Earlier text: THE BUBBLE FOUNTAIN“Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it.” In these words the Saviour enunciates a great principle of salvation. In contrast with the selfish, worldly theory of self-defense and the heaping to ourselves of riches here, Christ shows that only those who lose sight of this life as an end in itself will be able to appreciate or enter into eternal life. This life is a means to an end, and only as we sense and meet the responsibilities of this life shall we be enabled to enjoy the future life. The doing for which we hope to receive the “Well done” must so fill this life that we shall be consumed upon the altar of service. We have many examples of this principle in the lives of the martyrs, who “loved not their lives unto the death,” but “obtained a good report through faith.” Solomon, many years before, voiced the same gospel principle when he said: “Cast thy bread upon the waters: for thou shalt find it after many days.” “Waters”—“peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues”—are hungering for the bread of life. Even our literal bread is to be divided with the needy. And God says of what we give that it is not lost, but, “Thou shalt find it after many days.” “He that hath pity upon the poor lendeth unto the Lord; and that which he hath given will he pay him again.” While the widow of Zarephath divided her all with Elijah, the servant of God, “the barrel of meal wasted not, neither did the cruse of oil fail.” And Jesus adds, “There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel’s, but he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.” In times of war and revolution in the South American states, there is always a great rush among the merchants to deposit their money in the foreign banks doing business in those countries. Brethren, a great international war is soon to be declared. The banks of this earth are soon to fail. A great financial crash is coming. The royal bank of heaven is still open to receive deposits. But banking hours are almost over. Jesus admonishes us, “Lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven,” where banks do not fail. The stocks of heaven are souls bearing the Maker’s superscription, heaven’s seal. What are you worth in stocks negotiable in heaven? Jesus said, “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations.” Whoever engages in this work, either by going or by giving, places himself in direct contact with the “all power.” Christ, with all his power, has promised to be with those who go and who give that the gospel may be heard in all lands. Do we recognize the power and authority of Jesus over our part of this world’s goods, our bank account? If we would have God’s blessing in our business, we must recognize his authority in the same. Let us make Christ our partner in our business; and be assured he will be with us even unto the end, to bless and prosper. That which is consumed in the preaching of the gospel will be a credit in favor of those who have given of their plenty or of their little. That which is retained in these closing days of the mystery of God will be a debit against us on the books of heaven. The means which God has given us is a power for which he will hold us responsible. But if placed in the gospel bank, it will increase and grow in power till Jesus comes. He who determines the wealth or the poverty of each, in so doing has determined the extent of our responsibility. The poor widow with her two mites gained for herself Christ’s commendation, or praise, which has been sounded wherever the gospel has been preached. God measures our gifts, not by the amount given, but by the amount retained. We sometimes feel proud of the great totals of our offerings to missions. But could we see the great total of what was retained and is still in our possession, or has been spent for selfish pleasure, what anguish of heart and sense of shame it would produce in us! In the great day of final reckoning, how many will grasp us by the hand and attribute their knowledge of Christ to our sacrifice and faithfulness? How many of us will have the reward of Dorcas when we close our eyes in the last sleep? By what are we known among our neighbors now? Where our treasures are there will our hearts be. Where our heart is now, there is, today, our treasure. Let us be Christ-men and Christ-women, and save our talents by placing them where they can be used. Let us save our credit by paying the debt we owe. Let us do for the heathen what we would have them do were we to find ourselves in their place tomorrow. Unless we do, our lot will be worse than theirs in the day of judgment. Let us do well if we would receive the “Well done.” “O, it is a pity to cut them!” exclaimed the caller to the generous one in the flower garden, as she led the way from bush to bush and cut the most beautiful blooms from each for the caller to carry home with her. The owner of the flower garden laughed as her sharp scissors snipped off another lovely bloom. “They last only a day or two. You might just as well have them and enjoy them while they are in their beauty,” she answered, and put the great bunch of fragrant blooms into the other’s hands. There are many things in life that are like the blossoms in the flower garden. They come and brighten a day or an hour and are gone; they are not meant to be hoarded in miserly fashion, but to be shared and passed on, and so made to bring joy to as many as possible while they last. Young people can take a lesson from the incident. They have youth, energy, and enthusiasm. How are they using these? Selfishly, for just their own good or pleasure? Or are they sharing them with those who may have none of these beautiful things; giving freely of their own abundance that others may forget the burdening years, and under the inspiration of their help do good things that they could not accomplish alone? It is a wonderful and beautiful thing to gather the rosebuds of life and pass them on to others. Do not put it off until the flower blooms and fades and the opportunity is gone. Better to— “Gather ye rosebuds while ye may,
Old time is still a-flying;
And this same flower that smiles today,
Tomorrow will be dying.”
