Earlier text: THE MEMORIAL OF CREATIONNever since the great Napoleon have the politics of Europe assumed a more threatening aspect than at present; and never have the nations of that mighty continent been more convulsed with real and apprehended danger. France, humbled to the very dust before victorious Prussia; Prussia vaulting from the position of a third-rate power into the highest seat of military glory; Spain assuming the principles of freedom amid the throes of revolution, and Russia shaking off the restrictions which jealous treaties have heretofore imposed, and absorbing new provinces in the valley of the Oxus preparatory to a march, sooner or later, to Constantinople; all proclaim the presence of prodigious events, and foreshadow the coming of still greater catastrophes. The dissolution of the treaty of Paris effected by Russia a few months ago, and the more recent absorption of Khiva in the valley of the Oxus, are initial steps in the execution of a plan which aims at the absorption of a continent. The ambition of Russia is boundless. Not content with an empire stretching from the Black Sea to the Baltic, and from the Baltic on through northern Asia to the Pacific, she is still ambitious of extending her dominions, and the shadow of this ambition falls ominously across Europe, and darkens all Asia. She dreams of a mighty empire which shall claim oceans for its harbors, and continents for its provinces. The plan which has long filled the outline of her imperial policy is to seize Constantinople, cross the Bosphorus, conquer Persia, and, passing the borders of Afghanistan, dispute with England for the possession of India. Her southern limits thus extended from the Bosphorus to the Ganges, the dominion of the continent becomes inevitable, and thus Asia is annexed as a foot-block to the throne of her empire. The memories of the Crimea, then, are not obliterated. England will yet feel, in the robbery of her most flourishing provinces, the vengeance of that ambition which neither the diplomacy of statesmen nor the arms of consolidated soldiers can foil or conquer. Nor does this plan involve simply territorial acquisition; it grasps at the greatest commercial advantages. Hitherto the commerce of England, France, Spain, and nearly all Europe, with India and China, has been subjected to slow and distant voyages around the Cape of Good Hope and the Indian Ocean. But since the opening of the Suez canal, a far more rapid and easy passage is found through the waters of the Mediterranean and the Red Sea. But give Russia Constantinople, and Russian keels will soon guard the Straits of Gibraltar and the ports of Rosetta. Constantinople controls the Dardanelles; and this passage to the Mediterranean once secured, Russian fleets or policy would soon spread Russian mastery over all the Mediterranean. Thus fetter this important sea, and the commerce and bread markets of all southern Europe lie at the mercy of Russia. Thus Spain, France, Italy, Turkey, and Greece, would be compelled to pay tribute to an empire as much dreaded as its ambition is aspiring. Truly “Constantinople is the key to the world,” as Napoleon said at St. Helena. It was the fear of this plan that disturbed that illustrious warrior, and the fear of it to-day makes Europe tremble. Had Russia less power, the specter would seem less huge and formidable; but powerful as she is in numbers and resources, the apprehensions of Europe are well grounded. The only obstacle which has hitherto prevented the consummation of the scheme, has been the Turkish Empire, backed by the consolidated powers of Europe; and the maintenance of her territory unimpaired, is the only impediment which can prevent it now. For the preservation of Turkey, the resources of Europe must be pledged. Turkey herself can offer no successful resistance to Russia. For a long time her power has been waning, and nothing has kept her in existence but the jealousies of other nations, fearful of ambitious Russia. As soon as these nations cease to come to the rescue, the terrible doom of Turkey and of the dominion of the Mediterranean is sealed. Let the fleet of Russia once start for Constantinople, unimpeded by rival nations, and the Turkish Empire will be trampled into powder. It is true the valor of the Turks is historic, but valor alone cannot accomplish all things. It may be heroic and desperate, but without material resources it is powerless. But while the valor of Russia