Earlier text: HE IS NOT HERE; HE IS RISEN“THE GREATEST THING IN THE WORLD.”
By G. E. Fifield
[Sermon by Pastor G. E. Fifield, preached at the camp-meeting at Ellsworth, Me., 1900, and written out for publication in the SIGNS, by request of the editor, who was present.] TEXT.—“And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.” I Cor. 13:13. PERHAPS this is the most wonderful comparison in literature. Here is faith, without which man’s life would be like the lives of the beasts that perish, absolutely bounded by the narrow span between the waking and the sleeping; faith that sweeps back the horizon, broadening grandly man’s life till he lives even here the life eternal, the hopes and joys of eternity becoming daily motive powers to righteousness. Faith that grasps the great fact that God is, better still, that He is my Father; faith that grasps the great fact that Christ is the Saviour of the world, more precious still, that He is my present and personal Saviour; faith that grasps the fact that this book (the Bible) is a letter from my Father to me, all its warnings for me, all its precious promises, too, for my soul, ah! how great, how grand is faith! And yet it is not the greatest or the grandest; for “now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.” Here is hope, without which the heart would break; hope that in the darkest night ever whispers of a dawning morrow, on the brow of the blackest storm-cloud ever painting the bow of promise; hope, that, when earth hath done its worst, and all the joys of this life have failed, is still as an anchor to the soul both sure and steadfast, reaching within the vail. How well I remember a dear old sister who was slowly dying. They thought she would never speak again, but, holding an ear very close to her lips, she was heard to say, as with enraptured gaze her eyes looked heavenward, “The anchor holds.” Hope is that anchor. How great! how grand is hope! And yet it is not the greatest nor the grandest; for “now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.” Surely it is worth our while for a little time to study this greatest thing in the world. We may, perhaps, better learn what charity is by first learning what it is not. There are those who think that charity is the gold, or the silver, or more probably the copper which we fling to the beggar we meet by the way-side. Ah no! The motive for the gift may, or may not, be charity; for there are many modern Pharisees who give to be seen of men. True, the modern Pharisee does not hire a trumpeter to stand on the street corner to proclaim his good deeds. We do things more scientifically in these days. Frequently he owns secretly and operates a big city daily, and publishes to the whole world his benevolence. The motive may, or may not, be6 charity, but it is only metonymically speaking that we can truly call the gift itself charity. Then there are those who seem to think that charity is that failure to appreciate the real value and sacredness of truth which will enable a man to think that a falsehood is as good as the truth, so a man believes it sincerely. A Methodist may believe in free salvation for all, and that “whosoever will may come;” but he must not believe that so strongly as to think it is any better for him than the old predestination idea is for the Presbyterian; for that, they think, would be narrow and bigoted, and we must have charity. The Baptist may believe in baptism by immersion, that is his right; but he must not be so enthusiastic in his belief as to think that immersion is any better for him than sprinkling is for some other man. Even the Seventh-day Adventist, they think, may, if he wishes to, believe in, and practise the observance of the seventh day; but he must not think that Sabbath-keeping is any better for him than Sunday-keeping is for some one else. In short, the lie is as good as the truth if you only believe it sincerely; and it is narrow and bigoted and uncharitable to think otherwise. If this is charity, then Satan is the most charitable being we know of; for he has always been trying to make men believe a lie for the truth, and has thus led men into endless difficulty. Jesus, too, if this is charity, was most uncharitable. He came into a world where many honest teachers had preceded Him, in their blindness and ignorance doing their best. Honestly mistaken they had been, but Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man cometh unto the Father but by Me.” The disciples picked up the same strain, saying, “Neither is there salvation in any other; for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” How narrow and uncharitable this is, is it?