Review and Herald, Vol. 82, No. 4. (1/26/1905)

Review and Herald

Jan 26, 1905

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Washington, D. C. · Jan 26, 1905

PRINCIPLES TOO LITTLE UNDERSTOOD

By W. A. Colcord

RELIGIOUS LIBERTY LEAFLETS. No. 1.

PRINCIPLES TOO LITTLE UNDERSTOOD

BY W. A. COLCORD,

Secretary Religious Liberty Bureau

ONE of the most dangerous evils threatening our times is the growing demand for religious legislation. This demand is being urged more and more, and in some instances governments are beginning to yield to it.

Many are led to believe that the remedy for the present wide-spread irreligion lies through human legislation. Few seem to realize that the use of force in religion is inconsistent with the gospel of Christ, and that in the end religious legislation means religious persecution.

There needs to be a better and more general understanding of the great principles underlying human rights and liberties. Principles which, if universally understood and adhered to, would insure peace on earth and good-will among men, ought not to be ignored nor forgotten.

The principles of liberty are living, ennobling principles. They are recognized or disregarded wherever people live and governments exist. The people of all nations either enjoy the blessings of freedom, or feel the oppressive hand of intolerance and persecution.

To keep these principles fresh in the minds of the people is the only sure way of securing the blessings accruing from them, and perpetuating these blessings to the race. It is because these principles are allowed to be forgotten, and false

Eight pages, 38 cents per 100.

Editorial

By Editor

Leaves and Fruit

THE result of abiding in Christ is seen in bearing fruit. “He that abideth in me, and I in him,” said Jesus, “the same beareth much fruit.” There is constant danger of being satisfied with a luxuriant growth of leaves while good fruit is conspicuous by its absence. “It is much easier to grow leaves than fruit, as all Christians well know; and many a life hides the absence of fruit by the abundance of leaves. It is so easy to be deeply interested and actively engaged in the promotion of religious questions, without being much governed or controlled by religious principle. Outward activity is not always the best proof of inward reality; and it becomes important to reflect whether sometimes, amid the foliage of an outward Christian life, some may not be hiding the fruitlessness of a barren experience, and thus drawing away the tree’s best sap before its time, and rendering a supply of good fruit impossible.” It is well to remember that it is not possible “by mere outward show of leaves to supersede the necessity of those fruits of the Spirit which prove the reality, the genuineness of the growth, and the proper development of that life to which all Christians are called to aspire, and which each should manifest.” “By their fruits ye shall know them.”

Prayer and Power

THERE are lessons for us in the experiences of Jesus while he was here upon the earth. Note this one: “Jesus also having been baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened, and the Holy Spirit descended in a bodily form, as a dove, upon him.” After this the record states that “Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee.” There was a direct connection between his praying and his receiving the power of the Spirit. So it is to-day. It is the men of prayer who are the men of power. The Lord has promised his Holy Spirit to those who ask for it, but prevailing prayer is much more than the repetition of a mere form of words appropriate in a supplication to the Most High. There must be a real communion of heart and soul with God, a oneness of purpose with him, and a yielding of the whole being for service in order that God may be glorified in bestowing the gift of his divine power upon us who have wasted our substance in riotous living. The Father is willing to give in just that measure that his children are willing to receive to his glory. There is therefore no excuse for weakness in view of the abundant provision for supplying power. “He giveth power to the faint; and to him that hath no might he increaseth strength.” Prayer is the channel of this power.

Creator and Redeemer

In the very first verse of the Bible God is revealed to us as the Creator. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” But it is not sufficient for the purpose of the revelation to state simply the general truth that God is the Creator. In simple language which is evidently intended to be understood by the common people it is clearly stated that the heavens and the earth, together with all living beings, were brought into existence by the direct power of God’s word, and by a series of special steps, each one of which occupied an ordinary day. The record in detail is found in the first chapter of Genesis. The summary is found in the fourth commandment: “In six days Jehovah made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is.”

