WHAT is this sin? and what is the destiny of those who commit it? Will they live and die the same as other sinners? How long is it supposed that the wicked will be punished? Mrs. H.
1. The unpardonable sin is a sin that can not be pardoned. This is not because God is not willing to pardon, but because the unpardoned sinner has rejected the means of pardon. The only means of salvation are the blood (or life) of Christ, by which we are transformed. See Heb. 10:29. Now if a man rejects salvation through the sacrifice of Christ’s life, if he counts as naught the power of the Spirit of God, how can he be reached? God will not compel belief. He asks, invites, entreats, men to come to him, accept the salvation purchased by the blood of Christ, and let the Spirit of God into their hearts, that their lives may be transformed to his image. See Rev. 1:5; Zech. 4:6; Eze. 36:26, 27; Rom. 8:9, 10. Now when in the light of the Gospel men reject these means of grace, turn from them, cast them away, their case is described in Heb. 10:26–29: “For if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins. . . . Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye [than temporal punishment anciently], shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden underfoot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?” The Jews committed this sin in attributing the works of the Spirit of God through Jesus to the works of Beelzebub. Read Mark 4:22–30. The Spirit of God if received would have healed them, but they rejected it. And every one commits the same sin who year after year resists God, and at last rejects him altogether. God has no other means of cleansing and pardon. They, having rejected its strongest pleading, will never recognize it more, nor yield to its entreaty.
2. “The wages of sin is death.” Rom. 6:23. “Sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.” James 1:15. Death, or destruction, is the end of sin. We do not know as there is any difference between unpardonable sin and the sins of the finally impenitent. In both cases sin is chosen instead of righteousness, and thereby death is chosen instead of life.
3. The Bible reveals that God will reward every man according to his deeds. Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6–11; 2 Cor. 5:10; Rev. 22:12. Some will doubtless be longer in dying than others, but the punishment of each and all will be eternal death.
4. One word more on the unpardonable sin. Satan persuades precious souls who have fallen or departed from God to think that they are past hope, that they have committed the unpardonable sin. But we are never past hope as long as we have a desire to do the Lord’s will for the Lord’s sake. As long as his Spirit pleads with us and we recognize its voice, there is hope. As long as we hate sin of itself and long for righteousness, there is hope. Those who commit the unpardonable sin are generally little worried about the matter. O, there is all hope in God if we will return to him! Whosoever comes to him he will in nowise cast out. The only one who will not be forgiven is the one who loves sin more than righteousness, self more than Christ.
PLEASE explain what is meant when it says, “God is a spirit.”
The Revised Version is better, “God is spirit.” It means that God is a spiritual being. 1 Cor. 15:45, 46. He is not gross, material, mortal, earthly, but spiritual, yet not less substantial; for Christ is said to have been “the express image of his person,” or, as in the Revised Version, “the very image of his substance.” The things of heaven are more substantial than those of earth. See Heb. 10:34. Angels are spirits, yet real beings. See Heb. 1:14. We must not think that our idea or conception of substance is the one by which to judge the heavenly. While the heavenly beings have form and substance, they have not the flesh of man.
No. 253. The Second Creation.
WILL you please tell me your opinion as regards the second creation. In Gen. 1:29 it says God created man in his own image, male and female. But in the next chapter verses 18 to 23 would seem to imply that a second creation took place. Will you please explain in your next issue and oblige a subscriber. P. C.
Both chapters refer to the same creation—the first is a general description or narrative as regards the world, and the second is a detailed account as regards the first male and female, preliminary to their test and fall. The same order is common in Scripture. The second creation is when God regenerates men (2 Cor. 5:17), and will be completed in the new heavens and new earth (Rev. 21:1, 5).
The Way of Peace
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
“The Way of Peace.”—“The way of peace have they not known,” because they refused to know the God of peace. It has already been shown that God’s law is his way; therefore, since he is the God of peace, his law is the way of peace. So he says, “O that thou hadst hearkened to my commandments! then had thy peace been as a river, and thy righteousness as the waves of the sea.” Isa. 48:18. “Great peace have they which love thy law; and nothing shall offend them,” or, “they shall have no stumbling-block.” Ps. 119:162. So he who prepares the way of the Lord, by giving knowledge of remission of sins, guides our feet into the way of peace (Luke 1:76-79), because he brings us into the righteousness of God’s law. E. J. W.
