Review and Herald, Vol. 85, No. 14. (4/2/1908)

Review and Herald

Apr 2, 1908

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Apr 2, 1908

REACH THE GOAL

By Charles B. Mitchell

HE only attains to success who has acquired, that which he can take with him up through the silent air to the throne of God. He only has lived a life worth while who, though poor he may have been as the world calls poverty, attains the riches that are eternal. This is the one high goal toward which every honest-hearted man struggles; and this is the one high reward which every true seeker may gain. Believe me, if you gain that goal and get that reward, it will be because you have sought it; your life's bark will never drift into heaven. You will gain that heavenly port because, all through life's storms and stresses, you kept ever your bark's prow pointed toward that desired haven.—Charles B. Mitchell, D. D.

For Every Church-Member

As Good as a Preacher

One of our first companies in the West Indies was presented with a complete set of the “Testimonies for the Church.” They were for several years without a preacher, but they reported that the reading of the Testimonies not only kept them from discouragement, and fully established them in the faith, but also developed new believers.

“Testimonies for the Church” should be in the home of every Seventh-day Adventist. The messages which they contain are for each one, right now. You can not afford to be without them.

Prices: Full set, Volumes I-VIII, in flexible leather, $11.50. Single Volumes, I-VI, $1.50 each; VII and VIII, $1.25 each. Full set, cloth, $7.50. Single volumes, I-VI, $1 each; volumes VII and VIII, 75 cents each.

Great Results from Small Beginnings

God, who prepares his work through ages, accomplishes it by the weakest instruments, when his time has come. To effect great results by the smallest means—such is the law of God.—D’Aubigne.

The progress of the Seventh-day Adventists is a record of the work of the Spirit of God through a humble people. The story of this progress makes an inspiring volume, especially when written by one who has been in the work, and part of it, all the way along.

In “The Great Second Advent Movement,” Elder J. N. Loughborough, a pioneer in this message, graphically portrays the progress of the denomination since its inception. You will appreciate the solidity of the whole foundation of this message as never before when you read of the experiences, trials, disappointments, and final victories of those who gave their lives for this truth.

Mailed to any address on receipt of $1.25.

Keeping Pace with the Message

The third angel’s message is speedily going into all parts of the earth, and the time draws rapidly nearer when “this gospel” will have been “preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations.” All who have chosen a part in this glorious work are naturally interested in its progress, and desirous of keeping pace with it. It is practically impossible to do so if we do not read the one paper that is constantly presenting a comprehensive record of that progress. To fall behind now is a most serious matter. For that reason it is incumbent on the reader not only to have this paper, the “Review and Herald,” himself, but to induce the other members of his company to take it if they are not now doing so. That is truly home missionary work of a most important character. It is as important a work to help a brother or sister to hold onto this saving truth as it is to get them to accept it in the first place.

About the first of May there will begin in the “Review” a series of articles by the editor on the book of Daniel which will contain the fruit of much study, and will be of special interest to our people.

Every One Wants a Copy

“It will last as long as I need it, for time is short. I have long wanted it, and I am so glad that you have such a cheap edition, so every one who wants a copy of that precious book can get it.”

All appreciate the thin edition of “Early Writings.” It is small, light, and handy. Contains all that is in the thicker book, at half the price.

Post-paid, 35 cents. A few in red flexible leather, $1.25. Full morocco, gilt edges, $1.50.

The Youth’s Instructor

The value of houses and lands is expressed in dollars; but the worth of one link in the chain that binds a young person to right and truth is infinite, and can in no way be given in terms of earthly coins.

The “Youth’s Instructor,” with its weekly contributions from our foreign missionaries on the progress of “this gospel of the kingdom” in all lands; together with articles from our home workers, giving instruction relative to the best ways of laboring in the Master’s cause, and citing experiences that bring to the reader new inspiration in missionary service; its varied contributions on education, history, and science; its studies in the Mission Fields; outlined Reading Course; timely hints to students; attractive Children’s Page and Home Circle Department; “its helpful suggestions on spiritual growth,—all these things make the “Instructor,” we are assured, a strong link in the chain that must be forged if our young people are to be bound to the cause of God for all time. And this fact bespeaks for the paper a place in every home.

