Review and Herald, Vol. 85, No. 28. (7/9/1908)

Review and Herald

Jul 9, 1908

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Jul 9, 1908

I'm Sure I Shall Not Pass Again This Way

THE bread that giveth strength I want to give; The water pure that bids the thirsty live; I want to help the fainting day by day; I'm sure I shall not pass again this way.

I want to give the oil of joy for tears, The faith to conquer crowding doubts and fears, Beauty for ashes may I give alway; I'm sure I shall not pass again this way.

I want to give good measure running o’er, And into angry hearts I want to pour The answer soft that turneth wrath away; I'm sure I shall not pass again this way.

I want to give to others hope and faith; I want to do all that the Master saith; I want to live aright from day to day; I'm sure I shall not pass again this way.

— Selected.

The Book Department Mirror

Being a Reflection of Interesting Happenings and Notes on Our Publications. Conducted by the Book Department of the Review and Herald Publishing Association.

¶ Apropos of the “Revival of the Book Work,” we have sent out about ten tons and a half of books since the first of June. Is this not good evidence of a revival?

¶ Speaking of sending out such a large amount of books, reminds us of the fact that we have nearly sold out the first edition (10,000 copies) of the new “Steps to Christ.” This little guide-book to Christian experience is proving the help that it was intended to be, and there is not one who would not be benefited by reading it. A very serviceable style for workers is found in the red flexible leather binding, which sells for $1, post-paid. The other bindings are gilt, $1; cloth, $.60; paper, $.30.

¶ Children are often the means of bringing the light of truth to their parents. One worker was visiting a home when the little girl came in, and said, “Mama, which day is the seventh? My teacher says Sunday, but I have a book which says Saturday, and I found that the calendar also gives Saturday as the seventh.” The “New Testament Primer” is a book that appeals to the children. The Bible doctrines of the Sabbath, baptism, and other important subjects are woven into the New Testament stories in a way that can not but implant true principles in the young minds. Prices, cloth, $.60; board, $.35.

¶ “The gospel is to be bound up with principles of true health reform. Christianity is to be brought into the practical life.”—Mrs. E. G. White.

¶ In the new pamphlet entitled, “The Tobacco Habit,” Dr. D. H. Kress goes thoroughly into the question of the use of tobacco, and appeals to those addicted to the habit from a physical as well as a moral standpoint. Under the title, “How to Get Rid of the Habit,” the author says, “Pepper, mustard, and flesh-foods all act as predisposing causes of the tobacco habit. . . . A diet free from flesh-foods is bound to result in a decreased desire for both alcoholic drinks and tobacco.” Every suggestion will be found practical and substantiated by actual experience. Price, 5 cents, post-paid.

¶ “The Bible Text-Book” is one of the handiest volumes which we issue. Its arrangement makes it accessible for both reference and study. Those texts which you know so well, but just can’t locate at the proper time, will be easily found if you have the Bible Text-Book in your pocket. Forty-nine different subjects covering over two hundred pages give the possessor of this little volume an enormous amount of information in a small compass. Size, 3½ x 6 inches, and only ⅜ of an inch thick. Prices, cloth, $.30; leather, $.50.

¶ One of our lady canvassers recently took orders for $27 worth of books in one day. Three of these orders were from clergymen. What book? O, that “heaven-sent torchlight,” “Great Controversy.” Don’t you suppose that you could interest some of your neighbors in this book? Think of the truths which it contains. Prophecies which are fulfilling before our very eyes, warnings against being deceived by the sophistries of Satan, and other subjects so important at this time. Perhaps you could buy one yourself and loan it. Prices, marbled, $2.75; library, $3.75; morocco, $4.75.

¶ Any of the publications mentioned on this page may be ordered through any State tract society, publishing house, or direct from Review and Herald Publishing Association, Takoma Park, Washington, D. C., New York City, or Battle Creek, Mich.

