Earlier text: THE DEMANDS OF AN ATONEMENTWHAT LOVE WILL DO.
By M. E. K.
SOMETIMES when we demand of those who hold to the observance of the first day of the week as a day of rest and worship, a scriptural command for so doing, we are met with the statement that no such command is needed. Love, it is claimed, needs no commandment, but will of its own accord seek out the best method of expression, and that love has done this in the voluntary observance of the day of Christ’s resurrection. One minister illustrates this idea in the following manner: “It is not necessary to command the wife to place a monument over her deceased husband; love will prompt her to do that.” So he claimed it was not necessary for Christ to command His disciples to observe the day of His resurrection, when love alone would lead them to do so. This may be a very convenient way to avoid the force of the unpleasant fact that there is no direction for Sunday-keeping in the divine Word, but it is a very faulty way, both in relation to the principle involved, and also in regard to the especial point which is sought to be proved,—that love alone will lead to the keeping of the first day of the week as a day of especial devotion—a sabbath of rest. We now raise the question, Is love infallible in regard to the best way of expressing itself? If men were infallible, this might be so; but how can fallible man, without directions from the infallible One, be always right in everything? Does not the very fact that God has given us laws to govern our conduct prove that we need such laws that we may know how to express our love to our Creator in a proper manner? An inspired apostle has said, “This is the love of God, that we keep His commandments.” I John 5:3. Then the proper way to show our love to God is to yield a perfect obedience to what we know that He has commanded. And without God’s law, man would not know how to show his love to God, for love to God, as we have seen, is best expressed by obedience. How then can any one declare that no law was necessary for the establishing of a new sabbath? If a sabbath can be instituted without any especial act or command of God, why was not the original seventh-day Sabbath established in that way? Our first parents were created with full intellectual powers and placed in the beautiful garden to dress and to keep it, which would certainly require labor. But would they ever have thought to dedicate every seventh day to rest and worship, even had their love been ever so strong, had not God sanctified, or appointed the seventh day for such a purpose? Evidently they would not; and the God of infinite wisdom, foreseeing man’s need of something to aid him to keep in memory the Creator and His work, gave him, what he could not give himself,—a holy Sabbath of rest. This is made very clear when we remember that the observance of the Sabbath is a part of our duty to God. Man of himself, no matter how much he searches, can not find out God, can not know His requirements. Human beings, placed in close personal contact with each other, will, in time, learn their own rights and the rights of others. As evidence of this we point to the fact that some of the heathen nations of antiquity had quite just and equitable laws in relation to life and the rights of men in regard to their property. Men can learn much in regard to such things by intercourse with each other. But mankind can not, by their own efforts, have any such general and tangible connection with God. Hence our duty to God can only be learned by a divine revelation. This revelation we have in the Bible. In this book God has told us how to show our love to Him. He has also told us how to show our love to our fellow-men far better than we could learn it in any other way. Mistaken ideas of duty to God—in other words, love without direction—have led to many very terrible and cruel things. The Hindu mother loves her child as fondly as her western sister with a whiter skin, but tears it from her bosom and throws it to the crocodile because she thinks God would be pleased to have her do so. This is a good illustration of what love without divine guidance will do. She fears and loves the Deity, but, being unacquainted with the law of God, does not know how to express her love. Yet it is claimed love needs no direction. Love does need direction, such direction as God’s law alone affords. Jesus has told us plainly how to show our love to Him. “If ye love Me, keep My commandments.” John 14:15. He did not leave it for love to prompt His disciples to celebrate the Lord’s supper, institute the ordinance of humility, or to be buried with Christ, in baptism. All of these new institutions were plainly appointed. Can any one believe that love alone, without any command from Christ, would have led the early church, or the church at any time, to practise these ordinances? No one would put forth such a preposterous claim. Yet a position precisely like this is taken in regard to the observance of Sunday. Love will lead us to do just what God commands. Love may also lead us to do other things for Christ and for each other which He has not specially commanded, but such things are always included in the general principles of Christianity, and they must never be of a character to supersede or destroy other things He has commanded. God did command the observance of the seventh day. The specific command to hallow that day was placed by His own hand in a position of honor in the bosom of the great moral code. He surrounded it with a cluster of other moral precepts, all as immutable as Himself. The Sabbath rests upon the divine example and the divine command. Upon what does Sunday-keeping rest?—Nothing but the various and contradictory positions of men. How, then, can we show any love to God by its observance? “This is love, that we walk after His commandments.” 2 John 1:6. M. E. K. TWO REWARDS.
