IN recent articles we have called attention to some of the great empires of the world, and referred to the attempts that have been made to establish still other world-wide empires. We have shown that this notion for world dominion spread from the idea of merely having a world empire of the State to having a world empire of the church as well; and then the two ideas were combined between the 'Holy Roman Empire' and the 'Holy Roman Church,' in order that a universal church might be supported by a universal State. And it was the founders of this 'Holy Empire' who fixed the idea in the minds of men that the Church and the State should be united.
When the Church and the State became united, the practise was for the church to decree, and the State would then carry out the decrees of the church, if necessary, by the edge of the sword. The Protestant Reformation was a revolt against the church-and-state despotism of the Papacy; but many of the Reformers retained their church-and-state notions, and brought them over into the new faith, only to carry out the old régime under a new garb. It now remains for us to inquire whether these church-and-state theories still exist, and whether or not there is a prospect that we will see another world empire of the church.
It is well known among those who have given some study to the subject, that history is continually repeating itself. Men are never satisfied with the experiments of the past. They think that those experiments have failed because they were not worked out right, and therefore they want to try again, and as the result successive generations are going over the same ground that the fathers went over, only to make the same mistakes and failures. It would seem that the history of the Middle Ages was sufficient to make men repel the idea of a union of Church and State for all time, and under that particular name the most of them do repel it in theory, while in fact they are calling for it under a new name.
A pope who has not been so long dead but many who are still living will remember him quite well, gave expression to the doctrine that has been held by the Papacy for more than a thousand years, and it is still a leading part of their creed. He said in one of his encyclicals:
We are bound anew to enforce and to profess, what we have oftentimes declared, with your unanimous consent, that the civil sovereignty of the Holy See has been given to the Roman pontiff by a singular counsel of divine Providence; and that it is of necessity, in order that the Roman pontiff may exercise the supreme power and authority, divinely given to him by the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, of feeding and ruling the entire flock of the Lord with fullest liberty, and may consult for the greater good of the church, and its interests and needs, that he shall never be subject to any prince or civil power.
The Papacy makes the boast that she is the universal church, and therefore infallible. She holds the only keys to the proper interpretation of right and wrong. And claiming thus to be infallible, she makes the further boast that she never changes. The foregoing paragraph from Pius IX shows that she still holds to the dogma that she is supreme over both the Church and the State. She claims that she is not amenable to any earthly prince.
Notwithstanding the holding of these principles of the Middle Ages, the Papacy is making the most rapid advancement in point of gaining influence in the world. Italy, that made such a war against the civil power of the Papacy, has sufficiently yielded to her influence to permit of the pope's blessing the army of Italy when she started on her present war to take Tripoli from the Turk. Germany has her Center or Catholic Party, and the emperor is so beset by the Socialist element that he finds it necessary to court the influence of Rome more and more. England is holding out, perhaps, as well as any of the nations, against the influence of the Papacy; but she is gradually yielding, and the pope is getting greater and still greater power and influence in that country. And when we come to the United States, the growth of the Papacy is attested by the necessity of the recent appointment of three more American cardinals.
As has been shown in previous articles, it was the Papacy that taught the world in the Middle Ages the idea of having a universal empire to support the universal church. The Papacy claims that she never changes; and being a leader in this time, she will lead the world back into that condition that was one of her fondest and most cherished ideals for so many centuries.
In consonance with this ideal of the Papacy, is the sentiment that is growing so rapidly, in favor of world federation. There are those who are working for a world federation of the State, and those also who are working for a like federation of the church. As I write, there is lying on my desk a little document entitled 'A Constitution for World-Wide Federation, Based upon the Constitution of the United States of America, Amplified and Adjusted for the United Nations of the World.' There are also several volumes lying before me giving accounts of the various movements and organizations that are working for the federation of all the churches of the world into one great body for the conversion of the world. And these Christian organizations hope to bring their influence so to bear on politicians that they will be able to work out great reforms thereby.