NEW SERIES OF ARTICLES

A new series of biographical sketches has been contributed by Elder W. A. Spicer. Other series will also appear on the “Reformation,” “French Revolution,” “Purpose of Creation,” “Lives of Missionaries,” and “Correct Pronunciation.” In the last series mentioned the preferred authorized pronunciation will be given of hundreds of words commonly mispronounced.

All of this profitable matter, together with much more of varied character but equally valuable, will appear during the coming year. Every youth and every worker for the young people should have the weekly visits of the “Instructor.”

Yearly subscription price, $1. Club rate for five or more copies, $.65.

REVIEW AND HERALD, PUBLISHING ASSN.

New York City WASHINGTON, D. C. Battle Creek, Mich.

“In Time of Need”

WE are exhorted to come to the throne of grace with boldness, that we “may find grace to help us in time of need.” When do we need help?—Every day and every hour. With the most of us there is quite a sameness in our life experiences. Day after day brings about the same round of duties, and it is for these everyday experiences that we need sufficient grace that we may rise above discouragement and doubt, gain the victory over besetting sins, and constantly show forth the praises of him who has called us into his marvelous light. Often we do not know the strenuous struggle through which those nearest to us are passing, and we may not be aware that they are in a special time of need, but we may judge something by our own experience. Do we sometimes take up the daily routine with a heavy heart, every fiber of our being crying out for help? Do severe trials come in quick succession until we are sorely buffeted? Perhaps the serene countenance of our fellow worker is hiding a heart as heavy as ours, and possibly one with whom we associate daily is almost ready to fall by the wayside, pressed down by the weight of his burdens. Every one knows the plague of his own heart, and realizes that each day is his time of need, and weak human nature is much the same with us all. The throne of grace is accessible to all, and it is our privilege to ask not simply for ourselves, but for the others who are in a time of need. “My God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.”

Preaching Righteousness

In the Sabbath-school lesson for April 11 the first great reform movement is considered under the title “The Flood and the Preaching of Noah.” In connection with it we present the following thoughts:—

Let us note first three things: Noah was a righteous man before the flood (Gen. 6: 9, R. V.); Noah was a preacher of righteousness (2 Peter 2: 5); Noah built an ark by faith, and through this ark “he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.” Heb. 11: 7.

Several conclusions will follow at once from these facts: Noah did not make himself righteous by building the ark, as he was declared to be righteous before the instructions were given him concerning building the ark; Noah was a preacher of righteousness to a world threatened with destruction, and the building of the ark was a part of his proclamation of righteousness; it was through the ark (the antecedent of “which” is “ark”) that Noah condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith. It would, therefore, have been impossible for Noah to be a preacher of righteousness to the people of his time without building an ark, and it was equally impossible that he should himself be an heir of righteousness otherwise than by building an ark. His work of faith was an essential part of his preaching of faith, and it was through his work of faith that God bestowed upon him the reward of righteousness.

Noah is set down as one of the heroes of faith. He believed God, and his faith was counted unto him for righteousness, and the genuineness of his faith was manifested in implicit obedience to the command of God. When he was warned of God concerning things which as yet had never been seen, namely, a flood, and a way of salvation from the impending calamity was made known to him, he accepted the warning as absolutely reliable, he acted upon the warning as far as his own household was concerned, and then he invited others to share with him the ark of safety. Thus he became a preacher of righteousness.