By M. E. Darling
His dwelling was grand and spacious,
His land stretched far and wide;
He had all that gold could purchase,
And the esteem of men beside. He drank from the fount of knowledge,
Bought books with a lavish hand;
The fame of his wealth and learning
Was known throughout the land. His thoughts and plans were selfish
And grew with the passing years;
He was deaf to the orphan’s pleadings,
He was blind to the widow’s tears. In the shadow of his mansion
Was a cottage small and plain,
Rocked with the storms of winter,
And browned with sun and rain. The inmate of this humble cot,
Aged and poor and gray,
A servant of God, lay dying,
His life fast ebbing away. He had nor wealth nor station,
No treasures laid up on earth;
So quiet was his kindness shown
But few had known his worth. His backward path, how beautiful,
Shone bright with the fragrant dew
Of helpfulness and charity,
And of friendship sweet and true! An angel came from heaven one day,
On a mission of peace and love,
To cheer the weak and discouraged,
And point them to Christ above. As he passed the lordly rich man,
He said, as he lingered near,
“Dear mortal, one thing thou lackest,”
But the rich man would not hear. In his heart was the love of pleasure,
And he calmly made his choice;
The praise of men was sweeter
Than the angel’s pleading voice. So the angel went to the poor man,
And, whispering low, said he,
“Take now thy rest from labor;
Thy crown awaiteth thee.” The rich poor man was glutted
With the prize of earth’s renown;
The poor rich man received by faith
Life, and a fadeless crown. CHRISTIANITY is the greatest book producer in the world. Christianity is always enlarging its printing-press. Christianity says: There is a child that can not read; go and teach him the meanings of those symbols, and get him connected with the great stream and scheme of things; he has no right to be out there; if you have not a school, build one for him; if there is only one ignorant child, make a school of him; all of you get round about him and make his learning as easy as you can. Christianity will have a library. Wherever Christianity has gone, she has taken her books with her. She is a reading religion, a literary religion; not in the sense that creates and fosters pedantry, but in the sense that creates and fosters an instinct of inquiry, a love of investigation, and that cultivation of mind which asks itself questions as if it were uttering prayers.—Anon. EIGHT OF THE THINGS WHICH THE WORD OF GOD DOES FOR US.
By G. I. A.
1. It gives us a new birth. “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the Word of God, which liveth and abideth forever.” I Peter 1 : 23. 2. It gives light. “The entrance of Thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple.” Ps. 119 : 130. 3. It guides our pathway. “Thy Word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.” Verse 105. 4. It keeps us from sinning. “Thy Word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against Thee.” Verse 11. 5. It is a comfort in affliction. “This is my comfort in my affliction; for Thy word hath quickened me.” Verse 50. 6. It causes us to rejoice. “Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and Thy Word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart.” Jer. 15 : 16. 7. It cleanses us. “Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.” John 15 : 3. 8. It sanctifies us. “Sanctify them through Thy truth; Thy Word is truth.” John 17 : 17. THE OUTLOOK FOR SOCIAL PEACE.
By T.
