Earlier text: Blessed Are They That MournSIN CONDEMNED IN THE FLESH.
By Ellen G. White
“God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh; that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” Satan declared that it was impossible for the sons and daughters of Adam to keep the law of God, and thus charged upon God a lack of wisdom and love. If they could not keep the law, then there was fault with the Lawgiver. Men who are under the control of Satan repeat these accusations against God, in asserting that men can not keep the law of God. Jesus humbled himself, clothing his divinity with humanity, in order that he might stand as the head and representative of the human family, and by both precept and example condemn sin in the flesh, and give the lie to Satan’s charges. He was subjected to the fiercest temptations that human nature can know, yet he sinned not; for sin is the transgression of the law. By faith he laid hold upon divinity, even as humanity may lay hold upon infinite power through him. Altho tempted upon all points even as men are tempted, he sinned not. He did not surrender his allegiance to God, as did Adam. The Pharisees accused Christ of breaking the Sabbath because he had healed a man upon the Sabbath day; but his words made it evident that he had not violated the command of God. He declared that they were ignorant both of the Scriptures and the power of God, and reminded them that if they had known what this meaneth, “I will have mercy, and not sacrifice,” they would not have condemned the guiltless. He carried their minds back to the law and to the testimony, to the words which he himself had spoken when enshrouded in the pillar of cloud, and revealed to them the principles of the law of God. He showed them that to relieve the suffering of either man or beast on the Sabbath day was in harmony with the commandment of God. He said to them: “What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the Sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out? How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath days.” He pointed them to the action of David, how when he was hungry, and they that were with him, “he entered into the house of God, and did eat the showbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests.” It was their own ignorance of the true import of the law of God that emboldened them to charge upon Christ the sin of Sabbath-breaking. Could they have found one action that violated any commandment in the Decalogue, they would have lost no time in condemning Christ. But it was because no fault could be found in him that they had to hire men to bear false witness against him. In their anxiety and determination to put him to death, they had to perjure their souls. Christ took human nature upon him, and became a debtor to do the whole law in behalf of those whom he represented. Had he failed in one jot or tittle, he would have been a transgressor of the law, and we would have had in him a sinful, unavailing offering. But he fulfilled every specification of the law, and condemned sin in the flesh; yet many ministers repeat the falsehoods of the scribes, priests, and Pharisees, and follow their example in turning the people away from the truth. God was manifested in the flesh to condemn sin in the flesh, by manifesting perfect obedience to all the law of God. Christ did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth. He corrupted not human nature, and, tho in the flesh, he transgressed not the law of God in any particular. More than this, he removed every excuse from fallen man that he could urge for a reason for not keeping the law of God. Christ was compassed with the infirmities of humanity, he was beset with the fiercest temptations, tempted on all points like as men, yet he developed a perfectly upright character. No taint of sin was found upon him. Through the victory of Christ the same advantages that he had are provided for man; for he may be a partaker of a power out of and above himself, even a partaker of the divine nature, by which he may overcome the corruption that is in the world through lust. In human nature Christ developed a perfect character. “For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behooved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succor them that are tempted.” “Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto Him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared; tho he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; and being made perfect, he became the Author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him.” The humanity of Christ is called “that holy thing.” The inspired record says of Christ, “He did no sin,” he “knew no sin,” and “in him was no sin.” He was “holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners.” He tabernacled among men. This testimony concerning Christ plainly shows that he condemned sin in the flesh. No man can say that he is hopelessly subject to the bondage of sin and Satan. Christ has assumed the responsibilities of the human race, and the sins of all that believe are charged to him. He has engaged to be liable for them. He obeyed every jot and tittle of the law, to testify before unfallen worlds, before holy angels, before the fallen world, that those who believe in him, who accept of him as their sin-offering, who rely upon him as their personal Saviour, will be advantaged by his righteousness, and become partakers of his divine