Earlier text: SAVED BY FAMILIESTHE THIRD ANGEL'S MESSAGE.
What Is It as to Babylon the Mother?
“And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters. And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.” Rev. 14:6–8. In this quotation from the Scripture there is expressed a great principle concerning Babylon in all its phases in the Christian age. The principle is that wherever the everlasting gospel is disregarded, or its advancing light is not followed, even by those who believe it, there is a moral fall and confusion as the sure result. As we have before shown, the ancient meaning of “Babel,” from which comes “Babylon,” was “Gate of God;” and because of the pride and exaltation of those who were of this “Babel,” confusion overtook them; and that which originally meant “Gate of God,” thenceforth meant only “confusion.” Now the church is “the body of Christ” in the world; and he says: “I am the way,” “I am the door.” The church of Christ is the Lord's appointed agency through which he would call men unto himself, that they may find in him deliverance from this present evil world. The church is therefore indeed and in truth the “Gate of God” to mankind; and the faith of Jesus is that which gives access through this gate, to all the fullness of God. If, then, the church, or any part of it, should become proud and self-exalted, and thus there come a confusion of principles and relationships, it would follow that that which at first was “Gate of God” would become confusion. What, then, says the Scripture?—It tells that there would come “a falling away” from the truth of the gospel; that there would come a self-exaltation in the church, through men arising, from the very midst of her trusted ones, who would speak “perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.” 2 Thess. 2:3, 4; Acts 20:28, 30. Now the church in Rome was, in the beginning, pre-eminently a church of Christ. So entirely was this so that she was an example to the whole world; for Inspiration has declared, with thanksgiving, of her faith, that it was “spoken of throughout the whole world.” Rom. 1:8. By this great and exemplary faith that church was clothed with the beautiful garments of salvation and the robe of the Lord's, righteousness; she was endowed with the power of God and of godliness, before the eyes of all the nations. The beauty of the Lord God was upon her, and she prospered, and her renown went forth to all the world for her beauty, for it was perfect, through his comeliness, which he had put upon her. But not satisfied with the exaltation that the Lord gave, which could remain only through her own humility and purity of faith, the church grew haughty, and exalted herself. Not content with the beauty of the Lord, which he had put upon her, she prided herself upon her own beauty. Instead of trusting in him for her beauty, she trusted in herself. Not content that God alone should be glorified in her, she “glorified herself, and lived deliciously.” Trusting in herself, priding herself upon her own beauty, magnifying her own merit, and satisfied with her own sufficiency,—this was in itself to put herself in the place of God. Then it was natural enough that she should seek to draw disciples to herself, rather than to the Lord. And having so exalted herself and magnified herself, and trusting in herself, it was impossible for her to draw disciples to anybody but herself. Thus came the apostasy. And thus, instead of remaining the church of Christ in truth, manifesting to the world the mystery of God and of godliness, she became, though still professedly the church of Christ, only the manifestation to the world of the mystery of self and of selfishness, which is the very mystery of iniquity. Thus, pre-eminent in both phases of this career was the church at Rome. She was pre-eminent in faith, inasmuch that her faith was “spoken of throughout the whole world.” She was also pre-eminent in apostasy, inasmuch that this likewise has been spoken of throughout the whole world, and for nearly eighteen hundred years. There is another thought in the Scriptures, which illustrates this apostasy: In the fifth chapter of Ephesians, the apostle speaks “concerning Christ and the church,” under the figure of the marriage relation, with Christ in the place of the husband, and the church in the place of the wife. And the Word says, “The husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the Saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. . . . This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.” Verses 23–32. The relationship of the church to Christ is thus plainly shown to be the same as that of the wife to her own husband. As the husband himself, and not another man, is “the head of the wife,” so Christ himself, and not another, is “the head of the church.” Now suppose another man should propose to put himself in between a husband and his wife, to speak to her the sentiments of her husband in faith and morals, what would the loyal wife do?