Earlier text: FAITHFULNESSTHE THIRD ANGEL'S MESSAGE.
As before stated, the Edict of Milan, March, A. D. 313, granted “to the Christians, and to all, the free choice to follow that mode of worship which they may wish.” It decreed “that no freedom at all shall be refused to Christians to follow or to keep their observances or worship, but that to each one power be granted to devote his mind to that worship which he may think adapted to himself.” This freedom was “absolutely granted to them.” It was “also granted to others to pursue that worship and religion they wish, . . . that each may have the privilege to select and to worship whatsoever divinity he pleases.” As freedom of religion and worship, without any interference whatever on the part of the State, was thus decreed, and absolutely granted, this act was the formal surrender of the Roman imperial power to the principle announced by Jesus and maintained by his disciples through two hundred and eighty years, against all the power that the Roman empire could employ to suppress it—the principle of the total separation of religion and the State; the rendering to Cæsar only that which is Cæsar's, and to God the things that are God's. It is perfectly plain, therefore, that, at this point, upon this question, the Roman State stood exactly as the United States stood at the formation of the national government with its total and Constitutional separation of religion and the State. Here, as there, the supreme law of the State disavowed any authority in matters of religion and worship. That is the only instance of such a thing in ancient times: this of the United States is the only instance of such a thing in modern times. It is true that in that ancient instance, the principle was immediately subverted, and the good intent and proper results of that supreme law were destroyed by the apostate church being able, through the political necessity of the State, to force herself upon the State. It is likewise true that, though in this modern instance the freedom guaranteed in the supreme law of the State has continued longer than that anciently was allowed to continue, yet it is equally true that here, also, the principle has been subverted. In that ancient instance, as we have seen, the principle was subverted by interpreting into the supreme law a meaning which, on its face, was not there; and in this modern instance the principle has been subverted also, by interpreting into the supreme law a meaning, which not only on its face was not there, but which, by its positive terms, was entirely excluded. The supreme law of the United States said that “no religious test” should “ever be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the United States;” that Congress should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” and that “the government of the United States is not in any sense founded upon the Christian religion.” By an interpretation, Feb. 29, 1892, the Supreme Court of the United States declared it to be the “meaning” of the Constitution of the United States that it is “the voice of the entire” people of this nation, speaking in “organic utterances” that “this is a religious nation;” that, therefore, “this is a Christian nation;” and that “the establishment of a Christian religion was one of the purposes” of those who made the Constitution and formed the nation. As we saw in last week's study of that ancient course of procedure which made the Beast, the supreme authority of the State was shortly required to decide who were Christians, and the decision was that only those of the Catholic Church were Christians, in the eye of the State: and that next, the State was required to decide who were Catholic Christians: and it decided that only those were Catholic Christians who were in communion with the bishop of Rome. These points have not, in actual fact, been brought yet to a decision in the United States. But that things are swiftly shaping unto the point where these steps will have to be taken, is plain. And this has been in progress here ever since the Supreme Court declared this to be “a Christian nation.” In a very short time after that declaration was made by the Supreme Court of the United States, a letter from the Vatican, announcing the plans of Leo XIII respecting the United States, said that “what the Church has done in the past for others, she will now do for the United States.” Then very shortly after this announcement from the Vatican, a permanent apostolic delegate was sent from the Vatican, and established at the capital of the United States, with the assurance beforehand, under the seal of “the fisherman's ring,” that whatever he does shall be confirmed by the pope. Then, within a year from that, Sept. 5, 1893, at the World's Catholic Congress, Chicago, this same apostolic delegate—Satolli—delivered to “the Catholics of America” the following message from Leo XIII:— In the name of Leo XIII I salute the great American republic; and I call upon the Catholics of America to go forward, in one hand bearing the book of Christian truth, and in the other the Constitution of the United States. . . . Bring your fellow-countrymen, bring your country, into immediate contact with that great secret of blessedness—Christ and his church. . . . Here you have a country which will repay all effort not merely tenfold, but aye! a hundredfold. And this no one understands better than the immortal Leo. And he charges me, his delegate, to speak out to America words of hope and blessing, words of joy. Go forward! in one hand bearing the book of Christian truth,—the Bible,—and in the other the Constitution of the United States. The real secret and