To preach righteousness by faith in Noah’s time involved something more than a study of righteousness by faith in the abstract. It took hold upon the conduct. It meant a course of conduct which was in itself a condemnation of the lovers of pleasure, of those who did not believe in a personal God who was in control of nature, and of those who placed reason above revelation. The framework of the ark was the concrete outline of Noah’s sermon on righteousness by faith, the ark itself was the real body of his discourse, and he emphasized and punctuated with hammer and saw. He would have saved himself much ridicule if he had discussed righteousness and free grace without antagonizing the scientists of his time by actively preparing for an event which was contrary to all human experience, and which involved in ruin every one who did not believe his preaching. A singular man, that Noah, who claimed to have a message for the world concerning impending destruction, and who by his work of faith condemned to destruction all who did not join his movement.

There was a crisis in Noah’s time. “The wickedness of man was great in the earth,” and “every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” A limit was set to the

time during which the Spirit of the Lord would strive with men, after which destruction was decreed upon all those who were not found in the ark. But a proclamation of a warning of the coming flood and of the divine way of salvation from the overwhelming disaster was sent to the world,—a message of salvation by believing-doing, and yet a salvation which was wholly by the power of God, for it was not the natural strength and storm-enduring qualities of the ark which preserved those within it, but rather the direct power of God exercised through ministering angels. Their faith accepted God’s gift of salvation to them, and under divine direction prepared the channel through which the salvation was revealed. The world scoffed at the message, rejected the way of salvation by believing,—and perished miserably in the flood. Scientific religion was at a premium until the windows of heaven were actually opened and the fountains of the great deep broken up, and then the consequences could not be avoided.

There is a striking parallel between Noah’s time and ours. “As it came to pass in the days of Noah, even so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.” And the details of the parallel are being filled out before our own eyes. Violence prevails to an extent truly alarming, and threats of violence are driving peace of mind from many who are designated for death unless they comply with harsh demands. The struggle of class against class grows more bitter, and must result in outbreaks of further violence. At the same time God is being shut out from his place as the personal Ruler of the universe, and a scientific god is being proclaimed, an Infinite Force which works according to established laws; and such a calamity as the destruction of the world by fire, according to the prophecy, is discounted and discredited. God’s judgments already in the earth, both general and special, are explained away as the result of natural causes, and thus the expectation of the day of judgment is dulled. The great cities are reproductions of Sodom and Gomorrah, and the wrath of God is invited upon them.

But now, as in Noah’s day, there is a message of righteousness by faith and a divine way of salvation. Then, the world was facing destruction by water; now, it is by fire. Then the righteous rode upon the flood of water in the ark prepared by Noah and his helpers; now, the righteous will ride upon the billows of fire in the New Jerusalem prepared for them by the Son of man. Then from the flood there came forth another world; now, ‘according to his promise, we look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.’ And the hope of salvation, now as then, rests wholly upon the acceptance of the message of righteousness by faith, proclaimed in the divine setting God has given to it, and revealed in obedience to his commandments of God. This is the third angel’s message—the hope of the world.

Editorial

By Editor

On an old slab in the Cathedral of Lübeck, Germany under the title “Thus Speaketh Christ Our Lord,” there is inscribed the following:—

Ye call me MASTER and obey me not, Ye call me LIGHT and seek me not, Ye call me WAY and walk not, Ye call me LIFE and desire me not, Ye call me WISE and follow me not, Ye call me FAIR and love me not, Ye call me RICH and ask me not, Ye call me ETERNAL and seek me not, Ye call me GRACIOUS and trust me not, Ye call me NOBLE and serve me not, Ye call me MIGHTY and honor me not, Ye call me JUST and fear me not, If I condemn you, blame me not.

In an old book are found these words: “Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am.” “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.” To acknowledge Christ in our words but not in our ways is to honor him with the lips while the heart is far from him.

Fulfilling Righteousness

Let us regard it as settled, once and for all, that righteousness is an absolutely free gift, that it can neither be purchased nor paid for, and that it can not be secured by good works or works of any kind. Forgiveness is a gift, grace is a gift, righteousness is a gift, life is a gift—everything pertaining to salvation is a gift. “His divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness.” “A gift ceases to be a gift as soon as any return, no matter how small, is made for it. A gift must be received without money and without price, or it is robbed of the character of a gift.”