is at a discount, her resources are well-nigh illimitable. The largest and best accoutred army, a rapidly increasing navy, and the most unmeasured means, when developed, of any nation in Europe, await her imperial nod to convert plan into execution and ambition into conquest. But it may be urged, if the plans of Russia are so formidable, why did she submit the Black Sea question to a congress of powers? Why did she not improve her opportunity when France and Prussia were grappling, and each was straining every nerve for mastery? Then if ever, it may be thought, her ambition could have been realized, for two of the most formidable nations of Europe were so disposed that, if they could not be her friends, at least they could not well become her enemies. And when the number and power of her adversaries were thus reduced and weakened, why did she not strike if she has intended to strike at all? Dear as this scheme is to Russia, it may well be supposed that she is too discreet, if not too humane, to unnecessarily forfeit the sympathies of all Christendom by setting Europe at defiance and plunging headlong into aggressive war. “Peaceably if we can, forcibly if we must,” is doubtless the policy of the Russian Czar. The submission of the Black Sea question to a congress of powers was a master stroke of policy. No one can look at the position of Russia on the map, with a knowledge of her population, commerce, and resources, without instantly perceiving the vital necessity of an unrestrained outlet to the Mediterranean. Nearly three-fourths of the commerce of that great nation must be shipped by sea, and the Baltic, the only sea over which she has free control, is open to navigation but little more than one half the year. Hence the necessity of an outlet through the Dardanelles, which admits of constant commercial advantages. Russia has a large coast too on the Black Sea. But, by the treaty of Paris, her right to coast defense was grievously restricted. She was denied the right of maintaining in the Euxine a fleet of sufficient strength to protect her coast in case of “invasion.” With this restriction, literally binding her in the South, the Dardanelles in a military as well as a commercial point of view, became to her precisely what the lower Mississippi in the hands of a foreign power would become to the United States. Had Louisiana never been purchased from France, or had the Southern States succeeded in establishing a separate confederacy, the parallel between the Northern States and the Mississippi, and Russia and the Dardanelles, both in respect to self-defense and commerce, would be perfect. As long as Russia was denied the right of maintaining in the Euxine a navy sufficient to insure her safety, any European nation that might league with Turkey could at any moment sail up the Dardanelles with hostile navies, sink the Russian fleet almost at a broadside, and ravage her defenseless coast. Thus her most easily assailed parts were exposed to the assaults of foreign enemies. What nation would thus suffer its commerce to be subjected to the caprices of a foreign power, or would mildly permit its most easily assailed point to be in the hands of a hostile nation? The demands of Russia in this respect were not only wise, but just; and it was to call the attention of the nations to these facts, and to press home upon them the justness of these demands, that this submission was resorted to. No policy could have been wiser, or more effective in riveting the sympathies of enlightened nations to her cause. Russia was well aware that if her demands were refused, and war was invoked, that intrinsic justice would go far to shield her from the censure of the world. If they were acceded to, she was one step nearer the consummation of her plans. In either case, therefore, the policy pursued would be beneficial to Russia, and injurious only to her foes. But aside from these considerations, Russia is not yet ready for such a war. However strong her military armaments may be upon land, however rapidly her navy and other elements of strength may be rising into power, she is not yet ready for the threatened blow. The contest when begun, will not be confined to land and the strife of armies. The sea will reel beneath the shock of navies, and her white foam redden at the broadsides of their squadrons. To-day, the combined fleets of England, France, Austria, and Turkey, could sweep the Russian banner from the seas. To