believes to be nobler and broader forms of faith. Mr. Collingwood tells us that an intended marriage after mid-life was stopped by his supposed want of orthodoxy. He has suffered for his faith. Here is, then, at bit of the religious teaching of the later years:

"

Christian,'' did I say? "Alas! If we were but wholesomely unchristian. . . It is our imaginary Christianity that helps us to commit these crimes, for we revel and luxuriate in our faith, for the lewd sensation of it; dressing it up like everything else in fiction. The dramatic Christianity of the organ and the aisle, of dawn service and twilight revival, the Christianity which we do not fear to mix the mockery of, pictorially, with our play about the devil, in our Satanellas, Roberts, Fausts; chanting hymns through traceried windows for background effect, and artistically modulating the 'Dio' through variation on variation of mimicked prayer; while we distribute tracts next day for the benefit of the uncultivated swearers, upon what we suppose to be the significance of the Third Commandment; this gas-lighted and gas-inspired Christianity, we are triumphant in, and draw back the hem of our robes from the touch of the heretics who dispute it. But to do a piece of common Christian righteousness in a plain English word or deed, to make Christian law any rule of life, and found one national act or hope thereon, we know too well what our faith comes to for that! You might sooner get lightning out of incense smoke than true action or passion out of your modern English religion. You had better get rid of the smoke and the organ pipes both, leave them and the Gothic windows and the painted glass to the property man, give up your carburetted hydrogen ghost in one healthy expiration, and look after Lazarus at the doorstep. For there is a true Church wherever one hand meets another helpfully, and that is the only holy or mother Church which ever was or ever shall be.

For Friends' Intelligencer.

THE CHARACTER OF JOSEPH. THE character of Joseph, as delineated in the Bible, has appeared to me as more closely resembling that of Jesus than does that of any other personage in the Scriptures. Obedient in childhood to his father, gentle to his brethren, faithful to his master's trusts, pure and true under temptation, wise in his advice to the king as to preparation for approaching famine, prudent in the distribution of provisions to the needy, modest in bearing while enjoying the confidence and support of his sovereign, magnanimous in the treatment of his suppliant brothers in what other person do we find all these characteristics so intimately blended, forming so complete a character? Many other worthies mentioned in both Old and New Testaments have memorable and distinguishing qualities, but none other so conspicuous, none other so perfect as he.

The first account of him, excepting his birth, is in the 37th of Genesis, where he is described as being 17 years old, and that " Israel loved Joseph more than all his children, because he was the son of his old age; and he made him a coat of many colors; and for the reason that his father thus loved him so greatly, “his brethren hated him, and would not speak peaceably unto him." Envy and jealousy, two of the worst foes. to the happiness of the human family, took possession of their hearts, increased and intensified by the dreams he dreamed, which in his innocence he told them, and upon which they placed an interpretation against themselves. Knowing well the feelings entertained by

them, yet, when his father wished to hear of their welfare, while they were feeding his flocks in Shechem, and proposed sending him to them, he dutifully said, Here am I." No flinching from filial duty for fear of his brethren, yet surely he must have known that some kind of harsh treatment would be his portion at their hands, and when he found them not at the expected place, instead of returning home to his father, he went on in quest of them, thus rendering obedience not only to the letter, but to the spirit of his father's wishes, a lesson to all. But even before he came near them, they knew it was he, and plotted to kill him, saying, "We shall see what will become of his dreams." What an exultant spirit seems to be there, gloating over the chance to wreak spite on the victim of their hate. The oldest brother, Reuben, however interposed to prevent his death at their hands, advising them to cast him into a pit, intending to deliver him after a time, and return him to his father. But his design was frustrated, as in his absence they sold him for twenty pieces of silver to a party of Midianites, who were going to Egypt.

We will pass hastily over the despair of Reuben on finding him gone, and the heart-rending grief of his father when by their deception they convinced him that Joseph was indeed dead, devoured by wild beasts, and we wonder that they could hold their peace, when their father refused to be comforted, saying, "I will go down into the grave with my son, mourning.” How true it is that the commission of one crime often requires that of another, to conceal the first. Murder in their hearts, deceit and falsehood were resorted to for concealment.

