Earlier text: THE MESSAGE FOR THIS TIMEA WONDERFUL DISCOVERY.
By W. N. Glenn
ONE of the “regular contributors” of a California religious journal took a trip across the Atlantic in the early part of the summer. It seems, too, that on his arrival in Liverpool he made a discovery—a discovery so important that he records it for the benefit of his readers. Here it is:— There is five hours’ difference between here and New York, and eight hours between here and California. Thus the Sabbatarians in Oakland are at work while those here are resting, and vice versa. Is time sacred? All of which he might have learned without leaving California. He seems to think that he has found a poser for Sabbatarians; but Sabbatarians knew all of this long ago. They can tell him more,—that if he will go on further east he can find even twelve hours’ difference between a given locality and California, and the Sabbatarians there will be resting while those in Oakland are working, and vice versa. And he will find on the next day that the same thing is true of Sunday and the people who observe that day as a day of rest. If he will continue his journey around the world he will find that the seven days of the week also travel around the world in regular succession, and he will meet them everywhere he goes. The law of God is in force all around the earth, as two or three established facts will show: (1) “Sin is the transgression of the law” (1 John 3:4), and “where no law is, there is no transgression” (Rom. 4:15). (2) “All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23), which is further shown in the commission, “Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.” (3) To believe this gospel is to acknowledge sin on the part of the one who believes, and to acknowledge that one is a sinner is to acknowledge that one is a “transgressor of the law.” Faith in Christ is an acknowledgment of the justice of the condemnation of the law under which we are placed by transgression. By faith “we establish [or acknowledge] the law.” Rom. 3:31. Now the Sabbath, being a part of the law of God, must of necessity have application wherever the law exists. God knew how it would be when he instituted the Sabbath in Eden, and he is not so unreasonable as to require impossibilities. He does not require anyone to keep the Sabbath in two places at once. But he does require us to keep it wherever we are when it comes to us, without worrying about how somebody else is going to do several thousand miles distant. There is no place on the earth where people cannot keep track of the twenty-four-hour days, and know when the seventh day comes to them. God also knew when he reiterated his law at Sinai that the Jewish people would sometime be scattered throughout a good many degrees of longitude. And so it was in the various captivities and dispersions; but he made no exception as to the observance of his Sabbath according to the commandment. On the day of Pentecost there were “at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.” From that day to this there have been Jews in every part of the world, yet we have never heard of any perplexity among them on the Sabbath question. There are to-day Christians keeping the Sabbath all round the world, and they have no trouble about when the seventh day comes. A noticeable feature of the matter is that those who have settled it in their hearts to obey the commandments of the Lord are not perplexed in regard to the time, no matter where they are; it is only those who are anxious to get rid of the obligation of the Sabbath of the Lord, and espouse the more popular substitute, who see such imaginary difficulties about the time in different longitudes. “Is time sacred?” asks this East-bound traveler, with an implied sneer at the commandment. Ask the word of God; it will tell you that the time of the seventh day is holy, and it makes no exceptions as to latitude. “And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.” Gen. 2:3. Again, in Isa. 58:13, he calls it “my holy day.” That which God sanctifies is sacred, and that which he calls holy is sacred. PROHIBITION IN IOWA.
By J. O. Beard
THE FIRST EFFORT AND ITS FAILURE.
PROHIBITION in Iowa has had a checkered experience. At first the State licensed the sale of liquor. But in 1854 the Legislature passed a prohibitory law, and for three years Iowa tried prohibition. It appears that the law was quite well enforced. But in 1857 the Legislature was importuned to so modify the law as to permit the sale of ale, wine, and beer. It was claimed at that time that these were not intoxicating, and it is also reported that two or three judges, on the evidence laid before them, declared that they were not. It was further argued that to allow the sale of these "non-intoxicating" drinks would advance the cause of temperance, because they would take the place of the stronger drinks, and would, therefore, decrease the illicit sale of the latter. The Legislature changed the law so that it prohibited the sale of all alcoholic liquors, "except ale, wine, and beer." The sale of these was to be regulated(?) by a license, and anyone, to get a license, must have a good "moral" character. Of course it was found, as soon as the law was passed, that ale, wine, or beer would intoxicate. And a very little experience also showed that men of good moral character were not the kind that sold liquors, and that those who did sell them, with scarcely an exception, violated both the law and their oaths by secretly selling the stronger drinks. This continued to be the situation until 1882. It was practically local option, because the rate of license was left to be determined by the local authorities, and could be made prohibitive. The following instance is vouched for personally: In a county seat the license fee had been $500, and there was only one saloon. When the year expired, the city council raised the rate to $3,000. Then the694 saloonkeeper built just outside of the city limits. The city extended its corporation limits a mile into the country, and the saloon was closed. But in many other places the license was so low that it was practically free liquor. THE SECOND EFFORT AND ITS FAILURE.
