RATIONALISM in England no longer dwells on the outside; it has effected its entrance into the very heart of the church, and bids fair, in the near future, to exercise a predominating influence.
In these days there is no longer any “offense of the cross.” You can be a Christian without believing in any of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity. This is the burden of a great many articles in the newspapers and magazines, and is also taught by skillfully-written books, which are having a very wide circulation.
The most popular, certainly the most fascinatingly-written book of this character, is Dr. Harnack’s notable work, “What Is Christianity?” which, in cheap paper binding, is having an enormous sale throughout the country. The book is in the author’s most taking style, and contains a good deal to which, considered by itself, no exception could be taken; but it is distinctly rationalistic in tone, and, taken as a whole, may well be placed in the category of books subversive of Christianity. Perhaps the system of belief it expounds might not inappropriately be called “Rationalized Christianity.” Certainly it explains away all that is most distinctive and characteristic in the Christian religion as revealed in the Bible, and leaves in its place a sort of 20th-century Platonism, flavored with a weak tincture of the Gospel.
No Divine Saviour—No Resurrection.
In the first place, the book frankly tells us that the history of Jesus’ birth is not to be taken account of. “Two of the gospels do, it is true, contain it;” nevertheless “we may disregard it.” In other words, Jesus is simply the son of Joseph.
Of course, on top of this we are not surprised to be told that the stories of demons are “absurdities,” and that in general in the religious teaching of Jesus we must discriminate between the kernel and the husk. The resurrection degenerates into a mere “belief.” “Whatever may have happened at the grave,” writes Dr. Harnack, “and in the matter of appearances, one thing is certain: this grave was the birthplace of the indestructible belief that death is vanquished, that there is a life eternal.” Again he says: “It is not our business to defend either the view which was taken of the death, or the idea that He had risen again.” (Italics ours.) The thoughtful reader will note the significance of this language—how carefully it excludes any statement of fact in connection with the resurrection. We are prepared now to be told that the death on the cross as one for expiation for sin, is only an “idea,” one which “responds to a religious need.” Moreover, “everywhere that the just man suffers, an atonement is made which puts us to shame and purifies us.”
The Gospel according to John finds no place in Dr. Harnack’s scheme. It “does not emanate from the apostle John,” and “can not be taken as an historical authority in the ordinary sense of the word.” The wonderful discourses by Christ, which form such an important part of this Gospel, were, Dr. Harnack says, drawn up by the author himself, who “illustrated great thoughts by imaginary situations.”
Christ’s divinity is denied in these words: “The name of the Son, rightly understood, means nothing but the knowledge of God. . . . Jesus is convinced that He knows God in a way in which no one ever knew Him before.”
“Paul,” we are told, “became the author of the speculative idea that not only was God in Christ, but that Christ Himself was possessed of a peculiar nature of a heavenly kind.”
No Literal Kingdom.
The kingdom of Christ, according to Dr. Harnack, is “nothing but the treasure which the soul possesses in the eternal and merciful God.”
What, then, is the Gospel, as this book would make it out to be? First, it “has to do with the Father only, and not with the Son.” Here is the summing up of the whole thing, in the author’s own words—here is his answer to the soul’s inquiry, “What shall I do to be saved?”
If with a steady will we affirm the forces and the standards which, on the summits of our inner life, shine out as our highest good, nay, as our real self; if we are earnest and courageous enough to accept them as the great reality, and direct our lives by them; and if we then look at the course of mankind’s history, follow its upward development, and search in strenuous and patient service for the communion of minds in it, we shall not faint in weariness and despair, but become certain of God, of the God whom Jesus Christ called His Father, and who is also our Father.
This is evidently a carefully-worded statement of the author’s belief. It is what he calls Christianity. But what humble, believing follower of Jesus Christ would recognize it as such? Does it not, by leaving out Christ, virtually deny its own name? Is it anything at all but an exalted form of heathenism?