The Pope’s Authority Over Rulers

In a recent issue of the Catholic Mirror, the sermon of a Catholic priest is reported under this title: “Church and State. Each Given Full Power in Its Separate Sphere. They are Two Rulers. One with Authority over Spiritual, the Other Over Temporal Matters.” This priest quotes approvingly the words of Christ, “Render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s,” and declares that “age after age the Roman pontiffs, while claiming the right to censure and correct rulers for their unlawful and sinful acts, for in those days the rulers were members of the church and subjects of the pontiffs in spiritual matters no less than the humblest in their kingdoms, yet always paid them the greatest deference, and insisted on the obligation of obedience due to them from all.”

The priest refers to the famous bull, “Unam Sanctam,” issued by Boniface VIII in A. D. 1300, and explains that the statement that princes “are subject to the Roman pontiff in respect of sin,” means “with regard to their good or bad use of the power entrusted to them.” He also declares that Catholic philosophy teaches that “the temporal authority is supreme as long as it remains in its own domain, which is the procuring of peace and public prosperity of its subjects in the temporal order.”

The whole question of the relation of the church to the state is thus stated: “In these purely temporal matters, therefore, as long as they remain in the temporal order, the church claims no jurisdiction, and there is no possibility that the present Holy Father or any of his successors will ever interfere with the true allegiance due from his children to those that rule them according to justice and right in their search for temporal peace and prosperity.”

A little reflection will show just how much reality there is in this assertion that the church and the state are “each given full power in its separate sphere,” according to Roman Catholic doctrine. Princes are declared to be subject to the Roman pontiff “with regard to their good or bad use of the power entrusted to them;” and we are assured that “there is no possibility that the present holy father or any of his successors will ever interfere with the true allegiance due from his children to those that rule them according to justice and right.” In the qualifications thus made the jurisdiction of the church over the state is really assumed and the independence of the state is shown to be a mere figment. Whenever the Roman pontiff decides that a prince is using his power in a bad way, which generally means that he is opposing the interests of the Roman Catholic Church, he may be called to account; and if refractory, he may be deposed. If it appears at any time that a ruler is not ruling his subjects “according to justice and right,” while the Roman pontiff reserves the right to interfere with the true allegiance due from subjects to a sovereign, and he is thus, in the final analysis, the supreme ruler both of church and of state.

This view is in entire harmony with the facts of history. An illustration of the lofty claims of the Roman pontiff is found in the letter of Gregory VII to the Bishop of Metz, from which we take the following extract: —

As for those who maintain that kings can not be legitimately deposed by popes, I refer them to the words and the example of the Fathers; and they will learn that St. Peter said, “Be ye always ready to punish the guilty, whatever their rank.” Let them consider the motives which induced Pope Zachary to depose King Childeric, and to free all the

Franks from their oath of fidelity. Let them learn that St. Gregory in his Decretals [A. D. 590-604] not only excommunicated the lords and kings who opposed the execution of his orders, but that he even deprived them of their power. Let them not forget that St. Ambrose himself drove from the temple the Emperor Theodosius, calling him a profane man, sacrilegious, and a murderer.

Perhaps these miserable slaves of kings would maintain that God, when he said to St. Peter, “Feed my lambs,” excepted princes; but we will demonstrate that Christ, in giving to the apostle power to bind and loose men, excepted no one. The holy see has absolute power over all spiritual things: why should it not also rule temporal affairs? God reigns in the heavens; his vicar should reign over all the earth. These senseless wretches, however, maintain that the royal is above the episcopal dignity. Are they, then, ignorant that the name of king was invented by human pride, and that the title of bishop was instituted by Christ? St. Ambrose affirms that the episcopate is superior to royalty, as gold is superior to a vile metal.—“History of the Popes,” by Cormenin, Vol. I, page 371.