Finally, at the demand of the people, the Legislatures of 1880 and 1882 voted to submit a prohibitory amendment. This amendment was voted on in June, 1882, the State Constitution requiring amendments to be voted on at a special election in order to make them as free as possible from political influence. The amendment prevailed by a majority of nearly 30,000. As was expected, its enemies began to fight the amendment in the courts, and a test case was soon carried to the Supreme Court. There the liquor faction was defeated at every point but one. It was clearly established in the court that the bill passed in 1892 had two words different from the one passed in 1880. It was not claimed that this change altered, or in any way obscured, the meaning of the amendment. In fact, it was a mere technicality. But on that technicality two out of three of the judges decided to declare it invalid. An amendment, to be valid, must be passed by two successive Legislatures, and then receive a majority of the votes of the people. But, contended these astute judges, the proposed amendment that was passed in 1880 was not the identical amendment that passed the second time, and was voted on by the people, for were not two words different? This decision threw the question into politics. The Republican party promptly espoused the cause of prohibition, and the Democratic party as promptly took up the opposition. The rallying cry of the latter was "personal liberty." Their position is shown by this plank from their "platform" in 1893:— We demand, in the interest of true temperance, the passage of a carefully-guarded license tax law, which shall provide for the issuance of license in towns, townships, and municipal corporations of the State, by a vote of the people of such corporations, and which shall provide that for each license an annual tax of $500 be paid into the county treasury, and such further tax as the town, township, or municipal corporation shall prescribe, the proceeds thereof to go to the use of such municipalities. And as a partial reparation for the unjust confiscation of private property caused by the prohibitory law, we favor such legislation as will permit the manufacture of spirituous and vinous liquors within the State, thereby giving to our people at least equal rights in this respect with the manufacturers of other States.—Des Moines Leader. And this from a eulogy of their candidate for governor the same year:— He has led the people of his State back to Democratic ideas on personal liberty. He is strong because he stood for opposition to all prohibitive, restrictive legislation, either in State or Federal government.—St. Louis Post-Dispatch. This is their latest official utterance. Yet, with slight changes in the wording, it is what they have said all the time. The election following the defeat of the amendment chose a Legislature almost unanimously Republican, and was made to secure prohibition. The Legislature did what it had been chosen to do—that is, it enacted a strong prohibitory law. That law, with some changes, mostly new restrictions and increased penalties, has been the Iowa prohibitory law for the last ten years. Its penalties were severe. Each sale of liquor was made a separate indictable offense, and the fines were cumulative, so they could be made very high. The law also required the court to issue a temporary injunction against the sale of liquor in a house. The penalty for violation of this injunction was a fine of not less than $300, and might be a permanent injunction. The latter meant that the sheriff would lock the door with a padlock, and keep the key until satisfactory assurance was given that only legitimate business would be carried on in the building. For a while the law was reasonably well enforced over most of the State; and associations were formed to secure evidence and conduct prosecutions in parts of the State where the people would not do that work. But there were difficulties at every step. Clubs were organized to import liquor—for the club only, but not for sale. Drug stores sold it in bottles, for medicine, of course, or in their back rooms or cellars. "Holes in the wall" (sometimes in the floor) were made, and in many other ways was the law evaded. One firm sent into the State a model of a book(?) which, when opened, disclosed a pint flask of whisky. But notwithstanding all this illicit selling, many could not get what they wanted to drink. Especially was this true in the interior of the State. The worst difficulty was in securing evidence that would convict. Drinkers refused to testify to what they drank, or of whom they bought. Prohibitionists were all "spotted" by the violators of the law, and when one of them was in sight, liquor was kept out of sight. Search warrants generally failed to yield satisfactory evidence, and many who would talk and work for a prohibitory law would give neither the time nor money necessary to enforce it. One prominent editor of this class said, "None of us like to sign an information." Yet, as was aptly replied, not "one of these men would hesitate to file an information against a man who set fire to his dwelling, who stole his horse, or committed an assault on his wife or daughter."