THE WRONG MAN.
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
It will be worth all the world to me if when the time of reckoning comes the avenger can not find me. The accuser of the brethren comes every day, and here we are before the Judge. “We have come,” says the apostle, “to God, the Judge of all.” The accuser says I am a liar and deceitful, have borne false witness, and have done everything that is evil. This is what you are, he says.
Now it would be worth more to me than all the gold that could be piled in the Bank of England, and ten thousand times that, if I could say: “You are mistaken. The one who did all those things is dead, and you are too late. Another man lives here now. Christ liveth in this house. You may bring against him all the charges you please, for he is able to settle with you for them; but the one you are charging is dead, and you have no case at all.” In order to be able to say that, I must be willing that the Lord should take my life, and all that pertains to it. It will be like taking my life, for my life has been made up of sin. So in the midst of sin and temptation I say, “I am crucified with Christ; nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.” E. J. W.
SOMETIME
By Gertrude Judson
BY GERTRUDE JUDSON.
Some time, some day, the dark clouds will be rifted,
Some time will the pain from the sad life be sifted,
And hearts aching now will with joy be uplifted,
Some time, some day.
Some time, some day, thro' the bitterness springing
Will fountains of light sweet heart peace be bringing,
Clear skies, soft winds, and sweet wild birds winging,
Some time, some day.
Some times, some days, there are burdens of sorrow;
Be patient, dear heart; faith hath light—we may borrow.
The Saviour holds for us a golden to-morrow,
Some time, some day.
Some time, some day, this drear earth will be vernal
There'll be rest, sweet rest on fair hills eternal;
For sorrowing hearts there'll be joys supernal,
Some time, some day.
Divine Love.
By G. T. Wilson
BY G. T. WILSON.
THERE is a magic influence in the power of divine love, which, when it touches the human heart, melts away the barriers of cold formality, bursts the bands of pride and selfishness from the soul, and causes to fall from the head, the ears, and the hands of the person whom it touches, those outward adornments which are used to attract vain admiration of poor fellow-mortals. It makes the soul fall at the feet of a crucified and risen Saviour, and, renouncing self, plead the merits of Christ alone. It sees in the Saviour matchless charms, which, in contrast to human selfishness and outward adornments, are of more value than diamonds and gems.
Divine love is like an ocean inexhaustible. We bathe in it and are refreshed. We drink it and live. It quickens every fiber of the being to perform the same actions as its Author. It works righteousness where sin had reigned supreme. It makes the receiver forgetful of self and selfish interests, and causes him to find his greatest joy in bringing happiness to others. It binds the receiver so closely to the Giver that the loss of earthly friends is little felt if only the smiles of the Saviour and Father can be constantly secured. It clears the soul from the fear of man, and fills it with a freedom which makes it free from all men, and yet the willing servant of all men, if thereby some may be saved from ruin. Cold or hunger, nakedness or peril, the civil sword, the stake, or dungeon, can not drown or break that love by which the soul is bound to his Creator. It suffers long and is kind. It thinks no evil; it gives soft answers for harsh words; it delights in mercy and truth, and rejoices in carrying out the will of the Creator, and in promoting the happiness of fellow-creatures. Such are a few of the blessings and fruits of divine love. But who can tell its depth or number of its blessings. We need it; let us ask for it and receive it.
Gisborne, N. Z.
THE SABBATH CONTROVERSY.
By W. N. Glenn
BY W. N. GLENN.
Brief Argument for the Seventh Day.
THE Sabbath is a memorial of creation. “Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.” Gen. 2:1–3.
Christ was the Creator of all things (see John 1:1–3, 14; Col. 1:14–17); therefore the seventh day was sanctified as a memorial of Christ and his work. “The Sabbath was made for man; . . . therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath.” Mark 2:27, 28.
The Sabbath is a memorial of redemption. “And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched-out arm; therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day.” Deut. 5:15. Redemption is creation over again. “We, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.” 2 Peter 3:13. “For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works.” Eph. 2:10. The redemption of Israel from Egyptian bondage was a type of the greater redemption from sin. But the Sabbath is not a type; all types have been instituted because of sin and the plan of redemption. The Sabbath was instituted as a memorial of creation before sin entered; therefore the Sabbath is the appropriate memorial of re-creation, or redemption.