The men of this time, in seeking to do these things, are using many of the arguments that were used by those of the Middle Ages who went over the same ground. The men in that time did not plan to make the Dark Ages as a result of what they did. But since they held wrong principles, they threw the world into the Dark Ages as the result of the doctrines they followed. The men of that time wished to unite the whole world in one great State over which the benign influence of one great church would hover. A prominent man of this time, in making one of the leading addresses in a late meeting of the 'Federal Council of the Churches of Christ,' said: 'I pray that some day, in God's great future, purged of all superstition and error, the great Roman Church may, indeed, clasp hands with our Protestantism in active work. Then there shall be in that, one great irresistible host standing against all things opposing our Christ and His cross.'
The unity that Christ prayed for is not a federation; for He says in His Word, 'Say ye not, A confederacy, to all them to whom this people shall say, A confederacy; neither fear ye their fear, nor be afraid.' Isa. 8:12. And again the same prophet says, 'And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; and He will teach us of His ways, and we will walk in His paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.' Isa. 2:3. Micah, in the fourth chapter of his prophecy, uses almost the identical words of Isaiah quoted above, only he says that 'many nations' shall be saying these things 'in the last days,' instead of saying that 'many people' shall be saying them.
In studying these statements from Isaiah and Micah, note that the Word is telling what the people will be saying. The text, if studied carefully, will reveal that God is not saying any such thing. He is just telling us in advance what the 'many people' will be saying. God is opposed to what they are talking; for later verses in these chapters show that while the people are saying such things, they are not sincere. They are swept on by a great popular movement, without having the real essence of Christian life that the Man of Nazareth and of Calvary calls for in His Word.
Thus do we see that the prophecies call for a world-wide confederacy, a world-wide Christian empire with headquarters at Jerusalem. These 'many people' will say that the 'word of the Lord from Jerusalem' shall go forth.
In the Middle Ages, when the 'Holy Empire' of that time was in full swing, a great popular craze took hold of the people to rescue the 'Holy Land,' including the 'holy sepulcher,' from the infidel Mohammedans. They were not successful in that time. The Mosque of Omar is in the 'holy city,' and the Moslem hosts are still in possession of the 'Holy Land.' It will be interesting to watch developments as the conditions of this time unfold into the fulfilment of what is called for in Isaiah and Micah and other scriptures of like import.
The Cruelty of Sarcasm
By Sunday School Times
You and I are good Christians—do we ever grip some tender heart with red-hot pincers of cruel sarcasm? Have we ever in our minds a hateful thing heating itself into a bitter word? Is there any one in "our church" whom we are inclined to persecute unless he change his views on some polysyllabic doctrine until they conform to our own? Is there no one among our brethren whom we sometimes "talk about"? Ah, friends, the heart is more sensitive than the body. A broken heart aches longer than a crushed hand. A tender, wounded spirit quivers with anguish that the body broken at the wheel and beaten with rods never felt.
Senator Heyburn on the Johnston Sunday Bill
By W. A. Colcord
By W. A. Colcord
THAT the friends of religious liberty are not yet all dead, was demonstrated in the United States Senate when Senator Heyburn, of Idaho, gave expression to his views upon the Johnston District Sunday Bill.
For the third time, Senator Johnston, of Alabama, introduced this bill in the Senate on April 6, 1911. A hearing for the benefit of its opponents was granted before a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on the District of Columbia May 17. This, however, did not appear to deter its progress, the measure being favorably reported to the Senate from the District Committee May 22, and immediately put on the Senate calendar, which meant that it was to be called up regularly for action or consideration each legislative day in the Senate, and that some action should be taken upon it or some disposition made of it when called up, unless some member of the Senate objected or asked that it "go over."
May 26, after the bill, upon request of different senators, had "gone over" several times, the measure was called up again, whereupon Senator Heyburn said, "I ask that the bill may go over," and the president of the Senate said, "It will go over." But Senator Johnston at once asked, "What is the purpose of the senator? I will ask him." To this Senator Heyburn replied: "It is a measure that should not be discussed under a five-minute rule. The questions involved here are of more than passing importance. Many questions are involved; and if the bill is taken up at all, it should be under a rule which would permit its full and free discussion."
Senator Johnston, still insisting that consideration be given to the measure, moved to take up the bill, which took it out from the five-minute rule, and the motion was agreed to. Thereupon, after a few preliminary remarks and considerations, Senator Heyburn made the following speech:
Senator Heyburn's Speech
Mr. President: I have always been opposed to this class of legislation. In the very early days of the settlement of this country we had a great deal of it, and on the statute-books in many of the States there are now provisions which are termed "blue laws," that are ignored. There are some now in existence relative to the District of Columbia that are not enforced.