The question of the relations of “capital and labor” has been a topic for consideration from time immemorial. But the heated discussion of the subject has never been so general all over the world as now. And aside from the stormy times in France just before the revolution and reign of terror, there has perhaps never been a more bitter feeling against the rich than may be found now among a large class in all parts of the world. There is a growing feeling that the very wealthy are in one camp, that the poor and distressed are in another, and that hostilities between these two classes must soon begin. It is not within the sphere of this paper to discuss the merits of the arguments made and the principles enunciated by either party to this “capital and labor” controversy. A statement of the simple facts as they exist to-day is all that is intended. Some there are who try to console themselves with the idea that the “capital and labor” trouble will never amount to anything—that it will take care of itself, and be settled without difficulty. Yet all will admit that there is a grave situation summed up in this labor problem. And all are aware of the fact that not the United States alone is grappling with the difficulty, but England, France, Germany, Russia, in fact, the whole world, is confronted with the perplexing query, “What shall we do with the labor question?” In the meantime, labor of every grade and description, from the most highly cultivated and skilled engineer and mechanic, on down to the newsboy, has been formed into “unions” “for mutual benefit and protection.” While, on the other hand, capital has been most completely and extensively organized by means of great corporations, and combinations of corporations into trusts. In this way the whole of society is broken up into “orders,” “combines,” and “unions,” which some social spark may ignite, and a destructive conflict must inevitably follow. And under such circumstances the government is powerless. When a community is completely broken up by orders and combines, each thinking that the other is an enemy to its own welfare, it is impossible to enforce governmental authority when once a general strife begins. The hope is fondly cherished by many that the world is becoming too much enlightened for it ever again to be precipitated into any serious conflict involving force and the great shedding of blood. But there never was a wilder or more delusive dream. This is an age marked by peculiarly strong and very nervous unrest. The telegraph, the telephone, the rapid transit from place to place by the railroad and steamship, and the whole train of inventions and material improvements in our time, have not only stimulated business activity, but have made our business men a complete bundle of sensitive and excitable nerves. The age is filled with the greatest unrest that has ever been known. Everything must go with a rush and whirl. Some one has remarked that the bustling, rushing man of forty to-day, has seen more, done more, and actually lived more than did Methuselah in his quiet millennium of years. Some may consider this statement an exaggeration, and all ought to agree that the pastoral life of the antediluvian patriarch is by far the most natural and happy one. For who can enjoy the thought of being continually rushed and driven to keep abreast with such a whirling age? This excitable, nervous strain is continually making overdrafts upon the physical system, and causing us to become weaker and still more susceptible to the unrest of our time. How many there are who have to retire from active duties before they reach the age of forty, because of “nervous prostration,” a term which most frequently means the wreck of the whole nervous system. So in all serious earnestness the question may be asked, Is there a shadow of a reason for believing that this age, strung to the highest tension of uneasiness and excitability, can lay any peculiar claim to the attributes or characteristics which make for peace? For the last few days war talk in this country has been running very high. And with the press and the people calling for vengeance on Spain, the query often arises, Where are those who at other times are giving such eloquent discourses or writing such sublime essays on our age of peace? The Spanish people in many localities are also keenly desirous of a chance to fight the “Yankees.” And if we look over the whole world, there is quite enough of the flame of war to wither every budding branch of the olive of peace. Any one who will withdraw from the exciting scene long enough to get his bearings, so as to see things as they are, and not as they may appear, must see the inconsistencies of those who affirm so strongly that we have surely reached the age of peace. To-day they attend a peace congress, and in their talks would have us believe that we are already within the borders of the glorious millennium. All our labor troubles, our social difficulties of every sort, and every international dispute, will be settled by arbitration. To-morrow something comes up that he considers an “outrage on civilization,” and the same man, forgetful of his peace proclivities, is loudly calling for shot and shell to wreak dire vengeance upon his fellow-man. In his peace talks it is the “brotherhood of all mankind” that furnishes the topic to draw out his most kindly and emotional sentences. But when he gets stirred up by another kind of sentiment, he wants the army to “destroy the infamous wretches from the face of the earth.” The foregoing statements are not given as “news.” Neither is it considered that they need be supported by arguments. They are simple facts with which every one is familiar. And of course all you need do with a fact is simply to state it, and it can stand alone without any argument. So again we invite careful consideration of the situation before us all over the world to-day. The people are in a feverish rush, and the least provocation serves to irritate the already overstrained nerves. Society is all divided up into unions, combines, and associations, and in too many instances each thinks that the good of the social and moral world depends upon the overthrow of the other. And no one can fail to see that intense feelings invariably possess the people of this age. Indeed, it could not be otherwise. For people must feel deeply and keenly when their nervous energies are so highly aroused as is the case with those now living. Then ask yourself the question, What is the outlook for social peace? You know perfectly well that the world now is divided into two great camps—capital on the one hand, and labor on the other. Yet, while there are these7two great divisions of society, each division is split up into numerous smaller divisions, all agreeing that there is a great social evil, yet with no uniformity as to the way to overcome it. So we have a very sick patient and numerous doctors. But the doctors can not agree as to the remedy to be applied, and the patient is getting sicker all the time. Some strong-minded social doctor, supported by his peculiar subdivision or organization, will yet step forward and insist on trying his skill; others will just as strongly insist that their particular remedy is the only proper one for the disease. And so the social storm begins; who will attempt to tell where it may end? Only divine foreknowledge can answer. And, marvelous tho it may seem, divine foreknowledge caused to be recorded nearly two thousand years ago that capital and labor would come into conflict down here in these days. It is a most interesting subject for study, but it will have to be deferred till next week. T. “HE WILL SUBDUE OUR INIQUITIES.”