The Sabbath is a sign between God and his people. “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; also verse 20. Some will say that this means Israel; so it does, but who are Israel?—“They are not all Israel, which are of Israel; neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children; but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.” Rom. 9:6–8. “And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” Gal. 3:29. “For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the Spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.” Phil. 3:3. Then the seventh-day Sabbath, which Christ, the Creator, sanctified in the beginning, is and ever will be the sign between him and his6people.
The Sabbath is the seal of the law of God, the only commandment which designates the Author of the law. It is thus an essential part of the law, of which Christ said, “It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.” Luke 16:17. The Sabbath “according to the commandment” is the seventh day, and was kept by Christ and his disciples. See Luke 4:16; 23:56; Acts 13:42; 17:2; 18:3, 4.
Some Stock Arguments for the First Day.
It is said that the Sabbath was changed from the seventh to the first day of the week, because Christ rose from the dead on that day.
It is thought that Christ inaugurated the change and left his disciples to carry out the purpose.
It makes no difference which day we keep, so we keep the seventh part of time.
Sunday is the true seventh day, and therefore it is the day designated in the commandment.
We can not tell which is the seventh day.
The seventh day is the Jewish Sabbath, and therefore done away.
The Sabbath was “blotted out,” “nailed to the cross;” therefore there is no sacred time.
The majority observe the first day.
The law of the land recognizes Sunday, therefore we ought to keep it.
My father and mother kept the first day, and they have gone to heaven.
The workingman needs to rest one day in seven, therefore he ought to rest on Sunday.
The right of rest for each requires a law of rest for all, therefore all should rest on the first day of the week.
The long day, when Joshua commanded the sun and moon to stand still, carried the seventh day forward to the first day. (This is the latest pretext, as far as we have heard.)
Many other so-called arguments of a like nature are advanced but none of them are based on the authority of the Scriptures. The word of God is silent on the subject of a change of the Sabbath, excepting as a matter of prophecy that an attempt would be made to change the law. Of a certain arrogant power the prophet Daniel wrote: “And he shall speak words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High; and he shall think to change the times and the law.” Chapter 5:25, R. V. In Paul’s second letter to the Thessalonians this same power is called the “mystery of iniquity,” the “man of sin.” And this is the power (Rome) that set up the first day of the week as a substitute for the Sabbath. “But,” says Daniel, “the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.” Paul also adds, “And then shall be revealed the lawless one, whom the Lord Jesus shall slay with the breath of his mouth, and bring to naught by the manifestation of his coming.” 2 Thess. 2:8, R. V.
The Tridentine Faith
By I. E. Kimball
THE CREED OF CATHOLICISM. No. 2.
BY I. E. KIMBALL.
The Tridentine Faith.
The Roman Church embraces 180,000,000 communicants, one-half of nominal Christendom. All not of her faith are understood to be schismatics. Her monarchy is a pyramid whose head reaches to heaven and its base fills the earth. The fabled realms of purgatory are subject also to her, for many of her communicants are thought to need the salutary pains of fire to purge their sins.
Romanism doctrinally may be learned from the Council of Trent, which for twenty years (ten of actual service), looked up articles of faith, and defined and condemned heresy. Since that time Bellarmin, the great controversialist, Bossuet, a skillful and very effective writer of France, and Mohler, of Germany, have written out Romanism very fully.
The Council of Trent is reckoned the eighteenth ecumenical council, and was called by Pope Paul III., Dec. 13, 1545. Its decrees were finally signed by 255 members, two-thirds of whom were Italians.
The articles for consideration were drafted by the pope. Twelve sessions were given to doctrines. Virulent anathemas upon heretics closed the record of the council, whose decrees were solemnly affirmed by a bull of Pius IV., 1564, with the reservation of the sole right to interpret them.
The Tridentine Faith formulates these decrees in a precise summary, and this creed was made binding by a double bull of Nov. 13 and Dec. 9, 1564. All preachers, teachers, professors of colleges, etc., are made to subscribe to these articles. It is the plainest symposium of Catholic faith, although two new dogmas have since been introduced.
The Tridentine Faith is put in the form of a personal confession, and made binding by the most solemn oath. It begins with profession of faith in the Nicene Creed, with all the western additions; then follows the summary of the creed, which begins as follows:—
I most steadfastly admit and embrace the apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions, and all other observances and constitutions of the same church. I also admit the Holy Scriptures according to that sense which our holy Mother Church has held and does hold, to which it belongs to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the Scriptures; neither will I ever take and interpret them otherwise than according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.