We can not make people good by legislation. You can punish them for being bad. The spirit upon which this is based, I suppose, is the commandment that "six days shalt thou labor." I have never known any one to propose legislation for the enforcement of that part of the commandment, or trouble his mind about it, and yet, I presume, it is just as important, and was intended to be just as operative, as the following provision against performing any labor on the seventh day.
Mr. Gallinger: Does the senator think that the language "Six days shalt thou labor" is a command that men and women shall labor six days?
Mr. Heyburn: It says "Thou shalt labor."
Mr. Gallinger: I think the senator has given that a far-fetched interpretation. I am sure the theologians will not agree with him.
Mr. Heyburn: I am not a theologian. It may be fortunate for all except myself that I am not. I have a due regard for the observance of the Sabbath, and I believe it should be observed, but I do not believe in legislation compelling one to do it. This measure is of more than passing importance. I had not thought it would pass without considerable discussion. I have heard it suggested that it was a delicate question upon which to speak. I do not feel it to be such. A man who can not discuss his religion has none; a man who is afraid to discuss it has none. I do not think this is an appropriate place to discuss religious questions, except so far as they may be relied upon as a basis of legislation, but I can not refrain from expressing my regret that it is proposed in Congress to deal with the questions involved in this bill. I think I opposed a similar bill on a former occasion, and it was charged in certain places that I was an irreligious person and that I did not believe in orderly conduct on the Sabbath day. There is no foundation for that charge. I have always been a person of strong religious convictions. My ancestors have always been largely interested in religious principle and the development of it. I have followed in their footsteps, and it is because of that, at least in part, that I do not approve of this class of legislation. It was such legislation as this that wrote the annals of bloodshed and oppression and intolerance in the religious history of the world where a part of the people undertook to be sponsors of another part... This legislation grants special privileges to people who are members of religious societies. More than half the world and more than half the people in this city are not members of any religious society. It grants a special privilege to those who are which is withheld from those who are not. The law in this land, general and local, was intended to insure perfect freedom and independence to the citizen in regard to the observance of religious principles. So, as a matter of principle, I am opposed to such legislation. . . . Who is to say what is a sacred concert? A concert that is sacred to one person or one class of persons is not sacred to another. . . . No man has the right to set himself up as a moral standard of all the community or of any part of the community except himself. As to the use of the Sabbath day, every man, so far as personal acts that do not include any acts of lawlessness are concerned, should be the guardian of his own morals. It was never intended that law should be down the rules that should constitute a good man, and say that all men must live up to those rules. That never was the intention of the lawmakers, and we discovered it very soon after we became a nation and had organized government, and we abandoned that kind of legislation. It was the legislation that resulted in whipping people at the tail of the cart, placing them in the stocks, branding them upon the hands, and so forth. That was this kind of legislation under which some person or coterie of persons undertook to set themselves up as censors of the morals of the people. I thought that age had passed. I never expected to see it revived, and I never expected to see an attempt made in the Congress of the United States to prescribe rules that are intended, I presume, to supplement the Ten Commandments, and I suppose every year, according to the temper of a part of the people, we shall have new prohibitions and restrictions. . . . If you are going into this question, go into it to the limit, and compel people to live like the old Puritans of New England did, when they were not allowed to have fire in their churches, and when they had to take their luncheons with them and eat them in cold sheds or where they might. If you are going to be erratic in legislation, be erratic according to some established rule, the rule of our ancestors. If you are going to recognize the rule that is recognized, or, at least, I thought it was, in all parts of this country, of religious freedom and freedom of personal action so long as it violates no law of the land and no contractual right of any one—if you are going to uphold that kind of religious freedom—you can not pass this bill. What authority have we, where do we derive authority, under the Constitution, to enact legislation that will interfere with the personal action of a citizen that is in violation of no law applicable to the whole country? Where else in the United States does such a law as this exist? Are we going to have one code of morals in force by virtue of a law of Congress in the District of Columbia and allow people to go right outside into the State of Maryland and perform the acts that they are not allowed to perform in the District of Columbia?
Mr. Gallinger: Why not?
