The work of salvation our hearts should employ. Soon Jesus from Heaven to earth will descend To gather his saints, and the wicked destroy.

Shall these precious moments pass by unimproved, Till the summer is ended, the harvest is past? The jewels all gathered, to Heaven removed, And we be cut off with the wicked at last?

Shall we undervalue the great ransom paid, And thus judge ourselves all unworthy of life? Forbid it, my Lord; may we lean on thine aid To succor and save mid the world's ceaseless strife.

O slumberer, wake! heed the moments that pass; Make sure of salvation now while the time flies, That you, with rejoicing, may hail at the last The morn of bright glory so soon to arise.

MARY E. GUILFORD. Castalia, Ohio.

Long Sermons.

A WRITER in the London Quarterly Review, in an article entitled “Home Heathenism,” makes the following comment on “the immoderate length of sermons,” which we shall extract for the benefit of the clergy and others:

The length of the modern sermon is a great disadvantage and a growing evil; but it is not the main cause of listlessness in the hearers—for it is not the last portion which tires us; we are tired before we get that relief; and there are long sermons which never appear long. The fault is both in the matter and the style. The topics are too generally stale, and extremely limited in their range; the public mind wants variety and freshness. The mass of the truths uttered from the pulpit need no proof; it is an idle waste of patience and skill to offer it. If all repetitions of thought were excluded, and the best of the remainder were alone retained, sermons would not be so unreasonably long. And generally the style is too verbose; it is not close, compact, nervous. The rule might be, to see how much space the gold can be made to cover; the practice is, not to be perspicuous, convincing, brief. The word painter fails to exhibit his own thought, probably because it is not clearly conceived by himself; for he who thinks clearly and vigorously will express himself with sufficient perspicuity; thought shapes the style. The one radical error not universal, but general, is excessive verbiage—“the seven grains are hid under a bushel of chaff.” We are of the opinion that it is the sin of the age; and indiscreet persons freely bestow their praises upon young ministers—especially if they have plenty of bold “figures.”—Sel.

The Beauty of Godliness.

“Blessed is the man that trusteth in the Lord and whose hope the Lord is.” So God’s eternal truth declares, and who is able to contradict it? None; not the mightiest, although some of earth’s towering intellects have spent themselves in endeavoring to overwhelm and batter down this glorious bulwark of human hopes, yet it stands, and shall stand while God is God. Knowing, then, the stability of this foundation, it is amazing to see so many passing to the dark unknown beyond, leaning only upon a doubt. A true trusting in God gives the perfect peace which passeth understanding—gives sweet rest even in the midst of storms, gives a supporting assurance of “green pastures” and “still waters” beyond, when our feet press heavily upon thorns in the life-path. How can we know anxious care when we are assured that “he careth for us”? How can we complain, and weep, and sorrow when we know that the “steps of the good are ordered by the Lord,” and that all our times are in his hands?

When we consider that he spared not his own Son, but freely delivered him up for us all, shall we think that he would dispense lesser gifts with a parsimonious hand? Oh! no; freely he giveth unto us whatsoever we have need of—not as we see, but as he sees; not, perhaps, at all times as we could wish, but always as his superior wisdom dictates, for as a father pitieth his children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear him, and his mercy is from everlasting to everlasting upon them.

Does the world look with suspicion upon religious people? On the contrary, they are far more readily trusted than if their character of godliness were not known. Such is the purity and beauty of the principles of which they are exponents, that with the mass to know a person is a Christian is sufficient guarantee of character.

Does godliness debar its friends from partaking the pleasures of earth? Does it cause them to look gloomy and miserable? No, oh, no! Every pure joy, every real pleasure is open and free to the Christian; they are bidden “rejoice” and “rejoice evermore,” and it is declared of the Eternal that no good thing will be withheld from them that walk uprightly. A Christian does not limit God, but feasts upon his promises with the perfect assurance that they will be fulfilled; for, since the world was, not one has failed or ever can fail. Our God changes not, but we, creatures of frailty, very often change, and what God promises to-day to a pure soul, the sinning soul of to-morrow can no longer claim.