true inspiration of this message of the pope can be discerned from the following consideration. In the Catholic World, the representative Catholic review in this country, for the month of September, 1871, was printed a leading article, in which the Constitution of the United States was referred to in the following words:— As it is interpreted by the liberal and sectarian journals that are doing their best to revolutionize it, and is beginning to be interpreted by no small portion of the American people, or is interpreted by the Protestant principle, so widely diffused among us, . . . we do not accept it, or hold it to be any government at all, or as capable of performing any of the proper functions of government; and if it continues to be interpreted by the revolutionary principles of Protestantism, it is sure to fail. . . . Hence it is, we so often say, that if the American republic is to be sustained and preserved at all, it must be by the rejection of the principle of the Reformation, and the acceptance of the Catholic principle by the American people.—Page 736. Contrast that now with Leo's command by Satolli “to the Catholics of America” to “go forward” on their “hundredfold” rewarded mission, “bearing in one hand the book of Christian truth,—the Bible,—and in the other the Constitution of the United States;” and inquire, What has caused this change of the attitude of Rome toward the Constitution? The principle upon which the Constitution was founded in its total separation of religion from the notice of the national government, was definitely and intentionally the Protestant principle. In the discussions which led up to the making of the Constitution as it reads in this respect, and in the discussions upon the Constitution in the conventions which made it, this point was especially dealt with, and the Protestant principle was the one chosen and made the principle of the Constitution. In the documents of that time, and which are an essential part of the history of the Constitution, this was the crucial point considered; and the Protestant principle was made the principle of the Constitution. In fact, it was plainly said not only that “it is impossible for the magistrate to adjudge the right of preference among the various sects which profess the Christian faith, without erecting a claim to infallibility, which would lead us back to the Church of Rome;” but it was also said that “to judge for ourselves, and to engage in the exercise of religion agreeably to the dictates of our own consciences, is an unalienable right which, upon the principles on which the gospel was first propagated and THE REFORMATION FROM POPERY CARRIED ON, can never be transferred to another.” Therefore it is the undeniable truth of the only history on the question, that the Constitution of the United States was founded upon the Protestant principle. And while it was held so, no Catholic was ever commanded by any pope to take that Constitution in one hand and the Bible in the other for any purpose under the sun. On the contrary, they openly declared that so long as the Constitution was held to that principle, Catholics did “not accept it,” nor hold this government “to be any government at all.” But as soon as the Supreme Court of the United States had interpreted the Constitution by the papal principle,—the principle of “the establishment of the Christian religion,”—as soon as the Supreme Court thus rejected “the principle of the Reformation,” and accepted “the Catholic principle”— First, Then it was, and not till then, that there was published to the United States the purpose of Leo XIII, that what the Church has done for other nations, she will now do for the United States. Second, Then it was, and not till then, that Leo XIII, pope, sent his permanent apostolic delegate here in his name, to “call upon the Catholics of America to go forward, in one hand bearing the book of Christian truth, and in the other the Constitution of the United States,” upon their hundredfold rewarded mission to bring this “country into immediate contact with the Church” of Rome. Immediately following this, in the same month, Sept. 24, 1893, it was declared, in the Chicago World's Congress of Religions, that the United States is “a nation that shall find its perfection in Catholic Christianity.” In less than a month after that, Oct. 18, 1893, at the jubilee of Cardinal Gibbons, celebrated in Baltimore, Archbishop Ireland exclaimed:— I preach the new, the most glorious crusade. Church and age! Unite them in mind and heart, in the name of humanity, in the name of God. Church and age! . . . Monsignor Satolli, the church, and the age. Rome is the Church; America is the age. Sept. 21, 1894, Bishop Keane, on his return from Rome, announced that:— The policy of the pope, in view of the late overtures in Italy, is the union of the Church with the great democratic powers of the future—that is, America and France. This is his hope, and toward it all his remarkable energies are bent. Three days later, September 24, the newspaper dispatches stated that Bishop Keane was “the bearer of a rescript from Pope Leo XIII,” of which the import was the following:— The papal rescript elevates the United States to the first rank as a Catholic nation. Heretofore this country has stood before the church as a missionary country. It had no more recognition officially at Rome than had China. . . . By the new rescript the country is freed from the propaganda and is declared to be a Catholic country. . . . The importance, not only to Catholics, but to all citizens of the United States, of this radical change in the relations to Rome of the Church in America, can scarcely