—Everybody knows that she would resent such an intrusion, and would promptly repudiate all such proffers. But suppose another man should not only propose to put himself in the place of the husband to the wife, but that the wife should agree to the proposal, and actually accept this other man in the place of her husband, to speak to her the sentiments of her husband in faith and morals, then what would that be but treason to her own husband, apostasy from her marriage vows, and adultery with this other man? And what kind of faith and morals have you in that case?—Everybody knows that that would be nothing but unfaithfulness and immorality. Now the Bishop of Rome claims to be, and the Church of Rome claims that he is, the head of that church. From Cardinal Gibbons we quote:— Says the Council of Florence (1439), at which also were present the bishops of the Greek and Latin Church, “We define that the Roman pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter, prince of the apostles, and the true vicar of Christ, the head of the whole church, the father and doctor of all Christians; and we declare that to him, in the person of blessed Peter, was given, by Jesus Christ our Saviour, full power to feed, rule, and govern the universal church.” The pope is here called the true vicar, or representative, of Christ in this lower kingdom of the church militant; that is, the pope is the organ of our Saviour, and speaks his sentiments in faith and morals.—“The Faith of Our Fathers,” pages 154, 155. It was the Council of Chalcedon, 451 A. D., that first addressed the Bishop of Rome as “the head, of whom we are the members.” Thus the Church of Rome claims to be “the bride of Christ.” She claims that she is “the spouse of Christ.” And yet she has accepted another man as the “representative” of her husband, as the “substitute”—vicar—for her husband, to occupy the place of her husband in his absence, to speak to her “his sentiments in faith and morals.” She not only has accepted another in the place of her husband, but she openly boasts of it, and actually proclaims it as the chiefest evidence of her faithfulness,105 her morality, and her purity. How could the unfaithfulness, the apostasy, the immorality, and the impurity of a church be more plainly shown than in this which is her boast? How could the complete abandon, the essential wantonness, the utter confusion of moral principles, of a wife, be more clearly demonstrated than in citing the confirmed fact of another man's occupying the place of her husband to her, as evidence of her faithfulness and purity? Would not such a boast, and for such a purpose, be the strongest possible evidence that that woman's native modesty and moral sense had become utterly confused? Yet by her own words this is precisely the case of the Church of Rome. She has accepted another to occupy the place of her husband to her. She constantly boasts before the world that this fact is evidence of her faithfulness, her morality, and her purity; and she insists that all the world shall fall in with her in this course, in order that they may all be faithful and moral and pure! How could she more clearly demonstrate that all true sense of faithfulness, of morality, and of purity has become completely confused in her consciousness? That a confirmed adulteress and harlot should boast of her iniquity as being the only way to righteousness, is certainly nothing else than the very mystery of iniquity itself. And such, even according to her own showing, is the Church of Rome. Yet she did not stop even there: she went on and took to herself yet other men: she committed fornication with the kings of the earth. Having lost the heavenly power, she now sought for earthly power. Having forsaken the arm of the Lord, she sought the arm of man. Having disconnected herself from the kingdom of heaven, she would now connect herself with the kingdoms of earth. Still trusting in her own beauty, and her own bedecking of herself with silk and gold and precious stones and pearls, and holding in her hand the proffer of rich gifts to any lover that would receive her immodest advances and form an alliance with her, she finally succeeded, through Constantine, in gaining imperial favor, and in forming an adulterous connection with an earthly lord. The now unholy church formed an unholy connection with the unholy state. Thus did she who had been espoused as a chaste virgin to Christ; she who had been joined in the bonds of pure and holy marriage to him who is perfect in power, in love, and purity; she who had known the blissful delights of his love,—thus did she violate her virgin vows, break her marriage ties, and become a bold and vicious harlot, and the very symbol of confusion. Accordingly the next view that is given of her is this: “I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet-colored beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet color, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication; and upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus.” Rev. 17:3–6. And that all may have the best authority, outside of the Bible, that this Babylon does refer to Rome, we set down here the statements of two standard works of the Church of Rome. One of these is by Cardinal Gibbons, and says:— “Babylon,” from which Peter addressed his first epistle, is understood by learned annotators, Protestant and Catholic, to refer to Rome.