The separation of church and state, according to the Roman Catholic view, simply means that so long as the state is conducted in the interest of the church, and its dignitaries are subservient to the wishes of the church, the church will not interfere; but the church all the time reserves the right to correct and to depose those rulers who do really maintain an actual separation of church and state, and therefore permit perfect freedom of religious belief and practise. The smooth talk of priests in America, where the real Roman Catholic theory of church and state is not yet permitted to be put into practise, must not deceive those who know Roman Catholicism as it is in those countries where the Roman Catholic Church is in control. In such countries religious liberty is summed up in the liberty to believe and practise Roman Catholic doctrines. Roman Catholicism and liberty are opposite terms.

The Inspiration of the Scriptures

THE charge is sometimes made against the Bible that all parts of it can not be equally inspired, as there are certain statements found in it contrary to the truth. This supposed difficulty, however, grows out of a misapprehension of what is meant by inspiration. We are told that “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God;” but it does not follow that every act recorded in the Scriptures meets the approbation of God, or that he moved upon the actors to do or to say all that is recorded in the Scripture. For example, because the record is inspired, we are sure that the serpent said to Eve, “Ye shall not surely die;” but the inspiration of the Bible does not make the serpent’s statement true. Again, because the record is inspired, we know that the Pharisees represented Jesus to Pilate as “that deceiver;” but it does not follow that Jesus was actually a deceiver. On the contrary we know, from his own statement, that he is “the Truth.”

Because the inspired record includes an account of David’s great sin, and of Solomon’s departure from the way of the Lord, of Peter’s denial of Christ, and of Saul’s persecution of the early church, we are not to conclude that such conduct meets with divine approval. This would be a contradiction of the fundamental principles of righteousness set forth in the Scriptures. God can not lie; all that he says is true, all his promises are reliable. On the other hand, Satan is “a liar, and the father of it,” and those who ally themselves with him are not of the truth. The inspired record of the great controversy between good and evil contains the words and acts of those on both sides of this controversy, and we may be sure that the record is correct; but the doings of all beings must be in harmony with the divine standard of righteousness, in order to meet the approval of Heaven.

A right understanding of what is meant by the inspiration of the Scriptures, will prevent any confusion in regard to this matter.

Editorial

By Editor

IN the din of strife, and in the confusion of voices calling hither and yon, may be heard by the listening ear the invitation, “Come unto me, . . . and I will give you rest.” It is the call of the blessed Saviour, who knows the difficulties of the life experience, and who longs to render help. There is no trial for which his grace is not sufficient; there is no perplexity which his wisdom can not solve; and there is no longing of the soul which his fulness can not satisfy. “In joy or sorrow, life or death, His love is still the same.”

The Quick Development of Apostasy

By W. A. S.

When men remove their feet from the true platform, it requires but a little time for all manner of error to develop. We have seen this in watching the course of those who have gone out from us. One principle after another has been repudiated, and a confused variety of teaching has quickly sprung up, the one bond of union being opposition to the unity and organized work of the body.

So it was in the apostolic days. The apostasy was already at work with deceptive power in Paul's day. “I know this,” he wrote, “that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.” It came to pass, and all the warnings and tears of the apostle and his associates could not restrain the unstable from following after the perverse teachers who had separated themselves from the body.

The gifts of the Spirit had been placed in the church to bring all into “the unity of the faith.” But the gospel order established by the gifts of apostleship, of prophets, pastors, and teachers being repudiated, every wind of doctrine was soon blowing.

In a foot-note, in his life of Mahomet, Irving gives the following partial list of the sects that developed in Syria and Arabia after apostolic days:—

To exhibit the perplexed maze of controversial doctrines from which Mahomet had to acquire his notions of the Christian faith, we subjoin the leading points of the jarring sects of Oriental Christians alluded to in the foregoing article; all of which have been pronounced heretical or schismatic.

The Sabellians, so called from Sabellius, a Libyan priest of the third century, believed in the unity of God, and that the Trinity expressed but three different states of relations, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, all forming but one substance, as a man consists of body and soul.

The Arians, from Arius, an ecclesiastic of Alexandria in the fourth century, affirmed Christ to be the Son of God, but distinct from him and inferior to him, and denied the Holy Ghost to be God.