It will be observed in this, first, that the church is held up high above everything else; her observances and constitutions must be steadfastly embraced altogether intact. Secondly, that tradition is put before the Scriptures as the next necessary thing. The traditions of the church are law and life, more sacred than Scripture, because oral expositions, or stories, forsooth, transmitted from the past, are settled matters, having received the sanction of the church, whereas the Bible is an unsettled matter to all who read it carefully. A dogmatic definition stands forever; consequently the Bible is brought in last; and while they “steadfastly embrace” tradition, they “admit” the Scripture, but “only according to that sense which holy Mother Church has held and does hold.” It is plain enough that the Scriptures are not held as an infallible guide of the church, but are completely taken out of the hands of the people. The church, not the Bible, instructs the mind and heart.
It was a notorious fact, which Luther made very plain, that there was no such thing as the “unanimous consent of the Fathers.”
The consent of Augustine or of Basil is not a universal thing, simply because there are differences of opinions amongst the Fathers. They claimed no lordly authority in the interpretation of the Scriptures. The church would thrust them into the chair of infallibility—a place they had no idea of occupying. Think of it now: I must be gauged in the interpretation of Scripture according to “Mother Church’s” opinion, which is often a medley of opinions.
St. Bernard—shall I say the greatest saint of his age—opposed the idea of the immaculate conception of Mary; popes and Fathers have stood on both sides of this issue, stood there, and died standing there, and yet the church settles the dogma with an anathema upon the head of every opposer. And then the church tells us to interpret according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers. Thomists and Scotists, Franciscans and Dominicans, Augustinians and Jesuits, have thrown down the gauntlet to each other, with charges of mortal sin upon their lips. The corrupt harmony of the Catholic Church is a perpetual discord. But, right to the point of fact, it takes away wholly the right of private judgment or choice; it makes us dummies in the hands of man; makes us depend upon the voice of the church for knowledge of the way of salvation; and the voice of the church is quite commonly the voice of one or two or three men, whose controlling influence is definite with the body.
Are we to be children and babes before the Fathers of the church? The Catholic answers, Yes. No, say I vehemently, for Christ teaches to “beware of false prophets,” and try them, whether they be false or true. He enjoins us to call no man on earth your Father, that is, regard them not as such in spiritual matters, “for one is your Father, which is in heaven,” and “all ye are brethren.” “They shall be all taught of God,” and he will pour out his Spirit upon “all”—not two or three. He gives his Holy Spirit to them that ask, “richly, to teach them all things.”
This doctrine of limiting our investigation or belief is altogether subversive of faith in God. It tends toward the glorification of man, and trusting in man, contrary to the Scriptures, which say, “Cursed is the man that trusteth in man;” and again, “Put not confidence in a guide.” The Catholic Church so abounds in mediaries that they will never know that we have access by faith directly to God, through Christ, who needs no colleagues of mediation. The Tridentine Creed goes on to make profession of faith in the seven sacraments of the church, baptism, confirmation, eucharist, penance, and extreme unction, holy orders, and matrimony. A Protestant will hesitate as he goes over this list in the acceptance of all this as “necessary for salvation.” Protestants choose the word “repentance” rather than “penance;” and anointing with holy oil consecrated by the bishop, at7the dying hour, they deem altogether unnecessary, unless the instruction of James is to be carried out for the recovery of the sick. It was not made a sacrament of the Roman Catholic Church until the council of Florence, 1453. Marriage was also made a sacrament in the days of Innocent III., 1199 A.D.
But it is a fact that one and all of these sacraments are utterly perverted. Baptism is not only perverted in method, but in principle. Man “believeth unto righteousness,” the Bible says not, “is baptized unto righteousness.” Baptism is only a sign of what believing has wrought in the soul. It is made to show death to self and resurrection unto life with God. Rom. 6:3–5. Thus we show that we are dead to self by being buried, and that we now live with God and unto him, by our resurrection from the watery grave. The sprinkling of holy water does not show this. The Catholic idea is that water made holy by bishop or priest imbibes the power to sanctify the initiate, and that it “washes away sin;” but the blood of Christ alone can do that. Thus they trust to an empty form and remain unchanged in heart and life. It is faith in the blood of Christ and the power of God “which worketh by love and purifies the soul.” Confirmation is but an empty form if the one who confirms be not filled with the Spirit of God. The laying on of hands indeed should be practiced, and will be by those who are baptized with the Holy Ghost. Then indeed it will “confer grace.”
