IN all the gain of godliness, however, there is no concrete thing mentioned. All
Page 1
The American Sentinel
August 25, 1892
Pacific Press Publishing Company · New York · August 25, 1892
IN all the gain of godliness, however, there is no concrete thing mentioned. All the steps which reach up to it, and all its fruits, are spiritual,—certainly so far as their present earthly realization is concerned. The profit of godliness is all in spiritual growth and in the inheritance promised to the faithful, which is not of this world, but is to be laid up where moth and rust do not corrupt, and where no thief has entrance. The injunction is, “lay not up treasures on earth”—then godliness and its fruits are not concrete, of the earth, earthy. They are not gold and silver bullion or souvenir coins, for the time is to come when these precious metals will corrode in the rich man's safety vaults, and no multiple, even, of his many millions will suffice to buy him a cooling draught in that great day of the wrath of the Lord. In that day, Job tells us, there is no hope for the hypocrite however great his earthly gain. He has sold his soul.
This idea of concrete gain, as a premium upon doing right, seems to raise many peculiar questions. It is presented with much fervor in an editorial article of the Mail and Express, of August 6, under the title, “The Sabbath Triumphant,” in which it is said of the act of Congress closing the World’s Fair on Sunday:—
It gives a premium of $2,500,000 on doing right. It proves in a concrete way that “godliness hath great gain.” This appropriation would not have been made except for the Christian generosity of the people who have demanded the observance of the Sabbath by the World’s Fair people, for they labored first in many national, State and county religious bodies throughout the country to form the sentiment in favor of making the grant; and secondly, in many of the State legislatures; and thirdly, in Congress itself. No class of people are equally determined as the Christians to make the Fair a glory to the country, as it is now sure to be.
At the head of the editorial column, in which is the article containing this paragraph, there stands a text of scripture, in clear and conspicuous type, taken from the fourth chapter of the Gospel of Luke, the sixteenth verse:—
And He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up; and He entered, as his custom was, into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read.
Is this text intended to emphasize the inconsistency of the editorial utterances which follow, with the custom and teachings of Christ who, in us, is alone our hope of godliness? If that were its intent it could not have been more aptly chosen. The one was the act of Him who was himself incarnate godliness, in observance of that day which he had himself set to be the sign of the mystery of godliness; while the other is an exultation over the legislative success of that other day which is the seal of the mystery of iniquity.
This day upon which the text says Jesus of Nazareth entered into the synagogue and taught, as was his wont, is the antithesis of that day over which this editorial paragraph so strangely and inconsistently exults. Were the things which Jesus there taught as diverse? They were. These days are as antithetic as the mystery of iniquity and the mystery of godliness; for they are the standards around which gather the legions of darkness and the hosts of light for the last great conflict. But what was it which Jesus taught upon this Sabbath day in the synagogue, at Nazareth? He read from the prophet Esaias:—
The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath258anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the broken hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
And he said to them that that day the scripture which he had read to them was fulfilled in their presence. But is there a diversity between those things for the teaching of which Jesus there read his commission, and the gospel of gain and of force of which the Sunday, legislatively triumphant, is the sign manual? There is. The one brings the gospel to the poor; the other offers promise of great gain to the hypocritically godly. The one comforts the broken hearted; the other exults in worldly power with the great of the earth, legislatures and Congress. The one preaches deliverance to captives and sets at liberty the oppressed; the other imprisons the innocent for a matter touching the law of their God and strives to make their burdens more than they can bear. There is this diversity. Happy is he who can see it. It is the fulfillment of scripture. In those days those scriptures were fulfilled in their ears. In these days other scriptures are fulfilled in our ears.
W. H. M.
WHAT shall it profit a man, if he lose his soul? Can a man bargain with God for his soul for a money price? How many souls can he ransom for five millions of silver half dollars. To whom is this bribe due? To God, or to Satan? Or to the municipality of Chicago? Or to the Directors and stockholders of the World's Fair corporation? Are the stockholders of the World's Fair paid two and a half millions of dollars to do right, and is this the kind of gain which is the result of godliness? Does godliness receive “concrete” returns such as this? Do the godly promise to the godly such rewards as this for right doing? Is the gain of this money-bought godliness to be for the saving of the souls of the stockholders who receive the money also, or is it to redound to the eternal advantage of those from whom the money proceeds, or do the stockholders hold in their hands the eternal weal or woe of the millions who may attend the World's Fair, and is this to purchase of these stockholders the salvation of those many millions? If this be so, what is the money value of a soul? Was it God, or was it Satan, who once offered the earth and all its kingdoms for the souls of men,—the only time a concrete price was ever offered for such a commodity?