nature. He testifies that through his imputed righteousness the believing soul shall obey the commandments of God. John pointed to Christ, saying, “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world!” The Son of the infinite God does not remove from man his obligation to keep all of God’s commandments. But with Christ formed within, the apostle declares, “Ye are complete in him, which is the Head of all principality and power.” All our transgressions are transferred to Christ. While he who knew no sin was made sin for us, and the sinless is accounted sinful, the righteousness of Christ is placed upon the undeserving, so that the repenting sinner is declared to be sinless before God. But if a man blinds himself to the light, and hardens his conscience, and will not acknowledge himself as a sinner lost and undone, and in need of a Saviour, his sin will remain. He does not believe in the only-begotten Son of the infinite God. Like Cain he refuses to offer to God the blood of the Son of God. He refuses to acknowledge that “God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” It is all-important that we understand the art of believing, that we individually accept the provision which has been made whereby we may have eternal life. Divine compassion was moved by the ruin of man, and God sent Christ into the world in order that his own arm might bring salvation to the human race, who were found in peril, in helplessness, and bound in captivity to Satan’s chariot car. God beheld man lost and ruined, and with no possibility of recovering himself. His intrusted capabilities and powers were perverted from their intended design, and degraded in the service of self, Satan, and sin. He saw men dropping the solemn realities of eternity from their reckoning, and, viewing the ruin to which they were hastening, divine6 (38) compassion is moved for a fallen world, and provision for their recovery is made from the limitless resources of divine love. Provision is made that those who discern their apostasy may return to their allegiance. Those who return will find the Father’s heart open to receive them, full of yearning tenderness and compassion towards them. Human agents are all too precious to God to be left without every possible effort on his part for their recovery. In the recovery of every soul, God will realize a peculiar joy. “Likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance.” It was for the recovery of the law that Christ exhibited holy integrity in the midst of universal corruption, and manifested unwavering adherence to the right when truth, equity, and righteousness were objects of popular contempt and scorn. He lived out the law of God, thus giving fullest recognition of the supreme right of God to govern and to be obeyed even in a world sunken in unbelief and making void his law. The more severely he was tried, the more faithfully did he adhere to the truth of God. This must also be our experience, and if we are partakers of Christ’s sufferings, the more surely will we be partakers of his glory. The more decided the unbelief and corruption of the world become, the more clear and conspicuous should the integrity and loyalty of the followers of Christ shine forth. The more generally apostasy prevails, the more steadfast should the children of God stand in defense of the laws of God’s government. Christ is our example. When wickedness was swelling like a roaring torrent around him, he stood like a rock. He was a true, faithful, authoritative, unbending witness for God. What a character was that of Christ! By beholding him, we shall become changed into his image, from character to character. If we would indeed be witnesses for Christ, we must behold him, work as he worked, pray as he prayed. We must fight the fight of faith, clad in the armor of Christ’s righteousness. Christ declared that he did nothing of himself, but only that which he saw his Father do. Ministers of God, study the lesson of the life of Christ. Jude describes Christians as those “that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called.” To those he gives this salutation: “Mercy unto you, and peace, and love, be multiplied. Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.” EVERY SINNER MAY BE SHARER.
By Llewellyn A. Morrison
BY LLEWELLYN A. MORRISON. [“Thou shalt have joy and gladness.”] THERE are brighter things before us
Than the brightest we have known,
For our Father will restore us,
By the largess of his throne,
Every silvery sunbeam shaded,
All the blessedness above,
Till we see—by faith unaided—
All the glory of his love. There are better times awaiting,
Where his royal mercies teem,
And where life needs no translating,
Like the phantoms of a dream;
Where the truth shall rule, and Reason
Be her messenger of grace;
Where, in every clime and season,
Virtue hath her virgin place. There are purer hearts in keeping
For the patient ones who pray
Than the purest penance, weeping,
Ever wrought in cumbered clay—
For the holiness invested
In the soul-redeeming blood
Hath all pureness manifested
Which the human hath in God. There's a fairer morning breaking
For this weary world of ours
Than the fairest dawn awaking
O’er a summer-land of flowers,
For Immanuel will banish
Evil, wrong, and sin away;
All the vice and crime will vanish
Ere that coming, perfect day. O, the sweetness of the resting
When the turbulence is past!
O, the peace, beyond molesting,
When his favors hold us fast!
Brighter! Better! Purer! Fairer!
