The American Sentinel 10
February 21, 1895
“The ‘Monitor,’ the Prophecies and the Beast” American Sentinel 10, 8, pp. 57, 58.
IN further consideration of the complaints made by the Monitor against the AMERICAN SENTINEL, and commented upon in these columns last week, we notice first that it says:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 57.1
The prophecies though are the most alarming characteristic of the sect [to which the SENTINEL belongs]. Ordinary people and politicians are compelled to wait for the morrow to see what it will bring, but the AMERICAN SENTINEL can pierce the future, and by chapter and verse construct the horoscope of the next century. AMS February 21, 1895, page 57.2
Why should the prophecies be an alarming characteristic of any sect, or of anybody, or of anything? Is not the greater part of the Bible made up of prophecies? To respect the prophecies is only to respect the Bible. To believe the prophecies is to believe the Bible. To despise the prophecies is to despise the Bible. To make light of the prophecies is to make light of the Word of God. Is it then that the prophecies are an alarming thing to the Monitor, because the Bible is an alarming thing to Catholicism and the papacy altogether? AMS February 21, 1895, page 57.3
As for our not being compelled to wait for the morrow to see what it will bring forth, like ordinary people and politicians, but by chapter and verse being able to know the future, why should that be counted a reproach to us or anybody else? It is written: “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” Amos 3:7. Then when God has revealed things, why should it be considered an alarming or a reproachful thing that somebody should know them? And if “ordinary people and politicians” do not know the things that are revealed by the Lord, and therefore do not know what the morrow will bring, is it not because ordinary things and politics, rather than the wisdom of the Lord, occupy their minds and attention? When God has revealed the things that the morrow will bring, then ought not ordinary people and politicians to know as well as anybody else what the morrow will bring, and ought not all to know, who have any respect for God and his Word? AMS February 21, 1895, page 57.4
The Lord has been revealing the things of the morrow ever since the day in which he told Noah of the coming flood—yes, even from the day when Enoch, “the seventh from Adam,” prophesied, saying: “Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” Jude 14. AMS February 21, 1895, page 57.5
In the book of Daniel the world-powers are described, and the history of the world is outlined, from the days of Babylon of old until the last day and the end of the world itself. There is clearly pointed out the then coming succession of the empire of Medo-Persia to that of Babylon; the succession of the empire of Grecia to that of Persia; of Rome to Grecia; the division of Rome into the ten parts, caused by the barbarians; the rise of the papacy as a world-power among these, and its uprooting of three of them; and the continuance of the papacy until it shall be destroyed and given to the burning flame at the coming of the Lord in the clouds of heaven. Now it would have been perfectly easy for any man who lived at any time in these periods, who had these prophecies and believed them, to know and to tell what would be in succeeding centuries; and this, not from any wisdom or knowledge of his own, but simply by believing the Word of God. AMS February 21, 1895, page 57.6
In the book of Revelation the field of prophecy is opened with Rome at the time of Christ’s sojourn upon the earth; and, with many particulars added, the time is again covered till the end of the world and the destruction of the papacy in flaming fire at the coming of the Lord in the clouds of heaven. And to anyone who will read these prophecies and believe them, it will not be at all difficulty to know what the morrow will bring. We confess that we do carefully study these prophecies; and we do implicitly believe them; and we are happy to be able to say that by them we do know what the morrow will bring. But with him to whom some of these things were first revealed, we freely say, “But as for me, this secret is not revealed to me for any wisdom that I have more than any living” (Daniel 2:30); it is open and free to all equally with us, and, equally with us, all can know who will read the prophecies and believe them. The Monitor would do far better to study and believe these prophecies than to be publishing that “the prophecies are the most alarming characteristic” of any sect, or sneering at the ability of anybody to pierce the future and know what the morrow will bring. AMS February 21, 1895, page 57.7
Quoting from the SENTINEL, and commenting as he goes, the editor of the Monitor continues as follows:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 57.8
The SENTINEL was established in 1886 to combat the organized attempt, first represented in the National Reform Association alone, and later, in the solid combination of the popular Protestantism of the whole country, to fasten upon the National Government the recognition and maintenance of the forms of religion—to accomplish the union of religion and the national power. AMS February 21, 1895, page 57.9
The establishment of the paper was a most peculiar move, as we are told on the next page that the editor knew that the movement—whatever it was, we haven’t the faintest idea—would succeed, and what is more, would be followed by the triumph of the church of Rome. AMS February 21, 1895, page 57.10
Yes, we did know from the beginning that that movement would succeed, and that its success would be followed by the triumph of the church of Rome in this country, and through this triumph it would triumph in Europe and all the world; and this we announced long before Leo XIII. had publicly announced his scheme to accomplish this very thing in this very way. AMS February 21, 1895, page 57.11