What must have been Joseph's feelings when he thought of his past life, contented and care-free, and then on the future before him,-far away from his father and family, taken to a strange country, and sold as a slave, while but a lad of seventeen? Yet there was a recompense for even these evils. We are told, "The Lord was with Joseph." How comforting that presence must have been in his isolation from home; what a support in his trials. Even his master perceived that the Lord was with him, and "he found grace in his master's sight," and "the Lord blessed the Egyptian's house for Joseph's sake." Notice the effect of the presence of one good person; for his sake were the others blessed. Then followed the temptation, out of which he came pure and unscathed, yet through the calumny of his temptress, he was cast into prison with others. But the Lord was still with him, and "showed him mercy, and gave him favor in the sight of the keeper of the prison," and "that which he did, the Lord made it to prosper." Then came the butler's and the baker's dreams, their interpretation by Joseph, and their fulfillment. After this we see a too common phase of human nature; the butler forgot Joseph, after being restored to his former place, notwithstanding Joseph's touching appeal to him, to "think on me when it shall be well with thee, and show kindness, I pray thee, unto me, for . . . I was stolen away and here have I done nothing that they should put me into the dungeon." Conscious of his innocence,

he could well make this plea. “Two full years passed," when Pharaoh, the king, was troubled with those remarkable visions, which so seriously affected his kingdom, and, indirectly, were the cause of Joseph's release. When no one could explain the dreams, the butler remembered his own case, and freely spoke to the king of Joseph and his wonderful gift. The king sending for him, told him what he had heard of his abilities. But in his modesty and uprightness he disclaimed any such power, saying, "It is not in me; God shall give Pharaoh an answer of peace." We are are all familiar with these dreams, and their interpretation, which so pleased the king that he said, "Can we find such a man as this is, a man in whom the spirit of God is?" Even he recognized the presence of that Spirit which continually dwelt with Joseph, and recognized his wisdom by appointing him ruler over all, with but this reservation, "Only in the throne will I be greater than thou." He said, "See, I have set thee over all the land of Egypt." What a change for Joseph

day,

yesterday a slave and in a prisoner's gaol; toclothed in vestments of fine linen," commissioned to "ride in the second chariot " while "they cried before him, bow the knee." Nowhere in all the narrative do we find any intimation that this grandeur and homage tempted him to forget the God, who in his vicissitudes had so marvelously preserved him, and at last had uplifted to so great a height, nor can we suppose that in his inmost soul he enjoyed this Divine presence more, or that "the Lord was with him" any more now, when "ruler over all the land," than when quietly performing his menial service in the prison, though he experienced the consciousness of larger powers and of greater opportunities for good to his fellows. ELIZABETH H. COALE.

Holder, Ill.

(Conclusion to follow.)

For Friends' Intelligencer. RECOLLECTIONS OF ALEXANDER

YOUNG.

ALEXANDER YOUNG, a well-known minister of a former generation, on a religious visit in Sullivan county, New York, had appointed a meeting in that mountainous country, in a town remote from Friends. While sitting in a hotel, bowed in body and mind, a person of note came up to him and addressed in, or nearly in, the following language: "Well, sir, I understand you are going to preach for us to-night. A Presbyterian comes along and he tells us unless we believe in his doctrines we can't be saved. Again a Methodist comes and he tells us he only is right, and we are lost if we do not believe in his doctrines. And an Episcopal clergyman comes too, tells us the same story. Now, I want to know what you have got to tell us?" Alexander raised his head and said, "If you do not know right from wrong, probably I shall have nothing to say to-night." "Well," the person replied, “if that is your religion, I will go and hear you." The novelty of such views, joined to his singular dress, caused a large meeting, and being favored to open our doctrines with much clearness, they very

earnestly requested another meeting, but he felt his

service was ended.

Once, intending to take a boat from New York to go up the Hudson, and another boat lying by, he made a mistake and went aboard one going to a town in Connecticut. The passengers soon gathered around him, a plain Friend being a novelty, and engaging him in conversation on religious topics, he explained the truths of Christianity so forcibly he soon had a most instructive meeting. One person was so pleased with the old Friend that he insisted on his going to tea at his house. Another would lodge him free, and would pay his passage back to New York.

On a visit to the writer's house, at our Quarterly Meeting, he related that at first he did not incline to attend, there was so much discussion and so much of the militant church of self-acting, he could not enjoy the meeting, but his Good Father addressed his inward ear: "I love this people. Why can't thee go and visit them, and do the work I may give thee?" He yielded to the counsel, and was much favored in testimony.

He was an original thinker, and it required a close attention to his discourse, or else we would not comprehend the truths he explained. His view was that much of the Scriptures, especially as historic events, were but as illustrating some deep spiritual truths not understood by those not enlightened by the light of Christ. Holding these views, the discrepancies that modern criticism has shown he avoided in these

writings, not quoting as literal facts, which too many of our ministers have done, the legends of a rude people. A Friend who did not appreciate these spiritual expositions of the "wheel within the wheel,” a spiritual life in the outward life, asked him if the use of language was not to be understood? He replied: "Thee is not deep enough.