We now desire to refer to the result of receiving righteousness as a gift. The gift of righteousness is inseparable from the gift of Christ, and Christ is our life. When Christ is received as our righteousness and abides in the heart by faith, a change will appear in the manifested life. “The loveliness of the character of Christ will be seen in his followers.”

The purpose of the gift of Christ was that there might be a transformation of character. “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” “Ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins, and in him is no sin. Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.” “He that saith he abideth in him, ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.” But all this does not secure righteousness nor pay for righteousness; it is the manifested result of receiving righteousness as a free gift through faith in Christ.

It is quite possible, however, to have a perfectly correct theory concerning the Scriptural way of obtaining righteousness, and yet not to manifest in the life the fruits of righteousness. It is easier to correct other people’s theology than to live a correct life. And one who lives up to all the light he has, may put to shame by his manner of life another who has seen great light, but has a greater burden to point out the mistakes in the theology of others concerning righteousness by faith than to reveal in his own life the works of righteousness.

It is a nice thing to keep an even balance in our experience and in our teaching, and not to substitute a theory of the truth for the manifestation of the truth. It brings a reproach upon a correct theory of salvation from sin when one who preaches it eloquently either commits open sin or by condoning sin in others becomes a partaker of the sin with them. Men would rather see an outward righteousness by works than constantly to hear about a righteousness by faith which is made an excuse for sin. “Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?” or dost thou defend the course of others who steal? “Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery?” or dost thou condone the guilt of others who commit adultery? A man whose brain is befuddled with drink, and whose tongue is thick, may make a good temperance speech, but it only wounds the temperance cause.

Men are needed now who will both preach righteousness according to the Scriptures and in whom the righteousness of the law will be fulfilled. Such a preacher of righteousness was Noah, and therefore the ark was built, through which “he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.”

Contrasts and Counterfeits — No. 4

By C. M. S.

THERE is perhaps no institution of divine origin that Satan has sought more earnestly to counterfeit, disparage, contradict, and dishonor than he has the family institution—marriage. His warfare upon this sacred institution began while the first pair were still living, and he used a descendant of the fratricide Cain as his instrument.

Cain was the father of Enoch (not the Enoch who was translated), Enoch was the father of Irad, Irad was the father of Mehujael, Mehujael was the father of Methushael, and Methushael was the father of Lamech. Lamech was the first polygamist, so far as the record shows, the first man who set himself against the Creator's plan for the perpetuity of the race; and he was not only the descendant of a murderer, but he was a murderer himself. Concerning him we read: “And Lamech took unto him two wives. . . . And Lamech said unto his wives: . . . I have slain a man for wounding me, and a young man for bruising me: if Cain shall be avenged

sevenfold, truly Lamech, seventy and sevenfold.” Gen. 4:19-24.

The murderer reasoned thus: My provocation was greater than Cain’s, therefore my assurance of protection is greater. But from that descendant of a murderer, who was himself a murderer, the world has inherited the scourge of a system of conjugal relations as much opposed to the purposes of God for man as Cain’s hate and the fruit of his hate are opposed to God’s love and the fruit of that love.

This is not overdrawn. We read in the sixth chapter of Genesis, only a few generations later than the days of Lamech, that when men began to multiply on the face of the ground, “they took them wives of all that they chose;” and immediately the record states, “And Jehovah said, My Spirit shall not strive with man forever. . . . And Jehovah saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented Jehovah that he had made man on the earth.” Gen. 6:3-6. Is there no connection between this abundant, overflowing wickedness of thought and act and the disruption of the divine plan for the family? The Word indicates that there is the closest connection between the two. More than that, it is shown by the analogies of history. Where the divine plan has been followed closest, there has been the least of the practises of moral degradation. Where the divine plan has been thrown aside and the plan of Lamech followed, the imagination has wrought with fierce endeavor to debase and ruin the morals of men and women. We can find the trace of that debasing propaganda in all portions of the earth; and expounders of the theory of evolution attempt to show, by the existence of various degrees of bestial practises in different parts of the world, that there has been an evolution of the marriage institution from a state of animal promiscuity up to the monogamy of to-day, through polygamy, polyandry, concubinage, and marriage by capture and by barter; and the terrible conditions out of which the propounders of that theory drag the marriage institution are such as can not be told here. The imagination can picture nothing darker or more shamelessly debasing. Out of polyandry grew the murder of infant girls, a practise which has been kept up in certain lands long after polyandry gave way to monogamy. That murder and the debasing of the family institution should go hand in hand is not strange when we consider the history of Lamech, who instituted polygamy.

