POWER to decide the temporal fate of individuals does not always attach to the good or to the great. This is true in all the affairs of life, but the principle is more strikingly illustrated in the higher official realm. For instances: King Saul had the power to execute eighty-five priests, besides all the inhabitants of Nob, where the priests resided, and all their cattle, because Ahimelech had befriended David when he was in need. Herod Antipas had the power to slay the Lord’s special messenger, John the Baptist, who had been sent to announce the coming of the Messiah. Pontius Pilate was permitted the power to put to death the Son of God, at whose command lay all power in heaven and earth. Herod Agrippa I had the power to behead the Apostle James, and his position would have given him the power to execute Peter also, but the angel of the Lord interfered to thwart his purpose. Emperor Nero had the power to behead the Apostle Paul, and many like examples on the part of minor magistrates in official position might be cited. But these are enough to show that the brief authority that falls to men in this world does not necessarily make them wiser or better than their fellows.
The theory of good government is that rulers are the servants of the people. This is especially recognized as the theory of republican government. But we have reached a period in the world’s history when this theory is practically reversed, and officialdom assumes a superiority over the rank and file of the population. And the principle has not only found place in national, state, and municipal government, but it has passed into all corporate bodies with which the country abounds. More and more the employee class are coming to be deemed inferior to those who are for the moment placed to direct their labors. The tendency is to caste conditions, and even to slavery.
It is this principle run to the extreme that eventually results in attempts to reverse the order, and to all manner of violence to reach that end. The disposition to destroy the property of the rich (James 5:1-6), is the direct result of oppression—which is a misuse of power. So also is the power to arise and destroy in retaliation for the injustice practised by employers. There is no more justice in this than there is in the course that provokes the strenuous resentment. The last verse cited in the above reference shows that there are some just ones who suffer by the fraud of unjust employers, but they do not resist. The words are, “Ye have condemned and killed the just; and he doth not resist you.” So it is evident that those who go to the extreme of physical resistance indicated by the prophet, would, if conditions were thereby reversed, continue a system of oppression.
Rulers, or overseers, even in the work of the Lord, are a necessity, but they are not to deem themselves, nor to be deemed by others, as superior to their fellows. The Apostle Paul writes: “We beseech you, brethren, to know them which labor among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you; and to esteem them very highly in love for their work’s sake [not for their own sake].” 1 Thess. 5:12, 13. This harmonizes with the counsel of Christ: “Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them. But so shall it not be among you; but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister; and whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all. For even the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give His life a ransom for many.” Mark 10:42-45.
INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY.
The Gospel work is a covenant of sacrifice. The Son of God made the one great essential sacrifice, giving Himself for the lost race, and every true disciple enters into that sacrifice. That consecration was one of self-denial for the salvation of men, the great purpose knowing no limitation save the “uttermost parts of the earth.” “The field is the world,” and not a little favored spot here and there. The commission of the chief Missionary to His subordinates is: “Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature.” No true missionary will rest satisfied until this purpose is accomplished. He can not follow the Master’s example and be content to stop short of a finished work.
The Lord does not send His co-workers out to traverse the world alone. His assurance is, “Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” He will not cease His efforts until the work is done, and, altho His own special work is in the heavenly sanctuary, His Spirit accompanies His disciples in their ministrations in the earth.
It was not the Lord’s purpose that a few devoted servants should bear the burden of responsibility for carrying the Gospel to the world, and the great mass of disciples devote themselves and their means to providing for themselves in this world. The word “go” applies to all, altho every one can not go into all places. Some may be able to go only a short distance, perhaps not out of their own neighborhood; but their influence may go a great deal farther. Many would be efficient laborers in foreign lands, if they had the means to go with. Others have the means, but may not otherwise be so well qualified. But in some way all working together, with a judicious union and distribution of gifts and material facilities, the field might be quickly covered. The work goes slowly because so few realize that the field is the world, and therefore feel only a limited responsibility—only a “home” responsibility, and a rather light burden for that.
