THE MARK OF THE BEAST, AND THE SEAL OF GOD. NO. 2.
The Seal of God.
HAVING found that Sunday is the mark of the beast, we will now consider the seal of God. This is presented in Rev. 7:2, 3, in these very forcible words: "And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God; and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea, saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads." The same work is mentioned in the eighth and ninth chapters of Ezekiel. In Eze. 9:4 the command is given to set a mark in the foreheads of God's people. The seal, or mark, is in the forehead, the seat of the mind; for with the mind we "serve the law of God." Rom. 7:25.
We notice that in the Scriptures the words "sign," "mark," and "seal" are used interchangeably. See Rom. 4:11 and the texts already quoted. The Catholic Bible already referred to, has, in Rev. 7:2, 3, the word "sign" (both noun and verb) instead of "seal" and "sealed." It says, "Having the sign of the living God," and, "Till we sign the servants of our God in their foreheads." In Isaiah 8 we have a prophecy for the same time. Verse 16 says, "Bind up the testimony, seal the law among My disciples." In the Revised Version it is, "Teaching the law among My disciples."
It would appear that the disciples do not understand God's law; and especially that part of it which is a seal, or sign, of His authority and right to command a law. In all these prophecies the command is given to set the servants, or disciples, right on this point. "Seal the servants of our God;" "Seal the law among My disciples;" "Set a mark upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations;"—these expressions show that the message is not to a people that know not God, but to a people that are serving God, but whose practise on some point of faith or life is not right.
Now, in examining the law as spoken and written by God Himself, we find one precept, and but one, that tells us who God is, or His right to exercise authority. This one is the fourth commandment: "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates; for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it." Ex. 20:8-11.
This commandment tells exactly who is the giver of the law—the Creator—hence His authority and the extent of His dominion,—the heavens, the earth, and the sea. This, then, is the seal of God's law; for it shows the authenticity of the law. It is this for which a seal is used in connection with the laws of this and other countries. A seal is affixed to the laws as published, to show by what authority they are enforced. So God gives one commandment that shows His right to be ruler. This commandment, as given in the Scriptures and obeyed by His people, is to God just what the Sunday commandment is to the papal power. It is a sign of God's authority and power. God gave the Sabbath at the close of creation week as a memorial of His creative work, and when man sinned and brought death on the human family. He still gives the Sabbath as a sign of His power to create anew in Christ, or sanctify, or make holy. "Moreover also I gave them My Sabbaths, to be a sign between Me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord that sanctify them." Eze. 20:12. And verse 20 adds, "That ye may know that I am the Lord your God." Read 1 Peter 1:9-11, and you will see that it was the Spirit of Christ that spoke these words through the prophet; and all Christians know that Christ is the only true sanctifier, or Saviour, ever given under heaven. Acts 4:12. Neither has He changed: "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to-day, and forever." Heb. 13:8. The same Saviour exercises the same power to sanctify now that has ever sanctified the people of God. Hence the words spoken through the prophet Ezekiel by the Saviour have the same force to-day as in the past; and the Sabbath is still a sign between God and His people, that they may know that He is the Lord their God, the One through whom they are sanctified. If we but stop to consider that to sanctify is to exercise His divine power to create us new creatures in Christ, we can easily see why He gives the Sabbath as a sign now. It was a memorial of creative power from the beginning, and would always have been such had man not sinned, and will be observed as such by every redeemed man and woman in the earth made new. See Isa. 66:22, 23.
Two Powers—Two Signs.
Here, then, are two powers, each of which has a sign, or mark, of its own. One, the Lord Jesus Christ, exercised His divine power in bringing all things into existence (John 1:10; Col. 1:16), and He pledges the same divine power for the sanctifying and redeeming of every one who believes Him. And He gives the memorial of His creative work for a sign to us, that we may know He sanctifies us. Then He prefaces His commandment in regard to it with the word "remember," which certainly means, Do not forget.