How it can be that the editor of the Monitor “has not the faintest idea” of what this movement was, immediately after having quoted our statement of just what the movement was, is a question worth asking; but that he may be fully informed on this point, we will say that there is a book now on the press which gives the full history of the movement and its success, and the first steps of the papacy toward her coming triumph upon the success of that movement, and as soon as this book is ready we shall send a copy to the Monitor for the editor’s special information and use. AMS February 21, 1895, page 57.12
Concerning the establishment of the SENTINEL being “a most peculiar move,” in view of the fact that “the editor knew that the movement would succeed,” it must be remarked that this is another queer notion of the editor of the Monitor. What would be the use of starting a paper to oppose a movement that had in it no element of success? The SENTINEL was started to oppose the movement, not with the expectation of preventing its success, but to save men from the ruin involved in the movement. Noah knew that the wicked movement of his day would succeed in ruining the world; but he opposed that movement, not with the expectation of preventing it, but to save men from that ruin. Jesus Christ knew that the wicked movement of his day would result in his death and the awful destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish nation, and yet he opposed that wicked movement that he might save men from its terrible consequences. Paul knew that the “falling away” form the truth of the gospel, begun in his day, would result in the establishment of the “man of sin,” the “mystery of iniquity”—the papacy; yet he devoted his life to opposing that movement, not because he expected to prevent its success, for he knew it would continue until destroyed “with the brightness of His coming,” but with the hope of saving men from the soul-destroying deceptions of that movement. So now, the AMERICAN SENTINEL is opposing the same movement with the same knowledge that it will succeed, and with the same object, the salvation of men—including the editor of the Monitor—from the ruin involved in a connection with the movement. AMS February 21, 1895, page 57.13
Yes, we knew the movement would succeed, and it has succeeded; and the papacy is now making vast use of the advantage which this success has given her. Upon this the Monitor further remarks:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.1
This startling information is all derived from the Bible. “It was by the scripture of Revelation 13:11-17, saying that they would make ‘an image to the beast,’ that we knew that the National Reform movement would certainly succeed, and we always said so.” He does not enlighten us on the name of the “beast” whose image was made, but there is no doubt in our minds but he refers to the Columbian postage stamp. AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.2
Yes, this information, startling or otherwise, was derived from the Scripture at the place referred to—Revelation 13:11-17. No, the beast referred to, to which the image was made, is not the Columbian postage stamp. It may be that in the article referred to by the Monitor, we were not sufficiently explicit in naming “the beast” to make it perfectly clear to the mind of the editor of that paper. And as we want never to leave anyone in doubt or uncertainty, especially upon this most important point, we shall occupy a little space in the endeavor to make it so plain that even the Monitor may not mistake. And lest the editor should again “have no time to look up the references,” we shall do all we can to aid him, by printing here in full and from the Roman Catholic Bible, the scripture in which “the beast” is described. Here it is:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.3
And I saw a beast coming up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten diadems, and upon his heads names of blasphemy. And the beast, which I saw, was like to a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion. And the dragon gave him his heads as it were slain to death; and his death’s wound was healed. And all the earth was in admiration after the beast. And they adored the dragon, which gave power to the beast: and they adored the beast, saying: Who is like to the beast? and who shall be able to fight with him? And there was given to him a mouth speaking great things, and blasphemies; and power was given to him to do two and forty months. And he opened his mouth unto blasphemies against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them. And power was given him over every tribe, and people, and tongue, and nation. And all that dwelt upon the earth, adored him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb, which was slain from the beginning of the world. If any man have an ear, let him hear. AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.4
There is the Lord’s own description of “the beast;” and anybody who knows the A B C of the history from the writing of this passage till now, knows full well that the description exactly fits the papacy, and will not apply to any other thing that was ever on the earth. AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.5
For from the time when that was written, what power but that of the papacy has there been on the earth that was of such standing that it could be truly said that “all the earth was in admiration” [Greek ethaumasem—wonderment] after it? AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.6
What world-power except the papacy has there ever been from that time till now, of which it was said to could be said in wonder, “Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?” AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.7