“Beautiful are thy ways and fair, O Zion, mountain of holiness, and perfect peace have they which walk in thy paths.” Therefore, trust ye in the Lord forever, for in the Lord Jehovah is everlasting strength. Trust in the Lord and do good, and verily thou shalt be fed. Trust in the Lord with all thine heart and lean not to thine own understanding, for they that trust in the Lord shall be as Mount Zion, which can not be removed, but abideth forever. For them there is no darkness, but the day about them is full of light.—Sel.

A Word to Girls:

THE woman who is indifferent to her looks is no true woman. God meant woman to be attractive, to look well, to please; and it is one of her duties to carry out this intention of her Maker. But that dress is to do it and to suffice, is more than I can be brought to believe. Just because I do love to see girls look well, as well as live to some purpose, I would urge upon them such a course of reading and study as will confer such charms as no modiste can supply.

N. P. Willis wrote once a very pretty paragraph on the power of education to beautify. That it absolutely chiseled the features; that he had seen many a clumsy nose and thick pair of lips so modified by thought awakened and active sentiment as to be unrecognizable. And he put it on that ground that we so often see people, homely and unattractive in youth, bloom in middle life into a softened Indian summer of good looks and mellow tones.—Sel.

True Politeness.

A POOR Arab going through the desert, met with a sparkling spring. Accustomed to brackish water a draught from this sweet well in the wilderness seemed, to his simple mind, a present fit to offer to the caliph. So he filled his leathern bottle, and after a weary tramp, laid his humble gift at his sovereign's feet. The monarch, with the magnanimity that may put many a Christian to blush, called for a cup and filling it, drank freely; and with a smile, thanked the Arab and presented him with a reward. The courtiers pressed eagerly around for a draught of the wonderful water which was regarded as worthy such a princely acknowledgment. To their surprise, the caliph forbade them to touch a drop. Then, after the simple-hearted giver left the royal presence, with a new spring of joy welling up in his heart, the monarch thus explained the motive for his prohibition. “During this long journey the water in his leathern bottle has become impure and distasteful; but it was an offering of love, and, as such, I accepted it with pleasure. I feared, however, that if I allowed another to taste it, he would not conceal his disgust. Therefore it was that I forbade you to partake, lest the heart of the poor man should be wounded.”—Sel.

The Wondrous Relationship.

“For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in Heaven, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.” Mark 3:35.

As if no earthly type were enough to image forth the love of Jesus, he assembles into one verse a group of the tenderest earthly relationships. Human affection has to focus its loveliest hues, but all is too little to afford an exponent of the depth and intensity of His. “As one whom his mother comforteth,” “my sister,” “my spouse.” He is a “Son,” “Brother,” “Friend”—all in one, “cleaving closer than a brother.”

And can we wonder at such language? Is it merely figurative, expressive of more than the reality? He gave himself for us: after that pledge of his affection, we must cease to marvel at any expression of the interest he feels in us. Anything he can say or do is infinitely less than what he has done.

Believer, art thou solitary and desolate? Has bereavement severed earthly ties? has the grave made forced estrangement—sundered the closest links of earthly affection? In Jesus thou hast filial and fraternal love combined. He is the Friend of friends, whose presence and fellowship compensates for all losses, and supplies all blanks; “he setteth the solitary in families.” If thou art oppressed, friendless, comfortless, here, remember there is in the Elder Brother on the throne, a love, deep as the unfathomed ocean—boundless as eternity. And who are those who claim the blessedness spoken of under this wondrous imagery?

On whom does he lavish this unutterable affection? No outward profession will purchase it. No church, no priest, no ordinances, no denominational distinctions. It is on those who are possessed of holy characters—“He that doeth the will of my Father which is in Heaven”—he who reflects the mind of Jesus; imbibes his Spirit; takes his word as the regulator of his daily walk, and makes his glory the great end of his being; he who lives to God, and with God and for God; the humble, lowly, Christlike, Heaven-seeking Christian—he it is who can claim as his own, this wondrous heritage of love! If it be a worthy object of ambition to be loved by the good and great on earth, what must it be to have an eye of love ever beaming on us from the Throne, in comparison of which the attachment here of brother, sister, kinsman, friend—all combined—pales like the stars before the rising sun! Though we are often ashamed to call Him “Brother,” “He is not ashamed to call us brethren.” He looks down on poor worms, and says:

“The same is my brother, and sister, and mother,” “I will write upon them,” He says in another place, “my new name.” Just as we write our name on a book to tell that it belongs to us; so Jesus would write his own name on us—the wondrous volumes of his grace that they may be read and pondered by principalities and powers. Have we known and believed this love of God? Ah, how poor has been the requital! Who can not subscribe to the words of one, whose name was in all the churches—“thy love has been as a shower; the return but a dew-drop, and that dew-drop stained with sin.”—Words of Jesus, by McDuff.

