The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Vol. 78 (1901)

January 1, 1901

"The Faith of Jesus" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 1 , p. 8.

"LET this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus; who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery ["a thing to be seized upon and held fast"] to be equal with God; but emptied himself, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men." Phil. 2:5-7.

He was made in the likeness of men, as men are, just where they are.

"The Word was made flesh." He "took part of the same" flesh and blood as that of which the children of men are partakers, as they are since man has fallen into sin. And so it is written: "When the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made. . . under the law."

To be under the law is to be guilty, condemned, and subject to the curse. For it is written: "We know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that. . . all the world may become guilty before God." This, because "all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God."

And the guilt of sin brings the curse. In Zech. 5:1-4 the prophet beheld a "flying roll; the length thereof. . . twenty cubits, and the breadth thereof ten cubits." The Lord said to him: "This is the curse that goeth forth over the face of the whole earth."

This roll represents all the curse that is upon the face of the whole earth. And what is the cause of this curse over the face of the whole earth? This: "For every one that stealeth shall be cut off as on this side according to it; and every one that sweareth shall be cut off as on that side according to it."

That is, this roll is the law of God, and one commandment it cited from each table, showing that both tables of the law are included in the roll. Every one that stealeth–every one that transgresseth the law in the things of the second table–shall be cut off as on this side of the law according to it; and every one that sweareth–every one that transgresseth in the things of the first table of the law–shall be cut off as on that side of the law according to it.

The heavenly recorders do not need to write out a statement of each particular sin of every man, but simply to indicate of the roll that pertains to each man, the particular commandment that is violated in each transgression. And that such a roll of the law does go with every man wherever he goes, and even abides in his house, is plain from the next words: "I will bring it forth, saith the Lord of hosts, and it shall enter into the house of the thief, and into the house of him that sweareth falsely by my name: and it shall remain in the midst of his house."

And unless a remedy shall be found, there that roll of the law will remain until the curse shall consume that man, and his house, "with the timber thereof and the stones thereof;" that is, until the curse shall devour the earth in that great day when the very elements shall melt with fervent heat. For "the strength of sin" and the curse "is the law." 1 Cor. 15:56.

But, thanks be to God, "God sent forth His Son, made. . . under the law, to redeem them that were under the law." Gal. 4:4, 5. By His coming He brought redemption to every soul who is under the law. But in order perfectly to bring that redemption to men under the law, He himself must come to men, just where they are, and as they are, under the law.

And this He did; for He was "made under the law;" He was made "guilty;" He was made condemned by the law; He was counted, "made," as guilty as any man is guilty who is under the law. He was counted, "made," under condemnation as fully as any man is under condemnation because of his violation of the law. He was counted, "made," under the curse as completely as any man in the world has ever been, or ever can be, under the curse. For it is written: "He that is hanged ["on a tree"] is accursed of God." Deut. 21:23.

The Hebrew makes this stronger still; for the literal translation is: "He that hangeth on a tree is the curse of God." And this is exactly the strength of the fact respecting Christ; for it is written that He was "made a curse." Thus, when He was made under the law, He was made all that it means to be under the law. He was made guilty; He was made condemned; He was made a curse.

But bear in mind forever that all this He "was made." He was none of this of himself, of native right; but all of it He "was made." And He was made it all for us: for us who are under the law; for us who are under condemnation because of transgressions of the law; for us who are under the curse because of swearing, and lying, and stealing, and committing adultery, and all the other infractions of the roll of God's law that goeth with us and that remaineth in our house.

He was made under the law, to redeem them that are under the law. He was made a curse, to redeem them that are under the curse because of being under the law.

But for whomsoever it was done, and whatsoever is accomplished by the doing of it, there must never be forgotten the fact that, in order to the doing of that which was done, He had to be made that which those already were for whom the thing was done.

Any man, therefore, in all the world, who knows guilt, by that very thing knows also what Jesus felt for him, and by this knows how close Jesus has come to him. Whosoever knows what is condemnation, in that knows exactly what Jesus felt for him, and so knows how thoroughly Jesus is able to sympathize with him and to redeem him. Whosoever knows the curse of sin, "the plague of his own heart," in that can know exactly what Jesus experienced for him, and how entirely Jesus identified himself, in very experience, with him.

Bearing guilty, being under condemnation, and so under the weight of the curse, Jesus, a whole lifetime in this world of guilt, condemnation, and the curse, lived the perfect life of the righteousness of God, without ever sinning at all. And whenever any man knowing guilt, condemnation, and the curse of sin, and knowing that Jesus actually felt in His experience all this just as man feels it, then, in addition, that man can know in his experience the blessedness of the perfect life of God, in righteousness in his life, to redeem him from guilt, from condemnation, and from the curse; and manifested in his whole lifetime to keep him from ever sinning at all.

Christ was made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law. And that blessed work is accomplished for every soul who will accept of that redemption.

"Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us." His being made a curse is not in vain: it accomplishes all that was intended by it, in behalf of every man who will receive it; for it was all done "that the blessing of Abraham might come on the gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith." Gal. 3:14.

Still, whatever was intended by it, and whatever is accomplished by it, there must always be borne in mind by every soul the FACT that, in His condescension, in His emptying himself and being "made in the likeness of men," and "made flesh," He was made under the law, guilty,–under condemnation, under the curse,–as really and as entirely as is any soul that shall ever be redeemed.

Having passed through it all, He is the author of eternal salvation, and able to save to the uttermost from deepest loss all who come unto God by Him.

January 8, 1901

"The Faith of Jesus" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 2 , p. 24.

"LET this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus; who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery ["a thing to be seized upon and held fast"] to be equal with God; but emptied himself, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men." Phil. 2:5-7.

Christ was like God in the sense of being of the nature, in very substance, of God. He was made in the likeness of men, in the sense of being like men, in the nature and very substance of men.

Christ was God. He became man. And when He became man, He was man as really as He was God.

He became man in order that He might redeem man. He came to where man is, to bring man to where He was. And in order to redeem man from what man is, He was made what man is.

Man is flesh. Gen. 6:3; John 3:6. "And the Word was made flesh." John 1:14; Heb. 2:14.

Man is under the law. Rom. 3:19. Christ was "made under the law." Gal. 4:4.

Man is under the curse. Gal. 3:10; Zech. 5:1-4. "Christ was made a curse." Gal. 3:13.

Man is sold under sin (Rom. 7:14), and laden with iniquity. Isa. 1:4. And "the Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all." Isa. 53:6.

Man is "a body of sin." Rom. 6:6. And God "hath made Him to be sin." 2 Cor. 5:21.

Thus all things that man is, Christ was made. And all this He was as really as all this the man is. And Christ became all this in order that the man might become what Christ was.

Christ was the Son of God. He became the Son of man that the sons of men might become the sons of God. gal. 4:4; 1 John 3:1.

Christ was Spirit. 1 Cor. 15:45. He became flesh in order that man, who is flesh, might become Spirit. John 3:6; Rom. 8:8-10.

Christ was the righteousness of God. He was made to be sin, in order that man, who is sin, "might be made the righteousness of God in Him." 2 Cor. 5:21.

Thus, literally, "in all things it behoved Him to be made like unto His brethren." Whatsoever man is in the flesh, that Christ became in the flesh. Man is "sinful." Isa. 1:4. Christ, who knew no sin, was made as sinful as man is sinful. For God sent His "Son in the likeness of sinful flesh"–in flesh that is like, in the sense of being like in nature, in substance. Rom. 8:3. "Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also himself likewise took part of the same." Christ, who was the very righteousness of God, was made the very sinfulness of men.

Yet, bear in mind that none of this was He of himself, in His own right. But all of it He "was made."

Christ was made what, before, He was not, in order that the man might be made now and forever what he is not.

Christ, who knew no sin, was made to be sin, even the sinfulness of man, in order that we, who knew no righteousness, might be made righteousness, even the righteousness of God.

And as the righteousness of God, which, in Christ, the man is made, is real righteousness, so the sin of men, which Christ was made in the flesh, was real sin.

As certainly as our sins, when upon us, are real sins to us, so certainly, when these sins were laid upon Him, they became real sins to Him.

As certainly as guilt attaches to these sins, and to us because of them, when they are upon us, so certainly this guilt attached to these same sins of ours, and to Him because of them, when they were laid upon Him.

As the sense of condemnation and discouragement of these sins was real to us, when these sins of ours were upon us, so certainly this same sense of condemnation and discouragement, because of the guilt of these sins, was realized by Him when these sins of ours were laid upon Him.

So that the guilt, the condemnation, the discouragement, of the knowledge of sin were His–were a fact in His conscious experience–as really as they were ever such in the life of any sinner that was ever on earth.

And therein lies the fullness of our salvation from sin. He has gone the way of sin, in the very knowledge of it, to its very depths. It was all laid upon Him, and He was "touched with the feeling" of it.

And He did it all in order that we, sinful men, might be made the very righteousness of God, and so be delivered unto the glorious liberty of the children of God.

He who knew the height of the righteousness of God acquired also the knowledge of the depth of the sins of men. He knows the awfulness of the depths of the sins of men, as well as He knows the glory of the heights of the righteousness of God.

And so He became, and forever is, the author of eternal salvation to all who will receive Him; able to save to the uttermost all who come unto God by Him.

And blessed be His glorious name forever and ever!

"Cure 'La Grippe' Yourself" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 2 , p. 24.

TWO years ago we published the following cure for la grippe. It then did many persons much good; and as there are many who are readers of the REVIEW now who were not then, we publish it again:–

As winter has now come in full blast, la grippe is likely to make itself felt at any time. It is a dangerous thing, too; and if not broken up at the earliest possible moment, it will cause severe illness at present, and leave its mark upon the system for months to come.

However, la grippe can be so effectually broken up that no one need be injured by it, nor necessarily confined to the house longer than to put himself through the treatment. And the treatment is so simple that it is within the reach of everybody, and so easily applied that any one can give it to himself, if need be. And here it is:–

1. As soon as you discover that you have la grippe, put your feet, and up to the knees if possible, in water as hot as can be borne.

2. Keep the water as hot as can be borne, by putting in boiling water.

3. Continue this till perspiration is started. At the same time it is helpful, though not essential, to sip hot lemonade.

4. When perspiration has been well started, take out your feet, dry them quickly, wrap them in hot flannels, and lie down with hot-water bottles, hot bricks, or something of the kind, to your feet.

5. Lie there till you choose to get up; and la grippe will be killed. You will probably be took weak to do much; but as la grippe is gone, your strength will soon return.

Now do not pass this treatment by as too simple to be followed, and go to taking medicines, or even a full bath. Follow these directions strictly, simple as they appear to be, and you will find la grippe effectually broken.

I know this because I have tested the treatment thoroughly. I have tested it while on a journey, when I had only poor facilities, yet with complete success. I have tested it in a country cabin, within fifteen miles of the Russian border, in the month of December, on an attack of la grippe straight from Russia and undiluted, and with such success as to miss but one sermon in a series of appointments. And others have applied it with equal success.

There is true philosophy in it. And the philosophy lies here: La grippe, at its seizure, is peculiarly a disease of the head. Plainly, therefore, if the blood can be drawn away from the head, so that the disease shall have nothing to feed on, la grippe will have to fail. Holding the feet in water so hot, does effectually draw the blood to the farthest extremity from the head; and keeping the feet hot so long, holds the blood away from the head, so that the disease is robbed of support, and inevitably fails.

A full bath, even though it be a Turkish or a Russian, is not effectual against la grippe, because the whole body is equally heated, the blood is made to bound more rapidly, and the disease is fed rather than starved.

Follow these directions strictly, and nothing will fail but la grippe.

If you have not had experience so that you are acquainted with la grippe, you can know that it is upon you by your eyes burning, your nose tickling, your head feeling large and dull, and perhaps every joint and muscle of the body aching. Though you need not wait for all these feelings: one or two of them is enough to justify you in beginning proceedings.
ALONZO T. JONES.

"Editorial" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 2 , p. 27.

LAST week we printed the word of the Independent that "Archbishop Ireland is going to Cuba, commissioned by the President, to inquire concerning the allotment of Church property and other matters of interest to the Catholic Church." About a year ago an Italian was taken from the Catholic University and appointed bishop of Havana, because his "especial knowledge of the United States Constitution" would be of value in matters of Church property there; and now the President commissions Archbishop Ireland to Cuba concerning Church property and "other matters of interest to the Catholic Church." It should also be borne in mind, with these items, that Archbishop Chapelle is appointed by the pope apostolic delegate to Cuba, Porto Rico, and the Philippines. With Archbishop and Apostolic Delegate Chapelle, the President's adviser concerning matters of interest to the Catholic Church in the Philippines, and with Archbishop Ireland, the President's commissioner concerning matters of interest to the Catholic Church in Cuba, if now the President would take up some other archbishop, cardinal, or apostolic delegate as his adviser concerning matters of interest to the Catholic Church in the United States, he would occupy a position relative to the Catholic Church, second only to that of the pope. And at the rate of procedure of the last two years, how long will it be before that point shall be reached? By the instrumentality of the United States these are great days for the papacy.

January 15, 1901

"The Faith of Jesus" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 3 , pp. 40, 41.

"LET this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus; who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery ["a thing to be seized upon and held fast"] to be equal with God; but emptied himself, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men." Phil. 2:5-7.

"And the Word was made flesh."

How was it that He was made flesh? How did He partake of human nature?–Exactly as do all of us, all of the children of men. For it is written: "As the children [of the man] are partakers of flesh and blood, He also himself likewise took part of the same."

Likewise signifies "in the like way," "then," "in the same way." So He partook of "the same" flesh and blood that men have, in the same way that men partake of it. Men partake of it by birth. So "likewise" did He. Accordingly, it is written, "Unto us a Child is born."

Accordingly, it is further written: "God sent forth His Son, made of a woman." Gal. 4:4. He, being made of a woman in this world, in the nature of things He was made of the only kind of a woman that this world knows.

But why must He be made of a woman? why not of a man?–For the simple reason that to be made of a man would not bring Him close enough to mankind as mankind is, under sin. He was made of a woman in order that He might come, in the very woman in order that He might come, in the very uttermost, to where human nature is in its sinning.

In order to do this He must be made of a woman; because the woman, not the man, was first, and originally, in the transgression. For "Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." 1 Tim. 2:14.

He was thus made of a woman in order that He might meet the great world of sin at its very fountain head of entrance into this world. To have been made otherwise than of a woman would have been to come short of this, and so would have been only to miss the redemption of men completely from sin.

It was "the Seed of the woman" that was to bruise the serpent's head; and it was only as "the seed of the woman," and "made of a woman," that He could meet the serpent on his own ground, at the very point of the entrance of sin into this world.

To have been made only of the descent of man, would have been to come short of the full breadth of the field of sin; because the woman had sinned, and sin was thus in the world, before the man sinned.

It was the woman who, in this world, was originally in the transgression. It was the woman by whom sin originally entered. Therefore, in the redemption of the children of men from sin, He who would be the Redeemer must go back of the man, to meet the sin that was in the world before the man sinned.

This is why He who came to redeem was "made of a woman." By being made of a woman, He could trace sin to the very fountain head of its original entry into the world by the woman. And thus, in finding sin in the world, and uprooting it from the world, from its original entrance into the world till the last vestige of it shall be swept from the world, in the very nature of things He must partake of human nature as it is since sin entered.

Otherwise, there was no kind of need whatever that He should be "made of a woman." If He were not to come into closest contact with sin as it is in the world, as it is in human nature; if He were to be removed one single degree from it as it is in human nature,–then He need not have been "made of a woman."

But as He was made of a woman–not of a man; as he was made of the one by whom sin entered in its very origin in the world, and not made of the man, who entered into the sin after the sin had entered into the world,–this demonstrates beyond all possibility of fair question that between Christ and sin in this world, and between Christ and human nature as it is under sin in the world, there is no kind of separation, even to the shadow of a single degree. He was made flesh; He was made to be sin. He was made flesh as flesh is, and only as flesh is in this world.

And this must He do to redeem lost mankind. For Him to be separated in a single degree, or a shadow of a single degree, in any sense, from the nature of those whom He came to redeem, would be only to miss everything.

Precisely as He must be "made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law;" and must be "made a curse," to redeem them that are under the curse; and must be made "to be sin," to redeem them that are "sold under sin," so He must be made of a woman, to reach sin at its very root in this world, and must be made flesh, to redeem them that are flesh.

And precisely as He was made "under the law," because they are under the law whom He would redeem; and as He was made a curse, because they are under the curse whom He would redeem; and as He was made sin, because they are sinners; "sold under sin," whom He would redeem,–so He must be made flesh, and "the same" flesh and blood, because they are flesh and blood whom He would redeem; and must be made of a woman, because sin was in the world first by and in the woman.

Consequently, it is true, without any sort of exception, that "in all things it behoved him to be made like unto His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that He himself hath suffered being tempted, He is able to succor them that are tempted." Heb. 2:17, 18.

If He were not of the same flesh as are those whom He came to redeem, then there is no sort of use of His being made flesh at all. more than this: since the only flesh that there is in this wide world which He came to redeem, is just the poor, lost, human flesh that all mankind have; if this is not the flesh that all mankind have; then He never really came to the world which needs to be redeemed. For if He came in a human nature different from that which human nature in this world actually is, then even though He were in the world, yet, for any practical purpose in reaching man and helping him, He was as far from him as if He had never come; for, in that case, in His human nature He was just as far from man and just as much of another world, as if He had never come into this world.

It is thoroughly understood that in His birth Christ did partake of the nature of Mary. But the carnal mind is not willing to allow that God in His perfection of holiness could endure to come to men where they are in their sinfulness. Therefore endeavor has been made to escape the consequences of this glorious truth, which is the emptying of self, by inventing a theory that the nature of the virgin Mary was different from the nature of the rest of mankind; that her flesh was not exactly such flesh as is that of all mankind. This invention sets up that, by some special means, Mary was made different from the rest of human beings especially in order that Christ might be becomingly born of her.

This invention has culminated in what is known as the Roman Catholic dogma of the Immaculate Conception. Many Protestants, if not the vast majority of them, as well as other non-Catholics, think that the Immaculate Conception refers to the conception of Jesus by the virgin Mary. But this is altogether a mistake. It refers not at all to the conception of Christ by Mary; but to the conception of Mary herself by her mother.

The official and "infallible" doctrine of the Immaculate Conception as solemnly defined as an article of faith, by Pope Pius IX, speaking ex cathedra, on the 8th of December, 1854, is as follows:–

By the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we declare, pronounce, and define, that the doctrine which holds that the most blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instant of HER conception, by a special grace and privilege of Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of mankind, was preserved free from all stain of original sin, has been revealed by God, and, therefore, is to be firmly and steadfastly believed by all the faithful.

Wherefore, if any shall presume, which may God avert, to think in their heart otherwise than has been defined by us, let them know, and moreover understand, that they are condemned by their own judgment, that they have made shipwreck as regards the faith, and have fallen away from the unity of the Church.–"Catholic Belief," page 214.

This conception is defined by Catholic writers thus:–

The ancient writer, "De Nativitate Christi," found in St. Cyprian's works, says: Because (Mary) being "very different from the rest of mankind, human nature, but not sin, communicated itself to her."

Theodore, patriarch of Jerusalem, said in the second council of Nice, that Mary "is truly the mother of God, and virgin before and after childbirth; and she was created in a condition more sublime and glorious than that of all natures, whether intellectual or corporeal."–Id., pages 216, 217.

This plainly puts the nature of Mary entirely beyond any real likeness or relationship to mankind or human nature as it is. Having this clearly in mind, let us follow this invention in its next step. Thus it is, as given in the words of Cardinal Gibbons:–

We affirm that the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, the Word of God, who in His divine nature is, from all eternity, begotten of the Father, consubstantial with Him, was in the fullness of time again begotten, by being born of the virgin, thus taking to himself from her maternal womb a human nature of the same substance with hers.

As far as the sublime mystery of the incarnation can be reflected in the natural order, the blessed Virgin, under the overshadowing of the Holy Ghost, by communicating to the Second Person of the adorable Trinity, as mothers do, a true human nature of the same substance with her own, is thereby really and truly His mother."–"Faith of Our Fathers," pages 198, 199.

Now put these two things together. First, we have the nature of Mary defined as being not only "very different from the rest of mankind," but "more sublime and glorious than all natures;" thus putting her infinitely beyond any real likeness or relationship to mankind as we really are.

Next, we have Jesus described as taking from her a human nature of the same substance as hers.

From this theory it therefore follows as certainly as two and two make four, that in His human nature the Lord Jesus is "very different" from mankind; indeed, His nature is not human nature at all, but divine.

That is the Roman Catholic doctrine concerning the human nature of Christ. But Catholic faith is not the faith of Christ; it is the faith of Antichrist.

The Catholic doctrine of the human nature of Christ is simply that that nature is not human nature at all, but divine. It is that in His human nature Christ was so far separated from mankind as to be utterly unlike–a nature in which He could have no sort of fellow-feeling with–mankind.

But such is not the faith of Jesus. The faith of Jesus is that "as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also himself likewise took part of the same."

The faith of Jesus is that God sent "His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh."

The faith of Jesus is that "in all things it behoved Him to be made like unto His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that He himself hath suffered being tempted, He is able to succor them that are tempted."

The faith of Jesus is that He "himself took our

41

infirmities," and was touched "with the feeling of our infirmities," being tempted in all points like as we are. If He was not like we are, He could not possibly be tempted "like as we are." But He was "in all points tempted like as we are." Therefore He was "in all points" "like as we are."

In the quotations of Catholic faith which in this article we have cited, we have presented the faith of Rome as to the human nature of Christ and of Mary. In the second chapter of Hebrews and kindred texts of Scripture, there is presented, and in these studies we have endeavored to reproduce as there presented, the faith of Jesus as to the human nature of Christ.

In former studies in these columns we considered the commandments of God; and in that connection we found that the commandments of Rome have been substituted for the commandments of God. In these latter studies we have considered the faith of Jesus; and in this connection we find that the faith of Rome has been substituted for the faith of Jesus.

But the scripture in God's last message of mercy to the world, the Third Angel's Message, calls to all mankind: "Here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus."

Which way do you take–the commandments of God or the commandments of Rome? the faith of Jesus or the faith of Rome?

January 22, 1901

"The Faith of Jesus. The Nature of Christ" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 4 , p. 56.

"AND the Word was made flesh."

"When the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman." Gal. 4:4.

"And the Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all." Isa. 53:6.

We have seen that, in His being made of a woman, Christ reached sin at the very fountain head of its entrance into this world; and that He must be made of a woman to do this.

And thus all the sin of this world, from its origin in the world to the end of it in the world, was laid upon Him; both sin as it is in itself and sin as it is when committed by us; sin in its tendency, and sin in the act; sin as it is hereditary in us, uncommitted by us, and sin as it is committed by us.

Only thus could it be that there should be laid upon Him the iniquity of us all. Only by His subjecting himself to the law of heredity could He reach beyond the generation living in the world while He was here. Without this there could be laid upon Him our sins which have been actually committed, with the guilt and condemnation that belong to them. But, beyond this, there is in each person, in many ways, the liability, to sin, inherited from generations back, which has not yet culminated in the act of sinning, but which is ever ready, when occasion offers, but which is ever ready, when occasion offers, to blaze forth in the actual committing of sin. David's great sin is an illustration of this. Ps. 51:3; 2 Sam. 11:2.

In delivering us from sin, it is not enough that we shall be saved from the sins that we have actually committed; we must be saved from committing other sins. And that this may be so, there must be met and subdued this hereditary liability to sin: we must become possessed of power to keep us from sinning–a power to conquer this liability, this hereditary tendency that is in us, to sin.

All our sins which we have actually committed were laid upon Him, were imputed to Him, so that His righteousness may be laid upon us, may be imputed to us. And also our liability to sin was laid upon Him, in His being made flesh, in His being born of a woman, of the same flesh and blood as we are.

Thus He met sin in the flesh which He took, and triumphed over it, as it is written: "God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin IN THE FLESH." And again: "He is our peace. . . . having abolished in His flesh the enmity."

And thus it is that for the sins which we have actually committed, for the sins that are past, His righteousness, is imputed to us, as our sins are imputed to Him. And to keep us from sinning, His righteousness is imparted to us in our flesh, as our flesh, with its liability to sin, was imparted to Him.

Thus He is the complete Saviour: He saves from all the sins that we have actually committed, and saves equally from all the sins that we might commit, dwelling apart from Him.