Of the other power, the papal, we read in 2 Thess. 2:4 that he "opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." This prophecy the pope has fulfilled in every particular. He claims that he only is the representative of God on earth. He has fulfilled it in not only making himself equal with God, but in exalting himself above God; and the church boasts of his great power by saying that all the world bows down and worships on Sunday in silent obedience to the mandate of the Catholic Church, instead of observing the seventh day as commanded by God in the Holy Scriptures. He claims this as a sign that he is able to dispense with the precepts of God, or change them at his will. If any do not know these things, they may know them if they will; for the statement is boldly put before an intelligent world that every time we keep Sunday instead of the Bible Sabbath, we say the pope is able to change the law of God. Father Enright states it in this way: "The Bible says, Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy; but the Catholic Church says, No, keep the first day of the week; and the whole world bows down in obedience."
Reader, which of these two powers are you living in obedience to to-day? "Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?" Rom. 6:16.
A Scattered People.
God has a people all around in the different churches whose minds have not yet been brought to see these things as they are. But the sealing work of Rev. 7:3 is going on, while the angels of God are holding the elements of destruction in check, in obedience to the command, "Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads." Notice Rom. 6:16 again, and consider whom you are obeying. If it is the power that has "exalted himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped," there is still time for you to make a covenant with the true God and obey Him. The warning of Rev. 14:9-12 is sounding, not only in this favored land, but in earth's remotest corners. Thousands of honest-hearted people in different parts of the earth are hearing and obeying, and their united testimony is one of praise to God for the light and joy and peace they find in obedience to God. They realize now that they are better acquainted with God than before; they have learned that He has given them a sign. He says, "That ye may know that I am the Lord that doth sanctify you." Ex. 31:13. Of all these sanctified ones it is said, "Here is the patience of the saints; here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus."
Reader, shall this be said of you? In infinite love the great God, the Creator of all, has sent this truth to you that you may be wholly sanctified and saved in His everlasting kingdom. Will you step out in the light as God's opening providence reveals it to you, and in so doing receive the blessing in this world, and eternal life in the soon-coming kingdom of God? Oscar Hill.
GRAND PRINCIPLES.
By Editor
How Will They Be Received?
ON December 20 Hon. Geo. F. Hoar, Republican senator from the old Bay State, introduced into the Senate a series of resolutions, among which are the following:—
Resolved, That this republic adheres to the doctrines which were in the past set forth in the Declaration of Independence and in its national and State constitutions.
That the purpose of its existence and the objects to which its political action ought to be directed are the ennobling of humanity, the raising from the dust of its humblest and coarsest members, and the enabling of persons coming lawfully under its power or influence to live in freedom and in honor, under government whose forms they are to have a share in determining and in whose administration they have an equal share.
Among the obligations of the government, he mentions these:—
Sixth. To grow and expand over the continent and over the islands of the sea, just so fast, and no faster, as we can bring into equality and self-government under our Constitution peoples and races who will share these ideals and help make them realities.
Seventh. To set a peaceful example of freedom which mankind will be glad to follow, but never to force even freedom upon unwilling natives at the point of the bayonet or at the cannon's mouth.
Eighth. To abstain from interfering with the freedom and just rights of other nations and peoples, and to remember that the liberty to do right necessarily involves the liberty to do wrong; and that the American people have no right to take from any other people the birth-right of freedom because of a fear that they will do wrong with it.
Now what is there wrong with these? What is out of harmony with the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution? Why should they not pass without a dissenting vote?
But it is feared that these expressions of true republicanism and democracy, of true civil liberty, will not have a majority vote. Why?—Let the Oakland Enquirer, an ably-edited Republican paper, answer. In its issue of December 21 it says:—
The resolutions drawn by Senator Hoar, of Massachusetts, and which undertake to set forth the objects to the attainment of which our national policy should be directed, would not excite dissent if they could be dissevered from connection with the events of the last two years. Only in so far as Senator Hoar's well-known opinions make the resolutions a reflection on the policy of the McKinley administration, will there be a disposition to take issue with the learned gentleman from New England.