In our day the evangelization of the world is easy as compared with any former period. Hardly any place is really inaccessible, and that only from a human view-point. The command to “go into all the world” implies the possibility of going in person, or by means of Gospel literature. He who gave the command to go, also gave the assurance that He had all power in heaven and in earth, and that this power was accessible to those whom He sent out. When the apostles and their contemporary missionaries went out to the then known world, they everywhere had to face not only hostile religions, but hostile civil government. The experience of the Apostle Paul led him to expect persecution everywhere. To the elders of Ephesus he said: “I go bound in the spirit unto Jerusalem, not knowing the things that shall befall me there; save that the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions abide me. But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the Gospel of the grace of God.” Acts 20:22-24. A missionary with such a spirit of8faith and persistence would find his way even to the forbidden capital of Tibet, tho he should go in chains, preaching the Gospel as a prisoner of state, and eventually losing his head.
To-day conditions are greatly changed. The great powers of earth are nominally Christian, and at present favorable to the spread of the Gospel. Moreover, the facilities for traveling, for speedy communication by mail or by telegraph, the means of printing and circulating the Gospel, the readiness of the Word of God in hundreds of different languages, and the general popularity of the Christian religion in the world, all tend to accelerate its universal proclamation. It would seem that the only thing in the way of a short work is the lack of missionary spirit on the part of those who profess to believe the Gospel—a lack of burden for souls and a want of realization of personal responsibility in the matter. The Christian is debtor to the whole world, to the extent of his ability—as estimated by the Lord—to give the Gospel a universal proclamation.
THE KINGDOM AND THE NATURAL SEED OF ABRAHAM.
IN the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it. And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God; which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god; and he brought the vessels into the treasure-house of his god.” Dan. 1:1, 2.
What a woeful history, what a terrible calamity, what a sad reversal of conditions, is set forth in those two sentences! And that, too, in the providence of God! For in this great transaction Nebuchadnezzar, the heathen king of a heathen nation, was recognized as the servant of God (Jer. 25:9). The query naturally arises, Why this utter overthrow of the once prosperous kingdom, this transference of the dominion to a heathen potentate, this apparent surrender of the Almighty to the enemy?—The answer is brief and clear, tho anomalous: It was to save His eternal purpose from eventual defeat. It was one of the vicissitudes of carrying out a vast eternal purpose through the instrumentality of fallible creatures. It was for the same purpose that He had suffered and brought about the division of the kingdom in the time of Rehoboam. His people were departing from the right way, and prosperity would simply add encouragement to their apostasy. Nothing short of severe chastisement would bring them to a realization of their fallen condition.
The warning had been given by the prophet Isaiah one hundred years before the calamity came (Isaiah 39), but reformation was only temporary, and not thorough. Again, in the days of Manasseh king of Judah, the people were made to do “worse than the heathen” (2 Chron. 33:9); and, tho there was a change in the latter part of his reign, and in the reign of Josiah, there was afterward a hopeless relapse. The word of the Lord through Jeremiah was utterly rejected. So when the Lord’s people persisted in being “worse than the heathen,” the best thing that He could do was to place His cause in the hands of heathen.
Zedekiah, the last king of Judah, “did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord his God, and humbled not himself before Jeremiah the prophet speaking from the mouth of the Lord. . . . He stiffened his neck, and hardened his heart from turning unto the Lord God of Israel.” This is always the natural result of rejecting the counsel of the Lord’s prophets. But the king was not alone in his rebellion; had it been so, the king alone would have been removed. But “all the chief of the priests, and the people, transgressed very much after all the abominations of the heathen; and polluted the house of the Lord which He had hallowed in Jerusalem.” So the holy vessels which were carried to Babylon might better be in the treasure-house of Nebuchadnezzar’s god for safe keeping, than in the temple at Jerusalem which the Lord’s own professed people were polluting with heathen mimicry.