If He took not the same flesh and blood that the children of men have, with its liability to sin, then where could there be any philosophy or reason of any kind whatever in His genealogy as given in the Scriptures? He was descended from David; He was descended from Abraham; He was descended from Adam; and, by being made of a woman, He reached even back of Adam, to the beginning of sin in the world.

In that genealogy there are Jehoiakim, who for his wickedness was "buried with the burial of an ass, drawn and cast forth, beyond the gates of Jerusalem" (Jer. 22:19); Manasseh, who caused Judah to do "worse than the heathen;" Ahaz, who "made Judah naked, and transgressed sore against the Lord;" Rehoboam, who was born of Solomon, who was born of David and Bathsheba; there are also Ruth the Moabitess, and Rahab; as well as Abraham, Isaac, Jesse, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, and Josiah; the worst equally with the best. And the evil deeds of even the best are recorded equally with the good. And there is hardly one whose life is written upon at all of whom there is not some wrong act recorded.

Now it was at the end of such a genealogy as that that "the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us." It was t the end of such a genealogy as that that he was "made of a woman." It was in such a line of descent as that that God sent "His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh." And such a descent, such a genealogy, meant something to Him, as it does to every other man, under the great law that the iniquities of the fathers are visited upon the children, to the third and fourth generations. It meant everything to Him in the terrible temptations in the wilderness of temptation, as well as all the way through His life in the flesh.

Thus, both by heredity and by imputation, He was "laden with the sins of the world." And, thus laden, at this immense disadvantage, He passed over the ground where, at no shadow of any disadvantage whatever, the first pair failed.

By His death He paid the penalty of all sins actually committed, and thus can justly bestow His righteousness upon all who will receive it. And by condemning sin in the flesh, by abolishing in His flesh the enmity. He delivers from the law of heredity; and so can, in righteousness, impart His divine nature and power to lift above that law, and hold above it, every soul that will receive Him.

And so it is written: "When the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons." Gal. 4:4. And "God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for [on account of] sin, condemned sin in the flesh: that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Rom. 8:3, 4. And "He is our peace, . . . having abolished in His flesh the enmity, . . . for to make in Himself of twain [God and man] one new man, so making peace." Eph. 2:14, 15.

Thus "in all things it behoved Him to be made like unto His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that He himself hath suffered being tempted, He is able to succor them that are tempted."

Whether temptation be from within or from without. He is the perfect shield against it all, and so saves to the uttermost all who come unto God by Him.

"Editorial" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 4 , p. 56.

THE following are the items of the arrangement entered into by Russia and China, concerning the Manchurian province of Shengking, published by Russia a short time ago:–

1. The Tartar general, Tseng, undertakes to protect and pacify the province, and to assist in the construction of the railroad.

2. He must kindly treat, feed, and lodge Russians engaged in the military occupation and in the protection of the railroad.

3. He must disarm and disband the Chinese soldiery, delivering to the Russians all munitions of war in such arsenals as the Russians have not yet occupied.

4. All forts and defenses in the province not occupied by the Russians, and all powder magazines not required by them, must be dismantled in the presence of Russian officials.

5. New Chwang and other places now in Russian occupation shall be restored to the Chinese civil administration, when Russia is satisfied that the pacification of the province is complete.

6. The Chinese shall maintain law and order by local police under a Tartar general.

7. A Russian political resident, with general powers of control, shall be stationed at Mukden, to whom the Tartar General Tseng must give all information respecting any important measures.

8. In the event of the local police being insufficient for the emergency, General Tseng will notify the Russian resident, and invite Russia to send re-enforcements.

9. The Russian text shall be the standard.

And Russia assures the United States and the other Powers that she will not take any Chinese territory! And the United States assures the world that "the people of Cuba are, and of right ought to be, free and independent," and that this pledge shall be fulfilled "to the letter"!

"Some More Ancient and Modern History" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 4 , pp. 56, 57.

OF Rome's assertion of authority over the Greek states, and of her dealings with them whom she had freed from the oppressions of kings, the ancient history records:–

The Romans rendered themselves the sovereign arbiters of those whom they had restored to liberty, and whom they now considered, in some measure, as their freedmen. They used to depute commissioners to them. . . . They soon assumed a magisterial tone, looked upon their decrees as irrevocable decisions, were greatly offended when the most implicit obedience was not paid to them, and gave the name of rebellion to a second resistance. . . .

We shall hear one of the chief magistrates in the republic of the Acheans inveigh strongly in a public assembly against this unjust usurpation, and ask by what title the Romans were empowered to assume so haughty an ascendant over them; whether their republic was not as free and independent as that of Rome; by what right the latter pretended to force the Acheans to account for their conduct, in their turn, officiously pretend to inquire into their affairs; and whether matters ought not to be on the same footing on both sides. All these reflections were very reasonable, just, and unanswerable; and the Romans had no advantage in the question but force.

With that bit of ancient history, now read the following bit of modern history as published in the Manila correspondence of the Hongkong Telegraph, in August, 1900. The Mr. Mabini of the account was formerly minister of foreign affairs and premier of the provisional Flilipino government:–

At four o'clock this afternoon Mr. Mabini was taken to the Ayuntamiento, and introduced to the North American commission. There were present President Taft, two other members of the commission, the interpreter, and a shorthand writer. Mr. Mabini asked for this conference in order that it should not be said that he had confined himself to an imperious position without seeking means of approximation and intelligence, according to circumstances.

When the session was opened, he said: "I have been imprisoned since December last, and not allowed to be set free without previous recognition of the American sovereignty. The word 'sovereignty' in international law has not a precise nor fixed definition. So that in the South African trouble England claims to have sovereignty in the two republics, notwithstanding the recognition of their complete independence made by her with respect to their internal administration. My efforts in favor of my country have no other object but to obtain the most solid guarantee for the liberties and rights of the Filipinos. I therefore asked for a conference to find out to what extent American sovereignty will restrain that which naturally belongs to the Filipino people."

Mr. Taft, having heard the remarks of his companions, replied as follows: "The American sovereignty has the object of giving the Filipinos a good government. The sovereignty that the United States of America claims is the same as that which Russia or Turkey would claim if they occupied the Philippines, with the only difference that the exercise of this sovereignty will be inspired by the spirit of the Constitution. The commission will endeavor

57

to establish in the Philippines a popular government after the style of that adopted for Porto Rico."

To this Mr. Mabini replied that the principles on which the American Constitution rests declare that the sovereignty rests with the people by natural right; that the American government, by not contenting itself with restraining the sovereignty of the Filipino people, but with completely nullifying it, commits an injustice that sooner or later will demand reparation or explanation; that there can not be a popular government where the people are not given a real and effective participation in the constitution and performance of that government.

The commission replied, saying that they were not authorized to discuss abstract matters, as they had orders to make their views prevail by force, when the views of the Filipinos are heard.

Then Mr. Mabini said he considered the conference as closed, for he thought it useless to discuss matters and give his views to those who did not want to listen to the voice of reason.

Mr. Taft asked him if he wanted to help them in the study of the taxes that may be imposed on the people of the Philippines. Mr. Mabini replied that, considering unjust every tax imposed without the consent of the representatives of those who are to pay it, he could not take part in such study without the representation and command of the people.

Mr. Mabini said that he saw the Americans persisted in reducing the Filipinos to the hard alternative of dishonesty or death; and that since this was so, he would prefer to behave himself as an honest man, who puts above all his duties his honor. Between dishonesty and death, it was his duty to prefer the latter.

To what pass has the government of the United States come when by its highest possible representative, the personal representative of its president, the chosen standard of comparison in government is "Russia and Turkey"! Is that the government founded by the Fathers?

And the commission "are not authorized to discuss abstract matters," such as "the principles upon which the American Constitution rests"–"sovereignty rests with the people by natural right," etc., etc.; but have "orders to make their view prevail by force, when the views of the Filipinos are heard"!

But from whom did the commission get such "orders" as these? Bear in mind that that commission was not created by Congress: it is the "personal representative of the President." The commission, not being created by Congress, has not from Congress any "orders" of any kind, nor any instruction of any kind. Being the "personal representative of the President," all the "orders" the commission could receive, could be only from the President himself. Then from whom did the commission receive "orders" to make their views "prevail by force"? And this without any authority, and instead of any authority, to discuss the principles upon which the American Constitution rests: making these only "abstract matters"–the metaphysical; and "their views prevail by force" the concrete–the practical.

That commission, not being the creation of Congress, and so having no instructions or directions from Congress, is not a creature of law. The Constitution being held not of its own force to extend to the Philippines, and it not having been extended there by Congress, the commission is not a creature of law, either statutory or Constitutional. The commission being only the "personal representative of the President," receiving its "orders" only from him,–and that not from him as commander-in-chief of the armies and navies of the United States, but only as civil executive; because the commission is entirely civil, not military,–this makes the commission only the creature of will, and its government only a government of will, and not of law.

And will anybody say that this is not a repudiation by the United States of the principles of its Constitution as a Protestant and republican government? As a matter of fact it is the repudiation of all Constitutional principle clear back to Magna Charta, and even of the principle of Magna Charta itself, which at the time was repudiated by the pope, and resisted by the king. So that, as we have before shown in these columns, the present colonial course of the United States is not merely a going back from American principles to British, it is a leap over and back of all Anglo-Saxon history and principle to the times beyond Magna Charta, and to the Roman only.

The issue that brought forth Magna Charta was simply that "a king should rule in England by law, and not by force, or rule not at all." And this principle written out and signed by the king, in Magna Charta, King John, of England, had to accept, or not be crowned. True, the pope repudiated it, and released the king from his oath and the binding obligation of his signature; but against pope and king, the kingdom of England held the principle, and the Charter.

John's son, Henry III, also rejected the Charter, and thought to repudiate the principle, declaring: "Whensoever, and wheresoever, and as often as it may be our pleasure, we may declare, interpret, enlarge, or diminish, the aforesaid statutes, and their several parts, by our own free will, and as to us shall seem expedient for the security of us and our land." But he, as John, was firmly met by the kingdom's insistence upon the right of the people and the supremacy of the law. In answer to the king's pronunciamento, an English judge, Bracton, set the voice of English law in words that are important to be remembered to-day, and by all generations. He declared: "The king must not be subject to any man, but to God and the law, for the law makes him king. Let the king, therefore, give to the law what the law gives to him, dominion and power; for there is no king where will, and not law, bears rule." Again: "The king can do nothing on earth, being the minister of God, but what he can do BY LAW: . . . so that, if the king were without a bridle,–that is, the law,–they ought to put a bridle upon him."

Upon this it has been well observed: "Let no Englishman, who lives under the rule of law, and not of will, forget that this privilege has been derived from a long line of forefathers; and that, although the eternal principles of justice depend not upon the precedents of ages, but may be asserted some day by any community with whom a continued despotism has made them 'native, and to the manner born,' we have the security that the old tree of liberty stands in the old earth, and that a short-lived trunk has not been thrust into a new soil, to bear a green leaf or two and then to die."

"Will Your Church Act?" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 4 , p. 59.

AS a people we are being tested to see if we love God more than the world. We have been told that He is testing us over "Christ's Object Lessons." These words are full of meaning: "Have faith in God. He gave me the idea of giving 'Christ's Object Lessons' for the relief of the schools. He is testing His people and institutions in this thing, to see if they will work together and be of one mind in self-denial and self-sacrifice. Carry forward this work without flinching, in the name of the Lord. Let God's plan be vindicated."

He has told every member of the Church that he would receive a blessing if he would take this book and present it to the people. It is present truth. The Lord has also said that some should receive special preparation, in order that they may carry the truth to the people. "If our church-members were awake, they would multiply their resources; they would send men and women to our schools, not to go through a long course of study, but to learn quickly, and to go out into the field."

The Battle Creek College, realizing that the time to act is just now, will begin a course of study, January 29, extending to April 23, for those who wish to receive a preparation that will enable them to help their home churches, and to carry the book intelligently to a large class of people who are waiting to receive it. Is your church preparing to send some one to receive this special training? If not, why not? Write at once, for special announcement, to the president of Battle Creek College.

January 29, 1901

"The Ten Commandments. Who Shall Escape the Plagues?" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 5 , p. 72.

WHO shall escape the plagues?

In the Seven Last Plagues "is filled up the wrath of God" (Rev. 15:1); the wrath of God falls upon those who worship the Beast and his Image; for it is written: "And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the Beast and his Image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of His indignation." Rev. 14:9, 10.

This Third Angel's Message is to keep men from the worship of the Beast and his Image, and so to save them from the wrath of God. And the way in which men escape the worship of the Beast and his Image, and so escape the Seven Last Plagues, is by keeping the Commandments of God and the Faith of Jesus; for the closing words of the Third Angel's Message: "Here are they that keep the Commandments, of God, and the Faith of Jesus." Rev. 14:12.

It is true that, in a sense, whatsoever is in the Bible is of the Commandments of God. Yet, in a particular sense, above all things else in the Bible the Ten Commandments are distinguished as the Commandments of God. These are especially singled out from all things else, upon which people are directed to fix their special attention.

Accordingly, thus it is written: "Only take heed to thyself, and keep thy soul diligently, lest thou forget the things which thine eyes have seen, and lest they depart from thy heart all the days of thy life: but teach them thy sons, and thy sons' sons; specially the day that thou stoodest before the Lord thy God in Horeb, . . . and the Lord spake unto you out of the midst of the fire: ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude; only ye heard a voice. And He declared unto you His covenant, which He commanded you to perform, even Ten Commandments; and He wrote them upon two tables of stone." Deut. 4:9, 10, 12, 13.

When He had spoken the Ten Commandments,–these Ten Words,–He spoke no more: there was no more to be said. Accordingly, the conclusion of the whole matter, the sum of all that hath been heard is, "Fear God, and keep His commandments: for this is the whole duty of man." Eccl. 12:13.

When the Lord spoke that day from the top of Sinai, all that He said needed to be said. And when He had spoken, all was said that could be said. Now the first words that were spoken that day are these:–

"I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." Ex. 20:2.

This is the introduction, the preamble, to all the Commandments, the whole Law of God. It is as much a part of the Law of God as is any word that follows; for it is written: "God spake all these words." These words were a part, indeed the very beginning of the words that day spoken, when all was said that could be said, and when nothing was said that needed not to be said.

That law is spiritual: all that is in it or of it is spiritual. This preamble, equally with all the rest of the law that day spoken, is "holy, and just, and good." Rom. 7:12.

God is spirit. And this law, preface and all, being altogether of God, is therefore altogether spiritual; for "the law is spiritual." Rom. 7:14. Accordingly, the Egypt referred to is spiritual Egypt: and the bondage referred to is spiritual bondage; for the Scriptures deal definitely with a spiritual Egypt, as well as with a temporal Egypt. Rev. 11:8.

Spiritually, then, what is Egypt? Read this: "By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter; choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season; esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt." Heb. 11:24-26.

Here we have "affliction with the people of God" set over against "the pleasures of sin," and "the reproach of Christ" set over against "the treasures in Egypt;" thus:–

Affliction with the people of God. Pleasures of sin.

Reproach of Christ. Treasures in Egypt.

This shows "affliction with the people of God," and "the reproach of Christ," to be synonymous; and "the pleasures of sin," and "the treasures in Egypt," to be likewise synonymous. It also plainly shows "sin" and "Egypt" to be synonymous. Spiritual Egypt, therefore, is the realm of sin. Therefore this beginning of the Law of God, as spoken by the Lord from heaven, simply says, I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the realm and bondage of sin.

And by these holy words being placed at the very threshold of the keeping of the Commandments of God, it is signified to all people forever that in the keeping of the Commandments of God the first of all things is that the soul shall be delivered from the realm and bondage of sin. By this it is indicated that no man can keep the Commandments of God unless he is first delivered from the realm and the bondage of sin. And in these blessed words, God presents himself to every soul, as the perfect and free Deliverer of men from the realm and the bondage of sin, that they may keep His Commandments.

This is the teaching of the whole record of the deliverance of Israel from Egypt, which was "written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come." While Israel was yet in Egypt, the word was spoken to Pharaoh: "Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, even my firstborn: and I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me." Ex. 4:22, 23. And when, by great plagues and mighty judgments, Pharaoh was brought to the point where he would let Israel go; and when, by His great power, God had delivered Israel, that they might serve Him,–then He said: "I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me," and so on, to the end of the Ten Commandments; and He added no more.

And all this happened unto them for an ensample: it is "written for our learning," and "for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come."

The deliverance of Israel from Egyptian bondage did not, even at that time, consist in deliverance from bodily oppression or temporal bondage. For even after the multitude of Israel had been delivered from that bodily oppression and temporal bondage, their hearts were yet in Egypt: in thought and in heart they time and again "turned back again into Egypt." Heb. 11:24-26.

And there were others; because it was by faith that Moses, "when he was born, was hid three months of his parents;" for, by this faith, "they were not afraid of the king's commandment" that had gone forth, to slay all the male children of the children of Israel.

As, therefore, it is true that the children of Israel, though bodily and temporarily in Egypt, were yet free from Egypt, and were the children of God; and as the whole multitude, although taken bodily entirely out of Egypt, were not free, but, in heart, were still in Egypt,–this demonstrates that at that time, as well as now and forever, true deliverance from Egypt is spiritual; and that the real Egypt from which this true deliverance is found is spiritual Egypt.

Further consideration will have to be deferred until next week.

"The Faith of Jesus" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 5 , pp. 72, 73.

"LET this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery ["a thing to be seized upon and held fast"] to be equal with God; but emptied himself, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men." Phil. 2:5-7.

"For it became Him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the Captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings." Heb. 2:10.

"Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succor them that are tempted." Verses 17, 18.

Made "in all things" like unto us, He was in all points like as we are. So fully was this so that He could say, even as we must say the same truth, "I can of mine own self do nothing."

Of Him this was so entirely true that, in the weakness and infirmity of the flesh,–ours which He took,–He was as is the man who is without God and without Christ. For it is only without Him that men can do nothing. With Him, and through Him, it is written: "I can do all things." But of those who are without Him, it is written: "Without me ye can do nothing."

Therefore, when He said, of himself, "I can of mine own self do nothing," this makes it certain forever that in the flesh,–because of our infirmities which He took; because of our sinfulness, hereditary and actual, which were laid upon Him, and imparted to Him,–He was of himself in that flesh exactly as is the man who, in the infirmity of the flesh, is laden with sins, actual and hereditary, and who is without God.

He came "to seek and to save that which was lost." And in saving the lost, He came to the lost where they are. He put himself among the lost. "He was numbered with the transgressors." He was "made to be sin." And from the standpoint of the weakness and infirmity of the lost, He trusted in God, that He would deliver Him and save Him. Laden with the sins of the world, and tempted in all points like as we are, He hoped in God, and trusted in God to save Him from all those sins, and to keep Him from sinning.

And this is the faith of Jesus: this is the point where the faith of Jesus reaches lost, sinful man, to help him. For thus it has been demonstrated, to the very fullness of perfection, that there is no man in the wide world for whom there is not hope in God: no one so lost that he can not be saved by trusting God. And this faith of Jesus, by which, in the place of the lost, He hoped in God, and trusted God for salvation from sin, and power to keep from sinning,–this victory of His it is that has brought to every man in the world divine faith, by which every man can hope in God, and trust God, and can find the power of God to deliver him from sin and to keep him from sinning. That faith which He exercised, and by which He obtained the victory over the world, the flesh, and the devil,–that faith is His free gift to every lost man in the world. And thus "this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith."

This is the faith of Jesus that is given to men. This is the faith of Jesus that must be received by men, in order for them to be saved. This is the faith of Jesus which, now in this time of the Third Angel's Message, must be received and kept by those who will be saved from the worship of the Beast and his Image, and enabled to keep the Commandments of God. This is the faith of Jesus referred to in the closing words of the Third Angel's Message: "Here are they that keep the Commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus."

"'Christian Democracy'" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 5 , p. 73.

IN connection with the Vatican there is one who signs himself "Innominato," who is the regular correspondent of the New York Sun. By his connection with the Vatican, what this correspondent writes is as nearly official as could easily be without being actually so.

In the Sun of December 30 is a letter from "Innominato," under the heading of "Christian Democracy." He says that the pope will soon issue an encyclical on the subject of "Christian Democracy." It seems that this encyclical has already been prepared, for the letter says that "the encyclical was announced for September 30," last; and that "the encyclical was about to crown and sanction the labors of the International Congress of the Third Order when unexpected resistance was discovered. The announcement was made that very powerful pressure was being used to put off the promised document sine die." And the letter says that "some persons who should know think that they can assert that the German Episcopacy demanded officially the withdrawal of the encyclical." And this because, "as is well known, an intimate alliance is being formed between the bishops and the Kaiser. The emperor promises all sorts of benevolences provided the Church in Germany will place its forces at the disposal of the Weltpolitik [world-politics], in the expectation of the establishment of the empire of the West, that brilliant phantasm of the imperial fancy." And "by every means he is endeavoring to enlist on his side the great universal movement which is carrying Catholicism, under the direction of the pope, into social peace, order, justice, and fraternity."

Yet though the encyclical has thus been held up, it is said that it "will be promulgated soon."

From the letter, and, indeed, from the title of the announced encyclical, it seems plain that what the pope is going to write upon as "Christian Democracy" is exactly what is especially carried on by Protestants in the United States, under the name of "Christian citizenship," and which the Protestant and Catholic scheme of Church federation is but a means of making effective.

And even this "Christian democracy" idea of the pope's finds its impulse in the United States. The letter says that the meeting at which the encyclical was to be promulgated September 30, was arranged with a certain "Cardinal Vives y Tuto, M. LÈon Harmel, and the generals of the Sons of St. Francis, in order to make it the starting point for a great social action." This Cardinal Vives y Tuto, the letter says, is "the youngest member of the Sacred College." He was formerly a monk in Guatemala, whence he "was obliged to flee from persecution;" and in his flight "he took refuge in the United States, where he came into contact with the exuberant American democracy." He has also "a fervent admiration for the program of regeneration of Leo XIII, with the object of bringing together the Church and the people." "Settling down at Rome, for long years he placed his soul and his knowledge at the service of the papacy and its central ideas." And now "he is one of the main working levers of the papacy. Whenever the pope and Cardinal Rampolla have to carry out a delicate affair, they intrust it to Cardinal Vives."

Thus the influence of the United States is being exerted not only in the United States itself, not only in the United States and Japan, but in the United States, in Japan, and in the papacy itself, and thus around the world. And thus it is beginning plainly to appear, even upon the surface of things, that that other Beast of Revelation 13, which came up out of the earth, and which is to exercise all the power of the first Beast, in his sight, is already exercising some of the power of that first Beast, in his sight.

These are important times. Striking events are occurring day by day. And we shall wait with interest for the actual publication of that papal encyclical on "Christian Democracy."

February 5, 1901

"The Keeping of the Commandments" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 6 , p. 88.

WHEN the Lord visited and redeemed His people, to take them into the land of promise, the land which He sware to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob to give to them: when He took them unto himself to swerve Him only in the keeping of His holy law, He said, first of all: "I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me," etc.

Israel missed God's call; they believed Him not, and therefore could not enter into His rest. These fell in the wilderness. And the generation that went into the land of Canaan did not in that go into "the land" and the "rest" to which the Lord would have taken the people when they first left Egypt, had they only believed. They drifted further and further away from God until they actually rejected Him, that they might be like the nations.

And they became like the nations. They failed exactly as had their fathers before them. For, in the days of David, the Lord said still: "To-day if ye will hear His voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness; when your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works forty years. Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, They do always err in their heart; and they have not known my ways. So I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest." Heb. 3:7-11; 4:7, 8.

But still they hardened their hearts, and went further away from the Lord, until they got into such darkness that it was the very darkness of "the shadow of death," which is "darkness, as darkness itself, and of the shadow of death, without any order, and where the light is as darkness." And there the people sat, when there shined unto them a "great light," even the light of God, in which darkness itself is light. Isa. 9:2; Job 10:21, 22; Matt. 4:16.

Christ came. Again God visited to redeem His people, to make them not simply servants, but sons of God, that we "might serve Him without fear, in holiness and righteousness before Him, all the days of our life." And at that time again God said: "Our of Egypt have I called my Son."

Why was it necessary that the infant Jesus should be taken into Egypt at the time of the slaughter of the innocents by Herod? It was not alone to escape the decree of Herod, that Jesus was taken into Egypt; for that decree could have been easily escaped by a much shorter journey. This was done to teach all people forever the deep spiritual lesson of the true deliverance from Egypt.