be overestimated. Much more to this same effect might be quoted; but this is enough for the present, to show the aims of Rome, and how ready she is to repeat here, and now, the very thing which she did yonder in the fourth century. And it is evident that such progress can not be much further made before a decision shall be drawn forth as to just what is the Christianity of this “Christian nation.” And this is made even the more certain just now, since the313 United States has taken possession of Cuba, Porto Rico, and the Philippines, which are solidly Catholic, and in connection with which there must inevitably arise, sooner or later, and sooner much rather than later, an issue which will call for a decision. This is peculiarly the situation, and the present prospect, in the Philippines. Bear in mind that, when such a decision shall be called forth, we do not say that the decision will be that Roman Catholicism is the Christianity of this “Christian nation.” The decision may, indeed, be in favor of Protestantism; but, which way the decision may go, is not material; for, whichever way it shall be decided, it will be in the perfect image of the making of the Beast, and will be a mighty stride in the further making of the Image of the Beast. And if there be soon no actual decision of that question, it is perfectly plain that at the past and present rate of progress of Rome in the affairs of the United States, and especially with her now great advantages through the affairs of Cuba, Porto Rico, and the Philippines, Rome will be in a position where, even without an actual decision, she can assert her claims with such advantage and power as to amount practically to a decision in her favor. In any event, therefore, it is perfectly plain that the making of the Image of the Beast is steadily progressing before the very eyes of the whole people of the United States and the world. This is plain from only this one item; but there are others equally as marked, yet to be noticed. “HOWBEIT then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto ['were in bondage to,' R. V. and Greek] them which by nature are no gods. But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain.” The Galatians, having been Gentiles, knew not God, and, accordingly, were in bondage to them which by nature were no gods at all. To them the gospel had been preached. They had believed the gospel, and so were delivered from bondage, and had received the adoption of sons of God, and were, therefore, no more bondmen, but sons; and, being sons, were heirs of God, through Christ. But the Pharisees which believed, knowing nothing of true faith and the freedom which Christ gives, had come among the Galatians, with their perverted gospel, which was not the gospel at all, had confused them, and turned them from faith to works: from the Spirit to the flesh, as the means of justification, and the hope of salvation. Gal. 3:1–3. But when the Galatians were turned from faith to works, they did not stop with the works which the Pharisees recommended and urged. Having at first been heathen, and having now been driven back from faith to works, they took up their own heathen works, as well as the works which the Pharisees recommended. Having been turned from the Spirit to the flesh, it was only to be expected that they would do this: seeing that the ways of the heathen were more satisfying to their flesh than the ways of the Pharisees could be, because these were the things to which their flesh had formerly been accustomed. This is certain from the very words of the text, in the inquiry: “But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?” The apostle had just stated that before they knew God, they were in bondage unto them which by nature are no gods, and now, having been turned from God, they turned AGAIN to those things, and AGAIN to that bondage. And, as seen in the former lesson, these elements whereunto they were formerly in bondage, and to which they were now AGAIN in bondage, were “the elements of the world,” and the only elements of the world are “the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life:” the works of the flesh—in a word—are only sin. Among these things in which they had formerly done service unto them which by nature are no gods, were the observances of certain days, and months, and times, and years: to the very things of the heathen which the Lord, even in ancient times, had condemned, as it is written: *“When thou art come into the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For all that do these things are an abomination unto the Lord: and because of these abominations the Lord thy God doth drive them out from before thee. Thou shalt be perfect ['upright, or sincere,' margin] with the Lord thy God. For these nations, which thou shalt possess, hearkened unto observers of times, and unto diviners: but as for thee, the Lord thy God hath not suffered thee to do so.”* Deut. 18:9–14. In the Galatian backsliding some of these things had entered; for the text says: “Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.” Well enough, therefore, might Paul write: “I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain.” The one great lesson in this particular phase of the experience of the Galatians, is that there is no power but that which is in the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ, that can save any man from the evil that is naturally in him: there is no half-way ground between the way of the Spirit and the way of the flesh. Every man is either in the freedom of the Spirit and of the righteousness of God, or else in the bondage of the flesh and of sin. THEY TOOK NO OIL WITH THEM.