One writer on ethnography, who is a believer in evolution in general, and in the evolution of marriage in particular, says: “It is in animality that humanity has its root; it is there, consequently, that we must seek the origins of human sociology.” Reasoning from such an atheistic standpoint, his conclusion is natural that “our moral sentiments are simply habits incarnate in our brain, or instincts artificially created.”

That leaves out of the question entirely all authority in morals, and makes human instinct alone the director of our destinies, the judge of righteousness. It was because men in the time of Lamech and Noah had come to look upon the matter from that standpoint, or to act upon that premise, that the race sank into the unmentionable immoral conditions which the ethnographer has found. Paul found the same conditions, and gave a better reason for them. Instead of those conditions being a step upward from the unreasoning anthropoid ape toward the plane of the manhood of to-day, they were a long step downward and away from the purpose of God, showing the inevitable result of pandering to fleshly passion and trusting to human habits as a guide in moral sentiment. Paul says: “Because that, knowing God, they glorified him not as God, neither gave thanks; but became vain in their reasonings, and their senseless heart was darkened. . . . Wherefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts unto uncleanness. . . . For this cause God gave them up unto vile passions. . . . And even as they refused to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up unto a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not fitting.” Rom. 1:21-28.

This earth, through centuries, has reeked with the disgusting iniquities that have grown out of the example of Lamech, who, under the tutelage of Satan, opposed the plan of God with a counterfeit family institution. Every evil tendency has been accentuated by the influences growing out of that counterfeit institution, because of its power to weaken every moral fiber of the being. It was a deliberate attack upon the law of God, especially the seventh commandment, just as truly as Satan’s contradiction of God in Eden was an attack upon the truthfulness of the Lawgiver himself.

The plan of God was one man and one woman: “I will make him a helpmeet for him,” not several helps for the one man, as in polygamy, nor one help for several men, as in polyandry, nor a slave for him as in the concubinate and in the lowest forms of monogamy as now existing in many countries; but “an helpmeet for him.” So we read: “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” Gen. 2:24. Our Saviour, in calling to the mind of his hearers these words above quoted, makes them more specific. He says, “The two shall become one flesh.” Matt. 19:5.

Nothing could be plainer than these statements of Inspiration in reference to the marriage institution; and nothing could be more certain than that Satan has deliberately sought to pervert God’s purpose in this as in other things. In so far as he has succeeded, he has brought degradation, sorrow, misery, and dishonor, with the blasting of brightest hopes and the ruin of souls.

Some quote the example of the polygamous kings of Israel as justification for polygamy to-day. It is a sufficient answer that the Israelites demanded a king that they might be like the nations around them. They got the king, became like the nations around them, and their kings copied the customs of the kings of those nations. But “from the beginning it was not so;” and in the plan of God it had no part.

C. M. S.

Count Zinzendorf and the Sabbath

By William Ambrose Spicer

THE biographers of the famous leader of the Moravian missionary movement represent him as holding decidedly to the view that the seventh day of the week was the day of Sabbath rest for Christians. Thus, in the life of Zinzendorf, by Bishop Spangenberg, one of his closest associates, we are told of the agitation of the Sabbath question in Pennsylvania, during the count’s visit to America, in 1741:—

As a special circumstance it is to be remarked that he determined, with the church in Bethlehem, to celebrate the seventh day as a rest day. The matter was previously fully gone into in the church council, with consideration of all the reasons for and against it, when the unanimous agreement was reached to observe the day Sabbatically. . . . The count had already long held the seventh day of the week in special honor.— “Zinzendorf’s Leben,” Band V., pages 1421, 1422.