— Onward.
A Short Sermon
By Albert Carey
TEXT, Isa. 7:15: "Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good." Jesus' comment: "My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work." John 4:34. Conclusion: The richest, sweetest thing on earth is to do our Father's will, and to "finish" the work he has given us to do. This, and this only, will teach us to "refuse the evil, and choose the good." Wishart, of Scotland, Providentially Forewarned
THE Bible had entered Scotland, and the Reformation going forward in England and on the Continent was breaking day among the Scots. George Wishart, scholar of Cambridge, and earnest believer in the reform, came to his native Scotland and began to preach. He was a burning and shining light. The multitudes thronged his preaching. He was forbidden the churches, but it is said that his congregations were so large as to forbid the use of churches at any rate. In streets, and at market crosses, and in the fields, he preached the message of salvation. At last the papal ecclesiastics brought him to the martyr's stake, at St. Andrews, in 1546. Enemies had sought to check his witness many times before, but in vain. John Knox, then a youth, had been his companion and pupil. In his "History of the Reformation in Scotland," Knox tells how again and again the Lord delivered Wishart from his foes. On one occasion, the Reformer was preaching in Montrose. Cardinal Beaton laid a plan to lure him to his death. Knox says:— He caused to write unto him a letter, as it had been from his most familiar friend, the laird of Kinneir, desiring him with all possible diligence to come unto him, for he was stricken with a sudden illness. In the meantime had the traitor provided sixty men with jacks and spears to lie in wait within a mile and a half of the town of Montrose for his dispatch. The letter coming to his hand, he made haste at first (for the boy had brought a horse); and so with some honest men he passed forth of the town. But suddenly he stayed, and, musing a space, returned back; whereat, they wondering, he said: "I will not go; I am forbidden of God. I am assured there is treason. Let some of you," saith he, "go to yonder place, and tell me what ye find." Diligence made, they found the treason as it was, which being shown to Master George, he answered, "I know that I shall end my life in that blood-thirsty man's hands; but it will not be on this manner." The Lord preserved his servant from all the power of the enemy until his work was done. John Knox believed with all assurance that the Lord gave to Wishart at times in these crises direct counsel by the Holy Spirit, guiding him in bearing his witness for the Word of God in those perilous times. Knox says in his history:— He was so clearly illuminated with the spirit of prophecy that he saw not only things pertaining to himself, but also such things as some towns and the whole realm afterward felt, which he forespake not in secret, but in the audience of many. This was well along toward the end of the days of the predicted period of papal supremacy, and the Lord was raising up in every part of Europe the witnesses to the blessed Word of light whose shining was to shorten the days of persecution for the elect's sake. These witnesses often sealed their testimony with their blood; but wherever we read the history, we see evidence that the living God fulfilled his promise and stood by them and sent his angels to deliver and to comfort or to sustain to the end, even as in ancient Bible times. Religious Liberty in Peru
By Editor
THE Christian Advocate of January 15 contains a lengthy article by Bishop Homer C. Stuntz, D. D., in reference to the prospect for religious liberty in the republic of Peru. The Christian Observer of March 11 also publishes an article on the same topic, basing its remarks on the article above referred to. Both these articles make mention of the part played by a certain Protestant medical missionary in the good work of bringing about religious tolerance in that republic; but neither article mentions the name or the denomination of that medical missionary. We are glad to make known that this was our good brother F. A. Stahl, superintendent of the Seventh-day Adventist mission in the Lake Titicaca district. The article by Bishop Stuntz gives an interesting résumé of the matter, and we give below a considerable portion of his account:— Peru is the Rome of the two Americas. . . . Here Pizarro founded the first university in the Western Hemisphere. Here flourished the bloody and merciless agent of Roman Catholic intolerance—the Inquisition. Scores of "heretics" were publicly burned at the stake within a ten minutes' walk of the Maury Hotel, in which I am now writing. Thousands were tortured and their goods declared forfeited for the crime of thinking! Protestantism Versus Medievalism