oppose the navies of her adversaries with her present naval strength, would be to court irretrievable disaster. She would only repeat the story of the French at Trafalgar, or the Turks at Navarino. But as soon as the fleet of the Baltic shall be strong enough to protect the coasts of Russia that lie along the sea (a consummation not impossible nor distant), and the fleet of the Euxine has grown to equal power, we may then believe that the decisive time has come. And it may be, notwithstanding these seeming impediments, sooner than this, England will hear the tread of her embattled legions in India. Slowly, but surely, the work of Russian absorption goes on east and south-east of the Caspian. The clutch of Russia is already upon Khiva. Nearer and nearer the Russian eagles approach the lines of Afghanistan and Beloochistan, which will soon be the only barrier on the west between Russia and India. With equal slowness, but with equal certainty, the borders of the Russian Empire in Asia enlarge toward China and Hindustan from the north. Thus gradually the circle of Russian authority widens in Asia, as tribes and clans of semi-barbarous people, with their little States, are absorbed by the great empire. These absorptions justly excite the fears of European nations, for they well know they bring the hour of Russian supremacy nearer and nearer to their doors. It may be, too, that the annexation of Khiva and the provinces around the Caspian, which so lately stirred England to her feet ready to unsheathe the sword, has for its real object the crumbling of Turkish authority in Asia, by surrounding it on every side by Russian territory and Russian influence. If Russia could lop off Turkey in Asia from the Turkish Empire, and leave only Turkey in Europe subject to the Sultan, Turkish authority would then be confined to the western shores of the Bosphorus, while Russia would control the eastern shores, and virtually the Dardanelles. Thus strengthened, the foothold of Russia in Europe as well as in Asia, would be well-nigh immovable. But it may well be supposed that Russia will never be allowed to absorb provinces along the Bosphorus, through the artful policy of surrounding Turkish power in Asia, without a desperate struggle; but that such a struggle is approaching is undoubtable. To calculate the relations of the probable combatants, or the chances of defeat or victory, would be a matter of uncertain speculation. The sympathies of Prussia, however, would doubtless be with Russia, while the rest of Europe would consolidate against her. But whatever relations the crisis may necessitate, the world awaits with eager interest the solution of the question of Russian supremacy in the Mediterranean and Asia.—Penn. School Journal. As our Lord left no monument of himself in brass or marble, so he left no letters written by his own hand. He did not write his mind on tables of stone, or on sheets of parchment. Even Rome, with all her rage for relics, does not pretend to show a specimen of his hand-writing. Yet he has not left himself without a witness. He has left letters behind him which truly reveal his mind: “Ye are epistles of Christ.” Disciples, when he desires to let the world know what he is, he points to you. Nay, more and further, when he would have the Father to behold his glory, he refers him to the saved: “Father, I am glorified in them.” It is not only that the world, in point of fact, judges of Christianity by what they see in Christians, but they have authority so to do. The Lord himself consented that they should read him there. So, Jesus sends a letter to the world—sends many letters—sends a letter to every city, and every street, and every house. A merchant who is a disciple of Christ goes to India or China. He sells manufactured goods; he buys silk and tea. But all the time he is a letter, a living epistle, sent by Christ to the heathen. A boy becomes an apprentice in a warehouse or factory; but before he was bound to a master on earth, he has been redeemed by a Master in Heaven. He is now, therefore, a letter from the Lord to all his shop mates. In truth, and love, and gentleness, and fairness, and generosity, they should learn the mind of Christ. I confess that this thought is fitted to make us afraid. How shall we fulfill such a function? The solution is, It is the Lord’s own method. He has chosen earthen vessels in order that the glory may be to God.—Christian Weekly. Even to Your Old Age.