He hath said, and it shall be:
Every sinner may be sharer
Unto all eternity. The Sacrament of Holy Orders
By I. E. Kimball
THE CREED OF CATHOLICISM. No. 3.
The Sacrament of Holy Orders.
By the sacrament of holy orders, ministers are set apart or consecrated to their respective offices. The different ranks are particularly bishops, priests, and deacons; the minor orders, doorkeepers, readers, exorcists, and acolytes. The vow of celibacy must precede holy orders; and the tonsure, or cutting off of the hair—the shaven crown—is made to show separation from the world. “St. Peter’s tonsure” was formerly made quite round the head, to resemble the Lord’s crown of thorns, and in “St. Paul’s tonsure” the whole head was shaven. Other forms have also been used. I shall in this connection consider holy orders in the light of the hierarchy of Rome. Ordination is supposed to confer the grace necessary to discharge the duties of the office. The lay priest and deacons may be mentioned first, who have charge of congregations or bodies of believers. They receive ordination from the bishop, who must be able to trace his succession through a line of bishops back to the apostles. Ordination is thought to bestow the power of God even upon an unworthy or wicked man. And even this is accepted in the Anglican Church. The “gift of truth” is supposed to come down therefore from the apostles, sometimes, of course, through very wicked men. Who can but see that the visible is to them all, and the spiritual nothing? But this will not be admitted, inasmuch as ordination confers the grace, even as baptism is supposed to take away original sin. But all sin is in the heart, and neither baptism nor ordination can save from the curse pronounced of God upon one “whose heart departeth from the living God.” All sinners are under the power and control of Satan. Of such God says, “What hast thou to do to declare my statutes, or that thou shouldest take my covenant in thy mouth?” But lineal succession through such men is of vast consequence to the Church of Rome, and such men (as even staunchest Catholic authorities will acknowledge) are found in the priesthood, who are supposed to have all authority to remit sin, and bind in heaven and earth, according to their judicial notion of authority. The weak point in this is that such a priest has the carnal mind, which is not, and verily can not be, subject to the law of God, neither can he know spiritual things, which must be spiritually discerned. See Rom. 8:7; 1 Cor. 2:14–16. So then he can not even discern the truth, and conversely can not know who are sinners. God will not smell in the assemblies of such men. Various congregations form a diocese over which a bishop presides. As the people find their head in the priest, so he is a child before the bishop, who in turn is suffragan to the archbishop, who is in charge of several dioceses, like an imperial province; metropolitans or primates come next, as national vicars, who rank above other prelates; and above all stands the pope of Rome, as the fountain from which flow the living streams to all the ends of the earth—and he a murderer and a knave and a madman, as, indeed, popes have been according to their own confession; yet the office sanctifies the man, and the pure waters flow forth from this corrupt fountain so that Christ by his power reigns through his vicar! Impossible. I must now refer to the Vatican council of 1870. It was called to proclaim the Dogma of Infallibility, which puts the capstone to papal pretensions. All future ecumenical councils were made unnecessary by the proclamation of the personal infallibility of the pope for all time. When speaking from his chair (ex cathedra), that is, in official capacity, on subjects relating to faith, morals, discipline, and government, his decrees are irreversible; and this is believed to have been the sentiment of the church all through the ages. This dogma is “the whole system in a nutshell,” as Schaff well observes. Every bishop is simply the pope’s vicar, and the priest is the bishop’s vicar. Whoever, therefore, is thrust into St. Peter’s chair, is thereby made infallible by virtue of his office and the special dispensations of Christ, not infallible in private opinions, but in public official utterances. And therefore it is that eternal damnation must come to every soul upon the earth who so much as rejects openly one of the papal bulls promulgated during eighteen hundred years of the past. But now the papal belief and system are so dressed up under the magic touch of her writers, and the glow and tinsel of her teachers, that all deformity and sin are wrapped up in what seems to stand before the world as a miracle of righteousness and grace.7 Her logic seems pure and convincing. She stands before the world professedly as the kingdom of God, with all her opponents under a Satanic spell, doomed to the pit, unless they seek her fold. Jew, Protestant, Mohammedan, heathen, belong to the kingdom of Satan, and are the enemies of the “church of Christ”(?). Now if they are correct in all this, then we are doomed, if not to torture in this world, yet surely to eternal torments in the next. And as papal infallibility