The Nestorians, from Nestorius, Bishop of Constantinople in the fifth century, maintained that Christ had two distinct natures, divine and human; that Mary was only his mother, and Jesus a man, and that it was an abomination to style her, as was the custom of the church, the Mother of God.

The Monophysites maintained the single nature of Christ, as their name betokens. They affirmed that he was combined of God and man, so mingled and united as to form but one nature.

The Eutychians, from Eutyches, abbot of a convent in Constantinople in the fifth century, were a branch of the Monophysites, expressly opposed to the Nestorians. They denied the double nature of Christ, declaring that he was entirely God previous to the incarnation, and entirely man during the incarnation.

The Jacobites, from Jacobus, bishop of Edessa, in Syria, in the sixth century, were a very numerous branch of the Eutychians. Most of the Christian tribes of Arabs were Jacobites.

The Mariamites, or worshipers of Mary, regarded the Trinity as consisting of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Virgin Mary.

The Collyridians were a sect of Arabian Christians, composed chiefly of females. They worshiped the Virgin Mary as possessed of divinity, and made offerings to her of a twisted cake, called collyris, whence they derived their name.

The Nazaraeans, or Nazarenes, were a sect of Jewish Christians, who considered Christ as the Messiah, as born of a virgin by the Holy Ghost, and as possessing something of a divine nature; but they conformed in all other respects to the rites and ceremonies of the Mosaic law.

The Ebionites, from Ebion, a converted Jew, who lived in the first century, were also a sect of judaizing Christians, little different from the Nazaraeans. They believed Christ to be a pure man, the greatest of the prophets, but denied that he had any existence previous to being born of the Virgin Mary. This sect, as well as that of the Nazaraeans, had many adherents in Arabia.

Many other sects might be enumerated, such as the Corinthians, Maronites, and Marcionites, who took their names from learned and zealous leaders, and the Docetes and Gnostics, who were subdivided into various sects of subtle enthusiasts.

This enumeration shows the mysterious capacity of the human mind to go wrong, and follow freakish ways, when once the true platform is repudiated, and half-views of truth, or fragments of truth mixed with error, are used to build up a movement or teaching centering round some individual agitator. We live again in a time when every wind of doctrine is blowing. Well may we thank God for the sure platform of the third angel's message.

W. A. S.

The Rise and Fall of Religious Liberty in America

By C. M. S.

Conscience Outlawed in Virginia

THE early history of Virginia proves again the proposition that wherever religion and the state are united, conscience is crucified, and the true worship of God is winnowed from the chaff by the hot breath of persecution.

The first Virginia charter, issued by King James I, in the year 1606, specifically sets forth the religious character of the Virginia expedition. To that charter there was added the provision “that the said presidents, councils, and the ministers should provide that the Word and science of God be preached, planted, and used, not only in the said colonies, but also as much as might be among the savages bordering among them, according to the rites and doctrine of the Church of England.” In the second charter, issued in 1609, the same provision was made for the establishment of the Church of England in that colony, and it also contained a provision designed to exclude from the colony those outside the fold of that church. The company was licensed to take to Virginia “all persons wishing to go thither, who would take the oath of supremacy.” They must swear allegiance to the Church of England before the company would embark them. While this ruled out all conscientious dissenters

it opened the door to a multitude of unscrupulous persons who would have as much voice in the government, as much influence in molding sentiment toward the dissenters, as would the kindliest and most conscientious members of the establishment. It was but natural that such conscienceless individuals, desiring to stand well with the theocratic government, should assist in carrying into effect the harsh measures of the church-and-state régime, or even to help in framing such measures. At the same time history testifies that these persons “displayed their condition in all kinds of looseness.” Another of the anomalies of the situation was illustrated in the fact that while sturdy Christian dissenters were not permitted by the king’s charter to enter the colony, yet the government attempted to make Virginia a place of exile for the criminals of England, and did succeed in sending over fifty of “such rogues as are dangerous to the common people.” Concerning this policy Stith says, “It hath laid the finest countries in America under just scandall of being a mere hell upon earth.”