By A. S. Hutchins
As the venerable form of the aged servant of God bows under the weight of years, and gradually sinks under the pressure of age, as from the vision the prospects and treasures of this world fade and recede, what solace, what sure support and consolation, are found in the hope of eternal life. The worth of a treasure now laid up above cannot be told. Friends and associates of former years have passed away; the active duties, the heavy responsibilities of life are quite finished; the head has grown hoary, and life's journey is nearly completed; yet peace, joy, and hope, may light up with calm, heavenly cheerfulness and sweet composure the lingering hours till the blessed Saviour shall come with power and great glory, or till called to rest, a little season with sleeping saints, quickly to awake to take the crown of life. The aged pilgrim may have strong hope in God. “The hoary head is a crown of glory, if it be found in the way of righteousness.” Prov. 16 : 31. The language of the believing heart is, “For this God is our God forever and ever: he will be our guide even unto death.” The response of Him who numbers the hairs of our head is, “And even to your old age I am he; and even to hoar hairs will I carry you: I have made, and I will bear; even I will carry, and will deliver you.” Isa. 46 : 4. In view of the infirmities and weakness of old age, David prays: “Cast me not off in the time of old age; forsake me not when my strength faileth. Now also when I am old and grayheaded, O God, forsake me not; until I have showed thy strength unto this generation, and thy power to every one that is to come.” Ps. 71 : 9, 18. Let none who sincerely love the Lord, sink in discouragement because they cannot labor as heretofore. You may show the strength of the Lord to support and comfort you, not only “even to your old age,” but in the hours of “time's farewell.” We are amidst the signs of the times when Jesus says, “Look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.” “Those that be planted in the house of the Lord shall flourish in the courts of our God. They shall still bring forth fruit in old age; they shall be fat and flourishing; to show that the Lord is upright: he is my rock, and there is no unrighteousness in him.” Ps. 92 : 13–15. Confirmation of Scripture.
By J. A. Woodman
The testimony from old monuments to the truth of the Bible is already wonderful and abundant. The following is a strangely interesting instance of this, confirming the story in the 12th chapter of Exodus of that awful morning when the oldest child of every Egyptian family was found smitten by the angel of wrath, “from the first-born of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the first-born of the captive that was in the dungeon,” and “there was not a house where there was not one dead.” Dr. Cumming, of London, says: “There are monuments to be found to every Pharaoh save the one who perished in the Red Sea. Concerning him, two stones have been found narrating many of his exploits, but each ends with “and ——,” a long black line succeeding. Every other of the Pharaohs we find, was succeeded by his eldest son, according to the law of Egypt; but of this Pharaoh it is expressly said that he was succeeded by his second son; while no account whatever remains of his first son.” What an astonishing confirmation of Scripture is this! J. A. WOODMAN. Work is of a religious nature; work is of a brave nature; which it is the aim of all religion to be. “All work of man is as the swimmer’s.” A waste ocean threatens to devour him; if he front it not bravely, it will keep its word. By incessant, wise defiance of it, lusty rebuke and buffet of it, behold how it loyally supports him—bears him as its conqueror along! “It is so,” says Goethe, “with all things that man undertakes in this world.”—Carlyle. COMPLAINTS.—Perpetual complaints, says an old writer, are like unto a new cart, which creaks and cries even while it has no burden but its own wheels; whereas that which is long used and well oiled goes silently away with a heavy load.
Scripture Facts Concerning Man’s Nature and Destiny.
By John Nevins Andrews
Of man’s creation we read thus: “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground.” Gen. 2:7. How he gave to man life is stated in the words which follow: “And breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” It is plain, therefore, that man was taken out of the earth and then life was given to him by his Creator. Paul was correct when he said: “The first man is of the earth, earthy.” 