Then came the end! Spain lost Peru. Her tyranny bore fruit in revolt after revolt, and in 1821 Peru became a republic. General San Martin, to whose valor and sagacity Peru owed her victory against Spain, wanted a monarchy rather than a republic, believing that the citizens were not yet ready for self-government. But what interests a Protestant more than his opinion in this matter is the fact that he did his utmost to have liberty of conscience and worship guaranteed by the new constitution, and to put Protestants in places of influence in the educational and religious life of the young state. As the first president, he invited the Rev. James Thompson from Scotland to begin a school in which the teachers needed in a public-school system could be trained under Protestant auspices. Thompson came in 1822, and President San Martin took a large public building from one of the Catholic orders and gave it to him for use as a school. But he was soon dispossessed and driven from the country, though not until he had prepared two classes of teachers and had organized a Bible society among the leaders of the young Peruvian nation. If Protestantism had been ready to come in and occupy the field in force at that time, it is very probable that Peru would now be predominantly Protestant, instead of being under the leadership of the most bigoted and intolerant ecclesiasts known in all the Americas. Constitutional Prohibition Against Protestantism
By C. M. S.
But Protestantism was not ready. Medievalism triumphed! The constitution when finally adopted had as Article IV the following: "The nation professes the Catholic religion, apostolic and Roman, and the state protects it, and does not permit the public exercise of any other." During seventy years from the adoption of the constitution the prohibition contained in the last ten words of Article IV met with but little opposition. But in 1890 the event occurred which proved it to be the beginning of its end. In that year the Rev. Francisco Penzotti, a Methodist preacher in the service of the American Bible Society, came to Callao, the chief port of Peru, to distribute the Bible. As homes were opened to him, he preached to the few who cared to come, as Nicodemus came to our Lord, believing that this was not in contravention of the law. At the instigation of the clericals, he was arrested, and lay in the common jail of Callao eight months, while his case dragged through all the courts of the country. In each court he was acquitted, and was finally released from his filthy cell, and allowed to go on with his work. To the extent to which religious liberty has been enjoyed in Peru since 1890 it has been upon the judicial decision in the now-famous Penzotti case. That decision, in brief, was to the effect that worship conducted in a building devoid of the public appearance of a church, and with no sign or mark to show that it was used as a place of public worship, was not a "public exercise" of religion, and, therefore, was not an infraction of Article IV of the constitution. But this gave a negative and limited kind of liberty, which hindered and hampered all that has been attempted in the way of direct gospel work in these more than twenty years. Twenty Years' Fight Against Ten Words
About twenty years ago the bishop administering South America sent Dr. Thomas B. Wood here to do all that lay in his power to secure the repeal of those obnoxious ten words. Dr. Wood8had a record for success in similar fights elsewhere on this continent. He was even then a veteran fighter against "the dominant priestcraft" of South America. He was one of the chief human agents in securing religious liberty in Paraguay, Uruguay, the Argentine, Bolivia, and Ecuador. He faced great odds. But he has written and interviewed senators, deputies, editors, educators, and other national leaders, until the leaven of his teaching is at work throughout the whole nation. Several times he has had a bill all drafted and introduced, but each time it has been mysteriously shelved, to his deep disappointment. When Dr. Wood went to the United States last year on his first furlough at the expense of the Board of Foreign Missions in the entire forty-three years of his South American service, it was with regret that he left that part of his task apparently where he had found it. But to the surprise of the world, the first battle was gained on Oct. 4, 1913. How did it come about? What spark set off the magazine? This is what I have been eager to ascertain since I first heard of the victory during my visit to London in October. Intolerance Which Overreached Itself
