Review and Herald, Vol. 85, No. 52. (12/24/1908)

Review and Herald

Dec 24, 1908

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Dec 24, 1908

LIFE AND HEALTH

January, 1909

THE many friends of Life and Health will be glad to greet the first number of the new year as it continues its mission of helpfulness with enlarged size and improved appearance.

Not alone in outward show has improvement been made, but in other ways it gives evidence of growth. New departments have been added, and additional room provided for more complete discussion of the topics considered.

The topic given special prominence in the January number is Tuberculosis. Many phases of preventive measures are fully considered. Added force is given to articles by illustrations.

Send ten cents for a sample copy, or better still, send in your subscription for the year. If received before Jan. 1, 1909, it will be entered at the old price of seventy-five cents. After January 1, the yearly subscription price will be $1 a year.

Although the size of the magazine has been increased, and it has been made more valuable, yet the price to agents remains the same. The contents and appearance of the magazine make it an easy seller. Agents make good wages. There is plenty of unworked territory. Write for helps and suggestions.

Prices: Five to 25 copies, 5 cents each; 25 to 500 copies, 4 cents a copy. Special rates on larger lots.

Life and Health

Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C.

LIBERTY

The Official Organ of the Religious Liberty Bureau

THIS is the only magazine devoted to upholding the principle of the separation of church and state as originally provided for, and defined by, the Constitution. The magazine clearly states the fundamental principles whose adoption made possible religious freedom in this country. It briefly deals with the occurrences incident to the struggle between religious intolerance and freedom of conscience. It faithfully warns against the repudiation of these principles of religious liberty, and portrays the consequences of such a course.

Fourth Quarter, 1908

The issue for the fourth quarter contains well-written articles in exposition of these principles. Among the subjects discussed are:—

The Religious State Idea in the French Revolution.

Sunday Laws Forbidden by the National Constitution.

The Religio-Political Campaign in Missouri.

The proposed National Sunday Law.

The Sunday Law Campaign in Newfoundland.

The Mockery of Enforced Religion.

The Outlook for a Sunday Law in California.

A Significant Demonstration was that recently made in behalf of Cardinal Gibbons. It is one more evidence of the rapidly increasing influence of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States.

President Roosevelt on Religion and Politics. The President's vigorous protest against raising the question of a man's religion when considering his qualification for any office has awakened a widespread interest in the proper relation of civil government to religion.

Now is the time to enlighten the people concerning the true principles of religious freedom. They are clearly set forth in Liberty.

Prices

Yearly subscription, 25 cents; ten or more subscriptions (cash with order), 15 cents each; single copy, 10 cents; 25 or more copies, 4 cents. Special terms to agents on lots of 500 or 1,000 copies. Write for terms. Address your tract society or—

Liberty

Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C.

The Federal Council of Churches

The general program of the council consisted mainly of reports of committees appointed to consider various subjects, and the discussion and adoption of recommendations made by these several committees. The leading subjects upon which such reports were made were: The Relation of the Federal Council to Interdenominational Organizations, Co-operation in Foreign Missions, the the Work of State Federations, the Church and the Immigrant Problem, the Church and Modern Industry, the Work of Local Federations, Co-operation in Home Mission Work, Family Life, Sunday Observance, Temperance, Week-Day Religious Instruction for Schoolchildren, Religious Instruction in Higher Institutions, Sunday-School Instruction, and International Relations.

Each evening during the meeting of the council, addresses were made by well-known clergymen and prominent laymen. Among the speakers were Mr. Robert E. Speer, Dr. Charles L. Goodell, Dr. J. Wilbur Chapman, and Rev. Charles Stelzle. Dr. S. Parkes Cadman and Judge Peter S. Grosscup, who were expected to deliver addresses, were unable to attend.

It will be impossible to present in full the reports of the various committees, and we can only make a record of such actions of the council as indicate most clearly the scope of its work and its plans for the future.

Among the resolutions presented by the Committee on Relation of the Federal Council to Interdenominational Organizations, and adopted by the council, are the following:—

That it is our conviction that the plan of work which this council will take up will be so comprehensive as to make unnecessary the further increase in the number of undenominational or interdenominational organizations for special work, and will thus protect the churches from many appeals for aid which tend to dissipate the energy of the churches and to divert the stream of their benevolence from the regular and recognized channels.

That all organizations asking regular financial assistance from the churches, be requested to file an annual statement of receipts and expenditures with the executive committee of the federal council, together with a brief outline of methods employed.