Mr. Heyburn: The senator asks me why not. Are we going to convert the District of Columbia, then, into a sanctuary, into a great church, so that the citizen must get out of the District of Columbia in order that he may enjoy the ordinary and reasonable freedom of a citizen?
Mr. Gallinger: The senator must know that in a large number of the States, tho not in all the States, laws very similar to this are now on the statute-books. The senator must know that in regulating the liquor traffic we have prohibition in one State and local option in another State, and I do not suppose that this is an anomaly which would come under the senator's condemnation. I see no absurdity or contradiction in legislating for the District11of Columbia on any matter different from what Maryland or Virginia or any other State may think it wise to do. So I think the senator's contention is not well grounded on that point.
Mr. Heyburn: Would the senator be in favor of enacting a law such as this, if he had the power, that should be applicable to the whole nation?
Mr. Gallinger: I would on this subject. I do not know that I would take the exact phraseology of this bill; but I would in a general way.—Congressional Record, May 26, 1911, pages 1569-1571.
This was a fine impromptu speech, and a noble plea for religious freedom. Senator Heyburn should be commended for giving expression to these fearless and courageous utterances. His remarks show that he has some knowledge of history and of the workings of religious legislation; and coming from one who is himself deeply religious, and a believer in Sabbath observance, they were doubly weighty.
The reply given by Senator Gallinger, who is chairman of the Senate Committee on the District of Columbia, and the successor of Ex-Senator Blair of national Sunday Best Bill fame, to Senator Heyburn's last question, is indeed significant, and may itself be taken as a prophecy of what may be expected if Congress once enters the domain of religious legislation.
This speech of Senator Heyburn's, however, appears to have placed somewhat of a damper upon this bill, and checked it in its progress, for they were not able to pass it in the last session of Congress. Well would it be for the country if there were many such champions of right principles and religious freedom. His remark, twice made, that this bill is of more than passing importance, is indeed true, and ought to awaken a wide-spread interest in a study of the principles involved in it, and of the results that must surely follow its enactment into law.
"An Amazing Year"
By Editor
"An amazing year" is what the Springfield Republican calls the year just closed. It says further, "For such a topsyturvy year as this, one must search long in the annals of the past." It then tells of the very mild, balmy weather in New England at Christmas time; and while it was so mild in New England, the storm king was playing havoc in other parts, there being six storm-centers in other sections.
The Republican then goes on to record the storms that broke on so many parts of the world during the last year, speaking particularly of the extremes of heat not only in this country but in Europe — extremes that resulted in much suffering and loss of life. These heat waves were followed by midsummer frosts in parts of Canada, and very early frosts in parts of this country, that did much to damage crops. Then there were earthquakes in some of the islands, and tornadoes in numerous places.
The concluding paragraph of the article reads:
In the Philippines, in November, there was a frightful cyclone, and with it the greatest rainfall — seven feet — ever recorded in human history since the Noachian Deluge. Through the fall the North Atlantic was tormented by such a series of violent gales as old captains say they can not remember in a lifetime at sea. With December things went from bad to worse. Costa Rica suffered a cyclone which destroyed half the banana crop. In Spokane there was an unprecedented snow, stalling trains so that some passengers had to walk sixty miles through the drifts. In Seattle, on the other side of the mountain, the snow was a disastrous rain, and a warm chinook melting the new fallen snow in the mountains caused violent floods. In Colorado this same storm cost the life of a Massachusetts woman, lost in the mountains while on her honeymoon. On the Atlantic there were fresh hurricanes, and even on the big liners many men and some officers were swept overboard by monstrous waves. In the middle of the month severe winter marched down into the Southwest, and two feet of snow fell in the "Panhandle" of Texas — another record. No less astonishing has been the recent invasion of Kansas City, Topeka, St. Louis, and Chicago by such fogs as have previously been known only in London at its worst — fogs in which at midday one might feel in the street the touch of a hand and be unable to see it or the body to which it was attached. Truly, an annus mirabilis, a year of portents, but New England has had little to complain of.
Let the foregoing statements of the conditions of the past year be borne in mind while you read the following:
And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. And then shall they see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. Luke 21:25-27.
