It is a significant comment on the vanity of human wishes and the futility of earthly endeavor, that while the nominal head of the Roman Church is repining at the loss of his temporal office in the states of the church, the Romish “mission” in this country almost equals in wealth and surpasses in vigor, the original parent. Some recent statistics prove that the Roman Catholic denomination is steadily evangelizing in all parts of the country. The roving red men, as the protégé of the Amendments are in turn the subjects of this all-conquering zeal, and in time the religious balance of power will be wholly in the hands of this creed. Whatever effect schisms may have in the church itself, it is evident that the material prosperity is increasing rapidly.
From a review of the statistics, it is shown that the growth is permanent and regular, unvaried by the accidents that mar or impede other callings. It appears that there are 128 monasteries and 300 nunneries in the United States. This, however, does not include the various colleges, the so-called “academies” and select schools. New York City, of course, presents a strong array of Catholic institutions. Of churches and chapels there are 145, in which no less than 229 priests officiate. There are also twelve convents, twelve select schools, twelve academies and eight monasteries. The Archdiocese of Baltimore is as strong in the quality of its institutions as in New York, if not equaling the latter city in number. Besides a host of convents, are several colleges and young ladies’ seminaries, the latter chiefly attended by the wealthier classes. There are some forty or fifty pay and free schools, under the care of different orders, who also sustain no less than thirteen orphan asylums and several hospitals. Baltimore has now a Catholic university, the seminary of St. Sulpice having been raised to this rank by the Holy See, and is given the power of conferring degrees upon such students and members of the reverend clergy as are duly qualified.
The next Archdiocese in importance is that of Cincinnati, which has eight convents, 152 churches, eighteen chapels and sixty stations, upon which 145 priests attend in various capacities. New Orleans, so long a stronghold of Rome, has not decreased in strength, and now numbers 104 churches and chapels, sixteen hospitals and orphan asylums, and fourteen convents. There are 153 priests connected with this Archdiocese. San Francisco has 104 churches and chapels, with ninety-two priests officiating. Chicago has 220 churches, six convents and twenty-two “academies for young ladies.” With the exception of Cleveland, which has 160 churches, the smaller cities do not present a very large number of either churches or chapels. However, it is not so much in the strength or number of the former that Romanism relies. The convents—under which name are included both male and female religious houses—constitute the bulwarks of the church. It would at first seem that the older towns and cities would contain the greater portion of their institutions. Indeed, it is the popular idea that Romanism is principally confined to the great cities. But it has kept pace with, and even advanced ahead of, the march of civilization. In the North-west, where as yet nature’s quiet is hardly unbroken, some of the numerous orders are already well established. Stretching farther westward, we find a “Benedictine Priory” in Kansas, and a “Mercy Hospital” in Nebraska. Then, connecting as it were the West with the South, is another link in the Romish chain, of Galveston—the “Convent of the Incarnate Word.” Continuing on to the Mississippi, a curious illustration of a characteristic of the Romish Church—its readiness to maintain full control of secular affairs by methods not compelling the abandonment of its doctrines—is found at Natchez in the “St. Stanislaus Commercial College.” Again to the southward, the chain continues unbroken to the Gulf, passing along which it stretches out to that ancient town whose name commemorates a powerful and time-honored order of monks—St. Augustine.
This is, however, but the outer cordon of the network of the Romish organization. An inner one is woven and interwoven among the cities of nearly every State from the Gulf to the “North woods,” and from the Eastern seaboard to the Pacific, the lines are extending neither slowly nor with uncertain progress. Several curious features are presented in this record of the Catholic Church in America. Prominent among these are the institutions themselves and their management. Under the names of convents, monasteries, priories, abbeys and orders, these institutions are known, though not by any means indicating their real character and object. The only avowed order of Jesuits is at Cleveland, where flourishes the “Convent of the Jesuit Fathers.” That the various “orders” are in most respects similar to the last named, there seems to be but little doubt. The almost unwavering success of Romanism, in this country at least, seems to be due perhaps more to principles than to men. Or, rather, it might be said, more to women, for to them no religious or other organization presents so large a field for legitimate work. In nearly every institution of the church, the women are appointed to responsible positions. It is generally deemed that Catholicism has something inherent in it which causes womankind to embrace its doctrines so readily. But it seems not unlikely that it may be due more to the wise principle which makes them active co-workers. Be this as it may, the fact is too plain for denial that the success of the Romish Church in this Protestant land (?) certainly arises from its broad management rather than the secret workings of craft orders.—Indianapolis Sentinel.