These recommendations, if effective, practically prohibit any further addition to the list of such organizations as the Young Men’s Christian Association, the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union, etc., and to a certain extent bring the organizations already formed under the supervision of the federal council.

As to the union of the various denominations in foreign mission work, the council adopted this plan: “We favor the closest possible federation of all Christian churches in foreign mission fields, and the formation of a native church without emphasizing the differences in our historical development.” The practical working of this plan, as developed in the discussion, would mean a division of territory among the various denominations, with the understanding that each one would refrain from conducting work in another’s territory. It is, of course, clear that those who have a world-wide message to give could not enter into such an agreement as this, and will more and more be looked upon as intruders by those who have already divided the field among themselves.

The Committee on the Work of State Federations brought in a report of considerable length, which suggested quite a complete plan for the further development of the State federation idea. The general policy was thus expressed:—

We recommend to the several denominations affiliated in this federal council that they either formally recommend, or at least authorize, their constituent bodies in the several States to enter into co-operation and federation with the constituents of other denominations in their States, for the more efficient extension of the kingdom of Christ, and the fuller expression of his spirit among his disciples.

In this connection, it will be appropriate to refer to the resolution adopted by the council relating to the further development of its work. This resolution, presented by the committee on organization and development, recommended:—

That in addition to the equipment of the central office in the city of New York, the executive committee be authorized, as rapidly as funds will permit, to provide for a district superintendence that will establish at least four offices in strategic centers of population, representing different sections of the country.

When this organization is completed, it will include the union of the churches in the federal council as a general supervising body, and in addition to this State federation, county federation, and city federation. With such an organized power behind them, it is plain that the leaders of the federal council can exert a mighty influence in the settlement of such questions as they may deem to be included within their field of work. In order to provide for the expenses of administration, it was voted that thirty thousand dollars be raised annually among the constituent bodies to be paid into the general treasury.

In its report on “The Church and Modern Industry,” the committee committed the council to an aggressive policy

in the interest of workingmen. It was agreed that the churches must stand—

For equal rights and complete justice for all men in all stations of life.

For the right of all men to the opportunity for self-maintenance, a right ever to be wisely and strongly safeguarded against encroachments of every kind.

For the right of workers to some protection against the hardships often resulting from the swift crises of industrial change.

For the principle of conciliation and arbitration in industrial dissensions.

For the protection of the worker from dangerous machinery, occupational disease, injuries, and mortality.

For the abolition of child labor.

For such regulation of the conditions of toil for women as shall safeguard the physical and moral health of the community.

For the suppression of the “sweating system.”

For the gradual and reasonable reduction of the hours of labor to the lowest practical point, and for that degree of leisure for all which is a condition of the highest human life.

For a release from employment one day in seven.

For a living wage as a minimum in every industry, and for the highest wage that each industry can afford.

For the most equitable division of the products of industry that can ultimately be devised.

For suitable provision for the old age of the workers and for those incapacitated by injury.

For the abatement of poverty.

The discussion of this report called out some very plain statements from the delegates concerning the attitude of working men toward the churches, and the reasons therefor.

Among the recommendations of the committee, adopted by the council, were the following:—

That the study of existing conditions in the industrial world, their origin and outcome, be more definitely enforced as an immediate Christian duty. That to this end, in all theological seminaries, and, so far as practicable, in other schools and colleges, there be established, wherever they do not now exist, courses in economics, sociology and the social teachings of Jesus, supplemented, wherever possible, by investigation of concrete social facts.

That the churches, with quickened zeal and keener appreciation, through their pastors, lay leaders and members, wherever possible, enter into sympathetic and fraternal relations with working men, by candid public discussion of the problems which especially concern them, by advocating their cause when just, by finding the neighborly community of interest, and by welcoming them and their families to the uses and privileges of the local churches.

That more generally in her buildings provision be made for the service of the community, as well as for the public worship of God.

That the attention of working men be called to the fact that the institution of a day of rest secured for the toilers of Christendom by the very charter of the church, has been defended on their behalf by it throughout the centuries.

There was an evident desire to win the approval of the working men in the attitude taken by the council upon the labor question, and a mass-meeting was held on Sunday afternoon at the Lyric Theater, to which all the labor organizations of the city were invited, and which was presided over by the official head of one of these organizations. The leading address on that occasion was made by Rev. Charles Stelzle, secretary of the Department of Church and Labor, of the Presbyterian Church.