Yet what is this but to declare that this government in the last two years has departed from the very principles of liberty and republicanism which made it a nation? It has turned its back upon the very elements which made it the grandest nation on earth, and turned to the imperialism and oppression of the Old World, as a protest to which the United States of America sprang into being.
Concerning the politics of the matter, we are not interested. We are not concerned as to the political party or administration through which the work is wrought. Suffice to say in this matter the policy which has brought this departure from the old paths has ardent advocates in all parties and also earnest protestants, for principle's sake, in all.
Our concern is as to the result. Our outlook is from the watch-tower of the prophecy of God's Word. In that Word this government is represented by a symbol having "two horns like a lamb." Rev. 13:11. A lamb is a symbol of Christ. "Two horns like a lamb" represent the embodiment of Christian principles in the government,—these principles, peculiar to the Christian religion of all religions, to this government of all governments. These are the principles of civil and religious liberty, or the equality of all men before the law, the absolute freedom of conscience to worship or not to worship. These principles are repeatedly set forth in the teachings of Christ and His apostles. These principles were embodied in the charters of our national existence, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
The same prophecy assures us that this nation shall "speak as a dragon," shall make an image to the beast which had the wound by a sword and did live. That dragon and that Roman beast both stand for union of religion with the State, for religious intolerance and persecution, for imperialism and the dominance of the many by the few, of weaker races and nations by the stronger.
This nation has departed from the principles of religious liberty in every branch of its government, the divergence since the Trinity Church decision of 1892 ever becoming more marked.
For the last two years especially has this government been departing from the principles of true republicanism, so much so that it is even questioned whether resolutions setting forth the principles of our charters of liberty can even pass, simply because of "the events of the last two years."
When a nation proves false to those principles which gave her life, she will die. Either a complete reversal of policy as respects these principles must soon, very soon, take place, or the republic is, according to the Word of God, doomed.
Reader, this is not a matter of politics or party; it is a matter of eternal principle, in which are wrapped up eternal destinies.
Study the prophecy. Note its fulfilment.
SPIRITISM AND ITS INCREASE.
ONE of the great mistakes that men make in noting the spread and growth of error, is to look upon it in an organized form, and to get the idea that this comprehends about all there is of it, when the organized form is of minor importance.
So Spiritism, or, as it is erroneously called, "Spiritualism," is estimated. There are many professed believers in Spiritism, many organized bands, circles, societies, and a few churches with pastors. There are mediums, many of whom have been proved to be fraudulent tricksters. Because of this latter phase especially, many are inclined to ridicule the cult, and deprecate its influence.
But it is outside of organized Spiritism that we are to look for its increase. The essentials of the error are that the soul or spirit of man is a personal conscious entity, surviving the death of the body as such, and capable of knowing and communicating with those in the flesh.
In some quarters this is manifesting itself in Theosophy, thought transference, Psychical Science, and kindred isms. Among the late converts of prominence in the world are the well-known writer, W. T. Stead; Dr. Richard Hodgson, of Boston, formerly of Cambridge, England; Prof. William James, of Harvard University; Prof. James Hyslop, of Columbia, and others of nearly equal prominence. The three last named have become converted through the mediumship of a Mrs. Piper, the seances so conducted as to prohibit all deception. The results have led Professor James to conclude that the world is on the eve of a new revelation, and that the immortality of the soul has thus been scientifically demonstrated.
But Spiritism is wide-spread among those who do not know they are Spiritists. It is a not uncommon thing to hear some good woman, who might be shocked to be classed with Spiritists, speak of Frances Willard as still leading, tho invisible, the hosts of the W. C. T. U.