—Correspondence of Daily Iowa Capital, September, 1893. While great difficulty was being experienced in this respect, the enemies of the law made it both disagreeable and dangerous for those who ventured to prosecute. Merchants were injured in business, slanderous tales were circulated, and assaults were made privately, and almost publicly. A friend summed up the situation quite clearly in stating his own case. He said:— I have fought the battle single handed for over four years. Professed prohibitionists would not help secure evidence nor appear as prosecutors. The last conviction I secured cost me $30 out of my own pocket. A man has to be sneaking and almost dishonest in order to get evidence that will convict. Then they egged me, stoned my house, and the insurance company canceled my "policy," because they considered the risk on my property too great for them to carry. So I was forced to give up the fight. The town where he lived had about 800 inhabitants and 4 open saloons. But they did not stop with egging and stoning. Rev. Haddock was assassinated at Sioux City; a constable in Des Moines was shot by some hidden party, while making an arrest, and the houses of Editor Mahin and two others, at Muscatine, were blown up by bombs. No one was ever punished for these outrages. Arensdorf, the murderer of Rev. Haddock, was acquitted, although the evidence against him was clear and full. But the jury, after declaring him innocent, retired to his brewery and got drunk. In the other cases the perpetrators could not be found. THE GREAT STRUGGLE.
By S. M. Cobb
IN the experience of both church and nation, throughout all the history of the past it has been demonstrated that history repeats itself. May we not look, therefore, for a repetition of past history in both our own time and nation? A repetition of evil history comes because men depart from right principles, ignore justice and reason, seek to enhance their own glory and to sustain their own cause. But this is not as God designed. He designed that not only the laws of our own beloved country, but that the laws of all nations, should be based upon the broad principles of civil and religious liberty. There are God-given rights which are granted to every individual. These principles are expressed in the Declaration of Independence, "that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights and privileges, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." There is a depth of meaning to these grand principles which but few realize. They are sacred to every lover of truth and freedom, and they have been so regarded by ancient worthies, whose lives and examples have been written out for our instruction, "upon whom the ends of the world are come." Daniel's God-given rights were restricted when cruel and unjust laws were enacted, which prohibited him from worshiping God according to the dictates of his own conscience. God gave him the right to dissent from those laws, because they were averse to the principles of religious liberty. Also in the experience of the three Hebrew worthies we see the same principles carried out; and though it cost them their lives, they could not for a moment make any compromise with that infuriated arbiter of unjust laws. Being conscious of their God-given right, they exercised that right, and persecution was the result, not because they deserved punishment, but because their manner of worship was not in harmony with the mind of the government. But there is another thought connected with their experience which I will mention because it has a parallel in our own times. The king was not only asking them to worship as he worshiped, but was interpreting his god's will to them, and commanding them to accept his interpretation independently of their own judgment. Hence their refusal. The same grand principle was also taught by Jesus himself; and because he conformed to those principles, he met opposition, and, like those already referred to, was persecuted. Jesus maintained his right to dissent, both from prohibiting his right to worship God as he chose, and from accepting their interpretation of Scripture, contrary to his conception of truth and duty. Coming down to our own times, we find ourselves very similarly situated. After a period of nearly one hundred years of uninterrupted success as a nation, we see a storm cloud gathering which threatens to leave nothing but wreck and ruin in its path. As it695 first appears, it seems to be no larger than a man's hand; but the low, distant muttering, and the rapidly increasing darkness, assure us that the storm is about to burst upon us in relentless fury. We refer to the work of the National Reform Association, which was organized in 1863, whose chief object it was to so change the Constitution of this government as to acknowledge Jesus Christ as the rightful ruler of the nation. We quote article two of their constitution:— The object of this society shall be to maintain existing Christian features in the American government, to promote needed reform in the family, the religious element in education, the oath, and public morality as affected by the liquor traffic and other kindred evils, and to secure such an amendment to the Constitution of the United States as will declare the nation's allegiance to Jesus Christ, and its acceptance of the moral laws of the Christian religion, and so indicate that this is a Christian nation, and place all the Christian laws, institutions, and usages of our government on an undeniable legal basis in the fundamental law of the land.