Jesus came into the world to take the place of man, to be our substitute and surety. Mankind is overwhelmed in the darkness and bondage of sin–Egyptian darkness, a darkness that may be felt. He was made to be sin; upon Him was laid the iniquity of us all; He was numbered with the transgressors; He was made in all things like those whose substitute He became.

Therefore He was taken into Egypt, and was brought out again, "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my Son;" and that by this object lesson there might be emphasized anew, and forever, the great lesson taught from of old to all people, the great truth that men become the sons of God only by their being called out of Egypt.

The Ten Commandments express the whole duty of man. All that ever a man ca do, in deed, word or thought, in righteousness, is covered by the Ten Commandments. All man's service to God is in the keeping of this His Law. And when it was written of Christ, and it was fulfilled in Christ, as the Example of all mankind, that "out of Egypt have I called my Son," this was simply speaking anew to all mankind the words which, that great day, God spoke from heaven, as the preamble to the whole Ten Commandments and their keeping: "I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage."

This is the universal lesson: that no man can serve God, that no man can keep a single one of the Ten Commandments, except he is first delivered, by the power of God, from the darkness of Egypt, from the darkness of the shadow of death, from the realm and bondage of sin.

This is the lesson of the whole Bible. Look, for instance, at Eph. 2:1-10: how men are dead in trespasses and sins, in the darkness of this world; walking according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the ruler of the darkness of this world (Eph. 6:12), the spirit that works in the children of disobedience. But God, who is rich in mercy, has quickened us together with Christ, and has raised us up together with Him, to live and walk with Him. And this He did, not by our works, nor because of our works, but of His own mercy and grace: "for we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." Thus is the lesson taught, that no man can do good works except he is created unto it by the power of God.

How strongly this lesson is emphasized in the book of Galatians, which is just now the subject of the Sabbath-school studies. What are generally regarded as the practical things of the Christian life are not mentioned until the end of the book–brotherly kindness; bearing one another's burdens; communicating in all good things; the sowing and the reaping, whether to the flesh or to the Spirit; doing good to all men, especially to the household of faith. These things come only in the few verses of the very last chapter. After men have been delivered from this present evil world, into the glorious liberty of the children of God, and are standing fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free,–the liberty by love to serve one another,–filled with the Spirit, so that all the fruits of the Spirit are shining in the life, reflecting the sunshine of righteousness,–only THEN it is that the generally considered practical things of the Christian life are enjoined.

Why is this? It is the same universal, divine lesson, that no man can do good works, no man can possibly do the "practical things of the Christian life," who has not first the Christian life as a practical thing. And, therefore, it is made perfectly plain that deliverance from the darkness and bondage of sin; the finding of the sonship of God; the ability to stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free; the receiving of the fullness of the Spirit of God in the life,–these things are the practical things of Christianity, equally with the others. Indeed, in a sense these are the more practical things; because so certainly must these precede the others that, without these, the other practical things of the Christian life can never be seen at all.

Therefore when, from Mount Sinai, God would speak, with a voice that shook the earth, the practical things of the life of man, He spoke first of all this original practical thing of the life of man–deliverance from the realm and bondage of sin:–

"I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." Ex. 20:2.

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

Yet this is not the preamble of only the first commandment, but of the whole law, as if it were as follows:–

"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments."

"I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

"I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.

"I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Honor thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.

"I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Thou shalt not kill."

"I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Thou shalt not commit adultery."

"I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Thou shalt not steal."

"I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor."

"I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's." Exodus 20.

And since, when He sent His only begotten Son to redeem us indeed, He renewed and emphasized this preliminary thought, in the words, "Out of Egypt have I called my Son," it is as if this were the preamble and the whole law–is expressed in the great of the whole law of God. And all of it–the preamble and the whole law–is expressed in the great thought of the Third Angel's Message: "Here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus."

"What Are You Studying?" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 6 , p. 89.

EDITORS OF THE REVIEW AND HERALD: The members of our Sabbath-school have been studying, or trying to study, the book of Galatians all through the quarter, and do not know what we have been studying about. Some of us think we have studied both laws together; others think we have studied the moral law; while others say it is the ceremonial law all through the book of Galatians, and nothing else. Now I wish you would tell us what law we have studied this quarter. Please answer through the REVIEW.

We publish this letter and answer it in the REVIEW, because it is a sample of a number that we have received; and we fear that it tells the experience of a great many persons, and, indeed, a good many whole Sabbath-schools throughout the United States.

The letter asks us to tell what law these folks have studied the past quarter, in the Sabbath-school lessons. We can not tell. For when they themselves can not tell what law they have been studying, who are the very ones who have been doing the studying, how can we be expected to tell, when we were not there at all to know what they were studying? Perhaps even if we ourselves had been among them, it would have been as difficult for us to tell what law they were studying, as it is for them to tell.

One thing we do know; that is, that no law at all has been the subject of study in the Sabbath-school lessons themselves; but the gospel only. We know that in the Sabbath-school lessons as written and as published in the Sabbath-school lesson books, papers, etc., the sole subject for study, from the first verse of Galatians unto the last one that has been before the schools, and even to the end of the book, has been and is the gospel, and the gospel only.

It could not be otherwise, and be a study of the book of Galatians; for the gospel is the only subject of the book. This is made plain at the very outset of the book itself. The very first words of actual address in the book are: "Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen." And that is the gospel, and the gospel alone.

The very next words of the book are: "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed."

That shows emphatically that the only subject that was in the mind of the writer of the book of Galatians, is the gospel. There is, indeed, a question as to whether it is the true or the false gospel, the genuine gospel or the perverted gospel; yet, for all that, the only subject is the gospel.

The following verses in the first chapter (11-14) show that the subject is still the gospel; that the gospel is received by the "revelation of Jesus Christ," and that it delivered Paul from the false gospel, the traditions of the Jews' religion.

The next verses (15, 16) still emphasize the fact that it is only the gospel that is treated, showing how the revelation of that gospel is Christ in you the hope of glory: "It pleased God . . . to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the heathen." And that is the gospel.

The narrative of Paul's experience, in the remaining part of the first chapter and the greater part of the second chapter, is all given as a means of demonstrating how he stood firmly, and even alone, and alone against even Peter himself, for "the truth of the gospel," and in order that "the truth of the gospel might continue with you."

Then the book takes up the thought of what this gospel is, and demonstrates by every possible consideration, with all the intensity of the Spirit of God, that it is righteousness by faith–justification, salvation, redemption, sanctification, by faith of Jesus Christ and the power of the Spirit of God.

And so it continues throughout the whole book. There is no other subject, there is no other thought in the whole book, than the gospel, and "the truth of the gospel," and the salvation that is wrought in those in whom that "truth of the gospel" shall find a place.

We say that the letter at the beginning of this article is a sample. And, indeed, it is only a fair sample of a number of letters that have come to this Office, with respect to the Sabbath-school lessons of the book of Galatians. But what a sad story it tells: that there are people, professing to be Christians, who are studying Sabbath after Sabbath, and week in and week out, for six months, and more, a book of the Bible that deals wholly with the gospel, and yet have not been able to find any gospel at all! but only questions, disputations, and strivings about some law, or what law!

This is astonishing, and as painful as it is astonishing. We are exceedingly sorry to have to print such a letter. And if this had been the only one, or a sample of only two or three, or half a dozen, we should not have printed it. But when it is only a fair sample of a considerable number, and simply reveals a condition that, though indeed not general, is far too widespread, it is only proper that it should be printed, and that some endeavor be made to better the condition.

We are glad to say that we do not believe this condition is general. We know that there are thousands upon thousands of persons who, in the study of the Sabbath-school lessons, have found, from the beginning, and have studied from the beginning, that which is the true subject of the book, and of all the studies–the gospel, "the truth of the gospel." And we know that these have been made glad with the joy and the fullness of the great salvation that is revealed in that gospel, as it is in this precious book of Galatians. These have found a great improvement and a general advancement in their experience in Christ and the power of the gospel.

But what can be done for these others who have wholly missed the subject of the lessons, from beginning to end? What can be done to help these who have been studying the gospel for more than six months, and yet "do not know what we have been studying about"? The studies in this book are almost ended; there remain but four lessons. And since these have gone through the whole series of more than six months without discovering the subject, and, so, without having really studied the lessons at all–how can these now be helped to find it, and to have the benefit of it?

We know what will supply this loss: we know what will accomplish in these the purpose of the book of Galatians. It is this: Let each one read, carefully and prayerfully, the book of Galatians THROUGH, each day, praying constantly: "Lord, show me thy gospel, the true gospel, the truth of the gospel." Put away forever all discussions and "strivings about the law," even as saith the Scripture: "Avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain." Titus 3:9.

Ask only for the gospel, study only for the gospel. And once find in your life the revelation of that gospel; and, in one minute, by that revelation, you will know ten thousand times more about the law and all laws than you could ever possibly know, to all eternity, by any questions, discussions, and "strivings about the law," or as to which law, or whether it is one law or another, or whether it is all together.

It is not the law at all, but the gospel, that saves, and that gives light on all the law.

"The kingdom of God is at hand; repent ye, and believe the gospel."

February 12, 1901

"The Keeping of the Commandments" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 7 , p. 104.

"I AM the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage."

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me." Ex. 20:2, 3.

"Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve." Matt. 4:10.

"The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord: and 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." Mark 12:29, 30.

When Moses, at the command of the Lord, said to Pharaoh: "Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Let my people go," Pharaoh, in rebellion, said: "Who is the Lord, that I should obey His voice to let Israel go? I know not the Lord, neither will I let Israel go." Ex. 5:1, 2.

If, in reverence, Pharaoh had asked, in an honesty iniquity: "Who is the Lord, that I should obey His voice to let Israel go?" his question would have been respected by the Lord. For when the Lord first appeared to Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, and sent him into Egypt for the deliverance of the people, provision was made for the answer of just such a question. For Moses said to Him: "When I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is His name? what shall I say unto them?" Ex. 3:13.

This supposed question, "What is His name?" is only, in different form, Pharaoh's question," Who is the Lord?" And, in expectation of the asking of that question, "God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM." And "thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you." Verse 14.

It is true that Pharaoh did not know the Lord. But that, of itself, was not against him; for that is the condition of every man, at first. Pharaoh's mistake was in exalting himself upon his ignorance, and supposing that he knew enough without God, and in refusing to receive the knowledge of Him. For, equally with any other man in the world, Pharaoh could have received the knowledge of God. For God had sent into Egypt, for all who were there, the revelation of himself: "I AM THAT I AM."

This expression, "I AM THAT I AM," is the revelation of God. It reveals Him in His self-existence–"I AM;" and in His character–"I AM THAT I AM"–I AM THAT WHICH I AM–I AM WHAT I AM. "This is my name forever, and this is my memorial unto all generations." Ex. 3:15.

In believing in God it is not enough to believe in the self-existent One. He is more than that–He is more than existence: He is character. And in believing in Him it is not enough to believe that He is: we must believe WHAT He is. As it is written, "He that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him."

His name embraces both these thoughts. And His name is not know unless these two thoughts–self-existence and character–are known. As to existence, His name is "I AM;" and as to character, "I am what I am."

What is He, then, in this which He is? What is His name as to character? This question is answered in full by the Lord himself. He has revealed not only that He is, but He has revealed what He is; and this in order that all men may know Him; may know His name in its fullness, and as it is in truth. For again in its fullness, and as it is in truth. For again He said to Moses: "I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee. . . . And the Lord descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the Lord. Ex. 33:19; 34:5.

And in proclaiming this His name, "the Lord passed by before him, and proclaimed, The Lord, The Lord God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation." Ex. 34:6, 7.

This is what He is. When He said, "I AM THAT I AM. . . . This is my name forever," this is what He said. And when He passed by before Moses and proclaimed this, His name, He only said in more words what He said at the first, "I AM THAT I AM. . . . This is my name forever."

The words, "The Lord, The Lord God," express self-existence, as do the words "I AM." All the rest of the words of that glorious name express His character, as do the words, "I AM THAT [THAT WHICH, or WHAT] I AM."

And what a Person is thus revealed!

"Merciful," full of mercy, which is the disposition to treat persons, even offenders, better than they deserve. The disposition is the very heart's core of the person. And He is full of the disposition, it is His very nature, to treat all the people of this world, forever, better than they deserve. For this is His name; and His name is but expressive of His nature; for His character is but himself. Then it is himself to treat all people better than they deserve. And He takes pleasure in those who hope in this, His disposition to treat them better than they deserve.

It is man's natural disposition to treat offenders just as they deserve; to get back at them; to render evil for evil; to "teach them a lesson." And this disposition is so natural to man, it is so entirely his own, that it is difficult for him to conceive that it is really God's disposition to treat him better than he deserves. Men think that God wishes to treat them as they deserve. They think of Him as if He were waiting for an opportunity to treat them fully, and in vengeance, as they deserve. Thus they are afraid that He will; and so are afraid of Him.

But such is not God; such is not the God revealed in the Bible. He is merciful–full of the disposition to treat offenders better than they deserve. It is His very nature to do so; and He never can do otherwise; for, in order to do otherwise, He would have to cease to be what He is, and would therefore have to cease to be God.

But that is only one item of His glorious name.

"Gracious;" extending favor to all people, everywhere, and forever. And this is what He is; and He can not be anything else; for He can not cease to be. He is "the same yesterday, and to-day, and forever."

"Long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth." And this long-suffering is especially that none shall perish; because He is "not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." Accordingly, "the long-suffering of our Lord is salvation, and since His long-suffering is salvation, His name, then, is Salvation. This is what He is, and He can not be anything else.

"Keeping mercy for thousands." And this is not simply thousands of thousands, but thousands of generations; for it is written: "Know therefore that the Lord thy God, He is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love Him and keep His commandments to a thousand generations." Deut. 7:9.

"Forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin." Note that it is not written, "I will forgive;" but, He is "forgiving." It is not stated even in the form of a promise, as if it were, "I will forgive;" it is stated in the form of a present actuality: He is "forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin." Note also that this is not merely what He is DOING, but it is what He IS, in His very nature and character. To be everlastingly forgiving is His very essence, and He can not be anything else; for He is God.

"And before whom no man is clear of guilt." Our common translation of this clause is very poor, in making the Lord say that He "will by no means clear the guilty," when every thought of the Bible, from the fall of man to the end, is that He DOES clear the guilty; that He longs to save all; for all are guilty. For "what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. . . . But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe; for there is no difference; for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." Rom. 3:19, 21-23.

The true sense is given in the German translation: "Before whom no man is guiltless." And the Vulgate (Latin translation) expresses the thought that "no person is innocent by, or of, himself" before God.

This is His name. And it is written, "My people shall know my name." Isa. 52:6. And this is known in Christ; for when He came into the world in man's stead, He said, "I will declare thy name unto my brethren." Only thus can the name of God be known. To know His name is to know Him. Therefore, only thus can He be known, as it is written: "Neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him." Matt. 11:27.

The knowledge of God is obtained only by revelation; and Jesus Christ is the only revelation of God. To know the name of God; to know God as thus revealed; to worship Him according to this revelation; to have Him, and Him alone, as God, loving Him with all the heart, and all the soul, and all the mind, and all the strength,–this, and this alone, is the true keeping of the First Commandment.

But when He is thus known,–known as He is revealed,–whosoever thus knows Him never wishes any other god, and so, delightedly, keeps the First Commandment.

And so, whereas without Christ the First Commandment speaks in the stern voice of reproof and condemnation, yet in Christ it is turned into the blessed and glorious promise fulfilled, "I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage;" "Out of Egypt have I called my son;" "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

"That 'Last Resort'" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 7 , p. 105.

IN trying to clear themselves of the charge of using the civil and military powers of their respective countries in their missionary work, the Protestant missionaries are unanimous in their testimony that the Catholic missionaries to do. The latest statement of the case is by the author of the "Cyclopedia of Missions," as follows:–

There is no popular conception of missionaries more absolutely mistaken than that which represents them as constantly seeking the aid of the gunboat and running to the consul or ambassador on the least provocation. That is not, and never has been, the habit of missionaries of the evangelical churches. Unfortunately, as much can not be said of the Roman Catholics. Witness the course of Bishop Anzer in securing the seizure of Kiaochou by the German government. Evangelical missionaries, whether in Asia, Africa, or the Pacific, use ever other means first, and appeal to the civil and military power only as a last resort.

But if the civil and military powers are to be used at all, even "only as a last resort," then why is not the Catholic way the better and the more consistent? Is it not the dictate of common prudence to use these powers from the beginning, and so prevent any such crisis as the last resort, rather than to pretend not to have any use for these powers at all, and so become involved in dangers and damages that make it necessary "as a last resort"? Is it not far more consistent to use these power from the beginning, and so prevent outbreaks, than it is utterly to ignore them until an outbreak occurs, and then the powers have to be so used as to kill and imprison and to fine? Is it not far better to use these powers so as to prevent any killing, imprisonment, and fining of the people, than it is to use the powers only to kill, to imprison, and to fine?

If the civil and military powers are to be used at all, even "only as a last resort," in any such connection, then the Catholic course if the only consistent one, as it is indeed the more humane. But the Protestants all know well enough that such a course is only that of a union of Church and State; and is only the propagation of religion by means which Christ has positively repudiated. They therefore think to save appearances by using such means "only as a lost resort." But to use it as a last resort is in principle to use it equally as a first resort: this is as certainly the union of Church and State as is the other. Yea, more than in principle, it is to use such means as a first resort; because when they know that the power is there to be used as a last resort, and know that it is their intention to use it as a last resort, they will, at the first, act in a way in which they would not act at all if it were settled that no such power were ever to be used at all as any possible resort. And so acting only brings the crisis that involves the last resort.

"My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight."

"Editorial" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 7 , p. 105.

THE Examiner speaks of "conscientious Christian people" who "are strong in their conviction that the Fourth Commandment is of perpetual validity, and are laboring with commendable assiduity for the restoration of the sanctity of the day of rest;" yet who, "at the same time," are "indifferent to the at least equally binding requirement of New Testament baptism," saying that "the mode is 'non-essential.'" Surely, in this the Examiner has written without due consideration. For there are only two Christian peoples in the world who are laboring for the restoration of the sanctity of the day of rest of the Fourth Commandment, and both of these hold strictly to New Testament baptism in mode and everything else–as strictly as does the Examiner itself. One of these peoples are indeed, and have always been, Baptists–the Seventh-day Baptists. The other, though not bearing the denominational name of Baptists, are, are to the form and everything else, as truly holding New Testament baptism as are any Baptists in the world. These are the Seventh-day Adventists. Now the Seventh-day Baptists and the Seventh-day Adventists are the only Christian people in the world who are laboring for the restoration of the sanctity of the day of rest of the Fourth Commandment. And both thoroughly hold New Testament baptism. Why, then, should the Examiner imply that these have "such a punctilious regard for one of God's requirements, and such very improper indifference to another"?

"Back Page" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 7 , p. 112.

THE Philippine-American Civil Commission is framing statutes and making laws under the heading, "Be it enacted by the authority of the President of the United States." And the president of the United States has no authority whatever to enact anything. The president of the United States is the executive, not the legislative, authority of the government of the United States. In the Philippines he has power to enact laws and whatever else he chooses, because he has an army of sixty thousand men there; but he has no authority to do it. And that is precisely the Roman system of government after the republic had failed.

THE Cuban Constitutional Convention is proceeding on the supposition that the declaration of the United States that "the people of the island of Cuba are, and of right ought to be, free and independent;" and that the United States "disclaims any disposition or intention to exercise sovereignty, jurisdiction, or control over said island, except for the pacification thereof," is all true and honestly intended. And the administration is in a peck of trouble to know what to do about it?

February 19, 1901

"The Keeping of the Commandments" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 8 , p. 120.

"I AM the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me." Ex. 20:2, 3.

What is it to have other gods before the Lord? Since to truly have Him alone, is to love Him with all the heart, and all the soul, and all the mind, and all the strength, then, plainly enough, it follows that anything by which any part of the heart, any part of the soul, any part of the mind, or any portion of the strength, is turned from God, is devoted to anything other than to God, is, in itself, to have another god than the Lord. And all this is what is forbidden in the First Commandment: "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

It is important, therefore, to notice the gods which the Lord points out as the principal ones that it is natural for men to have before the Lord.

One of these, if not the chief one, is "the world." For it is written: "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him." 1 John 2:15. And, "Know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." James 4:14.

The reason of this is that "the world" itself has a god. And "the god of this world" is "the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience," and is, in fact, Satan himself. Friendship of the world, therefore, is of the spirit of the world; it is fellowship with the spirit of Satan. And this is why it "is enmity with God." Note, the Word does not say that the friendship of the world is at enmity with God, but that it is itself "enmity with God." And this is because it is of the very spirit of him who is the god of this world.

This is made plain in another text: "The whole world lieth in the evil one." 1 John 5:19, R.V. It is true, as our King James version renders it, that "the whole world lieth in wickedness," lieth in evil; but this is so because the whole world lieth in the wicked one, in the evil one. And the thought expressed here in the word "lieth" is "to lie at ease continually."

Plainly, then, a person who has friendship, and is in fellowship, with that which lies at perfect ease, and is content continually so to lie, in the evil one, is of the same spirit; and that can be only the spirit of the evil one, and, therefore, is of itself "enmity with God." And one thus so in friendship with the evil one, who is the fixed and continual enemy of God, makes himself thereby "the enemy of God."

This spirit of enmity is described in another place: "The carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." Rom. 8:7. It can not be subject to the law of God, because it is of the very mind and spirit of Satan, who is the decided enemy of God.

But thanks be to God, there is deliverance from this enmity; there is deliverance from this present evil world. For Christ Jesus "is our peace, who hath made both [God and man] one [who had been separated by this enmity], and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; having abolished in His flesh the enmity. . . . for to make in himself of twain [God and man] one new man, so making peace." Eph. 2:14, 15.

Therefore, though that enmity can not be subject to the law of God, in Christ every soul can find it completely abolished. Though such a spirit is enmity with God, in Christ every soul can find that spirit completely driven out, and himself made one with God, having not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God, that he may know not the things of the world, but "the things that are freely given to us of God." Therefore, for a man to love the world, or to have friendship for the world, is for him to have the world as his god. And that is, in reality, to have the god of this world as his god; it is to do service to the evil one as his god.

And so, when the god of this world, the evil one, had shown to Christ "all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them," and had offered them to Him, Christ could have them only on the condition that He would "fall down and worship" the evil one. And these are the only terms upon which anybody in the world can ever have the kingdoms of this world and the glory of them, or the things of this world and the glory of them. "For, all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world."

Christ's answer to that whole thought, for himself and all who are His forever, is: "Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve." Matt. 4:10.

And when Jesus had taken this stand against all the world, against all that is of the world, against all worldliness, and all the spirit that is of the world, and for God only, "then the devil leaveth Him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto Him." Verse 11. And so shall it be forever with every one who, in the faith of Christ, takes his stand as did Christ.

Thus utter separation from the world and from all that is of the world–nothing less than this–is the keeping of the First Commandment. "Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world." "They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world."

Deliverance from the world–this is the way to the keeping of the Commandments of God. And Christ "gave himself for our sins that He might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God."

Deliverance from sin is deliverance from the world. Deliverance from the world is deliverance from sin. This is the way to the keeping of the Commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.

"I am the Lord thy God which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." "Out of Egypt have I called my son." And "behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God."

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

Who would have other gods?

"Editorial" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 8 , p. 120.

THE leading Washington correspondent of the Chicago Times-Herald and of the administration, speaking of Congress and the Philippine Islands, says that there is a suspicion "that speculators are swarming into Manila, eager to gobble up mines, lands, and franchises," and that "it has been suggested that the speculators, the commercial houses, the banks, the franchise seekers, had a good deal to do with forming" what is called the "federal party" in the Philippines, which is asking for wider powers for the Philippine Commission.

Of Rome it is written that, when she had spread her power over the whole basin of the Mediterranean, and had turned into Roman provinces or Roman dependencies these dominions, "over this enormous territory, rich with the accumulated treasures of centuries, and inhabited by thriving, industrious races, the energetic Roman men of business spread and settled themselves, gathering into their hands the trade, the financial administration, the entire commercial control, of the Mediterranean basin. . . . Governors with their staffs, permanent officials, contractors for the revenues, negotiators, bill-brokers, bankers, merchants, were scattered everywhere in thousands. Money poured in upon them in rolling streams of gold."