Here are two other straws. Printed in a San Francisco paper under date of December 4, is an interview with Mrs. Jane Stanford, relict of the late Senator Stanford. Speaking of her business transactions, she remarked:—
Mr. Stanford's railroad holding belonged to Stanford University and was in my keeping. I wanted to handle that property in the best way possible for the university. It was a severe trial to know what was best to do. After much deep thought and many prayers for proper guidance in the matter, I sold the railroad holdings. I believe my husband knows and approves of what I have done.
And now comes Dr. Joseph Parker, and other Spiritists of the same type. The Living Church, Protestant Episcopal, of November 4, 1899,7as quoted by the Literary Digest, says:—
Dr. George Adam Smith, in his "Life of Henry Drummond," mentions as a fact within his knowledge that certain persons habitually address prayers to Henry Drummond. Dr. Joseph Parker, of the City Temple, London (not the Temple church), a doughty adversary of "Popery and Prelacy," has openly declared that he prayed to his departed wife every day. He said that he never came to the City Temple to preach without asking her to come with him, and furthermore, he knew that she did come. Nor does he hold this as a mere sentiment applicable only to his own individual case, but, alluding to a friend who had lost his wife, he says: "I encourage my friend to pray to his wife, and pray to God to ask her to come to his help. She will be more to him than twelve legions of unknown angels." Dr. Parker evidently has no use for the "ministering spirits sent forth to minister to them who shall be heirs of salvation." Well may the Protestant paper from which we cull these instances say, "All this is simply petrifying!" It mentions a Roman litany to the saints, and asks: "Is this what we are going to come to in our Protestant churches?"
But it is to just what this belief in a spirit, death-surviving entity will inevitably lead. Just recently, a prominent minister, known East and West, Charles R. Brown, D.D., pastor of the First Congregational Church in this city, is thus reported in the Oakland Tribune of December 13:—
The Rev. Charles R. Brown presented some interesting religious points in his sermon Sunday night at the First Congregational Church. Dr. Brown based his discourse on a late paper by Professor James, of Harvard, in which the professor states that "Protestantism stands to-day between agnosticism or the scientific proof of immortality."
Dr. Brown remarked that Professor James thought the latter method possible through possible experiments in Spiritism. He accepted Professor James' proposition that there were "only two alternatives open to the Protestant of to-day—a drift into agnosticism or a religion based on the scientific proof of immortality." He prefaced his discourse by stating, that "Protestants accepted the Bible as a whole as a correct rule of moral conduct. Parts of it are not authentic, as for instance, when different authorities describe the same occurrence. The thoughtful Christian of to-day accepts the Bible as a safe and satisfactory rule of conduct, as a high standard of ethics, while not endorsing each individual portion of it."
Dr. Brown also quoted from Fiske's book, "Through Nature to God," to prove the strength of his position that Protestants accepted Professor James' challenge knowing "that they had a scientific basis for their belief."
All that Professor James has done is to demonstrate more fully that there is a reality in Spiritism; that spirits do communicate with persons in the flesh. But all this is clearly set forth in the Word of God—the Bible. The strange thing is that higher critics will reject the Bible teaching concerning spirits, good and evil, as superstition, while they accept the evidences set forth by Professors Hodgson, Hyslop, and James.
Spirits do communicate with persons in the flesh. But they are not the spirits of the dead. In the words of Holy Writ: "The dead know not anything. . . . Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion forever in anything that is done under the sun." "His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish." "His sons come to honor, and he knoweth it not." These portions of the Bible are, however, those which will be set aside as tradition and superstition, because, forsooth, they do not agree with Mrs. Piper's revelations through some professor of psychology.
There are spirits, however, waiting to communicate with people in the flesh, but they can not do this till the people can be brought into harmony with them: These spirits are the fallen angels, wicked demons, who come in the guise of the spirits of the dead.
Satan said, "Ye shall not surely die; . . . ye shall be as gods." The unbelieving believed it. But men died. Satan then deceived them into believing that the real man did not die, but existed still in a higher state of being. Heathenism clothed its dead heroes with the attributes of gods and goddesses; the heathen believed he was worshiping his honored dead, and that the supernatural manifestations sometimes seen came from these gods. They came from demons, Satan's angels. Those who "ate the sacrifices of the dead" were but sacrificing to devils. Ps. 106: 28, 36, 37. "The things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils [demons], and not to God." 1 Cor. 10: 20. Yet they believed they were honoring dead heroes.