This policy seems to have had a reflex influence upon the Virginia ministry itself, and many a great “scandall” was created by the clergymen of the established church, so that it became necessary to enact legislation specifically covering transgressions of the clergy. The purpose named in the first charter—the conversion of the Indians—was greatly retarded by such conditions. A letter written at the time by a member of the colony to the bishop of London complains of the general conduct of the colonists in these words: “Through the licentious lives of many of them the Christian religion is like still to be dishonored, and the name of God blasphemed among the heathen, who are near them and oft among them, and consequently their conversion hindered.” — “Virginia’s Cure.”

To remedy this condition,—which was conspicuously the result of church-and-state union,—Governor Dale proclaimed his “Lawes Divine, Moral, and Martial.” If religious legislation could make men moral and religious, the fact ought to have been demonstrated in Virginia on that occasion; for it is difficult to imagine more rigorous “lawes” than those of Governor Dale’s rigid code. The following is the substance of some of them:—

1. To speak impiously of the Trinity or one of the divine persons, or against the known articles of Christian faith, was punishable with death.

2. The penalty of death avenged the “blaspheming God’s holy name.”

3. To curse or “banne”—for the first offense some severe punishment; for the second a “bodkin should be thrust through the tongue;” if the culprit was incorrigible, he should suffer death.

4. To say or do anything “to the derision or despite of God’s holy Word,” or in disrespect of any minister, exposed the offender to be “openly whipped three times, and to ask public forgiveness in the assembly of the congregation, three several Saboth daies.”

5. Non-attendance on religious services entailed a penalty, for the first offense, of the stoppage of allowance; for the second, whipping; for the third, the galleys for six months.

6. For Sabbath-breaking the first offense brought the stoppage of allowance; the second, whipping; the third, death.

7. Whoever came into the colony must at once repair to the minister for examination in the faith. If it transpired that he was unsound, he was to be instructed. Refusal to go to the minister for examination entailed a whipping. On a second refusal the culprit was to be whipped twice, and compelled to “acknowledge his fault on Saboth day in the assembly of the congregation;” for a third refusal he should be “whipt every day until he makes acknowledgment.”

These laws, in which the functions of church and state were so irreverently jumbled, signally failed in the work of producing a paradise of peace and morality, or in saving the souls of the hypocrites and the heathen. The fierce execution of these laws by Governor Dale’s successor, Governor Argal, resulted in their repeal by the company in London.

The repeal of the laws, however, did not in any sense disestablish the church. The instructions to the new government directed the officials “to take into their special regard the service of Almighty God and the observance of his divine laws; and that the people should be trained up in true religion and virtue . . . to the order and administration of divine service, according to the form and discipline of the church of England, . . . and to cause that the ministers should be duly respected and maintained.” —Anderson, “Colonial Church.” Members of the established church, dissenters, and members of no church, were required to submit to taxation for the support of the state religion, and among the earliest measures of the first assembly whose acts have been preserved (that of 1623) was a law to the effect that “there should be in every plantation, where the people are to meet, for the worship of God, a house or room sequestered for that purpose, and not to be for any temporal use whatever.” It was further provided that “there should be a uniformity in our church as near as may be to the canons in England, both in substance and in circumstance and that all persons yield readie obedience under pain of censure.” Penalties were provided for failure to comply with these religious laws. For instance, he who absented himself one Sunday from church was fined five pounds of tobacco. In 1629 the assembly passed a law ordering that “all ministers conforme themselves to the canons of the Church of England.” Through this and other similar enactments the lot of clergymen who did not belong to the established church was made extremely uncomfortable. When Lord Baltimore, a Roman Catholic, came to Virginia on his way to establish the Maryland Colony, the governor and council insisted that if he should make even a temporary sojourn in Virginia, he “must take the oath of supremacy.” As that would mean a renunciation of his faith, he refused to do this, and so was compelled to quit the colony.