Yet there is scarcely any recent work of eminence in the field of theology but is more or less tinged with these rationalistic ideas. The world’s scientists have seized upon evolution as a means of ruling out the idea of a personal Creator. Its scholars have chosen Rationalism as a means of ruling the divine element out of the Christian religion. The result, in both cases, is practical atheism, whether it be called by that term or not. Professor Harnack, with all his great learning and ability, is strangely ignorant of the essential characteristics of Christianity. He may be Germany’s greatest theologian; yet many a ten-year-old child has a truer, more consistent view than he, of spiritual realities.
Speculation does not solve
the problems of the spiritual world, which yield only to obedience and faith. We must believe, and do, if we would know. To rationalize religion is to take the very heart out of it. When we have reduced God to the comprehension of the human mind, we have eliminated His divinity.
It is a striking “sign of the times” that Dr. Harnack’s book, with all its crude unbelief and utter contradiction of vital religious truth, should meet with a hearty reception in church circles generally, and that its author should be held up as one of the champions of Christianity. Truly, we have here an example of base betrayal of a sacred trust. But no one who knows the Word for himself, need be deceived. Philosophical subtleties can not move the man who stands on the vantage-ground of truth. Neither can they turn aside one who is seeking for truth, for he can claim the promise: “If any man will do His will, he shall know of the doctrine.”
M. E. OLSEN.
Untenable Grounds
By G. W. Reaser
SUNDAY-LAW AGITATION IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST.
TWO meetings recently held in the city of Portland, are worthy of mention, as indicating religious sentiment in certain lines in the Pacific Northwest.
One of these gatherings was convened for the purpose of agitating and perfecting organization, for the enforcement of Sunday observance upon all classes of society.
Nearly all of the churches and religious organizations of the city were represented in the meeting.
Included in the election of officers for the ensuing year, was the selection of a field secretary, whose time and energies are to be devoted to the holding of public meetings for the education of the masses to the idea of Sunday-sacredness, and to the enactment and enforcement of laws, to preserve its assumed sanctity.
Untenable Grounds.
On this occasion, the presumed holiness of the first day of the week was based wholly upon the binding nature of the Decalogue on all mankind, and particularly upon the claims of the fourth commandment.
But why should this position be taken? The seventh, and not the first, day of the week is declared by Jehovah to be sacred, and He has never informed us of the transfer of His blessing from the seventh to the first day.
An astonishing contrast is noteworthy in this connection. When a meeting is convened for the purpose of securing united action to enforce Sunday observance, in order to touch a responsive chord in the consciences of the people, great stress is laid upon the authority of Jehovah's law, and the perpetuity and binding obligations of the fourth commandment; but when the perpetuity of the same law, and the sacred obligation of the fourth commandment, are taught by seventh-day observers, the tactics of first-day keepers are suddenly reversed, and, strangely enough, their usual claim is, that the law of God is not binding upon Christians in this dispensation, and that the Sabbath of the fourth commandment has no sacredness above other days; that the first day is binding upon Christians as a holy day, and all this presumption without a single statement from Jehovah authorizing the change of the Sabbath.
Consistency is a priceless jewel. Questionable is the acceptability of the worship of him who perverts truth, at least after the forthshining of heaven-sent light upon his pathway. Of such the Saviour said, "Why call ye Me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say;" and again, "In vain do they worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."
One of the greatest stumbling-blocks in the way of unbelievers is the inconsistent course of professors.
What minister of the Gospel was ever driven to the ridiculous extremity of preaching the abolition of the law, except to sustain the practise—borrowed from paganism—of Sunday-keeping?
What can more truthfully account for the alarming increase of lawlessness,—which, as stated by "educators and jurists, imperils the very existence of our nation,"—than the preaching from the pulpits of the land, that anarchistic doctrine, the abolition of God's law. Such ruinous preaching gives license for all manner of crime.