The general trend of the report of the Committee on the Church and Modern Industry, as well as other utterances in the council, plainly indicated the acceptance of that modern view concerning the mission of the church, which makes it its chief work to improve present conditions, and to establish the kingdom of God here in the earth, through the solution of social problems and the application of human remedies. The need of a spiritual revival and the duty of the ministry to quicken the spiritual life in the home and in the church were not the topics which were emphasized in this council. As will be seen by the list of subjects already mentioned, the burden which seemed to rest upon the minds of the leaders of this movement was concerning those problems which at best should be only secondary in the work of the church, and which, if solved at all, can be solved only by giving first attention to converting hearts rather than instructing minds. No one seemed to appreciate the fact that the evils which now press so heavily upon men will never be cured, and that present conditions are one of the signs of the times, indicating that the end of all things is at hand, and that the only remedy for existing troubles will be found in the coming of the Lord.

The recommendations made by the Committee on Co-operation in Home Mission Work were of the same general tenor as those which preceded them, all looking toward a combination of effort under a complete plan of federation. This plan includes the organization of a Home Missions Council, representing the principal home mission organizations of the United States, and provides for such co-operation between the different denominations, both in city mission work and in mission work in sparsely settled districts, as will prevent the different bodies overlapping in their work, and will doubtless reduce the number of churches and missionary societies which will operate in the same territory.

The addresses delivered before the delegates on Friday evening by Dr. Charles L. Goodell and Rev. J. Wilbur Chapman were somewhat out of harmony with the general trend and spirit of the council. Both speakers deprecated the decline of spiritual life in the churches as evidenced by the practical discontinuance of the family altar, and the lack of devotion among the members of the churches. An earnest appeal was made for a revival of personal religion and for an effort to reach men as individuals instead of in organizations. One statement made by Dr. Goodell is worthy of special note: “You can not make men Christians by edict. If you wish to see what it means to attempt such a thing, go back to the days of Constantine, and there you will find it.”

If the principles urged by these speakers should be followed out, it would practically bring to naught the whole scheme of combination in church federation, and would turn the attention of the churches to their legitimate work in preaching the gospel of Christ to individuals.

One of the most interesting and significant discussions of the whole session was that pertaining to the attitude of the council on Sunday observance. With this we will deal in our next report.

Editorial

By Editor

Not the occasional act, sometimes performed under special pressure, but the habitual conduct determines the character. He whose fixed purpose is to serve God is not to be rejected because he has not always been able to meet his own ideal. In the plan of salvation, provision has been made to save from discouragement those whose feet have slipped. “My little children, these things write I unto you that ye may not sin. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.” There is power in fellowship with Christ to deliver from sin, but there is an advocate for those who have not availed themselves of their full privilege. This does not encourage the true follower of Jesus to sin carelessly, but renews his hope when he has for any cause suffered a temporary defeat. “Hope thou in God; for I shall yet praise him, who is the help of my countenance, and my God.”

A Moving Panorama

By William A. Spicer

It is a wonderful picture that is spread before us week by week in the reports from the fields. It is a moving panorama of the rapid progress of that message of “the everlasting gospel” that is to end with the coming of the Lord.

When John in the Revelation described it, he saw it under the symbol of the three angels flying with the solemn warning to “every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people.” The pages of the REVIEW, in descriptions by pen and camera, give us a view in modern times of the same work that the revelator beheld in vision.

Who that really knows this truth can hope to keep pace with the message without watching the hand of God revealed in power as the closing work moves onward? And it is in these pages week by week that the reports are spread before us. These reports from all the four quarters of the earth, from Catholic, heathen, and Protestant lands, are awe-inspiring records of the work that God is doing in the third angel’s message.

We put a few of these pages together, as in the Thanksgiving number, and people of the world are astonished to see to what an extent this work has grown in the hands of a small people. But we ourselves have these reports coming fresh and new fifty-two times a year. Let them not become a common thing. Twenty years ago the reports were coming from but a few places. Now they pour in from every land. Brethren, God is doing what he has promised—finishing the work in this generation.

Those who do not see the REVIEW, and thus miss the week-by-week panorama of the closing work, are missing much. Rouse every soul to the importance of keeping watch of the swiftly

changing scenes in the progress of the message. When prophets were shown the closing work in vision, their souls were stirred. We who live when the things long foretold are being fulfilled must never forget that we are seeing the hand of the Lord at work in these reports of progress. W. A. S.