What power ever existed that spoke such great things and blasphemies as the papacy has spoken over and over? AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.8
What power was there in the world that blasphemed God, and his name, and his tabernacle—that is “His church and His saints,” 1—and them that dwell in heaven, as has the papacy, and as the papacy still does? Look at that word that Leo XIII. lately set forth to “the princes and peoples of the universe,” claiming to “hold the regency of God on earth;” is not that blasphemous enough, of itself, to fulfill the prophecy and meet this description of the beast? Look also at the claim of infallibility on the part of the Pope of Rome—the assumption of the essential prerogative of the Creator himself;—is not this also enough to meet the description of the beast? AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.9
What power ever made such war, and so long continued, and so implacable, against the saints, as has the papacy? AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.10
Revelation 12:9 says that “the dragon” is “that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan;” and in this description of “the beast” it is said that “the dragon”—“the Devil and Satan”—gave him his own strength and great power. Now to what system or organization that was ever on the earth has the devil ever given so much of his own strength and great power as he has given to the papacy? Why to the papacy has he given so much of “his own strength” and great power, that one historian was driven to say of the bishops of Rome that they “have deluged Europe and Asia with blood;” another declares that “among the contrivances that have been devised for deceiving and oppressing mankind, it occupies the highest place;” and these statements are exactly true—they are simply the response of history testifying that the prophecy relating to “the beast,” is fulfilled to the letter in the evil working of the papacy in the sight of all the world. So that any person who will study this prophecy and believe it, can say truly and without hesitation that “the name of the beast who image was made” is the papacy. AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.11
It will not do to say that this prophecy concerning “the beast” refers to pagan Rome; for pagan Rome and its instrumentality in the hands of Satan against Christ and his Church is noticed in chapter 12:4, 5. For it was through Herod, a Roman appointee, and the representative of Roman power, that Satan sought to “devour” the “man child” “as soon as it was born.” And it was by the orders of Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor, that Christ was put to death, from which death he “was caught up unto God, and to his throne.” There is pagan Rome and her place in the account. AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.12
But after pagan Rome had passed, there came another power which Satan used against the Church, against the saints, and against God and his Christ. To this other power the dragon “gave his own strength and great power.” This is the power described in Revelation 13:1-8. It was after pagan Rome had been used by Satan. It came as the successor of pagan Rome. And this was and is the papacy—papal Rome. And by every consideration it is demonstrated that this is “the name of the beast whose image was made.” AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.13
“True and False Theocracy” American Sentinel 10, 8, pp. 58, 59.
THEOCRACY is the highest, the most perfect form of government known to man; for it is government by the direction or administration of God himself. Had man never fallen, there never would have been any other kind of government; and in the earth redeemed from the curse, God will be King; for it is written: “the tabernacle of God” shall be “with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.” This can mean nothing less than a perfect divine government of willing subjects. AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.1
Primarily, theocracy means government by the immediate direction or administration of God, as in Eden before the fall; it is also applied to the exercise of political authority by priests representing the Deity. It is not enough to constitute a true theocracy that rulers profess to represent God; it must be even so, as it was in the case of Samuel. But in its highest and most perfect sense a theocracy has never existed in this world since the fall; for man in his fallen condition has never yielded true and undivided allegiance to God. And only for brief periods has political authority been exercised by men truly representing God. It is declared that “Moses verily was faithful in all his house.” The Lord was also with Joshua even as he was with Moses; but after the death of Joshua the intervals were indeed brief in which the children of Israel walked in the counsel of the Most High; and with the crowning of Saul the theocracy proper ended; for one of the essential elements to a true theocracy was lacking, namely, the consent of the governed; for while the Lord designated Saul to be king, he declared to Samuel, “They have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.” 1 Samuel 8:7. AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.2
Two things are absolutely necessary to the existence of a true theocracy: (1) God himself must be the governor; and (2) the subjects of the government must consent to be governed by him, or by those directly chosen and directed by him. God himself having made man a free moral agent,—a being endowed with power of choice,—recognizes the great truth that in all things civil, governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. The Creator himself exercised civil power only so long as it was the choice of the people that he should exercise it. When God became the recognized governor of the children of Israel, it was by their unanimous consent. “And all the people answered together, and said, All that the Lord hath spoken we will do.” Exodus 19:8. And when God abdicated the throne, so to speak, and gave the government into the hands of Saul, it was likewise in deference to the practically unanimous demand of the governed, i.e., of the people. AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.3