The ancient history of Rome is modern, even up-to-date. And it will continue to be so; for the great influence even to the last day, is "the Image of the Beast."

"Bible Stories for Children" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 8 , pp. 120, 121.

WE have received a circular letter and prospectus of what purports to be a Bible story paper for children. The circular letter refers to "the plea made of late by several educational experts. . . for a change in methods and plans for Sunday-school instruction, whereby the story shall be chiefly employed in teaching little children." The chief of these experts "recommends Old Testament stories first–New Testament stories, involving higher truths, later."

The publishers who send out this letter approve of this plea of the educational experts; and so do we. There is nothing that can equal it.

Now these publishers propose to meet this plea by publishing this paper of Bible stories for the children. And they say that "the manner in which these Bible stories are illustrated and told can be seen from the sample copies inclosed." And they think that "teachers will be able to use them as supplementary to the regular lessons in many cases." They also publish, as a P.S., the word of a "well-known kindergarten instructor," that "the Old Testament stories are told in a delightful manner," etc.

This No. 1 of the paper tells the story of Genesis 1. It tells the story of the first verse; then, in the story of the second verse, it says:–

"And God said, Let there be light: and there was light." No bright sun was to be seen yet, or stars, but there was a kind of light. It had been one long night before this. It was a great many years before this light came. The Bible story of the making of the world divides it into six days,–not days like ours, but long ones, of thousands of years. On the first day light was made.

After this came a time of many years called the second day.

The story continues through the other five days of creation, and closes thus:–

The seventh day came, and God rested. Of course plants and animals kept growing, but no new thing was made. It is the long seventh day now.

Now, there can be no doubt that that is a fair sample of the "Bible" stories for little children, of the present day; for this paper is issued by the official publishing body of one of the leading denominations of the United States. And yet this professed Christian denomination, in a professed Bible story paper for the children, sows the seeds of the latter-day scientific infidelity, among the very first that are sown in the minds of the children. And when this is so, what can be expected of those children in the way of respect for the Bible, or in the way of their ever learning the truth of the Bible? And what can be expected of the coming men and women, when the truth of God is thus corrupted at the very fountain-head in the world; and when infidelity is laid as the very foundation stone of the spiritual life of the man?

This makes it important that all who have respect for the Bible as the word of God, exactly as God gave it, be diligent in putting before the children, and by every means getting into their minds, the true Bible story as it is in the Bible, and as it is in the fear of God. And to fill this demand, which is so emphasized by what we have here related, there is no better, no more appropriate, no more timely, books than "East Steps in the Bible Story" and "The Bible Reader, No. 1"–the latter for beginners, the former for others.

121

From what we have here related, which is only an illustration of the situation throughout the whole United States, and even the world, it is perfectly plain that it is not enough that our people simply take these little books into their own homes, and put them into the hands of their own children–it is true missionary work to put these books into every family, and into the hands of all the children, where it can possibly be done.

The people of God are in the world to hold up and to spread the word of God, and faith, against the word of men and infidelity–to hold forth the word of life. And in this time of most widespread infidelity, all who know God should be most active in fighting the good fight of faith. "Work while it is called, To-day; for the night cometh, when no man can work."

February 26, 1901

"The Keeping of the Commandments. The First Commandment" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 9 , p. 136.

"I AM the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me." Ex. 20:2, 3.

We have seen that, for any one to have this world, or anything that is of this world, is to have another god before the Lord. And this other god is "the god of this world," the "spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience," which is Satan.

But Christ came to "bring us to God." And this is the whole work of the preaching of the gospel; for it is written: "Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me." Acts 26:17, 18.

Now "the world" is divided into three parts–"the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life." And under one or all of these three heads is idolatry manifested. We shall study them one by one as they are written.

First: "the lust of the flesh"–appetite, or intemperance. This is specifically defined as a god; for it is written: "For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: whose end is destruction, whose god is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things." Phil. 3:18, 19.

Temperance is self-control,–not merely the control of one particular part of the man, self-control in one particular thing,–it is the control of self, the very being, the whole man. But this can never be done by the man himself; for the man himself is already subject to the control of "the god of this world," the evil one. This control was gained by the evil one, in the garden, and through appetite, this very "lust of the flesh." Since man is thus the subject of "the god of this world," a slave, "sold under sin," it is impossible for him of himself to clear himself of that power to which he surrendered himself.

But there is deliverance by the power of God, the true God, the living God, the rightful God of man. God can set free every man, from all the power of "the god of this world;" and it is only thus that any man can ever gain control of himself. It is only thus that any man can attain to true self-control, to true temperance.

The heart of man is the place of the seat of God in things pertaining to the man; for "the kingdom of God is within you." The kingdom of the heart and life of man belongs to God: it is alone His dominion. Through the deception of man this kingdom has been usurped by "the god of this world." This was done at the choice of man. At the choice of man, God, the true God, will return to His kingdom, and will take His place upon His throne in that kingdom, and will there rule and reign in righteousness, "even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference." Rom. 3:22.

Therefore the whole question of having other gods, or the true God alone, turns simply upon the one question: Who has the heart? Therefore it is written: "Keep thy heart above all keeping; for out of it are the issues of life." Prov. 4:23, margin.

Since, then, it is only by the power of God that any man can ever truly have control of himself, can be truly master of himself, it follows, inevitably, that the use of anything which has a tendency to take control of the man, to deprive the man of the control of himself; anything the use of which creates a habit which must be satisfied, and demands that it shall be served,–that is the having of another god. The man who has thus surrendered himself, and is thus controlled, is of those whom the scripture describes, "whose god is their belly."

This principle is expressed in the scripture: "All things are lawful unto me, . . . but I will not be brought under the power of any." 1 Cor. 6:12. Anything, therefore, which has a tendency to bring man under its power is the indulgence of idolatry: it is to have another god before the Lord.

Now not only the tendency, but the positive effect of all stimulants and narcotics, is to take control of the man who uses them. The only effect of any of these things is to create an appetite for itself,–an appetite that must be served at whatever cost,–and thus to rob the individual of all control of himself. Also it makes him not only a slave to that particular habit, but so weakens him that in other things he can not control himself. And "from tear to hasheesh we have, through hops, alcohol, tobacco, and opium, a sort of graduated scale of intoxicants, which stimulate in small doses, and narcotize in larger. The physiological action of all these agents gradually shades into each other; all producing, or being capable of producing, consecutive paralysis of the various parts of the nervous system".–Encyclopedia Britannica, Art., "Drunkenness."

Thus the First Commandment is the basis of all true temperance; and the keeping of that commandment and the faith of Jesus, is the only way to true temperance.

"I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." "Out of Egypt have I called my Son."

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

"Build Firmly the Foundation" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 9 , pp. 136, 137.

IN the Chicago Times-Herald of February 12 there was an editorial entitled, "School Reforms Must Being at the Bottom," in which it was said that the speeches made at the banquet of the Merchants' Club, held a short time before, were, in fact, "an indictment of the entire public school system in this city. It is true that the addresses were intended as strictures upon the scope and quality of the high school work. It was pointed out that our high school graduates seemed to be utterly lacking in the training necessary to fit them for any kind of a business career. Mr. Shedd deplored the manifest 'professional' tendency of the high school instruction, which seemed to imbue the student with the idea that only the 'professions' were worth striving for, while Mr. Farwell frankly stated that the best employees secured by his firm were 'graduates of country high schools. They get outside training in ability to construct and to accomplish, which the city high school boys do not have.'

"But to discover the sources of the acknowledged deficiencies of our high schools graduates one must go further back than the high schools. . . . If a young man is not fitted for the ordinary requirements of business when he gets through the highest grammar grade, the common school system is a failure. The higher school, with its courses in Latin and rhetoric and chemistry and geometry, can not be expected to supply the essential elements of a business training unless it is to be converted into a 'commercial school.' The truth of the matter is, There is no thoroughness in most of the work done in the lower grades of the Chicago public school system. Incompetency, shiftlessness, indifference, and incapacity are discernible on every hand. . . . The unfitness of hundreds of the teachers is a matter of such common knowledge and comment as to constitute a scandal and a reproach to the city. . . . No use beginning at the top while the foundations are crumbling."

A correspondent wrote to the editor (issue of February 15), describing his experience in a school, thus: "I took about a dozen of the older boys and gave them pens and paper, and dictated a letter which I had written. I then pinned my letter upon the wall, and had the boys each go to the copy and mark the errors upon his written sheet. It was a short letter. This test revealed the fact of the total failure of these letter writers to follow me. The essentials named were atrociously inaccurate. Some of the letters were out of form, and contained as high as sixteen errors! How do you account for it?"

And to this the editor of the Times-Herald replies, in the following forceful and sensible sentences: "How account for it? Our correspondent has only to visit any one of the grade schools in Chicago to find the solution of his conundrum.

"Or if he can get hold of a programme of the meeting of the National Educational Association to be held here February 26, 27 and 28 next, he will perceive the wherefore of the phenomenon of inaccuracy of our present school system in the essentials of education. This is to be a gathering of school superintendents from all over the country, and the list of subjects for discussion proves that instead of a prayerful consideration of the ways and means of saving the children of the republic from ignorance of reading, writing, spelling, and ciphering, its members will devote themselves principally to psychology, physiology, and manual training. Not until the afternoon of Thursday, February 28, when the meeting is in the throes of dissolution, do the members get down to a discussion of "A Standard Course of Study for Elementary Schools in Cities,' and 'Some Aspects of Public Study Training.'

"Instead of setting an example of accuracy in its 'Programme,' the National Educational Association starts out by spelling that word after the bob-tailed fashion of the Amalgamated Society of Faddists. A few years ago there was quite a rage for such a spelling. But the common sense of the English-speaking race asserted itself in favor of etymological accuracy. According to Skeats, a great authority with the philologists, the word found its way into English from the French, although the Latin form 'programma' appeared in Philips's New World of Words' as early as 1706. It came originally from Greek 'programma,' a public notice in writing.

"The programme also spells through 'thru,' although this word is merely a variation of thorough, which the spelling reformers with delightful inconsistency spell 'thoro,' as if ;the two words were not of common origin. Etymological inconsistency is a jewel they spit upon.

"Of course this gathering of experts will discuss the following proposition:–

"Would these young people (prospective teachers) catch the spirit of teaching and gain valuable APPERCEPTIVE material for their broader training-school course?

"No discussion of modern pedagogy is genuine without the word 'apperceptive' blown into it with all the self-consciousness of psychological superiority.

"In the meantime the children of the republic are being robbed of the alphabet, multiplication table, and the commonest rules of syntax. The course of study in the elementary schools is so top-lofty that it is bound to come down with a crash."

Any one who himself understands the fundamentals of schooling can verify for himself the truth thus stated by the Times-Herald, by merely asking the pupils, or the teachers, in any school, and especially in the high schools and colleges, to spell some common words; to read a page of matter; or to write a common letter, an item, or a short article.

That reform in education will be the most successful, and the most quickly successful, that recognizes this truth so emphasized by the Times-Herald; and

137

that, in recognition of this truth, begins at the foundations, and builds only by a thorough teaching in the fundamentals.

"Editorial" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 9 , p. 137.

IN order to get rid of the friar incubus in the Philippines the President's commission has recommended that the government of the Philippine Islands borrow money on the Philippine customs, and pay the friars the enormous demand for their holdings. And to the question as to "why the President delayed so long to publish the report of the Philippine Commission," the Independent makes the following suggestive answer:–

Is it not conceivable that during that time he had quite another object than that of persuading Congress to pass the military bill, and that the Catholic authorities in this country were quietly consulted as to whether the proposal of the Taft Commission would be satisfactory, and that it was found to be acceptable?

And does anybody notice now that this last week or two the leading Catholic papers are quite changing their tone, and are speaking favorably of the report of the Taft Commission and the proposition for the purchase of the friars' property and their withdrawal from the islands?

People should keep their eyes and ears open.

From the very beginning of this new "world-career" of the United States, the Catholic authorities have been quietly consulted by the President of the United States. And now it has become a regular thing. And if the United States ever gets out of the papal meshes thus already woven, it will do more than the papacy intends, and more than those expect who really keep their eyes and ears open. Leo's statement of 1892, that what the papacy has done for other nations she will do for the United States, is fast coming true.

March 5, 1901

"The Keeping of the Commandments. The First Commandment" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 10 , p. 152.

"I AM the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me." Ex. 20:2, 3.

The second of the three forms under which "the world" is embraced, and idolatry manifested, is–

"The lust of the eyes."

The lust of the eyes can be summed up in one word, vanity; and vanity is simply love of display. Something is put on ourselves, or that which is ours, merely for display, to attract the attention and excite the lust of the eyes of others, and cause them to envy our condition.

Further, on our own part, this idolatry is indulged in our seeing something that somebody else has, and not being content until we have imitated him by obtaining for ourselves a like thing.

That which we see with others may be perfectly proper, and strictly becoming, to them; yet, when imitated by us, it may be altogether improper, and unbecoming in itself, besides our indulging idolatry in the use of it. Because, if our eyes had not seen that particular thing, no thought of our own, and no need of our life, would ever have suggested that we should have it. The only reason of our having it being solely that our eyes saw it in possession of some other one, the possession of it by us is sheer idolatry in the lust of the eyes.

This principle of idolatry is expressed in the one word, the worldly word, "fashion." The world spends time in inventing particular styles of dress, or whatever else may be a part of the living. The world is expected to follow, and expects to follow, the fashion set by the world.

But we are studying how to serve God. We are studying how to be separate from the world; how to be "not of the world;" how to be completely divorced from the love of the world, or of the things that are in the world. And in this we are studying how to be separated from this lust of the eyes which follows the world, which accepts the dictates of the world, and which itself is "of the world."

God has made no two persons alike. He has made each person with characteristics which single him out distinctly from all others in the universe. This is for a purpose. We are created for the glory of God; that is, the purpose of our creation is that each one, in the characteristics which make him himself alone, distinct from all others in the universe, shall be a means of making God manifest,–of reflecting a ray of the light of God, in a way that no other can possibly do, that by each one God shall be manifested as not by any other one. And, in order that this shall be so, it is essential that each one shall be joined only to God, and this with all his heart, and all his soul, and all his mind, and all his strength–the whole being.

This principle is expressed in the parable of the talents in Matthew 25. When the master took his journey into a far country, and delivered to his servants his goods,–to one five talents, to another two, and to another one, he gave "to every man according to his several [individual; not common to two or more; separate, particular] ability." And from the master, at His returning and reckoning, each one receives according as he has used the gift of God, according to this "several ability."

No one is to use, indeed no one can use, this gift of God in imitation of others. To attempt to use it in imitation of others is to separate from God, and put others in His place; it is to have other gods before the Lord; it is idolatry.

There are desires of the flesh which are not lusts of the flesh, in the wrong sense. While we are in this world, it will be necessary for us to eat and to drink–not to make a god of the belly, not for the satisfaction of appetite, not for the lust of the flesh, but for the glory of God. Those who serve God in the keeping of the First Commandment eat and drink that which, in every respect, enables them best to discern what is the will of God, and how best to serve Him according to that will.

While we are in the world, it will be essential to clothe ourselves–not to please the world; not to conform to some silly style that our eyes see, which is altogether of the world, and which we ourselves would never think of it our eyes had not seen it as displayed by the world–not that; but the glory of God.

It is proper, indeed it is essential, to our glorifying God, that we shall dress neatly; that we shall wear as good clothing as we honestly can; that it shall be made to fit us becomingly, that is, that it shall conform strictly to our own individuality; that it shall be a proper expression of our own several selves, as God has made us. But to imitate the dress of others, to put something on ourselves simply because we have seen it on others, to adopt a style for ourselves which we have seen adopted by others,–all this is of the lust of the eyes; all this is not of the Father, but is of the world; it is idolatry.

A long coat is strictly becoming to a long man, but not at all so to a short man. A high collar is entirely proper for a man who has a long neck; but for a man with a short neck to wear a collar so high that it throws up his head as if he were constantly gazing at the moon, is not at all proper. A blue dress, or one of some other color, may be exactly becoming to the one whom you saw wearing it; but it may be the last color in the world that you should wear in a dress.

Now, all this imitating of others, all following of fashion, is but the lust of the eyes, is of the world, and is idolatry.

Ask God what He will have you do. It can never be a proper question with you, as to whether anybody else in the wide universe does it. You are to glorify God, not others.

Study, in the fear of God, your own self as the workmanship of God; and study, in the fear of God, asking Him only what you shall wear, what you shall eat, what you shall drink, what you shall do, that shall most fully glorify Him, that shall most fully represent the talent which He has given you to be used for Him only, according to your "several ability."

In every way it means much to love God with all the heart and all the soul and all the mind and all the strength. It means much to be not of the world; to love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. Yet that which it means is simply the keeping of the First Commandment.

"I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." "Out of Egypt have I called my son." "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." "Here are they that keep the Commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus."

"Sunday-law Hearing in Massachusetts" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 10 , pp. 153, 154.

BEFORE a committee of the Massachusetts Legislature, February 7, there was held a hearing on "a bill to provide a weekly rest-day for employees of transportation companies." As always, the petitioners for the bill, and those who pleaded for it before the committee, were preachers.

From the employees of transportation companies there were present more, it would seem, to oppose the bill, than there were of the preachers to advocate it. Yet the preachers insisted to the committee that "although the railroad men present were against the bill, it should be passed, as it is best for them." But, "as most of the petitioners were ministers and representatives of organizations in no way connected with railroading, the conductors, brakemen, and engineers who were present demanded the privilege of running their own affairs, and claimed to know what they wanted as well as anybody else."

One of the advocates of the bill, as usual, took pains to explain that the bill had "no relations to Sabbath-day observance. There is no objection to running trains on Sunday, but the bill attempts to make up to transportation employees for their loss of Sunday. The proposed law will furnish work for one-seventh more men. Mr. Buttrick then went on to show the great increase of Sunday travel, and the growing number of men who are compelled to work seven days in the week. He said that the continuous toil is causing men to deteriorate in many ways. General Bancroft told him that the motormen and conductors of the Boston elevated are better paid than the average clergyman. From this Mr. Buttrick concluded that they could better afford to give up a day than mill hands and others who can not work seven days if they want to.

"After several railroad men had tried to cross-examine Mr. Buttrick, he refused to answer questions, and Rev. G. G. Farwell was called. He said that for five years the committee of the Congregational general association had tried to get the bill. He stated that conductors and motormen of the Boston elevated do not dare to come and petition for a day of rest; moreover, they do not dare even to frequently ask for a day off, as, if they do, they will lose their places. The opposition to the bill, he said, came from steam-railroad men, who have a day off each week.

"The next witness for the petitioners was Rev. Doremus Scudder, of Woburn. Dr. Scudder went on to explain how, although they work seven days in a week, lawyers, doctors, and ministers can get recreation by a very long vacation or by the variety of their work. He thought workingmen who do the same thing day after day should be compelled to rest.

"Rev. W. H. Allbright pictured a horrible future for labor which must work seven days in order to live, and claimed that it is the duty of the State to compel the transportation men to do what is good for them, whether they wish to or not.

"The principle of the State legislating for the good of the man, whether by his consent or not, was laid down by the next speaker, Rev. A. A. Beale, of Brighton.

"Rev. Daniel Evans, of Cambridge, stated that all great reforms do not come from the people to be benefited, but from those outside who are able to see what they need better than the beneficiaries themselves.

"H. M. Sweeney, representing the building trades council of Boston, said that the bill looks toward one great principle of organized labor; namely, to lessen the hours of labor. Men should not be allowed to work seven days a week, because they thereby prevent other men from getting any work. It is also necessary that a man shall not work too long, as thereby the public is endangered, as the motorman, engineer, or conductor is not alert and at his best if he has not rest.

"George E. McNeil told how he was grieved at this time, when the century is just beginning, to find intelligent men opposing the bill in question. Then Mr. McNeil brought up the old question of leisure promoting efficiency, and thereby increasing payment. 'Wherever the Sabbath day is invaded by labor,' said Mr. McNeil, 'there civilization has deteriorated.' We want not the religious seventh day, but a labor sabbath. We always find men willing to follow the boss wherever he may lead. Of ten thousand people employed on street railways, eight thousand are compelled to work seven days a week. The extra men make about two dollars and a half or three dollars a week. Make the regular men work one day less a week, and these extra men will have a larger income, because they will get more work. The American Federation of Labor stands for one day's rest in seven, but railroad men think they are too good for association with carpenters and painters. As Mr. McNeil was generalizing to a considerable extent, the chairman of the committee, Senator Butler, reminded him of the subject at hand.

"Rev. M. D. Kneeland, secretary of the New England Sabbath Protective League, said he considered that the proposed bill would make a wise law.

"Rev. Carey, of the Methodist preachers' meeting, said the bill would serve the workingmen, the community, and the commonwealth.

"C. D. Baker, president of the legislative board of railway employees, opened the opposition to the bill. He said that, except in emergencies, men of the steam railroads are not compelled to work on Sunday. If the bill were passed, Sunday would be cheapened and brought down like other days. Mr. Baker stated that it is fitting that clergymen should come here to try to get a day off for railroad men, as he was sure that the man who first agitated a Sunday train on the Boston and Albany railroad was a minister who wanted to get into town to his church. Regarding the employment of extra men, Mr. Baker said that extra men can not be employed indiscriminately on a steam railroad, as they are unable to protect the public. He said he knew that steam-railroad employees do not want legislation on this subject.

"J. Johnson said that for almost fifty years he has worked seven days a week, six days for the railroad and one for the church, singing in the choir and being paid for it.

"J. H. Parant said that the railway conductors' association is against the bill. It would not call for the employment of extra men, and to the twenty-five thousand employees of the Boston and Maine not more than a handful would be added, but the regular men would have to lengthen their hours of work. About the only men who work Sunday are those who do it to get extra money. Not three per cent of the railroad employees in Massachusetts would want this bill. 'We are not directed by any officials,' said, he, 'but we have no trouble in approaching the president, and without a committee. We know very well that all these clergymen want is Sunday observance, and that the present bill is only an entering wedge. We can now get off almost any time, and are sure of it; under the proposed law, we should never know when we should have any time to ourselves.'

"Chairman Butler then asked all the remonstrants to rise, and forty-three stood up, representing every division of the Boston and Maine, the New York, New Haven and Hartford, and Boston and Albany railroads.

"J. R. O'Connell quoted statistics showing that the railroad men are the second longest-lived class of people, and doctors last.

"A. H. Brown said that on the Fitchburg division of the Boston and Maine a few men work twelve days and lay off two; most of them have Sunday.

"Mr. Stone, an engineer and member of the Congregational Church, said that the bill would take forty-three men out of his church. He had never worked Sundays, because he had scruples, and the trainmaster respected them.

"J. H. McDonald said he had worked for eighteen years at railroading, and many Sundays, and did not feel deteriorated. When he asked to be relieved of Sunday work, the request was granted.

"The hearing then adjourned."

It has been observed that "where ambition can be so happy as to cover its enterprises, even to the person himself, under the appearance of principle, it is the most incurable and inflexible of all human passions." And it is equally true that where professed leaders in morals have deliberately deluded themselves into maintaining a confessedly false issue upon false pretenses, "for righteousness' sake," they have committed themselves to the control of a passion that is as blind and cruel as that other is incurable and inflexible.

Every one of those preachers knows full well that to ask for legislation in behalf of "the Sabbath" or of enforcing Sabbath observance is unconstitutional, un-American, un-Protestant, and un-Christian. This is clearly shown by their being careful to disavow all intention of asking legislation enforcing a religious sabbath: "we want not the religious seventh day, but a labor sabbath." Yet every one of them knows that there is no sabbath but a religious sabbath; and that their so-called "labor sabbath" which they demand is identically to the very minute the religious sabbath that they profess to exclude. Thus they shift the issue, and boldly demand the very thing which at the outset they profess to exclude, and so commit themselves to an utterly false issue.

Then, the easier to maintain their false issue, they put themselves forward as the champions of the "poor oppressed laboring man."

Then when it is demonstrated that the "poor oppressed" ones whom they have championed "are better paid than the average clergyman,"–that is, that the "poor oppressed" whom they have assumed to champion are neither so "poor" nor so "oppressed" as are the average of the class who put themselves forward as the champions,–the fact is deftly turned in their own favor by the additional cool assumption that those can so much the better afford to have these as their champions, and submit to their will.