THERE are many poor souls who have hoped in God’s forgiving mercy and loving compassion, but who become discouraged because of repeated failure. “What is the use,” they will say, “to seek again God’s mercy, when repeated failure follows?” And truly there is but little use. But may there not be something wrong in the seeking? “According unto your faith, so be it unto thee,” is a Scripture rule. Is not the reason of failure the lack of faith? Have we not come to the Lord as children often come to parents, with the petition, “If you will forgive me this time, I will never do it again?” But such a proposition or promise shows a lack of both faith and knowledge. God must not only forgive our sins if they are to be taken away, but it is His power alone that can keep us. We can no more live a sinless life than we can forgive ourselves. We can no more walk on the water than we can lift ourselves to the surface of the wave. God alone can do either. He alone can forgive sin. He alone can conquer sin. In Him is our hope for every moment. Therefore declares the prophet: “Who is a God like unto Thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of His heritage? He retaineth not His anger forever, because He delighteth in mercy. He will turn again, He will have compassion upon us; He will subdue our iniquities.” Micah 7:18, 19. Here is hope for every fallen, stumbling, discouraged soul. Are you sinful?—He will forgive. Have you sinned repeatedly?—“He will turn again and have compassion” (R. V). Do you need repeated mercy?—“He delighteth in mercy.” He “taketh pleasure” “in those that hope in His mercy.” Ps. 147:11. But are there still other sins?—He will subdue your iniquities. Yea, He will conquer them all. Know that you are “without strength.” By faith lay hold of Him. Put yourself in His hands. Give all to Him. His power, His wisdom, His love, are all infinite. Do not be discouraged. “He will subdue your iniquities.” He will bring “into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.” Go to Him with simplicity of heart, yield all to Him, take all from Him which He gives you, and eternal victory in Christ Jesus is yours. “This is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith.” And faith believes the Word, “He will subdue our iniquities.” Strengthened with All Might
“STRENGTHENED with all might, according to His glorious power, unto all patience and long-suffering with joyfulness.” Col. 1 : 11. In the Christian Work, a large and influential independent Presbyterian newspaper, of February 3, is an editorial article entitled, “Have Our Missionaries Property Rights?” That article opens thus:— We ask the question advisedly; it is a proper question, a burning question, and it should have an answer. Some three weeks ago we noted the fact that a commission composed of members of the American Board, the Bible Society, the Evangelical Alliance, and other representative Christian organizations, had called upon the president and had requested that action be taken to secure reparation from the Turkish Government for the destruction of American property by Turkish troops during the progress of the Armenian massacres. With a new minister at Stamboul whom the whole Christian world could trust—but who could do nothing without the support of his government, and everything if he could have that support—we expressed both the conviction that the time for action had arrived, and the hope that the administration, in view of the reparation that France had secured and the efforts made by the other powers in the same direction, would, by a firm policy, proclaim to all the world that American missionaries were in foreign countries to stay, and that while there they and their property should be thoroughly protected; any other course would mean the minimizing of American influence, the placing of a humiliation upon the missionaries which would put them wholly on the defensive. This expectation we are told is not realized; that that “committee has not made any report;” that the committee were informed by the government that there were “difficulties in the way.” The Christian Work continues:— Three methods, it was said, presented themselves: (1) The United States could sever diplomatic relations with Turkey. (2) We could blockade a Turkish seaport until the indemnity was paid. (3) We might seize the seaport and take possession of the government revenues. To this we have a fourth factor interposed, which was given out to the commission, or to some members of it,—the troubles in Cuba, which demand the presence of a powerful fleet near the Gulf of Mexico. Passing by the reason offered for not pursuing either of the first two courses mentioned; we note the third proposition,—the seizing of a Turkish seaport. To this plan the objection is offered by the State department officials that it would involve us in a war with Turkey and possibly with other European powers, would necessitate concentrating our navy in the Mediterranean, and would leave our own shores unprotected, and give Spain an advantage in the event of war over Cuba. Of the methods presented the editor advises the third, in the following language:— It is to the statement of the danger of seizing a Turkish seaport that we invite attention as being inadequate, and in the light of all precedent, false to the fact, and carrying with it a pitiful and unworthy confession of weakness. When, let us ask, did Turkey ever refuse to make amends to a great power