Since coming to Peru I have the whole story. It is only another chapter in the long history of an intolerance which overreaches itself. The factor which has had the greatest direct influence in bringing about the present reform has been the policy of Bishop Ampuero, of Puno, who is accused of scores of abuses in the exercise of his powers. The most notorious incident occurred two years ago, when, for a minor offense, the bishop, with all the medieval rites which characterize the act, proceeded to excommunicate a well-known Indian lawyer, Francisco M. Chuquihuanca Ayulo, of Cuzco. Ayulo is one of the most brilliant lawyers in Peru. His great passion is to fight the battles of his people, and consequently he has won their loyalty. When the bishop of Puno accused Ayulo of being an atheist and brought him to trial, on a charge from which he was later triumphantly cleared, he was sowing the seed that has in due time come to fruit. In March of last year the bishop descended in wrath upon La Platania, where a medical missionary has been accomplishing remarkable work for several years past, and carried off a number of the converts, including one woman, and brought them to Puno. They were held prisoners for eight days at the tender mercies of the bishop, until the hue and cry raised as a result of the occurrence forced their release. A man of ordinary intelligence should have recognized that public opinion, even in Peru, would not forgive him, though thrice a bishop, for binding men and women with a common rope, and personally forcing them to walk over miserable roads to jail for the crime(?) of being helped in times of sickness by a Protestant physician! The hue and cry which compelled their release was local. But when the papers in the case reached the civil authorities in Lima, public indignation burned to white heat. Senator Bezada, from the district of Puno, immediately introduced a bill in the upper house calling for the suppression of the much-debated last clause of Article IV, and the battle was on. Our Peruvian pastor in Lima, the Rev. Ruperto Algorta, and John Ritchie, of the Evangelical Union, both saw the brief mention which the Commercial, the chief Peru daily paper, made of this bill, and they at once sought Senator Bezada. To their amazement, they found that he appeared to have no interest in the success of his bill, being a Catholic, and having been pushed into presenting the bill by his Puno constituents, who were up in arms over the two cases mentioned and other equally exasperating experiences at the hands of their intolerant bishop. When these Protestants offered to help him he was frightened, and begged them not to say a word—"not one word." But they had learned the name of the chairman of the committee to which the bill had gone in regular course of congressional business, Senator Mariano Cornejo, one of the most eminent members of the Peruvian bar, and a sociologist of international repute. Within a few minutes after quitting the timorous, trimming author of the bill, they were being heartily welcomed by Senator Cornejo, and assured that he had every confidence that the bill could be put through. His plan was to avoid debate and get action before opposition could do its worst. Within a day or so, he had secured the signatures of all the members of his committee, as he passed the report to each member in the senate chamber. The signed report was thus placed upon the speaker's table for consideration before the opposition knew that it had been reported. By prompt action and good parliamentary tactics, Senator Cornejo not only secured an early order of the day for his report, but what is called "preferential consideration." Though he is one of the most eloquent members of the senate, he piloted the bill through to the voting stage with the least possible debate. The bill passed with but three dissentient votes, two of these having been cast by the only two priests present and voting! So sudden and so complete a victory astonished the nation. Catholic leaders bestirred themselves to secure the defeat of the measure in the lower house—the chamber of deputies—and Liberals united with the missionary forces of the country to carry the fight to victory. During the two weeks which elapsed before securing the vote in the chamber of deputies, the Inca Press (evangelical) was not long idle, and mails were heavy with blank petitions going out and signed petitions coming to deputies urging that Peru fall into line with the modern world in granting freedom of worship to all her citizens. The students in the universities and colleges, together with the independent papers of Lima and Callao, used all their influence in favor of the reform. Roman Catholic opposition took many forms. . . At last it became evident that the bill would have enough votes in the lower house to insure its passage, and every device of Jesuitism was exhausted to prevent a quorum. The speaker of deputies was in favor of the bill, and when he saw that he had a quorum with a margin of two members, he had the measure brought up. There was no debate, and the bill passed—66 to 4. And two of the four dissentients were priests! The dailies of Lima have the names of the four dissentients only in their report. But the end is not yet. Constitutional changes cannot go into effect without affirmative action on the same measure in two successive years. This measure must come up again for ratification in 