“The Lord God of their fathers sent to them by His messengers, rising up betimes, and sending; because He had compassion on His people, and on His dwelling-place.” Thus whatever the Lord did was for the best interest of His cause, altho some things were done in His wrath. It is always worthy of note, however, that the Lord’s anger, being righteous indignation, never distorts His judgment. “The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.” Ps. 19:9. But the people of Judah “mocked the messengers of God, and despised His words, and misused His prophets, until the wrath of the Lord arose against His people, until there was no remedy [margin, no “healing”].” So the decree came from the Lord, by the mouth of the prophet Ezekiel: “And thou, profane wicked prince of Israel, whose day is come, when iniquity shall have an end, Thus saith the Lord God: Remove the diadem, and take off the crown; this shall not be the same; exalt him that is low, and abase him that is high. I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it; and it shall be no more, until He come whose right it is; and I will give it Him.” Eze. 21:25–27.
He whose right it is, is Christ. The kingdom never was restored after the captivity, and never can be restored to the literal seed; for the emphatic Word of the Lord is against it. A portion of the people returned to Jerusalem, and re-established the worship of God. But only a minority of them had faith to return when the opportunity was given by the king of Persia. So neither the city nor the temple ever attained the grandeur and influence that they might have attained had the people taken the Lord at His word, and by faith seized the opportunity set before them. In after years, when they attempted, in their own way, by rebellion under the Maccabees, to re-establish their independence, their success was but partial and temporary.
“It [the kingdom] shall be no more” until Christ, “whose right it is,” shall come to take it for Himself and people. He did not take it at His first advent, for that was not His mission. His kingdom “is not of this world” (John 18:36). His subjects are not the natural seed of Abraham (Rom. 9:6–8; Gal. 5:6; Phil. 3:3; Heb. 8:9; Rev. 5:9, 10). Moreover the natural seed again threw away their opportunity by rejecting the Messiah. In deliberate session, their official council formally condemned Him to death. When He ascended to heaven He went to receive for Himself a kingdom, and to return (Luke 19:11–28). He will receive it when His mediatorial work is done (Dan. 7:13, 14). His subjects will enter into the kingdom when He comes again, accompanied by all the holy angels (Matt. 25:31–34; John 14:1–3; 1 Thess. 4:15–17; Revelation 21). It is only in looking forward to the grand consummation that we are able to understand the purpose of God in what otherwise would appear like strange dealings with a chosen people. But His love for all the world is too great to allow those whom He has given place in His vineyard to always cumber the ground. If they will not work, they must give way to those who will. The stumbling-blocks must be taken out of the way. His great love and patience has been manifested in all generations, with all people; and it is only when they have demonstrated that no appeal will reach their obdurate hearts, that they are cut off. And, as in the case of Jerusalem of old, it is with weeping that He sees those who have had great opportunities cast them aside, and choose the way of death. His daily appeal is, “Whosoever will, let Him take the water of life freely.”
Please explain Gen. 1:26. Was it to Adam that God gave this dominion? A. W.
The man of verse 27 is the fulfilment of verse 26. The Hebrew word from which “man” is translated is adam, the same as the name of the father of the race. Gen. 2:4–6 refers to a time previous to the creation of man. Verses 7, 21, 22 is a detailed account of what is given in a brief way in Gen. 1:27. The American Revised Version has “man” in every instance in the second chapter where the common version has “Adam.” Adam was the name of our first father and of the race (Gen. 5:2); and to Adam and his descendants was the dominion given, which he lost by sin, and which will be restored through the second Adam, Christ Jesus (1 Cor. 15:45).
Was Jephthah’s daughter offered as a burnt-offering? T. B.
We do not think so. (1) Because it was unlawful for God’s people to offer human sacrifices. If a vow included that which it was unlawful to offer, a value was estimated, and the value given. Lev. 27:2–8, 11, 12. Jephthah’s vow was, “Whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, . . . shall surely be the Lord’s, or I will offer it up for a burnt-offering.” Judges 11:31, margin. As it was his daughter that met him, he could not offer her as a burnt-offering, but he could dedicate her, his only child, to the Lord as a perpetual virgin. This he did, and thus yielded all hope of having any descendants; hence his lament in verse 35; hence also her period of mourning, not because she was to be made a sacrifice, but because she was to be deprived forever of being a mother in Israel. Verses 37, 38. Then her father fulfilled his vow, and she knew no man; that is, she never married. To honor that sacrifice the daughters of Israel went four days a year to meet with and comfort her. Verse 40, margin. All depends on the understanding of his vow, and its nature. It would have been sin to have burnt his daughter. God did not want rash wrong vows fulfilled. Lev. 6:4, 5.