when a Turkish seaport was threatened? She never did; and the statement that decisive action on our part would involve us in war with Turkey and possibly with other European powers, is the purest assumption. . . . And is it so that the administration does not know—it should know if it does not—that no sooner would an American battle-ship or cruiser appear off Smyrna than the indemnity would be paid? For is Turkey, whose antiquated boats she did not dare bring against Greek ships in the late war, prepared to send her tubs against our American battle-ships or steel cruisers? After intimating that the commission had learned that “there is a strong tendency on the part of the administration to drop the question as old, and complicated with other matters in Turkey—too much so, in fact, to warrant our government taking it up just now at least”—the article in question remarks:— What is this inaction on the part of our government but an invitation to Turkey to drive out our missionaries, as she longs to do—as she drove out Mr. Knapp?—what is it but an unworthy humiliation placed upon American missionaries? It is not too late yet for the administration to come to a better state of mind, nor is it too late for public opinion to assert itself upon this matter, as we trust it will. Upon all which, admitting that missionaries have the same rights as other men, because they are men, we desire to ask, in the light of the following scriptures, some questions: Is armed interference, the sending of a man of war to protect or defend or to collect for the property in question, the better way? Is asking for this the proper thing to do on the part of Christians? Is it the Christian way? Is it the Bible way? What are the probable results of such a course? Is it not the same old subterfuge of the church and people of God looking to Egypt for help? “Wo to the rebellious children, saith the Lord, that take counsel, but not of Me; and that cover with a covering, but not of My Spirit, that they may add sin to sin; that walk to go down into Egypt, and have not asked at My mouth; to strengthen themselves in the strength of Pharaoh, and to trust in the shadow of Egypt! Therefore shall the strength of Pharaoh be your shame, and the trust in the shadow of Egypt your confusion.” Isa. 30: 1–3. “Wo to them that go down to Egypt for help; and stay on horses, and trust in chariots, because they are many; and in horsemen, because they are very strong; but they look not unto the Holy One of Israel, neither seek the Lord! . . . Now the Egyptians are men, and not God; and their horses flesh, and not spirit. When the Lord shall stretch out His hand, both he that helpeth shall fall, and he that is holpen shall fall down, and they all shall fail together.” Isa. 31: 1–3. To send a war ship to Turkey and to seize a Turkish port is to commit the government to war; it is to take the initiatory step in a series which may involve the loss of millions of property and thousands and perhaps millions of lives. Whether Turkey would submit or fight does not affect the principle. Our Lord told His ardent disciple, and through him all other disciples, “All they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.” Are Christian missionaries desirous of turning to the sword, or civil power, for succor? When has such appeal ever been of benefit to the church of God? Macaulay has truly said, and it is a lesson for the ages: “The ark of God was never taken till it was surrounded by the arms of earthly defenders. In captivity, its sanctity was sufficient to vindicate it from insult, and to lay the hostile fiend prostrate on the threshold of his own temple. The real security of Christianity is to be found in its benevolent morality, in its exquisite adaptation to the human heart, in the facility with which it accommodates itself to the capacity of every intellect, in the consolation which it bears to the house of mourning, in the light with which it brightens the great mystery of the grave. To such a system it can bring no addition of dignity or of strength, that it is part or parcel of the common law,” or, we may add, is supported or defended by steel cruisers or Gatling guns. Are these missionaries ambassadors for God or for the United States? If for God, why not look to Him for help? All the power of Turkey can not drive them from her boundaries if God has sent them there and they are doing His work, trusting in Him. When that time comes that He permits His trusting servants to be expelled from a country, is it not an evidence that their work is done there, and that He would have them go elsewhere? He told His missionaries of old, “But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another.” (See Matt. 10:23; 12:14, 15; Acts 8:1, 4; 14:5, 6, and others.) This is one of God’s means of spreading the truth. What is the object of the missionaries in Turkey? Is it to convert or to coerce those who are blind to the Gospel? Will force convert them? Will it give the Turk a better idea of Christ to back up the Christian missionary by a blazing broadside? “But property is destroyed.” Well, what if it is? If destroyed for Christ’s sake, it is not lost. The Word commends those who “were made a gazing stock both by reproaches and afflictions,” and who “took joyfully the spoiling of your [their] goods,” knowing in themselves that they “have in heaven a better and an enduring substance.” And this confidence they were besought not to cast away. Read the lesson