—No, it is never uncharitable to speak the truth instead of a falsehood. A man may be honestly mistaken, but he is still mistaken. A man may honestly believe a lie; but his honesty does not make the lie a truth, nor rob it of its danger. In company with a friend I was once driving to the town of S. As we passed a road turning to the right, my friend said, “We ought to go that way to reach S.” I said, “No, I am sure you are wrong; we should go straight ahead.” We were both honest and earnest, but one of us was mistaken. As I had the lines, we went my way. My friend kept insisting that we were wrong, and that we never should reach S. going that way. To silence him, and utterly crush him so he could say no more, I asked a farmer toiling by the roadside the way to S. He said, “You ought to have turned at that road a mile back.” I was honest, and so perhaps not so guilty as if I had wilfully driven wrong, but still I should never have reached S. by that road. My honest tho mistaken belief only led me the more surely and persistently astray. It perhaps would be nice at such times if the world would slip a cog, and bring the desired place around in front of such an honest man; but it is not built that way. The relation of truth to action is, I think, not often well understood, and so I will speak of it briefly here. There are two things in the realm of thought, and only two; the true and the false. There are also two things, and only two, in the realm of action; the right and the wrong. Every act is preceded by a thought. I do not even move my hand till I think to move it. If the thought is a true one, the act it gives rise to will be a good one. If the thought is a false one, the act it gives rise to will be a wrong and bad act. All truth comes out into action somewhere,—action of righteousness. Every lie, also, however sincerely believed in, comes out into action somewhere,—action of unrighteousness. Truth is divine, for God is the truth. There is nothing therefore in charity which minifies the value of truth. God Himself can not sanctify us through a lie. He may in His infinite love do the best He can in spite of the lie, because of our honesty; but even then the lie is a limitation, preventing His perfect work. Jesus prayed, “Sanctify them through Thy truth.” But while charity can not look upon the lie itself with the least degree of allowance, charity looks beyond a man’s opinions; beyond their truth or their falsehood, their orthodoxy or their heterodoxy; beyond the man’s social state too, beyond his education or his ignorance, his poverty or his wealth, beyond even his morality or his immorality; and beyond it all, and back of it all, and way down underneath it all, charity sees a human soul; a poor, deformed, and shrunken thing it may be, missing, infinitely missing, the high possibilities for which God created it, and yet a human soul still so precious that Christ gave His life for it. Charity sees it not as it is, but as it is capable of becoming under the divine, transforming touch. Charity loves it not for its deformity, but in spite of the deformity because of the possible within it, loves it so as even to give its life with Christ for that soul, to bring out the possible, the ideal, and make it an eternal fact in that life. That this is the Bible meaning of charity we shall endeavor to show in our future study. That many have not understood this, and that far less have we all practised this in our lives, is no wonder. Charity is the greatest thing, the highest Christian grace, the topmost round of the heavenly ladder of Christian experience, from which the perfected Christian steps off into heaven’s eternal joys. To see that this is true we need only to read what is sometimes called Peter’s ladder: “Add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; and to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; and to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.” These virtues are here named in the order of their development in the Christian’s life. By this it is not intended to say that any one of these virtues must be brought to perfection before the one above it can exist at all; but only that the successful development of any one of these, depends upon a prior development, at least to the same degree, of those below. “Add to your faith.” Faith is the foundation. Since faith is the telescopic eye that sees the invisible and the eternal, it follows that without faith a man is not living the eternal life at all, but only the life of temporal expediencies. His hopes and aims and motives are here in this world. If he is honest, it is because he considers honesty the best business policy, and not because he considers dishonesty a sin against God. The motive of such a life fails always just at the time it needs most to hold firmly. Almost all the large fortunes are built up on principles other than those of the divine standard of honesty. Amid the hot competitions of the day it is perhaps impossible for a man eminently to succeed, as the world counts success, without departing from the divine standard. This world furnishes no sufficient and enduring motive for a life of righteousness. This is why “Without faith it is impossible to please God.” Faith sweeps back the horizon of our existence till God, and heaven, and eternity, are brought near, and all the infinite hopes and joys and possibilities of eternity become present motive powers in the life. From faith in God comes that divine love which does right, not for any hope of personal gain here or hereafter, but for love’s sweet sake. This is the only true motive, and whatsoever is not of this motive, in God’s sight, is sin. THE PENALTY.
By J. A. Edgerton
We are mad—grown mad in the race for gold;
We are drunk with the wine of gain;
The truths our fathers proclaimed of old
We spurn with a high disdain.
But while the conqueror’s race we run,
Our rulers should not forget
That the God who reigned over Babylon
Is the God who is reigning yet. Would we tread in the paths of tyranny,
Nor reckon the tyrant’s cost?
Who taketh another’s liberty,
His freedom hath also lost.