Our correspondent will understand Mr. Starr’s article on Judges better if he will remember that “Lehi” in Hebrew is the same as “jawbone” in English. Notice that after his slaughter Samson cast away the jawbone (Judges 15:15–17), and called the name of the place Ramath-Lehi, meaning in English, “the height of a jawbone.” Then he was sore athirst, and called upon God. In answer “God clave a hollow place that was in the jaw [margin, ‘in Lehi,’ the place where Samson stood], and there came water thereout.” The Jewish version reads, “And God clave a hollow place that was at Lechi.” See also verse 9. Similarly also Spurrell, Young, and the Revised Versions, render.
Isa. 66:15–17 seems to have been written in view of Christ’s coming and the end of the world, and would indicate that the law regarding clean and unclean meats would exist to the end, but some claim that this law was done away, citing Col. 2:16. How is this? K.
The law as given to the Jews was done away. The fact still remains that there is a distinction between beasts. This distinction is not because of some law, but it exists in the very nature of the beasts, and did before the law of Leviticus 11 was given. See of the beasts that entered the ark, Gen. 7:2. He who would have the better diet will abjure the unclean meats. He who would have the best in these days of unnatural conditions, will abstain from all flesh foods.
1537.—A Troubled Sister.
I am the only one in my family who makes a profession. My husband, and my daughter, and son-in-law, who live with us, are not Christians; consequently when I read and have worship, there is talking going on. Sometimes I feel as though I must run away—where, I do not know; for I am old and could not support myself by labor. I pray for them. I think sometimes my lot is hard, and I can not bear it. Then I think our blessed Jesus had more to bear than I do, and I am ashamed to find fault. Well, please pray for me, and if you can offer any comfort through the SIGNS, please do so. READER.
Our heart goes out to these lonely ones. We wish there were not so many. Yet the place they are in may be the very best place for them under the circumstances. But, first, it may not be this sister’s duty to read and pray in public. Do not neglect to read and pray, but do it alone with God. Matt. 6:6. Your family does not seem to have respect either for God or you, and if so you can not help them in this way; but they must see and read your life. If you feel at times you must have family worship, ask them if they are willing. Get one or all of them to read from the Bible. Do not condemn them in conversation or prayer. John 12:47. Place them before the Father, and plead that His love may win them to God. But do not force your religion upon them. If they do not wish to hear you talk, say nothing; but live Christ every day. Make Jesus your trust. “Roll thy burden upon the Lord, and He shall sustain thee.” He loves you. He suffers and bears with you now. Rest down in His arms like a little child. Isa. 46:4. Cherish sunshine; look for the blessings; sing and rejoice. “The joy of the Lord is your strength.” May God bless you and yours.
DEVOURING INSECTS.
One of the last-day evils is an increasing, and sometimes an absolutely overwhelming, number of what are frequently termed “pests,”—destructive worms, bugs, beetles, moths, locusts, etc.
Oftentimes these pests seem to be an entirely new species, but it is sooner or later discovered to be a native inhabitant of some country or section which has not been in touch with modern cultivation of the soil.
Cotton-Boll Weevil.