1914. Rome will fight to the bitter end, and she will face a united Peru. The present congress is elected for two years. But the air is full of rumors that Catholic influence will bring about the prorogation of congress by executive order, and new elections will be held so that pro-Catholic senators and deputies may be chosen to undo what has been done. The struggle will be watched with intense interest by every lover of religious liberty. When the reform bill has been confirmed, in October of 1914, our church should at once provide the funds for a worthy church in Lima, and increase her force in all Peru. All doors will then be open. Bishop Stuntz believes that the "spark" which "set off the magazine" was the Catholic bishop's treatment of the Indian lawyer; but there is unquestionable evidence that the real "spark" was the Catholic bishop's persecution of the Seventh-day Adventist mission at La Platania and the imprisonment of the members of our church there. Such acts as the excommunication of the Indian lawyer had been going on from the days when Pizarro and the Spanish priests ruled the land. We give full credit to the importance of the work done by Francisco Penzotti, Dr. Thomas B. Wood, and the others mentioned by Bishop Stuntz. There is no doubt that the work done by these men with the legislators was preparing them for the crisis when it should come. The bishop admits, however, that when Dr. Wood left for the United States, "it was with regret that he left that part of his task apparently where he had found it." It was when the Catholic bishop of Puno began to lay his heavy hand upon the Indians of our Lake Titicaca Mission that the door of liberty began to open. The imprisonment of these Protestant Indians by the Catholic bishop was followed by a trial in which fifty persons had been hired to testify against them; and yet the judge, listening to their simple story, set them free in spite of the hired testimony. They were honorably discharged, "to the great chagrin of the bishop and his friends." The bishop and his friends, smarting under this defeat, renewed their persecution of the Lake Titicaca Adventist Indians. They mistreated the members of the little company there and forcibly closed the school. The Indian brethren then made up a purse and sent Brother Camacho to Lima to lay the case before the president of Peru. As a result of Brother Camacho's9appeal, President Billinghurst sent a high official to Puno to investigate the matter. Then came the introduction of the bill for the amendment of the constitution. Brother Stahl says: "The Lord blessed Brother Camacho and our brethren at Lima, and as a result of the work done there at that time, our brethren, by the blessing of the Lord, secured religious liberty for Peru." But within the past few weeks President Billinghurst was made the victim of a plot and was sent into exile. Familiarity with the history of the Roman hierarchy causes us to feel that Rome's hatred of President Billinghurst for his attitude toward these developments is the real reason for his overthrow and exile. Rome will not yield that stronghold of oppression and intolerance without a mighty struggle, and we may expect her to concentrate all the powers at her command to forestall the amendment of Peru's constitution. In the meantime, let the friends of religious liberty pray that God will burst the bars and fling wide the doors of Peru for the entrance of the gospel.
C. M. S. Unruly and Vain Talkers
By F. M. W.
THEIR name is legion. They have existed in all ages of the church. In the days of the apostle Paul he declared that there were "many" of them. Against their pernicious influence he warned the church of God: "For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: whose mouths must be stopped. . . . Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith." There is hardly a church today that is free from the influence of this class of persons. They are found in every neighborhood. They may not discuss the doctrine of circumcision. Oftentimes they talk of topics far less profitable. They are the gossip mongers, the tale-bearers, the agitators of the community. We all need to guard ourselves that we do not form habits of thought and conversation which will constitute us members of this class. There is enough that is noble and uplifting to engage our thought and conversation. There is much in this superficial age which contributes to cheap talk, but let us aim to be sound-minded men and women; to talk sense; to speak well-chosen words — words that are like "apples of gold in pictures of silver." The words we speak will become a savor of life or a savor of death to us and to those who hear. We cannot afford to spend hours of precious time discussing the fashion plate, or the baseball game, or in idle chitchat which makes for neither our spiritual nor intellectual betterment. "Every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned." Bridging the Gulf
By C. M. S.