There are other declarations of the Scriptures which may be read with profit as bearing directly upon the fact and the manner of creation. Paul exhorted the heathen to turn “unto a living God, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all that in them is.” In holy vision John heard the four and twenty elders say, “Worthy art thou, our Lord and our God, to receive the glory and the honor and the power: for thou didst create all things, and because of thy will they were, and were created.” The psalmist declares: “By the word of Jehovah were the heavens made, and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. . . . For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.” Through the apostle John it is stated: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . All things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that hath been made.” The apostle Paul writes to the Colossians: “All things have been created through him [the Son], and unto him; and he is before all things, and in him all things consist.” And the same apostle writes to the Hebrews: “By faith we understand that the worlds have been framed by the word of God, so that what is seen hath not been made out of things which appear.” And in the same epistle the Son is mentioned as “upholding all things by the word of his power.”

From these statements of the Bible it is clear that the work of creation was wrought by God the Father through the eternal Word, the Son, in whom “all things consist,” who upholds all things “by the word of his power.” It is further evident that this work did not occupy an indeterminate period of many millions of years of gradual development, that matter and living beings were not evolved from some original germ, but that there were certain unique acts of creation at a definite time, as the result of which “what is seen hath not been made out of things which appear.”

A plain distinction is also drawn between the original work of creating all things and the constant work of maintaining all things. “As regards this earth, Scripture declares the work of creation to have been completed. ‘The works were finished from the foundation of the world.’ But the power of God is still exercised in upholding the objects of his creation.” “Upholding all things by the word of his power.”

These facts and principles concerning creation are fundamental truths of the gospel of salvation from sin. It is not merely by chance that the first chapter of the Bible contains the only authoritative and reliable account of the creation

of the world. And this is not done simply for the purpose of writing history, but to lay the foundation of the gospel strong and deep. In doing this the particulars as to both the time and the manner of creation are essential. This will clearly appear as we proceed.

After he had finished the work of creation in six days, the Lord rested on the seventh day. Then he placed his blessing upon the seventh day, and made it into the Sabbath, and gave it to man. His thoughts concerning it are expressed through his servant Moses as follows: “Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever: for in six days Jehovah made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.” Again through the prophet Ezekiel the Lord said: “Moreover also I gave them my Sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am Jehovah that sanctifieth them.”

The bearing of the fact that God is the Creator of all things upon the plan of redemption is plain from the following scripture: “But now thus saith Jehovah that created thee, O Jacob, and he that formed thee, O Israel: Fear not, for I have redeemed thee; I have called thee by thy name, thou art mine. . . . I am Jehovah thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour. . . . Fear not; for I am with thee: I will bring thy seed from the east, and gather thee from the west; I will say to the north, Give up; and to the south, Keep not back; bring my sons from far, and my daughters from the end of the earth; every one that is called by my name, and whom I have created for my glory, whom I have formed, yea, whom I have made.” It thus appears that redemption is creation, and the Redeemer can not possibly be any other than the Creator. This is clearly recognized in other passages of Scripture: “We are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God afore prepared that we should walk in them.” “If any man is in Christ, there is a new creation.” “For neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation.” The love, the life, the power of God, went out through his Son in the creation of the heavens and the earth, “and God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.” The same love, the same life, the same power of God, went out through his Son in redemption, for a new creation. It is by the same word of God that the redemptive creation is accomplished: “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever.” And the seventh-day Sabbath is the sign for both the old and the new creation.

The time and manner of the original creation, and the distinction between the special acts of creation in the beginning and the work of upholding the things that are made, are of importance as teaching gospel truths. The same God who through his eternal Son created something out of nothing, and that, too, through the immediate action of his word, and not through the indirect method of development from primordial elements, can create a new heart in the repentant sinner through the immediate action of the same word. Furthermore, the delusive hope that righteousness can be developed out of the elements already existing in the sinner, if only a sufficient time is allowed, will end only in disappointment and loss. The original creation was not accomplished through evolution, and evolution is not the method of the new creation. In the original creation “what is seen hath not been made out of things which appear,” and in the same way the new creation is not the mere development of the good already in man. “The theory that God did not create matter when he brought the world into existence, is without foundation. In the formation of our world, God was not indebted to pre-existing matter. On the contrary, all things, material or spiritual, stood up before the Lord Jehovah at his voice, and were created for his own purpose.” Such is the truth concerning creation, and such is the application of the truth in the teaching of the gospel.