With the hedgehogs, woodchucks, coons, crows, and squirrels, the early agriculturist had a hard fight. But worse than all these, not excepting California’s and New Zealand’s plagues of rabbits, are the multitudinous insects. Untold millions of damage has been wrought by the locust, the grasshopper, the codlin moth, the phylloxera, the Gypsy moth, the wheat weevil, the rust, the Texas fly upon cattle, and other pests. Among the latest is the cotton-boll weevil, which threatens the entire cotton crop of America. The loss to Texas alone in 1902 from the ravages of this insect amounts to $15,000,000; in 1903 it is estimated at $25,000,000; and the total loss to date in the Lone Star State is placed at $125,000,000. A red ant has just been discovered in Panama which may sometime prove a check to this beetle. About the only hope now seems to be to plant early a cotton plant which develops quickly; and by thorough cultivation a two-thirds crop may be secured. Mr. M. J. Munn, assistant Topographer of the United States Geological Survey, who writes in the Independent, of February 18, on the “Cotton-boll Weevil Invasion,” presents a discouraging outlook to the careless, “routine” farmer, such as most of the small cotton growers are. For the sake of the cotton growers, it is hoped that the red ant will prove a success.
But these numerous “pests,” which multiply with such astonishing rapidity, and spread over the cultivated fields of civilization with such celerity, are predicted by the prophet of old as among the manifest tokens and plagues of the last days. These destructive insects are set forth in the prophecy of Joel under four different types, as among the evils which shall usher in the great day of the Lord:—
“Hear this, ye old men, and give ear, all ye inhabitants of the land. Hath this been in your days, or even in the days of your fathers? Tell ye your children of it, and let your children tell their children, and their children another generation. That which the palmer-worm hath left hath the locust eaten; and that which the locust hath left hath the canker-worm eaten; and that which the canker-worm hath left hath the caterpillar eaten.
Awake, ye drunkards, and weep; and wail, all ye drinkers of wine, because of the sweet wine; for it is cut off from your mouth. For a nation is come up upon my land, strong, and without number; his teeth are the teeth of a lion, and he hath the jaw-teeth of a lioness. He hath laid my vine waste, and barked my fig tree; he hath made it clean bare, and cast it away; the branches thereof are made white.
The field is laid waste, the land mourneth; for the grain is destroyed, the new wine is dried up, the oil languisheth. Be ye ashamed, O ye husbandmen; howl, O ye vinedressers, for the wheat and for the barley; for the harvest of the field is perished. The vine is withered, and the fig tree languisheth; the pomegranate tree, the palm tree also, and the apple tree, even all the trees of the field are withered; for joy is withered away from the sons of men.” Joel 1:2–7.
The original word from which “palmer-worm” is rendered means “devourer.” The predatory habits of the locust and its capacity to devastate and blight and consume is as well known in some parts of America as in Palestine. “Canker-worm” comes from a Hebrew word meaning “to lick up,” denoting how utterly it devours, licking up the remainder with appetite unsated. The Hebrew word from which “caterpillar” is rendered means “a ravager.” We are aware that some think these all refer to locusts or their larvae, but this is not necessarily the meaning of the terms. The name is expressive of the character rather than the kind, and they well typify the devouring insects of the last days, which, when they come in desolating swarms, in clouds, in numbers so vast as to be incomputable, are worse than any army of invasion. Vine and fig tree, pomegranate and palm and apple trees, wheat and barley, all devoured, till the land that was like the garden of God before them is like a fire-burned heath after they have passed over.
The world has forgotten God; God withdraws His restraining hand that man may know his utter powerlessness before the little insect which he crushes under his feet without knowing it. It is a time when the world, and especially God’s own people, should turn unto Him with all their heart, and with fasting and weeping and mourning, beseeching His mercy.
For all these latter-day pests, bad and troublesome as they are, are of minor importance compared with the numerous sins and iniquities prevalent on every hand, which are devastating churches, devouring character, ravaging the heart fields of Christendom, and which God’s people seem to be loath to put away.
Those who will heed God’s voice, who turn to Him, have the promise, not only of deliverance, but of restoration in all they have lost. To those who thus seek, He gives this cheering assurance: “Be glad then, ye children of Zion, and rejoice in Jehovah your God; for He giveth you the former rain for righteousness, and He causeth to come down for you the rain, the former rain and the latter rain, as at the first.” Joel 2:23, margin. In the midst of calamity, God remembers mercy.
Honesty the Exception.