So Satan comes now as a dear wife or husband or father or mother or son or daughter or friend or philosopher. And no one thing is so preparing the world to receive Satan's damnable doctrines as the discredit which religious teachers in high positions are throwing upon the Bible.
Nevertheless, the Bible is true. "The dead know not anything." Satan and his angels come in their guise. He is past master in the art of simulation. He imitates form and tone and gesture. And thus he is deceiving the whole world by his "seducing spirits," his "spirits of devils." Be not deceived. "And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits; . . . should not a people seek unto their God? on behalf of the living should they seek unto the dead? To the law and to the testimony! if they speak not according to this word, surely there is no morning for them ["no light in them," A.V.]." Isa. 8: 19, 20, R.V.
ONE MEDIATOR.
THANK God that Jesus Christ is accessible to every soul. Common souls could not reach the czar of Russia, the kaiser of Germany, or the queen of Britain without influential friends to introduce them. Men have thought that God was like themselves, and so have fixed up the doctrine of intercession of saints.
Do we wish God's favor? We are told to ask the priest to ask the Virgin to ask Jesus to grant us favor. The Catholic Mirror, speaking of the Virgin Mary, says that “the same assurances that she is influential with Him, makes all Catholics, princes or peasants, educated or simple, European or American, seek the intercessions of the holiest, fairest, and tenderest of women.”
But our God is love; He is merciful and compassionate, and all the love or pity the Virgin Mary ever had, all that any saint ever had, was given them of God through Jesus Christ. We may come to Him boldly. He will in no wise cast us out. He is the Shepherd that seeks the sheep. He is the Shepherd that died for them. He is the great High Priest that pleads for them; all love for souls that any heart possesses was born of Him. How could He be influenced for us? He can not be. He is always for us. He always will be. His words are as true now as when He walked the earth: “Come unto Me, all ye that labor and are heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.”
EVIL OF HYPNOTISM.
By Editor
ONE of the evil things which is coming into present-day education at no tardy pace is Hypnotism as a moral agent. An Eastern paper reports that Prof. John D. Quackenbos, of Columbia University, under the auspices of the Psychic Society, recently delivered a lecture on "Hypnotism from the Christian Standpoint," supplementary to one delivered previously, "Treatment of Moral Diseases by Hypnotism." Professor Quackenbos contends that Hypnotism may be used to overcome evil prenatal influences. It is advocated by others for use in schools.
By Hypnotism the mind of one person is brought under absolute control of another. If the controlling mind were always good, always wise, always true, there might be a little reason for its use; but this is more likely to be the very opposite.
But, even tho this could all be true, the operator good, wise, and true, yet even then Hypnotism is a perversion of the true.
God designed that man should be free, absolutely free, in mind and heart, in will and choice. The only way man can be free is in submission to God's will, which is the only law of liberty, righteousness, and truth. The law of the eternally-existing Creator is good, only and always good. Every other being is a creature, limited in mind and operation. Every other law is a creature law, absolute submission to which is slavery, not liberty.
Hypnotism, the absolute submission of man to man, is the lowest form of slavery. A will once so yielded, never in its own power returns to its normal independent tone. The will is weakened. The God-given individuality is lost, and the man is left to become, sooner or later, the sport and tool of evil spirits more crafty and powerful than man. We say to all our readers, Never for one moment become an automaton for another. Place your will in the keeping of no other save the God of the universe.
IS WAR CHRISTIAN?
Comments of an Unbeliever.
THE worst foes of Christianity are the inconsistent ones within the professed churches of Christ. The strongest written arguments that Christianity has to meet are the inconsistent, erroneous teachings of her leading men, who pervert the doctrine of Christ. Here it is that Christ receives His worst wounds—in the house of His friends.