From this brief study of the principles involved, it is easy to understand why in this last generation geology has come “with its message that the world was not made in six days,” and why anthropology has come “with its message that man was not created six thousand years ago,” and why evolutionary science has come “with its message that man was not made perfect,—he has been developed gradually, like all other animals, from a germ,”—and why a leading interpreter of the newest things in science and the newest things in religion declares that “all days are equally creative,” and further says: “Every day a creative day. That is the word of science.” We call special attention to this claim. “Every day a creative day,” is the watchword of the evolutionist. This breaks down all distinction between the original work in the creation of all things and the continuous work of upholding all things. This discards the Biblical revelation of six literal days of creation, and substitutes for it the indefinite periods of development. This destroys the foundation of the seventh-day Sabbath, and substitutes the idea that all days are holy unto the Lord.

This whole evolutionary conception of the universe, when logically carried out in its application to religion, ends in the claim that all men are holy, that “God is in all humanity,” and that it only needs proper environment to develop the godlike in every man. All this is bound up in the apparently beautiful and religious sentiment, “Every day a creative day.”

The basis of the threefold message of Revelation 14 is found in the announcement, which is to be made “with a great voice,” “Worship him that made the heaven and the earth and sea and fountains of waters.” Thus the message for the last generation, when men are turning away from the personal Creator to “an Infinite and Eternal Energy,” is based upon the fundamental truths of the revealed account of creation, and this is necessary in order that the gospel may not be deprived of its power to save men from their sins. Only he who can create something out of nothing, and can uphold all things by the word of his power, is a sufficient Redeemer, a complete Saviour. This personal God gave himself for us in the person of his Son, and gives himself to us in the third person of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit. This is the message of Christ and his righteousness. In this message is found the only antidote for the evolutionary Christianity which is now being taught under the guise of a better philosophy than is revealed in the Scriptures. It is time for this message to be given with a loud cry.

Railroads and Plutocrats

By Editor

An editorial in the January number of The World's Work, with the title “Big Facts about Railroads,” calls attention to the increase of mileage and of earnings of the railroads in the United States during 1904, and then refers to a significant fact, in the following language:—

While the railroads are thus growing, and their business is increasing, the control of the lines is becoming more and more concentrated. . . . Gradually the great lines came into the hands of a very small number of capitalists in New York; and, very recently, so many other roads have been acquired by the same capitalists that New York may now be said to control the railroads of the whole country. And the number of capitalists holding the great system is becoming smaller and smaller. Mr. E. H. Harriman, Mr. J. P. Morgan, Mr. James J. Hill, the Moore brothers, Mr. George J. Gould, and the Standard Oil interests may be said now to control the great thoroughfares of American inland transportation.

If our readers will recall an article in a recent issue of the REVIEW, on the subject of banking in New York City, they

will observe that some of the same men and some of the same interests are found in control both of the leading financial institutions and of the railroads of the country. There is a meaning in this situation which should not escape our attention. In it may be found one of the signs of the times.

In this connection it will be suggestive to make another quotation from the same number of The World's Work, which is found under the heading “A Little New Year Sermon.” It reads as follows:—

The one real danger, if there be any grave danger, that besets our American life is our rapidly growing wealth, which may work harm in two ways: it gets a firmer grasp on government as it becomes concentrated, and develops better machinery for controlling public officials; and it does this the more easily because it has a tendency at the same time to soften the fiber of the people’s character. The London Spectator recently expressed the opinion that the plutocrat is everywhere in Europe gaining distinctions and privileges such as hitherto have been conferred only by birth or great deeds. “The tendency” in England “is to place parliamentary power in the hands of the rich.” In Germany rich men of the Krupp type “attain the position of great nobles.” In Italy “the owners of the great banking fortunes are potentates;” while in Russia “the noble is great or little in proportion to his wealth.” “The plutocrat, in fact, has become the ideal man.” In the United States the rich man is not the ideal man—that would be saying far too much. But he is the powerful man. . . .