Would we win as the strong have ever won,
Make ready to pay the debt;
For the God who reigned over Babylon
Is the God who is reigning yet. The ruins of dynasties passed away
In eloquent silence lie;
And the despot’s fate is the same to-day
That it was in the days gone by.
Against all wrong and injustice done
A rigid account is set;
For the God who reigned over Babylon
Is the God who is reigning yet. The laws of right are eternal laws,
The judgments of truth are true;
My greed—blind masters, I bid you pause
And look on the work you do.
You blind with shekles your fellow-man,
Your hands with his blood are wet;
But the God who reigned over Babylon
Is the God who is reigning yet. INSTANTANEOUS photographs show the graceful trotting horse, or flying bird, or leaping hound, in apparently clumsy, awkward, and unnatural attitudes. Instantaneous judgments—judgments of men or of the actions of men—may be just as misleading. Many a busy Christian worker indeed suffers from just such injustice, incomplete representation of his actions becoming misrepresented. We seldom have the right to judge another by a single action of his, in ignorance of his object ahead, and of his motives behind. We seldom do well to paint a fellow-being from an instantaneous photograph. We are seldom justified in deciding, from an instant’s glimpse of shadows on another life, that that life is all darkness, or is even tending toward darkness. There is a twilight of the morning, as well as of the evening. Those shadows may be tokens of the fading night, instead of the fading day. Up from darkness of early surroundings, sinful habits, wrong teaching, or neglect of teaching, or years of indifference, the soul beside us may be even now painfully struggling into the light. Let us not criticize; let us help. Let us look more at direction than at instantaneous position; more at the general trend than at the occasional deviation. Two points, at least, are required to determine the direction of even an ideally straight line. Shall we decide the direction of a wavering human life by the single point of a single action?—Sunday School Times. The Unity of the Divine Word
THE more I occupy myself with Scripture exegesis, the more powerfully am I convinced of the certainty that the divine Word is one single work, and the more am I stimulated with the glad hope that our generation will witness the victory of the truth of inspiration. . . . It is a sure impossibility that the prophecies of the prophets and apostles are false, while their doctrines are true; for true form and contents, fact and doctrine, are one; and this is a distinguishing characteristic of revealed truth.—Johann C. K. von Hoffman. THE WISDOM OF MAN SET AT NAUGHT.
By G.
THE Scripture says: “The wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.” I Cor. 3:19. This was well illustrated when the king of Egypt undertook to “deal wisely” with the children of Israel. Fearing their growing power, he said to his counselors, “Let us deal wisely with them; ‘lest they multiply,’” etc. Then to restrict their multiplication he thought to weaken them with hard service, and set over them cruel and exacting taskmasters. “But the more they afflicted them, the ‘more they multiplied.’” The combined wisdom and power of this mightiest of earthly empires could neither devise nor accomplish any scheme that would thwart the plans of the Almighty. Egypt had been given ample opportunity to know the wisdom and power of Israel’s God, and to know that to “deal wisely with them” would have been to recognize their God, and to seek to know His will concerning them. A little of God’s wisdom would have been a great saving to Egypt, both in men and resources. Even to know Joseph, the servant of God (that is, to follow his counsel and policy), had been of incalculable value to the whole country. Under the guidance of the wisdom given to him, the true interest of both the king and the people of Egypt lay in the direction of fostering Israel. Had they continued to recognize the wisdom and power of Israel’s God, and sought to know Him for themselves, as He was all the time endeavoring to have them do, they could have enjoyed all the blessing that Israel enjoyed. There could have been no separate interest. But the king and his courtiers had a wisdom of their own; of course it was antagonistic to the purposes of God, and must come to naught. While there is encouragement in this for the true people of God, there is also a lesson. It is a significant question, how much of this reversion of sentiment on the part of the Egyptians was due to Israel’s own apostasy. Had not they in great measure departed from the integrity and faith of Joseph, which had so long held the confidence and favor of the Egyptians? Had not they become so lax in their lives that the worldly ambition of the Egyptians had taken hold of them? Had not they been yielding to the ways of the Egyptians, rather than holding to the example of Joseph in manifesting lives of unselfish devotion to the law of their God? The sequel shows that the wisdom and ways of the Egyptians had been influencing the children of Israel, rather than Israel’s wielding the drawing influence through the power of the Gospel. The king’s purpose to prevent the increase of Israel was frustrated, but the Lord allowed him to severely discipline them. Yet we may be sure that this was permitted only to the extent necessary to prepare them for departure when the Lord’s time should come to call them out. The judgment of the king was very much at fault when he thought to cruelly treat the Israelites to prevent their leaving. As long as they enjoyed favor and prosperity in Egypt, they were not likely to want to leave, and God does not deliver any one from a perilous position against his will. This is not an isolated case where the persecution of God’s people has led to their being brought nearer to Him, and to a