From the foregoing we may learn something, of the power of Catholicism in this country. As it is a characteristic of the Romish church or of the papacy to maintain full control of secular affairs, and that, too, by methods not compelling an abandonment of its doctrines, may we not learn from this fact, and from the possibility that the religious balance of power may yet be in the hands of this creed, that although Protestantism alone should not succeed in effecting a union of church and State, there is a power behind which will no doubt unite with them in making a Sunday law, or in upholding one of its own institutions? Should Protestantism finally oppose the union of church and State, and the measure be brought about by the “religious balance of power” of Catholicism, it would seem to be no less a fulfillment of the prophecy, for it would not be the same beast but another as it would be a union with a republican government, whereas the former beast was composed of a union of the papacy, or of the Romish church, with the Roman civil government.
We can therefore see what an array of evidence there is that the prophecy will be fulfilled. The image will surely be made; for it is the sure word of prophecy. Rev. 11: 11–18. Wm. Penniman.
LEGS
By J. W. Bozeman
THERE is a very pressing and important qualification in candidates for the gospel ministry, that we must no longer neglect. I refer to good legs. The idea is occasionally advanced that brains are necessary in a preacher. They are, doubtless, of some importance. When, however, we consider the quantity of leg work that is demanded of pastors, we find that good legs are a sine qua non in this office. One might say that ministers must have knowledge. Well, yes, but prophecy says that knowledge shall run to and fro. The churches require their pastors to fulfill that prophecy as to the matter of running to and fro to dispense their knowledge. To go from house to house, gadding around daily, if not hourly, that is the work demanded of them. What need of brains, when it is work of legs that is wanted? What use to spend time in laziness, cultivating their minds and studying the word of God, when it is action, and that of the pedal extremities, that is a “felt want” among all the members of our churches? Pastors can flatter the pride of so many more people and make themselves so much more popular, by frequently calling on their flocks in detail and bestowing welcome compliments. It shows such vim, too, in the preachers, and proves them to be earnest workers, live men, deeply interested in their charge. On every side we hear churches saying: “We want pastors who will go around and see the people.” The idea of what constitutes a pastor seems to be the number of visits he can make. It is admitted that to be a preacher, a man must have brains; but to be a pastor, a man must have legs. The cry is not for preachers; but for pastors, live men, who can walk from house to house rapidly, and keep it up all the time. This is mainly, if not solely, a leg exercise. It is the work craved and demanded. It is the mark of “a live man.” To perform it, a preacher must have legs.
I do wish I could emphasize the importance, the imperative necessity of this qualification. Let me give an illustration: A large aristocratic family of Baptists moved into a new town and took up their abode. The pastor did not scent their presence on the breeze, as he ought to have done, and haste with flying feet to pay them his respects. But alas! the Rev. Mr. Shanks, of the Methodist church, being informed of their arrival, did outrun him to that home, and solicited the children for his Sunday-school. Young Dr. Golightly, the Presbyterian minister, had sped there too, ahead of him, and had won their hearts. Dr. Speedwell, rector of the Episcopal church, had visited them already more than once, and had accidentally left his prayer-book in their parlor. At last, as early as propriety demanded, Eld. Head, deliberate and dignified as ever, reached that threshold and met Father Levides, the Catholic priest, just bidding them adieu—most blandly smiling, and most graciously bestowing his blessings and compliments in richest profusion. The family deported themselves decidedly cool toward Eld. Head, who they said had so grievously neglected them. They soon drifted away into other congregations. Who cannot see that they were lost to the Baptists for lack of legs—swift and obsequious legs, on the part of the pastor? What are brains in such a contest? Eld. Head had brains, character, experience, learning, dignity, eloquence, and piety, but he was not swift of foot. There was the defect. Legs are worth all the rest. Things, you see, have changed since Solomon’s day, and now the race is to the swift.
Oh for preachers with legs, swift legs and glib tongues, to win the people and hold them for the truth. Brethren, look out among you numerous men of good legs, that we may set them over this matter. Let that be the point most closely scrutinized when a man is about to offer for the ministry. Are his legs trim, supple, agile, durable? Apply the sense of touch; rub these all-important members; lift them; test their speed and endurance, and see if they can outrun those of their rivals. Never forget that the churches are calling, nay, crying and beseeching for pastors—men who can go with dispatch from house to house, brains or no brains. The demand is for men with legs to do leg work in the ministry. Heed it. Verbum sat. Text for ordination sermon: “Run, speak to this young man.” Zech. 2:4. “So they ran both together; and the other disciple did outrun Peter.” John 20:4. “Then Ahimaaz ran by the way of the plain, and overran Cushi.” 2 Sam. 18:23.—J. W. Bozeman, in Baptist Record.