EVENTS are moving rapidly toward a culmination which we have been expecting for a number of years. We have been faithfully warned of a coalition that was soon to take place between professed Protestantism and Roman Catholicism — the bridging of the gulf that has so long separated those two religious houses. It was not to be expected that this coalition would come about through any one organic act; but would rather be a gradual process, each step preparing the way for another that would go farther in the same direction until the predicted union was effected. The indications of such a coalition were extremely faint at first, and to some hardly discernible. Today steps are being taken that unmistakably lead toward that consummation. We have felt for a long time that this union would be reached through Romanists and Protestants working for similar objects; and the efforts to secure more rigid Sunday laws, and the more rigid enforcement of Sunday laws already enacted, have been drawing these two religious bodies toward each other. The Protestant bodies saw the need of the help of Rome in securing and enforcing such laws; and Rome, knowing the Sunday institution to be one of her own establishing, was glad to see Protestantism championing the institution. The common purpose was making for coalescence. These two religious bodies are in hearty accord for another common object, and this also is a religious object, the securing of a large increase in the number of chaplains in the army and navy. The unconstitutionality of the whole matter can be easily shown. It is entirely out of harmony with the fundamental law of the land, the government being based upon the idea of the total separation of religion from the functions of government, and the support of religion being left entirely to individual choice, as it should be. Madison saw this when the nation was still young, and wrote strongly against the support of such religious teachers by public taxation. If it were right according to the nation's fundamental law to support these religious teachers by public taxation, then there is no argument that could be successfully used against the support of all religious teachers by general taxation. That the government has committed itself to this unwise and unconstitutional procedure is deeply to be regretted, and never ought to be used as an argument for inducing the government to go still farther in a wrong course. But that is exactly what is being done. The Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America, which claims to represent the great majority of all Protestant believers in this country, has committed itself definitely to that program; the Catholic Church in America has as definitely committed itself to the same undertaking. On January 20 there was held in one of the rooms of the national Capitol, before the House Committee on Naval Affairs, a hearing on the subject of an increase in the chaplain corps of the United States Navy. Roman Catholicism was there represented officially by "Father" Lewis J. O'Hern, of Washington, D. C., who spoke as the designated representative of the Roman hierarchy in America. "Father" O'Hern, representing the entire Roman hierarchy in America, read the following letter as his credentials: — CARDINAL'S RESIDENCE,
408 NORTH CHARLES ST.,
BALTIMORE, MD., Jan. 15, 1914.
Rev. Lewis J. O'Hern, C. S. P.,
Apostolic Mission House,
Washington, D. C.
MY DEAR FATHER O'HERN: As our representative in matters pertaining to army and navy chaplains, may I ask you personally to call on the members of the Committee on Naval Affairs, both of the Senate and the House of Representatives, and urge upon them the necessity of more chaplains for the navy? Explain to them that the proposed scheme of substituting "welfare secretaries" for chaplains does not meet with the approval of the American Catholic archbishops, since no layman can do the work of an ordained clergyman.
Most faithfully yours in Xt.,
J. CARDINAL GIBBONS,
Archbishop of Baltimore. This representative of the Roman Church was in complete harmony with the purpose of the other religious leaders in the hearing, and asked for the same thing as they were asking for. The harmony between them showed plainly that these representatives of opposing religious bodies had settled upon their demands by conference before coming to the hearing. The Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America was represented there officially by Rev. Charles S. Macfarland, the secretary of the organization. The Episcopal Church, which is outside the Federal Council, was also officially represented at the hearing, adding the demand of Episcopalianism to that of Protestantism and Romanism for the further committing of the national government to the principle of the union of church and state. That these men believed they were speaking as one man for the one object,10and in that speaking they were uttering the composite voice of religion in America, was plainly apparent at the hearing. Dr. H. King Carroll, associate secretary of the Federal Council of the Churches, who has been designated by those whom he represents as "in short, a sort of religious lobbyist at the national Capitol," in opposing the plan of the Secretary of the Navy for the appointment of forty "welfare secretaries" to positions in the navy, said: "Congress might for various reasons think it expedient to adopt the Secretary's recommendation. Such a compromise could not be acceptable to the churches." This attitude was further demonstrated in the following declaration by Dr. Carroll: — The churches are also agreed in the conviction that the present discrimination against chaplains in the matter of consideration according to rank and length of service is, in effect, a disparagement of religion and the worship of Almighty God; which disparagement should not longer be countenanced by the national government. Rev. Wallace Radcliffe, who was given charge of the program at the hearing, believed that he and the men there gathered represented all religion in America. The first sentence of his remarks reads: "We have practically here representatives from the whole nation." He then enumerated the various religious bodies there represented, to impress the committee with the idea that the united church was