THE greatest thing in this world is the opportunity here offered to inherit eternal life. The greatest gain to be had here is the inheritance of the hereafter. But the world that is to come belongs to the Son of God. To inherit with him it is necessary to accept salvation through him, and receive his righteousness. Righteousness is godliness. In godliness there is, therefore, great gain.
GODLINESS is profitable. It is all-profitable. It is a sure defense for this life and it bears within it the certain promise of the life that is to be. He that has godliness certainly has great gain, for it is the sixth in the list of Christian graces which Peter enumerates, that by diligence are to be added one to the other—faith, virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness; and to this great attainment the apostle yet adds brotherly kindness and charity. This surely is much.
The Gospel; What It Is, and Its Work As Opposed to the Mystery of Iniquity.
By A. T. Jones
Now from this let us start into another field. I want you to think closely now, if you have not done so up to this point; and the more so, if you have done so. The gospel is the mystery of God, isn't it? The mystery of God is the gospel. The preaching of the gospel, the unsearchable riches of Christ, is the making known to men what is the fellowship of this mystery. In the preaching of the gospel, God is revealing the riches of the glory of that mystery among the Gentiles, and that is Christ in men, the hope of glory. In former ages this mystery had not been made known unto the sons of men, as it was now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets. And though hidden from ages and generations, when the apostles were sent forth to preach, endowed with power from on high, to reveal the mystery of God, that was the breaking off of the veil that had covered this mystery through all these ages; and it was broken off that all nations might see and know and understand and turn to the Lord, and get acquainted with God as he was revealed in Jesus Christ, by having Jesus Christ revealed in themselves.
That was sent forth to be preached to all the world, to be preached to every creature. It was so preached. Before the men had all died to whom the gospel was committed in the beginning, it had been preached in all the world. And while it was being preached, and before Paul had died, who had written so much about it, he wrote these words: “The MYSTERY OF INIQUITY doth already work.”
What was Paul preaching?—The mystery of God. What was already working?—The mystery of iniquity. That mystery of iniquity would oppose and exalt itself “above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.” Then there was another mystery to be revealed. The mystery of God was revealed; the mystery of iniquity was also to be revealed.
The mystery of iniquity was revealed. That mystery of iniquity rose up and hid the mystery of God which had been revealed. That mystery of iniquity was the Papacy in all its workings; and the beginning of its working was there when Paul wrote that word; it was working then. He could see it. While the apostles were preaching the mystery of God, they could see the other mystery coming.
That other mystery did come; it was revealed; it stood before the world, professing to be Christianity; professing to be the representative of God to the world; professing to be the religion of Christ in the world; professing to be the mystery of God. Attention was called to that as Christianity, whereas there was no Christianity about it at all. God declared it to be “the mystery of iniquity;” “Mystery, Babylon the great, the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth.” And it was only hiding the mystery of God again from ages and from generations.
But thanks be to God! it was not to hide the mystery of God from all ages and generations. When the mystery of iniquity should have fully revealed itself, again the veil would be broken off, and the mystery of God would again be revealed. For I read: “I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying with a loud voice, Fear God and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.”
This everlasting gospel is the mystery of God which is again to be preached unto men; and that mystery is “Christ in you, the hope of glory.” And that is the preaching that is now to go to the world, in the glorious threefold message which makes up the third angel's message. And now is the time when the gospel, the mystery of God, is to be preached and revealed in a power, a majesty, and a glory such as has never been known except in the time of the apostles, if it does not even surpass that. The power of the mystery of iniquity being broken off, the mystery of God is to be brought again before the world in all its glory; for I read that “in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished.” Rev. 10:7. “And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen. . . . And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation. . . . Here is the patience of the saints; here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.” Rev. 14:8–12.