But though the children of Israel rejected God as their ruler, “and would none of his counsel,” his merciful providence was still over them. They were to be preserved a separate people for a special object, and even their rebellion could not defeat the purpose of God concerning them. The divine mould was still upon their laws, and a divine providence still protected them from utter extinction as a nation. AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.4
God’s promise to David was “that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne” (Acts 2:30), and it was necessary that the nation should continue until the Promised One should be revealed. Nevertheless when the people rebelled against God, he permitted them to reap the fruit of their doings. When they repented and sought him, he delivered them, and they were still called by his name. But while he permitted them to retain in a measure their religio-civil laws, and to administer them by a semi-ecclesiastical court, he never restored the theocracy which they had rejected. And with the overthrow of Zedekiah the descendants of Abraham ceased to be an independent nation and became a dependency of another power. “Ichabod” had long been written on the Jewish escutcheons, but they did not fully realize the fact, and most persistently did they from time to time endeavor to restore the ancient polity and rehabilitate themselves with divine power. But it was not to be. They preserved their ecclesiastical organization, but their political power was limited by the will of a foreign ruler. God still cared for them, but foreigners ruled over them restrained only by his providence. The word of the Lord was:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 58.5
And thou, profane wicked prince of Israel, whose day is come, when iniquity shall have an end, Thus saith the Lord God; Remove the diadem, and take off the crown: this shall not be the same: exalt him that is low, and abase him that is high. I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him. Ezekiel 21:25-27. AMS February 21, 1895, page 59.1
The divine fiat had gone forth canceling forever any special right of any man or of any set of men to rule in civil things in God’s name. It is true that the Jewish rulers never ceased to claim divine right to rule, and that in fact they represented Deity. Down until the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans, the Sanhedrim clung to the delusion that they were God’s representatives in both civil and religious affairs, but the Lord did not so recognize them; and our Saviour utterly repudiated the claim of the people to civil authority by refusing to accept a throne at their hands, declaring that his kingdom was not of this world,—that is, it was not of a temporal nature, neither was his authority to be conferred by the powers of this world, but by his Father only. And again did the Saviour humble the pride of the Jews and rebuke their assumption by reminding them, in the incident of the tribute money (Matthew 22:15-21), that Cesar was their ruler, and that they themselves recognized his authority by using coins bearing his image and superscription. The Apostle Paul likewise disdained the civil authority of the Jews when he appealed unto Cesar. And even the Jews themselves in their made frenzy declared, “We have no king but Cesar.” And in this they spoke truly, for God had declared that civil power should no more be exercised in his name, till he should come whose right it is—come, till he should come whose right it is—come, not to die for sinners, but as “King of kings and Lord of lords.” AMS February 21, 1895, page 59.2
At the date of the prophecy of Ezekiel 21:25-27, already quoted, the Jewish people were subject to Babylon. The first overturning left the kingdom subject to Medo-Persia; the second placed it under the dominion of Grecia, while the third and last gave it to Rome. “And it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is.” Who he was to whom the promise was made we learn from Luke 1:31-33:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 59.3
And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. AMS February 21, 1895, page 59.4
But it is plain that this promise does not refer to an earthly, temporal kingdom. To Pilate, Jesus declared, “My kingdom is not of this world.” John 18:36. While to his disciples he said: “I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; that ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” Luke 22:29, 30. And he did not leave them in doubt as to the enduring nature of that kingdom, or when they should enter upon it; he said: “In the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” Matthew 19:28. When it is that Christ shall “sit in the throne of his glory” is told in another text. It is “When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his cheep from the goats: and he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say to them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.” Matthew 25:31-34. AMS February 21, 1895, page 59.5
These texts make it positive that a theocracy can exist no more in this world until the second coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, with power and great glory, and that anything which professes to be a theocracy, or to partake of the nature of a theocracy, is simply a usurpation of the divine prerogatives and in defiance of the will of God as plainly expressed in his Word. AMS February 21, 1895, page 59.6
“The ‘Pilot’ Attacks the ‘Sentinel’” American Sentinel 10, 8, pp. 59, 60.