The official organ of this society is the Christian Statesman, established in 1867, and published in Philadelphia. This association has, in a manner worthy of a better cause, both by voice and pen, sought to promulgate the foregoing principles. But before denouncing the object of this organization, let us determine whether or not a change in the Constitution of these United States is necessary for the public good. The people of the United States ordained and established the Constitution "in order to form a perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to the people of this nation." To secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, and whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to change or abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles, and organizing its powers in such a form, as to effect the safety and happiness of the people. But has the Constitution of this government been destructive of the best interests of the people?—By no means; but for their best and highest good. Why, then, the change?—Simply to effect such a transformation in the Constitution, to use their own words, as shall "indicate that this is a Christian nation, and place all the Christian laws, institutions, and usages of our government on an undeniable legal basis in the fundamental law of the land," and thus, as a nation, acknowledge our allegiance to Jesus Christ, or, in short, to unite Church and State, a thing which has always been, and always will be, disastrous to both Church and State. Would these principles of the National Reform Association form a perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, or secure the blessings of liberty to the people of this nation? To each and every question all history will answer, No. And therefore we dissent from the measures advocated by this organization because it is our right and duty. Were this association the only one whose existence and influence militated against the broad principles incorporated in the Constitution of our own beloved country, we should have but little cause for alarm. But more recent organizations have taken steps which place them in advance of the association above referred to, in the accomplishment of the union of Church and State. Among these we may mention the Prohibition party, the Woman's Christian Temperance Union, and the American Sabbath Union, together now with the coöperation of the Roman Catholic Church. This combination is zealously laboring to unite Church and State in this country, make an image to the beast, and enforce his mark, the Sunday sabbath. It has been and is the duty of every lover of religious liberty to oppose the work and influence of these combinations, which have, for several years, been tending toward the evil thing that we see now so nearly accomplished. It was to unmask the subtle working and deceptive influence of those various organizations that the American Sentinel appeared, about eight years ago. And it has, ever since that time, stood as a faithful sentinel to oppose every wrong, and in defense of a liberty-loving people, and of American institutions. Other publications have done a similar work. In this movement will the prophecy of Rev. 13:15, 16 meet a perfect fulfillment. The cause of the persecution brought to view in the above scripture is presented in Rev. 12:17: "And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ." On the one side will be the mark of the Papacy, the false Sunday sabbath; on the other side, the Sabbath of the fourth commandment, the seventh day. This solemn work is now in process of fulfillment, and, oh, how solemn the hour! Therefore, it is the right and duty of every true Christian to dissent from all of these unjust laws and movements, because they conflict with the law of God. But by dissenting we know we are beginning the struggle that will culminate in the last great deadly conflict between truth and error. And though we see the conflict before us, we cannot, no more than could the three Hebrew worthies, make any compromise with infuriated arbiters of unjust laws. Daniel's life was so perfect before God that his enemies could find no fault in him, except concerning the law of his God. So will God's remnant people be; and it is concerning their obedience to that law that they will be persecuted. But all through their struggles his eye, that never slumbers, is upon his people. He will enable them to fight the battle until they gain the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name, and stand triumphant upon the sea of glass, having the harps of God, and singing the song of deliverance. Thus is the struggle ended, the victory is won, and God's people crowned with effulgent glory in his everlasting kingdom. Certainly it will pay, it does pay, to be on the right side. God knows what he wants us to be and to do. He will shape and use us if we will submit ourselves to him truthfully. Martin Luther calls attention to the fact that the invitation in the Psalms, "Rest in the Lord and wait patiently for him," is in the Hebrew, "Be silent to God—let him mould thee." If we are not what we ought to be, it is because we resist God's effort to make us so, and prefer our plans to his.—S. S. Times. Rejoicing Christians in the Flames
By J. R. Miller
MANY a rejoicing Christian never learned to sing till the flames kindled upon him.—J. R. Miller. "WE HAVE A LAW."