in Heb. 10:32–35. The last sentence quoted from the Christian Work is indeed a sad one. If these missionaries are “ambassadors for Christ,” if they are sent forth under the great commission (Matt. 28:19, 20), trusting in the “all authority” of Christ and the mighty Spirit of God, how can anything that this government or any government does do or does not do, be an unworthy humiliation to them? It certainly can not be unless their hopes are fixed upon the broken reeds of civil power. If they are persecuted, so were holy men of old. If they lose property, so have the witnesses of God before them. The Son of God lost His life. He is the example of the missionary of God. “Even hereunto were ye called.” When missionaries abroad and their friends at home will cease to look to men and look to God alone, then will it be that God will trust them with the plenitude of His power, and we shall have no “Christian” demand for war or armed interference to promote, to protect, or to defend the work of the Gospel. Jesus Christ will be all-sufficient. “Enquire, and make search, and ask diligently.” WILL you please instruct me on the ninth chapter of Revelation, and do you believe that it has been truly fulfilled? J. M. P. N. It is impossible to give in this department anything like an adequate explanation of a whole chapter like Revelation 9. For an explanation see “Daniel and the Revelation,” by U. Smith. It is generally believed to have been fulfilled. See above work. WASHINGTON’S MEMORIAL.
By W. N. G.
Apropos of the recurrence of Washington’s birthday, which was celebrated last week throughout the country with much demonstration, it is well to bear in mind that a prominent issue in the events which implanted his memory in the hearts of all true lovers of freedom, was religious liberty. True, the point of political independence was the direct issue of the Revolutionary War, in which Washington was the leading spirit; but it must be borne in mind that there never can be political independence for the people at large without religious liberty—entire freedom of conscience in religious matters. A government may not be under the control of another nation, yet its people may for all that be deprived of political liberty by an illiberal system of government. And history has demonstrated that political freedom is impossible in conjunction with religious thraldom. Where there is any restriction of conscience there can not be freedom of action. In this connection, while the people of this nation are giving vent to just laudations of Washington’s services in behalf of independence, his attitude in regard to religious liberty should not be overlooked. The following is a specimen utterance of his on this subject:— “If I had the least idea of any difficulty resulting from the constitution adopted by the convention of which I had the honor to be president when it was formed, so as to endanger the rights of any religious denomination, then I never should have attached my name to that instrument. If I had any idea that the general government was so administered that liberty of conscience was endangered, I pray you be assured that no man would be more willing than myself to revise and alter that part of it, so as to avoid all religious persecution. You can without doubt remember that I have often expressed my opinion that every man who conducts himself as a good citizen is accountable alone to God for his religious faith, and should be protected in worshiping God according to the dictates of his conscience.” There is one feature of government which the great statesman evidently did not contemplate, namely, the possibility of the Constitution’s being so construed by the courts as to threaten its original purpose. However, this is just what has been done, and is therefore liable to be done again. The idea of the framers of the Constitution was the complete separation of the State from the Church. Why was this, when the war for independence was ostensibly for political independence only? (The Declaration of Independence had made no reference to religion or religious rights.) It is evident that experience had taught the people that there could be no permanent political freedom without religious freedom also. This idea of Church-and-State separation was emphasized by the very first Congress that convened under the Constitution, when the First Amendment was adopted, providing that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” This Church-and-State-separation idea was further emphasized while Washington was still President, by a treaty with Tripoli in which it was stated that “the Government of the United States is not in any sense founded upon the Christian religion.” As before stated, Washington evidently did not contemplate the frustration of these constitutional ideas by mere judicial dictum. But that is just what happened in 1892, when the U. S. Supreme Court declared that “this is a Christian nation.” And those elements of our population who are desirous of having the government swayed by religious dictation have not been slow to emphasize the logical advantage which inures to their claims and intentions by this judicial declaration. If the people of the United States are still desirous of profiting by the principles so clearly enunciated and so ably defended by Washington, they would do well to remember that “eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” W. N. G. PEACE TALK, AND THE WAR TALK TOO.