Then, further, when the ones whom they have especially championed appear, and openly and decidedly repudiate these self-constituted champions, and assert their ability to know what they themselves want as well as anybody else, and demand to be let alone to exercise the privilege of running their own affairs,–then they are met with the enormous proposition that "those outside are able to see what they need better than the beneficiaries themselves:" that "the State must compel these persons to do what is good for them, whether they wish to or not"!

All of this is the very philosophy and argument of the Inquisition. And in it all there is a terrible danger, though this danger is unperceived by those who are so zealously pursuing the dangerous course. Yet this great danger is especially to those who are so zealously pursuing that course. It has been presented by another, as follows:–

"No real supporter of these laws can persuade himself, even by trying to persuade others, that either he or his fellow Brownists of the past or present time care in the least for the physical benefits which may or may not result from the enforcement of the idle and cheerless Sunday. All Brownists know perfectly well that their idle and cheerless Sunday was originally established in England as a theological institution, and without any reference whatever to physical consideration; that wherever it is established in the United States, the motive of its establishment is a religious stimulus, and no regard for social and sanitary results inspires its advocates. They know that if it were demonstrated that their idle and cheerless Sunday is a positive injury to the bodies of men, and a disorganizing social influence, their zeal for 'the day' would not in the least abate, and that they would simply regard whatever inconvenience it might entail on the in-

153

dividual or the body politic, as 'a suffering for righteousness' sake.'

"They will prate of the 'secular sabbath,' 'the overworked laboring man,' 'police regulations,' etc., etc., being all the while perfectly aware that they are guilty of false pretenses, and are throwing a mask on this dogma of Brownism, and seeking to keep it in the statute book by imposition, and by making it appear to others that it is a certain thing, and has a certain a purpose, when they know that it is no such thing, and has no such purpose; and that, if it were any such thing or had any such purpose, they would not care in the least either for the passage or the enforcement of a Sunday law.

"Knowing all this, are they not clearly guilty of a high and execrable degree of intellectual dishonesty when they pretend that the object of Sunday laws is the physical betterment of the race, and that they are supporters of these laws for any such reason? Cato wondered how one augur could look another in the face without laughing. It is difficult to understand how any intelligent Brownist can use this secular argument for the idle and cheerless Sunday without blushing at his own insincerity.

"But whether the red signal flag of the blush is flown or not, the corruption exists within. The man is false to himself. He has prostituted his intelligence. He has sold his soul. He has done evil that good may come. He has undertaken to obtain under false pretenses the 'goods' of idleness and cheerlessness on the first day of the week. And a soul that has once been bartered is ever thereafter in the market. A clergyman who is compelled in defense of a dogma or tenet of his sect to be intellectually dishonest, ought to resign; for nowhere does falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus [false in one, false in all] apply more absolutely than to such a case. If he once plays fast and loose with his own spirit, at the dictation of tradition or convention, he will do it again at the command of interest or desire. The consciousness of his own degradation will never leave him; no second baseness will lower him any further in his own esteem. He has lost his bearings on the ocean of morals. How is he safely to steer any longer, either for himself or others?"

Such is the beginning of a course which easily and inevitably leads to the office of the actual inquisitor, in the workings of the Inquisition itself.

"Why Not Use Sense, Instead?" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 10 , p. 154.

WE have received a booklet, and a circular letter calling attention to the booklet and its value, hoping that we will accept it. This booklet advertises a patent-medicine–a grand curse–"a perfect remedy for headache arising from the following causes:–

"Headache resulting from protracted mental effort and close confinement; nervous headache occasioned by excitement, excessive grief, or other causes; headache due to loss of sleep and rest; headache from indigestion and overindulgence."

From this it is perfectly plain that, if ever there was a medicine invented as a sheer imposition upon the ignorance and thoughtlessness of the people, and to encourage dissipation and injurious practices, this must be the one. For it distinctly identifies certain causes of headache, and then recommends this drug, or whatever it may be, as a cure for the headache produced by these distinctly named causes; when the simplest thing in the world, and the only sensible thing, is for the individual to stop the causes.

Imagine the perfect thoughtlessness and the nonsense of taking a drug to cure a "headache resulting form protracted mental effort and close confinement"! All in the world that is needed in that case is for the sufferer to stop his protracted mental effort, and go out into the open air.

For headache that is "occasioned by excitement, excessive grief, or other causes," all that is needed is to stop the excitement, to tone down the grief, and to put away whatever "other causes" there may be.

For headache that is "due to loss of sleep and rest," why should it be thought that anything is needed but to take sleep and rest?

And for headache caused by "indigestion," the thing to do is to eat only what will digest. And for headache from "overindulgence," the sensible thing would seem to be to stop the overindulgence.

Yet this circular is a fair exposition of the present-day ideas of cure–continue causes, and then administer drugs to kill the effects? And, in all reason, what can the end be of such a course, but to kill the person?

March 12, 1901

"The Keeping of the Commandments. The First Commandment" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 11 , p. 168.

"I AM the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me." Ex. 20:2, 3.

The third of the three forms under which "the world" is embraced, and idolatry manifested, is–

"The pride of life."

The word here used to express the thought of "life" is a form of the Greek word Bios, and signifies not animal life; not the breath of life; not spiritual life; not life itself, the life which comes from God; but "the life which we live; the life led; hence, manner of life, course of life."

The word used to express the thought of "pride" is alazoneia ("alazoneia"), "the character of an alazon ("alazon"). And an alazon is literally "a wanderer about the country;" hence, literally, "a false pretender, imposter, quack; hence, swaggering, boastful, braggart; and by implication, ostentation, arrogance, pride." It is the same word that is used in 1 Tim. 3:6: "Being lifted up with pride."

The closest equivalent English word is "ambition," which signifies, literally, "a going about, as of a candidate soliciting votes;" again, "the act of going about to solicit or obtain an office or other object of desire;" a "desire for some object that confers distinction;" "desire to distinguish one's self from other men;" "desirous of obtaining power, superiority, or distinction."

Another word that corresponds to this "pride of life" and "ambition," is "self-exaltation," self-aggrandizement. The Latin word that corresponds to the Greek word used to express "pride of life," is gloriosus, and expresses the idea of worldly glory.

In the light of these definitions, it is easier to see the real nature of the temptation of Jesus, when "the devil taketh Him up into an exceeding high mountain, and showeth Him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; and saith unto Him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me." And then all the fires of ambition, of worldly glory, that were ever manifested in human flesh–in Alexander, Napoleon, and all other like–poured like a driving storm upon Jesus, to entice Him to the desire of that which was before Him.

But by the Spirit of God, Jesus knew that none of all that "glory" which He saw was "of the Father," but all "of the world." He knew that it was only a false, fleeting glory. He knew that true glory lies not in "the pride of life," not in ambition, not in self-exaltation; but in self-emptying, self-renunciation. And, therefore, He promptly answered: "Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve."

As points out in a previous study, the divine account of this temptation reveals the fact that worldly glory, the glory of the kingdoms of this world; the glory of rulership, of overlordship; the glory of position, of office,–all this, or any of it, can be had only by idolatry, only by the worship of "the god of this world."

Christianity, the true keeping of the commandments of God, is not rulership, but service. The liberty wherewith Christ makes men free, the liberty in which Christians stand fast, is the liberty by love to serve one another; as it is written, and as it has been studied only lately, in the Sabbath-school lessons all over the world: "Brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another. For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Gal. 5:13, 14. And to love our neighbor as ourselves is to do good to him always, in all things, and by whatsoever means. In "all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them."

And when, in this same "pride of life," this spirit of ambition, the disciples were striving among themselves as to who should be the greatest, or who should be counted the greatest, "Jesus called them unto Him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; and whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant: even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give His life a ransom for many." Matt. 20:25-28.

Thus, all desire for place or for position; all exercise of dominion or of authority in place or position; all national distinctions, all racial distinctions, all aristocratic distinctions, all class distinctions, all place or official distinctions, are only of the pride of life, are not of the Father, but of the world, and are idolatry. They are all vanity, which is only idolatry.

The greatest curse that has ever come upon the earth since the original curse itself, has been, and is, in men, in the world and in the Church occupying places of authority, and exercising authority, who have no true authority. What has been the greatest curse that all history has known among men in the world, as they have existed in nations or organizations? What organization has been the most oppressive, and the most far-reaching in its oppression? Everybody can answer in a moment and in a word–the papacy. And what is the papacy?–It is summed up in a man in place of authority, who has no true authority. It is simply a man, having seized authority over men, and the means of enforcing it, and demanding respect and subjection to that authority, who yet has not authority at all except that which he has seized by unlawful means. And the Scripture description of the papacy is that he "opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." This is the extremity to which men can possibly go in the violation of the First Commandment. And yet it is all simply the desire for place, position, and to exercise authority.

But the papacy has no true authority, because it has no truth. Truth is the only source of authority. He who has the truth has authority. And he who has the most truth has the most authority. This is why it is that Jesus had all authority in heaven and in earth: He had all authority because He had all the truth–He is the Truth itself. "All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth." "I am the Way, the Truth." Those two sentences belong together. Each explains the other.

And yet Jesus had no position: He occupied no place. And that simply expresses the eternal truth that position never gives true authority. And that is simply to say that, in the Church and work of God, position never gives authority to anybody. Authority may qualify a person for a position that he has not. But position never can give to a person authority that he has not without the position. Position entails responsibility, but never gives authority.

Jesus taught "as one having authority." And that authority was readily recognized by those who heard. This was because the authority was in what He taught. The authority was in the truth that He had. And whosoever in the world has the truth as it is in Jesus, in that he has also authority in heaven and on earth–not to exercise authority, but to speak with authority. "The princes of the Gentiles exercise. . . authority," "but it shall not be so among you." God does give authority; but He gives it in the truth which He gives; and he who receives the truth of God as it is, as it is in Jesus, in that receives authority. The authority which he has is in the truth which he has, in the message which he bears.

Where, then, is the true position of greatness, and the position of true greatness? Here is the answer: "Whosoever will be great aong you, let him be your minister; and whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant." The greatest position is that of servant; and the greatest work is that of service. "Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister." "I am among you as He that serveth."

In Christ and the way of Christ is the keeping of the First Commandment. In the papacy and in the way of the papacy is the breaking of the First Commandment.

"I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." "Out of Egypt have I called me son."

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

"A Brief Review of Passing Events" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 11 , pp. 168-170.

THOSE who have been readers of the REVIEW for three years past know that, from the day that Cuba fell under the power of the United States, by the defeat of Spain, we have never had a particle of confidence in any representation that was made by the United States respecting the declared right of Cuba to be free and independent. The declaration of war against Spain by the United States was made April 18, 1898. That same day the Congress of the United States officially declared, in a joint-resolution, that "the people of the Island of Cuba are, and of right ought to be, free and independent." In the declaration of war that day made by the United States, it was also declared "that the United States hereby disclaims any disposition or intention to exercise sovereignty, jurisdiction, or control over said islands, except for the pacification thereof, and asserts its determination, when that is accomplished, to leave the government and control of the island to its people."

Yet, for all this, all the reader of the REVIEW for these last three years know that we have never believed for a moment that these promises would be kept, that Cuba ever would be free and independent. Before the war between the United States and Spain was ended, under the heading of "Passing Events," we called attention, July 12, 1898, to the "New World-Power" that was arising in the prospect of a world-career that was opening to the United States, through her victories so far over Spain. Among other things, we then said: "The only republic that ever went over this ground before was the republic of Rome. And when Rome once became imperial in territory, it was but a little while before she became both imperial and imperious in spirit, and then it was but a little while before she became imperial in government."

July 19, 1898, touching further the same subject of "Imperial America," we said: "All these things are worthy of thoughtful consideration; for no one knows what 'manifest destiny' may produce. And if we mark events as they pass, we shall be able better to understand each new phase that may open to the world. These are times in which the world moves rapidly, and much may occur in a day. And all these events are laden with solemn meaning to every one who is waiting and watching for the coming of the Lord. 'Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments.'"

In the REVIEW of Aug. 2, 1898, under the general heaving of "Passing Events," we cited "A Little Ancient History, Which Is Also Modern." In that article we said: "In considering the new and 'imperial' career that is opening before the United States, and being sanctioned by so many in high

169

positions, we have remarked that there was one republic that passed over this ground once before in the history of the world. That republic was Rome. It is interesting to read the statements made to-day concerning this 'colonial policy' and 'colonial career' that is opening up before 'Imperial America,' and compare it with what has long been written of the course of Rome as she passed over the same ground."

We referred to the pretensions that the United States was making, of extending "the blessings of liberty" to the peoples in the Philippines, San Juan, and Cuba, who had hitherto been oppressed by Spain. Then we said: "All this is precisely what Rome proposed to do. Rome claimed that she never wished to make any conquests of any people, nor to control any territory, outside of her own boundaries of Italy. All that she ever did outside of Italy was altogether out of pure benevolence, and solely to extend to oppressed peoples the blessings of liberty, of which the Romans were the exemplars before the world, and in behalf of the world, and which they so sincerely loved that they couldn't be content at all so long as any other people were not enjoying this wonderful liberty. Therefore they would man fleets and raise armies, send them over seas at great sacrifice and immense expense to fight battles for strange peoples, only that those peoples might have the blessing of liberty, of which Rome was the world's conservator."

We then cited the ancient history of the decree of liberty to the Grecian States, which the Roman Republic proclaimed in 1896 B.C., as follows:–

"The senate and people of Rome, and Titus Quintius, their general, having overcome Philip and the Macedonians, ease and deliver from all garrisons, taxes, and imposts, the Corinthians, the Loerians, the Phocians, the Euboeans, the Phthiot Acheans, the Magnesians, the Thessalians, and the Perrhúbians; declare them free, and ordain that they shall be governed by their respective laws and usages."

We then quoted the history that followed that proclamation, in which were the following two paragraphs:–

"The remembrance of so delightful a day and of the invaluable blessing then bestowed, was forever renewing, and for a long time the only subject of conversation at all times and in all places. Every one cried in the highest transports of admiration and a kind of enthusiasm, that there was a people in the world who, at their own expense and the hazard of their lives, engage in a war for the liberty of other nations; and that not for their neighbors, or people situated on the same continent, but who crossed seas, and sailed to distant climes, to destroy and extirpate unjust power from the earth, and to establish, universally, law, equity, and justice: that by a single word and the voice of a herald, liberty had been restored to all the cities of Greece and Asia: that only a great soul could have formed such a design; but to execute it was the effect at once of the highest good fortune and the most consummate virtue.

"They called to mind all the great battles which Greece had fought for the sake of liberty. 'After sustaining so many wars,' said they, 'never was its valor crowned with so blessed a reward as when strangers came and too up arms in its defense. It was then that, almost without shedding a drop of blood, or losing one man, it acquired the greatest and noblest of all prizes for which mankind can contend. Valor and prudence are rare at all times; but of all virtues, justice is most rare. Agesilaus, Lysander, Nicias, and Alcibiades had great abilities for carrying on war, and gained battles both by sea and land; but it was for themselves and for their country, not for strangers and foreigners, they fought. That height of glory was reserved for the Romans.'"

Then we asked: "When two things are so precisely alike in their beginnings as are this course of Rome and that proposed for the United States, can there be much likelihood that the endings will be any less alike?"

In the REVIEW Aug. 23, 1898, under the heading of "Passing Events," we gave again "A Little Ancient History, Which Is Also Modern." We said: "The conquests of the Roman Republic were made in the name of liberty, to deliver peoples from oppression. But after these conquests had been made, and the immediate question settled, there was a different story to tell." We then cited, word for word, another portion of that "Ancient History" of the liberty proclaimed by the Roman Republic to the Greek States, whom she had freed from the oppressive rule of kings, prefacing it with these words: "Honest old Rollin's 'reflections' upon the course of the Roman Republic are important to-day, as the republic of the United States has started in this identical path."

Two paragraphs from the "Ancient History" then printed in the REVIEW run as follows:–

"The Romans declared loudly in favor of those republics [of Greece]; made it their glory to take them under their protection, and that with no other design in outward appearance; than to defend them against their oppressors; and further to attach them by a still stronger tie, they hung out to them a specious bait, as a reward for their fidelity–I mean liberty, of which all the republics in question were inexpressibly jealous, and which the Macedonian monarchs had perpetually disputed with them.

"The bait was artfully prepared, and was eagerly swallowed by the generality of the Greeks, whose views penetrated no further. But the most judicious and most clear-sighted among them discovered the danger that lay concealed beneath this charming bait; and, accordingly, they exhorted the people from time to time, in their public assemblies, to beware of this cloud that was gathering in the west; and which, changing on a sudden into a dreadful tempest, would break like thunder over their heads to their utter destruction."

Then we closed the article with these words: "This extract will be good to keep, and to read along with much spread-eagleism that has been, and that will be, manifested upon 'Imperial America,' 'our colonial policy,' and 'our obligations to extend the blessings of liberty to oppressed peoples' and 'to all the world.'"

This same thought we have followed up from time to time ever since, because there has been abundance of occasion for it.

It was for these reasons that we never had a particle of confidence in the professions of the extending, by the United States, of "the blessings of liberty to oppressed peoples." We knew that ancient Rome, and her character, are cited in the book of Daniel especially for the last days. We knew that this history was not thus cited in the word of God in vain. We had studied that history, to know what the real character of that ancient republic was. And, knowing that it was thus cited in the word of God as instruction to the people of the last days,–these present times,–and knowing that the only great republic that there is in the world is the United States, it was easy to know where to look for the events concerning which the career of this ancient great republic was so especially instructive. And, knowing that the blessings of liberty promised by that ancient great republic were delusions; and, knowing that that republic is cited in the word of God as instruction for "the last days," we could not possibly have any confidence in "the blessings of liberty" promised by the modern great republic.

Still, that great benevolence was being loudly proclaimed by the government of the United States. June 20, 1900, the convention of the National Party, in their platform, declared that "to Cuba independence and self-government were assured in the same voice by which war was declared, and to the letter this pledge shall be performed." Yet, for all this, we knew that it would not be so; because, in addition to the warnings which the Scripture gives upon the subject, there were constantly appearing evidences, on the part of the government itself, that the promises to Cuba were never to be kept, either in spirit or in letter.

When the directions of the United States were given for the creation and the holding of a convention to frame a constitution for Cuba, the instructions plainly showed that there was no such thing to be allowed as Cuban independence. A newspaper correspondent in Washington who plainly had access to the innermost circles of information of the administrations, was constantly writing in the magazines, as well as in his regular newspaper, facts and information concerning the purposes of the administration, which showed conclusively that, on the part of the administration, there was no intention of recognizing any such thing as the independence of Cuba.

However, it was first decided to communicate to the Cuban Convention that, when the convention had framed and adopted a constitution for Cuba, then the convention was "to formulate what, in your opinion, ought to be the relations between Cuba and the United States." And when the convention had formulated their relations, then "the government of the United States will doubtless take such action on its part as shall lead to a final and authoritative agreement between the people of the two countries to the promotion of their common interests."

The Cuban Convention framed a constitution for Cuba; but this other arrangement, dictated by the United States, was not carried out. Then the convention was informed that unless they did make such arrangements, the President of the United States could not present to Congress their constitution, with his approval. Still the Cuban Convention delayed. Then, Feb. 27, 1901, the Senate of the United States, and Thursday, February 28, the House of Representatives, passed legislation by which, on the part of the United States, the power of the United States is extended over Cuba forever, and by which is established forever "the right" of the United States "to intervene for. . . the maintenance of a government" in Cuba. And with all this, the government of the United States declares "that the government of Cuba consents that the United States may exercise the right to intervene," etc.

Cuba had not consented, nor has she yet consented, except with the mere consent of silence in the presence of the overwhelming power of one of the mightiest world Powers. But the United States has declared "that the government of Cuba consents that the United States may exercise the right to intervene for. . . the maintenance of a government" in Cuba "adequate. . . for discharging the obligations with respect to Cuba, imposed by the Treaty of Paris on the United States, now to be assumed and undertaken by the government of Cuba."

Thus, on her own initiative, the United States government has swept away her own official promise of freedom and independence to Cuba, and her promise not "to exercise jurisdiction, sovereignty, or control over said islands, except for her power over Cuba, and her "right" forever, at any moment, "to intervene" in the affairs of the government of Cuba. And thus, in principle and in practice, in spirit and in the letter, the republic of the United States has repeated the crafty policy of the republic of Rome.

Of the republic of Rome, and of Rome of all time, it is written: "Though his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many." Dan. 8:25. Out of Rome was formed the Beast. The republic of the United States is walking, step by step, in the way of the republic of Rome. Under the pretensions of a peaceful, lamb-like disposition, this republic, too, "through his policy also, shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; . . . and by peace shall destroy many." From that thing anciently came the Beast. From that same thing, repeated in these last times, comes the Image of the Beast.

And now, with an emphasis that it never had before, the Third Angel's Message speaks with its "loud voice:" "If any man worship the Beast and his Image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the

170

wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of His indignation. . . . Here is the patience of the saints; here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus."

March 19, 1901

"The Keeping of the Commandments. The First Commandment" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 12 , p. 184.

"I AM the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me." Ex. 20:2, 3.

Yet another phase of the worship of "the god of this world," included in "the pride of life," is the worship of Mammon, or riches. And this is not by any means least, though it is the last one in the list. For is it not written, "The love of money is the root of all evil"?

This is so wrapped up with that phase of "the pride of life" which was noticed last week,–ambition, self-exaltation, self-aggrandizement, gloriosus,–that it is, in great measure, inseparable from it. For there is nothing that gives worldly glory so quickly, so easily, and so abundantly as money; and there is nothing that gives power so quickly and so easily as does money. All this, simply because Mammon is such a familiar deity to mankind, because mankind is naturally so worshipful of Mammon. And yet it is all idolatry; it is all a denial of the true God; it is a breaking of the First Commandment, which says, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." For, says Jesus: "Yet can not,"–not, Ye ought not; not, Ye should not; but,–"Ye can not serve God and Mammon."

Since the true worship of God is to love God with all the heart, and all the soul, and all the mind, and all the strength; and anything that draw away either the heart, soul, mind, or strength to it, and comes between man and the true worship of God, is another god; so the allowing of money, the desire for money, the love of money, to come between a man and his true service to God, is the worship of Mammon. And to allow the desire for money, the love of money, to separate a man from true Christian thoughtfulness, and care of mankind temporally and eternally, is the worship of Mammon; it is to have another god than the Lord; it is to break the First Commandment.

The distinction may be clearly drawn by saying that the keeping of the First Commandment is the being right, and doing right, with no thought whatever, at any time, as to what it will cost. No amount of money can ever have any consideration whatever in any question of serving God; in any question of loving God with all the heart, or our neighbor as ourself. And yet everybody knows that "What will it cost?" does have a positive bearing with the vast majority, even of professed Christian people, upon the exercise of their love to God with all the heart, and their neighbor as themselves.

But to allow this question to have any bearing whatever is the worldly way. It is not of the Father, but of the world. For with the world the first question is always, "What will it cost?" "How much can I make?" In all the dealing, all the traffic of business relationship, in the world, the way of the world, and the inquiry of the world, is only, "How much can I make?" And if more can be made by oppressing the neighbor, the oppression takes precedence of the love of the neighbor; and the neighbor is deliberately robbed.

If a neighbor begins business of the same order as that of a man who has already begun, he is deliberately underbidden, undersold, that, if possible, he may be crowded completely out of the business, in order that the first one may be left alone, to have all, in order that he alone may be rich, and have the worldly glory of his little kingdom of the crossroads. And those that have succeeded most fully at this, form gigantic combinations to crush out, or absorb, all lesser ones, until there remains but one vast combination drawing tribute from all the people in the nations, and even of the whole world.

But God has written of it all that "he is a proud man" "who enlargeth his desire as hell, and is as death, and can not be satisfied, but gathered unto him all nations, and heapeth unto him all people;" "that coveteth an evil covetousness to his house, that he may set his nest on high, that he may be delivered from the power of evil." But "shall not all these take up a parable against him, and a taunting proverb against him, and say, Woe to him that increaseth that which is not his? how long?" "Shall they not rise up suddenly that shall bite thee, and awake that shall vex thee, and thou shalt be for booties unto them? Because thou hast spoiled many nations, all the remnant of the people shall spoil thee." Hab. 2:5-9.