Now mark the connection. There goes forth the angel with the everlasting gospel to preach. That everlasting gospel is the mystery of God, and the preaching of it the preaching of Christ in men, the hope of glory, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. This gospel is rejected, and there is the falling away spoken of as “Babylon is fallen, is fallen.” Then out of that falling away comes that against which the third angel warns.
Now, what brought the mystery of iniquity?—The falling away from the mystery of God; for says Paul: “That day shall not come except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition.” And the mystery of iniquity is the beast, the Papacy. When the mystery of iniquity has run its course, then comes the word of God announcing an angel flying in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel, the mystery of God, to preach to all the world, to every creature. Then from this also there comes a falling away, and out of that falling away there comes that against which the third angel warns,—the image of the beast, the image of the Papacy.
As out of that first falling away there came the mystery of iniquity, the beast, so out of the second falling away there comes the image of the mystery of iniquity, the image of the beast. Just as certain as the preaching of the gospel by the apostles was the preaching of the mystery of God, Christ in men, the hope of glory; just so certainly the second preaching of the gospel is the preaching of the same mystery of God, the same power of God, and the same wisdom of God, to make known the same Christ in men, the hope of glory. Then as certainly as out of that falling away there came the mystery of iniquity, the beast, the Papacy; so certainly out of this falling away there comes the image of the mystery, the image of the beast, the image of the Papacy. The two things are alike from beginning to end. And now the third angel's message—this threefold message—warns against the whole evil combination of the beast and his image. This threefold message has been more than forty years in the world. This little leaflet from which I have read before gives an excellent statement of this, as follows:—
The revelator says: “I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power, and the earth was lightened with his glory. And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen.” This is the same message that was given by the second angel,—Babylon is fallen. When Jesus began his public ministry he cleansed the temple from its sacrilegious profanations. Almost the last act of his public ministry was to cleanse the temple again. So in the last work for the warning of the world two distinct calls are to be made to the churches—the second angel's message, and the voice heard from heaven, “Come out of her, my people, . . . for her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.”
In 1840–1844, the first angel began his work. This message was rejected, and in 1844 the second angel's message announced the fall: “Babylon is fallen;” and out of that falling away there comes the image of the mystery of iniquity, the image of the beast; and the third angel's message is the warning against the worship of the beast and his image.
As the beginning of this was in 1844, then began the time when the mystery of iniquity was to be broken off, and the mystery of God once more to stand forth in all its glory in the world. But Ezekiel and the Laodicean message show that there was to be a time of dearth. But now even that time of dearth is past, and the times of refreshing have come from the presence of the Lord, and soon he will send Jesus.
Therefore, now is the time when that everlasting gospel, the mystery of God, is to be preached in all its fullness, which means Christ in men in all his completeness. And as the Sabbath of the Lord, in the fullness of its meaning, is but the sign259of what Christ in all his completeness is to those who believe in him; so when Christ in all his completeness is formed and found in us, there will stand the Sabbath as the witness, the sign, the seal of the blessed consummation.
And so this threefold message, revealing in its fullness the mystery of God, which is Christ in men, the hope of glory, thus puts upon the people of God the seal of the living God, and saves them from the evil and the ruin of the mystery of iniquity, the beast and his image, his mark, and the number of his name.
(Continued next week.)
Hands Off!
By C. P. B.
IN discussing the action of the Senate on the question of closing the World's Fair on Sunday the Nebraska State Journal says:—
Senator Manderson offered an amendment that is sensible and to the point. It was that all those sections of the Fair that involved machinery and labor, be closed on Sunday, leaving it optional with the managers to open the art galleries on that day if they so decide. There appears to be no reason why people should not be permitted to look at a painting or a piece of sculpture on Sunday, that would not also forbid them listening to a choir and an organ. It is no more a sin, per se, to look upon a collection of curiosities from the four points of the compass on that day than in admiring a beautiful landscape that nature has spread out before us in infinite variety, and opened on Sunday.
In short, while Sunday should be made a day of rest for all those who can be spared from necessary labor, it is rather foolish and obsolete to attempt to make it a day of penance to those who have the opportunity of resting.