For a time Virginia was quite tolerant of the Puritans; but in 1639 there came a decided change. The Church of England archbishops, Bancroft and Laud, vehemently protested against allowing Puritans to settle in Virginia, and King Charles finally issued a proclamation forbidding their emigration to that colony. The colonial assembly in 1642, in harmony with the example of the archbishops and king, began to enact legislation designed to strengthen the establishment against all its opponents. These new laws made obligatory a rigid performance of the liturgy of the Church of England, disfranchised Romanists, and provided that any Catholic priest entering the colony must depart within five days. Three Puritan ministers who had come down from Massachusetts in answer to a call for ministerial help, soon found conditions so intolerant there that they were compelled to leave, Governor Berkeley taking the position that “to tolerate Puritanism was to resist the king.” Another minister also, a Mr. Durand, was banished by the governor, and the Puritan services were suppressed. Members of the established church even went so far as to attribute the Indian massacre of 1644 to divine displeasure because certain members of the colony had harbored the Puritans. Others attributed the massacre to divine displeasure because of the persecution of the Puritans. Thus was demonstrated again the ridiculous inconsistency of church-and-state union,—the established church of Virginia persecuting members of the established church of Massachusetts, and both claiming to be the body of Christ on earth, sole custodians of his truth, recipients of his blessings, and dispensers of salvation.

The bitter experiences of the Baptists, Quakers, and Presbyterians will be considered in another article.

C. M. S.

An Excellent Feature

By Arthur G. Daniells

I WISH to call the attention of our brethren in charge of camp-meeting arrangements to an important feature of the Central New England camp-meeting, which has just closed. The meeting was held in West Newton, one of the finest suburbs of Boston.

Soon after the meeting had begun, it was suggested by some one that an effort be made to hold a union temperance meeting. A committee was appointed to secure speakers, and to get out an announcement. This committee called on some of the ministers in charge of churches in the vicinity of the tent, told them of their plans, and requested them to give addresses. The Methodist minister accepted the invitation. The committee also called on some of the leading temperance workers in Boston, and solicited their co-operation. Mr. Tarney, director of religious work in the Young Men's Christian Association, and Mrs. Cheney, assistant recording secretary of the W. C. T. U. of Massachusetts, responded.

Having secured the promise of help from these parties, a program was arranged, printed, and widely circulated in West Newton, where the tent was located. The meeting was held Sunday afternoon at three o'clock. The large pavilion was filled with people who were deeply interested in the temperance work. The addresses given by those who came in to help us were excellent. The principles they advocated were sound and practical, and could be indorsed by all. Dr. D. H. Kress, of the Washington Sanitarium; Dr. Nina Case Baierle, of the Melrose Sanitarium; and Elder K. C. Russell, and the writer were the speakers representing our people. Elder Ketring, president of the conference, conducted the service.

After the addresses had been given, a resolution declaring for total abstinence and the prohibition of the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors was adopted by a rising vote. It was inspiring to see that great audience spring to its feet.

At the close of the meeting many of the citizens came forward to greet us, and to thank us for working up such a good, helpful meeting. Our own people greatly enjoyed the meeting, and felt strengthened and encouraged by it. It had been announced on the printed program that half of the collection would be devoted to the State W. C. T. U. The total amount received was about twenty-six dollars. The choir, under the leadership of Elder L. T. Nicola, furnished excellent music. This did much to make the service bright and cheerful.

Altogether the meeting was good. It was instructive and uplifting. When it was in progress, and after it was over, we all regretted that we had not been holding such services for years in the past, and we could but wish that all our camp-meetings from this time on could be blessed with such meetings. Let all who attempt to arrange for similar meetings remember that most earnest, thorough work will be required to make them a success. A. G. DANIELLS.

