« AnteriorContinuar »
For this you must wait until you are a man.” Then the boy looked sorrowful, and said, “Is there not some other way of being rich, that I may begin now?”
She answered, “The gain of money is not the only, nor the true wealth. Fires may burn it, the floods drown it, moth and rust waste it, and the robber make it his prey. Men are wearied with the toil of getting it, but they leave it behind at last. They die, and carry nothing away. The soul of the richest prince goeth forth like that of the wayside beggar without a garment. There is another kind of riches which is not kept in the purse, but in the heart. Those who possess them are not always praised by men, but they have the praise of God."
Then said the boy, “May I begin to gather this kind of riches now, or must I wait till I grow up, and am a man ?” The mother laid her hand upon his little head, and said, To-day, if
will hear His voice ; for He hath promised that those who seek early shall find.”
And the child said, “ Teach me how I may become rich before God.” Then she looked tenderly on him, and said, “Kneel down every night and morning, and ask that in your heart you may love the dear Saviour, and trust in him. Obey his Word, and strive all the days of your to be good, and to do good to all. So, though you may
be poor in this world, you shall be rich in faith, and an heir of the kingdom of heaven.”
A BOY THAT WAS KILLED, BECAUSE HE
WOULD NOT TELL A LIE. The Daily Argus" published at Madison, Indiana, United States, contains the following harrowing recital. It says
the succeeding facts have been established by Judicial investigation and were related by the presiding judge. "A beautiful, fair-haired, blue-eyed boy, about nine years of age, was taken from the Orphan Asylum in Milwakee, and adopted by a respectable farmer of Marguette, a professor of religion, and a member of a church. A girl, a little older than the
boy, was also adopted into the same family. Soon after the were installed in their new home, the boy saw something improper in the conduct of his new mother, which he mentioned to the little girl, and it thereby came to the ears of the woman; she indignantly denied the story; her husband believed her statement, and she insisted that the boy should be whipped until he confessed the falsehood. The inan-poor weak bigot-impelled by a sense of religious duty, proceeded to the task assigned him, by procuring a bundle of rods, stripping the child naked, and suspending him by a cord to the rafters of the house, and whipping him at intervals for over two hours, till the blood ran through the floor, making a pool in the room below; stopping only to rest and interrogate the boy, and getting no other reply than “Pa, I told the truth–I cannot tell a lie;" the woman all this time urging him “ to do his duty." The poor little hero, at length released from his torture, threw his arms around the neck of his tormentor, kissed, and said, “Pa, I am so cold," and died. It appeared in the evidence upon the trial of this man and woman for murder, that the child did tell the truth, and suffered death by slow torture rather than tell a lie. The age of heroism and of martyrdom will not have passed till mothers cease to instil holy precepts into the minds of their offspring. The man and woman who murdered this angel child, are now in the penitentiary at Wanpun, to which they were sentenced for ten years.
OUR INQUIRY OFFICE. WE haye received in answer to the inquiry, “Why is Christ called The Branch'?” the following reply:
1. The sacred writings abound with figurative language, and, perhaps, none is so copious as that applied to the Redeemer. For instance, he is called a rock, a door, a way, a sun, a light, a shepherd, and a Branch. The term Branch is often employed to denote offspring or descendants. Thus in Job xviii. 16, where Bildad is speaking of the calamities that shall befall the wicked, we read, “ His branch shall be
cut off," meaning that his family shall become extinct. Again, in Isaiah, it says:
“ The branch of the terrible ones shall be brought low,” evidently implying, that the children of those who had held the rest of the people in subjection, should themselves be humbled. By reading from the fifth to the seventh verse of the eleventh chapter of Daniel, another proof of the correctness of this view may be obtained. The following passages will also throw further light upon the subject: Ezek. xix. 10, 14; Hosea xi. 6; xiv. 6. All that is intended in the passages quoted by W. D., therefore is, that Christ should be a descendant from Jesse, who was the father of David.