realization of His mercy and care. Matthew Henry says: “Times of affliction have often been the church’s growing times. Christianity spread most when it was persecuted; the ‘blood of the martyrs was the seed of the church.’” The Lord ruleth in the kingdom of men. It is not necessary for human governments to pass laws making Christ their ruler; He is always their ruler in spite of any laws they may pass, or any other action they may take. The king of Egypt thought to do Israel harm, but God overruled it for their good. It was He who was chastening them all the time. “Their ‘lives were made bitter’ for the time being; but while the king of Egypt was exercising his cruel animosity, the love of God was using the only means that could avail for their salvation.” “My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of Him; for whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom He receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence; shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure [as seemed good, margin]; but He for our profit, that we might be partakers of His holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous; nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.” Heb. 12:5-11. There were many practical advantages gained, in the providence of God, by the sojourn in Egypt. Their sustenance during the famine was not the only object in the mind of the Lord. Had it been so, they could have gone back as soon as the famine was over, twelve years before the death of Jacob. But they were no safer in Canaan than in Egypt. There were powerful tribes there, who were worse than the Egyptians, and the Israelites had already become contaminated by their association. In Egypt the oppression kept them to a great extent from social commingling with the Egyptians; it prevented, or restricted, intermarriages, excepting with those who came in as proselytes to Israel’s faith. It cemented them together in a common bond of union, and tended to create an interest in, and sympathy for, one another. It was designed to make of them a united people, and prepare them for unity of service in the cause of God, when His time came for their deliverance and removal to the land which He had promised them. When they should go back to Canaan, they were to be strong enough to endure hardship as good soldiers of the cross. All this required hard discipline, such as they never would have given themselves. Therefore the only means the Lord had of giving it to them was by means of the government’s taskmasters, who had been set to weaken rather than to strengthen them. The sojourn in Egypt, especially the season of enforced servitude, was a kind of industrial school, wherein they learned to do mechanical work, to become artisans. In their own chosen calling as herdsmen, they never would have learned to be the skilled workmen that many of them were. They learned many things in the line of mechanical art, especially in building, and in ornamental work, which they could not have learned in Canaan. All these advantages they were enabled to turn to account through the Lord’s bringing to naught the designs of their oppressors. G. THE GROWING INTOLERANCE OF THE WAR SPIRIT.
By S.
Two years ago Germany was pointing to the punishment of the French captain, Alfred Dreyfus, as an indication of the moral deterioration of the French army. Now Germany is aroused over a case that has come up in her own army very much similar to that of Dreyfus in France. The victim, Sergeant Marten, has not been banished, as was Dreyfus. His life is the sacrifice to be offered to the god of war, the spirit of discipline. Marten and two other non-commissioned officers were accused of shooting their captain. All were acquitted by the civil court. This did not satisfy the spirit of discipline-worship which is the natural accompaniment of a military aristocracy, and so the general appointed a court-martial. In this trial by court-martial the same evidence was offered that had failed to convict in the civil court, and no new evidence was submitted. The case of the prosecution was so weak that the public prosecutor did not feel warranted in asking for the death sentence upon Marten. The two civilian members of the court-martial voted for the acquittal of all three; but, notwithstanding all this, the military members of the court pronounced upon Marten the sentence of death, and dismissed the others from the service with the forfeiture of the 1,000 marks bounty to which they had become entitled for long and faithful service. It is openly declared by the press of Germany that this is but another sacrifice to the offended dignity of the god of war. Some one shot a captain. It is presumed he was shot by a subordinate officer. This was a fearful shock to the worshipers of discipline; and therefore some one must suffer. If the murderer can not be found, then a substitute must be; for there must be a sacrifice, or discipline would suffer. The Kölnische Volkszeitung has explained the necessity of such a proceeding by saying that, even if innocent, it is advisable that Marten should die, lest discipline in the army should suffer by a failure to find any criminal. This sounds cruel enough; but it reads still worse when one remembers that the life of the victim had once before been placed in jeopardy for this same offense—a thing which ought to be impossible in Germany, as in some other civilized countries. The whole second trial—and especially this fact in connection with the second trial—shows how lightly are regarded human rights and civil laws when the war-god is aroused by an offense to its dignity. And right in this connection let it be remembered that militarism is growing as never before. In these countries where its reign is most pronounced, the peasantry are groaning under its crushing weight. It is not alone the burden of supporting the pompous, sword-bearing