is the whole thing in a nutshell, let us test this thing as best we are able in few words. Having such considerations as that popes have hurled anathemas at each other, ex cathedra; that two and three rival popes have had their sustaining factions at the same time; that councils have condemned popes as heretics; that even their own canon law makes provision for judging and deposing the pope for heresy; that popes have been deposed on the charge of despicable crimes (notably in the case of John XXIII., May 29, 1415, condemned by the Council of Constance); that the Fathers almost universally are against the dogma, and the “unanimous consent of the Fathers” would put down such pretensions—I will proceed to test it wholly by the Bible. Is passive submission all that is required to dogmatical definitions of faith? or are we required to search for the truth, to try the spirits, to detect false prophets by their life and fruits, not merely by their belief?—Certainly the latter. Are we to believe in a vicar present and a Christ absent, and defer to the vicar, when Christ says, “Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world;” and, “Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them”? Surely in this we would turn to Christ, who sups with us personally. Is it not a virtual surrender of the Spirit of truth when we ignore the Scripture, which requires to “prove all things,” and receive like machines whatever is ground out for us? Are we to conclude that, after the repeated assertions of Christ that all the church were brethren and none should be called “father” or “master,” and whosoever should so exalt himself should be abased, that they should be all taught of God, not one alone, and should be subject one to another in all humility, in the face of all this, one may be exalted as infallible over his brothers, and the care and soul of his brothers be in his keeping, yea, and he assume the very name “father,” which Christ condemned, and not only the name but the prerogative, which Christ also implied? Must I trust my soul to a man, when the Lord says, “Cursed is the man that trusteth in man?” Shall I even imagine that the gift of the Spirit, promised to one as fully and copiously as to another, must necessarily constitute us infallible? We know that difference of opinion existed amongst even the apostles. And is it not a continued gift of the Spirit to the one who “trembles at God’s word,” which gives continued discernment and power, and not a continuation of power by virtue of an official succession? When Christ spoke of Peter as “rock” upon which the church was built, we know he was good material; so were some of the other apostles likewise; but who would imagine that, although Peter was “rock” as well as his Lord, Christ meant to give a weak, pusillanimous successor of Peter the same title? Was succession at all hinted at?—It was not. Peter was to feed the Lord’s sheep; so were they all. And none can find where Peter exercised one particle of sovereignty over James or Paul or John or any of the rest. We can just as easily conceive of a carnal church wholly devilish being in deed and truth the church of God as we can conceive of a carnal pope being at the same time the vicar of Christ. The fleshly mind is not the spiritual mind, and until it is put away, none will believe in the miraculous overrulings of the Spirit in a church where naught but the carnal heart is found. “I keep my body under and bring it into subjection,” said Paul; but monstrous fiends of cruelty, and filled with fleshly passions, have posed as vicars and lords of God’s heritage. Such men God will not speak through, honor, or allow to speak in his name. Ps. 50:16. The perfecting of the church was not to be effected through the compulsory, lordly authority of one man, and he possibly a fiend, but through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, leading all into loving union. WORK FOR GOD.
By J. R. Miller, D.D.
ALL work is for God, in a certain sense. We do our business for him. We keep house for him. We drive the team, or run the engine, or keep the books, or sell the goods, or carry the mail, or sew the seams, or build the house, for him. Yet it is true that, besides what we call our week-day work, all of us have special work to do for God, our "Father's business." We are in this world for Christ. Part of our duty, in addition to our secular affairs, is to do good in the ways that our divine Master may indicate, to perform the tasks of love and service that he may allot to us. All of our busy days, for example, we are to be gentle, kindly, patient, Christly to every one whose life touches ours. In the heaviest pressure of our task-work we must never fail to do the kindness that we are called to do. We must never be too much occupied in this world's affairs to do the part of the good Samaritan, if by our path we find a wounded brother. We must get into every one of our days some work for Christ. We all remember the story of the king who counted that day lost in which some other life had not been made happier. That day is lost in a Christian's life which has no record of blessing to the world and glory to God. NEW YEAR 1895.