—“The Faith of Our Fathers,” page 131. The other is by the Very Rev. Joseph Faa di Bruno, D. D., Rector-General of the Pious Society of Missions, and says:— No one mistook what St. John in the Apocalypse designated under the figure of Babylon. In the end of the first general epistle of St. Peter we have these words: “The church that is in Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you: and so doth my son Mark;” in which passage the word “Babylon” must be taken to mean Rome; in fact, it is not recorded either in Holy Scripture or elsewhere that St. Peter or St. Mark had ever been to ancient Babylon in Asia; and no ancient writer has ever said10 that this letter was dated really from ancient Babylon, or that it was so understood by any one: on the contrary, it is recorded positively in the history of Eusebius (book 2, chapter 15) as having been stated by Papias, the disciple of St. John the evangelist and friend of St. Polycarp, that St. Peter, in his first epistle, which he wrote from Rome, called Rome figuratively Babylon. The same thing is asserted by St. Jerome in his book of “Illustrious Men,” when he speaks of St. Mark.—“Catholic Belief,” pages 323, 324. Now since this Babylon signifies Rome, and since it is a church—a woman—that is thus called Babylon, it follows with absolute certainty that it is the Church of Rome that is this “Babylon the mother.” AFTER the wicked are destroyed, as shown in Revelation 20, and in the previous study on this subject, “he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. . . . It is done.” “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea;” and the new Jerusalem, the holy city, having already come down from God out of heaven, and being thus upon the earth, it is written: “I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and he their God. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.” Rev. 21 : 3, 4. And thus is fulfilled the promise made of old: “For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind. But be ye glad and rejoice forever in that which I create: for, behold, I create Jerusalem a rejoicing, and her people a joy. And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in my people: and the voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her, nor the voice of crying.” Isa. 65 : 17-19. “And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honor into it. And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there.” Rev. 21 : 23-25. And there the wilderness shall be “like Eden,” and the desert as “the garden of the Lord.” “Joy and gladness shall be found therein, thanksgiving, and the voice of melody.” Isa. 51 : 3. There “the light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold, as the light of seven days.” And even “then the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed, when the Lord of hosts shall reign in mount Zion, and in Jerusalem, and before his ancients gloriously.” Isa. 30 : 26; 24 : 23. There “the inhabitant shall not say, I am sick;” for “the people that dwell therein shall be forgiven their iniquity.” Isa. 33 : 24. There the people “shall be all righteous” (Isa. 60 : 21); and “the wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them; and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose. It shall blossom abundantly, and rejoice even with joy and singing.” Isa. 35 : 1, 2. There the eyes of the blind shall have been opened, and the ears of the deaf unstopped. There the lame man shall “leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing: for in the wilderness shall waters break out, and streams in the desert.” “And the ransomed of the Lord shall return, and come to Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads: they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away.” Isa. 35 : 5, 6, 10. There all shall be so quiet and so secure that the people can dwell safely in the wilderness, and sleep in the woods. And the people, and the very places round about, shall be a blessing; yea, “there shall be showers of blessing.” Eze. 34 : 25, 26. There the very land itself shall rejoice even with joy and singing; and there, for very joy, “the mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing, and all the trees of the field shall clap their hands.” Isa. 55 : 12. There “we shall ever feel the freshness of the morning, and shall ever be far from its close.” “And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them,” are heard “saying, Blessing, and honor, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb forever and ever.” Rev. 5 : 13. “And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: and they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads. And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord giveth them light: and they shall reign forever and ever.” Rev. 22 : 3-5. “Sing, O daughter of Zion; shout, O Israel; be glad and rejoice with all the heart, O daughter of Jerusalem. The Lord hath taken away thy judgment, he hath cast out thine enemy: the King of Israel, even the Lord, is in the midst of thee: thou shalt not see evil any more. . . . The Lord thy God in the midst of thee is mighty; he will save, he will rejoice over thee with joy; he will rest in his love, he will joy over thee with singing.” “Bless the Lord, O my soul: and all that is within me, bless his holy name.” “And