The Eucharist.—On this I must quote the sixth article of the creed:—
In the mass there is offered to God a true, proper, and propitiatory sacrifice, for the living and the dead; and that in the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist there is truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and that there is made a change of the whole essence of the bread into the body, and of the whole essence of the wine into the blood, which change the Catholic Church calls transubstantiation. . . . Under either kind alone Christ is received whole and entire, and a true sacrament.
This has a strain above all the idolatries of heathendom. The spiritual Christ and the sacrifice on Calvary are lost sight of. They manufacture the Deity out of bread and wine, because, forsooth, Christ said, “This is my body,” and “this is my blood.” But did he not say, “I am the Vine,” and “I am the Light of the world,” “I am the good Shepherd,” and “I am the way, the truth, and the life”? But “the flesh profiteth nothing; the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit,” and are to be spiritually interpreted. He is the spiritual Vine, the spiritual Bread, the spiritual Shepherd, and the spiritual Way, Truth, and the Life,” so that even the dead might hear his voice.
This dogma of transubstantiation obliterates all traces of the spiritual life. We do not eat our Christ as a biscuit, but feed upon his word, his life, and thus bring his mind and principles into the soul. The mass purports to be salvation for the living and dead, as a sacrifice in and of itself. So it no longer stands “to show the Lord’s death till he come,” as a memorial, but is simply a repetition of his sacrifice by the hand of the priest. It tends to lead all to trust not in the sacrifice of Calvary, but in works, in human efforts for salvation. How damnable is such a sacrament! It puts Christ’s atonement entirely out of sight.
GOD'S WORD THE SOURCE OF PURITY.
By J. F. Ballenger
BY J. F. BALLENGER.
“Thy word is very pure; therefore thy servant loveth it.” Ps. 119:140.
If all who profess faith in God’s word were to make it the guide of their daily lives, it would do more to silence infidel objections than all the preaching and writing that is done in defense of the Bible, when a fact is demonstrated that puts an end to any further controversy.
There are but few men in the world but what admire a pure and holy character, even if they know that they do not possess it themselves; and if they could see in all who profess conversion a real and true transformation of character, a real living reflection of the life of Christ, there would be a more general yielding to the power of the Gospel as a means of reform.
A man’s life is a duplicate of the rule by which he walks; if his rule of conduct is pure and elevating, his character will be such.
David says, “Thy word is very pure.” All who are in any way familiar with the Scriptures know that this is true. There is no duty of love, reverence, or respect that we can show either toward God or our fellow-men but that is found in the Bible. So, then, that book contains a perfect rule of life. And this infallible guide to holiness has been and is to-day the “desire of all nations.”
The heathen world has felt the need of a direct revelation from God. Plato said: “We can not know of ourselves what petition will be pleasing to God or what worship we should pay to him, but it is necessary that a lawgiver should be sent from heaven to instruct us. O, how greatly do I long to see that man!” Again he says, “This lawgiver must be more than man, that he may teach us the things that man can not know by nature.”—Fables of Infidelity, p. 68.
Had this great philosopher believed in and studied the plan of salvation through Jesus Christ, as revealed in the types and shadows of his time, he would have received the instruction and seen by faith the One whom his soul so much desired—the Immanuel, or God with us. Plato had his rule of conduct, but he found it powerless to subdue the evils of the natural heart and guide him to that haven of rest that he longed for.
It is in this that the word of God differs from all human rules of conduct. When this word is received in the heart by faith in the world’s Redeemer, it comes, not as a mere form, but a living reality. It reaches the “thoughts and intents of the heart,” and subdues every vestige of evil, and enables the pure life of God to shine out through the human soul.
The reason that so many fail to reflect the pure life of God’s word is because they do not receive the life of God in the word. Many people merely give a mental consent to the truth of the Scriptures, and then try to show their belief in the word by their attendance at church and an occasional performance of some ordinance or ceremony, while the general tenor of their lives is but little, if any, better than the world around them. This ought not to be so, and would not if the word was received in the heart by faith, for it would then be a living, active demonstration of the character of the Author of the word, because there is power in the word to make the life just what God designs it should be, and what the individual desires that it shall be.