THE CHRISTMAS TREE AGAIN.
By J. P. LOGAN
Its introduction and use in our church, by some is opposed, while by others it is defended. Head-quarters defend; while some of the laity—at least one—who might be styled “the weak brother,” is opposed to, and sorry for, its introduction among us. Might it not be well for those who are “strong,” and who also have “knowledge,” to do and say concerning the Christmas tree, as the apostle did in the case of eating meat offered to idols? And also for the same reason. See 1 Cor. 8 : 7–13.
“It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.” Rom. 14 : 21. As the words “any thing” are in the text, may it not be properly applied to the Christmas tree?
Might it not be well for our leaders to unite with the apostle in saying, “We that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves” (Rom. 15 : 1) in the case of the Christmas tree? And especially as its disuse would injure no one, while its use does hurt the weak?
“‘But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat,’—Or, if you please, thy Christmas tree,—“now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat,”—or thy Christmas tree—“for whom Christ died.” Rom. 14 : 15. J. P. LOGAN.
DATE OF CHRISTIAN ERA.
Please answer question 18 on page 156, Bible Lessons for Youth, through the REVIEW. Reference is made to the article on Christian Era in REVIEW, Vol. 35, p. 80, which we do not have. W. A. T.
The question reads as follows:— “But how could the baptism of Christ have taken place in A. D. 27, when he is said to have been about thirty years of age at the time of his baptism? (Luke 3:23.) Ans. Because the Christian era, called A. D., commences when Christ was about four years old. See article on “Christian Era,” in REVIEW, vol. 35, p. 80.”
The article referred to in the REVIEW is the following:—
A correspondent says: “Please explain that statement in the pamphlet entitled, Prophecy of Daniel, which says that Christ was anointed A. D. 27, being about 30 years old. I always understood that he was 30 years old A. D. 30.”
The difficulty of our correspondent lies in the fact of his supposing that the year A. D. 1 coincides with the birth of Christ. This, however, is not the case. The Christian era was the invention of Dionysius Exiguus, A. D. 532. The era did not begin to be used much till A. D. 730, and did not come into general use till A. D. 1141. Dionysius, from the best evidence he could obtain, placed our Lord’s nativity in the year 753 of the Roman era, at that time in use. It has since been ascertained that Christ was born about four years previous to this date. But as it makes no material difference in the reckoning of time, the point fixed by Dionysius has never been disturbed. Thus in taking a certain number of years B. C. and a certain number A. D. adding them together, we get the exact number of years between the two points, although the birth of Christ is not within about four years of the line which separates the two divisions. It will thus be seen that this does not in the least affect the accuracy of chronological reckoning.
THE DEVIL'S VANTAGE GROUND.
By L. A. CARTWRIGHT
Conversing lately with a person of mature years who never had made a profession of religion, he excused himself by saying that he never would profess religion till he could live it. He went to meeting steady, and heard professors tell how they were determined to live. But they did not do it. Some would shave every penny and take all the advantage they could within the limits of the law. And most every one had rather go to a place of amusement than to a prayer-meeting. He had lost confidence. Those who were so anxious about his soul in the revival, did not seem to care in the least about it now; for now they invited him to play instead of praying. And if they could not live religion it was no use for him to try. “You are all on the devil’s vantage ground,”
The interview closed with an effort to make him feel his own accountability and an appeal to the perfect example of Christ. But sad and bitter was the reflection, and painfully true, that every inconsistent professor of religion is on “the devil’s vantage ground.” One stumbles here, and another there; and Satan uses them to keep souls away from the Saviour.
The world has keen eyes of observation, and when the church leans on its arm, it knows that her heart is not with Christ.
And not the world alone feels the dire influence, but professors of religion lose confidence in each other, and begin to excuse themselves by what their neighbors do, till the most solemn truths fall on incredulous ears, and the cause of the Redeemer is wounded in the house of his friends. Shall this be so? May the Lord help us all to be careful to depart from iniquity; and not to lay a stumbling-block in the way of any.