The Rise and Fall of Religious Liberty in America

By C. M. S.

The Church Losing in Religion While Winning in Politics

In the same year in which the Supreme Court of the United States made the declaration that “this is a Christian nation” those in charge of the preparations for the World’s Columbian Exposition at Chicago were putting forth earnest efforts for a large government appropriation. A certain portion of the religious element of the country was determined that no aid should be given unless the gates of the exposition should be closed on Sunday. There was much debate over the matter, and the discussion took such a religious turn that the chaplain of the Senate made this statement:—

During the debate you might have imagined yourself in a general council or assembly or synod or conference, so pronounced was one senator after another.

Petitions asking for the closing of the exposition on Sunday, and petitions urging Congress to have nothing to do with the matter, poured into the Capitol. It was recognized, even by the congressmen who were debating the matter, that they were dealing with a religious question. Yet the discussion went on, and the appropriation was finally voted with the proviso that the gates be closed on Sunday. The stimulus to such a course was apparent throughout. For instance, the petitions sent in to Congress by the Presbyterian churches of New York contained the following threat:—

Resolved, That we do hereby pledge ourselves and each other, that we will from this time henceforth refuse to vote for or support for any office or position of trust, any member of Congress, either senator or representative, who shall vote for any further aid of any kind to the World’s Fair except on conditions named in these resolutions.—Congressional Record, May 25, 1892, page 5144.

The condition referred to in the above extract was that the gates be closed on Sunday. There is no question but that the Christian-nation dictum of the Supreme Court made these petitioners bold to attempt to carry through, by threat and by an appeal to unworthy and selfish motives on the part of congressmen, what they feared they could not accomplish by appeal or argument; and the world was made to witness the sad spectacle of the professed church of Christ threatening to boycott and blacklist the national legislators if they voted according to their own convictions, as they had sworn to do, rather than according to the wishes of a portion of their constituency, as they were ordered to do. In other words, these senators and representatives were asked to perjure themselves in the interests of this militant church party, and threatened with the extinction of their political career if they refused to yield.

That some of these legislators understood what it meant, and had so poor an appreciation of the responsible position to which they had been called by the people as to yield to the threat, is shown by the following extract from a speech by Senator Hiscock, of New York:—

If I had charge of this amendment in the interest of the Columbian Exposition, I would write the provision for the closure in any form that the religious sentiment of the country demands, and not stand here hesitating or quibbling about it. . . . I say to the junior senator from Illinois [Mr. Palmer], he had better yield to this sentiment, and not let it go out to the country that there is the slightest doubt that if this money shall be appropriated, the exposition will be closed on Sunday. . . . I should make this closure provision satisfactory to those petitioners who have memorialized us against the desecration of the Lord’s day.—Congressional Record, July 13, 1892, page 6755.

On the same day Senator Hawley, of Connecticut, in urging the Senate to yield to this threat-demand-petition, said:—

No wise statesman or monarch of modern times, no satrap of Rome, would have thought it wise to fly in the face of a profound conviction of the people he governed, no matter if he thought it a profound error. It is not wise statesmanship to do it. . . . Now, if gentlemen repudiate this, if they desire to reject it, if they deny that this is in the true sense of the word a religious nation, I should like to see the disclaimer put in black and white, and proposed by the Congress of the United States. Write it. How would you write it? How would you deny that from the foundation of the country, through every fiber of their being, this people has been a religious people? Word it, if you dare; advocate it, if you dare. How many who voted for it would ever come back here again?—None, I hope.—Congressional Record, July 13, page 6759.

The strongest argument used by Senator Hawley in this impassioned plea was the argument of expediency, and his peroration was a sinister threat of a senatorial blacklist—a far remove from the noble motives that actuated the founders of this republic when they pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor for the principles they had espoused. He should have been answered to the effect that the nation had already replied to his heated questions in an expression found in the treaty with Tripoli, consummated in 1797, which reads:—

The government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.

And, according to Article VI of the Constitution of the United States, that treaty is a part of the supreme law of the land, and that declaration is a part of the national purpose. The Constitution also answers the Senator’s questions in its first amendment by prohibiting Congress from passing any law respecting the establishment of religion. “How would you write it?” asks the Senator. It is already written. “How many who voted for it would ever come back here again?” That was the least of George Washington’s considerations when he signed that treaty, and he is probably as near to the hearts of the American people as any who voted to bribe the Chicago Exposition to keep Sunday. It was during Washington’s administration, too, that the first amendment to the Constitution was passed.