By Uriah Smith
OUR Lord uses these words in describing the five foolish virgins, in the parable of the ten virgins, in Matt. 25 : 1–12. Of them all, he says that ten virgins went forth to meet their Lord, or “to meet the Bridegroom. And five of them were wise, and five were foolish. They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them: but the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.” These two classes represent all who have any experience in the movement shadowed forth by the parable: Five wise virgins, and five foolish ones. And the language intimates that it will be easier to be among the foolish ones than among the wise; for the cases of the foolish are first taken up, and their failures described, “They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them.” That was their failure. The wise are next described; and the only difference between the wise and the foolish, is that the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps. Here were the two classes of wise and foolish: one class with oil, the other without oil, or at least, any extra supply. There was no apparent difference between them, in outward appearance and outward profession. They looked alike, and they were both engaged in the same work; but with one class there was an inward work of grace in the heart, which the other did not have. With the wise there was real genuine heart work; a real entrance into the cause of God; a fixed determination to believe the promises of God, act upon them, and secure what he had to offer in them. With the foolish, it was all pretense and sham, a spasmodic grasping of a passing emotion, a momentary yielding to present conditions. Hence the wise anticipated contingencies to come, and prepared to meet them, determined to follow their Lord all the way, and to see the come-out of the whole matter. And when finally the issue was reached, and the conclusion was manifest, the same two classes again appear, described now in a different manner to show a different destiny; namely, “And they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.” One class is admitted, and the other is shut out. The wise virgins are received to the marriage, and the foolish are excluded therefrom. Here is the solemn lesson of the parable, for all. What was the difference between the two classes?—One was “ready,” the other was not. What is this readiness?—It is not a condition of nature. None are, or will be, ready to enter to the marriage supper of the Lamb, while they are in an unregenerate condition. It must be a work of grace, since we can not any of us make ourselves fit for the glorious presence of Christ, or the unspeakable majesty of the Father. Without holiness, which none of us can generate, no man shall see God. But with this preparation we are ready for anything; ready to live and work for the Lord, or to die, and wait in hope for the resurrection; and without this we are not ready for anything; we are living an utterly bankrupt, hopeless life. But when we have the inward work of transformation wrought in our hearts; when we are reconciled to God, by the blood of his Son; when we are regenerated and made meet for glory; when we have been anointed by the Spirit, and fitted for holy service; when we have been quickened into high and holy fellowship with God, when we delight in him more than in all else,—then we feel that we are ready to enter into his presence and enjoy his glory, in his kingdom. So, the ever-present inquiry in our minds should be, “Am I ready? or, if I have not already attained, am I pressing forward to reach the heavenly standard?” Some seem to be making no efforts at all; they make no profession; never pray, nor offer praise. Others make a profession, and go through the forms of worship; but they neither love nor trust; they have lamps, but no oil with which to keep them supplied and burning. “They that were ready went in.” Into what?—Into glory, to be forever with the Lord. 1 Thess. 4:17. And when the time comes for this move, there is no delay about it. No sooner does the Bridegroom enter upon the marriage ceremony, than those who are ready go with him in to the marriage. Love brooks no delay. The Lord has left on record his wish that his saints may be with him, to behold his glory; and to our unaccustomed eyes no scene will appear more glorious than when he takes his kingdom. It is the perfection of divine intimacy; they enter in with him. This is the glory of heaven, the crowning of its joys. We go in with Jesus, and are no more separated from him. He says himself, “Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out.” And again, “These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth.” It is an occasion of exuberant joy. They do not go in to any of the ordinary scenes even of heaven, but to the marriage of the Lamb; and a marriage is a scene of festivity and good will. No clouds of depression or sadness are allowed to overshadow such a scene. And it is an occasion not only of general joy, but of personal and individual ecstasy. It does not say that their friends and acquaintances went in; but they went in, each one for himself, into his own individual rapture. And the condition into which they enter is one which is safeguarded for eternity. The door was shut; not only shutting the wicked out, but shutting the saints in. He shutteth, and no man openeth. We do not read that this door is ever, at any time afterward, opened again. When once that door is shut, there is no second probation for any man. There is a world of meaning, little comprehended, in Peter’s declaration, “So an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.” 2 Peter 1:11. The unready are excluded. What is the cause of their unreadiness?