soldier; but wherever civilian and soldier meet in public, the civilian must give way. In these countries it is dangerous for a civilian to jostle a soldier however unintentionally; he may have to pay for it with his life, as some have done. With the growth of militarism, the danger of international conflict increases. Offended dignity must be wiped out in blood; and, tho a much more pretentious plant than formerly, dignity is also much more tender of itself—much more ready to avenge a slight than to condone or forgive a mistake. In this deadly atmosphere are we living to-day. The world is a powder magazine, and military dignity stands over it with a lighted torch, ready at any moment to ignite the fuse. God has declared that the world would come to its end in war, and the nations are preparing for their part in the catastrophe with all possible speed. The growing dignity and importance of the military is but one of the infallible evidences of the approach of that event. It is time to awake out of sleep. S. ABOUT ANSWERING OBJECTIONS.
By T.
“But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; and that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.” 2 Tim. 2:23-26. A great deal of the controversy that men engage in, no matter how learned it may appear at the first glance, is not only “unlearned,” but “foolish.” This is especially true in religion. There is a lingering sentiment that if we do not attempt to answer all the questions that are put to us, we manifest a weakness, and are either afraid or incompetent to defend our faith. The Christian is to study the Word of God until he is able to discern “foolish and unlearned questions,” and then unswervingly avoid them. To engage in discussing them is a waste of time, and does positive injury. God’s Word is able to keep us out of “foolish and unlearned questions.” Let us in all things follow the admonitions of the Book of books. T. Labor Strikes and Their Leaders
It is estimated by some statisticians that the steel combination lost $15,000,000 by the recent great strike, and that the strikers’ loss was $10,000,000. But the trust has means by which it can make up its loss in a short time, while the strikers must go on losing; for the conditions of labor are not as favorable to them as before the strike. As to the late industrial strike in San Francisco, a good many union men have learned, what they all ought to have known all the time, that they were only the tools of leaders who are aiming for self-advantage under the pretext of interest for the laboring classes. When a body of laboring men put themselves under the absolute dictation of those who have no interest in the work they are doing, they must expect to become the subjects of barter on the part of their chosen dictators. A KIND OF “EQUALITY.”
By Editor
It is said that the Puritans believed in religious liberty—for the Puritans. The Catholic Church believes in religious liberty for the true religion, which of course she feels that she pre-eminently possesses. A good illustration of how politicians and latter-day reformers look upon the “equality” of classes is furnished by the present candidate for Mayor of San Francisco by the Union Labor party. The gentleman says:— I am not in favor of dividing the people into classes. I am not in favor of arraying one element against another. I am not in favor of making political distinctions based on wealth, religion, or social station in life. I believe in equal representation for employer and employe, for capital as well as for labor, and equal protection for all. If elected, I pledge myself honestly and fairly to give equal consideration and to show neither favoritism nor prejudice for or against any element or class. And the same gentleman shows what he means by this by counting all of labor that is worthy of consideration as organized labor. He says again:— I deprecate violence, am in favor of peaceful measures at all hazards, and believe in the fair and friendly consideration of invested capital, as correlative to similar consideration for organized labor. I am also in thorough sympathy with the provision that, where practicable, all public supplies shall bear the Union Label. Now organized labor is not the only labor worthy of consideration. There are more men in California, it is said, outside of unions than belong to unions. Are not these worthy of consideration? Why should public goods bear a “union label”? Are not non-unionists a part of the public? Is a man a whit better because he belongs to a union? Is not a man just as worthy who does not belong to any union? Is not the work of an American who belongs to no union as worthy of support as the equal work of another American who may belong to a union? Is not this attitude of the candidate above mentioned just the very thing which will divide classes and emphasize present differences? The gentleman believes in the equal protection of all—union laborers. This is the exact parallel of the religious liberty granted by the Puritans. Now we are not at all interested in the coming municipal election of San Francisco. The gentleman referred to may make as good a mayor or better than his opponents. We do not know as to that. We are pointing out in this the erroneous conception of liberty and equality which obtains in so many circles, and which is constantly demanding legislation to favor some class. True liberty is the liberty of the other man who may not agree with us. True Christian liberty is the right of the other man to speak and think and act for himself in opposition to what I may think and speak and do, to the same extent, and on the same equality, which I demand for myself. Men may prate of liberty and equality; but unless this is held with equal respect for the other man, it is not liberty. That is not genuine Christianity which does not recognize this, whatever may be its claims. THE SPIRIT OF VIOLENCE.