L. A. CARTWRIGHT.
Live One Day at a Time
ENJOY the blessings of this day if God sends them, and the evils bear patiently. For this day only is ours; we are dead to yesterday, and we are not born to-morrow.
COMMUNION
MEANING by this term the act of coming around the Lord's table, and partaking of the sacred emblems of the broken body and spilt blood of our Saviour, the queries arise, Who are proper guests at the Lord's table? Assuming ourselves to be such, with whom is it proper for us to commune? Is it proper for us to invite other people to commune with us? Should we practise what is called close communion? If so, do we thereby say to others that we are better than they? Does not the act signify that we fellowship those with whom we thus commune?
The subject opens an extensive field of investigation upon which volumes have already been written. The aim of these lines is simply to inquire if there are not some plain truisms which underlie the whole question, and to try to ascertain what they are.
1. The statements of the Bible on the subject of communion presuppose a definite organization of the church; and organization supposes order. Without these to draw some lines, and establish some boundaries, there could be no restriction nor discrimination. The Christian pasture would be like the boundless prairies of the West, over which all classes at all times may roam at pleasure. But it is not so set forth in the word of God. The church is a well-defined body, distinguished from all others, and to which, by complying with the distinguishing characteristics, others may be “added;” things are “set in order” therein; “elders” and “deacons” are “appointed” and “ordained;” some are said to “have rule,” and others to “obey;” and provision is made whereby those who “walk disorderly” may be “marked” and set aside. All this is too clearly set forth in the Scriptures to be questioned for a moment. But this cannot be done without organization, proper officers, a list of membership, and a complete record of the reception, dismissal, or expulsion of members, and all other proceedings.
2. The church being thus set in order, some have a right there, others have not. Paul speaks of an altar of which some have no right to eat, and of a cup of which some cannot drink; he speaks of being unequally yoked with unbelievers, and of the fact that no agreement, concord, or fellowship, can exist between righteousness and unrighteousness, light and darkness, Christ and Belial, the believer and the infidel, the temple of God and idols; and he adds, “Ye are the temple of the living God.” 2 Cor. 6: 14–18. Whether all these expressions refer to the subject of communion or not, they lay down the principle that should govern us in this matter.
3. Who, then, may come to the Lord's table? We inquire for those in reference to whom there can be no question. And all will agree in the answer that those may come who have sought to come to God through our Lord Jesus Christ. But this involves the steps of repentance toward God, and faith in Christ; and repentance embraces a knowledge of God's law, conviction by the law, a turning away from transgression of the law, to a compliance with its precepts; then the acceptance of Christ as our sacrifice, mediator, and only Saviour, and an earnest and sincere prayer to God for the pardon of our sins through this gracious provision of his dear Son. In short, he is entitled to Christ's table, who is returning to God by the path of obedience, looking to Christ to atone for, and cancel, his past acts of rebellion and transgression; or, as expressed in the precious message going forth at this time, he who keeps “the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.” And all this is to be, of course, in accordance with the best knowledge we have of what the law requires. But every S. D. Adventist well knows that the fourth commandment requires the observance of the seventh day; and that he who does not keep that day is either consciously, or unconsciously breaking the law of God. There is no question, then, on this point but that all Christian commandment-keepers may properly commune with one another.
4. We now come to the real question, How far may we deviate from this rule? There are all gradations of character between the two extreme points, one of which is represented by the most hardened sinner, and the other by the most exemplary Christian. There are some whom we cannot fellowship. Where is the dividing line between the two classes? How far up must the wicked man come to be within the pale of Christian communion? and how far down from his standpoint may the Christian extend the hand of fellowship? Is there here a sliding scale, the upper grades of which are preferable, but the lower admissible? We have spoken of the unquestionable platform of Christian communion; namely, an intelligent observance of the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus. Why should there be any deviation from that? Communion is an act by which we show that we fellowship those with whom we commune. Can we fellowship those who are not keeping the commandments of God, that is to say, declare to them that we are satisfied with their course and approve of their position? If so, we say that the commandments of God are of no account, and that it is to us a matter of indifference whether they keep them or not. And if God has intrusted to us a work of trying to defend his Sabbath, and to carry on a work of reform among our fellow-men in this respect, preparatory to the coming of his Son, there is no way in which we could more effectually betray that trust.