The popular theory that “the world is growing better,” is popular because it flatters people, and not because it has any foundation in truth. The fact that a strictly honest man in public becomes noted on that account, and that the resistance of an easy opportunity to make gain by dishonesty is deemed remarkable, prove that such traits are exceptions rather than the rule. The universal demand for “security” from men occupying positions of financial trust, and the growing necessity for devices to prevent peculation by employees who handle money, may rightfully be taken as a general acknowledgment of a tendency to dishonest acts. But emphasis is placed on this acknowledgment by the fact that honesty on the part of a church is deemed so remarkable as to become worthy of widespread notice in the press. Note the following item clipped from the Commoner:—
According to the press despatches, the Southern Methodist Church of Hobart, Okla., has set a good example in returning an excess of fire insurance. The insurance company allowed the church $1,300 for repairs, but the church found that the repairs cost only $1,000, and returned the remaining $300. And why not? That the incident should excite attention shows the low state of public conscience. “The principles of right and wrong are easily discerned,” says Jefferson, “and require not the aid of many counselors.” That is true. It is not lack of intelligence, but lack of conscience that causes the most alarm to-day. Cheating in business, cheating in politics, and corruption of government—all spring from the same source, namely, indifference to moral obligations. The Hobart church has done well, but as “darkness brings out the stars,” so this incident is made conspicuous only by the fact that scrupulous integrity is not as common as it ought to be.
THE PAPAL “LEGATION” IN WASHINGTON.
Rome is pressing the idea of diplomatic relations with the United States Government in a most persistent manner. That persistence amounts almost to an assumption that such a condition really exists. When Francis Satolli came over from Rome the first time (1892), he was not a cardinal, but he came as a special ablegate of Pope Leo XIII. On the face of his mission was the representation of papal interests at the Columbian Exposition. But there were important controversies in the church in this country that he was to settle, and, beyond this, he was to be permanent apostolic delegate at Washington, the capital of the nation. The importance of his mission was emphasized by the assurance, under authority of “the fisherman’s ring,” that all his official acts would be confirmed by the pope.
Satolli established headquarters at Washington, which are still recognized as the “papal legation,” and the “embassy.” The apostolic delegate has been a feature of the capital ever since, the evident purpose being to become recognized eventually as an ambassador to the United States Government. During his first visit, when he came as delegate, Satolli delivered, at the Chicago World’s Catholic Congress, a message to the Catholics of America from the pope. In that message were these significant words:—
In the name of Leo XIII., I salute the great American republic; and I call upon the Catholics of America to go forward, in one hand bearing the Book of Christian truth, and in the other the Constitution of the United States. . . . Bring your fellow-countrymen, bring your country, into immediate contact with that great secret of blessedness—Christ and His church. . . . Here you have a country which will repay all effort not merely tenfold, but aye! a hundredfold. This no one understands better than the immortal Leo; and he charges me, his delegate, to speak out to America words of hope and blessing, words of joy. Go forward! in one hand bearing the Book of Christian truth—the Bible—and in the other the Constitution of the United States.
It will be observed that, while the address from which the foregoing words were taken was ostensibly to the Catholics of America, it was primarily a bid for governmental favor. The same year, and a few months later, the jubilee of Cardinal Gibbons was held in Baltimore, when Archbishop Ireland delivered an address, in which occurred these words:—
I preach the new, the most glorious crusade—church and age! Unite them in mind and heart, in the name of humanity, in the name of God. Church and age! Monsignor Satolli, the church and the age. Rome is the church; America is the age.
During the same jubilee occasion, on the following evening, the archbishop again spoke, and in course of his remarks gave further expression to the long-cherished hope of the Papacy:—
I do not know whether or not you appreciate the full value of the union you see typified here to-night—the union of the Catholic Church and America; the fraternity between the church and the non-Catholics of the nation. The vice-president of the United States comes here and takes his seat alongside the cardinal. The spirit of fraternity between church and state thus typified, is the result of the work of our American cardinal.
Eleven months later, in September, 1894, Bishop Keane having returned to Washington from a visit to Rome, an interview was published in which he was quoted as saying:—
The policy of the pope, in view of the late overtures in Italy, is the union of the church with the10great democratic powers of the future—that is, America and France. This is his hope, and toward it all his remarkable energies are bent.