By E. J. Driver
In such days as these, with part of the world resting on its arms; its factories busy, and the nerves of its commerce tingling with a triumphant, “All is well,” with others we are apt to pride ourselves on the rapid strides of higher civilization. Be it sadly said, however, that oftimes a glimpse behind this outward calm reveals civilization yet a long call from the top of the hill. Such a glimpse is here quoted from a recent article in the Nashville American, describing the burning of a negro murderer by a mob of 2000 persons:— “Burn him” was the cry. A dozen men then began gathering dry saplings, which were piled around the tree. A number of men caught the prisoner and bound him to the tree with chains, one chain extending around his neck and the other around his body. Some of them came forward with a five-gallon vessel of kerosene, which was poured over the body of the wretch and on the fuel. The negro never moved or showed any signs of breaking down during this ordeal. A number of men scrambled over each other for the privilege of lighting the funeral pyre, and a number of matches were applied. The negro remained stolid until the flames enwrapped his body, then he shrieked with pain. It was the intention of the mob to burn the victim slowly, but the rapid work of the flames thwarted this, and he was dead in about three minutes. Groans were heard until the flames had burned away the lips. There were deafening yells from the mob while the wretch was burning. Members shouted that was the fate of all committing such crimes. The crowd then began dispersing, and in about an hour there were only a few on the scene. The body was burned to a crisp, nothing remaining but the trunk. After the fire died down there was a rush for souvenirs. The chains holding the charred body to the tree were cut off, and the links divided out among those present. One man took out his knife and cut out two of the negro’s ribs, which he took with him. The ropes with which the negro was bound were also cut into fragments and divided among the men. After the body was taken from the tree, it was placed on the burning wood, and was left in the smouldering mass. It had not been removed to-night, and was almost completely burned. There was no effort on the part of any members of the mob to disguise themselves. Modern history gives us no stronger pictures of abject barbarism and brutality than is seen in these lynchings; and in view of the enlightenment in our country to-day it seems incredible that men of intelligence should stoop to a degradation so low that it can go no further. Deaf alike to the appeals of reason and morality and the demands of law, they can be stopped only by their own impotence, only when brute force must yield. It is recognized that only one argument can be made to appeal to those who take part in these bloodthirsty bands, and that is the assurance of law that life imprisonment awaits each member, and even this appeal is weak indeed. The spirit of civilization does not thrive in their hearts, and the dealing with these men becomes one of the largest social problems of the day, inasmuch as it is not local, the Southern center throwing lines of violence throughout the country. These things are not indicative of higher civilization, but rather the signs of a coming storm. THE friends of an amendment to the Federal Constitution prohibiting the practice of polygamy in the United States are sending out large quantities of literature. Not only the pernicious doctrines of the Mormon Church, but their cunning political methods and persistent labors, are being quite thoroughly exposed. The Interdenominational Council of Women for Christian and Patriotic Service sends a number of leaflets, from one of which we take the following:— It is conceded that Mormon Church sentiment controls and directs all political action in Utah; that it holds the balance of power in Idaho, Wyoming, and Nevada; that it is fast gaining power in Montana, Oregon, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and California; and that it is constantly using every secret manipulation of its thoroughly organized priesthood to secure the balance of power, politically, throughout the Great West. Thousands of true Latter Day Saints in all these States are the oath-bound subjects of this hierarchy. Since it will require the concurrence of three-fourths of the States of the Union for the passage of an amendment to the Constitution of the United States—without which amendment no Federal anti-polygamy legislation can be made effective within the confines of any State—therefore it is necessary that this amendment be made now, before this growing hierarchy shall have it in its power to prevent its adoption. Two thousand Mormon elder priests are now in every State and Territory of the Union propagating this system, of which polygamy has been, and now