The Effects of One Sin.

“Whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.” James 2:10.

From this we are to understand that the divine law is to be regarded as one total and entire law; the breaking of one precept, the whole (being a collection of precepts) is broken. It is a perfect chain; the breaking of one link breaks the whole chain.

A late expositor says, “The apostle does not say that this, in fact, ever did occur; but he says, that if it should, and yet a man should have failed in only one particular, he must be judged to be guilty.” * Are there not the same reasons for turning from every sin that there are for turning from any one sin? Do we turn from any one sin because God has forbidden it? Why, for the same reason, should we not turn from all sin? He who turns from any one sin, because it is a dishonor to God, a reproach to Christ, a grief to the Spirit, a wound to religion, is under obligations to turn from all sin for the same reason. One sin has done much harm. Only one sin stripped the fallen angels of their dignity and glory. One sin—only one—robbed our first parents of all their purity and power. One thief may rob you of all your treasures. One disease may deprive you of all your health. One dagger, plunged to the heart, kills as effectually as ten. One spark explodes the whole magazine. If a ship springs a leak in three places or ten, and all are stopped but one, that one leak will sink the ship. We cannot take one sin into our bosom, and shut all the rest out. They come in swarms, at the bidding of the lone occupant. A little thief put in at the window, will open the door for fifty more, much larger and stronger, to enter. We should remember that a holy God never shares honors with an unholy devil. He approves of neither halting nor halving. He will not allow us to divide our hearts between holiness and sin, between Christ and the world. We cannot swear by God and Baal. We are required to abandon our covert, as well as our open sins; our loved as well as our loathed lusts; our baby iniquities as well as our giant-like provocations. Gideon had seventy sons and only one bastard, and yet that one bastard managed to destroy all the rest; so, that evil disposition which leads us to venture upon a violation of one of God’s precepts, were it not for some sinister motive, would lead us to break any and every commandment, when it should serve our turn to do so. The precepts of the Almighty are one beautiful string of pearls; break the string in any place, and all the pearls fall to the ground. Let us not conclude, therefore, that, because we are guilty of but one sin, we are less exposed to ruin than those who are guilty of many. Whatever sets a soul in conflict with God, unless abandoned, will prove the ruin of that soul. One sin will do that as surely as many. Satan will make his nest in the smallest sin, and unless expelled, will very soon hatch all manner of wickedness. A sinful emotion, if it be not at once rejected, will procure consent; and consent will break forth into acts; and acts will ripen into habit; and habit will blind conscience, and conscience, when blinded, will permit the soul to practice the basest sins unreproved.

“Why not, then, abandon every sin? Why not expel every base intruder? Why not proclaim universal freedom; If we have harbored a single foe to our King, let us out with it, and forever bolt the gates against its return. Let us seek that we may find, and find that we may enjoy, and enjoy that we may inherit, the precious gift.”—Advocate of Holiness.

Living in the Hearts of Friends

THERE is a sublimity in the thought that though a man dies, and his body goes back to dust—though his face is seen no more in the old familiar places, and his voice is silent in the councils of men, yet he lives, and will continue to live in the hearts of his friends.

The Crisis of Mormonism.

We have been several days in Salt Lake City, with both eyes and ears eagerly open. The air is full of reports and discussions. The whole community feels and acknowledges that a crisis has come in the history of Mormonism. And when a potential idea like this gets a deep lodgment in the public consciousness, it is likely to effectuate itself, whatever may be its origin. But in this case, it is no vague apprehension; it is a definite deduction from definite facts. We have conversed incessantly, along the streets, in the hotels, in the Tabernacle, in the homes of Gentiles and Mormons, and the theme everywhere is the revolution that is sweeping over the Territory, and the virtual downfall of the “Saints.” Not long since, visitors held their breath on these streets while conversing about Mormonism and Brigham Young; now free speech is rampant, and the hosts of miners pouring into the region add an abundance of free swearing against the system. It is our opinion that before long you may hear of some pitched demonstration between the Mormons and the miners. The latter, stalwart and fearless mountaineers, tread these streets with firm feet, as on the soil of “Uncle Sam,” not of Brigham Young; and the latter and all his followers evidently shrink from any untoward provocation. They not only compromise, but cower.