THE Pilot, a Roman Catholic paper of Boston, publishes the following in its issue of February 9:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 59.1
Judging from the utterances of the AMERICAN SENTINEL, an organ of the Seventh-day Adventists, on “Romanism,” and its diatribes against Protestants who believe in keeping the Christian Sabbath holy, it is easy to guess how tolerant the Seventh-day fanatics would be if they had the power of making the Sabbath laws. Woe to the Jew who did not keep Saturday, to the Mohammedan who observed Friday, and to the Christian who rested on Sunday. A little toleration of others would be becoming in people who shriek so loudly against the “intolerance” which compels them to respect their neighbor’s religious views on one day of the week. AMS February 21, 1895, page 59.2
Now, this is interesting indeed. A Roman Catholic paper, in the role of champion defender of Protestantism against Seventh-day Adventists! It is said that politics sometimes makes strange bedfellows, but politics never accomplished so great a feat in that direction as has been accomplished by Seventh-day Adventists in their advocacy of the Bible Sabbath. By the last sentence we are given to understand that Roman Catholics sympathize with the imprisonment of Seventh-day Adventists, because they neglect to pay to the dominant religion a tribute of one of the “six working days” which God has given them. AMS February 21, 1895, page 59.3
Seventh-day Adventists have never been prosecuted for an actual disturbance of any person’s Sunday-rest. Of the hundreds of witnesses against them in the forty-four cases in which they have been punished for laboring on Sunday, only two have sworn that they were disturbed by the work. One testified that though he did not see or hear the work done, he was disturbed by the mere knowledge that it was being done. The other witness swore that he was “shocked” on seeing the Seventh-day Adventist hoeing in his field, while acknowledging, under oath, that at the same moment that he was so “shocked” with the seventh-day observer’s Sunday hoeing, he, with his hired hand, was driving home a cow which they had gone to a neighbor to procure. The kind of disturbance and disrespect which Seventh-day Adventists have inflicted on these Romanizing Protestants is the same kind of disrespect which Huss and Jerome paid to the religion of their Roman Catholic murderers,—they taught and practiced contrary to the religion which, as Pope Leo XIII. expresses it, enjoyed the “favor of the laws and the patronage of public authority.” AMS February 21, 1895, page 59.4
The Pilot thinks that Seventh-day Adventists would be just as intolerant as itself and its Protestant imitators of they had the power. We can understand this. It is an absolute impossibility for a papist to understand how a man can enjoy his religion and not desire to force it upon his neighbor, or at least compel him to cease opposition to it. This is not because the Roman Catholic is by nature any more perverse than other men, but it is because his religion teaches him a principle totally at variance with the spirit of the gospel. He who understands the spiritual nature of the gospel will not attempt to compel any man to accept it or to pay a hypocritical respect to it. God himself does not and cannot force the will of man to accept salvation. He wooes him by his Spirit, and when he rejects his tender pleadings, he says: “Ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.” AMS February 21, 1895, page 59.5
The papal system is a stranger to this spiritual nature of the gospel. We therefore pity the editor of the Pilot, because he is the victim of an antichristian system, and we are making every effort to present the gospel in its true nature, with the hope of winning Roman Catholics by its infinite beauty, love and mercy. AMS February 21, 1895, page 59.6
The Pilot charges us with abusing Protestants because we tell them the truth about the papal Sunday. It has been regarded as abuse to tell and live the truth ever since Cain killed Abel “because his own works were evil, and his brother’s righteous.” Jesus, during his earthly ministry, spoke and acted the truth about the Sabbath, and those who violated the Sabbath and exalted the traditions of the church above the law of God, sought to kill him because of it. AMS February 21, 1895, page 59.7
We have never used, and never will use, as severe language in telling Protestants that Sunday is a Roman Catholic institution as papists are themselves using in telling the same truth. Here are paragraphs from editorials which appeared in Cardinal Gibbons’ organ, the Catholic Mirror, of September 9 and 23, 1893. The editorials in question are two of a series of four articles which appeared in the Mirror of September 2, 9, 16 and 23, 1893, and were afterwards published by the Catholic Mirror, Baltimore, Md., in a pamphlet which has not reached its fifth edition. The pamphlet is entitled, “The Christian Sabbath the Genuine Offspring of the Union of the Holy Spirit, and the Catholic Church His Spouse. The Claims of Protestants to any Part Therein Proved to be Groundless, Self-Contradictory and Suicidal.” AMS February 21, 1895, page 59.8
On pages 13 and 14 of the pamphlet we find the following:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 59.9
Thus, it is impossible to find in the New Testament the slightest interference by the Saviour, or his apostles, with the original Sabbath, but, on the contrary, and entire acquiescence in the original arrangement; nay, a plenary indorsement by him, whilst living; and an unvaried, active participation in the keeping of that day and no other by the apostles, for thirty years after his death, as the Acts of the Apostles have abundantly testified to us. AMS February 21, 1895, page 59.10