It is not saying to others, I am better than thou; it is paying due deference to God's law as he has made it known. But it may be said that many who keep the first day are as yet uninformed on the subject of the Sabbath. Would it not then be well to wait till they are informed? But they are good, honest, devoted people, and would be saved should their probation end where they now are. In very many cases this is undoubtedly true. Can we not then fellowship a person whom the Lord would save? Let us extend the thought a little further. If the person is so good a Christian, and would be saved in his present uninformed and hence unconsciously-disobedient state, why not leave him there? Why try to show him any further truth? No one would consider this right. If God has given us clearer light, it is our duty to make it known, and try to lead others to it, however good Christians they may have been before. And though, before the light comes to them, God could save them, this does not release us from our duty. And does not this work properly, with us, come in first of all? But suppose the person makes application to partake with us of the emblems? A due sense of propriety should restrain him from this till further acquaintance. But if he has not been baptized, but designs and engages to be the first opportunity, and has never kept the Sabbath, but promises henceforward to do so, should he be excluded? In such a case, there would seem to be but little, if any, objection, the determination being accepted for the act itself.
We would not be understood in this as sanctioning the course of those who refuse to come to the Lord's table, because some one has said something or done something which they do not like. Our personal likes and dislikes are not the test in this matter. Nor is it left to the feelings of those who in little things and in non-essential matters would be conscience for all others, and who, unless their standard is adopted, draw off and neglect this important Christian ordinance to their own loss. We speak of those great features of conduct which determine Christian character, touching our duty to God, the great law-giver, and Christ our Saviour. What other standard can there be?
INGERSOLL, COOK, AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
By W. H. Littlejohn
As there are planets in the clear evening sky which, by their size and brilliancy, are rendered the objects of almost universal attention, so in the horizon of the religious world there frequently are individuals whose conspicuous talents and active labors keep them prominent in the thoughts of men.
There are in this country, just now, two persons who are notably of the latter character. The first of these is Robert Ingersoll, and the second, Joseph Cook. The former as an infidel lecturer, and the latter as a defender of the Scriptures from a philosophical standpoint, are, perhaps, equally well known to the reading public.
As it regards intellectual ability, we think we should not do injustice to Mr. Ingersoll should we say that he is inferior to Mr. Cook. The two men are cast in entirely different molds. The one is an orator whose rhetoric is captivating in the extreme, but whose logic, in some respects, is sadly defective; the other unites, in a rare combination, qualities which would enable him to excel either as a metaphysician or a poet.
Both of these lecturers—though, so far as we are aware, never having come in personal contact—have succeeded in popularizing their peculiar views in a most wonderful manner. On the one hand, it may well be doubted whether any exponent of infidel sentiments in this country has ever been able, like Mr. Ingersoll, to travel from city to city, address on consecutive evenings large and intelligent congregations made up of hearers whose interest has in many cases induced them to travel for miles to reach the place of the lecture, and then pay a large admittance fee at the door; and, on the other hand, we doubt whether a parallel to Mr. Cook’s Monday lectures in Boston can be found in the history of any similar lectureship on this continent.
Week after week and month after month, large audiences have been assembled on one of the busiest of the secular days, to listen to the discussion of themes which heretofore have been supposed to possess interest only for a certain class of impracticable individuals whose love for the abstruse and the polemical has been supposed to unfit them for the more practical themes of every-day life.
Both of these lecturers have also made themselves felt not only upon those who have heard the sound of their voices, but their printed orations have found their way to the hearths and homes of the people all over the northern portion of this continent to almost an incredible extent. Why these things should be so,—why these two men should suddenly emerge from the bosom of society, and thus unexpectedly revolutionize the taste of the reading and thinking public, is a question worthy of consideration.
Another query of like importance might be propounded in reference to the results of this unprecedented phenomenon. Should it be replied that the success which has attended the efforts of these two lecturers is wholly attributable to their superior methods in the presentation of their respective themes, it might be said that while this undoubtedly is true to a great extent, he who believes that there is a destiny which presides over the affairs of men cannot help but feel that the wonderful coincidence which is found in the time and extent of the success of two men of such widely divergent sentiments, can only be satisfactorily explained on the theory that God’s providence is in some way connected therewith.