Another biographer, Barnhagen von Ense, gives the Bethlehem incident in very nearly the same words:—

Here he determined also, after thorough consideration and unanimous conclusion regarding the matter in the church council, to celebrate the seventh day of the week as a rest day. He had already long especially honored this day, which alone appeared to correspond to the divine institution of the Sabbath.— “Biographische Denkmale.”

It appears that Zinzendorf saw the importance of the Sabbath sufficiently to keep it himself, and to call the attention of others to the fact that it was the only divinely ordained day of rest. In that early time he evidently failed to see that the final test in the great controversy was to come over that same Sabbath truth which he was agitating as he met with the Moravian believers.

It may be that it was his agitation of the Sabbath question in the Pennsylvania colony that drew upon him the attention of the officers charged with enforcing the colonial Sunday law. A French biographer, Felix Bovet, says:—

It was a habit with Zinzendorf to set apart the Saturday as a day of rest and prayer,— not out of conformity to the Mosaic law, but because of the blessing that God pronounced on that day when he had completed the work of creation. While, however, he was careful to let it be understood that he considered all persons free to do as they thought fit in this matter, he observed the Lord’s day in common with the Christian church at large. But though he thus kept two Sabbaths instead of one, this was not enough to satisfy the rigid notions peculiar to American Puritanism; and one Sunday evening, when he was engaged with his daughter in composing some hymns, the justice of the peace made his appearance, and ordered them, in the king’s name to cease writing. The next day they were summoned to answer for their crime, and were fined six shillings each for profaning the sabbath.— The Banished Count, Translated by John Gill, pages 223, 224.

Thus, a century and more before the time of special Sabbath reformation came under the advent movement, Zinzendorf, the pioneer of missionary leaders, was teaching the Sabbath truth as he moved about the world. W. A. S.

On Baptism

A CORRESPONDENT makes the following inquiry concerning the subject of baptism: “Is there a shadow of a doubt about baptizing or immersing in favor of washing or pouring? What is the Greek version on the subject in full? A Presbyterian minister here makes the claim that the Greek meaning admits of pouring or washing for baptizing.”

The English word “baptize” is taken directly from the Greek verb baptizein. This Greek word is itself derived from the Greek word baptein, which is defined in Liddell & Scott’s Greek lexicon “to dip; to dip under,” and the definition given in the same lexicon to the word “baptizein” is “to dip repeatedly; to dip under,” and in the middle voice it means to dip one’s self; that is, to bathe. Other secondary meanings are given to both words, but it is not necessary to deal with them in this connection.

It will thus be seen that the primary definition of the word would indicate that the English meaning of “baptizein” would be to put under water, but in addition to the definition given in the dictionary, it is also necessary that we should consider the use of the word in Scripture. Such passages as Rom. 6:4 and Col. 2:12, in the connection in which they are found, make it clear that baptism, both in its essence and in its form, is a memorial of the death and resurrection of Christ, and in view of this fact, such a mode of baptism is proper as implies a burial of the candidate in the water, and is necessary in order to make it a proper memorial of Christ’s burial. A death and burial and a resurrection are indicated by the ordinance of baptism.

Furthermore, it is perfectly clear on reliable authority that in the early church only one mode of baptism was practised, and consequently that there is at present only one form of real baptism. Thus we read in the foot-note on Rom. 6:4 found in “Life and Epistles of the Apostle Paul” by Conybeare and Howson, as follows: “This passage can not be understood unless it be borne in mind that the primitive baptism was by immersion.”

Also the following note on Acts 8:38 found in the same work: “It is needless to add that baptism was (unless in exceptional cases) administered by immersion, the convert being plunged beneath the surface of the water to represent his death to the life of sin, and then raised from this momentary burial to represent his resurrection to the life of righteousness. It must be a subject of regret that the general discontinuance of this original form of baptism (though perhaps necessary in our northern climates) has rendered obscure to the popular apprehension some very important passages of scripture.”

