Thoughts from an early Health Reform Movement writer

[Guest guest]

" The press teems with accounts of wonderful cures wrought

by such and such medicines; and the point of each statement

is this: 'If you would have health, buy this marvelous remedy.'

Sensible people long ago decided that these certificates

were in the great majority of cases entirely unreliable,

and that they were formed for the manifest purpose of

enriching the proprietor of 'the matchless sanative' that

they respectively extol.

 

 

" Now, why should not health reformers be as generally

and as promptly discredited as should the venders of the

various 'magic cordials' and 'healing balsams' everywhere

offered 'for the relief of suffering humanity'? They should,

if they can be justly classed together. And if the same

principle governs the action of each, then let them share

in the same condemnation.

 

 

" But observe the contrast: The advocates of the hy-

gienic system declare, as a fundamental principle, that

health can be regained or preserved only upon condition

that we 'cease to do evil and learn to do well;' while

the dealers in the aforesaid wonderful preparations sev-

erally state, as one of the most convincing reasons for

the use of their respective medicines, that 'no change of

diet or of habits of life is required in order to be bene-

fited by this wonderful remedy.'

 

 

" The first party declares that the restorative power

exists only in the vital forces which God has given us;

the other, that it is to be found in drugs. The one affirms

that the restorative power within ourselves can alone give

us health, but will do it only upon condition of abstinence

from wrong habits, and of simple obedience to the laws of

our being. But the other replies in derision, 'This is all

humbug; you may eat, drink, and act as you will, with-

out any danger of evil consequences, provided you freely

use my healing balm.'

 

 

" Which of these parties is entitled to our confidence?

One of them asks no money, but insists that we govern

ourselves by the laws which the Author of our being has

established within our own organization. The other bids

us freely disobey, and promises us immunity from evil

consequences on condition that we use the medicines which

they desire us to buy at their hands.

 

 

" We know which of these two kinds of teaching is

the more enticing to the multitudes; but would it not be

well to ask which is the more reasonable? One of them

declares that obedience to the laws of life is the one con-

dition upon which we can have health. The other asserts

that God has provided means whereby men may deliber-

ately disobey those laws, and yet escape the consequences

of that disobedience; and that that means is something

known only to the ones who say this, and to be had only

on condition that you pay them well for it. On which

side are reason and common sense? on that of self-control,

or on that of self-indulgence? And which of these two

classes is attempting to get your money upon false pre-

tenses?

 

 

" I am a firm believer in the principles of health reform.

I have cause to be such. My judgment is convinced that

its principles are reasonable, and just, and true. More-

over, I have proved them true by the test of actual

experience. In this thing, therefore, I speak not merely

that which I have heard, but I also testify that which I

know. I believed in the health reform when I first learned

its principles, because to me they were self-evident truths.

But there is no teacher like experience. Ever after I was

first instructed in this system, I believed it to be true;

but the experience of seven years enables me to speak

now as one who knows whereof he affirms. "

 

 

J.N. Andrews

1871

 

 

from: natural-health-forum " at "

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

>

> " Know

>  

>  The true nature of your Beloved.

>  

>  In His loving eyes your every thought,

>  

>  Word and movement is always-

>  

>  Always Beautiful. "

>  

>  Hafiz

 

This is beautiful! Thanks! ERica

[Guest guest]

Thankyou for this Tim,

 

It has helped fill some missing parts of the overall picture

and really helped me now see where NH is coming from.

 

It's not really about food at all is it?

 

It is about moral conditioning. Regulating behaviour.

and eating right is actually subbordinated to this senior

principle of 'living right'.

 

Who is truly qualified to make such determinations?

 

I prefer the God in these words below. There is no

shoulding, no musting, no do this do that. These are words

which to me, describe a God who is Love. (Beloved is

another word representing God)

 

" Know

 

 The true nature of your Beloved.

 

 In His loving eyes your every thought,

 

 Word and movement is always-

 

 Always Beautiful. "

 

 Hafiz

 

 

 

--

the kneeling fool