The amendment offered by Senator Manderson was no more sensible than was the original proposition to close the whole Fair. If it is a matter over which Congress has jurisdiction, and a question upon which it is proper to legislate, there is no use in stopping with half way measures. Congress is asked to provide that the Fair shall be closed because of the claim that Sunday is the Sabbath. Now if that were true, and if it were a matter of which Congress could properly take cognizance, that body would have no right to make any compromise. God has laid down the law of the Sabbath and Congress has no right to abate one jot or tittle from that law. The law of the Sabbath commands: “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.” Nor are we left in doubt as to the meaning of this command. An inspired commentary upon it says it means to “turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day;” and to “call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honorable,” and to “honor him [the Lord, the Author of the Sabbath], not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words” upon the Sabbath. See Isa. 58:13. Now if people were to go to the Fair on Sunday it would be for nothing else than their own pleasure, and would be as palpable a violation of the law of the Sabbath, if that law applied to Sunday, as to do anything else forbidden by the fourth commandment. That commandment requires more than simply rest from physical toil. It requires spiritual service, a service that can be rendered only by those who are spiritual. Congress has no jurisdiction whatever in the matter and can never properly acquire any jurisdiction. For Congress or any other human power to attempt to enforce the divine law as God gave it, would be to usurp authority which belongs alone to God, and would be moreover to attempt an impossibility, for only God can give the power to render a spiritual service, and that is the kind of service required by the law of the Sabbath. On the other hand, for Congress or any other human power to abate somewhat from the divine law professing to be governed by it, would be to think to change that law as did the wicked power described in the twenty-fifth verse of the seventh chapter of Daniel. It follows that the only proper course for Congress, and for all other human powers of government, is simply to let the whole question of Sabbath observance alone, leaving all men free to render to God such service as they see fit to give, being individually accountable to him for that service.
But God requires no man to keep Sunday as the Sabbath. That day is not the Sabbath. It never can be the Sabbath any more than the Fourth of July can be Christmas, and for Congress to require its observance as such is the height of absurdity; yea, it is worse than an absurdity, it is a wickedly blasphemous attempt to foist upon the world a base counterfeit in place of the Sabbath of the Lord. Congress and every other human authority should let the whole question of Sabbath observance alone. C. P. B.
Some Scraps of New England History.
THE SUFFERINGS OF THE BAPTISTS.
Of all the pests, which so far, the Puritans dreaded and hated, the Baptists, or, as they were nicknamed, “the Anabaptists,” were the greatest. It was not one of the least of the offenses of Roger Williams that he was a Baptist. Not long after Roger Williams’ banishment, that Thomas Shepard of Charlestown, in the sermon before referred to, entitled “Eye Salve,” had told the governor and the magistrates that “Anabaptists had ever been looked at by the godly leaders of this people as a scab;” and the president of Harvard College said that “such a rough thing as a New England Anabaptist is not to be handled over tenderly.” According to these principles, therefore, the general court of Massachusetts, in 1644—
ordered and agreed that if any person or persons, within this jurisdiction, shall either openly condemn or oppose the baptizing of infants, or go about secretly to seduce others from the approbation or use thereof, . . . and shall appear to the court willfully and obstinately to continue therein, after due time and means of conviction, every such person or persons shall be sentenced to banishment.
The next year, however, a strong petition was presented for the repeal of the law because of the offense that had been “taken thereat by the godly in England, ‘but many of the elders entreated that the law might continue still in force.’” The law remained, but the representative of the Colony who went to England in 1646 explained to parliament that “‘tis true we have a severe law, but wee never did or will execute the rigor of it upon any. . . . But the reason wherefore we are loath either to repeale or alter the law is because we would have it . . . to beare witnesse against their judgment, . . . which we conceive . . . to bee erroneous.” In pursuance of this law and in the same year, a Baptist by the name of Painter, for refusing to let his child be
sprinkled, “was brought before the court, where he declared their baptism to be antichristian.” He was sentenced to be whipped, which he bore without flinching.
And now, in 1651, three Baptist ministers, John Clarke, Obadiah Holmes, and John Crandall, went from the Providence plantation to Lynn, Mass., to visit an aged Baptist. They arrived on Saturday, July 19, and the next day they worshiped together in his private house. While Mr. Clarke was preaching, two constables entered the house with a warrant to arrest “certain erroneous persons being strangers.” The three ministers were carried off at once to the tavern, and were notified that they must attend worship at the parish church in the afternoon. They protested, saying that if they were forced into the meeting-house, they would be obliged to dissent from the service. The constable told them that was nothing to him. He was ordered to bring them to church, and to church they must go. As they entered the meeting-house, the congregation was at prayers, and the three prisoners took off their hats; but as soon as the prayer was over, they put on their hats again, and began reading in their seats. The officers were ordered to take off their hats again.