Hence the conclusion is inevitable, viz., that of those who follow the Bible as their guide, the Israelites and Seventh-day Adventists have the exclusive weight of evidence on their side, whilst the Biblical Protestant has not a word in self-defense for his substitution of Sunday for Saturday. AMS February 21, 1895, page 59.11
Here follows the language to which we call the Pilot’s special attention (pp. 31, 33):— AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.1
Let us now, however, take a glance at our second proposition, with the Bible alone as the teacher and guide in faith and morals. This teacher most emphatically forbids any change in the day for paramount reasons. The command calls for a “perpetual covenant.” The day commanded to be kept by the teacher has never once been kept, thereby developing an apostasy from an assumedly fixed principle, as self-contradictory, self-stultifying, and consequently as suicidal as it is within the power of language to express. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.2
Now are the limits of demoralization yet reached. Far from it. Their pretence for having the bosom of the Catholic Church was for apostasy from the truth as taught in the written Word. They adopted the written Word as their sole teacher, which they had no sooner done than they abandoned it promptly, as those articles have abundantly proved; and by a perversity as willful as erroneous, they accept the teaching of the Catholic Church in direct opposition to the plain, unvaried, and constant teaching of their sole teacher in the most essential doctrine of their religion, thereby emphasizing the situation in what may be aptly designated “a mockery, a delusion, and a snare.” AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.3
Should any of the reverend parsons, who are habituated to howl so vociferously over every real or assumed desecration of that pious fraud, the Bible Sabbath, think well of entering a protest against our logical and scriptural dissection of their mongrel pet, we can promise them that any reasonable attempt on their part to gather up the disjecta membra of the hybrid, and to restore to it a galvanized existence, will be met with genuine cordiality and respectful consideration on our part. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.4
But we can assure our readers that we know these reverend howlers too well to expect a solitary bark from them in this instance. And they know us too well to subject themselves to the mortification which a further dissection of this anti-scriptural question would necessarily entail. Their policy now is to “lay low,” and they are sure to adopt it. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.5
And now we suggest to the Pilot that here is a field for missionary effort. Let the Pilot complain to the pope that Cardinal Gibbons and the Catholic Mirror are abusing Protestants. However, we believe that such an undertaking would be fruitless. The Cardinal and the Mirror would doubtless insist that they had told the truth and refuse to recant. However that may be, the AMERICAN SENTINEL and Seventh-day Adventists will continue to tell the truth about “Romanism” and a Romanizing Protestantism, and we do it with the knowledge that it will result as indicated by the Pilot’s utterances, in compelling Catholicism and apostate Protestantism to make common cause against us. We have expected this for years. The Pilot’s warning is to us a most important sign of the times. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.6
“Hebrew National Reformers” American Sentinel 10, 8, p. 60.
IT is frequently the case that persecution for opinion’s sake makes people tolerant of the opinions and practices of others, but it seems that some of the Jews in this city have not learned the lesson. The Sun of the 10th inst. has the following, illustrative of this fact:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.1
The extreme rigor with which the Orthodox Russian Jews living here keep the Sabbath was illustrated by a trial reported in yesterday’s Sun. One of them offended his co-religionists by smoking a cigar in the street on the Sabbath; his brethren remonstrated with him, set upon him, smote him in the face, and wounded him in such a way that his smoking was brought to an end for one Sabbath. His assailants were brought to trial last Friday; he could not prove his case; they were acquitted; and, after their acquittal, as reported in the Sun, “half a hundred or more of the Orthodox gathered around them and kissed them.” AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.2
It seems to us that they interpreted the fourth table of the law of Moses too strictly. We do not see that cigar smoking, or the inhaling and exhaling of tobacco smoke, can properly be regarded as working, or as breaking the Sabbath, or as violating the command to hallow it; and yet we admit that, if the chief rabbi of the east side so regards it, there is an end to the controversy, so far as his many followers are concerned. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.3
As further bearing upon the subject, we can say with certainty that the original Puritan settlers of New England would have rejoiced over the smiting and flooring of any man who smoked on the Sabbath kept by them, which was Sunday. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.4
From one standpoint it seems strange that a people who have suffered as much from intolerance and religious prejudice, as have the Russian Jews, should retain in their practice, or in their feelings even, any of this evil. But we must remember that intolerance is innate in the human breast. It is human nature. It was intolerance that caused Cain to kill his brother; and from that day to this the same wicked thing has been causing men to maltreat, to imprison, and to kill their fellowmen. It was the moving spirit of the Inquisition as it is the inspiration of National Reform and American Sabbath Unionism. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.5
“The Fundamental Law of the United Presbyterian Church” American Sentinel 10, 8, p. 60.