But, if the rich are not likely to construct a social nobility among us, they are already too nearly our political masters. This is the danger that plutocracy has for a democracy. Those who like to find dark places in our sky may watch this cloud. It is great “interests” and syndicates that degrade the tone of public life. It is they that keep commonplace men in office—not many directly venal men, perhaps, but complaisant men, men without strong convictions or robust character, who yield to gentle pressure. This tendency explains the commonplace level of governors, members of the House, and senators, not to speak of mayors and members of the legislatures. One of these days this political use of wealth may arouse the people against plutocracy, and the gentle zephyr of Mr. Bryan become a whirlwind of the masses. Fortunately we do not seem to have reached a place of acute danger. But it is in this direction that danger lies.

It is not every writer who sees with such clearness and acknowledges with such frankness the “danger” which threatens the people of the whole world on account of the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few. The divine mind foresaw all this many centuries ago, and has given us warning concerning it. It is well to remember, however, that it is not necessary to be one of the few whose names are now associated with such colossal fortunes and with such financial power in order to share in our personal experience in the “miseries” which will come upon the rich. The man who holds and hoards far beyond his own needs when the needs of God’s work are appealing in vain for the means to carry this message to the world to save them from the impending ruin is just as surely inviting trouble to come upon himself as is the multimillionaire. It is time for some of our own people to lay these principles to heart.

“The Colossus of the North”

By W. A. S.

ABOUT a century and a half ago Lord Bolingbroke, statesman and historical writer, spoke of the history of the obscure Muscovite people “as having no relation to the knowledge which a practical English statesman ought to acquire.”

The scene has changed since then. A Hebrew prophet, twenty-five hundred years ago, had foretold the coming forth of a great power, out of the north parts, in the gathering of the nations to the last conflict. He designated the power in his address to the prince of Rosh (Russia), Meshech (Muscovy), and Tubal (Tobolsk). And in the last century, as though consciously hastening onto the stage to act its part in the closing drama, this power has been gathering its forces. Hutchinson’s “History of the World” says:—

One of the chief notes of political history in the nineteenth century is the great advance of the Russian empire in European and Asiatic influence.

Notice the parallel between the graphic description by the ancient prophet and the report of the modern war correspondent, as here quoted:—

Gomer, and all his hordes [the people of Gomer being the ancient Scythian tribes, who filled central and northern Asia]. . . . Thou shalt come like a storm, thou shalt be like a cloud to cover the land, thou, and all thy hordes, and many peoples with thee. . . . Thou shalt come from thy place out of the uttermost parts of the north, thou, and many peoples with thee, all of them riding upon horses, a great company and a mighty army.

Mr. A. G. Hales, correspondent of the London Daily News, describes the mixed peoples of many tribes gathered now under the Muscovite standard:—

Possibly no nation has drawn such a mixed lot of men to the colors for centuries as Russia is doing now. I saw grim Tartars from the Crimea; Turcomans from Merv were bound for the same destination; they had their orders to be at Verchneudinsk within a given time, and they went as swiftly as men could go; Circassians from the Caucasus bivouacked on the shores of Lake Baikal with Buriat seal-hunters; thick-set, sturdy fellows from Archangel; Samoyedes, who had flocked from the far frozen valley of the Yenesei, Buriats, men of almost ox-like strength, but of small intelligence; Mongols, from the Trans-Baikal—a mixed and motley crowd. They spoke many tongues, dressed in many garbs, and carried weapons peculiar to their particular provinces.

All were types of tribes and nations to whom the czar is lord and ruler. They had come singly, as rain-drops come pattering down the hillsides, and they had come in little scraps of half-dozens and dozens, like tiny rivulets meandering through ravines and other wide-spread plains. They had come in droves, like rivers that could not be impeded in their course, because the czar had called, and his voice reaches to the utmost bounds of his vast empire.

Many details in Ezekiel’s later chapters evidently have reference only to things that might have been had Israel fulfilled the Lord’s conditions, and allowed him to establish them in truth in their land. But it is evident that the general outline of Ezekiel 38 and 39 deals with the gathering for Armageddon. While we see tribes and tongues and peoples lining up for the final conflict in fulfilment of prophecy, how can we fail to be stirred day by day by the knowledge that we also are to fulfil prophecy, and carry to these same tribes and tongues the message God has given us to deliver before the storm actually breaks? We have an Eastern question of our own to settle. W. A. S.