let all the people say, Amen” and Amen. “Wherefore then the law?” This inquiry of “the Pharisees which believed” was not limited to the law of God, although that, being the chief of all laws, was of course the principal thought in the inquiry. But from the beginning of this study of the book of Galatians we have found that there was involved not only the moral law, but also the ceremonial law—indeed all that God had given. And this, because all the service of the Pharisees was a service merely of law; since their only idea of justification was justification altogether by law, and their only idea of salvation was salvation altogether by works. Therefore with “the Pharisees which believed” this inquiry extended also to, Wherefore the Levitical law? Wherefore the sacrificial system? Wherefore the sanctuary, its ministry, and its priesthood? Wherefore circumcision? What was the use of all these, if salvation were not attained by any of them? Such was the only use they ever made of any of these things: indeed, this was the only conception that they had of them. They expected perfection by the Levitical priesthood; the same by circumcision; the same by all that was given by the Lord. Their only idea of their use was that justification, salvation, came to them in the doing of these things, BY THE DOING of them. But this was all error, and was a perversion of the true intent of all that God gave. Justification was not by any of these, nor by all of them together, any more than it was by the law of God. Justification was always by faith; and the sacrificial system, and all the services and ceremonies of the Levitical law, were only means which God gave, by which faith was expressed: the sacrifices were means of expressing faith that they already had in the great Sacrifice that God had made. And this same query, and for the same reason, is raised to-day by thousands of “Pharisees which believe,” in their enmity against the truth of the gospel. For this reason alone, “Wherefore then the law?” is a live question to-day, and always will be a live question wherever the truth of the gospel—righteousness by faith—is preached. But there is a greater reason than that, as to “Wherefore then the law?” being a live question to-day and always. It is a true and proper question always, in the inquiry after the truth as it is in Jesus. For in the whole divine economy of the times of Israel, there is precious truth, rich instruction, and glorious light, for all who would be taught of God. This was all there for the people of Israel of old; but through carnal-mindedness and its self-justification they missed it. And because Israel did thus miss it, thousands of professed believers to-day, stumbling over Israel’s failures, neglect and even reject all the great riches which Israel missed, but which were then and are now for all people. For to the people of the very last days it is written: “Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments.” Mal. 4: 4. And “the Christian who accepts the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, will look at Bible history in its true bearing. The history of the Jewish economy from beginning to end, though spoken of contemptuously, and sneered at as ‘the dark ages,’ will reveal light, and still more light, as it is studied.” “Wherefore then the law” of Levitical priesthood, sacrifice, offering, burnt offering, and offering for sin, the sanctuary and its ministry?—It was all only the divinely appointed means of expressing the faith that they already had, and that had already brought to them the righteousness of God without any deeds of any law. The Levitical priesthood was the means of expressing faith in that greater priesthood—the priesthood of the Son of God—announced in the words: “The Lord said unto my Lord, . . . Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchisedec.” Ps. 110: 1–4. The sanctuary and the services of this priesthood were but means of expressing faith in the sanctuary and the services of the priesthood that is in heaven. For, of all that system, “this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.” Heb. 8: 1, 2. And this whole story, as here outlined, is shown in the instruction given to the people, in the book of Leviticus. In Lev. 4: 13–20 it is said that when the people had sinned through ignorance, and the thing was hid from their eyes in having “done somewhat against any of the commandments of the Lord concerning things which should not be done, and are guilty; when the sin, which they have sinned against it”—against the law of God—was known, then the congregation should “offer a young bullock for the sin, and bring him before the tabernacle of the congregation.” And the elders of the congregation were to lay their hands upon the head of the bullock before the Lord, thus confessing the sin of the congregation, and laying it upon the bullock. Then the bullock must be “killed before the Lord.” And the priest that was anointed brought “of the bullock’s blood to the tabernacle of the congregation: and dipped his finger in some of the blood, and sprinkled it seven times before the Lord, even before the veil.” And he “put some of the blood upon the horns of the altar,” which was before the Lord, in the tabernacle of the