When the service was over, Elder Clarke asked permission to speak. His request was granted on condition that he would not speak about what he had just heard preached. He began to explain why he had put on his hat, saying that he “could not judge that they were gathered according to the visible order of the Lord.” He was allowed to proceed no further, and the three were shut up for the night. The following Tuesday they were taken to Boston and put in prison. July 31 they were tried before the court of assistants, and were fined, Clarke twenty pounds, Holmes thirty, and Crandall five, “or each to be well whipped.” At the beginning of the trial Elder Clarke had asked that they be shown the law under which they were being tried, and now he made the same request again, but Endicott broke in, “You have deserved death. I will not have such trash brought into our jurisdiction. You go up and down, and secretly insinuate things into those that are weak, but you can not maintain it before our ministers; you may try a dispute with them.”
As they were sent away from the court to prison, Elder Holmes says, “As I went from the bar, I express myself in these words: ‘I bless God I am counted worthy to suffer for the name of Jesus;’ whereupon John Wilson (their pastor, as they call him) strook me before the judgment-seat, and cursed me, saying, ‘the curse of God . . . goe with thee;’ so we were carried to the prison.”
The Baptists were ready to defend their doctrines as well as to attack the popish ceremonies of the Puritans; therefore, Elder Clarke, as soon as they had arrived at the prison, wrote a letter to the court, and proposed to debate the Baptist principles with any of their ministers. He was asked in reply what the Baptist principles were that he would debate. Clarke drew up four propositions, the first stating their faith in Christ; second, that baptism, or dipping in water, is one of the commandments of the Lord Jesus Christ, and that a visible believer or disciple of Jesus Christ (that is, one who manifests repentance toward and faith in Jesus Christ) is the only person to be baptized, or dipped260in water, etc.; third, that every such believer in Christ may, in point of liberty, and ought, in point of duty, to improve that talent which the Lord had given him, and in the congregation may ask for information for himself; or if he can, may speak by way of prophecy, for edification, and upon all occasions, and in all places, as far as the jurisdiction of his Lord extends, may, and ought, to walk as a child of light; and, fourth, “I testify that no such believer or servant of Christ Jesus hath any liberty, much less authority, from his Lord, to smite his fellow-servant, nor with outward force, or arm of flesh, to constrain, or restrain, his conscience, nor his outward man for conscience’ sake, or worship of his God, where injury is not offered to any person, name, or estate of others, every man being such as shall appear before the judgment-seat of Christ, and must give an account of himself before God; and, therefore, ought to be fully persuaded in his own mind for what he undertakes, because he that doubteth is damned if he eat, and so also if he act, because he doeth not eat or act in faith, and what is not of faith is sin.”
There was at first some talk, or rather a bluff, that Cotton would debate with him; but after consulting together, Cotton declined, and as Elder Clarke’s fine had been paid by his friends, he was released, and ordered to go out of the Colony as soon as possible. They all three refused to pay the fine that was imposed. Crandall was admitted to bail, but they resolved to hold Elder Holmes and make him an example. What happened to him he himself tells in a letter to his brethren in London, as follows:—
I desired to speak a few words: but Mr. Nowel answered, “It is not now a time to speak,” whereupon I took leave and said, “Men, brethren, fathers, and countrymen, I beseech you to give me leave to speak a few words, and the rather because here are many spectators to see me punished, and I am to seal with my blood, if God give strength, that which I hold and practice in reference to the word of God and the testimony of Jesus. That which I have to say, in brief, is this, although I am no disputant, yet seeing I am to seal with my blood what I hold, I am ready to defend by the word, and to dispute that point with any that shall come forth to withstand it.” Mr. Nowel answered, now was no time to dispute; then said I, “I desire to give an account of the faith and order which I hold,” and this I desired three times; but in comes Mr. Flint, and saith to the executioner, “Fellow, do thine office, for this fellow would but make a long speech to delude the people,” so I, being resolved to speak, told the people, “That which I am about to suffer for is the word of God, and testimony of Jesus Christ.” “No,” saith Mr. Nowel, “it is for your error, and going to seduce the people;” to which I replied, “Not for error, for in all the time of my imprisonment, wherein I was left alone, my brethren