Happily all do not receive it as Christianity, and even the thoughtful, intelligent unbeliever can see its inconsistency. This is notably marked as regards the much that is said at the present time by the clergy in advocacy and glorification of war. A case in point is a recent poem from the Church of England Bishop of Armagh. His poem has called forth justly-deserved criticism from the well-known caustic, trenchant pen of an unbeliever, Ambrose Bierce, himself a brave soldier in the War of the Rebellion. Among other things Mr. Bierce says:—
The pious bishop does not merely excuse war—he glorifies it. True, war takes life, but that is of no consequence, for—
The life He loves is not the life of span,
Abbreviated by each passing breath,
but an altogether different and better [and vaguer] life invented by the good bishop himself for this controversial emergency. Unfortunately, the holy man has justified not only war but assassination.
That war tends to development of such high qualities as courage, steadfastness, and devotion is not to be denied, but so do piracy on the high seas, burglary, and theft. So do gold-grabbing in Alaska and “blackbirding” in the South Sea. There is no pursuit in which men share a common peril or hardship which does not, in its kind and degree, promote all the virtues that are promoted by war. . . .
The “unbeliever” has a logical right to regard war as refining and ennobling if he can, and to say so if he does, but no professed Christian can hold such a belief and utter it without forfeiting the respect of all who know and love the character of Jesus Christ. I am myself very well satisfied with war as a means of settling disputes among such nations as we have, and feel a compassionate contempt for the dreamers who persuade themselves that it is possible to “abolish” it; but not by the most strenuous effort of the imagination can I conceive Jesus Christ, whether He was a man or a God, urging a resort to arms or heading a charge. If the bishop of Armagh can, he is welcome to the conception, and may it give him joy. If he can not, he should achieve consistency by giving an undivided, spiritual allegiance to the god of gore. I fancy Unitarianism would be tolerably becoming to him.
After the fashion of his kind, this fat patriot and smooth hierarch dates his poem at his “palace”—this disciple of the Prince of Poverty, who had not where to lay His head. And this is Christianity—this corrupted cult within whose wide confines a luxurious clergy may without reproach applaud the anger of nations and the slaughter of their people in the interest of His religion at whose birth the angels are said to have proclaimed “peace on earth, and good-will toward men.”
War is not of Christ, it is not of righteousness; it is all things evil. It is strange that it should be glorified by those who occupy the positions of ambassadors of the Prince of Peace.
THE TIDE HAS TURNED.
By W. N. G.
LESS than a year ago the soldier caste had carte blanche in San Francisco. A sentimental enthusiasm—too generally mistaken for patriotism—took hold of the masses and stirred them almost to distraction. For a time it was hero worship gone mad; everything in army uniform was a hero. The newspapers, the political orators, and the preachers lauded the soldiers. The women, old and young, fêted them and smiled on them, and the more forward ones kissed them. Young women strolled with men in uniform whom they would have disdained to notice in their former garb; and acquaintance was ofttimes formed without even the formality of an introduction. And the boys of every age strove to imitate the man in uniform, while their young hearts fairly thirsted for blood. Even the officers of the law relaxed their wonted vigilance, lest the carnal pleasures of the soldier be too much limited and patriotism seem lacking. But the soldiers, underneath the artificial halo of glory with which they were for the time enshrouded, were only men, and many of them proved to be very ordinary men at that. Their conspicuous appearance in Chinatown, the Barbary Coast, and the slum districts in general, was, and still is, proof that "all is not gold that glitters."