Thus the definition of the original word, the use of the word in the Scripture, and the practise of the early church, all testify to the fact that the only Scriptural mode of baptism is immersion.

We hope this will be clear to our correspondent, and to any others who have been in uncertainty in regard to this question.

Note and Comment

“Pro-Romanism”

UNDER this title there has appeared in The Living Church a series of articles by the Bishop of Fond du Lac, an eminent leader of the Protestant Episcopal Church, who frankly admits a “Pro-Roman tendency” within his own communion. In one of these articles he says:—

There is much now to depress the most courageous and heroic of our brethren. The growing indifference to all religion is so great; the disbelief in the Bible, the church's authority, its traditions, is so increasing; the aggressive movement of the Boards to liberalize the church by an open pulpit and other methods is so attractive to the world; the sacrifice of principle to popularity in the divorce legislation, the observed diminishing spirituality of the church, the humbled condition of the clergy, the arrogance of the laity,—no wonder the work of Catholicizing the church is so slow. Then the attractiveness of Rome in its zeal and its devotion, their people's fuller realization of the supernatural, of the guardianship of the angels, the communion of saints, the devotion to the Blessed Sacrament (that pledge of Christ's abiding presence with his people)—all this must affect any devout soul. We are willing to confess that we believe our Lord loves the Roman communion in the United States, perhaps more than our own timid, unspiritual, uninstructed communion. It may also fairly be said that the errors in Rome, like those of the papal infallibility and supremacy, the modern dogma of the immaculate conception and that of indulgences, do not touch or scarcely hurt the spiritual life of the people; while our defects, and unbelief in the real presence and sacraments, do. No wonder the hearts of the clergy sometimes fail in the presence of our divisions and their own failures, and the arguments of the Roman Church loom large.

This is one more straightforward testimony to the lack of spiritual life and power in the professed church of Christ, and another proof of the increasing tendency to hope for an improvement by uniting with Rome. What will the end be?

Macaulay’s Warning

THE present industrial depression and the increasing bitterness of the strife between capital and labor lend a timely interest to the words of Lord Macaulay, who prophesied thus concerning this country:—

You will have your Manchesters and Birminghams, and in those Manchesters and Birminghams hundreds of thousands of artisans will assuredly be sometimes out of work. Then your institutions will be fairly brought to the test. Distress everywhere makes the laborer mutinous and discontented, and inclines him to listen with eagerness to agitators who tell him that it is a monstrous iniquity that one man should have a million while another can not get a full meal. . . . There will be, I fear, spoliation. The spoliation will increase the distress. There is nothing to stop you. Your constitution is all sail and no anchor. As I said before, when a society has entered on this downward progress, either civilization or liberty must perish. Either some Cæsar or Napoleon will seize the reins of government with a strong hand, or your republic will be as fearfully plundered and laid waste by the barbarians in the twentieth century as the Roman empire was in the fifth; with this difference, that the Huns and Vandals who ravaged the Roman empire came from without, and that your Huns and Vandals will have been engendered within your own country and by your own institutions.

In this connection a recent interview with Hon. E. H. Root, Secretary of State, published March 15, will be of special interest. He said, in part:—

With regard to the immigration problem the United States is now in the position of the Roman empire, invaded by

the barbarians who overran it in search of riches. The barbarians—Sarmatians, Dacians, etc.—were miserably poor, and the rich countries of the Roman empire, with their high culture, irresistibly attracted them. The same peoples—I mean people from the same countries that sent barbarians Romeward—Croatians, Bohemians, Slovaks, Rumanians, Poles, Ruthenians, Jews, and uncultured South Italians—are overrunning the United States now.

Is the Cæsar or Napoleon of whom Macaulay speaks, yet in sight?

Continue reading: One Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollar Fund