By Sara W. Young
Dear Father, through this coming year
I know not what shall be;
But I will trust without a fear
My future all to thee. I know not if I'll see the end
Of this fair opening year;
But I will on thy love depend,
And trust thy constant care. I know not if the friends I love
By death will severed be;
But in thy happy home above
We shall each other see. I know not if the coming days
Will bring me grief or joy,
Or if my lips shall sing thy praise
Or death my life destroy. I know not if the world will give
To me its smile or frown;
But this I know, I will receive
At last a golden crown. I know not whether grief or ill
For me may be in store;
But help me bow to thy sweet will
And I would ask no more. Now, Lord, I pray that I may be
Resigned, submissive, meek;
And, whate'er changes come to me,
Thy face help me to seek. ERRONEOUS JUDICIAL REASONING.
By W. N. Glenn
In the now famous decision of the United States Supreme Court declaring that “this is a Christian nation,” there occurs this curious piece of logic:— No purpose of action against religion can be imputed to any legislation, state or national, because this is a religious people. As a matter of fact, the reason why “no purpose of action against religion can be imputed to any legislation” is because, as a political organization, this is not a religious people. If it were a religious people, we might naturally expect purposes of action against all religions other than that upheld by the people in their governmental capacity. Even were every citizen, at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, a religious person, it is clear that that fact was not designed to enter into the purposes of the national compact. The forming of a governmental arrangement was a purely secular movement, for purely secular purposes. It matters not what was the purpose of the expedition that discovered America; it matters not what was the purpose of European governments in establishing colonies; it matters not what was the character of the governments of those colonies; it matters not even what was the character of the government under the Articles of Confederation prior to the adoption of the Constitution in 1889; this nation, this people in a national capacity, takes character from the Constitution. The Constitution clearly defines the functions of the three branches of the government—the legislative, the executive, and the judicial departments. Yet there is not one word about religious duty or purpose throughout the document. Not only so, but at the first session of Congress under this Constitution, an amendment was proposed especially emphasizing the non-religious character of the fundamental law. This amendment was sustained by the states, and provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” etc. The effect of this Supreme Court “Christian nation” opinion, if sustained by the people, is to establish the Christian religion, a consummation forbidden to Congress. Where is the force of a constitutional provision forbidding an establishment, by a law of Congress, which the Supreme Court may effect by a mere dictum? The result of such logic is law enacted by the judicial department of the government, a department whose constitutional power is limited to “cases in law and equity.” Of course this dictum has of right no legal force. The case at bar was decided, and properly decided, on legitimate grounds, and this dictum, with all the matter upon which it was based, was entirely irrelevant and superfluous. But the National Reform forces, and other agitators who would fain have it enforced as law, are doing all in their power to make the people believe that it is law, and therefore gives constitutional sanction to all manner of religious legislation. And it will, no doubt, have force in shaping legislative and judicial decisions. It will be deemed a precedent in lower courts indicating the probable decision of the Supreme Court in cases involving religious requirement, such as the observance of Sunday. It will be deemed a precedent by legislators in determining the probable status of proposed religious legislation in the event of its coming before that tribunal. The demands of religious “reform” bodies on the strength of this dictum will be legion. Already such religious forces as look upon the civil government as the servant of the church are quite dictatorial in their demands upon all grades of legislative bodies, from the town council to the national Congress; and their slogan is, “This is a Christian nation, therefore we demand” thus and so. Whoever dissents from these demands is met with the charge of setting himself above the Supreme Court, “the highest authority in the land.” But the Supreme Court is not the highest authority in the land. The highest authority is in the people, who have indicated the character of the government in the language of the Constitution, from which the Supreme Court derives its authority. The people have said (Treaty with Tripoli, 1797) that “the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion, as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity of Musselmans,” etc. And Article VI of the Constitution says: “This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land.” In the light of these facts, it is clear that the Supreme Court has given an erroneous reason why “no purpose of action against religion can be imputed to any legislation, state or national.” The reason is not “because this is a