By S. B. Horton
THE record of religious persecutions in Maryland is on the increase, two more brethren being called to answer for Sunday-law violations in Church Hill. When the Third Angel's Message was first heralded in that town, God's servants were fairly well treated. But as present truth was gradually unfolded to the people and the test of loyalty to God plainly brought to the attention, a few yielded to the influence of the divine guidance, but the multitude became "grieved," because the deed of Sunday keeping was shown to be of antichristian origin. In April of this year the Sabbath keepers were organized into a church, and steps were immediately taken to erect a house of worship. The majority of the people were of opinion that our work would not stand, but expected the minister would leave soon and then the flock would scatter, etc. But they "reckoned without their host," and when the church lot was purchased and the lumber commenced to arrive, the foundation laid and the frame was being raised, their "grieving" turned to "indignation." The "church" people agreed largely that the erection of a Seventh-day Adventist Church was worse to the community than the opening of whisky shops. They finally agreed that the work must be crushed and stamped out by State law, since their gospel had no power. Inquisition methods were resorted to and a constable found who assumed the role of detective. He has been laboring night and day seeking for witnesses to betray the Sabbath keepers who exercise the God-given right to work on the first day of the week. As a result of this on June 7 R. R. Whaley was arrested for hoeing in his garden on Sunday, June 3. This was followed by the arrest on the 15th of W. G. Curlett on two counts. Other arrests will follow as fast as betrayers can be found. The Church Hill church is going through this furnace of affliction for the glory and honor of God and his truth. They are united and are seeking for that power which kept Daniel, Meshach, Shadrach, Abed-nego, Peter, James, John, Paul, Stephen, and others in the trials of persecutions. The people opposing God's work in Maryland are very bitter. Satan has so darkened their understanding that they are unreasonable in the extreme, their only cry and answer to the words of the Lord being, "We have a law, and Adventists must obey it." But the time has come when we must say, "We will not bow down to the image set up, nor receive the mark of the beast." I am forcibly impressed as never before with the words of Paul to Timothy, found in 2 Tim. 3:1-5. People who know not Christ in his fullness are rushing headlong, fighting against God, and in the end what will they have accomplished? The Sunday law is enforced only against Seventh-day Adventists; for it is well known that others violate the law. But "this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil." SUBTLETY OF SATAN.
By E. Hilliard
THE arch deceiver of the human family has had a long experience in beguiling the children of men. He has learned when one plan fails to immediately lay another with more devilish sagacity. Having been engaged in this for the uninterrupted period of nearly six thousand years, no class of men, no matter how intelligent and educated, are able of themselves to detect and escape his delusions. Our first parents, with giant minds, pure and perfect in their Eden home, were completely deceived and overcome by him, and this, too, after they had been faithfully warned of this subtle foe. Let us briefly notice how Satan profits by his failures, and also how completely he is overcome when he undertakes to measure strength and wisdom with Christ. When Paul and Barnabas were at Paphos in the Isle of Cypress, Sergius Paulus called for them and desired to hear the word of God. But Elymas the sorcerer opposed them, and tried to turn Sergius Paulus away from the faith. But Paul rebuked him sharply in the name of the Lord:— “Then Saul (who also is called Paul), filled with the Holy Ghost, set his eyes on him, and said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord? And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season. And immediately there fell on him a mist and a darkness; and he went about seeking some to lead him by the hand.” Acts 13:9-11. The powerful workings of the Lord astonished Sergius Paulus, and caused him to believe and accept the faith. Satan was defeated and cheated of his prey. His agent through whom he worked to deceive was disabled through blindness, and the cause of truth, for which Christ shed his blood, triumphed over the powers of darkness. The next time that Satan encountered Christ’s work through Paul he changed his tactics. It was when Paul was at Philippi. It appears that a damsel followed them to the house of prayer, crying:— “These men are the servants of the most high God, which show unto us the way of salvation. And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.” Acts 16:17, 18. Instead of opposing, as at Paphos, he influenced his instrument to join with the servants of God. By doing this he thought he could better deceive the people. But again Satan lost his agent, and learned that this plan was just as unsuccessful as open opposition. He could not deceive the Spirit of God. Nevertheless the arch deceiver, with determined purpose and invincible will, followed closely upon the track of this faithful apostle. When Paul was in the school of Tyrannus, God wrought special miracles by the hand of his faithful servant. The sick received handkerchiefs or aprons from the body of Paul, and their diseases departed from them, and evil spirits went out of them. Satan was losing his prey, and immediately planned to deceive the people. This time he had a much stronger force. Several of the vagabond Jews and the seven sons of Sceva engaged in the work. “Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth. And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, and chief of the priests, which did so.” Acts 19:13, 14. They were particular to mention the name of Jesus and Paul. This would cause the people to think that they were of the same faith as Paul. The evil spirits answered these sons of Sceva and said, “Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye?” The man out of whom they ordered the evil spirit leaped on them, and overcame them, so those seven sons were stripped of their clothing, and left that house naked and wounded. This time Satan went a little farther than to call Paul and his companions servants of God; he undertook to do work in harmony with Paul in the name of Jesus. But the defeat was more complete and the penalty more severe. While it is true that Satan’s power is too strong for fallen humanity, and his plans too deeply laid to be discovered by a sin-blinded mind, Christ is too wise, too powerful, and too merciful to allow him the victory over a soul that trusts in him. If we have failed—been overcome—it is because we departed from Christ, our Strength, and placed ourselves upon Satan’s ground. If we have yielded to the subtle tempter, let us not be discouraged, but renew the battle in the name of Him who so easily conquers this arch deceiver. We read the following encouraging words in “Steps to Christ”:— “We shall often have to bow down and weep at the feet of Jesus because of our shortcomings and mistakes; but we are not to be discouraged. Even if we are overcome by the enemy, we are not cast off, not forsaken and rejected of God. No; Christ is at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.” If we fall under the power of the fiendish deceiver, we need not remain there. Jesus pleads for us and will in his infinite love release us. When again set free, we should pray more fervently, believe more fully, and watch more closely. FREE THOUGHT VERSUS ORTHODOXY IN GERMANY.