This is all "the pride of life," which is not of the Father, but is of the world. It is all Mammon worship. And since the literal, original meaning of the word "mammon" is "that in which one trusts," it is particularly appropriate that these various combinations, which crush out all individuality and demand tribute of all peoples, should be called "trusts."

Yet the most gigantic of the "trusts" is but the extreme of that trick of trade held by the individual, by which, to get the trade, he undersells and crowds out the man across the way.

The most gigantic "trust" is but the extreme of that trick in trade by which the individual or the little partnership or corporation asks more for a thing when there is no competition than would be asked if there were competition. Whosoever, without competition, demands a greater price than he knows that he would take if there were competition, is an exactor of unjust gain. And "he that by usury and unjust gain increases his substance, he shall gather it for him that will pity the poor." Prov. 28:8.

The most gigantic "trust" is but the extreme of that trick in trade on the part of the individual, by which, through his beating down, or "jewing," he tries his best to get a thing for less than he knows that it is worth. "It is naught, it is naught, saith the buyer: but when he is gone his way, then he boasteth." Prov. 20:14.

The organizer or the president of the "trust" who boasts in his enormous gains is no more an idolater and a sinner in this thing than is the individual who, in his degree, and to the extent of his power, does the same thing precisely. If he had the ability, or the power, of the organizer or the president of the "trust," he would be doing precisely the same things that he is doing now, only in the larger measure that would be his, as the head of a mighty corporation. And so certainly is it true, as written, "In the world, the god of traffic is the god of fraud."

All such is but the worship of Mammon; it is idolatry; it is to have another god before the Lord; it is not of the Father, but is of the world; it is neither loving God with all the heart nor the neighbor as the self. "If I have made gold my hope, or have said to the fine gold, Thou art my confidence; if I rejoiced because my wealth was great, and because mine hand had gotten much; . . . this also were an iniquity to be punished by the judge: for I should have denied the God that is above." And this equally and as really as if I were a worshiper of the sun and the moon. Job 31:24-29.

There is a better way: it is the way of the keeping of the commandments of God: "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." It is the way of Christianity: "All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them." You know that you do not like to have a man work a scheme upon you, by which he requires you to pay for a thing more than he would take for it if there were competition. You know that you would not like to have people "jew" you down to take for a thing less than you know that it is worth. Put yourself in the other man's place–and stay there. Look at things from his side, and continue to do so. "Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others." This is Christianity; it is the keeping of the First Commandment. Yea, it is the keeping of all "the law and the prophets."

Nor is it hard to do this. It is the easiest thing in the world for him who has the heart to do it. And God gives the heart to do it; as it is written: "A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you."

"I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." "Our of Egypt have I called my Son." "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

"Another Brief Review of 'Passing Events'" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 12 , pp. 184, 185.

ALL who have been readers of the REVIEW for the past three years know that we have constantly called attention to the fact of a national apostasy from republican principle, which has been going on in these United States. It is true that a few have thought that this was "too much politics;" but we knew that it was not politics at all, but principle of divine truth, and of prophecy. The prophecy had declared long ago, and shortly ago, that such would be; that there would be, in this nation, an apostasy from the truth, a repudiation of republican as well as Protestant principle of government.

In the REVIEW of Aug. 30, 1898, under the general heading of "Passing Events," we called attention to "A Quiet Revolution" that was even then going on in the United States. We cited some facts that had occurred the week before in a great convention at Saratoga, N.Y., in which the lines were drawn between the maintenance and the repudiation of the principles of the Declaration of Independence: the force of the argument resting in favor of the Declaration, but the weight of sentiment being overwhelmingly against it. We then said: "This occurrence is only an illustration of the situation all over the country. And by this is perfectly plain that there is a great and most dangerous revolution going on before the very eyes of the American people; and they are even helping it on, while they do not discerned it.

"Under the false impression that revolutions can be accomplished only by violence invisible upheaval, the American people are even now passing through a revolution, and are in danger of finding themselves in the clutches of a new and strange power before they realize that any such thing is going on at all.

"We have already shown the course of the Roman Republic, and how the American Republic is going over the same ground precisely. And just now it should not be forgotten by any member of the American Republic, that the Roman Republic passed through the despotism of two triumvirates, the second far worse than the first, each ending in the despotism of one man, and then passed into the 'furious and crushing despotism' of the Roman monarchy, all in the name of the republic. All this occurred inside of forty years, before the eyes of all the people, while they were pleasing themselves with the fancy and the name that they were still a republic.

"Even when Augustus had become emperor, this fiction was played by him before the eyes of the people; and the people were pleased with it. For, as Gibbon most pointedly remarks: 'Augustus was sensible that mankind is governed by names; nor was he deceived in his expectation that the senate and people would submit to slavery, provided they were respectfully assured that they still enjoyed their ancient freedom.' Upon this safe assumption,

185

he accordingly deceived 'the people by an image of civil liberty, and the armies by an image of civil government.' He was eminently successful, and both people and armies congratulated themselves upon the greatness, and the new and wonderful career, of the Roman Republic!"

From that day, Aug. 30, 1898, to this day, March 19, 1901, the progress of this revolution has been as steady as has been the ticking of the clock. And this revolution is now so fully accomplished that, in principle, there is nothing more to be done: all that remains is the practice of the principles which have been officially adopted and promulgated by the government of the United States.

In the United States Senate, Wednesday, Feb. 27, 1901, and in the House of Representatives, Thursday, Feb. 28, 1901, there was enacted as law, for the governing of the Philippine Islands, the following:–

All military, civil, and judicial powers necessary to govern the Philippine Islands acquired from Spain by the treaties concluded at Paris on the 10th day of December, 1898, and at Washington on the 7th day of November, 1900, shall, until otherwise provided by Congress, be vested in such person and persons, and shall be exercised in such manner, as the President of the United States shall direct for the establishment of civil government and for maintaining and protecting the inhabitants of such islands in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property, and religion: Provided, That all franchises granted under the authority hereof shall contain a reservation of the right to alter, amend, or repeal the same.

First of all it is to be noticed that this is a distinct abandonment of the Constitution, and a distinct abdication of its powers by the Congress of the United States. For Section I of Article I of the Constitution of the United States says:–

"All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consists of a Senate and House of Representatives."

Secondly, Section I of Article III of the Constitution says:–

"The judicial power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish."

Now, when the Constitution definitely confines to Congress all legislative powers granted, and to a supreme court, and such inferior courts as may from time to time be provided, all judicial powers; and then Congress passes over to, and vests in, "such person and persons. . . as the President of the United States shall direct," all civil and judicial powers necessary to govern territory of the United States, that is nothing less than for Congress so far to abdicate its own powers; and, so far, to take away from the courts their powers. It is also a clear abandonment of the Constitution of the United States, so far as the Philippine Islands are concerned, and, in principle, so far as any place is concerned.

Nor is this abandonment of the Constitution merely tacit, by the wording of the law relating to the government of the Philippine Islands. It is explicit, and was repeatedly confirmed.

For an amendment was proposed, to the Philippine section of the bill, as follows:–

SEC.–That the Constitution of the United States is hereby extended over and declared to be in force in the Philippine Islands so far as the same or any provision thereof may be applicable.

This was rejected, by a vote of thirty-nine to twenty-three; not voting, twenty-six.

Afterward there was offered the following amendment:–

And provided further, That no judgment, order, nor act by any of said officials so appointed shall conflict with the Constitution and laws of the United States.

That amendment was rejected by a vote of forty-five to twenty-five; not voting, eighteen.

After this an amendment was offered requiring that:–

Every person in whom authority is vested under this grant of power shall take an oath to support the Constitution of the United States.

This was also rejected, by a vote of forty-one to twenty-five; not voting, twenty-two.

After this there was offered the following amendment:–

All persons shall be bailable unless for capital offenses where the proof shall be evident or the presumption great. All fines shall be moderate, and no cruel or unusual punishment shall be inflicted. No man shall be deprived of his life, liberty, or property but by the judgment of his peers and the law of the land. If the public exigencies make it necessary for the common preservation to take the property of any person, or to demand his particular services, full compensation shall be made for the same. No ex post facto law or law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be made. No law shall be made which shall lay any person under restraint, burden, or disability on account of his religious opinions, professions, or mode of worship, in all of which he shall be free to maintain his own, and not burdened for those of another.

This, too, was rejected, by a vote of forty-one to twenty-three; not voting, twenty-four.

When, thus, it had been voted, over and over again, to bestow unlimited power upon such persons as the President shall name to govern the Philippine Islands, then attempt was made to limit the time of the exercise of this power. Accordingly, an amendment was offered, limiting this time to March 4, 1903. But this was rejected by a vote of forty-three to twenty-six; not voting, nineteen.

When it had been so positively decided that unlimited power should be given to these men,–and for unlimited time,–an attempt was made to give the Filipinos a part in the government of themselves. Accordingly, an amendment was offered as follows:–

And secure to them such participation in the affairs of the civil government so to be established as shall be consistent with the safety of the government.

But this was rejected by a vote of thirty-nine to twenty-three; not voting, twenty-six.

When it had thus been explicitly and confirmedly settled that the powers of such men as the President shall appoint to govern the Philippines, shall be unlimited; shall be unlimited for all time; and shall be absolute over the people of the islands, attempt was made to save at least a vestige of Constitutional liberty, as follows:–

Mr. Hoar: Mr. President, there is one principle of Constitutional liberty not yet slain, and I desire to give it a little chance for its life. I move the amendment which I send to the desk, to be inserted at the end of the bill.

The Presiding Officer: The Senator from Massachusetts submits an amendment which will be stated.

The Secretary: It is proposed to add as a new section the following:–

"In the government of the Philippine Islands no person vested with legislative powers shall ever exercise the executive or judicial powers, or either of them; no person vested with executive powers shall ever exercise the legislative or judicial powers, or either of them; no person vested with judicial powers shall ever exercise the legislative or executive powers, or either of them; to the end that it may be a government of laws and not of men."

The Presiding Officer: The question is on the amendment of the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Hoar] to the amendment of the committee.

Mr. Jones, of Arkansas, and Mr. Pettus called for the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded to call the roll.

And even this last principle of Constitutional liberty was slain. It was rejected, by a vote of forty-three to twenty-six; not voting, nineteen.

See the whole account in Congressional Record dated Wednesday, Feb. 27, 1901.

As already stated, the next day the House of Representatives passed this legislation, as it came from the Senate, without any change whatever. And since it was all done at the demand of the President, of course it was all approved by him when it came before him to be signed. And thus the government of the United States has, in principle,–and for the Philippines in practice,–deliberately and expressly repudiated every principle of its Constitution as a republican government. Not a single item, nor even an iota, of the principle of republican or Constitutional government remains.

March 26, 1901

"The Keeping of the Commandments. The First Commandment" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 13 , p. 200.

"I AM the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me." Ex. 20:2, 3.

Last week we noticed that phase of idolatry manifested in the worship of Mammon, in the getting of money. A further method of manifesting idolatry in the worship of Mammon is in giving away the money that has been so obtained. There is just as much idolatry in giving away money that is obtained by idolatry, as there is in getting it by idolatry. Not all Mammon worshipers are misers; only a few of them. Many of them are abundant givers; and these have just as much satisfaction in giving away the money as they had in getting it, because it is further indulgence of the same idolatry.

Last week we cited how the laboring man is oppressed and robbed in his wages; the poor man is oppressed and robbed in the increased prices; small dealers are oppressed and robbed or driven entirely out of business in order that a few in the great combinations may draw to themselves the tribute of all the people. and when that is done, they will make gifts of millions to colleges and universities, hundreds of thousands to hospitals, thousands to churches, etc., etc.; and then further pride themselves upon the world's idolatry of their "great benevolence." But there is not a particle of benevolence in any gift that is thus made: it is sheer idolatry.

By the Lord, in perfect justice and righteousness, all our gifts are measured, and stand, altogether upon the basis upon which we get the money.

We say it again; for it is applicable to people who are not millionaires, as truly as to those who are: All the value of our giving as measured by the Lord, in perfect justice and righteousness, rests altogether upon the basis upon which we make our money. If my money is not made honestly, not a cent that I ever gave away will stand to my credit: it can not in righteousness: it can not in justice. I robbed another man to get it; it is his still, and when I give it away, it is his money that I give away.

And this is another reason why the two mites of the poor widow that day when she gave it, was more than all that the wealthy put in of their abundance. We know that the Mammon worshipers in Christ's day were like the Mammon worshipers in this day: they would crowd down in the dealing when people were selling to them; and they would crowd up on the price when people were to buy of them, and thus at both ends they increased their gains. Of these it is written: "It was this spirit that was manifested by the priests and temple officials in their gatherings for the Passover. Cattle were bought by the dignitaries, the moneyed men, who oppressed those of whom they purchased. The representation was made [to these owners out in the country, who had the cattle, the sheep, and the doves, and whoever had these to sell] that these animals were to be offered as a sacrifice to God at the Passover, and thus urged, the owners sold them at a cheap price. Then these scheming men brought their purchases to the temple,–purchases which meant double robbery,–robbery of the men of whom they had purchased, and robbery of those who wished to sacrifice, to whom they were again sold at exorbitant prices."

And when they would put great offerings into the temple treasury of the Lord, and take credit to themselves because they gave so much to "the cause." But that poor widow, who, because of these men who devoured widows' houses and for a pretense made long prayers, was reduced to a pittance honestly gotten, but by the hardest,–that widow, who, out of her love to the Lord, gave what little she had left after she had passed through the devouring hands of these men,–when she came into the temple of the Lord, giving the little that she had, she gave more than all the others together. Every particle of it was honest. Every particle of it came from honest effort. And that was a gift that measured according to righteousness in the sight of God. There is such a thing as honest dealing; and it can be practiced in this world. And whatever means is not acquired in that way, how much soever of it may be given, it can not be counted as the gift of him that gives it. It will be counted to those widows and the poor whom he has ground down to get it, to the laborers whose wages he ground down to the lowest notch to increase or to preserve his great gains.

This is why God says to the laborers, Be patient unto the coming of the Lord. The husbandman waiteth for the precious fruits of the earth, and hath long patience for it. Be ye also patient; your labor is not in vain. God knows the just wages that you earn, and of just how much of it you are robbed. And in the day of reckoning He will reckon it to you in full justice and righteousness.

Be ye patient. Serve God. "Obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eye-service, as men-pleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God; and whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men; knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance; for ye serve the Lord Christ."

In that day God will distribute justly all the rewards of labor. He is the righteous God. The Christian can cheerfully bear to be ground down, robbed, and oppressed: he can wait for the day of grand distribution in righteousness; for he knows that in that day he will receive all that his honest toil ever earned, and he shall have the eternal glory of it. Even though in this world some Mammon worshiper absorbed it, and made a great gift of it, and got the worldly fleeting glory of it; yet since from the beginning it belonged in righteousness to him who was defrauded of it, in righteousness it, with all the fruits of it, will be reckoned to him to whom in righteousness from the beginning it belonged.

This is the word and the message of God to the robbed, oppressed, and defrauded workingmen everywhere to-day, who are clamoring for a righteous distribution of the fruits of their labor: "Fear God, and keep His commandments." No righteous distribution can be made by force and violence. In that way, an iniquitous and bad condition can only be made more iniquitous and worse. "Sanctify the Lord of hosts himself; and let Him be your fear, and let Him be your dread. Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts; for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh." Then shall every man receive his own reward according to his own labor.

"I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." "Out of Egypt have I called my son." "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

"Slavery To-day in the United States" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 13 , pp. 200, 201.

IN Anderson County, S. C., there has been going on for a long time a private convict slavery system, whereby negroes were caught, confined in private stockades, and made to work for rich cotton magnates. This system was brought to light by the recent killing of Will Hull, who, according to the Chicago Tribune, "had been seized on a trumped-up charge, and illegally committed to the stockade. . . . Hull protested against his incarceration. He asked for a fair trial, and his reward was a blow with a club. Not content with his lot, the negro planned escape, to get back to his wife and children. In the quiet of the night, with the chains still binding his legs, he stole forth. But the guards had orders to watch him. As Hull was going away, a bullet from a fifty-four caliber rifle bored its way into his brain, and he fell dead. Newell, the guard who had fired the shot, was arrested, and sent to court. Other guards went to his rescue, a story of self-defense was put up in court, and in five minutes the jury said the man was not guilty. But, in the death of Hull, the story came out. A rasping charge from Judge Bennet followed, and the grand jury, armed with full power to summon leaders and seize papers, went to work to investigate, and found the condition of affairs more horrible than was ever dreamed."

"On these big farms, where thousands of bales of cotton were raised, enormous revenues rolled into the coffers of the managers. Of the twenty-five negroes released [when the case was in court], not one had been held for an infraction of the law. The systems were privately operated. . . . Back in the mountain section, away from the world, these places held hundreds of ignorant negroes who had been stolen from their families to make fortunes for white men who occupied high positions in the social work of the county and State."

These private prisoners were clothed in the striped garments of the usual State convict type, and all that the owners had to pay for the services of these poor wretches was their wretched food and the convict-clothes used as a blind to the public. After the hard day's work the negro men were driven to a pen, locked up, and guarded, being aroused the next morning before daylight. The grand jury reported at Anderson, S.C., the 7th inst., and "in a presentment which pictured the horrors of the bondage system, returned indictments against four of the leading citizens of Anderson, and a score of guards. So pleased was Judge Bennet, who first demanded an investigation, that he declared he was profoundly grateful to a jury which had the backbone to break up an iniquitious system of slavery, which was showing a tendency to spread throughout the State. The jury showed in its report that negroes had been bought and sol; that they had been seized on the highway and kidnapped and sent to prison pens, where they were bound and shackled, and warned that death would follow any effort to escape. When the jury began its investigations and summoned negroes, evidence could not be secured, because the former slaves claimed that they would be killed if they opened their mouths. The grand jury so far as it could has wiped out of existence the convict

201

lease system, under the shroud of which these private slave dens were allowed to thrive.

"The jury gave an account of the visits to the stockades. At a place managed by Julius Miller [this was only one of many such places] evidence was produced to show that runners had been paid to go out and seize negroes; and one man, Warren Sloan, was sent in for more than a year, because he owed a debt of ten dollars. When a neighbor offered to pay the fine, the dealer declared that he would not part with his negro for one thousand dollars. At Miller's place the negroes were flogged to the point of insensibility, and bound with chains." Those indicted by the grand jury will be bound over for trial in June. The next thing will be to punish them. It is doubtful whether this will be possible, as the slaveholders are wealthy. "Proof was secured to show that the system of slavery was more binding than the slavery system in operation throughout the South before the proclamation of Abraham Lincoln."

"Passing Events" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 13 , pp. 201, 202.

LAST week we gave the bare record of the repudiation of the Constitution and every principle of republican government by the Congress of the United States. But it ought not to be supposed that that is all there is to the record; and that it shall not be supposed by any, we now present some more of that important record–important to every human being.

Remember that the legislation that was passed says that–

All military, civil, and judicial powers necessary to govern the Philippine Islands acquired from Spain by the treaties concluded at Paris on the 10th day of December, 1898, and at Washington on the 7th day of November, 1900, shall, until otherwise provided by Congress, be vested in such person and persons, and shall be exercised in such manner, as the President of the United States shall direct for the establishment of civil government and for maintaining and protecting the inhabitants of such islands in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property, and religion: Provided, That all franchises granted under the authority hereof shall contain a reservation of the right to alter, amend, or repeal the same.

On its face, and in every element of it, this places absolute power, for unlimited time, upon one man, and in such person, or persons, as that one man shall choose, and these persons ten thousand miles away from him; so that it puts absolute power on all questions into the hands of human beings who are ten thousand miles away from even the restraints of the opinion of their fellow men.

It is true that there were attempts made to limit this power, both in itself and in the time of the exercise of it, and that every one of these attempts was promptly voted down. But this was not done without solemn warning of the nature and the consequences of what was being done. One speaker said:–

When this amendment shall have been crystallized into law, and the President shall have executed it by appointing his representatives, I say here now that in all the world you will find no more absolute government that that, and you may search every page of history since letters were know to men, and you will not be able to find a more absolute government than that will be. An absolute government of that character established in the twentieth century by the professed great free government of the United States! It is not a free government, it can not be a free government, when all the power is resolved into one man, though he may have a hundred agents to execute it.

The speaker then cited an address from the Continental Congress in 1774, to Britain, in repudiation of exactly this sort of government, though not quite so absolute, and then continued:–

Those were students of history; they were philosophers in the art of government, and greater truths were never uttered. They were not original with them, however; for that great French writer Montesquieu had said the same thing. These great truths that are necessary to be recognized to maintain freedom and liberty are not the creation of men; they have existed always; they are the emanation of the Deity; they are not human, they are divine, and no nation has ever neglected them or repudiated them that could claim to be called a nation of freemen. To-day we are asked here to put our approval upon a bill that would carry the government of this country back to the Dark Ages.

Mr. President, I will not give it my approval; but it will get the approval of the great American Senate and the American House of Representatives, and I very much fear that the people of this country have so forgotten these great principles of liberty that it may receive the approval also of the country. But, nevertheless, it is our duty to raise our voices against it, and at least give warning to the American people that an outrage of this kind, perpetrated upon ten million men, who may not be citizens of this country, but who are under its jurisdiction, at least, must in the end reflect upon every one of the seventy-six million men who dwell under one flag.

Another said:–

I am more strongly opposed to the Philippine proposition than I am to the Cuba proposition; for I believe the Philippine proposition is absolutely indefensible in every respect. It is indefensible from every point of view; and while it is much less offensive and much less objectionable than it was before the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Hoar] offered his amendment, it is still so absolutely un-American, and it so completely violates every idea of government which I have ever heard of, that I am willing to do anything reasonable to defeat this proposition.

Another said:–

Now, what do we propose to these people in the Philippines? It has been stated here, over and over again in this discussion, and I have no desire to repeat it, or to detain the Senate. It has been repeated here over and over again. There is no proposition here for the benefit of the people of the Philippines. The proposition is for somebody else, always somebody else, and the Constitution is set at naught that somebody else may profit by the sort of government that will prevail under this amendment, or what is called the Spooner bill.

Human nature is the same everywhere. We recollect the example of Crúsus in Asia Minor, and we recollect the more recent example of Clive and of Warren Hastings in India. Every colonizing country on earth, or country that has had other nations in subjection, that we know of, if history can tell the truth, shows that it has been the fountain and source of all corruption, and that it destroyed the ancient republics of the world. Greece existed in unmitigated splendor, and she colonized as much as any nation that ever lived, but never in any instance did she attempt to retain rule over her colonies; for she was as careless of them when they left her swarming country as the mother hive is of a swarm of bees that leaves. That was because the Greek was individual. But Rome was not individual. She undertook to extend her dominion over all of her colonies. The result was that corruption overthrew the mighty power of Rome.

Another said:–

You are to send out Mr. –– and Mr. –– and the rest, giving them a power which, in the height of his glory, the American people never would have trusted George Washington; giving them a power which, as an examination shows, the American people did not for a moment intrust to Thomas Jefferson on when Louisiana was purchased, although Louisiana was not a people, but was only a great waste place on the face of the earth, save for a few Indian tribes, and a few French settlements, who inhabitants were largely proposing to return to France.

This act of yours is to wipe out, if it be adhered to, the last hope that the example of the United States hereafter is to continue to work out its great result in the ideas and aspirations of the downtrodden people of the rest of the world. Down to this year, or last year, everywhere the world over,–in Russia, in Austria, in the far East, in the islands of the sea, even in this distant archipelago,–every poor man, every downtrodden man, every brave man who had an impulse toward freedom in his heart, had heard, directly or indirectly, of the great liberty-loving people, where all men were equal, and where no government of despotism could be permitted.

You are going to vote, as far as you can, in about ten minutes, to wipe all that out now. You may talk about benevolent assimilation, or giving good government, or use all the other fine phrases that your ingenuity can invent, but your act is pure, simple, undiluted, unchecked despotism.

"In vain you call old notions fudge,

And match your morals to your feelings;

The Ten Commandments will not budge,

And stealing will continue stealing."

Mr. President, I do not know how others may feel. But this is the faith in which I was born, in which I was bred, which came to me from my ancestors in every drop of my blood. It is the faith in which I hope to die, and it is the faith for which I am willing to die. Whatever it may be called,–it may be called Quixotism, it may be called extravagance, it may be called enthusiasm, it may be called illusion,–whatever it is, it is the inmost purpose and faith of my soul.

