THE THIRD ANGEL'S MESSAGE: WHAT IS IT?
Last week, under this head, we referred to warnings that had been given to this nation concerning the evils that must follow the doing, by the nation, of the things that the national authority was asked to do. These warnings were given not only with respect to the setting up of Sunday in place of the Sabbath, in a union of religion and the state; they were given likewise with respect to the abandonment of the Constitution and the repudiation of the Declaration of Independence. We are going to give in this study only an illustration on each of these points. We say only an illustration, because whole pages could be filled with it. First, as to the abandonment of the Constitution by the national authority. In Congress, and everywhere else in the country, much has been said within the last two years about the national authority governing “without the Constitution.” We ourselves have had somewhat to say concerning the principle. And that is now the established policy of the national administration, in, as yet, Porto Rico, the Philippines, and Alaska. Yet as far back as May 7, 1891,—more than nine years ago,—the writer of this article, in reviewing a decision of the United States Supreme Court, published in the American Sentinel, under the heading, “The New American Revolution,” the following words:— “This [decision] at once creates [in these United States] a sovereign power [apart from the people], and clothes it with paternal authority. And if this doctrine shall be maintained, so that it becomes a principle of American law, and shall become established as a principle of government here, then the revolution backward is complete; government of the people is gone; and that of a sovereign parent of the people is put in its place. THEN the doctrine of the Declaration of Independence and of the Constitution is subverted, and the doctrine of sovereignty, absolutism, and paternalism is established in its stead.” And concerning these consequences of that decision, and other things akin, we wrote, one week later, in the American Sentinel of May 14, 1891, these words:— “So long as the American principles of government shall prevail, all such wild schemes will amount to nothing. But let the European and the Roman principles of government supplant the American, then what is to hinder the carrying into full effect every item of the different schemes proposed and advocated? This is why we say that the Supreme Court decision under consideration, means vastly more just at this time than the mere enunciation of the principle which it has adopted.” That word is now being fulfilled to the very letter, in very deed in the government of the United States; and that very decision of the Supreme Court which we were then reviewing, is now used as the justification of what we then said would be, and that which now is, a “revolution” in the order of government in this nation. Second, as to the repudiation of the principles of the Declaration of Independence: This, too, has been largely discussed in Congress and everywhere throughout the country. This, too, has become the policy of the national administration. This goes hand in hand with the abandonment of the Constitution . And on this also the writer of this article wrote in the American Sentinel more than nine years ago, and as definitely as we can write to-day so far as the principle is concerned. In an article in the American Sentinel of June 11, 1891, under the heading “There Is Mischief in It,” we discussed certain issues that were then current. In that discussion it became necessary to consider and note the principle and development of a one-man power, a civil despotism, in the Roman Republic; and the turning of it by the church power into a religious despotism. And what we said then, by and for the American Sentinel, is just as fresh and true and appropriate now in the REVIEW AND HERALD. Here is what we said then, in the Sentinel, and what we can say now, and with an emphasis, in the REVIEW AND HERALD:— “[Thus there was developed] more and more the despotism of the many, till it was merged into a despotism of three,—the first triumvirate,—which ended in the despotism of one, whom they murdered, which was followed immediately again by a despotism of three,—the second triumvirate,—which ended again in the despotism of one,—Cæsar Augustus,—and the final establishment of the imperial despotism, the most horrible civil despotism that ever was, and which continued until Constantine and the political bishops turned it into the most horrible religious despotism that ever was. “That was the end of that story then and there; and the perfect likeness to it will be the end of this story now and here. “And this answers the query of one of our correspondents,—What business has the Sentinel, a religious paper, to touch this question which is political? We are persuaded that the Sentinel has not missed its calling, nor spent its efforts in vain in this respect. The Sentinel is a religious paper, that is true; and it exists for the sole purpose of exposing to the American people the movement for the establishment of a religious despotism here, AFTER THE MODEL OF THE PAPACY. “But no religious despotism can ever be established over a free people. It were literally impossible to establish a religious despotism over the royal freemen who made the Declaration of Independence and the American Constitution. “This gradual but steady perversion and subversion of the genuine principles of this government as established by our forefathers, this steady inculcation of the principles of paternalism, is but sowing the seeds of a despotism,—whether of the many, of the few, or of one, it matters not,—which at the opportune moment will be joined by the political preachers; and out of the wicked alliance thus formed there will come the religious despotism in the perfect likeness of the one which was before, and against which the continuous efforts of the American Sentinel have ever been, and ever shall be, directed. “And that is the reason, and the only reason, yet reason enough, why the American Sentinel, a religious paper, touches this otherwise political question. “It may be that our correspondents will not agree with us just now; but that matters nothing to us. Five years ago [1886], when the Sentinel first called attention to the movement to establish a religious despotism, we were criticised and pooh-poohed for that, more than we are now for calling attention to this surest forerunner of it. But the Sentinel knew then just what it was doing; and it knows now just what it is doing, just as well as it did then. Those who objected then, know now that we were right then; and those who object now may know some time that we were right now; and we shall have known it all the time. . . . “And we are perfectly willing to trust to the event to demonstrate that the coming religious despotism will be established substantially in the manner here outlined.” And now, in 1900, this which in June, 1891, we said would come—a one-man power—is coming as fast as the days go by. That which in June, 1891, we were “willing to trust to the event to demonstrate,” is now, in 1900, being constantly demonstrated before the eyes of the whole world by the steady progress of events. And in all this there is also demonstrated the truth that we are now occupying exactly the same position that we have always occupied, and are speaking precisely the same things that we have always spoken, when, in proclaiming the Third Angel’s Message, we call attention to the abandonment of the Constitution of the United States and the repudiation of the Declaration of Independence by this nation; and when, in warning, we point out the evils which must inevitably come upon the nation as the result of such a course. In 1891 this was the Third Angel’s Message. In 1900 it is still the Third Angel’s Message. For the sure result of these things in this nation will be the Image of the Beast in its full, active power. And whatever points out the making of the Image of the Beast, and warns against it, is, so far and in its place, the Third Angel’s Message.