Six months ago such an utterance as the above would have been subject to severe denunciation on the part of many who are to-day looking at the soldiers in the vicinity of San Francisco through a different glass. The Tribune of this city, which was second to none in encomiums of "our heroes" when their municipal and social prestige was at flood tide, has this to say in a recent issue:—
"The action of the military authorities at the Presidio, in co-operating with the San Francisco police department, in suppressing the lawlessness of the soldiers now quartered in San Francisco, is a highly commendable departure from the customary red-tape methods of the army. Ever since the emergency camps were established, the metropolis has been subjected to an era of viciousness on the part of those wearing Uncle Sam's uniform, the offenders not even stopping short of murder. At first, when the patriotic spirit was running high, there was a disposition on the part of the civic authorities not to inflict punishment when the offense simply consisted of drunkenness or disturbing the peace, but a change soon had to be made in this program, for the soldiers imposed upon good nature to an alarming extent. An appeal to General Shafter, however, brought about the prompt establishment of a provost guard, and after this all went well for a while.
"Then came the Hildebrand murder, that shocked the community, and the laxity of the prosecution aroused such a pronounced public sentiment on the proposition that the officials put on the screws and the turbulent elements were brought under control. The barriers have been gradually raised again, tho until now the law-breaking element is more in evidence than ever, as is shown by the recent shooting by a drunken army officer at an inoffensive citizen, and the outbreak in the colored regiment that has led to the present reform movement.
"It stands to reason that an iron rule must be exercised over the soldiers now reaching the coast en route to and from Manila. In the first place, a very small percentage of the troops consists of trained and experienced men, the great majority being 'raw recruits' who overestimate their importance from the time they don Uncle Sam's uniform. There is an excuse for this, tho, the trouble being that the hero flavor hovers around every man who enlists during war time, and the applause and enthusiasm with which the various regiments are greeted make each soldier think that he is a privileged character and can do about as he pleases. Then there is the temptation of being invited to drink everywhere he goes, and, as most of the soldiers are young men, they soon fall into evil habits, if, indeed, they had not contracted them before they enlisted."
This is indeed a sad picture, but it is not overdrawn in the least particular. It is a significant commentary upon the times in which we live, and the general encouragement of the young men to enter upon a military career. The results are more than hinted at in the fact that one of the journals which a few months ago was conspicuous in the general plaudits showered upon the men who were bound to Manila, is now constrained to advise that on their return an "iron rule be exercised" over them. And this advice is based upon experience with those who have previously returned, as well as with those awaiting transportation thither. As the picture must be drawn as a warning against the evils of army life, we are glad that it is so faithfully done by a journal whose influence was all on the side of the popular embrace of the men in uniform and armed with the weapons of death. True, the story could have been told a year ago just as well as now, but it would not have been heeded by a people aroused to fever heat by the prevailing spirit of war. Now that some of the results are seen and recognized through actual experience, may we not hope that at least the professed church of Christ will reflect that He whom they profess to follow did most emphatically declare, "The Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them." In the light of His example, how can they who profess His name urge men on to a death-incurring and death-dealing occupation, or encourage the youth to learn the use of carnal weapons and the art of warfare against flesh and blood? Or how can men professing His name urge or applaud measures that involve the wholesale destruction of life—spiritual as well as physical—which He came to save, even at the sacrifice of His own life?
The Plundering of China
By Editor
Says Harper's Weekly: "China contains much more potential wealth than any unexploited country in the world. Perhaps we would be within bounds in saying that if her resources were developed by modern methods and modern men, she would be naturally the richest country in the world, the United States excepted." And it is admittedly because of these great natural resources of wealth that the "powers" are seeking to partition China among themselves. If private individuals were doing such things they would be classed as highwaymen, and their deeds would be set down as robbery. Wherein is the difference in the morality of the thing when this work of plundering is done by great nations? What a commentary it is on these times that "great Christian nations" should give themselves to plundering the "poor heathen" of the Orient! And the most inconsistent and surprising part of it all is that these robber "powers" should be claiming that they are all getting so good that a millennium of peace9and righteousness is about to be ushered in. A millennium of righteousness is indeed about here, but it will be in nowise what these "powers" are looking for; it will be introduced by the second coming of Christ, who will destroy every vestige of this evil work, by destroying every one who refuses to yield to the merciful entreaties of truth and right.