The Work of Mrs. E. G. White

By Editor

DURING the visit of Mrs. E. G. White to Battle Creek, Mich., last autumn, the press dispatches announced under flaming headlines that she had made a public acknowledgment that she was not a prophetess, and much emphasis was laid upon the great deception which it was claimed she had practised upon this people. Since that time some papers whose columns have often contained attacks upon Sister White and her work have rejoiced over “the fall of Seventh-day Adventism,” and have called attention to this “providential” experience as being designed “to convince our Seventh-day Adventist brethren of their too long cherished error.”

In Sister White’s article in this issue of the REVIEW will be found her own report of what she did say, and her own statement concerning her work. The whole abstract of her remarks at Battle Creek should be read in order to get the setting of her specific statements about her work, but we call special attention to the following paragraph:—

I said that I did not claim to be a prophetess. I have not stood before the people claiming this title, though many called me thus. I have been instructed to say, “I am God’s messenger, sent to

bear a message of reproof to the erring and of encouragement to the meek and lowly.” With pen and with voice I am to bear the message given to me. The word given me is, “You are faithfully to reprove those who would mar the faith of the people of God. Write out the things which I shall give you, that they may stand as a witness to the truth till the end of time.”

If with great flourish of trumpets and with loud-sounding phrases Sister White had made extraordinary claims for herself, like John Alexander Dowie, there would have been nothing said about “the fall of Seventh-day Adventism,” but when she made no claim for herself, and did not assert her right to the title of prophetess, but simply called herself “God’s messenger,” and emphasized her work rather than her position, she is branded as a deceiver. But what is the work of a prophet? Let us read the Lord’s commission to the prophet Ezekiel: “Son of man, I send thee to the children of Israel, . . . and thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah. And they, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear (for they are a rebellious house), yet shall know that there hath been a prophet among them. . . . And he said unto me, Son of man, go, get thee unto the house of Israel, and speak with my words unto them.” Is not a prophet God’s messenger?

Consider the reply of Amos the prophet to Amaziah the priest of Bethel: “Then answered Amos, and said to Amaziah, I am no prophet, neither am I a prophet’s son; but I am a herdsman, and a dresser of sycamore trees: and Jehovah took me from following the flock, and Jehovah said unto me, Go, prophesy unto my people Israel.” Was Amos a deceiver because he did not boastfully claim to be a prophet and in the line of the prophets?

Of John the Baptist it is written, “Behold, I send my messenger before thy face.” And when he was asked concerning his work, he said: “I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness.” But of this same John the Baptist Jesus said, “Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist.” And of the people it is said, “All verily held John to be a prophet.” On his own part John simply claimed to be a voice in fulfilment of the promise to send a messenger to the people; but that is the work of a prophet, and Jesus and the people recognized him as such. Was John the Baptist a deceiver?

It ought to be apparent to all unprejudiced people that in her statements Sister White sought to make clear what her work is rather than to exalt herself, but those who have known her work most intimately for more than half a century know that it is the work of a mere prophet. And the scriptures quoted show that in not making any claim in her own behalf to the office of a prophet she was in harmony with the statements of acknowledged prophets of the Bible.

Modern Criticism of the Decalogue

By L. A. S.

A RECENT article in the Hibbert Journal, on the “Shortcomings of the Decalogue,” by Charles B. Wheeler, presents a good illustration of the shortcomings of the modern theology which presumes to criticize the Word of God. Mr. Wheeler has arrived at the conclusion that the ten commandments are altogether “inadequate as a guide to the complex life of to-day,” and believes that there are men who could rewrite them in better form. Such a view, of course, sets aside the Author of the decalogue as a being unsuited to the spiritual requirements of the present age.

Looking at the decalogue, “from a modern standpoint,” Mr. Wheeler says:—

A thoughtful man who would rewrite the decalogue to-day would almost certainly lay far more stress on the positive duties, with the idea of promoting active benevolence rather than blameless lethargy. The four commandments which deal with man’s relation to God would probably be replaced by one simple injunction to obey at all cost the voice of God within, while the four which treat of his conduct toward his fellows would be combined into one comprehensive prohibition of all interference with the lives of others.