Or, if, on the other hand, as are the tactics of some, the integrity of the law is maintained, and, simply at their own choice and convenience, without divine command or sanction, they attempt to change the fourth commandment, substituting the pagan institution, instead of Jehovah's day, the logical result is equally as pernicious in its effect upon the masses who are within the sphere of influence of the pulpits of the country.
If a preacher of the Gospel has the right to change one precept of the law to suit his convenience, and that he may be on the popular side, why should not his hearers have the same right, relative to all other precepts of the law?
As a matter of fact, we find that every principle of the Decalogue is violated by those who take the liberty of perverting its clear meaning, who are, at the same time, deluded into thinking that they are thus "doing God's service." John 16:2.
We will note some of the more prominent examples of this self-delusive service. Earth's millions of heathen worship other gods, and satisfy their unenlightened consciences with the fond delusion that they are "doing God service." Both heathen, and many professedly-Christian people, bow down and worship images under the same delusion. The scribes and Pharisees justified violation of the fifth commandment, and thus satisfied the ill-guided worship of the willingly ignorant. Matt. 15:3-9. The life-blood of fifty million martyrs was shed at the vile hands of those who thought they were serving God, in thus violating the sixth commandment.7
Bigamists freely teach that the only way of salvation for many of their female followers is in misery-producing violation of the seventh commandment. Nations consider themselves as fulfilling heaven-appointed commission in slaying in war, and in stealing property and territory of other nations. Others, claiming that "the end justifies the means," freely violate the ninth commandment.
But perhaps the most popular delusion and inconsistency in so-called Christian lands is the unwarranted change of the Sabbath from the day that Jehovah blessed, to another, its rival, borrowed from paganism, and adopted by that great apostate church, styled "the man of sin," and so incorporated into what passed for Christianity.
Surely one who possesses the simplicity of faith of genuine Christianity, will not be controlled by that carnality, that desire for popularity, that clamoring of the flesh for gratification, that will lead him to select one or more of the commandments, and in the violation of the same, be deluded into thinking that he is thus doing "God service."
The sincere prayer of the one who craves the fulness of Heaven's approval will be, "Teach me, O Lord, the way of Thy statutes;" "make me to go in the path of Thy commandments; for therein do I delight."
The Carnal Mind
is the only thing that is at enmity against the law of God (Rom. 8:7); the spiritual mind is in perfect harmony therewith (Rom. 7:14).
But, some will say, there are two sides to this law question. The proposition is freely admitted. The untold millions of heathen, of image-worshipers, of profane, of breakers of the true Sabbath, of disobedient to parents, of murderers, of adulterers, of thieves, of falsifiers, of covetous, are arrayed in greater or less degree, with him who undertook to overthrow the government of Heaven, on the one side. Some, not claiming righteousness, except through the merits of Christ, are identified with Heaven, in maintaining the integrity of the law of Jehovah. These are surely upon the other side of the question, and are logically following the leadership of Him who said, "I delight to do Thy will, O My God; yea, Thy law is within My heart." Every individual must choose one of these two sides. There is no neutral ground.
The only safe position is in following Christ in law-keeping. But even a higher motive than eternal, personal safety, is that of loyalty to our Creator. Reader, are you loyal to the government of Heaven? Guilt is not imputed until heaven-sent light is rejected.
Tearing down the law of God in the hearts of men, is laying the sure foundation for anarchy (lawlessness). If anarchy shall ever rule red-handed in our land, to the destruction of the republic, who will share in the responsibility for its cruel, devastating work? Surely not the one who moulds the consciences of men, both by preaching and practise, to obey from the heart, the perfect law of Jehovah as spoken from Sinai and revealed in the life of Christ.
G. W. REASER.
[The other meeting, of another character, will be reported in our next.]
SUNDAY ENFORCEMENT NEWS AND COMMENT.
By John D. Bradley
[From JOHN D. BRADLEY, 60 New York Ave., Washington, D. C., N. W.]
Sunday Enforcement in Hawaii.