As the greatest intellect that ever lived on the soil of New England, perhaps the greatest that ever lived on American soil,–a mighty genius to which that of Dante alone can be compared,–said in the dark time of his life, so say I now:–

"If such things are enthusiasm and the results of a distempered brain, let my brain be evermore possessed of that happy distemper. If this be distraction, I pray God that the world of mankind may all be seized with this benign, beneficial, beautiful, glorious distraction."

In supporting the amendment that was offered, beginning: "All persons shall be bailable," etc., another said"–

Mr. President, I think, after the statement made on this floor of the cruel torture that has been practiced upon those people by the soldiers of the United States and by the natives employed, the Macabebes, that it is very pertinent and proper that this amendment should be adopted; and if those people are to have no protection of the United States laws, and are to be absolutely under the power of the autocratic and absolute government that is to be established in violation of every principle of a free government, this amendment ought to be adopted.

After this amendment had been rejected, then the same speaker said:–

We are about to enact a law that is so contrary to anything that has ever taken place in American history that, even if it is late, I propose to read what the fathers of the republic said at an early day when they were contending with British power. To say it now I have no doubt is treason, but it was patriotism and good law then. on the 14th day of October, 1774, the congress of the colonies passed this resolution with some others, and I want to call the attention of the Senate to it. I want to know whether the Senate does not believe, when it is read, that either that was heresy then or this is heresy now.

"Resolved, It is indispensably necessary to good government, and rendered essential by the English constitution, that the constituent branches of the legislature be independent of each other; that, therefore, the exercise of legislative power in several colonies, by a council appointed during pleasure by the Crown, is unconstitutional, dangerous, and destructive to the freedom of American legislation.

"All and each of which the aforesaid deputies, in behalf of themselves and their constituents, do claim, demand, and insist on as their indubitable rights and liberties, which can not be legally taken from them, altered, or abridged, by any power whatever, without their own consent, by their representatives in their several provincial legislatures."

Mr. President, if the Crown of Great Britain can not establish an absolute government, the government of the United States can not do so; but that is what you are doing to-night.

Again, in their address to the people of Great Britain, on the 21st day of the same month, that Congress said:–

"That we hold it essential to English liberty that no man be condemned unheard, or punished for supposed offenses without having an opportunity of making his defense.

"That we think the legislature of Great Britain is not authorized by the constitution to establish a religion fraught with sanguinary and impious tenets, or to erect an arbitrary form of government in any quarter of the globe. These rights we as well as you deem sacred, and yet, sacred as they are, they have, with many others, been repeatedly and flagrantly violated."

They are to be flagrantly violated by the authority of the Congress of the United States. . . .

Mr. President, it is not a question of Filipinos alone; it is a question of American citizenship. I read here the other day of an outrage that has called forth no protest from any official of this government–an outrage to an American citizen, a soldier, who had gone there to fight the battles of his country, and was there discharged; who wrote an inoffensive article in a public paper, an article that I read, and I challenge any man now here to assert that there was either treason or menace or defiance or anything of the character in it.

I said then, and I repeat it now, that that rule applied would put every editor in the United States in jail; and yet that man was taken away from his business without a trial, without a hearing, except before a military officer, because he had assailed, not in violence, not slanderously either, the collector of the port, a man who appears to have been a pet of the government, a man who was court-martialed for conduct unbecoming a gentleman and an officer in

201

the Navy, a man against whom the secretary of the Navy, Mr. Hunt, passed the severest condemnation.

We have more than once called attention to the fact to which in these speeches attention is also called: that this legislation throws back the principles and the form of the government of the United States, not merely to those of Britain, but beyond those of Britain, to those of Rome alone.

In 1825 there was absolute power in the hands of Englishmen, in the British West Indian possessions which had fallen to Britain from Spain. Thus these English inhabitants had succeeded to the Spanish absolution. Macaulay wrote on the subject. It is true that, there, slavery was involved in the absolutism; but the principles laid down by Macaulay are universal, and without exception. There the law did really impose some restraints; but in THIS legislation of the United States with regard to the Philippines there is no restraint whatever. Then says Macaulay:–

We are required to believe that the place of all other checks will be fully supplied by the general sense of those who participate in his power and his temptations. This may be reason at Kingston; but will it pass at Westminster? We are not inveighing against the white inhabitants of the West Indies. We do not say that they are naturally more cruel or more sensual than ourselves. But we say that they are men; and they desire to be considered as angels?–we say as angels, for to no human being, however generous and beneficent, to no philanthropist, to no fathers of the Church, could powers like theirs be safely instructed. Such authority a parent ought not to have over his children.

They ask, very complacently, "Are we men of a different species from yourselves? We come among you: we mingle with you in all your kinds of business and pleasure; we buy and sell with you on "Change in the morning; we dance with your daughters in the evening. Are not our manners civil? Are not our dinners good? Are we not kind friends, fair dealers, generous benefactors? Are not our names in the subscription lists of all your charities? And can you believe that we are such monsters as the saints represent us to be? Can you imagine that, by merely crossing the Atlantic, we acquire a new nature?" We reply, You are not men of a different species from ourselves; and, therefore, we will not give you powers with which we would not dare to trust ourselves. We know that your passions are like ours. We know that your restraints are fewer; and, therefore, we know that your crimes must be greater.

Are despotic sovereigns men of harder hearts by nature than their subjects? Are they born with a hereditary thirst for blood–with a natural incapacity for friendship?–Surely not. Yet what is their general character?–False, cruel, licentious, ungrateful. Many of them have performed single acts of splendid generosity and heroism; a few may be named whose general administration has been salutary; but scarcely one has passed through life without committing at least some one atrocious act, from the guilt and infamy of which restricting laws would have saved him and his victims. If Henry VIII had been a private man, he might have torn his wife's ruff and kicked her lapdog. He was a king, and he cut off her head–not that his passions were more brutal than those of many other men, but that they were less restrained. How many of the West Indian overseers can boast of the piety and magnanimity of Theodosius? Yet, in a single moment of anger, that amiable prince destroyed more innocent people than all the ruffians in Europe stabs in fifty years. . . .

Nothing is so capricious and inconsistent as the compassion of men. The Romans were people of the same flesh and blood with ourselves: they loved their friends; they cried at tragedies; they gave money to beggars;–yet we know their fondness for gladiatorial shows. When, by order of Pompey, some elephants were tortured in the amphitheater, the audience was so shocked at the yells and contortions by which the poor creatures expressed their agony, that they burst forth into execrations against their favorite general. The same people, in the same place, had probably often given the fatal twirl of the thumb which condemned some gallant barbarian to receive the sword. In our own time, many a man shoots partridges in such numbers that he is compelled to bury them, who would chastise his son for amusing himself with the equally interesting, and not more cruel, diversion of catching flies and tearing them to pieces. The drover goads oxen; the fishmonger crimps cod; the dragoon sabers a Frenchman; the Spanish Inquisition burns a Jew; the Irish gentleman torments a Catholic. These persons are not necessarily destitute of feeling. Each of them would shrink from any cruel employment, except that to which his station has familiarized him.

This absolutism of government in the islands will inevitably react on the government at home. And thus the image of Rome continues to grow.

April 2, 1901

"The Keeping of the Commandments. The Second Commandment" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 14 , p. 216.

"I AM the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments." Ex. 20:2, 4-6.

The First Commandment forbids the having of any other god than the Lord; and so calls upon all to have God alone, and Him with all the heart, and all the soul, and all the mind, and all the strength.

Thus the First Commandment requires all creatures to worship only the true God; and the Second Commandment forbids the worshiping of Him in any but the true way.

The First Commandment forbids the having of any false gods; the Second Commandment forbids the having of the true God in a false way.

It is thus forbidden to worship God, or to think of Him, under any form or representation of any kind whatever. This is made clear by the word of the Lord in Deuteronomy 4. Having described how God came down upon Mount Sinai and spoke to the people out of the midst of the fire, declaring the Ten Commandments, it is remarked especially: "Ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude."

It is not suggested that there was no similitude there. There were similitudes: multitudes of the host of heavenly angels were there; four-winged and four-faced cherubim were there; six-winged bright seraphim were there; Christ was there; and the glory of God, which was like devouring fire, was there.

But all this glory, and all these similitudes, were completely hidden from any eye of man by the "blackness, and darkness, and tempest: that enveloped the whole mount. For "Mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke;" and "the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace," which formed a "thick cloud upon the mount," a cloud of "thick darkness;" and the voice of God was heard "out of the midst of the darkness."

Now, why was it that this wonderful scene of glory, even the brightness of the glory itself, was so completely hidden from the eyes of the people? Here is the answer: "Ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the Lord spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female, the likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air, the likeness of anything that creepeth on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the waters beneath the earth: and lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them." Deut. 4:15-19.

If the people had been allowed that day to see any similitude, or any figure, on Sinai, they would inevitably have formed a likeness of it, as a means of their worshiping God. If they could have seen but the wings of the cherubim or seraphim, they would have used winged creatures, or the likeness of them, as a means of their worshiping God. And even though they had seen no figure or similitude, yet if only they had seen the brightness of the glory, then they would have employed the brightness of the glory, then they would have employed the brightness of the sun or the moon, or the stars, as symbols, representations, by which they would offer worship to the true God.

Nor would they have taken these representations which they would have made as of themselves gods, so as to worship the images or representations themselves; but would have used them as visible symbols, as aids in fixing their attention upon God, the better and more exactly to worship Him. And they would have claimed all the time that, in this, they were worshiping the true God, and that such worship was true worship of God.

But all such idea as this, even all possibility of such idea, was utterly excluded by the Lord himself, in enveloping the whole grand array and glorious scene in impenetrable darkness. And then, by this fact, and in telling them why He did it, He gave His own clear interpretation of His own Second Commandment, and the plainest possible instruction to men as to how to observe it. In this the Lord himself has given, in the plainest and most forcible way, instruction to all people, that in the worship of God no conceivable form or similitude can be used in any way, or to any extent whatever. And thus there was said at Sinai precisely what Jesus said to the woman at the well, neither more nor less: that "God is Spirit: and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth."

God is Spirit, and is to be only spiritually discerned, and, therefore, can be worshiped only in spirit and in truth.

He can be worshiped only in truth as in spirit, because it is only by His word, which is the truth, that men can know what is true and acceptable worship. No man can know God except by revelation; and God must be worshiped strictly according to His own revelation: otherwise He is not worshiped at all.

This will be further considered next week.

"Decadence of Religious Papers" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 14 , p. 216.

ANY one who has had any opportunity for extensive notice of the religious papers of the United States in the last ten or fifteen years, can not but be struck with the general drift away from religion. Papers which formerly were distinctly religious and deservedly the leading ones, are now distinctly secular; and, where religion is touched, it is in a merely perfunctory way, rather than from any deep conviction of the real value of religion.

This change has now become so marked that the secular papers themselves are commenting upon it. The New York Sun of February 10 discusses "the decadence of the professionally religious paper." The Sun takes this up because other papers had remarked the same thing. It says that "denominational organs which once were powerful and of great prosperity give every evidence now of sadly declined fortunes; and magazines devoted especially to religious and theological discussion have lost their attraction even for the most serious public."

Further, the Sun says: "This is the more remarkable because interest and inquiry concerning questions of religion were never more active than they are now. Of the voluminous correspondence coming to us, the subject which engages the greatest part devoted to any single theme is religion. . . . It appears, then, that the decadence of the professional paper and periodical can not be due to any lapse of interest in the subject of religion. It would be easy for us to fill the whole Sun with manifestations of the deepest and most earnest interest and solicitude."

And then the Sun, in its own vigorous way, exposes the true cause of this notable decadence, in the following truthful words: "Unquestionably the old foundations of religious faith have been shaken or completely destroyed in many minds thoroughly imbued with the religious sentiment. In place of that faith has come in a critical spirit, even in those who were most alarmed at its approach and most earnest in combating it, provoked by the scientific method of treating the Bible, and the miracles, whose denial as facts of history leaves Christian theology without a basis on which to stand. This method, too, is now pursued by other than avowed enemies of the religion which it undermines so completely. It is adopted and cultivated in the theological seminaries and in pulpits of Christian churches. All the other infidels since time began have not done a tithe of the damage to religious faith, to faith in the supernatural, which has been accomplished during the last generation by this school nurtured in the Christian Church itself."

April 9, 1901

"The Keeping of the Commandments. The Second Commandment" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 15 , p. 232.

"I AM the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments."

We have seen that no similitude or likeness was seen on Sinai when God spoke His law, though there were many similitudes and likenesses there. We have seen that this was so, especially "lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image" or likeness. And thus in the Second Commandment there is forbidden, in the worship of God, the use of any similitude or likeness of any kind in any way whatever.

Yet there are a great number of professed Christians who use images, similitudes, and likenesses in abundance in their professed worship of God. This is worth inquiring into.

"This first introduction of a symbolic worship was in the veneration of the cross and of relics."–Gibbons. In "honor" of Christ and the martyrs.

And the first introduction of the cross as a visible symbol was by Constantine, and in the midst of that flood of evil that made the papacy.

It is true that the sign of the cross was used as early as the days of Tertullian; but it was only a sign, made with a motion of the hand upon the forehead or breast.

Constantine enlarged upon this by the introduction of the visible cross itself: in the Labarum. He erected in Rome his own statue, "bearing a cross in its right hand, with an inscription which referred the victory of his arms and the deliverance of Rome to that salutary sign, the true symbol of force and courage.

"The same symbol sanctified the arms of the soldiers of Constantine; the cross glittered on their helmets, was engraved on their shields, was interwoven into their banners; and the consecrated emblems which adorned the person of the emperor himself were distinguished only by richer materials and more exquisite workmanship."

The Labarum was "a long pike intersected by a transversal beam," forming a cross. "The silken veil which hung down from the beam was curiously inwrought with the images of the reigning monarch and his children. The summit of the pike supported a crown of gold, which inclosed the mysterious monogram, at once expressive of the figure of the cross and the initial letters of the name of Christ."

The basis of all this was the fiction and the imposture of Constantine's "vision of the cross." And from it "the Catholic Church, both of the East and of the West, has adopted a prodigy which favors, or seems to favor, the popular worship of the cross."

Under Constantine's patronage also, "magnificent churches were erected by the emperor in Rome, adorned with images and pictures, where the bishop sat on a lofty throne, encircled by inferior priests, and performing rites borrowed from the splendid ceremonial of the pagan temple."–Lawrence.

Pictures were used first. The introduction of these pictures was made under the plea that they were useful to instruct the ignorant, to awaken the cold, and to gratify the prejudices of the heathen proselytes. What some person imagined and produced as a picture of Christ, would be painted on the wall or window; and these people would gaze upon that, and sail away upon a sea of their own imagination. In this they thought they were contemplating Christ, and honoring Him, and indeed worshiping Him. But it was as sheer idolatry as ever was. They were only worshiping themselves, in their own imaginings. Never yet has there been made a picture of Christ. All that ever pretended to be such are only idolatrous imagings.

Soon images were set up along with the pictures, and thus "by a slow, though inevitable, progression, the honors of the original were transferred to the copy; the devout Christian prayed before the image of a saint; and the pagan rites of genuflexion, luminiaries, and incense again stole into the Catholic Church. The scruples of reaon or piety were silenced by the strong evidence of visions and miracles; and the pictures which speak, and move, and bleed, must be endowed with a divine energy, and may be considered as the proper objects of religious adoration."

And thus "the use and even the worship of images was firmly established before the end of the sixth century [before A.D. 600]; they were fondly cherished by the warm imagination of the Greeks and Asiatics; the pantheon and Vatican were adorned with the emblems of a new superstition. . . . The style and sentiments of a Byzantine hymn will declare how far their worship was removed from the grossest idolatry: 'How can we with mortal eyes contemplate this image, whose celestial splendor the host of heaven presumes not to behold? He who dwells in heaven condescends this day to visit us by His venerable image. He who is seated on the cherubim visits us this day by a picture which the Father has delineated with His immaculate hand; which He has formed in an ineffable manner; and which we sanctify by adoring it with fear and love.'"–Gibbon.

This will be followed further next week.

April 16, 1901

"The Keeping of the Commandments. The Second Commandment" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 16 , pp. 249, 250.

"I AM the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments."

We have seen that from the days of Constantine to the end of the sixth century image worship had become universally established in the Catholic Church.

Thus stood Catholic idolatry when, early in the seventh century, the Mohammedans swarmed up from the deserts of Arabia, executing judgment upon the "idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood: which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk." Rev. 9:20.

"The triumphant Mussulmans, who reigned at Damascus and threatened Constantinople, cast into the scale of reproach the accumulated weight of truth and victory. The cities Syria, Palestine, and Egypt had been fortified with the images of Christ, His mother, and His saints; and each city presumed on the hope or promise of miraculous defense.

"In the rapid contest of ten years, the Arabs subdued those cities and these images; and, in their opinion, the Lord of hosts pronounced a decisive

250

judgment between the adoration and contempt of these mute and inanimate idols. In this season of distress and dismay the eloquence of the monks was exercised in the defense of images."

Under the influence of the charge of idolatry, which the Mohammedans incessantly urged against the Catholics, some began to awake to the thought that perhaps the charge was true, and strongly desired the reformation of the Church. Besides these there were scattered throughout Christendom true Christians who constantly opposed, with the word of God and the example of primitive times, the worship of images.

In a hundred years these influences had become so strong that Emperor Leo the Isaurian, in 727, took his stand, and issued an edict, against the worship of images. Opposition to this movement of the emperor's caused the famous Iconoclastic Controversy, between the worshipers and the breakers of the images, which continued with bloody and unabated fury for one hundred and twenty years,–726-846,–and which finally resulted in the triumph of the worship of images, and the "religion of Constantine."

The emperor ordered the images to be broken to pieces, the walls of the churches to be whitewashed, and prosecuted with honest but imprudent vigor his design of extirpating idolatry. But a fierce dissension at once raged throughout all Christendom: the monks and the people arose in defense of their images and pictures, and the emperor, even in his own capital, was denounced as a heretic and a tyrant.

There was an image of the Saviour, renowned for its miraculous powers, over the gate of the imperial palace called the Brazen Gate, from the rich tiles of gilt bronze that covered its magnificent vestibule. The emperor ordered the sacred figure to be taken down and broken to pieces. But the people from all parts of the city flew to the defense of their favorite idol, fell upon the officers, and put many of them to death.

"The women were even more violent than the men. Like furies they rushed to the spot, and, finding one of the soldiers engaged in the unhallowed labor at the top of the ladder, they pulled it down, and tore him to pieces as he lay bruised upon the ground. 'Thus,' exclaims the pious annalist, 'did the minister of the emperor's injustice fall at once from the top of the ladder to the bottom of hell.'

"The women next flew to the great church, and finding the iconoclastic patriarch officiating at the altar, overwhelmed him with a shower of stones and a thousand opprobrious names. He escaped, bruised and fainting, from the building. The guards were now called out, and the female insurrection was suppressed; but not until several of the women had perished in the fray."

"The execution of the imperial edicts was resisted by frequent tumults in Constantinople and the provinces; the person of Leo was endangered, his officers were massacred, and the popular enthusiasm was quelled by the strongest efforts of the civil and military power."

In 728 the edict of the Eastern emperor abolishing the worship of images was published in Italy. The pope defended the images, of course, and "the Italians swore to live and die in defense of the pope and the holy images." And thus there was begun a war which, in its nature and consequences, was in every sense characteristic of the papacy. It established the worship of images, as an article of Catholic faith; it developed the supremacy of the pope in temporal affairs.

When Leo's decree against the worship of images was published in the West, "the images of Christ and the Virgin, of the angels, martyrs, and saints, were abolished in all the churches in Italy;" and the emperor threatened the pope that if he did not comply with the decree, he should be degraded and sent into exile. But the pope–Gregory II–stood firmly for the worship of images, and sent pastoral letters throughout Italy, exhorting the faithful to do the same.

"At this signal, Ravenna, Venice, and the cities of the exarchate and Pentapolis adhered to the cause of religious images; their military force by sea and land consisted, for the most part, of the natives; and the spirit of patriotism and zeal was transfused into the mercenary strangers. The Italians swore to live and die in the defense of the pope and the holy images. . . . The Greeks were overthrown and massacred, their leaders suffered an ignominious deasth, and the popes, however inclined to mercy, refused to intercede for these guilty victims."

At Ravenna, A. D. 729, the riot and bloody strife was so great that even the exarch, the personal representative of the emperor, was slain. "To punish this flagitious deed, and restore his dominion it Italy, the emperor sent a fleet and army into the Adriatic Gulf. After suffering from the winds and the waves much loss and delay, the Greeks made their descent in the neighborhood of Ravenna. . . . In a hard-fought day, as the two armies alternately yielded and advanced, a phantom was seen, a voice was heard, and Ravenna was victorious by the assurance of victory. The strangers retreated to their ships, but the populous seacoast poured forth a multitude of boats; the waters of the Po were so deeply infected with blood, that during six years the public prejudice abstained from the fish of the river; and the institution of an annual feast perpetuated the worship of images, and the abhorrence of the Greek tyrant. Amidst the triumph of the Catholic arms, the Roman pontiff convened a synod of ninety-three bishops against the heresy of the Iconoclasts. With their consent he pronounced a general excommunication against all who by word or deed should attack the traditions of the Fathers and the images of the saints."

The establishment of the worship of images as an article of Catholic faith, will be related next week.

"Loving Is Giving" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 16 , pp. 250, 251.

THE word "love" is a common one. It is much used. Its meanings are many and various. Sometimes it implies nothing more than admiration. Often it indicates only greed. It may denote personal sentiment and individual affection between men and women. Frequently it is indicative of the most supreme type of selfishness. It often signifies gross immorality and base passion.

In brief, our ideas of love have become so narrow and so low that if the word be analyzed in relation to the emotions, passions, and actions, to which it is for the most part applied, it will be found to express two of the worst traits of human life–selfishness and lust.

Even at best, human love is often but little better than a form of selfishness. A man loves a woman–why?–Because of his desire to draw her to himself, to possess her,–to have her for his life companion,–to gain her to be exclusively his own.

But the love of God is the absolute opposite of all these things. "God so loved. . . that He GAVE. With God loving is giving. "God is love." With the Eternal One to love is to give. "God is love." His life is nothing but love. With Him to live is to love, and to love is to give–living is loving, and loving is giving.

Now, therefore, the supreme idea in the love of God is this–It is a love which gives. Any love which does not give is not the love of God at all. It is only human. It is earthly, sensual, devilish. Common affection is not true love. The test of all genuine love is that it has in it the element of giving–yea, that its very essence is self-sacrificial giving. In this, when a man loves a woman it is that he may give to her all human devotion.

"God so loved. . . that He gave."

The word translated "love" signifies "benevolent." The word "benevolent" comes from two Latin words–bono, which means "rightly" or "well," and volens, meaning "wishing." The word "benevolent" is therefore defined as follows: "Having a disposition to do good; possessing or manifesting love to mankind, and a desire to promote their prosperity and happiness; disposed to give to good objects." Etymologically considered, benevolent implies wishing well to others, and beneficent, doing well. But by degrees the word "benevolent" has been widened to include not only feelings but actions.

From these definitions it is clear that the love of the Bible is a love that manifests itself in giving. More than this, right giving–the giving of the Bible–springs from right willing or wishing.

There are many in the world who make expensive presents or gifts to others. There are wealthy men who give millions of dollars to different enterprises. Yet much of this giving is pure selfishness. God frowns upon it, because it does not proceed from right wishes, from noble desires of the heart. A gift may be made with the idea of gaining the favor of some one else. Such gifts, whether made to Christ's cause or to men, are displeasing to God. Many times lavish gifts are bestowed upon great enterprises because the giver desires to become well known and well thought of. This is naught but pharisaism. It is written: "Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven. Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: that thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly."

The love of God therefore is a love which gives–gives because of love and loyalty to the cause and object upon which it is bestowed. This giving love, and it alone, is the love of God.

How many times has this and similar testimony been borne in a public social meeting: "I am very happy; I feel so much of the love of God in my heart; this faith grows more and more precious to me day by day."

And yet many who utter such words have absolutely no idea of the responsibilities of the love of God–the responsibility to give. He who does not feel the burden upon him to give of his life, to give of his God-intrusted talents, and to give of his property, of his money, to the suffering cause of God, does not know the love of God, for–

God so Loved THAT HE GAVE.

My brother, my sister, when you and I kneel down to pray that God will bless the Third Angel's Message and hasten on its work with power in the earth, how can we have faith that the Lord will be pleased with that prayer when we are withholding the money so necessary to make the work go?