being gone, which of all your ministers came to convince me of my error? And when, upon the governor’s words, a motion was made for a public dispute, and often renewed upon fair terms, and dashed by hundreds, what was the reason it was not granted?” Mr. Nowel told me it was his fault who went away and would not dispute; but this the writings will not clear at large. Still Mr. Flint calls to the man to do his office; so before, and in the time of his pulling off my clothes, I continued speaking, telling them that I had so learned that for all Boston I would not give my body into their hands thus to be bruised upon another account, yet upon this I would not give an hundreth part of a wampum peague to free it out of their hands; and that I made as much conscience of unbuttoning one button, as I did of paying the thirty pounds in reference thereunto. I told them, moreover, that the Lord having manifested his love towards me, in giving repentance towards God, and faith in Christ, and so to be baptized in water by a messenger of Jesus, in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, wherein I have fellowship with him in his death, burial, and resurrection, I am now come to be baptized in afflictions by your hands, that so I may have further fellowship with my Lord, and am not ashamed of his sufferings, for by his stripes am I healed. And as the man began to lay the strokes upon my back, I said to the people, “Though my flesh should fail, and my spirit should fail, yet God would not fail;” so it pleased the Lord to come in, and to fill my heart and tongue as a vessel full, and with an audible voice I break forth, praying the Lord not to lay this sin to their charge, and telling the people that now I found he did not fail me, and therefore now I should trust him forever who failed me not; for, in truth, as the strokes fell upon me, I had such a spiritual manifestation of God’s presence as I never had before, and the outward pain was so removed from me, that I could well bear it, yea, and in a manner felt it not, although it was grievous, as the spectators said, the man striking with all his strength, spitting in his hand three times, with a three-corded whip, giving me therewith thirty strokes. When he had loosed me from the post, having joyfulness in my heart, and cheerfulness in my countenance, as the spectators observed, I told the magistrates, “You have struck me with roses;” and said, moreover, “Although the Lord hath made it easy to me, yet I pray God it may not be laid to your charge.”
When the whipping was over, two men, John Hazel, and John Spur, went up to the suffering man, and shook hands with him, Hazel not speaking anything at all, and Spur simply saying, “Blessed be the Lord;” yet both were fined forty shillings, with the choice of paying the fine or being whipped. They both refused to pay the fine, but a friend paid Spur’s, and after imprisonment for a week another paid Hazel’s. The whipping of Holmes was thirty lashes with a three-thonged whip of knotted cord, wielded with both hands, and was so severe that when taken back to prison, his lacerated body could not bear to touch the bed. For many days he was compelled to rest propped up on his hands and knees.
Condensed from “Two Republics.”
The Sinai-Columbian Christian Sabbath.
By F. W. Howe.
SOME months ago, when the issue of Sunday closing was more in doubt than now, so long ago as December 5, 1891, the Michigan Christian Advocate had this to say in reference to the national duty of Sunday observance:—
We learn that when this same good Being had finished his works of creation, “he rested from all his works which he had made.” “And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it, because that in it he had rested from all his work which he had created and made.”
From that day to this the children of men in all Christian nations have observed and kept a Christian Sabbath in recognition of the hand of a great and good Creator. And now, strange as it may appear, the sickening spectacle presents itself in this most enlightened Christian Nation on earth of a discussion upon the propriety of closing the Columbian Exposition on the Sabbath. Was there ever a more ludicrous, ridiculous proposition entertained by a pretended Christian people?
Well, scarcely. And there are several reasons why this proposition is not only ludicrous and ridiculous, but disingenuous also. In the first place it is absolutely false that “from that day [the seventh of creation] to this the children of men in all Christian nations have observed and kept a Christian Sabbath.” First, because there has never been a “Christian nation”; second, because there has never been a “Christian Sabbath.” Adam was not the father of a Christian nation; nor did Moses lead out a Christian nation from Egypt to Sinai. Yet the Bible gives no command or authority for any Sabbath except to Adam and in the Decalogue. Hence the only Sabbath which God ever blessed and sanctified was not the “Christian Sabbath” of a “Christian nation,” but the “holy Sabbath of the Lord thy God.”