THE Sunday enforcement epidemic is not confined to the continental territory of the United States. It has recently manifested itself far away in one of the Pacific possessions. The Honolulu Hawaiian, of November 19, under the large heading, "Sunday Laws Will Start To-morrow," announced that "to-morrow will be the momentous day when the Sabbath law, resurrected from its former innocuous desuetude, will take effect, and exercise its wonderful vagaries upon the people of Honolulu, godly as well as ungodly," and published the following interview with High Sheriff Henry as to "the details of the campaign" to be inaugurated on the following day:
The sheriff said to-day that he did not think it necessary to state just in what instances the law would be enforced. "The law is there," he said, "and the people should guide themselves accordingly. It is my intention to enforce the law, but I will exercise good common sense in doing so in order not to make the measure appear ridiculous. I think the law as it stands means to be interpreted in a broad, common-sense way. There are naturally a great many instances where the law lays itself open to different interpretations. As the measure works along, light will naturally be shed on these questions. In enforcing the law it is my main intention to show and let the people find out just where the present law is practicable and where it is not. In this way a great fund of practical information will be gathered on the subject, and it will be up to the legislature to make use of this experience and frame a Sabbath law which is adapted to present circumstances.
There are certain points in which the law is plain, and where it will accordingly be carried out to the letter. To-morrow the department will see that the stores are closed and that the restaurants and eating houses are closed at 7 P.M. All work on plantations, with the exception of irrigation and labor which can be shown to be of absolute necessity, will not be allowed. The principal aim of the law is to see that the laboring man is not forced to work unnecessarily. Work on the docks and on vessels will not be allowed, except in cases where the carrying of mails is expedited, thereby thus making the labor work of necessity. The band will be allowed to play in Kapiolani Park to-morrow if the governor orders it to do so, but the baseball game in the park will be forbidden. As far as the golf playing in Manoa is concerned, I can only say that the law allows such sports as do not interfere with the right of the community to spend the Sabbath quietly. I do not think that the golf will interfere. The same will be the case with shooting, rowing, and other sports. They will be allowed so long as they do not interfere with the community's rights. The police will not interfere with the publishing and circulating of Sunday papers. Meat, vegetables, milk, and such other necessaries can be sold up till 9 A.M. Neither will the police interfere with any private individual's doing odd jobs about the house. I do not think the law was intended to interfere in such cases. I am inclined to think that the fishing boats should be restricted from working between the hours of 8 A.M. and 4 P.M. However, it may be necessary for them to go out in order to supply the Monday market. I have not decided in this matter yet. The police will not interfere with the running of trams, cars, hacks, livery rigs, or any such vehicles.
Two days later, under a display heading containing this statement, "Stores Closed, but Most Popular Amusements Are Suffered Without Interference," the same paper reported as follows:
Honolulu's first celebration of the revived Sabbath law yesterday was not quite so strenuous as it was thought it would be. There was no bloodshed and no arrests were made. High Sheriff Henry had decided to exercise a certain amount of discretion in enforcing the law. As a result, the enforcement amounted practically only to the closing of the stores. The baseballers did not enjoy their usual game at Kapiolani Park, evidently not relishing the idea of having the police interfere. As it seems, they could probably have enjoyed their sport without such interference, the latest police definition of the words "public games" of the statute being regular league games with paid admissions, etc., while free games which are conducted quietly are not in violation of law. The band played at Waikiki, and the aquarium was open to the public. A very large percentage of the town's population spent the day at Waikiki and enjoyed sea bathing and swimming without having the waterfront police descending on them. At Manoa the golfers held forth in great numbers without being molested. It was a general surprise to see the Grill, the Elite, and other such establishments keeping open all the evening, even after the ominous 7 o'clock which the law specifies in the following statute: "No keeper of a victualing house, restaurant, and coffee shop shall keep his house, restaurant, or coffee shop open after 7 o'clock on Sabbath afternoon." The High Sheriff stated this morning that the establishments named as well as several others, including some oriental establishments, held hotel licenses. Such places would be allowed to keep open Sundays. As far as the selling of liquor at hotels was concerned, the High Sheriff stated that the hotels could sell liquor to bona fide guests. Any attempt to evade the law by having people register for the mere purpose of purchasing liquor would, however, be strictly dealt with.