By T.
THE press despatches of February 18 contained the following item:— “Rev. J. Minot Savage, of the Church of the Messiah, Boston, Mass., responding to a toast at the banquet of the pulp and paper manufacturers last night, said: ‘As one thinks of the sad disaster that has befallen the Maine in the harbor of Havana, he can but wonder at the patience of the people of the United States. We have been thrilled and stirred by the massacre of the Armenians, but one here at our door has been worse, yet we have had patience. I do not advocate war, and I would like to see the day when all affairs could be settled by arbitration, but the limit of patience and humanity may come. Let us be ready to stand up for that freedom and manhood upon which the country rests. We ought to have dignity and power with every country. We should have a navy. If we can not build one rapidly enough, let us find where they have one for sale. Let us buy one and then dare to assert our will.’ Dr. Savage’s words caused intense enthusiasm, the guests rising to their feet and cheering.” There are many men to-day who attend “peace congresses” and make eloquent speeches in favor of “arbitration” as the only means by which civilized nations should settle their disputes. And no one who is civilized can object to the proposition. It is certainly the ideal and humane thing to arbitrate rather than fight. Men should ever seek to avoid the horrors and disasters of war. But while these peace sentiments are freely talked, they are not in reality the spirit of the age. For when something is done the natural tendency of which is to set the feelings of one nation against another, the question is not, How many men do we have that are good at arbitrating? but, How many good fighters have we? and what is the condition of our guns and powder? Of course none of these men “advocate war,” but still they think that we ought to “be ready to stand up for that freedom and manhood upon which the country rests.” And “we should have a navy,” and if it can not be built fast enough, then “buy one” already made. From the standpoint of patriotism to any country whatever, such language does not seem out of place. The only incongruity is between the sayings of these men who tell us one day that war is to be no more, and exhort us the next to buy a navy if we can not build one fast enough. Hence no amount of talking should blind our eyes to the fact that war and not peace is the spirit of this age. And all should know that the Scriptures give the anger of all the nations of earth as one of the great signs of the soon-coming end of time. Then do not allow the excitement of our time to keep you from taking your bearings so as to know where you are. RIOTING IN AUSTRIA-HUNGARY.
THE despatches state that “the wretched poverty of the agricultural laborers in Austria-Hungary is resulting in revolt.” Serious strikes are also threatened in England. In this country the muttering discontent of labor may be heard. And from your own observations, perhaps you are ready to say, Yes, and the same is true quite all the world over. With this condition of things in mind, read the following scripture: “Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you. Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are moth-eaten. Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days. Behold, the hire of the laborers who have reaped down your fields, which is of you kept back by fraud, crieth; and the cries of them which have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. Ye have lived in pleasure on the earth, and been wanton; ye have nourished your hearts, as in a day of slaughter. Ye have condemned and killed the just; and he doth not resist you. Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain. Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts; for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.” James 5:1–8. Note that it is the “last days” to which our attention is directed in this scripture. Observe also that in these “last days” the “heaping together of treasure” by some is that which makes the cry of distress among the “laborers.” And how clearly is it pointed out that those who patiently wait for the “coming of the Lord,” will find in that event the solution of this capital-and-labor difficulty. The coming of the Lord is the one bright hope before this world. Are not your convictions growing stronger that the glad day is very near? Then do not stifle the voice of God in your soul, but get ready to meet the Prince of peace in that near time.