A few days later, the press despatches announced that Bishop Keane was “the bearer of a rescript from Pope Leo XIII.,” in which were the following utterances:—
The papal rescript elevates the United States to the first rank as a Catholic nation. Heretofore this country has stood before the church as a missionary country. It had no more recognition officially at Rome than had China. . . . By the new rescript the country is freed from the propaganda, and is declared to be a Catholic country. . . . The importance, not only to Catholics, but to all citizens of the United States, of this radical change in the relations to Rome of the church in America, can scarcely be overestimated.
After the United States had acquired the Philippine Islands by conquest, and there was much controversy over the status of certain lands claimed by the Roman Church and held by the friars, the government proposed to buy the lands in order to settle the question. It was decided by the government that Governor Taft, of the Philippines, should visit Rome and deal directly with the pope. Altho the administration regarded the visit simply in the light of a business land deal, the pope being recognized only as the representative of the church and holder of the title, with sole power to consummate the sale, the papal authorities lost no opportunity, then or since, to make the incident appear as a really diplomatic affair. And the line between that land deal and recognized diplomacy is so fine that even many Protestants are unable to see it.
And now comes Satolli again to this country. This time he is a cardinal, and, among other things, he is to visit the Louisiana Purchase Exposition, at St. Louis. On this occasion it may be expected that further claims will be advanced in behalf of the nation’s obligation to the Roman Church. But the notices of his reception in Washington are significant, as a preface to which it is pertinent to recall the fact that on his first visit, to establish the position of apostolic delegate in Washington, a government vessel was sent out from New York to meet and greet him officially. His recent reception in the capital is in harmony with this action. The Washington Times, of June 21, 1904, gives several items that indicate progress in Rome’s great purpose. We take the following extracts from that journal:—
Cardinal Satolli at 2:30 this afternoon visited the White House and was received by the President in the Blue Room. The Rev. Father Stafford, pastor of St. Patrick’s Church, made the introductions. The President and the distinguished prelate conversed for some time, and Cardinal Satolli expressed interest in the executive mansion, and said that it afforded him much pleasure to meet the Chief Executive of the nation. Dr. Marchetti and the Rev. Father Stickney, auditor and secretary, respectively, of the papal legation, were hosts at noon to-day when Cardinal Satolli and a number of guests were entertained at luncheon at the legation in I Street northwest. Cardinal Satolli returned to his old home in Washington with apparent pleasure, and seemed to enjoy thoroughly the short time spent there. Altho the priests of the legation did not know the time of the cardinal’s arrival in Washington, it was understood that he would spend at least an hour or so at his old headquarters, and so he took luncheon there this afternoon. . . . In the middle parlor of the Arlington hotel last night, welcomed by a distinguished gathering of American citizens and dignitaries of the Catholic Church, Cardinal Satolli was the guest of Secretary of War Taft at an elaborate dinner. Cardinal Satolli attended the dinner in the Roman cardinal robes of his office. The room was decorated with cut flowers and palms. On the table were large clusters of American beauty and cardinal roses. . . . Secretary Taft made a cordial speech of welcome, which was responded to by the cardinal in happy and complimentary vein. Those present at the luncheon were: Secretary Taft, Cardinal Satolli, Archbishop Farley, of New York; General Chaffee, Mr. McCall, Charles C. Glover, Mr. Conant, Admiral Taylor, Mgr. O’Keefe, Archbishop Ireland, Secretary Moody, Admiral Dewey, Mgr. O’Connell, president of the Catholic University of America; General Sanger, the Rev. Dr. Stafford, Dr. Maurice Francis Egan, Major Ballinger, Major Porter, Chief Justice Arellano, of the Philippine Islands; and Justice Brown, of the United States Supreme Court.
Considerable effort is being made to show that the visit is purely a personal affair, and that these functions are only personal compliments, but it is safe to say that it will be a long time before any Protestant ecclesiastic, however noted, will receive such attention by government officials at the capital.