He carried the view of complete non-resistance so far that the writer asked him what he would do it attacked by an insane person, or if another one was. He replied: "Such is my confidence in the care and goodness of my Father, I believe, should I be placed in such a position, He would protect me or show me what to do."

In an interview the writer had with him he related some of his former experiences. About the year 1818 or 1820, being on a visit to his sister living near Jericho, L. I., she informed him of the great departure of her once dear friend Elias Hicks from the doctrines of our Society, and to prove to him the alleged statement she read to him several of his letters she had received on doctrinal subjects. He said, "I paid strict attention to their contents, and though they were new, yet so convincing were they, that I was in perfect unity with him when done reading and all in harmony with Divine revelation." Alexander also spoke of the When he first heard of E. H.'s views, his reflective mind opening of these truths to Edward Stabler.

examined them and for some time he reasoned on their truth. He found he must be still, and in faith leave all discussion and rely on the Power in whom he believed. In that quiet resting state these subjects were opened with great clearness, and in after years

The plain and simple duties of life as set forth in the Scripture reading of the lesson are old yet ever new, and need to be repeated and impressed upon our minds, for the tendency to lapse into reliance upon creedal confession and formal performance of religious ceremonies is the same to-day as in the time of Jesus.

We will remember that his protest was not against the law-he declared that he came not to destroy the law but to fulfill it but he unsparingly condemned the blindness and hypocrisy of the Pharisees who scrupulously adhered to the letter of the law while ignoring or wilfully trampling under feet its true purpose and spirit. Some expressed formulæ of doctrine or belief, and rules for their observance are requisite, even in an organization so simple as our own,—the important thing is that all shall be done "in the life' and under the quickening influence of the Spirit, and not as mere form. TEACHING.

The lesson to-day fully and clearly impresses upon us the necessity of both faith and works. The Apostle says, "Be not carried away by divers and strange teachings," he would have us with fixed and definite convictions. Again he says, "Let us offer up a sacrifice of praise to God continually"; he would also have us give expression to our convictions in praise and thankfulness, which he calls "the fruit of lips which make confession of his name.' It is frequently said that it does not matter what one believes so his life is correct—that is the essential thing. True, correctness of life is most important, but in order that it may find its best and fullest expression and exert its most potent influence it must be the result of a sincere, reverent, and uplifting belief. By which we do not necessarily mean such a belief as finds formal expression in creed or confession, but that unshakable sense in the soul of a great Central Power which makes for righteousness and to which we are responsible for our highest and best-with which we should be co-workers.

The difference between a correct life without belief and a correct life founded upon conviction is the difference between morality and religion-the difference between a mere conformity to a standard set up by the world and the active principle of goodness in a consecrated heart. Here again our best illustration is Jesus-his whole creed was love and an abiding and ever-sustaining faith in the power and presence of

the Father, and unwearied sacrifice of self to the manifest duties of life as he met them in his daily walk.

While the love of the brethren (our own household of faith) is enjoined we are also cautioned not to forget the strangers. It is natural that our affections should go out to those with whom we mingle in religious worship and are interested with in Christian work, but our love must extend to all children of the Father, especially to the unfortunate and those who are in bonds, whether of the body or the soul.

Again, personally, our lives must be clean and our affections pure, free from the undue love of things which, good in themselves, become debasing when permitted to dominate us.

As though in summing up, the Apostle uses the words of our Golden Text, and continues, "For with such sacrifice God is well pleased." We are not alone to keep ourselves unspotted by the world, but we are to be fruitful in deeds of loving kindness and beneficence, helping the less fortunate, strengthening the weak, and uplifting the fallen. Also, we are to communicate or impart of the heavenly riches which we may possess, that others may be fortified and established against times of trial or temptation.

TEMPERANCE LESSONS. (FOR ADULT CLASSES.)

TEMPERANCE AND THE CHURCH.

THE temperance question is at the same time moral and political. On the one hand the use of alcoholic stimulants is the chief single cause of the various forms of human degeneracy, shown in pauperism, insanity, and crime; on the other, the management of the drinkers and of the traffic in intoxicants is a chief problem of our police departments, while our revenue system is very largely dependent on the manufacture of fermented and distilled liquors.

As a moral question the whole subject comes distinctly within the domain of the church. This has long been recognized so far as personal abstinence is concerned. In 1743, the United Societies of Methodists (England) declared that members were expected -"to avoid evil evil. especially drunkenness, buying and selling spirituous liquors, or drinking them, except in cases of extreme necessity." This statement was modified later, but has come by degrees to represent to a considerable degree the attitude of most of the Protestant churches. In 1865, the Presbyterian church expelled from membership all "who are engaged in the manufacture and sale of intoxicating drinks to be used as a common beverage." The position of the Society of Friends in this matter is well known.