It is useless for men to pray to God to bless the work and to tell the Lord how much they love the work when they do not support it by their offerings. Such prayers are an abomination in the sight of heaven.

What good does it do to pray for the success of the Third Angel's Message if we do not freely give the strength and money necessary to forward it in the earth? Any one who does this simply does not believe the Third Angel's Message at all.

Statesmen and army officers have a saying that "money is the sinews of war." The same is to a great extent true in the warfare now being waged on earth between Christ and His followers on the one side and Satan and his followers on the other side.

It is not well-worded testimonies that count. Long prayers may or may not reveal loyalty and devotion to the cause of God.

In the Bible it is written: "My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth." Loving in word and in tongue,–

251

merely talking about the love of God,–making a profession of love,–is a very different thing from possessing the real love of God. The real love of God is a thing of deed, not of word. It is a love which does; it is a love which gives.

And now, my dear brethren and sisters, one and all, is God calling upon us to love His cause? Oh, yes; we know He is, and we must hasten to manifest that love in the same way that God himself manifests it–by giving. He has said that financial ruin and disgrace are starring His schools in America and the institutions in Scandinavia in the face. He is calling for gifts, both large and small, to succor these instrumentalities and save them to His cause.

Here is an opportunity to manifest the love of God in "deed and in truth," and the Lord has confidence that His flock will heed His voice and manifest their love. If He did not have this confidence, He would not make the call.

Giving on this wise is in itself the gift of God. It is so written in the Scriptures:–

"Moreover, brethren, we do you to wit [we want you to understand] of the grace of God bestowed on the churches of Macedonia. How that in a great trial of affliction the abundance of their joy and their deep poverty abounded unto the riches of their liberality. For to their power, I bear record, yea, and beyond their power they were willing of themselves; praying us with much entreaty that we would receive the gift, and take upon us the fellowship of the ministering to the saints. And this they did, not as we hoped, but first gave their own selves to the Lord, and unto us by the will of God. Insomuch that we desired Titus, that as he had begun, so he would also finish in you the same grace ["gift," margin] also. Therefore, as ye abound in everything, [or gift] in [the gift of] faith, and [in the gift of] utterance, and [in the gift of] knowledge, and in all diligence, and in your love to us, see that ye abound in this grace [gift] also. I speak not by commandment, but by occasion of the forwardness of others, and to prove the sincerity of your love."

The desire to give manifesting itself in the act of giving is in itself a gift of God. He who rightly gives to the cause of God is exercising a spiritual gift bestowed on him by the Master. This gift God freely bestows upon all who open their hearts and hands liberally to perform it.

Giving is a gift. The exercise of this gift is just as surely the exercise of a gift of God as is the exercise of the gift of faith, or of utterance, or of knowledge, or of prophecy, or of teaching, or of tongues. It is a gift of ministry, and he who exercises it is a minister of the gospel.

The gift of giving is the gift which proves the sincerity of our love. To all men and women who wish to prove that they possess the love of God, the great apostle commends this gift. By the exercise of the gift of giving, the redeemed of God can prove to all the world and to themselves that they have the love of God abounding in their hearts in deed and in truth.

So therefore, in the language of Paul, I say: "Now therefore perform the doing of it; that as there was a readiness to will, so there may be a performance also out of that which ye have. For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not. . . . But this I say, He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully. Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: FOR GOD LOVETH A CHEERFUL GIVER."

"Back Page" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 16 , p. 256.

THE treaties which created the famous "triple alliance" between Germany, Austria, and Italy expire in 1903. In 1870 France reckoned upon the assistance of Italy, but was disappointed. This led to an estrangement between the two countries. Also the French occupation of Tunis twenty years ago was interpreted by Italy as a hostile move. However, time having effaced some of these animosities, the two nations are trying to get together once more, as seen by the recent reception of the Italian fleet at Toulon. By keeping on intimate terms with France, which, by her military aid under Louis Napoleon, about forty years ago, helped to liberate her, Italy will feel free to demand a revision of the terms of the triple alliance in case she decides to renew her part of the same in 1903.

April 23, 1901

"The Keeping of the Commandments. The Second Commandment" Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 17 , pp. 264, 265.

"I AM the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments." Ex. 20:2, 4-6.

As already stated, Gregory II was pope when the great controversy over the worship of images was raised, by the efforts in the East to abandon it.

This pope Gregory made himself chief champion of the images and their worship. In 730 he wrote in defense of image of worship, to Emperor Leo the Isaurian who was trying to destroy the images.

Since the cause of image worship prevailed, and was established as a part of Catholic faith, this letter of Pope Gregory II is important as giving the principles and arguments upon which that worship rests.

To Emperor Leo, the pope wrote:–

Ten years by God's grace you have walked aright, and not mentioned the sacred images; but now you assert that they take the place of idols, and that those who reverence them are idolaters, and want them to be entirely set aside and destroyed. You do not fear the judgment of God, and that offense will be given not merely to the faithful, but also to the unbelieving. Christ forbids our offending even the least, and you have offended the whole world, as if you had not also to die and to give an account.

You wrote. "We may not, according to the command of God (Ex. 20:4), worship anything made by the hand of man, nor any likeness of that which is in the heaven or in the earth. Only prove to me, who has taught us to worship (aibrothos kai procaunein) anything made by man's hands, and I will then agree that it is the will of God." But why have not you, O emperor and head of the Christians, questioned wise men on this subject before disturbing and perplexing poor people? You could have learnt from them concerning what kind of images made with hands cheiropoieta God said that. But you have rejected our Fathers and doctors, although you gave the assurance by your own subscription that you would follow them. The holy Fathers and doctors are our scripture, our light, and our salvation, and the six synods have taught us (that); but you do not receive their testimony. I am forced to write to you without delicacy or learning, as you also are not delicate or learned; but my letter yet contains the divine truth.

God gave that command because of the idolaters who had the land of promise in possession and worshiped golden animals, etc., saying: "These are our gods, and there is no other God." On account of these diabolical cheiropoieta, God has forbidden us to worship them. . . . Moses wished to see the Lord, but He showed himself to him only from behind. To us, on the contrary, the Lord showed himself perfectly, since the Son of God has been made man. . . . From all parts men now came to Jerusalem to see Him, and then depicted and represented Him to others. In the same way they have depicted and represented James, Stephen, and the martyrs; and men, leaving the worship of the devil, have venerated these images, but not absolutely (with latria), but relatively. . . .

Why, then, do we make no representation of God the Father?–The divine nature can not be represented. If we had seen Him, as we have the Son, we could also make an image of Him.

This is precisely the reason that the Lord gives in His word, as to why He allowed no manner of similitude to be seen. Read that word again: "Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the Lord spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure." Deut. 4:15, 16.

Thus the Lord allowed no similitude to be seen, expressly that the people should make no image, and because the people were so idolatrous that, had they seen any similitude, they would certainly have made a graven image.

266

Yet Pope Gregory II plainly says of God: "If we had seen Him, . . . we could also make an image of Him."

This is only to say that he and those of that way are in heart as idolatrous as were the people at Sinai.

Pope Gregory says also, "We have seen the Son," and thus can make images of Him, and, "If we had seen God the Father, as we have the Son, we could also make an image of Him." But since God allowed no similitude to be seen, "lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make a graven image," and since this word of Pope Gregory's shows that he and those of that way are as idolatrous as were those at Sinai,–this, then, shows that the use of images of Christ in the Catholic Church is as essentially idolatrous as was ever the use of any images in the world.

Further, the pope wrote:–

You say: "We worship stones and walls and boards." But it is not so, O emperor; but they serve us for remembrance and encouragement, lifting our slow spirits upward by those (persons) whose names the pictures bear, and whose representation they are. And we worship them not as God, as you maintain; God forbid! For we set not our hope on them; and if a picture of the Lord is there, we say: Lord Jesus Christ, help and save us. At a picture of His Holy Mother, we say: Holy God-bearer, pray for us with thy Son; and so with a martyr. . . . It would have been better for you to have been a heretic than a destroyer of images.

But that is only the argument of open pagan idolaters. They know that the image itself if not their god; they say only that the image represents the god; it serves to aid the mind in rising to the true idea and worship of the god, of which the image is the representative and remembrancer.

The war against image worship continued till A.D. 789, when Irene came to power as the guardian of her son Constantine VI. She entered diligently upon the work of re-establishing image worship.

She opened correspondence with Pope Hadrian I, who "exhorted her continually to this." In his argument promotive of image worship the pope used Heb. 11:21,–Jacob blessed both the sons of Joseph, and "worshiped upon the top of his staff,"–and made it support image worship by casting out the preposition, so that it should read, "worshiped the top of his staff.–Bower's "Lives of the Popes," Hadrian, par. 40. And so it reads in the Catholic Bible to-day.

But since the image worship had been abolished by a general council, it was only by a general council that image worship could be doctrinally restored. It took considerable time to bring this about, so that it was not till 787 that the council was convened.

This council, called also the seventh general council, was held at Nice, in Asia, especially for the prestige that would accrue to it by the name of the Second Council of Nice. It was held Sept. 24 to Oct. 23, A. D. 787. "The inconoclasts appeared, not as judges, but as criminals or penitents; the scene was decorated by the legates of Pope Adrian, and the Eastern patriarchs; the decrees were framed by the president, Tarasius, and ratified by the acclamations and subscriptions of three hundred and fifty bishops. They unanimously pronounced that the worship of images is agreeable to Scripture and reason, to the Fathers and councils of the Church."–Gibbons, "Decline and Fall," chap. xlix., par. 17.

The closing words of the decree of the council are as follows:–

We are taught by the Lord, the apostles, and the prophets, that we ought to honor and praise before all, the holy God-bearer, who is exalted above all heavenly powers; further, the holy angels, the apostles, prophets, and martyrs, the holy doctors, and all saints, that we may avail ourselves of their intercession, which can make us acceptable to God if we walk virtuously. Moreover, we venerate also the image of the sacred and life-giving cross and the relics of the saints, and accept the sacred and venerable images, and greet and embrace them, according to the ancient tradition of the holy Catholic Church of God, namely, of our holy Fathers, who received these images, and ordered them to be set up in all churches everywhere. These are the representations of our incarnate Saviour Jesus Christ, then of our inviolate Lady and quite holy God-bearer, and of the unembodied angels, who have appeared to the righteous in human form; also the pictures of the holy apostles, prophets, martyrs, etc., that we may be reminded by the representation of the original, and may be led to a certain participation in His holiness.

This decree was subscribed by all present, even by the priors of monasteries and some monks. The two papal legates added to their subscription the remark that they received all who had been converted from the impious heresy of the enemies of images.–Hefele. The council was not content with this formal and solemn subscription. With one voice they broke out into a long acclamation, "We all believe, we all assent, we all subscribe. This is the faith of the apostles, this is the faith of the Church, this is the faith of the orthodox, this is the faith of the world. We, who adore the Trinity, worship images. Whoever does not the like, anathema upon him! Anathema on all who call images idols! Anathema on all who communicate with them who do not worship images! Anathema upon Theodorus, falsely called bishop of Ephesus; against Sisinnius, of Perga; against Basilius, with the ill-omened name! Anathema against the new Arius Nestorius and Dioscorus, Anastasius; against Constantine and Nicetas (the iconoclast patriarchs of Constantinople)! Everlasting glory to the orthodox Germanus, to John of Damascus! To Gregory of Rome everlasting glory! Everlasting glory to the preachers of truth!"–Milman, "History of Latin Christianity," book iv, chap. viii, par. 27.

In the West, Pope Adrian I accepted and announced the decrees of the Nicene assembly, which is now revered by the Catholics as the seventh in rank of the general councils. For the honor of orthodoxy, at least the orthodoxy of the Roman Church, it is somewhat unfortunate that the two princes [Constantine and Irene] who convened the two councils of Nice, are both stained with the blood of their sons.–Gibbon, "Decline and Fall," chap. xlix, par. 18.

Thus it was that image worship was established as a part of the faith of the Catholic Church, and that it is as clearly idolatry as ever was anywhere, the whole record, as well as the Scripture, shows.

May 14, 1901

"General Meeting in Indiana" The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 20 , pp. 316, 317.

THE first general meeting since the General Conference, was held at Indianapolis, Ind., May 3-5. There were present Elders A. G. Daniells, W. W. Prescott, A. T. Jones, P. T. Magan, W. C. White; and, as Sister White and her party were starting westward just at this time, she went by way of Indianapolis, and was also present.

By the Testimony during the General Conference, published on page 419 of the Bulletin, the true situation was made plain. The brethren who led in the wrong course confessed to this, and placed themselves in the attitude of perfect willingness to aid in every way possible in putting the affairs of the Conference on a better basis. At the time of the General Conference, the Indiana Conference Committee tendered their resignation. But as this was a matter to be considered by the people of the Indiana Conference rather than by the General Conference, it was thought best to convene a special session of the Indiana Conference. Although the notice was short, the response hearty, and a good representation from all the State was present, about one hundred and twenty delegates being in attendance.

The principles and spirit that had characterized the course of the General Conference just closed were continued in this general meeting and conference in Indiana. Everything was done openly with all the people present. Everything was stated candidly, and made plain to all, that all the people might know all that was done, and should themselves be the principals in the doing of it. So they, the people of the Indiana Conference, are the Indiana Conference, what was to be done in the Conference, as of the Indiana Conference, now be done by the people. Therefore, it was essential that everything should be plainly stated thoroughly known by the people who were to do to what must be done.

The meeting began Friday evening, with a sermon by Elder Daniells from the expressive words of Joshua 3:5; 4:24: "Sanctify yourselves: for to-morrow the Lord will do wonders among you. "That all the people of the earth might know the hand of the Lord, that it is mighty; that ye might fear the Lord your God forever." The Lord is ready to do wonders with His people. All that is needed is that the people sanctify themselves, cut themselves loose, and set themselves apart from the world, and all that is of it, that God may

317

have full possession. The word was well received, and the Spirit of God witnessed to it.

Sabbath morning at 8:30, Brother Prescott gave one of the best Bible studies that ever I heard, from 2 Cor. 3:1-6; 4:1-7, on the ministry of the Spirit of life. Words can not describe it, but a careful reading of the Scriptures used will give an indication of the line of study. The Spirit of God was present in power, giving light and life, and deeply impressing conviction of truth, privilege, and duty.

At eleven o'clock Sister White spoke with her usual power and solemn impressiveness, on the love, the presence, and the ready helpfulness of Christ to all.

At two o'clock the Sabbath-school lesson was studied. The house was so full that, instead of reciting by classes, all joined in a study of the lesson of the Sanctuary, led by Brother Prescott. Beautiful lessons were found on the meaning of the earthly sanctuary, as a parable for the time then present, signifying that the way into the holiest of all was not made manifest while the first tabernacle was yet standing; and, upon the manifestation of that way into the holiest of all, since the first tabernacle is not now standing; hearts were made to burn as it was seen that Christ alone is the Way into the holiest of all; that Christ is the great object and the meaning of the parable, as in all things of God He is the Way.

At three o'clock the writer followed with a discourse on the priesthood and ministry of Christ as the pattern of the priesthood and ministry of Christians. For of us it is written: "Ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood," and "all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation." 2 Cor. 5:18. Christ was made priest "after the power of an endless Iife." Heb. 7:16. And it is only "the power of an endless life" that can ever make anybody a priest and minister of God. It is only an endless Iife of which we are the ministers. God has committed to us the word of reconciliation. 2 Cor. 5:18. That word is the word of life, eternal life. It being thus only an endless life of which we are ministers, it is impossible for any one to minister that which he has not. Then, except we be possessed of endless life; our ministry, as of God, is nothing. This simply expresses the great truth that every man must himself be that which he calls others to be, or his call is in vain. No man can minister that which he has not. And in this, as in all other things of Christ, full provision is made, because, though "the wages of sin is death," "the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." Endless life is a free gift to every soul, every one can have it by believing in Jesus. He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life.

At the close of the Sabbath, there was taken up the business of the Conference. At 7:30 Elder Daniells was to preach; but the business meeting was so spiritual, and therefore so interesting, that it has the unanimous choice that the business meeting should continue. And throughout, the proceedings were not distinguishable in spirit from the meetings that had been held even on the Sabbath; because the same principles were simply continued in the business meetings that had been dwelt upon in the Sabbath meetings. The people themselves did the business; they themselves named the committees.

Sunday morning at 5:20 there was a Bible study led by Elder Prescott on the kingdom of God of Dan. 2:44. At 8:30 Sister White gave counsel, clear and direct, on the situation as it was in Indiana. It was accepted by all; and all willingly began to act in accordance with it. At 10:30 the writer delivered a discourse on the power of that endless life by which alone men are made priests and ministers of God. It is found only in the righteousness of God, which is by faith of Jesus Christ; for "in the way of righteousness is life; and in the pathway thereof there is no death;" "Righteousness delivereth from death;" and the gospel is the power of God, because therein is the righteousness of God revealed. This was followed in the interval before the afternoon meeting, by a Bible study with the ministers and other workers of Indiana, led by Elder Prescott, on the development of the truth in the book of Daniel, leading up to the finishing of transgression, the making an end of sins, and reconciliation for iniquity, and the bringing in of everlasting righteousness, the sealing up of the vision and prophecy, and the anointing of the Most Holy, by the coming and the sacrifice of Christ, and His ministration in the sanctuary, and the true tabernacle, which God pitched and not man. At noon, Sister White and her party departed for the West.

At 3 P. M. there was again a business meeting of the Conference, which was but a continuation in principles and spirit of the other meetings that had been held. All the committees reported; their reports were freely considered and adopted, in great spiritual blessing. When the Finance Committee reported, there was the period of greatest blessing. The Spirit of God came upon dear Brother M. Hill, and he delivered one of the most thrilling exhortations that it was ever my privilege to hear. And to this statement I know that all who were present will say "Amen."

The new Conference Committee, unanimously elected, are: President, Ira J. Hankins. Executive Committee: P. G. Stanley, Enoch Swartz, J. H. Crandall, and R. O. Ross, M. D. As Sister Thompson is called to work in another State, Sister A. L. Miller was chosen as Sabbath-school Secretary.

This business meeting closed about six o'clock, in full unity of the brethren, with the deep and heartfelt doxology, "Praise God, from whom all blessings flow."

The closing service was at 7:30, in a discourse by Elder Prescott, on "He that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved."

At the end of the discourse the meeting was closed, and the brethren departed to their homes in good cheer, of good courage, with the set purpose of "endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace." There are better days for Indiana, and for all the field; for this meeting made it perfectly plain that the good work of reorganization which God began in General Conference, He will continue in the field until all the Conferences shall be reached and touched with the new life and power which have come down from heaven to water and revive His thirsty heritage. And let all the people pray that thus it may be, and more and more.
ALONZO T. JONES.

June 18, 1901

"The Upper Columbia Conference Camp-meeting" The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 25 , p. 399.

THE Upper Columbia Conference Camp-meeting was but a continuation of the good work, the good spirit, and blessing that began in General Conference, and continued in the Indianapolis meeting shortly following. The blessing of the Lord and the light of His truth were made manifest from the first. The laborers present from outside the Conference were Sister E. G. White, Elders W. C. White and W. T. Knox, and Brother H. H. Hall, and the writer. Brother and Sister White left for the North Pacific camp-meeting, on the Thursday before the meeting closed. The others remained to the end, Sunday evening, May 26.

The first Sabbath, in the afternoon, at the close of a sermon by Sister White, when a call was made for those who would give themselves wholly to the service of the Lord, the whole congregation moved like a tide. Since it was manifestly impossible to have them come forward, the ministers went into the congregation and helped all who needed help or instruction in the way of the Lord. It was a blessed day altogether.

Sunday was again a good day. There were many of the people of the town and community present, and they took a deep interest in the services and in the truths presented. Good impressions, were made, which continued throughout the meeting.

In conducting the business of the Conference, a whole day was devoted to some particular branch of the great work of the Third Angel's Message.

Monday was devoted to the medical missionary work. It began in the early morning meeting, and was continued through the meetings of the whole forenoon, Sister White speaking on the subject at 3 P. M., and the writer in the evening. Tuesday was devoted to the educational work; Wednesday and Thursday to the Conference work, as such; and Friday to Conference and the publishing work.

In this way the business meetings were full of blessing and were just as spiritual and devotional as definite devotional meetings usually are. Indeed, no distinction could be discerned between the business meetings and the devotional meetings, or even the meetings on the Sabbath: all were spiritual and devotional, instructive and blessed.

Thus also, from the beginning, there was a steady growth and deepening of interest and blessedness, which culminated in a triumphant day the last Sabbath of the meeting.

The business of the Conference, in every meeting, is as done by the people themselves. They were glad to know that they themselves are the Conference, that each one, so far as he is concerned, each in his place, is the cause: that in whatsoever comes to him to do, he is a worker in the cause; he is working to support the cause, and to make it a success. All went to their homes with this purpose at heart and as surely as it is followed up, the cause will be prosperous not only in the home field, but in other parts of the earth. There will be abundance of money to supply all home demands, and also to send to supply the needs in desolate fields. This work was well begun in the Conference, in its deciding unanimously to support, for the coming conference year, two workers in Natal, South Africa.

At the close of the last Sabbath of the meeting, Brother A. Schlotthauer was ordained to the gospel ministry. This will be a great help to the work among the Germans in this field.

The names of the brethren who were chosen to conduct the affairs of the Conference the coming year are as follows: President, A. J. Breed; Secretary J. L. Kay; Treasurer, U. C. Tract Society. Executive Committee: A. J. Breed, E. L. Stewart, W. F. Martin, J. A. Holbrook, J. R. Leadsworth, S. A. Anderson, A. Schlotthauer; State Canvassing Agent, M. F. Hill; Secretary of Tract and Missionary Society, J. A. L. Derby; Corresponding Secretary, Claude Conard; Secretary of Conference Sabbath-school Department, Daisy Afton. Sabbath-school Department Committee: W. F. Martin, I. C. Colcord, H. E. Hoyt, C. F. Knott, Daisy Afton.
ALONZO T. JONES.

July 2, 1901

"The North Pacific Camp-meeting" The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 27 , pp. 428, 429.

THE North Pacific camp-meeting was held from May 23 to June 2, at Sunnyside, near Portland, Ore., in a beautiful grove of magnificent firs. Sister White and Elder W. C. White attended the meeting from the beginning until the close of the first Sunday. Elders Knox and Schultz and I were there Monday morning, May 17, until the end.

The same good Spirit and His cheering and encouraging liberty that was manifested in the General Conference, and was continued in the Indianapolis meeting and in the Upper Columbia meeting was here also to lead in all the work, all the way. Both ministers and people were ready to receive the instruction of the Lord, and to enter heartily into the work of reorganization, beginning with the individual experience. This meeting therefore, like the others before it, was full of blessing from beginning to end.

The instruction was plain and positive, that each member, so far as he is concerned, is the Conference and the cause wherever he is; and that Christ is indeed the Head of every man. As the people began to practice local self-government, they met some unexpected trials, but they were taught to hold fast the expected trials, but they were taught to hold fast the principle, to trust God, and to pray to Him to lead them out, and He did it most triumphantly, causing all to see eye to eye, and to stand together as one. The experience was an invaluable educative experience; and all rejoiced at the victory, and in the better acquaintanceship with God in His gentle power and bountiful working.

The attendance from without was good, of an excellent class of people who manifested a positive interest in the truths which were presented. Indeed, the interest was such that a tent was pitched in Sunnyside to meet it, and, so far as possible, carry it to conclusion.

The first Sunday, at the after noon service, in response to an appeal in behalf of the work in the

429

South, a cash donation of about five hundred dollars was made by the congregation. Later, nearly five hundred dollars was given to other parts of the work. Brother F. S. Bunch was ordained to the gospel ministry.

The following named persons were chosen to carry the responsibilities of the Conference for the coming year:–

President, Elder W. H. Decker. Executive Committee: J. L. Wilson, S. W. Nellis, Dr. W. R. Simmons, H. J. Schnepper, J. F. Hanson, F. S. Bunch. Trustees of Northern Pacific Church Extension Society, first five members of the Executive Committee: Treasurer, Church Extension Society; Secretary of Conference and Sabbath-schools, Edith Starbuck; Missionary Secretary, T. H. Starbuck; State Canvassing Agent, W. B. Scott; Corresponding Secretary, referred to Conference Committee.
ALONZO T. JONES.