As it regards the second query, it requires no prophetic gift to predict that the special stimulation which is being given to the infidel element in this country must terminate in a large increase of unbelievers in the Holy Scriptures, and in a more radical antagonism between them and those who represent the religion of Christ. For years skeptics have been cowed into an unwilling submission to many things in the existing state of society, by a sense of a lack of sufficient sympathy on the part of the masses to enable them to secure the changes which they have long desired. When, however—as was recently the case—sixteen hundred auditors can be assembled, in the city of Washington, to listen to what a distinguished newspaper correspondent calls a “Laugh at Moses,” and when similar events are transpiring all over the land, new courage will take possession of the hearts of the dejected ones, and, coming out of their hiding-places, they will ere long utter a howl of hate and a cry of war such as never yet has been heard within the confines of our favored country.
Without doubt the first attempt in the direction of the inauguration of a new order of things will be found in an effort for the removal of all legal enactments which in any way favor Christianity. This effort, of course, will be followed by a struggle for the maintenance of those regulations which so many Christians have regarded as inseparably connected with the prosperity of the church and the safety of the State.
In fact, the issue is already made up, and the drum beat and the bugle note which summon the combatants to their respective encampments is heard sounding everywhere throughout the nation. Even now an infidel political party demands the repeal of all purely Christian statutes on the one hand, while on the other, a Christian political party, not content with the vantage ground already occupied by the church, is loudly demanding more rigid Sunday laws, the recognition of God and Christ in the Constitution, and the reading of the Bible in the common schools.
Thus the flint and steel of a mighty struggle between Christianity and infidelity have come together, and thus the spark has already been emitted which may kindle a mighty conflagration that shall continue to rage until in one way or another it shall leave to us nothing but the smouldering ruins of what once was the proud fabric of religious liberty; for it matters not which of these extreme views predominates, perfect liberty of conscience and freedom from coercion in matters of faith can never survive the success of extremists, by whatever name they may be called.
Nay, more; in addition to those clear indications which may be drawn from the history of other nations under like circumstances, “we have a more sure word of prophecy,” whereunto we do well to take heed.
In the 13th and 14th chapters of Revelation, God has, according to the views of Seventh-day Adventists, clearly marked out the history of this government, and shown that, though republican in form, it should persecute the last generation of Christians for keeping the commandments of God. The pretext for that persecution, the people in question have for more than twenty-five years confidently declared would be the enforcement, against Sabbatarians and all others, of the observance of the first day of the week as a Christian institution. The source from whence that enforcement will come they have well understood must be religious in its character, since it is hardly to be presumed that infidels would be concerned in enforcing a Sabbath of whatever name or nature.
The only difficulty in the premises has been to discover how the constitutional guarantees for religious freedom could be disposed of, and how it would be possible for a Christian community, Protestant in name, and therefore having in their ancestors suffered the injustice of papal persecution, ever to be brought to the point where they would be willing to oppress others who are conscientiously observing the Lord’s Sabbath, or seventh day of the week. So far as the constitutional difficulty is concerned, the organization of the religious party for the amendment of that instrument, furnishes a satisfactory clue as to the manner in which the necessary legal authority for the accomplishment of the work is to be obtained. As it regards, also, the method in which a sufficient amount of the odium theologicum (or religious hate), can be manufactured to induce the inauguration of the anticipated oppression, we think an explanation will be discovered in the rise of the infidel political party alluded to above.
Religious animosities are worked up the most readily, and transform men into demons the most speedily and the most completely, of any with which the historian is familiar. Even where those antipathies have had for their basis simply technical distinctions, the bitterest and most relentless wars and persecutions have been the result in the churches themselves. But who cannot readily perceive that where the dividing line is drawn between those who on the one side hate, and those who on the other side love, or claim to love, the religion of Christ, the contest must be most fierce and terrible?
Who, also, does not know—when he stops to consider the chronic impracticability and unreliability of infidel statesmen—that they cannot be safely entrusted with the management of governmental affairs?
With the history of France and other nations before us, our people will hesitate to commit their dearest interests to the hands of those whose record in matters of government furnishes but a series of calamitous failures. Nevertheless, those men who always appear to the best advantage when engaged in the work of tearing down, will, no doubt, for a time be able to win victories. Their extravagances, however, will crown their opponents with success at last.
We have no doubt that the contest will eventually terminate in the triumph of the Christian amendment party. But before this shall result, a bitter struggle must be experienced. That struggle will engender fierce passions. Its favorable termination, also, will have the effect to exalt in their own estimation those who have been the victors therein.
