THE BALLOT AND THE BULLET.
By W. N. G.
The New York Christian Advocate truthfully says that “underneath the ballots always repose the bullets; for if the minority will not submit, force must be brought into requisition or government becomes chaos; and chaos becomes anarchy.” Christians should ponder the meaning of this saying. All civil government is founded in force, and no such government can long stand unless sustained by a sufficient physical force to insure the execution of its decrees. If any government has not the necessary force within itself, it must needs have the guarantee of other power or powers possessed of such force. For instance, Turkey has for more than fifty years been sustained by “the powers” of Europe; and still weaker governments, such as Greece, Holland, Belgium, exist by the sufferance of the greater powers. But under whatever circumstances, underneath the ballot, or will of the government however expressed, lies the bullet as the dernier-resort. What shall we say, then, of Christians resorting to the ballot to carry out their ideas of Christian reformation? Is it not logically a resort to the bullet? When the ballot is cast, it is expected that the government will enforce the sentiments thus expressed, by whatever degree of force is necessary; and it must be physical force, for the civil power has no other. It was only because man refused to be governed by the power of righteousness (which is love) that civil government, or a government of force was instituted. In the Scriptures the sword is used as a symbol of civil government. Of the ruler, Paul says, “If thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain.” Rom. 13:4. Anciently the sword was a principal weapon and implement of war; to-day, the main dependence in warfare or enforcing the decrees of governments is bullet-throwing weapons. Hence the significance of the statement that “underneath the ballots always repose the bullets.” Enforcing Christian doctrine and practise by the sword (or power of civil government) always follows a departure from the Word of God. We do not read of any such thing in the first century, and at no later date has that doctrine made such rapid progress, or maintained such a degree of purity. In the United States, where in theory the voice of the people is the government, the ballot is the initial form of expressing the will of the government. Hence, like the decree of a monarch, the ballot could have no influence without the recognized power of force behind it. In these days that power, in case of resistance, is the bullet. So in any resort to the ballot, the bullet is understood in case of determined resistance to the decision of the ballot. For a number of years there has been an extensive movement on foot in this government to bring about so-called Christian reforms by means of the popular ballot. It is urged that this is a Christian method, but it is a method of force, and is so designed by those who resort to it. At most, the success of such a method could enforce only an outward form of Christian observance; in other words, could only enforce hypocrisy. And if there should be resistance to a sufficient degree, the government must needs resort to the bullet to carry out the design of the ballot. That those who inaugurated this scheme of nominal Christian reform by the ballot fully understood its purport and logical result, we have in evidence the language of leaders in the movement. One of them, now an editor of a paper that sustains this National Reform movement, is on record as saying:— “Whether the Constitution will be set right on the question of the moral supremacy of God’s law in the government without a bloody revolution, will depend entirely upon the strength and resistance of the forces of antichrist.” The movement in question was constitutional enforcement of the Christian religion, which it was designed to bring about by means of the ballot, resistance to which would mean the shedding of blood, or the employment of the bullet by the constituted authority of the government. Not only so, but according to another apostle of ballot Christianity, it was expected that the Constitution so amended would disfranchise all who were “logically consistent” in their opposition to it. Thus it was expected that the ballot in this country would be given exclusively into the hands of nominal Christians, together with the physical power to enforce its decisions. Such a scheme of “reform” is the aim of the much-lauded “Christian Citizenship” movement. This is a scheme for so-called Christian reform by the ballot, a means that admittedly rests for ultimate success upon the bullet. This “Christian Citizenship” idea lays principal stress upon the ballot instead of the Word of God. It is held that should the primary election come upon the evening of the prayer-meeting, it would be the duty of the Christian voter to attend the primary. Thus the prime dependence is placed upon the ballot, and ultimately the bullet, for regenerating the world. This is in marked contrast with the teaching of Christ, whose prayer to his Father was, “Sanctify them through thy truth; thy Word is truth.” In regard to his disciples, he said, “I have given them thy Word;” he said nothing about their using the ballot. On the contrary, when Peter drew a sword to defend his Master, the Lord told him to put it up. And Paul tells us that the Scriptures are sufficient to thoroughly furnish the man of God unto all good works. 2 Tim. 3:16, 17. The doctrine of Christ is to “overcome evil with good.” W. N. G.