The coming of Christ is to be immediately preceded by unprecedented disturbances in nature. The foregoing text shows it clearly. A scripture from Isaiah is of the same import:
Fear, and the pit, and the snare, are upon thee, O inhabitant of the earth. And it shall come to pass, that he who fleeth from the noise of the fear shall fall into the pit; and he that cometh up out of the midst of the pit shall be taken in the snare: for the windows from on high are open, and the foundations of the earth do shake. The earth is utterly broken down, the earth is clean dissolved, the earth is moved exceedingly. The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed like a cottage; and the transgression thereof shall be heavy upon it; and it shall fall, and not rise again. And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall punish the host of the high ones that are on high, and the kings of the earth upon the earth. Isa. 24:17-21.
Trans-Atlantic Co. photo
The disturbances in nature that the Republican tells about will increase more and more as the days go by. We have hardly seen the beginnings of them yet. There is a scientific reason for them, but that reason is to be found in the science of divine prophecy. In the realm of nature we find that scientific law is infinitely accurate and reliable in its operation. God is the Author of every such law; and since He is infinite in all His attributes, His laws must show infinite perfection. But the law that the scientist studies is not any more accurate than are the prophecies that come from the same Author.
The meaning of these great storms may be understood, and the same One who tells their meaning has also provided a shelter from them. Do not delay to find it.
Russia and Persia
Poor Persia is feeling the claw and hug of the Russian bear, and the British lion stands by and seems to acquiesce.
Sun Yat Sen Marches on Peking
Dr. Sun Yat Sen, according to late despatches, has decided to take the field at the head of the Republican army of China and march on the capital. He is offering the Manchus clemency if they will not resist the formation of the republic. American troops have been ordered to China from Manila to help in keeping the railroad open from Peking to the sea.
Equitable Life Building Fire
On January 9 the large building of the Equitable Life Assurance Society, 120 Broadway, New York, was destroyed. Heroic work was done by the firemen to save life and property; but some seven, including several firemen, lost their lives, and the property loss is estimated conservatively at $16,000,000. Many valuable records of the Southern Pacific and other large corporations were destroyed, and much difficulty will be experienced in straightening out the business tangles that will result. The property loss was equivalent to the complete destruction of the buildings of the average town of twenty thousand inhabitants.
The Moroccan Crisis and War
The whole French Cabinet resigned on January 10, and the charge is made in the French press that the resignation is caused by Premier Caillaux seeking to favor Germany in the recent Moroccan dispute. When the German emperor visited Morocco in 1905, he said, in a speech, that French domination in that country would not be tolerated. And on his return to Germany, it is said, he demanded the resignation of Premier Delcasse, who strongly opposed the emperor's plans for Morocco. Delcasse was dismissed soon after, but now it is proposed to return him to the premiership, and that will mean opposition to Germany. Just as it had seemed that the Moroccan question was being settled amicably, it breaks out afresh, and there is no predicting what the outcome of it will be. There seems to be an irrepressible volcano of war that is determined to break out in spite of all that good men can do to stop it. These conditions forcibly remind one of the prophecy of the Bible that tells of the time when the spirits of demons would be working to embroil the whole world in war.
Earthquakes in Germany and Switzerland.
By Editor
A recent despatch from Berlin says: "The frequent occurrence of earthquakes in South Germany and Switzerland for a month or more is causing much discussion among German scientists. They hold that these almost daily shocks have a common origin, which they assumed to be structural displacements far beneath the surface of the earth, similar to what must have accompanied the upheaval of the Alps."
When a person in his sober moments considers what such scientists are saying, he must admit that it is all pure speculation. There is a field in which many men are doing valuable work because they are working on true scientific lines. But there is another class of men who are spending their time in speculations that are manifestly absurd. And if all classes would recognize the fact that there is the most definite scientific accuracy in the prophecies and general teaching of the Bible, they would not be left to speculate on these things, but would know what they are talking about. There are many who complain that the teaching of the doctrine of the second coming of Christ has a tendency to terrify people. But it seems much more consoling to us to think of the Lord coming to take us away from the evils of this world than to have to be in the constant fear that the tremors of the earth in Germany and Switzerland may result in throwing up another range of mountains like the Alps. We will have fearful things in nature, and they will come more and more as time goes on; but every one who knows the meaning of it all, will have no fears, for the reason that he knows what it means.