congregation; and poured out “all the blood at the bottom of the altar of the burnt offering,” which was “at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.” Thus the priest made “atonement for them,” and the sin was “forgiven them.” There was the law of God, and by it the knowledge of sin, showing them guilty. Then there was the sacrifice, and the laying of the sin, in confession, upon the sacrifice as a substitute. Then there was the slaying of the sacrifice and the offering of its blood in their behalf, and by it atonement made and the forgiveness of sin to them. There was by the law the knowledge of sin, and by the gospel of sacrifice the forgiveness of sin and at-one-ment with God. But “it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.” Heb. 10: 4. Wherefore then all this law, sanctuary, service, and ceremony?—Ah! it was “a figure for the time then present,” “until the time of reformation.” But “Christ being come an high priest of good things to come by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.” Heb. 9: 9–12. And with Christ and in Christ we have this day, A. D. 1900, the substance of which all that was the10 shadow. In the heavenly temple there is the ark of his testament, in which is the testament—his law. “By the law is the knowledge of sin.” And by the gospel of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, and his priestly service, and the offering of his blood in the heavenly sanctuary, there is forgiveness of sin “to every one that believeth,” and righteousness in his being made at one with God, in Jesus Christ, who is the atonement. And the only difference between the times before Christ and these times after Christ, is that then, because Jesus had not yet come and offered himself, but was to come, faith in his coming and offering himself could be expressed only in this way; whereas, now that he has come and has offered himself a sacrifice, and has entered upon his priesthood, and “ever liveth to make intercession for” us, faith is now expressed in the bread and wine—the body and blood—representing that which has actually been offered. To offer a sacrifice now, and to have a priesthood and a priestly ministry on earth, would be to deny that Christ, the true Sacrifice, has yet been offered. Thus, there was clear use, and intelligent use, for all the laws, both moral and ceremonial, which were given to Israel. And this without any purpose or thought of any justification coming by any of them, or all of them together; but that justification comes always and only by faith. And this is “Wherefore the law?” as to the ceremonial law. And from a considerable and careful study of the subject, we are thoroughly convinced that in the book of Galatians, the book of Romans and the book of Hebrews MEET. The letter to the Galatians was written before either the letter to the Romans or that to the Hebrews. In the controversy raised by “the Pharisees which believed,” which had confused the Galatian Christians, both the moral and the ceremonial law were involved; and so both are involved in the letter to the Galatians, and the whole ground is briefly covered. Then afterward the book of Romans was written, enlarging, and dwelling wholly, upon that phase of Galatians which involves the moral law, and justification by faith; and the book of Hebrews was written, enlarging, and dwelling wholly, upon that phase of Galatians which involves the ceremonial law, and justification by faith. And we believe that as the whole subject is more, and more carefully, studied, the more it will be seen that in Galatians both Romans and Hebrews are comprehended. RULES FOR DISCIPLES.
By Uriah Smith
“Teach me thy way, O Lord, and lead me in a plain path.” “Teach me thy way, O Lord; I will walk in thy truth: unite my heart to fear thy name.” So prays David, in Ps. 27: 11 and 36: 11; and these are but samples of many petitions of this kind in the inspired record, which find an echo in the heart of every believer. The desire of the true disciple is, above everything else, to know the will of the Master, to understand his ways, and have his heart molded into harmony with the Lord’s desires and designs concerning him. To this the heart of every true believer will spontaneously answer, when he knows what it is. This is set forth by the language used in the texts quoted. Thus the passage last referred to literally reads, “Guide me, Jehovah, in thy ways; I will walk in thy truth: unite my heart to fear thy name.” “The common version,” says J. A. Alexander, D. D., “of the first verse, ‘Teach me,’ is too vague, as it fails to bring out the peculiar suitableness of the term to express the kind of teaching here specially meant. The original meaning of the Hebrew word is to point out, or to mark out, the way. According to the usage of the psalms, the way of God is here the course of his providential dealings; and his truth, the truth of his promises; to walk in which is to assent to them, or acquiesce in them, and trust them. That he may be able to do this without distraction or reserve, is the last clause. The idea of a united heart is the opposite of a double heart.” This accords with the complaint of the Lord, against his people, in Hosea 10: 2, because their “heart was divided;” and