Ridicule vs. Exposition

By the inspired interpretation of certain prophecies the fact is established that beasts are used as symbols of world-kingdoms. Thus it is said: “These great beasts which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.” And again, we read: “The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia: and the rough goat is the king of Grecia.” And yet some who profess to accept the Scriptures as inspired, hesitate to believe that a beast in prophecy might possibly refer to this nation. As to this question, Rev. W. F. Crafts expresses himself in these words:—

So little attention has been given to Sabbath observance in theological seminaries and Christian colleges that few know enough of the Seventh-day Adventists’ absurd theory that the third beast of Revelation 13 is the United States government to show their supreme folly and laugh them out of court.

It may require the united wisdom of many theological seminaries and Christian colleges to show that such an interpretation of the prophecy is “supreme folly,” and it may demand something more than laughter to refute the exposition of this prophecy which has occupied the world over, so important a place in this movement. Ridicule is not a very satisfactory substitute for exposition. We should be glad to have Mr. Crafts meet this question by presenting a scriptural interpretation of the symbols used in the thirteenth chapter of Revelation.

God in Man

IN his recent book, “Passing Protestantism and Coming Catholicism,” Dr. Newman Smyth gives an explanation of that movement in the Roman Catholic Church known as “Modernism.” In accounting for the confidence of the Modernists in the permanence of Catholic doctrine and its power to renew without limit the strength and beauty of the church, he says:—

This conviction of the saint follows directly from the Modernist belief in the Immanence of God in man, and the permanent presence of Christ in his church. Here they are influenced by one of the profoundest and most vitalizing faiths which are pervading and renewing the Protestant world. In its spiritual simplicity this is the belief that God is in man, as well as above man.

All this teaching has a familiar sound. The doctrine that “God is in man” is the fundamental assertion of the “New Theology;” and this claim for all men, apart from the incarnation and ministry of Christ, is a long step toward that pure pantheism which identifies God with his works. The Protestant “New Theology” and the Roman Catholic “Modernism” are but different phases of the same movement which rejects the authority of the holy Scriptures, and by the acceptance of the principle of evolution

as applied to man’s history, denies sin, dispenses with a divine Saviour, and makes salvation a matter of developing the divinity residing within. This is an utter perversion of revealed truth, and renders unnecessary the preaching of the gospel of Christ, the present High Priest and the coming King. Such conditions as this make necessary the preaching of “the everlasting gospel” to all the world.

Note and Comment

Legal Marriage

In a leading Roman Catholic church in London the following notice was posted:—

By decree of His Holiness, Pope Pius X. On and after Easter Sunday, 1908, all Catholics are bound to be married in the presence of their parish priest or his delegate. Should they go through the ceremony of marriage in the registrar's office, or in a Protestant church, such ceremony will not only be unlawful, but will be null and void, and they will not be married in the sight of God.

According to Roman Catholic doctrine, marriage is one of the seven sacraments, and of course the church does not wish the state to celebrate one of the sacraments; but can the church nullify marriages authorized by the civil law? Can the church say to a citizen of the state, "Your marriage is illegal"? This may become a practical question for the state to settle.

Rome and France

EVERY visitor to Rome observes that pagan temples and pagan monuments have been made to do service for the papacy. One of the most popular images of the Madonna and Child is clearly an image of a Roman matron of the days of the republic, but now having been duly installed in a Roman Catholic church, it does duty as the Virgin Mary. This action on the part of the church is now being called up in justification of the taking over of a number of Roman Catholic churches and cathedrals by the government of France in the carrying out of the separation act. Thus it is said:—

The day the church gained a victory over Rome, she made no scruple in taking over the pagan temples, which surely were not built to foster the worship of the Galilean.

While the tit-for-tat argument may not be convincing, it yet sometimes serves a useful purpose in closing the mouths of complainers. The measure which the church meted out to the pagans, appears to be measured to her again in France.

The Demand for the Gospel

THE prevailing religious indifference does not seem to be confined to any particular denomination or to any country. Even where the Roman Catholic Church has had full power, it does not appear to be able to retain its hold upon the people. The situation in France is thus stated:—

Allowing for Jews and other non-Christian sects, there remain [of a population of thirty-nine millions] about thirty-eight million nominal Roman Catholics; but the priests confess that not more than four millions can be said to be following their teachings. The people are drifting away from all belief in the church, and from the control of the priests. A religious census in the department of the Seine and Marne revealed the fact that less than two and one-half per cent attended mass. In villages of five hundred inhabitants, not more than ten attended mass.