If this modern critic knew a little more about the subject whereof he speaks, he would know that the ten commandments are summed up in two “great” commandments, which are, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength;” and, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” “On these two commandments,” said Jesus, “hang all the law.” The ten commandments, therefore, according to the exposition of them given by the highest possible Authority, are fulfilled by love; they demand love; and love is the most positive thing in the world. He who will love God with all his heart and mind, and his neighbor as himself,—he whose life manifests this love to God and to man,—is discharging the “positive duties” of life to the fullest possible extent.

This critic who objects to the decalogue on the ground that it is “negative” in character, would substitute for it an injunction “to obey at all costs the voice of God within,” and a “comprehensive prohibition of all interference with the lives of others.” But merely to refrain from interference with the lives of others would be a negative sort of goodness, falling very far short of that unselfish love for one’s fellow beings which the law of God requires. The life of Jesus of Nazareth, who “went about doing good,” filling every day full of unselfish acts for the uplifting of humanity about him, is a perfect illustration of the positive character of that law. Christ did nothing more than fulfil his Father’s law.

To substitute for the first four commands of the decalogue an injunction to obey “the voice of God within,” would, furthermore, lower the standard of life infinitely below the plane of true Christianity, since it would lead an individual to look within himself to find God, and thus to sink eventually to the lowest level of heathenism. In Christianity, the voice of God without stands superior to the voice within; conscience is always to be instructed and guided by the written Word; while the eye of faith looks, not within to behold God, but to the courts above, to the sanctuary which God pitched, where is his throne, and into which Jesus, our mediator, is for us entered. It is well for us that the decalogue has not been rewritten by the modern critics.

L. A. S.

The Cross and the Flag

By L. A. S.

THE question whether a man may properly hold himself amenable to any higher authority than that of the government under which he lives, or in other words, whether a person may be justified in following the dictates of his conscience contrary to the law of the land, is receiving much attention in connection with the discussion of the eligibility of the Mormon “apostle,” Reed Smoot, to a seat in the United States Senate. The Independent, which views the subject in a clearer light than some others who have spoken on the matter, answers the question in the affirmative. It points out that Mormons are not the only ones in this country who profess allegiance to another sovereignty, regarded by them as a higher one than that of the United States, and says:—

It would be the easiest thing in the world to collect a catena of claims by distinguished Catholic theologians, and even from the last papal syllabus, asserting the authority of that church over the state, and its right to impose its laws on the state, and these utterances accepted by Catholics in this country. But for this reason do we refuse to allow a Catholic to be a senator?—Not at all. Further than this, we express our conviction of old, that the cross can properly be hoisted over the flag. We believe, as did Seward, in the higher law. We hold that the church has the right, speaking for the conscience of its members

to denounce and disobey laws of the state which it disapproves. . . . It makes no difference in principle that we are right, and that the Mormons are, we think, wrong—their own conscience must be obeyed; and it is right for them to declare, in their own way—even Orson Pratt—that the church ought to be supreme. A multitude of Catholics believe the same.

This is a matter of interest to Seventh-day Adventists; for they refuse to obey certain laws of the States designed to secure homage to a religious institution—the Sunday sabbath—in which institution they see a rival to the Sabbath of the Lord—the seventh day. Will it be admitted by their religious opponents that they have a right to disobey and denounce such laws, because of their allegiance to the “higher law” which speaks to conscience? This question recent history has partly answered, and time will soon answer it much more fully.

But for the recognition of, and the allegiance to, this higher law, by individuals who have had the courage to stand alone against bitter and overwhelming opposition, this world would be a far worse place of abode than it is to-day. Reformations are not produced by allegiance to the law of the land, but by allegiance to the higher call and claims of God. Disobedience to the law of the state is, however, justified only where that law is clearly contrary to the law of God. Not conscience, but the Word of God, is the ultimate authority in religion. Conscience must be guided and educated by the written Word. The statements of the Word, and not conscience merely, must be set up in defense of such an action. When conscience becomes so perverted that it leads to or justifies acts which invade the rights of others, it can not properly be pleaded in justification of disregard of human enactments.