"Upon the whole," said the High Sheriff, "I think the enforcing of the Sabbath law is a success. "We did not make a single arrest on that score yesterday. It is true that we had to close up a few places, but these were only few in number, and their owners were perfectly willing to close their stores when they saw that the other storekeepers were compelled to do so. The white merchants are exceedingly satisfied at having the oriental places of business closed. The white stores are closed on Sunday under all circumstances, and when the Orientals were allowed to keep their stores open on Sunday, they were thus given a great advantage, which now no longer exists."
This shows that an incentive to Sunday enforcement—the selfish, commercial, competitive desire to stop Sunday selling on the ground that it is unfair and illegitimate competition with those who do not sell—that is becoming increasingly common in continental America is also an incentive, and perhaps the main incentive, in this insular Sunday-enforcement movement.
THE WAR IN THE ORIENT.
THE Japanese are industriously clearing away mines from the harbor and harbor approaches of Port Arthur. They report that mines had been laid over a radius of forty miles. Prisoners are being removed to Port Dalney and thence to Japan. Sixteen hundred Russian prisoners have already reached Nagasaki. The army of Oyama now facing Kuropatkin has been re-enforced by 368 siege guns and 33,000 men, bringing the army of Oyama up to 388,000 men with 1,254 guns. Among the trophies of war received by the Japanese at Port Arthur are 546 cannon of large and small caliber, 82,000 shells, 60 torpedoes, 30,000 bushels of powder, 35,000 rifles, 2,266,000 rounds of small ammunition, and a great amount of miscellaneous war paraphernalia.
There have been a few small attacks and counter attacks between the two armies in northern Manchuria, but no real engagement or change of positions. It is anticipated that the heavy siege guns now being taken north from Port Arthur will enable the Japanese to harass the Russian lines severely.
In Russia there is much reluctance on the part of the reservists in joining the colors. At Moscow, on January 11, 3,000 reservists started a riot which was only quelled by the regular soldiers opening fire. As a result, 200 of the reservists were killed, and the hospitals were filled with the wounded.
One of the Russian cruisers of the Baltic squadron has been compelled to return to Kronstadt, being seriously damaged. The cause of her injury is not known to the public.
Russia has notified the powers that China has broken her pledge of neutrality. This state of affairs, the Russian notification declares, will bring the country into perilous paths, and it concludes by saying that Russia now claims the right of acting in her own interests. While it is improbable that Russia will declare war against China at present, this is a notification that she will at least demand indemnity from China when the present war is concluded.
Premier Balfour of Great Britain declares that the two problems now before that country are the defense of Afghanistan and re-armament of the British army. This, he declared, would involve a cost as great as any continental power was able to bear; but it must be done for the safety of the nation.
China has cancelled a concession which was to permit a British company to construct a railway from Swatow to Chou Chou, and has granted the same to a Japanese company. This is interesting as showing the increasing influence of Japan in the affairs of China.
Riots continue in the Baku (Russia) oil fields in connection with the strike of workmen. Many great oil tanks have been burned, wells have been set on fire, and deadly clashes have occurred between rioters and police.
Former Governor Peabody of Colorado has filed notice that he will contest the election of the newly-elected governor of that state. He claims wholesale fraud in six counties, and has demanded a recount.
M. Bertillion, the inventor of the system for the measurement of criminals, has now invented an apparatus for determining accurately the size of objects represented in photographs.
A report by a New York philanthropist to the commissioner general of immigration states that there are now in New York City 100,000 idle men.
A report from Africa states that there has been a massacre in the region of the Upper Kongo, and that all whites there have been killed.
Irving B. Dudley, United States Minister to Peru, has been appointed to succeed Minister Bowen at the capital of Venezuela.