religious people.” It is because, in the language of James Madison, “There is not a shadow of right in the general government to intermeddle with religion. Its least interference with it would be a most flagrant usurpation.” It is time that the people should know that the authority of a Supreme Court decision is binding only to the extent of the case at bar and its legitimate connections. Decisions have influence as precedents in cases involving like principles, but they do not decide other cases, only as lower courts or the Supreme Court itself make them a basis of decision. It is possible for a court to reverse its own decision in subsequent cases. Such has been the case. Hence Supreme Court decisions (aside from the cases under consideration), especially mere dicta, can not properly be deemed law, although they8 often have the effect of law, because most of the common people, many lawyers, and legislators generally, treat them as law. If the people by unanimous sentiment choose to ignore any principle involved in a decision, that is, beyond the case immediately affected, there is no power to enforce it. Supreme Courts are not infallible, nor is their authority unlimited. The dictum of a court has no binding authority at all. It is simply “a judicial opinion expressed by judges on points that do not necessarily arise in the case, and are not involved in it.”—Webster. Such was the opinion of the court that “this is a Christian nation.” It was a mere dictum, a far-fetched dictum, most illogically dragged into a case involving the right of a New York church to contract with and import a pastor from England. And it is a remarkable fact that the court devoted almost as much space to the support of this extraneous opinion as it did to the actual decision of the case. And this superfluous labor produced a document and aroused a sentiment that bids fair to become the lever that will overthrow both civil and religious liberty in the United States. THE following, with the above title, from the San Francisco Examiner of January 6, needs only to be prefaced by a passage or so from Holy Writ to constitute a telling sermon on the signs of the times:— The appalling list of murders chronicled in 1894 has been surpassed by that of the year just closed. The Chicago Tribune, which collects the yearly statistics of crime in the United States, has just published the list for 1895, and the figures are enough to startle the law-abiding people of the country. The total of murders has swollen from the 9,800 of 1894 to 10,500 in 1895. The causes of slaughter are set down thus: Quarrels, 4,813; unknown, 2,466; jealousy, 1,136; liquor, 684; by highwaymen, 441; infanticide, 269; resisting arrest, 232; highwaymen killed, 159; insanity, 101; self-defense, 104; strikes, 18; outrages, 49; riots, 28. The rapid increase of murder in the United States is one of the most distressing facts in our history. The figures are worthy of deep consideration by every man who is interested in the welfare of the country and his own safety. The recorded homicides for ten years run:— 1886 .................................................... 1,449
1887 .................................................... 2,335
1888 .................................................... 2,184
1889 .................................................... 3,567
1890 .................................................... 4,290
1891 .................................................... 5,906
1892 .................................................... 6,791
1893 .................................................... 6,615
1894 .................................................... 9,800
1895 .................................................... 10,500 This awful record of slaughter, a record that shows an annual loss of life by knife and pistol equal to the loss by almost any of the great battles of history, is an indictment of our civilization. It is a record that can not be matched out of Armenia or the brutalized regions of Darkest Africa. There is no part of the civilized globe in which human life is so little regarded, and the taking of it so lightly condoned, as in the United States of America. Beside the annual murder record of 150 to 200 that is found in England, or even the 2,500 to 3,000 murders that are found in Italy, the record of the United States is a national disgrace and humiliation. The cause of this shocking state of affairs is not far to seek. No thoughtful person who considers the facts can avoid the conclusion that the outbreak of slaughter is to be charged to the manner in which the laws against murder are administered. The legal machinery for the punishment of murderers has practically broken down, the arm of justice is bound, and the man who has killed another is in less danger of punishment than the man who has stolen a purse. If we turn to the record of hangings, we find an indication of what is the matter. The number of legal hangings in 1895 to balance the 10,500 murders was just 132—the same number as was recorded in 1894. But figures can give only a faint idea of the breakdown of the machinery of the criminal law. When it is remembered that of the 132 men hanged few were receiving punishment for crimes committed in 1895, the small deterrent influence of the laws may be more justly estimated. It is hardly possible to apportion the blame for this condition of affairs. The whole administration of criminal justice, from the trial jury to the appellate court, appears