L. A. S.

A Few Days at the Southern Union Conference Council

By Arthur Grosvenor Daniells

In company with Professor Prescott, I spent a few days at Nashville, attending the annual council of the Southern Union Conference Committee, which opened January 10. Owing to other appointments, I was not able to be present at the beginning of the council, nor to stay until its close. But it was a privilege which I greatly enjoyed to meet again with our dear brethren in the South. The reports they gave of the various features of the work in that part of the field were very helpful to me. The personal contact with those who are struggling with difficulties, and rejoicing over victories, brings us into closer union and more intelligent co-operation.

One long meeting of the council was devoted to the presentation of reports from conference presidents regarding the progress of the cause in their respective conferences. Most of these reports showed substantial gains in membership, funds, etc. The Lord has blessed the ministry of his people during the past year. As usual, the great cry is for more laborers and means to answer the many calls for help.

Two days were given to the educational work in the South. Professor Tenney gave a most encouraging report of the attendance, the spiritual condition, and the industrial features of the Graysville Academy. Professor Sutherland outlined at considerable length the plans of the school which he and his associates are just starting near Nashville. Brother F. R. Rogers and his co-workers gave a full report of the Huntsville Training-school. During the last six months most earnest efforts have been put forth to improve the conditions of this institution. From the details of the work presented by the principal and those in charge of the business and industrial departments, we were led to believe that very encouraging progress has been made. The attendance has been greatly enlarged, so that now seventy or more colored students are attending the school. The building and equipments have been greatly improved, and strenuous efforts have been made to make the farm contribute more largely to the support of the enterprise. The brethren in charge of this institution have been greatly pleased to receive financial help during the past few months, and earnestly solicit a continuance of contributions until the school can be placed on vantage-ground. A number of the leading brethren who visited the school just before the council opened, heartily confirmed all that the reports presented regarding the improvements that have been made. The policy being followed by those in charge of the school appears sensible, and we believe that our people may confidently expect to hear good reports regarding the Huntsville school.

Considerable time was given to the publishing interests in the South. Most of the discussion relating to this department of the work occurred before I reached the meeting. The reports submitted by the manager showed that very decided changes have been made during the last year, and that in some respects the conditions relating to the publishing interests have been greatly improved. The sale of our literature in the South is steadily increasing. The work of the factory has been greatly enlarged during the past year. Those who have kept close watch of the financial features have been aware that the institution has shown a heavy loss each year since it began operations. But during the past year this loss has been very largely reduced. Those in charge were very hopeful one year ago that this would be done, and we all desired that it should. The expectations of most of those acquainted with the situation have been met, and we are very hopeful that another year will record a gain instead of a loss, even though it is small this year compared with former years.

The report of the medical branch of the work had not been submitted when we were obliged to leave; but we learned that although working under many disadvantages, encouraging success has attended this line of work. The Graysville Sanitarium has received substantial financial help, and has been greatly improved, and is now fully prepared for good work. The brethren in charge of the medical work at Nashville have struggled with many unfavorable conditions. I understand that their work has been fully self-supporting; but they see vast opportunities before them for a splendid work, but owing to a lack of means, they are unable to take full advantage of these opportunities.

As we looked upon this truly destitute field, and talked with our brethren who are doing all they know how to develop the interests of this cause there, we felt an inexpressible longing to render our brethren more help in their efforts to build up the cause. No doubt quite full reports of this council will appear in the REVIEW, and I bespeak for them a careful reading by all our people.

We appreciated the hearty welcome extended to us, and the deep interest manifested by the brethren in the South in what we presented to them regarding the interests of the cause in other parts of the world. In no place in our recent travels have we met with more hearty sympathy than at Nashville. We could easily detect a sweet, tender, brotherly spirit in the meetings, which assured us that the good spirit of the Master is dwelling with, and working in, the hearts of our fellow laborers in the South.

Brethren Butler and Haskell, who have been so long identified with this cause, and have labored so prominently for its upbuilding and progress, are giving the work in the South the benefit of their energies and experience. We were sorry that we could not remain longer with our brethren, and join with them in the consideration of their problems, and in devising ways and means for the more rapid extension of the work in that field. Let us remember them at the throne of grace, and render every assistance we can consistently with the demands of the great field in which we are sent to labor for our Master.

A. G. DANIELLS.

Continue reading: Bearing the Cross