Regarding themselves as divinely appointed to the work of regenerating and Christianizing the nation through legal enactments, they will in their effort to enforce their favorite Sunday laws find in Seventh-day Adventists and Seventh-day Baptists, a class of antagonists entirely different from such men as Ingersoll and Abbott and their compeers. The battle-ground will be transferred—as far as it can be done by Sabbatarians—from the political field to the written word. The weapons which they will employ will from the outset be such as the man of God is furnished with by that word. In such a contest, however, the observers of God’s holy rest-day as commanded in this law, will have infinitely the advantage. Everywhere success in debate will be assured to them. The only manner in which it will be possible to dispose of them165and of the arguments which they bring out of the word of God to prove the perpetuity of his ancient rest-day, will be found in the law of force.
It will never do for men who have conquered the infidel, and legalized the “papal Sunday,” to be publicly exposed as those who themselves have been misguided into doing the work of him who should think to change the law of God, instead of doing that of Him who was to magnify the law and make it honorable. Therefore, whatever shall be lacking in argument will be speedily found in lines and bolts and padlocks. Then will be fulfilled the prediction of the prophet, and those who will not worship the papal beast, i. e., those who will not keep a Sabbath made by the pope instead of that commanded by the Lord, will be forbidden to buy or sell. Rev. 13: 11–18.
Already in Pennsylvania, Georgia, and other States, conscientious Sabbath-keepers have been imprisoned for loyalty to the God of Heaven; but when the time under consideration shall have arrived, then a condition of things now local and exceptional will become universal. The only thing necessary to the accomplishment of that end is strength in numbers on the part of those who are at present the prime actors in the “Christian-Statesman” movement.
That which they countenance in Pennsylvania, and which they have sought to provide for in the Constitution of that State, i. e., the punishment of all who violate Sunday sanctity even though they may conscientiously respect that of the Lord’s Sabbath, they would of course enforce in other parts of the nation. Nay, more, they boastfully proclaim their intention so to do, claiming that in such a course alone will be found the salvation of the country.
All, therefore, which stands between the fulfillment of what Seventh-day Adventists have for a quarter of a century confidently predicted as certain to take place in this nation, is the acquisition of sufficient numbers on the part of these self-styled reformers for the achievement of their openly declared purpose.
As for ourselves we have no doubt upon the point; first, because we believe it to be a subject of inspired prophecy; secondly, because we think we see in the proposed plan of recognizing God and Christ in the Constitution and the enforcement by law of Sunday observance the elements now at work which will bring out the result in question. There is in the movement a peculiar fascination for those who have embraced it, and one which is wonderfully calculated to capture the average Christian of the hour. The very thought of securing such ends furnishes to the minds of many an inspiration which those cannot appreciate who have not watched its effects. Many, having witnessed the writing on the roll of honor of the names of those who a few years ago were the despised agitators of the slavery question, fancied themselves engaged in another crusade which is soon destined to clothe its adherents with immortal fame.
W. H. LITTLEJOHN.
(Concluded next week.)
ARRIVAL IN OAKLAND.
By Stephen N. Haskell
I arrived in Oakland, Cal., Sunday, May 4. I was made welcome by many familiar faces. It really seemed refreshing after a tedious ride of about one week on the cars.
A general meeting is appointed here for next Sabbath and first-day, when we expect to see a good representation from the churches in the State. My present plan is to leave for the North so as to be at Walla Walla, Sabbath, May 31, and attend the camp-meetings in Washington and Oregon, and remain on this coast until after the California camp-meeting.
I spent Sabbath, May 3, at Reno, Nevada, on the way here. If nothing prevents I shall have at least one general meeting in Nevada before returning East. Business is lively here at the SIGNS Office. Six power presses are in full operation, and all hands are cheerful and happy.
Last evening I attended the meeting of the Vigilant Missionary Society, and listened to letters which had been received from Bermuda, England, and different parts of this country. This also seemed quite natural.
I have now been here less than three days, and during this time good news by way of payments of their indebtedness has come in from the tract societies in New York, New England, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Kansas, Wisconsin, and Nebraska, of over $1,600.00. Iowa and other societies will doubtless send greeting in the same manner soon. All such practical help will be greatly appreciated by the SIGNS Office at the present time.
When the various tract societies have their reserve fund established from one to three thousand dollars each, it will relieve our Offices more than fifteen thousand dollars. This we expect will be accomplished at the time of our camp-meetings. I expect to be remembered by our brethren East in their prayers, that my coming to this coast may be a mutual blessing, and the cause of present truth may be benefited. I am anxious to become acquainted with all the friends this side the Rocky Mountains before I return. S. N. HASKELL.