As occasional attendance at mass is the only thing absolutely required to maintain standing in the Roman Catholic Church, the true religious condition of the people may be inferred when so few even attend mass. There is the same need of the gospel in Catholic France as in heathen Korea.

Fanning the Discontent

In this time of general financial depression the marked contrasts between the rich and the poor are commented upon more frequently, and perhaps more bitterly, than in times of the usual prosperity. An editorial in one of the recent magazines puts it this way:—

Think of a fortune spent on a tennis court or a mushroom cellar, of five hundred thousand dollars spent for a painting or a conservatory, or a quarter of a million for a necklace, or five dollars for a single rose, while abject misery and poverty huddle in dens, scarce fit for a pig-sty, and shiver with cold and starve with hunger! The selfishness of extravagance is monstrous and cruel, and the destitute feel it and revolt against it.

A characteristic of the last days, when perilous times should come, and one which lies at the basis of the whole catalogue of evils, is that “men shall be lovers of their own selves;” and the reckless expenditure of money to gratify the capricious whims of those who have inherited, rather than earned, their wealth, is one of the ways in which this selfishness finds expression. To emphasize in such needless ways the wide gulf between the rich and the poor is contributing to that feeling of discontent which is likely in the by no means distant future to manifest itself in indiscriminate plundering. What has happened in Russia may happen in other countries.

Another Door Opening

By Editor

In connection with the article printed last week in our World Wide Field Department under the title, “Work on the Borders of Abyssinia,” the following editorial paragraph from the June number of the Missionary Review of the World will be of special interest:—

This land [Abyssinia] with its 150,000 square miles, and 3,500,000 inhabitants, has hitherto ranked with Tibet and Afghanistan as inaccessible to all messengers of Christ. Now according to recent reports, King Menelek, who seems to be possessed of not a few excellent qualities of both mind and heart, has partially opened the doors. For some years a Swedish missionary society has been watching and waiting upon the northern border, scattering also copies of the Bible. When one of these was presented to the king, with the request that their introduction be forbidden, he replied: “I have read these books, and they are good; let the people read them, too.” An order has also been issued that all children above seven years of age shall go to school, coupled with the promise to pay the salaries of any competent teachers whom the missionaries may supply.

It is a circumstance whose significance should not be overlooked that whenever an effort is made to spread the third angel’s message in any country, the closed doors are soon opened to the gospel, and facilities for communication are rapidly supplied. So it was in China and Korea, so it has been in Russia, and so it will be in Abyssinia. Our two missionaries recently sent to that country will, we believe, not wait long for entrance.

Baptist Christian Science

According to a press report, a Baptist pastor of Washington, D. C., recently preached a sermon on the topic, “The universal mind, and how to come in contact with it and appropriate its great gifts.” Among other things, this preacher said:—

God's mind is the great mind; it is perfect, holy, and healthy. Man is spiritually the image of this universal power and mind. God is the Spirit, and man is like the Infinite Spirit. . . . Man's mind is a part of God's mind, and he may develop and appropriate, what that Spirit has, such as health, happiness, and success, but he has to come in contact with that Infinite Spirit. . . . Faith is the hand which lays hold of what the universal mind has to give, and appropriates those gifts for one's own or another's use. . . . You can overcome sickness, trouble, and everything by putting your mind, the sub-conscious mind, in contact with the universal mind. You can get all things from the universal mind as you get your electricity, by contact.

Thus are some of the essential principles of spiritualism and Christian Science taught in a professedly orthodox pulpit, and testimony is again borne to the fact that the influence of these great untruths has permeated far beyond the limits of their own acknowledged adherents. The effort to introduce this same philosophy into this denomination was successfully resisted.

Continue reading: Abolishing the Law