O, how much we need men and women to-day that will show their faith by a life of perfect obedience to all God’s commandments, and thus prove to the world that there is power in the word to cleanse and purify the human soul and make it a temple of the living God. “O taste and see that the Lord is good,” and that he is able to save unto the uttermost them that come unto God by Jesus Christ. Praise the Lord for his goodness to the children of men.”
Grand Ledge, Mich.
What You Are Does More Good
“You will do good less by what you say or do, or even give, than by what you are.”
THE CHURCH RESPONSIBLE FOR SUNDAY “DESECRATION.”
Popular ideas which are erroneous, and are supported by religious leaders, often form the strongest barriers to genuine reform, and the richest soil for final harvests of evil. The popular teachings in the churches, at the present time, furnish food for no-Sabbathism, and what is called incorrectly “Sabbath-breaking.” The churches assume that Sunday is the Sabbath, and that all which the word of God says about the Sabbath is applicable to the Sunday. This assumption is so manifestly opposed to the facts of history, and to an intelligent exegesis of the Scriptures, that it carries no weight outside the circle of those who make it. Meanwhile the churches, in order to parry the claims of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment, have taught the fundamental doctrines of no-Sabbathism so long, and so vehemently, that the world has accepted the theory which is especially grateful to the carnal mind, and has settled into corresponding action. These false theories of the church have ripened, and come back to perplex and destroy. The great multitude sends its tens of thousands out every Sunday, seeking rest, pleasure, comfort, each in his own way. The churches call after them to desist from their impious “Sabbath-breaking,” and come to the church. Between the screams of the whistles, and the roar of the trains; at the pauses in the races, and the momentary silence of merry-go-rounds; amid the shouts of the bathers, and the clink of the beer glasses, the crowd answers back: “There is no Sabbath; that was an old Jewish affair, of the long ago; we are free of all such burdens under the Gospel!”
Where did the crowd learn such talk as that? They heard some man, larger or smaller, in the pulpit years ago when they went to church, say thus with sanctified derision, in order to keep some conscientious members of his flock from “keeping Saturday.” That idea has ripened fast, and now they laugh as the pulpit stands aghast at the result of its own teachings, and see the work of Sunday holidayism go on. This is not a picture of fancy, but the plain facts, and the cold logic of the situation. The average business man of to-day is too keen to be taken with the lame logic of “the transfer of the law from Saturday to Sunday.” He knows that if the law of the Decalogue is set aside, there is nothing left but human choice and individual authority. He prizes his own opinion above the opinion of the church, and hence the result as it now appears.—Selected.
Sorrows Like Thunder Clouds
“SORROWS are like thunder clouds; in the distance they look black; over our heads hardly gray.”
Order as the Foundation of Health and Peace
“ORDER is the sanity of the mind, the health of the body, the peace of the city, the security of the state.”
SUNDAY LAWS IN SWITZERLAND.
By H. P. H.
[From our own correspondent.]
ALTHOUGH inferior in size, Switzerland is not one whit behind her large sister republic, the United States, in fulfilling her part of Rev. 13: 11-18. There is here a well-organized effort to secure Sunday laws to insure the observance of the wild solar holiday wherever its pretended claims are not voluntarily respected. As in most countries of Europe, almost unobserved the camel's nose was thrust into the tent through laws regulating the operation of factories. In the different nations, these factory laws are modeled on the same block, and, while some variations appear, the Sunday clause is almost invariably retained.
This regulation of Sunday observance by civil law is chiefly fostered by “committees for the better observance of Sunday,” which were partly originated and chiefly inspired by similar organizations in America. A general committee of this character having charge of the work in all Switzerland has organized sub-committees in the leading cities. These consist chiefly of pastors of churches. Besides urging all ministers to preach at least once a year on the importance of Sunday observance, these committees hold special meetings, circulate literature, but above all seek to influence legislation in favor of Sunday.
These Sunday committees have set themselves with great vigor at the task of removing from the Sunday institution all the rubbish heaped upon it by greed of gain and a pleasure-loving world. They propose to clear the day of all abuses and hold it forth as the bright banner of the millennial dawn. In this, their dreams run parallel with those of socialists, who look for Edenic times to result from the execution of their theories.