—They had no heart-work in their service. They had the name and appearance of true virgins; they had lamps or torches, such as the true virgins had; they were the companions of true virgins for a while; they, like them, at the midnight cry, arose and trimmed their lamps; they seemed to be desirous of having as good a light as the rest; but the lack of oil soon began to show itself. They were shocked at a startling discovery: “Our lamps are going out.” Matt. 25:8, margin. They even resorted to a kind of prayer, but it was not directed to the right source; it was directed to the wise virgins: “Give us of your oil.” When told that the grace of God could not be distributed10 pro rata, but that they must go and buy for themselves, they started off in haste to buy. They were not indifferent. They were not inactive. No doubt they hastened, with all their power, to reach the merchant, and procure the oil which they lacked; and the narrative would seem to indicate that they succeeded in procuring the oil, or at least in supposing that they had, for they returned with haste and great confidence, and knocked, saying, “Lord, Lord, open to us.” And the Lord does not meet them as if their situation was the result of an ordinary piece of ill luck, or mishap; he does not treat them as if they had been all right through most of their experience, but had just then made a little mistake in coming late to the marriage. No; but he treats them as strangers; he says, “I know you not.” Their whole course in reference to Christ’s great marriage feast, with which, says one writer, “they had played the fool,” not deeming it important enough to procure a supply of oil, but going to it with empty lamps, which must inevitably go out in smoke, their lack of heart in it, and preparation for it, had so estranged them from the whole occasion and its spirit, as to render them wholly unfit for the provisions which had been made for the sincere and faithful. In Christ’s own instruction to his disciples, on the mountain, he speaks of many who will come to him in the great day, hoping to enter into the kingdom, and say, “Lord, Lord.” “Then,” he says, “will I profess unto them, I never knew you.” The trouble is, not some single contingent or fortuitous lapse from right, at the close of a long religious experience; but the vital error, the determining factor of failure, is a whole life characterized by a lack of fervor, and by insincerity. Another way in which this disposition manifested itself was that the foolish virgins put off till in the night, what should have been attended to at once and in the light of day. Think of this, you who mean to be Christians sometime, but are putting it off, and putting it off, till a more convenient season. If you have to go for oil at the close of the day, will that be a more convenient season?—No; it will be too late. Get it now. The foolish virgins were excluded. How many?—All of them; all who were not “ready.” It is no abrupt and arbitrary decision on the part of God that certain ones can not come in. It is no election or predestination that keeps them out; but they did not go in, simply because they were not “ready.” It was their own doing, their own fault. The door was shut. The righteous were shut in, as well as the wicked shut out. This separation of the two classes is final. They never are brought together again in common association; for the door is never again to be opened in such a way that the two kinds of characters can intermingle. The tares and the wheat are never again to grow together in this world. The poet Cowper tells us that when he was under conviction of sin, he dreamed that he was walking in Westminster Abbey, waiting for prayers to begin. “Presently,” he says, “I heard the minister’s voice, and hastened toward the choir. But just as I was entering, the iron gate under the organ was shut in my face, with a jar that made the Abbey ring. The noise awakened me; and a sentence of excommunication from all the churches upon earth could not have been so dreadful to me, as the interpretation which I could not avoid putting upon this dream.” The following incident shows how many try to turn aside the solemnity of this subject: A lady heard Whitefield preach on one occasion, in Scotland, upon the subject, “The Door Was Shut.” She was placed near two dashing young men, and witnessed their mirthfulness. She overheard one say to the other, in a low voice, “Well, if the door be shut, another will open.” Mr. Whitefield had not proceeded far, when he said, “It is possible that there may be some careless, trifling person here to-day, who may ward off the force of this impressive subject, by lightly saying, What matter if the door be shut, another will open.” The two young men were paralyzed, and looked at each other. Mr. Whitefield proceeded, “Yes, another will open; and I will tell you what that door will be. It will be the door of the bottomless pit; the door of hell; the door which conceals from the eyes of angels the horrors of damnation.” There is a great deal said to-day in this country, about “the open door.” There must be maintained an open door, say the leaders of the nation, if we have to fight for it. An open door to what?—Why, to China, and to every place where we wish to dispose of our merchandise; an open door for trade, that the few millionaires in this country may become billionaires. But what is this compared with the “open door” to everlasting life?—a door which will soon be shut. Who concerns himself about this greater matter? “Why do we waste on trifling cares
That life which God’s compassion spares,
While in the various range of thought,
The one thing needful is forgot?”
The door is not yet shut. Those in the parable who were unready, and did not go in, were those who took no oil with them. “Have salt in yourselves,” said Christ. Have oil in your vessels, says this parable. The only open door which should concern the people of the world to-day, is the open door to endless life in the kingdom of God; and before it is shut all who are ready will enter in. Let us be ready. U. S.