The only institution which can properly claim the name “Christian” must have been established by the teachings of Christ, and the warrant for it found in the New Testament. This can not be said of Sunday observance. No text can be given as authority or command for it. It is not sufficient to say that it was taught by “the church.” So is the mass, the worship of images, and auricular confession, all of which the Advocate presumably protests against. But the same “holy church” is the only authority for Sunday sacredness and obligation. The true Sabbath is neither “Jewish” nor “Christian,” since it is peculiar to neither dispensation, but was made for man—not by any civil law or ecclesiastical synod, but established by the omnipotent Creator; and his one law has never been abrogated or modified.
No, we agree that there was never a more ludicrous, ridiculous, hypocritical, or blasphemous proposition than that which volunteers to assist the Almighty in the government of the universe by civil legislation intended to compel all men to submit to religious opinions and practice not taught in the Bible. None but “a pretended Christian people” ever venture to attempt it. But the Advocate of this unholy proposition continues:—
And now we propose to have a grand celebration, appropriate millions of money for that purpose, invite the world to a grand banquet to commemorate one of the grandest events in the world's history, and in so doing make ourselves conspicuous by desecrating the Sabbath and setting at defiance the commands of God. And for what? and to please and accommodate whom? The moral and religious, law-abiding element of the Nation, or the saloon, law-breaking and bummer element, the curse of this as well as all other countries subject to its dictation or control?
The Advocate evidently supposed there was only one way of taking the alternative in its last question. As a matter of actual fact—whether it pleased the Advocate or not—the recent action of Congress in reference to Sunday closing does please “the saloon, law-breaking and bummer element” since it has practically yielded this “subject to its dictation and control;” and consequently, this action does and must displease the really “moral and religious, law-abiding element of the Nation.” Perhaps the blind zeal of the Advocate did not foresee this result; but it ought to have done so. In the last number of THE SENTINEL a quotation from the Washington Post states that—
The brewers and saloon men are delighted at the action of Congress in requiring the Exposition to be closed on Sunday, and if necessary they would raise a big amount of cash to have that pernicious piece of legislation enacted. They know that the hordes of people, if debarred from the inspection of exhibits, would seek solace and amusement in the bar-rooms—which will not be closed on Sundays—and augment the revenues of the proprietors by many thousands of dollars. The sporting fraternity, also, advocates the proposition from the same spirit of self-interest that actuates the whisky men.
So there are Chicago advocates that do not even pretend to Christian motives, as well as the Michigan Christian Advocate, all harmoniously working for what can only result in degrading the name of our American civilization and morality—saying nothing of the Christian religion; because genuine Christianity is so chary of the world and its wickedness that it is never betrayed into consorting with vice and iniquity.
And yet this course has been deliberate. The Advocate thus states its determination:—
Let there be united action of the better element of the country. Say to the Congress about to convene, You settle this question by an appropriate resolution at once, or you will never represent an intelligent Christian people again; you will never again appropriate our money to desecrate the Sabbath with. Say to the Christian churches, Take261united, prompt action and let every Christian family pledge to stay away and not patronize the institution. Give the world to understand that the religious element is a power in this country sufficient at least to cause the Sabbath to be respected by those wielding the Government, if not by individuals.
Let it be remembered that this plan of a religio-political boycott against the open Sunday Fair and all congressmen who should favor it, was inaugurated long before its threatenings became effective in the recent action of Congress. And the end is not yet.
The majority of Americans were, and are still, indifferent, heedless of the danger that threatens individual constitutional liberty, from the arrogant dictation of an ecclesiastic minority. An irretraceable step has been taken to commit the Government of the United States to a systematic course of religious legislation. What shall be the next? National Reformism replies through the mouth of Rev. J. D. Sand, of Pittsburg, “The Church is gaining power continually and its voice will be heard in the future much oftener than in the past.”
Listen to the voice of Christ: “My kingdom is not of this world.” “Not through power, nor with might, but by my Spirit shall mankind be redeemed.” His religion has no place for any scheme of compulsion by civil enactment. The gospel is “the power of God unto salvation,” not the jubilant threat of a legalized religious despotism. Herein is something to be pondered by every genuine Christian; something that should be rousingly significant to every patriotic lover of liberty.