During the past summer, efforts have been made to have transferred to another time the special schools held on Sunday for the benefit of young people that desire to continue their studies while engaged in business. Some of these schools are in session at the time of church service; in cities where there is little hope of having them transferred to another day, it is requested that the hour be changed so as not to conflict with the hour for church service. Thus it is evident that here, as elsewhere, the ultimate object of these efforts in behalf of Sunday laws ostensibly for the protection of the enslaved laboring classes, is to remove every rival of church services.
Another object aimed at during the past summer was to free the customs officers along the frontiers from Sunday service. But this is a hard point to carry; for the government has learned that people will smuggle on Sunday as well as other days. Of course, the object of these laws is to make everybody keep Sunday; but the question quite naturally arises, What good will it do to compel people by law to keep Sunday so long as they smuggle, steal, lie, blaspheme, etc.? What the people need is to be converted; then they would observe a rest day in obedience to God’s law; then there would be no need of a human law to compel them; but if they are not converted, what virtue is there in forcing them under penalties to observe the day? There is virtue in such work only where a premium is placed on hypocrisy.
In addition to secular schools and the frontier patrol on Sunday, the committee sees three great giants in the way,—the railways, the postal service, and the army. But it has with much spirit attacked these giants, and has already scored some victories. A law has been secured which requires that railway employees must have a given number of holidays each year, seventeen of which must be Sundays. In some cities, the number of mail deliveries has been reduced; in this, Basel is among the foremost, having but one delivery on Sunday. But the worst element of all to capture and manage is the army; when men have little or no religion, they much prefer the excitement and display of drill in the open air to the church service. Again, the whole tenor of war is diametrically opposed to the spirit of the Gospel. Nevertheless, the army has been attacked and some points scored in favor of Sunday. This is not because the army is growing better, but because Sunday friends are farther from the Gospel.
Being wearied of the long struggle with giant obstacles, the Sunday-law seekers have taken a new tack, and endeavored to reach their goal by a shorter road; they make an effort to have the principle of Sunday rest embodied in the national constitution. This is indeed a bold step, and is indicative of the strength of the Sunday movement. When once this principle is incorporated in the constitution, the nation is committed on the question of Sunday laws. With the principle thus firmly riveted on the nation, the Sunday committees will soon see that it is respected in all the details of social and commercial life; and the day when this will be an accomplished fact is near at hand.
Basel, Switzerland, December 15.
H. P. H.
Satolli on United States.
“Marquis Sacrapanti, the Noble Guard of Leo XIII., equipped with the zucchetto and beretta to be conferred on Mgr. Satolli, arrived in Washington at 4:30 o’clock Thursday afternoon, accompanied by Dr. Rooker, Mgr. Satolli’s secretary, and was immediately driven to the Legation Building. John D. Keiley, city treasurer of Brooklyn, and Surveyor McGuire, of the port of New York, came over to Washington as the guests of the Noble Guard.” This is from the Catholic Mirror of the 28th ultimo.
On receiving the zucchetto, a red skull cap, the new cardinal responded. He spoke of how faithfully he had carried out the instructions of the pope, his gratification at the pope’s kindness and appreciation of his services, and thus continues:—
“This gratification is increased when I see that the honor which the holy father has shown to and conferred on me is made the subject of rejoicing to the whole of the people of this great republic, irrespective of religious belief. Manifestations of this general rejoicing have not ceased to pour in upon me since the first day it was known in this country that I had been made a cardinal.
“You, Marquis Sacrapanti, have made a long voyage to bring to me this official announcement. You have come from the Old World to the New, and it gives me sincerest pleasure to welcome you here. You will find, as I have found, that the American people are second to none in their generous hospitality. You will be received with the same kindness as I met with when I came here a stranger. You will find much to admire and to wonder at in this great country, much that to you, coming from the Old World, will be new and marvelous. I am certain, however, that you will admire nothing more than the wonderful spirit of union and brotherly love which prevails in this great republic. You will see a people scattered over an enormous extent of territory, with an infinite variety of tastes and desires, and of material interests, but all united in the one great object of the maintenance of their constitutional unity and liberty.”
All of which shows the wonderful progress Rome is making in this country. Such an expression from a Roman Catholic celebrity can not, we believe, be found previous to 1892. In that year the government was in principle deeded to Rome, and Rome knows it.