to be in a conspiracy against the laws. The prosecuting officers delay the trial until the recollection of witnesses grows less positive, courts rule out testimony, jurors are reluctant to find a verdict against a murderer if he wears a good suit of clothes, and if a verdict is rendered against the criminal, an appeal to the higher court insures another year's lease of life, and perhaps a new trial, that is almost certain to bring an acquittal. How this state of affairs is to be bettered we confess we do not know. Such bodies as the Code Commission and the Legislatures of the states may profitably give time and effort to sweep away the legal snares and fill up the legal pitfalls that line the way for the officers of justice, that delay the trial and deny to the state the right to present evidence to the jury. But when jurors show an inclination to sympathize with the murderer and not with the murdered, and courts seek every opportunity to nullify the laws that have been passed against the crime, it is to be feared that a change in the written law will not avail much nor for long. Let the text come last. Says the prophet Isaiah in speaking of the time when the Redeemer is about to “come to Zion:” “And judgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off; for truth is fallen in the street, and equity can not enter. Yea, truth faileth; and he that departeth from evil maketh himself a prey; and the Lord saw it, and it displeased him that there was no judgment.” Isa. 59:14, 15. See verses 19, 20. Says the apostle Paul: “This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.” “Evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.” 2 Tim. 3:1, 13. In the days of Noah the Lord said, “The earth is filled with violence.” Gen. 6:13. Jesus said, “As the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.” Matt. 24:37. Does not the sermon fit the texts? THE POPULAR REVIVAL.
By W. N. G.
Dr. Carlos Martyn, the revivalist, is now in this city. His special line of revival effort is intimated by a press assertion that “he has been called the Dr. Parkhurst of Chicago.” Among a large class of ministers it is deemed the acme of fame to be styled a Dr. Parkhurst. Dr. Martyn’s initial discourse at the Y. M. C. A. Hall was on the subject of “American Citizenship,” followed by a sermon on “Municipal Reform.” Of his first discourse we give the following brief utterances, which taken together are quite suggestive:— “Who are the offerers of bribes?—Men of wealth, large corporations, greedy monetary institutions. Who defend such offenders?—Men whose talent has been trained in the high schools. As in chemistry, the scum floats.” “Wealth and education must join the church in the purpose to smooth its path, and instruct and inspire it with Christian motives and ideals.” These expressions bear their own comment. The desire expressed in the last paragraph is just what is coming to pass,—wealth, aristocracy, and worldly wisdom in the church, not only controlling its destinies, but also the destinies of the nations. The great “Christian Citizenship,” “National Reform” movement is fast developing “a form of godliness,” without the power thereof. The prophetic vision shows a final condition described in these words:— “Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird. For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.” Rev. 18:2, 3. The true church is thus pictured by the inspired historian, at a time when it was under the direct leadership of the Holy Spirit:— “And all that believed were together, and had all things in common; and sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.” Acts 2:44, 45. “And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul; neither said any of them that aught of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.” Chap. 4:32. The apostle Paul gives this further idea of the true church:— “Ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called; but God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and the base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to naught things that are; that no flesh should glory in his presence.” 1 Cor. 1:26–29. Thus we see the character of the revival inspired by the Holy Spirit. It is not an aim to fill up the church with the wealthy (unless they first become poor in spirit) or with the wise (unless they first come to realize that “the wisdom of men is foolishness with God”). The true revival does not develop a church seeking by political power and the influence of wealth to control the civil governments of earth; it brings out a people sanctified “through the truth,” which is the word of God (John 17:17); it develops a people who will stand in the judgment as “they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus” (Rev. 14:12). Jesus says, “If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.” Matt. 16:24. The man that follows the example of Christ and his apostles will not preach national reform, or municipal reform, or worldly citizenship, or church control of the state. He will preach “Jesus Christ and him crucified,” he will preach heart reform, individual reform, self-denial, and the salvation of souls. Instead of seeking to reform municipalities and nations, he will coöperate with the Master in the work of gathering out of the nations a people for his name. Acts 15:14. The “new song” of the redeemed will be, “Thou . . . hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation.” Rev. 5:9. W. N. G.