1 Cor. 15:47. The Creator knew whereof he affirmed, and without doubt gave to man his full measure of dignity as well as his just retribution when he said to Adam after his transgression: “Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.” Gen. 3:19. It was not the breath of life which became a living soul, but it was the man formed of the dust which became such when made alive by that breath. The term “living soul” does not distinguish man from the other creatures which God made to inhabit the earth. Moses uses the same term in the original in Gen. 1:20, 21 with respect to the creatures that live in the water. In verse 20, it is in our translation “creature that hath life.” In verse 21, our translation renders it “living creature.” In verse 24, Moses uses the term for the third time and applies it to the creatures which God made on the sixth day. In our translation, the words are rendered “living creature.” In verse 30, Moses uses this term for the fourth time and applies it to every creature that lives upon the land. This instance in our translation is rendered simply “life.” The margin of verse 20 gives the word “soul;” and the margin of verse 30 gives the term “living soul.” So the term nephesh chaiah is used four times by Moses before he applies it to man. And these four instances apply the term to every creature that God has made to live in our world. The first three instances signify simply “living creature;” the fourth instance signifies “life.” When, therefore, Moses in Gen. 2:7, asserts that man became a “living soul,” it is equivalent to saying that he became a “living creature,” or a “living person.” But in this respect, Moses gives him no pre-eminence over other “living creatures.” It is certain that the gift of life to Adam was not an absolute grant of immortal existence; for God affixed to it certain conditions, and if these were violated, the grant of life was forfeited. Gen. 2:17; 3:19. His life was held on condition of obedience, and was to cease in case he transgressed. But God did give to man pre-eminence over all other creatures. He made him in his own image, and the act by which he made him alive showed the honor in which he held him. He “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life.” Gen. 1:26, 27; 2:7. He also set him over the works of his hands. Gen. 1:26–28; Ps. 8. But these facts do not prove that he gave him immortality. God’s image is never said to consist in the attribute of immortality. The most natural signification of the word “image” is “form” or “likeness.” See Gen. 5:1, 3; 9:6; 1 Cor. 11:7; James 3:9. Compare also Phil. 2:6, 7; Col. 1:15; Heb. 1:3. If the image of God has a further meaning then it is fully realized in the fact that man was made with a moral nature capable of distinguishing right from wrong, because God put within man by nature a copy of his law. Rom. 2:13–15. The fall of man marred this work of the law by introducing the carnal mind. Rom. 7:21–23; 8:1–7. Conversion puts off the old man and puts on the new, and thus renews in man’s moral nature the image of God. Col. 2:9, 10. But this does not argue that God conferred on man immortality when he gave him life. Rather does this appear to be the truth: He made him capable of inheriting that great boon, but he put him on trial to first form such a character by obedience as should entitle him to this great gift. This great fact is decisive: God placed man upon probation with reference to the continuance of his life. If he sinned he must be shut out from the tree of life and must die. If he continued in obedience, he should have access to the tree of life and should live forever. Gen. 2:17; 3:19, 22, 23. So Adam held life upon conditions; and it is plain that the absolute gift of immortality could not be his till his probation was completed when there could be no more conditions connected with the continuance of his life. But Moses tells us that man rebelled, and that God pronounced on him the sentence of death. Gen. 3. Paul states the case thus:— “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.” Rom. 5:12. This is the origin of death. Paul tells us that death is “the last enemy.” 1 Cor. 15:26. He also speaks of Satan as the one who has the power of death. Heb. 2:14. It is true that men in general regard death as a higher kind of life; and such Satan intimated to Eve that she would find to be the consequence of transgressing. She would not actually die, but she would become in her mode of existence like God. Gen. 3:4, 5. But when the Law-giver acted as Judge and expounded the penalty which himself had threatened, he said, “Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.” Gen. 3:19. So that death exactly undid the Creator’s work. “The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” Gen. 2:7. Such was his creation. Death is thus described: “Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.” Eccl. 12:7. The conclusion is inevitable that death reduces the man to that very state from which he was raised by the action of the Creator. The dust returns to the earth; the spirit of life returns to its Author, and the man is dead! If the spirit had a conscious, personal existence with God before it came from him, it is fair to presume that it will have after it returns to him; otherwise not. But if it was simply the principle of life communicated by God to the man which he had made of the dust, by which he made him a living creature, and which he withdrew from man at death to be again returned to him at the resurrection, then we may fairly define death as the cessation of life, and not a higher kind of life, or happier mode of existence. The obituaries in Genesis 5, which extend from Adam to Lamech, are worthy of notice. Of the