By degrees also the various churches have come to feel responsibility as to the methods of publicly dealing with the great national vice, and as to the complicity of State and Nation, through the various revenue systems, with the traffic. This sense of responsibility has led to the adoption of resolutions or of public statements on the subject by most of the leading churches. Among the more recent utterances are the following:

The Baptist Home Mission Society adopted resolu

lutely the rule. Luxury is not only bad for the individual, but it tends to separate him from his fellows. But in spite of this fear, which sometimes comes over me, still I feel from the very fact of our having from the earliest times recognized that great doctrine upon which so much depends in social and indeed, all

ous traffic."

The American Christian Convention (1886) delivered itself thus: "This Convention announces itself as the patron and aider of all activities and associations that point clearly, definitely, and wisely to a direct and immediate erasure of permissions or sanctions of society or law upon the iniquitous traffic."

The National Congregational Council of 1889 says in part : "The saloon is so great a menace to the peace of society and so great a hindrance to the advance of the cause of our divine Master as to demand .. the wisest and most efficient means for its removal.”

The General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church (1892) says: "The only proper attitude toward it (the liquor traffic) for Christians is that of relentless hostility. It can never be legalized without sin."

The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (1892) says: "No political party has a right to expect the support of Christian men so long as that party stands committed to the license policy." In 1889 it said: "Total abstinence is the only safe rule for the individual and prohibition by law the true method by the State."

The Roman Catholic Plenary Council, 1885, says of liquor dealers in membership in the Roman Catholic Church: "If they can, let them choose a more honorable way of making a living.

The above will show the expressions of the leading churches. That they do not carry the hearty support of the membership is shown by the fact that little has been accomplished in the period elapsing since these earnest utterances, although the power of the church membership, if applied together, could have crushed the liquor traffic.

Suggestions. Discuss the church work of neighboring denominations, and look for opportunities of co-operation. Consider the public and private expression of other denominations, and see how far we can Do not let discussion degenerate agree with them. either into debate or into unkind criticism.

J. H. H.

FRIENDS AND "SOCIAL QUESTIONS." From the address by Robert Spence Watson, at the Friends' Conference at Manchester, England, 1895.

THEN again, if we are a really democratic body, we ought to have no difficulty in dealing with men of all classes on equal terms. I say, a democratic body. I sometimes fear there is a tendency amongst us rather in a direction which is opposed to this true spirit of equality, a tendency toward rank, and wealth, and position, towards things which are dangers and dangerous; and that it would be better for us if the old habit of simplicity, in every matter of life, were more abso

of these great questions depends more than upon any other, the absolute equality of the sexes, that we have a peculiar facility in dealing with a great many social questions.

Industrial questions make a great part of social questions at the present day. Friends ought to be able-are able, I trust-to take a leading part in the settling of these in the direction of industrial peace. Apart from the belief of Friends in the doctrine of peace, that doctrine which is one of our distinguishing principles, and which I hope as a Society and as individuals we shall always hold most strenuously, the strong democratic character of which I have spoken ought to be peculiarly of service in this direction of assisting industrial peace, peace carried into private life, and in all matters which require close, sympathetic attention to the needs of others less fortunate than ourselves.

One other matter has struck me as affecting us in dealing with these social questions, that which is, perhaps, our chief distinguishing doctrine, the spirituality of true religion-our view that religion is not a matter of form, but of the very life. Truly, this ought to help us in regard to a great number of subjects upon which the question is constantly raised as to what is secular and what is religious. Can we draw such a distinction, which I cannot but think unmeaning and full of danger? Surely every question ought to be a religious question. Surely we cannot lay a certain number on one side, and say, These are secular, and these are religious.. A week ago, with some German friends of mine, men of education and much thought, we were discussing the question of peace and war. As soon as I had laid before them our own views on peace, they said: “Oh yes, quite true; we agree with every word of it. But this is the religious view, not the political view of the question; not the view that any person in the world could think of acting upon !" It seems to me that the distinction so often made between things secular and things religious leads distinctly to that state of mind which would cause us to put a certain number of questions on one side, as those which are to be taken down on Sundays, and talked about on the death-bed. If the religious view is good for anything it is good for everything. The social questions that press for solution cannot be solved unless we have the religious sanction of what we are doing.

How awful would be our lot if the inclinations of our will were followed by fulfillment of our hasty desires, and sudden longings were always granted. One day, we shall bless him, not more for what he has granted than for what he has denied.-H. E. Manning.