speaking, and the lawmakers must take heed. In this matter there was a definite adoption of that suggestion made a few years ago at the Federal Council of the Churches, that this union of the churches would create "a force which lawmakers and lawbreakers would respect and heed." The result of this demonstration of force upon the lawmakers was made apparent when the Committee on Naval Affairs, after this hearing, made its recommendation to Congress. The recommendation of the Secretary of the Navy for the appointment of welfare secretaries was ignored, but the demand by federated religion that the number of chaplains be increased was complied with. Federated religion was strongly opposed to the Secretary's recommendation for welfare secretaries, and the committee eliminated it. It voiced its demand for more chaplains and more pay for them, and the committee recommended it. In this incident a precedent was set that will plague the nation to the end of its history. Government by demand of federated religion won a victory which it will not be slow to take advantage of, and we shall see more and more of that kind of government and legislation,—the churches demanding and the lawmakers yielding,—in short, government by the churches in place of government by the chosen representatives of the people; and, flushed with each new victory, we shall see them making greater and still greater demands, uniting religion and the state in greater and greater degree, until the prediction of the revelator is fulfilled in the decree of death against those who will not yield their conscientious convictions in religious things. Romanism and Protestantism have met on common ground, each strengthening the other's hands, united in a common purpose, the coercion of the government in a matter that involves a union of church and state. He who thinks they will stop with this is reckoning without his host. This is the taste which whets the appetite for more. If the government may tax the general public to support teachers of religion, it may do many other things that violate the true principles of just government. By yielding to that demand of federated religion—federated for the purpose of enforcing its demands—the government enters the first circle of the maelstrom, and the vortex of disaster is a matter of time only. The Federated Churches are not only united in demanding more chaplains and more pay for them, with higher rank, but they propose that what they demand in this matter shall become a matter of fixed law. Dr. Carroll declares that the churches "are convinced that this is the time to have the principle of an adequate supply of chaplains incorporated in legislation," and adds, "Ought not the united voice of the churches to have a determining influence in this matter?" It will have, and has already had, a determining influence. Dr. Carroll is stationed in Washington for the purpose of carrying through this and other such church-and-state projects in the interests of federated religion. Rome also has her official representative in Washington to foster the interests of the Roman Church. And it may safely be predicted that when these two organizations make a united demand through their official representatives, as in the case of the chaplains, the government will permit itself to be coerced into giving them what they desire. The American government is now entering upon its most critical period. The great religious bodies are uniting to cause the nation to forsake the principles that have made America great and free, and the lawmakers seem unable to resist the pressure. Romanism and professed Protestantism are voicing common demands which are opposed to the Constitution and opposed to the genius of representative government. When they have achieved their purpose to the full, what lies beyond? — The church dominating the government, the oppression of the Dark Ages again — and the end. This is written plainly in God's Word, and we see it plainly in process of fulfillment. The bridging of the gulf between Romanism and Protestantism is fast approaching, and, in that, the culmination of the controversy between truth and error, between light and darkness, between righteousness and iniquity. SPEAKING of the institution of the Sabbath and its observance in the different periods of the world's history, the Religious Telescope of March 11, 1914, declares:— The Sabbath was instituted for the temporal and eternal welfare of the race, and may not be desecrated, much less removed as a guide and guard to human health and happiness, as some are seeking to do, without serious loss to those who fail to keep it holy. Its law is a part of the life of men; and, as long as they exist, its restful reign will be an imperative need in the heart, in the home, and in the nation. It came before the decalogue, and dates back to the creation of man. It is said that "traces of its strict and sacred observance in the ancestral home of Abraham are disclosed in the Assyrian records unearthed in these later days." Centuries after it was originally instituted, it appeared again as the fourth commandment in the decalogue, was renewed a second time on tables of stone, and finally fulfilled in and by Christ himself, who is Lord of the Sabbath. “THERE is pending in Congress a resolution for an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, declaring that polygamy and polygamous cohabitation shall not exist in the United States or in any place subject to its jurisdiction, and authorizing Congress to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. Should this measure be adopted by the two houses, it will then be presented to the various State legislatures of the country for their ratification. It will require three fourths of the States, or thirty-six, voting in the affirmative to pass the proposed amendment and make it a part of the fundamental law of the nation. An emergency has arisen in this connection, in that the Mormon Church, instead of openly opposing the passing of the resolution, as it has in the past, is understood to have changed front, and to be devoting its attention to strengthening itself in thirteen States, in order to prevent the ratification of the amendment. Already that religio-political body has an appreciable influence in eleven States of the Union.”