first nine generations, with a single exception, the record ends thus, “And he died.” Gen. 5:5, 8, 11, 14, 17, 20, 27, 31. The exception is in the case of Enoch, and is stated in these words, “God took him.” Verse 24. Paul states the case thus: “By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him.” Heb. 11:5. Eight of the nine antediluvian patriarchs died. One of the nine did not die, for “God took him.” These facts speak volumes to the thoughtful reader. When we come to Abraham we read what God said to him: “Thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age.” Gen. 15:15. And when his years had expired, it is said: “Then Abraham gave up the ghost, and died in a good old age, an old man, and full of years; and was gathered to his people.” Gen. 25:8. Going to the fathers or being gathered to one’s people is plainly leaving the ranks of the living, and being numbered with the silent dead. This is clearly seen in what is said to Moses: “Thou shalt sleep with thy fathers.” Deut. 31:16. This cannot relate to the burial of Moses with his ancestors, for he had a burial by himself in the land of Moab. Deut. 33:6. Nor can it relate to his going to the spirits of his ancestors, unless we hold those spirits to have been asleep, and Moses’ spirit to be asleep when he should join them! The same things may be said with respect to David. 1 Kings 1:21; 2:1, 2, 10; Acts 13:36. Giving up the ghost is dying or expiring. Compare Gen. 25:8, 17; Acts 5:30; Col. 2:5, 10; Job 11:20; 14:10. Rachel’s death is thus recorded: “And it came to pass, as her soul was in departing (for she died), that she called his name Ben-oni; but his father called his name Benjamin.” Gen. 35:18. The word soul in the fourth instance of its use in the Bible, namely, in the original of Gen. 1:30, and in the margin also, is plainly used for life. Thus God speaks of all the creatures in the dry land as creatures “wherein there is life,” or a living soul. Now this use of the word soul is of frequent occurrence in the Bible, and is obviously the sense in which it is used in this text. “When her life was in departing, for she died,” is a very concise and emphatic statement of the case. The death of the widow’s son is recorded in a similar manner. “His sickness was so sore that there was no breath left in him.” 1 Kings 17:17. And Elijah asks the Lord why he has “brought evil upon the widow” by slaying her son. Then he prays that the soul of the child may come into him again, and this prayer being granted, the child “revived.” Verses 20–22. It is not necessary to suppose that a conscious being departed from the child, and then returned to him; for if the child’s soul had gone to Heaven it was no blessing to him to be recalled to earth; and if it were in conscious misery with the lost in hell fire it is not easy to see how it could have a second probation; but the narrative involves only this, that the life of the child was lost, and Elijah prays that it may be restored. His prayer being granted, he said to the mother, “See, thy son LIVETH.” It is plain that the ancient necromancers and dealers with familiar spirits believed that the dead have a conscious existence and can communicate with the living. 1 Sam. 28. But God forbade his people from going to this source for knowledge. Deut. 18:9–14. Why did God so emphatically forbid his people from seeking to the dead for knowledge? Isa. 8:19. Does he fence up any avenues of useful knowledge to his people while suffering sinners who will not be controlled by his word, to freely seek after knowledge? Why should it be a sin to talk with Samuel after he was dead if he could really talk? Indeed, why should the Lord be unwilling for men to do this? What we have already learned of death is sufficient to show that the dead have no knowledge to impart. Those who profess to converse with them receive communications in their names, but the fact that there are legions of fallen angels, who, with Satan at their head, seek our ruin, makes it unnecessary to believe that the dead send messages. On the contrary, the very nature of these communications proves them to be of Satanic origin. Take the case of Saul and the witch of Endor, as an instance. 1 Sam. 28. This woman divined by means of the familiar spirit. One of two things was true. Either the familiar spirit had power to raise any one that Saul should ask for, or he was able to personate exactly the individual that was sought. But to state this case is also to determine what is the truth. The familiar spirit could not raise Samuel from the dead, but he could personate him; and the very first thing that this pretended Samuel did was to tell the woman that her guest was Saul. Verse 12. His next act was to drive Saul to despair, so that in the battle he slew himself. And this is Satan’s usual method; for he tempts men to presumption, telling them there is time enough yet; and then he drives them to despair, telling them that it is too late. Saul did not converse with the real Samuel, but with the familiar spirit who spoke in Samuel’s name. See 1 Chron. 10:13, 14, omitting the italicised words. The Third Angel’s Message. Rev. 14.