The demoralizing effect of the campaign for national Sunday legislation was shown also in the House of Representatives in reference to the same question. A member of that body, in an interview with a Chicago Daily Post representative, said:—

The reason we shall vote for it is, I will confess to you, a fear that, unless we do, the church folks will get together, and knife us at the polls; and—well you know we all want to come back, and we can’t afford to take any risks.

Do you think it will pass the House?—Yes; and the Senate, too. We are all in the same boat. I am sorry for those in charge of the Fair; but self-preservation is the first law of nature, and that is all there is about it.

What a spectacle! The best interests of the state, the fundamental principles of the nation, sacrificed to sordid self-interest. The greed for political position overshadows the most vital interests of the nation, which are tossed aside to make way for an unworthy personal ambition.

But the sad result of this religio-political campaign does not cease with those against whom the threats of political boycott were made. This yielding of legislators under pressure seems to have had an equally demoralizing effect upon the campaigners themselves, as will be seen by the following. The final passage of the bill making the government contribution to the Chicago World’s Fair contingent upon the closing of the gates of the exposition on Sunday, was hailed by the president of the American Sabbath Union in these words:—

The form of the law is happy. It gives a premium of $2,500,000 on doing right. It proves in a concrete way that “godliness hath great gain.”

The appropriation did set a premium on something, and that something was the outward performance of a religious act; but that godliness was in any way increased thereby is not possible of demonstration. The quintessence of the whole procedure was simply this: The

World’s Columbian Exposition (and all such others that have received government appropriations on similar conditions) accepted a bribe for the observance of Sunday—went through the motions of a religious act for pay—and the advocates of Sunday legislation are rejoicing in the bribe-giving and the bribe-taking, and calling it a victory for righteousness. This is one of those victories that are worse than defeat; for the immorality of the procedure has been clothed with a robe of “civic righteousness,” and the people and the clergy themselves have been blinded to the iniquity of it. Such seed sown in such soil can never bring forth fruit for the kingdom of God; and the religious kingdom which they expect to build upon such a basis will go down to perdition through the rottenness of its own foundation.

The second sad result of the success of that threat-petition is the strengthening and invigorating of the political propensities of the campaigners. Great encouragement was given them when they succeeded in having the Sunday-closing proviso attached to the appropriation for the World’s Fair. They began to feel their power as a political factor in the nation, and, intoxicated with that “wine of Babylon” (confusion of the sacred and profane), planned for greater things. Said Rev. J. D. Sands, pastor of the Seventh United Presbyterian church of Pittsburg, Pa., soon after the passage of the Sunday-provisoed appropriation bill:—

That the church has weight with great political or governing bodies, has been demonstrated most effectually in the late World’s Fair matter, when the United States Senate, the highest body in the country, listened to the voice of religion, and passed the World’s Fair appropriation bill with the church-instituted proviso that the gates of the great exposition should not be opened upon Sunday. That grand good fact suggests to the Christian’s mind that if this may be done, so may other equally needful measures. The church is gaining power continually, and its voice will be heard in the future much oftener than in the past.

Rev. H. H. George, of Patterson, N. J., said the same year, and concerning the same matter:—

I have learned that we hold the United States Senate in our hands.

At the National Reform convention at Winona Lake, Ind., on Aug. 15, 1906, Dr. William Parsons, of Philadelphia, Pa., in describing the methods of his brethren in securing Sunday laws, said:—

In order to get the legislation we want, we must first make a public demand for it. There is a scientific way of doing that. Legislators are not, to any large extent, natural-born reformers. Many of them are out for graft, and you have got to be rough-and-tumble with them. They like to be on the sunny side of the political hedge. They are there for what there is in it. First you have to fight such men, then you have to forgive them, and then you have to use them. . . . Then you have to get after the politician. You have to promise and threaten and wheedle him, and make him thoroughly understand that if he votes against your measure, he won’t be on the sunny side of the hedge any longer. Then you have got to get some one to introduce your measure, and then you must put on the screws, put on the pressure. That work of putting on the pressure must be done. The other fellow does it, and you must.