with the warning, in James 1: 6–8, against being wavering, or double-minded. “Let not that man think that he shall receive anything of the Lord.” The figure in Psalm 86 is that of directing any one by pointing the finger to indicate the way in which he should go. The verb “walk” is in the intensive form, “I will walk earnestly in thy truth;” that is, according to all that thy revealed truth shall prescribe. “Unite my heart,” combining all its powers. Help me to concentrate every thought and affection upon filial, reverential obedience. Let not my heart be divided, so that it shall be given in any measure to other objects besides thyself. “Having taught me one way, give me one heart to walk therein; for too often I feel a heart and a heart,—two natures contending,—two principles struggling for the mastery. A man of divided heart is weak; the man of one object is the man. God, who created the bands of our nature, can draw them together, tighten, strengthen, fasten them; and so braced, and inwardly knit by his uniting grace, we shall be powerful for good, but not otherwise. To fear God is both the beginning, the growth, and the maturity of wisdom; therefore should we undividedly give up to it heart and soul.”—Spurgeon. Sincerity drives but one design; and that is to please and enjoy God. And what can more establish and fix the soul in the hour of temptation than this? The reason the hypocrite is unstable in all his ways is given by the apostle: He is a double-minded man—a man of two souls in one body. All the designs of a gracious heart are united in one, and so the entire strength of his affections runs strong.—Flavel. James Russell Lowell, contrasting the weight and influence of action with mere profession and sentiment, says:— Every man feels instinctively that all the beautiful sentiments in the world weigh less than a single lovely action, and that while tenderness of feeling, and susceptibility of generous emotions, are accidents of life, permanent goodness is an achievement, and a quality of the life. The only conclusive evidence of man’s sincerity is that he gives himself for a principle. Words, money, all things else, are comparatively easy to give away; but when a man makes a gift of his daily life and practice, it is plain that the truth, whatever it may be, has taken possession of him. For that sincerity, his words gain the force and pertinency of deeds; and his money is no longer the pale drudge ’twixt man and man, but by a beautiful magic what erewhile bore the image and superscription of Cæsar, seem now to bear the image and superscription of God. It will impress the reader to notice how frequently and fully the Lord has placed in his word the instruction that will meet these aspirations of a truly converted soul for the Lord to teach him his way, and to make known to him his will. In the twelfth chapter of Romans a course of life is minutely drawn out, which if a man would strictly follow, he would not be far from a perfect man. In the thirteenth of Hebrews we find further instruction on similar topics, and its statements form interesting and profitable themes for study and meditation for those who desire to be taught the way of the Lord, and walk therein. In Heb. 13: 1 the apostle writes thus: “Let brotherly love continue.” From the use of the word “brotherly,” it is generally understood that this is an exhortation to Christians, where we look for this kind of love. It is the same word that, in 2 Peter 1: 7, is translated “brotherly kindness,” a grace placed high in the list of Christian attainments. It is a more restrictive word than the one used in Titus 3: 4, which is philanthropia, or love for mankind in general. This is philadelphia, or love of the brethren. The word “continue” implies not merely duration, but involves the idea of that which causes a thing to endure; namely, the fact that it stands fast, or is established, and rests upon a sure and firm foundation. Let this love be established and rest upon such a foundation that it will endure, and then let it ever rule in the church. “Let brotherly love continue.” If it has grown cold, take means to revive it. If it has waned away, let it be restored. For the loss of this love the whole church of Ephesus was severely reprimanded, so far as to be told that such a state of things endangered the removal of their candlestick out of its place: “Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee,” said the True Witness, “because thou hast left thy first love. . . . Repent, and do the first works.” The next duty enjoined upon Christians, in this chapter, is hospitality: “Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.” Unprincipled and designing men have of course not overlooked this verse, and have occasionally sought to impose upon the credulous, and turn it to their own selfish advantage. While this verse enjoins the grace of hospitality, it does not forbid our taking precautions against being imposed upon by hypocrites and deceivers. And some have found that they could not pose as “angels unawares,” with breath smelling of whisky, and mouths full of tobacco; for they have been reminded that angels do not go around in that condition. Well may we be surprised and startled at the exhortation of verse 3: “Remember them that are in bonds, as bound with them; and them which suffer adversity, as being yourselves also in the body.” What, Christians in bonds,—in bonds for conscience’ sake, in this age of boasted liberality and enlightenment, and in this land which plumes itself on its political and religious liberty?