IT is often charged that Free Thought, or Rationalism, is a distinguishing mark, or characteristic, of those who break away from the established church,—the church that claims to represent Christian truth in its purity. But a writer in the Evangelische Botschafter, Stuttgart, is of the opinion that the State church of Germany has left the orthodox faith; and he prophesies that the time is near when those who really believe in Christ will be forced to form free congregations. He says:— “Only people who are blinded by outward appearances can deny that Christianity—evangelical Christianity—is not advancing, but declining. Unbelief is increasing rapidly among classes, and to be silent about this fact, or to deny it, can only aggravate the evil. What the Socialists preach without shame and fear is only what has been quietly going on for a long time among classes which are altogether opposed to Socialism. The lack of religion among the Socialists is the natural harvest of unbelieving science; and, while the people of the cities fearlessly exhibit their unbelief, the country folk hide it by an outward show of adherence to the churches. “Are we wrong in blaming the State churches for this deplorable state of things? The State churches number among their members many determined enemies of Christ. They firmly oppose the sects, but admit infidels. Socialists, who often do not even care enough for the church to live in holy wedlock, are nevertheless considered worthy to be called members. Dissenters, however, are considered as without the pale of an established church. While we may not object to the rule that persons who hold dissenting views should be regarded as outsiders, yet, surely, it is only right that scoffers and infidels should be denied privileges which are not given to Christians. “Worse than this misapplied leniency is the subtle skepticism which allows so-called reformers to destroy the Christian faith under the mask of scientific research; this skepticism, which takes Christ out of the church, uses the Bible to destroy the Bible, and smothers religion, while pretending to exalt it. “Christianity must be accepted as it is, or must be rejected altogether. The very supernatural is natural to religion, and a church which attempts to do justice to infidel science and sensuous rationalism is not Christian. “Where much freedom is given to the ministers of the established church, there is an ever-increasing rationalism. This is specially the case in Switzerland and Baden, where many pastors who formerly passed as orthodox now openly declare for rationalism. In orthodox Wurtemberg the pastors are still forced to preach the Christ of the Bible; but if they did not fear the loss of their livings, many would champion rationalism. “The deluded people applaud this open secession. The secular press defends the rationalist; and if a heretic is taken to task, we hear a hue and cry about the liberty of conscience. It seems as if the church is forced to allow its fundamental doctrines to be destroyed by the very men who were appointed to guard it.”—Translated for the Literary Digest. THERE is something wrong with people who can never see any good in others. There is something wrong with the man who never takes any interest in religious matters except when it comes his turn to lead the meeting. There is something wrong with the church member who never misses a baseball game. There is something wrong with the Martha kind of woman who thinks the church would soon go to pieces if she didn't run it. There is something wrong with people who take all their troubles to class meeting. There is something wrong with people who never hear a good word said for the absent without immediately beginning to point out flaws in them. There is something wrong with the man who thinks he can be religious without letting anybody know it. There is something wrong with the man who is very noisy in meeting, and very quiet when money or sacrifice for Christian work is wanted. There is something wrong with the man who is all snarls at home, and all smiles away from home. There is something wrong with the preaching under which nobody is ever brought to repentance.—Selected.