Note and Comment by L. A. S.

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Washington, D. C. · Apr 14, 1904

Note and Comment

By L. A. S.

The following paragraph from a Roman Catholic paper shows that Rome appreciates the work that is being done for her by the “higher critics:”—

Before the “Reformation” the Christian world meant and was the Catholic world. It will probably long before next century be the same again. The “higher critics” are knocking the foundation—the Bible alone—from under Protestantism.

The following statement regarding the deadly effect of the beer habit has the sanction of the insurance department of the Austrian government, under the authority of which it is given in a recently issued pamphlet:—

In Munich every sixteenth man dies of beer heart. An eminent physician of Munich declares that one man in every seven in the city dies from the excessive use of beer. The habit causes disease of the liver and destruction of the walls of the blood-vessels.

The imperial Russian minister of finance has offered a price of $25,750 to the person or persons who will invent some way of making alcohol undrinkable, says a report made by H. Warner, Jr., United States consul at Leipsic, Germany, to the department of commerce and labor. Alcohol is already undrinkable, naturally. The unperverted appetite has no taste for it. But who can set limits to the indulgence of perverted appetite? The change needs to be wrought in the appetite, not in the drink.

Regarding the present stage of Sunday legislation in Canada, the Canadian Union Messenger says:—

The latest word we have received from Ottawa in reference to the efforts of the Lord’s Day Alliance was to the effect that a question had been asked in the House of Commons what was going to be done with the petitions for an act of parliament to compel the observance of the Lord’s day, and Sir Wilfrid Laurier replied that there was a serious question of jurisdiction. It was not decided whether the Federal or the Provincial lawmakers had the authority, but that the question had been referred to the law advisers of the government, and their report was awaited.

Secretary Taft having recently in an address given expression to the idea common among American Protestants that the papacy here is a different system from that seen in lands where Rome is supreme, the Catholic Freeman’s Journal declares that this idea is false. It says:—

Secretary Taft is of the opinion that “it will be only a short time before the Spanish Catholic religion now in power (in the Philippine Islands) will be replaced by the broader American Catholic religion.”

Catholics are ignorant on this point. They are not aware of any difference in breadth, length, or thickness between the “Spanish Catholic religion” and the “American Catholic religion.”

In this the Freeman’s Journal undoubtedly tells the truth.

The British government is now importing Chinese coolies to South Africa to provide the needed labor in the mines of that country, which on account of scarcity of labor have been but little worked since the war. An English paper points out that the conditions of the contract governing this coolie importation virtually amount to a revival of slavery under the British flag:—

That the conditions under which the coolies are to labor will be those of slavery, the ordinance leaves not the slightest doubt. If one of them deserts the service of his master, he is liable to a fine not exceeding twenty-five pounds, or two months’ imprisonment in default. Any one who harbors him becomes liable to a fifty-pound fine or three months’ imprisonment. A laborer introduced under the ordinance is to reside on the premises, and not to leave them without a permit. He is not to acquire property in the shape of houses, land, minerals, or precious stones, or to engage in any trade. And his importer goes bail for the chattel in a certain sum to Edward VII.

It appears that Christianity, of a nominal sort, is represented in both the civil and military systems of Japan, being placed on an equal footing with Shintoism and Buddhism, the two prevailing Japanese religions. It is stated that in the new Japanese House of Commons, which opened March 18, there are seven Christians, all Protestants. The following as regards Christianity in the Japanese military service was received by a clergyman of Minneapolis from a Christian resident in Japan:—

In Kobe to-day we saw the Rev. Mr. Hayahawa, one of our Japanese clergymen, and he told us the government is said to have appointed a Christian chaplain for each division of the army as it proceeds to the front, thus placing Christianity on an equal footing with Shintoism, the religion of the government itself, and with Buddhism, each of which has a chaplain in each division of the army.

We also heard on good authority that the war minister, although not a Christian, had made a ruling that every war correspondent with the Japanese army must have a Christian interpreter, unless the correspondent himself speaks the language well.

The reason for this ruling is that in the war with China it was only the Christian interpreter who proved reliable and a creditable representative of his country.

Recently a bill was introduced in the New York State Senate, “to provide for the giving of instruction in the principles of morality in all schools wholly or in part supported by public money of the State or under State control.” By the provisions of this bill the pupils will be required to “receive instruction in . . . this subject, with suitable text-books in their hands, for not less than four lessons a week for ten weeks or more, or its equivalent, during every school year, and must pass satisfactory examinations therein, as in other studies before proceeding to the next year’s course of instruction. The local school authorities shall provide necessary facilities and definite time and place for instruction and for examination in this subject, the same as in regular courses of study. The text-books shall be graded.”

This of course will call for suitably qualified instructors, and accordingly it is provided in the bill that no teacher shall be licensed who has not passed a satisfactory examination in this branch of knowledge. If a teacher refuses to give the required instruction, such teacher’s license is to be revoked, and no public money is to be apportioned to schools the local officials of which shall not first have made affidavit that all the provisions of this bill have been complied with.

The bill does not, however, define what “the principles of morality” are; and this is a question over which there is an irreconcilable controversy between certain classes of the people. Many hold that morality can not be effectively taught apart from religion. Thus the way will be open for instruction in morality to lead directly to the teaching of religion, with all that this would involve for the overthrow of republican principles and institutions.

The difference between morality and a mere knowledge of moral principles, also, must not be overlooked. The State may define moral principles, and teach its definitions to the youth, but what is wanted is more practise. It does not follow that pupils who learn about moral principles will necessarily lead better lives. The power to reform the life is not in the head, but in the heart. Unless the heart is educated as well as the head, the desired results will not be seen. This is where Christianity does its reforming work. “My son, give me thine heart,” is the preliminary to a moral life as God defines it.

These frequent attempts, which no doubt will succeed ere long, to make the state the instructor in morality, and through that in religion, are interesting signs of the times, showing as they do that we are on the eve of a period when old controversies will be reopened, and new ones will be added. And necessarily, these controversies will be destructive of the peace and welfare of the state. Union of church and state is always a fruitful source of strife.

L. A. S.