—Even so. And what does this show?—It shows that God knew what his people were to meet; and it shows that the human heart, unenlightened by God’s word, and unrestrained by his grace, is the same in all ages; that education and so-called culture are no bar against religious bigotry, tyranny, and oppression. And the Lord has left his people instruction what to do in the cases of those who fall under these evils: Remember them. And here they are, right in our own day, and in our own land, needing our sympathy and material help. Are we heeding the instruction of this scripture? The Revised Version, in place of the words “suffer adversity,” reads, which “are evil entreated;” and “them which are in bonds,” literally reads, “the prisoners;” all of which shows that the oppression referred to comes upon believers on account of their faith in Christ. When one member suffers, all suffer with it. We are to put ourselves in the place of our persecuted brethren, and then do to them as we would wish to be done by, in like circumstances. In verse 5 we have instruction that covers the whole life: “Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee. So that we may boldly say, The Lord is my helper, and I will not fear what man can do unto me.” The word “conversation” means the whole manner of life, or course of action. Henry Cowles, D. D., remarks, on the use of this word:107 “The word ‘conversation,’ as used in our version, illustrates the instability of language. The translators seem to have had special partiality for this word, using it once (in this verse) for the Greek tropos, manner; thirteen times for the Greek anastrophe, mode of life; twice, in Philippians, for polis, citizenship and its compounds. They did not foresee that, within two and a half centuries, it would lose every one of these meanings, and settle down into a sense quite remote from any of them.” “Without covetousness.” When the apostle warns us of the perils of the last days, he names covetousness as the overmastering sin of the age: “For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous.” This is only another phase of this same self-love. It is this which is heaping up the massive money accumulations of these days, threatening human society with irretrievable ruin. It is this which leads to so much individual crime, and even to national war and revolution. If there is any one thing the Christian should keep clear from the taint of, that thing is covetousness. And why should we not keep clear of it, when God, the financial center of all the universe, says, “I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee”? And this promise rests on the strength of five negatives, every one of which, in the Greek, strengthens, instead of nullifying, those that stand before. Literally this promise would read, “I will not, not, leave thee; I will not, not, not, forsake thee.” With such a promise as this, well may the apostle tell us to say, boldly, “The Lord is my helper; and I will not fear what man can do unto me.” U. S. China Trade and Treatment of Chinese
At a dinner in Philadelphia, January 26, the Chinese minister to the United States in a very plain and gentlemanly way, and in faultless English, gave notice to the United States that if she wants successful trade in China, she must give better treatment to the Chinese who are within the jurisdiction of the United States. Here is what he said:— If you want our trade, it is necessary for you to study our requirements. It will not do for you to dump your surplus upon China irrespective of their quality. If you do that, then you will rue the venture. There is another hint I may with propriety give to you. That is to be a little civil and polite in your dealings with us. Remember that our notions of etiquette, and, in fact, of everything else, are different from yours. Civility goes a long way, and also remember, in dealing with Chinese, that great saying of President Lincoln, that “you can not fool all the people all the time.” Moreover, if you want to secure a large share of the China trade, a great deal will depend upon your treatment of my countrymen, not only in this country, but especially in your newly acquired colonies. It is my duty to warn you that your efforts to get our trade will be frustrated by unjust treatment of the Chinese, either here or in the Philippines. I am not going to say that my government will take retaliative measures for any such unfair treatment; but I do say that if you want to secure our patronage, you must be fair to my countrymen. You must give and take. You must not take everything and give nothing. If you expect us to give you our custom, you should not preclude the Chinese from coming here. I do not anticipate it, but it is within the range of possibility that some of my countrymen, in view of the severe enforcement of the Chinese Exclusion law, may boycott American goods, but I hope that this will never occur.