A somewhat rapid series of events has produced this change.

First, the great transcontinental railroad has broken up the insulation of the Salt Lake Valley. Its community has been thus brought into better relations with the rest of the nation. The people were before helplessly subject to the dictation of Young and his officers. Their suffering women were especially helpless. Now they have the protection of daily widening Gentile sympathy, and a powerful, independent public opinion, and the very foundations of the social system of Mormonism begin to loosen and move.

Secondly, the “Godbeite” schism has shocked the system quite generally. Our party heard Godbe and his coadjutors in public, and conversed much with them in private, and their movement has certainly a pervading power not only at Salt Lake, but throughout the Territory. It is not evangelical; it is not reconstructive; it is simply a disintegrating process, but it is indisputably effective in the latter respect. It is quite mixed up with “Spiritualism” and “Rationalism,” but by this very fact it meets, for the moment, the condition of this low, fanatical people (chiefly gathered from the lowest population of Wales, England, and Scandinavia), and, by wrenching them away from Mormonism, may render them accessible to the better religious influences now fast increasing in the Territory.

Thirdly, the most specific, most direct agency against the organized abominations of the Territory has been that of the United States Government officials. We all know what deplorable failures and compromises have heretofore taken place in this respect, and what arrogance they inspired in the dominant men here. This policy is now done with. The Government officers attempt no persecution; they say, officially, nothing against the religious opinions of the “Saints,” but they say in the precisest words that the laws of the United States must and shall be executed—that no tampering with them under any pretense, political, religious, social, or any other, shall be tolerated. The Territorial Legislature, being made up of Mormons, has heretofore made Mormon laws, and put the country under Mormon officers; wherever these interfere with the superior laws and functionaries of the United States, the latter are now made to suppress them promptly. The Territorial military force (the famous Mormon Legion) was officered by Mormons; the late Governor Shafer appointed Gentile citizens in command. The present Supreme Judge (Justice McKean) is laying the axe of the law to the roots of things. He is a “just judge,” a conscientious, fearless, dispassionate Christian man, revered for his high personal character and official ability. Some most important and decisive renderings of his court have about settled the fate of Mormonism. Notwithstanding the United States have had a marshal here, Young and his Mormon Legislature have had their own Mormon Marshal, and he has packed the juries with Mormons, so that no justice could be had by Gentiles against Mormons, for perjury has been one of the religious vices of his people. Judge McKean’s first act in his court was to decide that the United States Marshal, not the Mormon one, must provide the juries, and now Gentiles and Jews, as well as Mormons, sit in the jury-box and the law has fair play. The Territory had its Mormon “Attorney-General,” though the United States had appointed, as customary, its Territorial Attorney-General; the two came into official collision before Judge McKean; he decided, of course, that the officer of the United States Government is the only proper Attorney-General, and the Mormon had to retire. He has thus given legal emancipation to the people. Foreign Mormon converts have applied to the court for naturalization. He has read to them the oath requiring them to “satisfy the court” that they will obey the laws of the United States, and then read to them the law against polygamy. As they refuse to acknowledge this law, he promptly refuses to “naturalize” them. Here ends, then, the increase of polygamist voters in the Territory. The Mormon Legislature made, years ago, a law against adultery, in view of the Gentiles. It is terribly severe, imposing a heavy fine and twenty years’ imprisonment. As they made no law against bigamy, the suffering first wife of one of the high ecclesiastic (who has several families) has prosecuted him for adultery. The Judge is about to try the case under their own law and there can be no doubt of the result. We are informed that since this case began, scores of other wronged women have handed in their names to the prosecuting lawyer for similar redress. Thus a direct attack is about to be made on the chief corner-stone of this organized libertinism.

Other agencies now growingly powerful here against Mormonism—especially the more evangelical ones—we shall refer to hereafter. The subject has never had more interest for the American public than it just now has, for, as we have said, the “crisis” in its history has come, and the solution of its “problem” is at hand. —The Methodist.

Continue reading: Hints to Church Members