is, an essential part. They seek, by misrepresenting the actual conditions and teachings in Utah, to create outside of Utah a public sentiment more advantageous to the system than it could possibly secure if the whole truth were known. Mr. Wm. R. Campbell, field secretary of the movement to secure an anti-polygamy amendment to the Constitution, is also publishing some results of fifteen years’ experience among the Mormons. From an address recently delivered in Chicago, we call a few striking thoughts:— Mormonism does not propose to be ignored, and can not be ignored. It is pushing its way into every county, city, town, village, and hamlet in the land. It is invading our churches and our homes, and proselyting many of the fairest and best. It is putting its hands upon the ballot-box, and controlling the political destinies of States. One State it entirely owns, and six other States and Territories it demoralizes by its balance-of-power methods, while it hopes soon to gain enough proselytes to enable it, through its colonizing schemes, to gain control of the politics of enough additional States to enable it forever to prevent the ratification of an Anti-polygamy Constitutional Amendment. The Mormons are as wise as serpents in their use of the balance-of-power principle. Instead of voting all one way, they divide their votes between the parties, giving to the favored party just enough to insure victory, but not enough to show their hand openly, unless it becomes absolutely necessary. Having succeeded in safeguarding polygamy against a constitutional amendment, they then hope to fasten it upon us forever, as one of the permanent institutions of our country.9 Speaking of the exclusion of Mr. Roberts from Congress, Mr. Campbell deplores that the people are so easily satisfied with a small victory. In this connection he says:— As soon as Mr. Roberts was sent home, the masses of our people were so happy and so grateful that they felt it would be unreasonable, and even positively wicked, for them to ask any more favors of Congress for a long time to come. Not so the Mormon leaders. They were wiser than we. When they saw the storm of indignation spreading all over the land on account of their perfidy in electing Mr. Roberts, they decided to sacrifice Mr. Roberts for the good of the cause. He had scarcely gone from the national capital before two of the leading polygamists of the State were there making terms with politicians. These polygamists were supported in their efforts by non-Mormon politicians from Utah and the States where the Mormons hold the balance of power. We can not blame the politicians too much. They are only human; and they are utterly helpless without the support of public sentiment. A national election was at hand. The polygamous monster of the Rocky Mountains had been mortally offended by the exclusion of Mr. Roberts, and he demanded a large peace-offering. Moreover, he must have large tribute for the State which he politically controls. Is it any wonder that the politicians bowed the knee, while the American people were either asleep, or getting gain, or, at best, rejoicing over the great victory achieved in the Roberts case, which was as nothing compared with the victory which the Mormons gained in one short hour, while their enemies, as they regard us, were rejoicing over an illusive victory? No wonder that the overwhelming sentiment among Congressmen in favor of an Anti-Polygamy Constitutional Amendment all died away in a night, and the whole matter was shelved indefinitely. . . . The Mormons have large influence at Washington, because they look after their affairs, and see that they are attended to. If there is any other organization in this country that wields as much influence (in proportion to its membership) at the capital of the nation to-day as the Mormon hierarchy, I do not know what it is. Mr. Campbell further deplores the fact that there are “misguided but well-meaning Eastern people” who apologize for their Mormon friends. He has received letters even from women asking questions about the possible advantage of polygamy among a certain class. This does seem almost incredible; but we must remember that we are in the last days, days of delusion because the masses are ignoring the Word of God. As long as the people look lightly on the law of the Lord, it is not surprising that they come to look approvingly upon even the grosser forms of immorality. And as long as the law of God is ignored by the people, and even by professed Christians, there is no hope of moral reform in any section of the country. Certainly it is the duty of the civil government to restrain the people from acts of incivility as far as possible; but as long as the law of God is deemed of no effect, the way is paved for “evil men and seducers” to “wax ‘worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.’” 2 Tim. 3:13. G.