By Uriah Smith
EXPLANATION OF THE IMAGE.
The image, against the worship of which the third message warns us, is the image of the beast mentioned in the same message. That beast, as was shown last week, is a symbol of the papacy. An image of it must be something resembling it. To understand what would be an image of the papacy, we must first form a definite idea of what constitutes the papacy itself. Papal supremacy dates from the time when the decree of Justinian, constituting the pope the head of the church and the corrector of heretics, was carried into effect in 538. The papacy, then, was a church clothed with civil power, an ecclesiastical body, having authority to punish all dissenters with confiscation, imprisonment, torture, and death. What would be an image of the papacy? Another ecclesiastical establishment clothed with similar power. And we must look for this image in some non-Catholic country. For in any country where the Catholic religion is the prevailing religion, it would be impossible for any other church to be clothed with civil power but the Catholic church itself. But that would be the beast, not an image of the beast. The beast cannot be an image of itself. This image is not made by the papal beast, but by another beast introduced in Rev. 13:11, a beast which had two horns like a lamb. This symbol, as we design to show more fully hereafter, represents the United States of America. A brief enumeration of a few specifications may be given here: 1. This government is another power distinct from the papacy. 2. It has the right location, which must be outside of the territory occupied by the first beast, and the ten horns or kingdoms which arose out of the old Roman Empire. These occupy all Western Europe; and Eastern Europe and Asia where civilization has risen the highest are covered by the preceding symbols of earthly governments, Dan. 7, Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece. We must consequently look to this hemisphere; and here we find our own government. 3. It has come up “out of the earth,” out of territory previously unoccupied. 4. It arose in a quiet, peaceful manner, like a plant out of the earth, in contrast with those which have come up by the stirring of the wind upon the sea, that is, through revolution and conquest. 5. It is not a monarchical government, there being no crowns upon the horns. 6. It is a republic, as its acts are done by the consent of the people. Verse 14. 7. It is a non-Catholic country, and out of the material here furnished by the Protestant churches, a proper image of the papacy could be formed. It may be objected that whereas the papal church was comparatively a unit, and hence could act in harmony in all its departments in enforcing its dogmas, the Protestant church is so divided as to be unable to agree in regard to what doctrines shall be made imperative on the people. We answer, There are certain points which they hold in common, and which are sufficient to form a basis of co-operation. Chief among these may be mentioned the doctrine of the conscious state of the dead and the immortality of the soul, which is both the foundation and superstructure of spiritualism, and also the doctrine that the first day of the week is the Christian Sabbath. We call attention, briefly, to the fitness of the material here in readiness for an image to the beast: We are not unmindful of the noble service the Protestant churches have rendered to the world, to humanity, and to religion, by introducing and defending, so far as they have, the great principles of Protestantism. But they have made a fatal mistake in stereotyping their doctrines into creeds, and thus taking the first steps backward toward the spiritual tyranny of Rome. Thus the good promise they gave of a free religion, and an unfettered conscience, is already broken. For, if the right of private judgment is allowed by the Protestant church, why are men condemned and expelled from that church for no other crime than honestly attempting to obey the word of God, in some particulars not in accordance with her creed? This is the beginning of apostasy. Read Chas. Beecher’s work, “The Bible a Sufficient Creed.” “Is not the Protestant church,” he asks, “apostate?” Is not the apostasy which we have reason to fear, “already formed”? But apostasy in principle always leads to corruption in practice. And so Paul, in 2 Tim. 3:1–5, sets forth the condition of the professed church of Christ in the last days. A rank growth of twenty heinous sins, with no redeeming virtues, shows that the fruits of the Spirit will be choked and rooted out by the works of the flesh. We can look nowhere else for this picture of Paul’s to be fulfilled except to the Protestant church; for the class of which he speaks maintain a form of godliness, or the outward services of a true Christian worship. And is not the church of our day beginning to manifest to an alarming degree the very characteristics