W. G. 2. To the question, “ Was James, who wrote the Epistle bearing his name, the brother of our Lord, mentioned in Matt. xiii. 15, and Gal. i. 19 ?” we have not received any satisfactory reply; we therefore shall briefly answer the question. There were two apostles of Christ who had the name of James. One was a son of Zebedee, and brother to John. He was put to death by Herod. Acts xii. 2. His martyrdom is believed to have occurred twenty years before the Epistle of James was written. The other James was the son of Alpheus or Cleophas, and, it is believed, also, of the sister of the mother of Jesus. This James, therefore, was the cousin of our Lord, and, from the nearness of his relationship, is called “the brother of our Lord.” It is the opinion of learned men, that the Epistle was written by him. Acts xii. 17; xv. 13; xxi. 18.
To the inquiry on the use of the word "Saint,” we have received the following answer
3. The pith of G. P-'s four questions on the use of the word “Saint,” is found in the inquiry—is it proper to use any epithet which has been abused? Many terms have been employed in an objectionable manner, and among them is the word “saint.” Its simple meaning is holy, sanctified, or consecrated; and in its use, in this sense, there is nothing improper, when applied either to the writers of the New Testament, or of the Old, to any departed Christian, or any living one. In this sense it is frequently employed in the
Scriptures; and both the writers of the Old and New Testament, as well as all true Christians, are called “ saints”;see Luke i. 70; 2 Pet. i. 21; Heb. ii. 1; Rev. xviii. 20. In all these cases, and others, the Greek word rendered “holy” is the same as that elsewhere translated “saint"; and what is remarkable is, that here the attribute is prefixed, and is equivalent to saying St. Matthew, &c. But this word has been abused. As early as the beginning of the fourth century, false ideas respecting departed Christians began to prevail; and it was supposed that the most eminently holy Christiansand especially those who had suffered martyrdom—had power with God as intercessors; and hence they were impiously addressed in prayer; and for a long period the epithet “ saint” was used principally of those who were considered mediators. In this sense, the word is highly objectionable and fearfully wicked; for there is but “One Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus."
Martyrdom was mournfully frequent in the early ages of Christianity.
In Constantine's time (A. D. 335,) Popish legends inform us, there were 5,000 saints for every day in the year, except New Year's day. This was a day of such rejoicing among the heathen that they did not then slaughter the Christians. In process of time, however, the title was not strictly confined to martyrs. Even Michael the Archangel was made a Romish saint. Real and imaginary persons were canonized; and lazy monks, fanatics, mad men, and even robbers, were numbered with the sainthood!
It should be remarked, that in the Greek, the word "saint" is not prefixed to the name of any of the New Testament writers. The title is simply “The Gospel according to Matthew," "The Epistle of Paul to the Romans," &c. Propriety would therefore demand its rejection in these titles. Ought we, then, seeing the word has been abused, to abandon its use altogether? To answer this question it is necessary to reply to another. Has the abuse of the word obliterated its simple meaning, or so far darkened it as to
make it generally misunderstood ? We think not. Few of the Protestant millions of our countrymen, attach any other meaning to it commonly than the original one; and if they
speak of a saint,” they mean simply a holy” person. In dealing with all such words or epithets, one rule should guide us:-If they are improperly understood in general, or to any large extent, they should be abandoned, unless the sense attached to them be clearly defined; but if not, their use is righteously retained. Since, therefore, “saint" is a term which the multitudes do not misunderstand, it is not improper to employ it.
THE BETTER CHOICE. "I ENVY no quality of the mind or intellect in others, be it genius, power, wit, or fancy; but if I could choose what would be most delightful, and I believe, most useful to me, I should prefer a firm religious belief to every other blessing, for it makes me a disciple of goodness, creates new hopes when all earthly hopes vanish, and throws over the decay, the destruction of existence the most gorgeous of all lights ; awakens life even in death; and corruption and decay call up beauty and divinity; makes an instrument of misfortune, and scales the ladder of ascent to Paradise ; and far above all combinations of earthly hordes, calls up the most delightful visions of palms and amaranths, the garden of the blest, the security of everlasting joys where the sensualist and the sceptic view only gloom, decay, annihilation, and despair.”—Sir Humphrey Davy.
GOD IS EVERYWHERE.
What hiding place does earth afford ?
Or whither from Thy presence run ?
up to heaven I take my flight,
'Tis there Thou dwell'st enthroned in light;
There also hast Thou thine abode.
And fly beyond the western main ;
I still should find Thy guiding hand.