It is strange, if such work “must be done,” that our Saviour should have omitted it when he gave his final instructions to his followers. The fact that he gave no such commands, instituted no such work, eschewed all such operations, and repudiated utterly the doctrine of force in the upbuilding of his kingdom, stamps this work of the ecclesiastical politician as outside the pale of his recognition, and antagonistic to his purpose. The compulsion of the state by religious combinations is not only dangerous to the religious liberties of the people, but is destructive of true religious impulses in the hearts of those who bring it about. It is a scheme of human devising that makes mockery of religious forms, encourages hypocrisy for a reward, and teaches dishonorable legislators the political advantage of a perjured oath.

C. M. S.

Note and Comment

The New Message

The pulpit is fast losing its message concerning that kingdom which is “righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost,” and is substituting therefor a message of humanitarianism and social uplift. The change which has been taking place is plainly stated in one of our exchanges:—

The pulpit is coming to recognize more and more that industrial and economical questions are religious questions. They are questions involving the relationship of man to man, and all such questions are intimately connected with the message of religion. For the greatest service that man renders to man is also the best service rendered to God. . . . The clergy of Chicago have acted wisely in setting aside a certain Sunday in the year to discuss the labor-capital problem. The church has too long been silent on these questions. If the voice of the church is not heard on questions touching the ethical considerations of the people, it might as well close its doors.

Quite in harmony with this view of the work of the church were the addresses, resolutions, and discussions at the recent meeting of the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America. In wide contrast with this view of the mission of the church of Christ is the example of Christ himself when he was solicited to adjust a property inequality between brethren. He declined to enter them, into such disputes, saying, “Man, who made me a judge or a divider over you?” Jesus sought to change the hearts of men rather than to attempt to settle outward differences. Well would it be for his church to-day if the ministers of the gospel would follow his example.

Orthodox Spiritualism

THE pastor of the leading Methodist church in Washington, D. C., has been delivering a series of sermons on the “All-Surrounding Spirit World.” While declaring, “We have no sympathy with modern Spiritualism,” referring thereby to spirit-rappings, materializations, spiritualistic photography, etc., this pastor really admits the essential principles of Spiritualism; namely, the conscious existence of the soul as an entity separate from the body, and the ability of such disembodied spirits to communicate with those in the flesh. His words are these:—

While we no more believe in modern Spiritualism than do we believe in necromancy or astrology or in the impostures of the old-time divination, yet we hold the Bible doctrine that our world is incasedin a spirit-world, and that the two worlds so mingle that life in the one interpenetrates life in the other. Our world is the thoroughfare of the spirits of the departed. We can see no reason why we who are yet embodied may not be visited in helpful ways by those who have passed out into the larger life. “Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?” Their faces now and then may break through the mists; their voices now and then may whisper across the border to give us cheer and courage. Such a belief is grounded in the Bible.

It is only by the utter perversion of the Scriptures that they can be made to countenance any such teaching as this, and no better example of such a perversion is needed than in the application of the text quoted, “Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?” which, as the connection plainly shows (Heb. 1:13, 14), applies to angels, and not to the spirits of dead persons. Such discourses as this pastor is preaching constitute the most effective teaching of spiritualism.

Christian Barbarism

STUBBORN facts will sometimes compel the denial of cherished theories. Thus the Christian Observer, commenting upon the murder of ex-Senator E. W. Carmack, in Nashville, Tenn., speaks some plain truth:

We call ourselves a Christian nation, and boast of our refinement and culture, and pride ourselves on our works of philanthropy and religion. We speak with great eclat of the increase of civility, of our educational institutions and our pursuit of high ideals; yet we have to confess with shame that the barbarian and the brute is not far below the surface. Let some one accuse us wrongfully, or offend our self-important dignity, or assail us abusively, and straightway we seek his life. The thirst for blood wakes in us like the craving of a man-eating lion. All our peace of mind, all our satisfaction in life, is swallowed up in the mad desire to imbrue our hands in our enemy’s blood, and, driven by an insane passion for revenge, we accomplish our mad desire. It is a reproduction of the jungle, a recrudescence of savagery, an orgy of the lust for blood.

Even the declaration of the United States Supreme Court that “this is a Christian nation” does not change the hearts of men, and the steady increase of crime, often unprovoked and more and more revolting in its nature, testifies to the fact that the true spirit of Christianity does not rule the conduct of men. The prophet was right when he said, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked;” and only divine power can create a clean heart and overcome the evil nature.

Continue reading: A Significant Decision