which the apostle has specified? Sufficient testimony on this point has already been presented. See Nos. 11, 12 and 13 of the present volume of the REVIEW. That the majority of the Christians in our land are still to be found in connection with these churches, is undoubtedly true. But a change in this respect is also approaching. For Paul exhorts all true Christians, in his words to Timothy above referred to, to turn away from those who have a form of godliness, but deny the power thereof; and those who desire to live pure and holy lives, who mourn over the desolations of their Zion, and sigh for the abominations done in the land, will certainly heed this injunction of the apostle. And what will be the state of the religious world when this change shall have taken place? We shall then have an array of proud and popular churches from whose communion all the good have departed, from whom the Holy Spirit is withdrawn, and who are in a state of hopeless departure from God. God is no respecter of persons nor of churches; and if the Protestant132 churches apostatize from him, will they not be just as efficient agents of oppression as ever pagans or papists have been? And is it not the testimony of all history that just in proportion as any popular and extensive ecclesiastical organization loses the Spirit and power of God, it clamors for the support of the civil arm? Under these circumstances, let an ecclesiastical organization be formed by these churches (than which nothing would be more natural); and let the government legalize such organization and give it power to enforce upon the people those dogmas upon which they can all agree as a basis of union; and what do we have? Just what the prophecy brings to view: an image of the papal beast, an ecclesiastical organization resembling the ancient papacy perfectly in this respect, that it can use the civil arm to carry out its decrees. And are there any indications of such a movement? The preliminary question, that of the grand union of all the churches, is now profoundly agitating the religious world. In May, 1869, S. M. Manning, D. D., in a sermon in Broadway Tabernacle, New York, spoke of the recent efforts to unite all the churches in the land into co-operation on the common points of their faith, as a “prominent and noteworthy sign of the times.” Dr. Lyman Beecher is quoted as saying:— “There is a state of society to be formed by an extended combination of institutions, religious, civil, and literary, which never exists without the co-operation of an educated ministry.”
Chas. Beecher, in his sermon at the dedication of the second Presbyterian church, Ft. Wayne, Ind., Feb. 22, 1846, said:— “Thus are the ministry of the evangelical Protestant denominations, not only formed all the way up under a tremendous pressure of merely human fear, but they live, and move, and breathe, in a state of things radically corrupt, and appealing every hour to every baser element of their nature to hush up the truth and bow the knee to the power of apostasy. Was not this the way things went with Rome? Are we not living her life over again? And what do we see just ahead? Another general council! A world’s convention! Evangelical Alliance and Universal Creed!”
The Banner of Light, of July 30, 1864, said:— “A system will be unfolded sooner or later that will embrace in its folds church and State; for the object of the two should be one and the same. The time is rapidly approaching when the world will be startled by a voice that shall say to every form of oppression and wrong, ‘Thus far shalt thou go, and no farther.’ Old things are rapidly passing away in the religious and social, as well as in the political, world. Behold all things must be formed anew.”
The Church Advocate, in March, 1870, speaking of the formation of an “Independent American Catholic church,” a movement now agitated in this country, said:— “There is evidently some secret power at work which may be preparing the world for great events in the near future.”
A Mr. Havens, in a speech delivered in New York, a few years ago, said:— “For my own part I wait to see the day when a Luther shall spring up in this country who shall found a great American Catholic church, instead of a great Roman Catholic church; and who shall teach men that they can be good Catholics without professing allegiance to a pontiff on the other side of the Atlantic.”
There is every indication that at no distant day such a church will be seen. The fact that a special message is now waxing loud in the land designed to meet such a contingency, and that we even now see the preliminary steps taken which must result in the formation of that image of which the message forewarns us, is proof that a crisis is upon us for which men would do well to prepare. The third message, mercifully sent out to meet the wants of the present hour, indicates the path of duty, and the only way of escape from impending dangers. U. S.