THE United Presbyterian Synod of Ohio is troubled with heresy. J. K. Andrews of Antrim, Ohio, has come to disagree with the 59th Article of the creed of that church. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.1
The United Presbyterian Church has, like most other churches, substituted a man-made creed for the divine Word of God. This creed is known as the “Shorter Catechism of the Westminster Assembly.” The following are some of its questions and answers:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.2
Q. 9. What rule hath God given to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him? AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.3
A. The word of God, which is contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, is the only rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.4
Q. 14. What is sin? AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.5
A. Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, the law of God. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.6
Q. 40. What did God at first reveal to man for the rule of his obedience? AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.7
A. The rule which God at first revealed to man, for his obedience, was the moral law. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.8
Q. 41. Wherein is the moral law summarily comprehended? AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.9
A. The moral law is summarily comprehended in the ten commandments. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.10
Q. 44. What does the preface to the ten commandments teach us? AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.11
A. The preface to the ten commandments teacheth us that because God is the Lord, and our God and Redeemer, therefore we are bound to keep all his commandments. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.12
Q. 57. Which is the fourth commandment? AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.13
A. The fourth commandment is: “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.14
Mr. Andrews believes that this much of the catechism is in harmony with the Bible, but now comes a statement that he believes contradicts not only the Bible, but all we have quoted from the catechism:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.15
Q. 59. Which day of the seven hath God appointed to be the weekly Sabbath? AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.16
A. From the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ, God appointed the seventh day of the week to be the weekly Sabbath; and the first day of the week, ever since, to continue to the end of the world, which is the Christian Sabbath. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.17
Mr. Andrews believes, and rightly too, that this article contradicts the Bible in that the Bible teaches that “the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord,” and does not teach that God appointed the first day of the week to be the weekly Sabbath from the resurrection of Christ to the end of the world. He believes that it contradicts the catechism in that the catechism teaches that “the word of God, which is contained in the Old and New Testaments, is the only rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him,” while this portion of the catechism teaches that to glorify him one must keep the first day of the week, which thing is not only not commanded in that “only rule,” but is contrary to it. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.18
Mr. Andrews, after reforming his practice to correspond with the “only rule,” started out to reform his brethren, and as a result, was tried for heresy by the session of his church and excommunicated. He appealed to the Presbytery, and was allowed thirty minutes to argue his appeal. He maintained that Christ came to redeem man from the curse of a broken law, and that a law could not be broken before it was made; and since, according to the 59th Article, the law of Sunday sacredness was made since the resurrection of Christ, therefore Christ did not die to redeem men from Sunday desecration. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.19
The Presbytery refused to sustain the appeal from the decision of the session, which was as follows:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.20
WHEREAS Mr. J. K. Andrews believes that the seventh day of the week should be kept as the holy Sabbath, and that there is no Bible authority for keeping the first day of the week, and has so stated his belief in presence of this session: And whereas he further states that he feels morally bound in a public manner to advocate his belief, thereby making determined opposition to the principles of the United Presbyterian Church as contained in shorter catechism, question 59, thereby following a divisive course; therefore, AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.21
Resolved, That faithfulness to the laws of the church [not faithfulness to the law of God] requires that Mr. J. K. Andrews be suspended from the privileges of the church until he cease opposition and consent to follow the things which make for peace. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.22
Mr. Andrews then appealed to the synod of Ohio, which recently convened at Wheeling, W. Va. This synod first passed a gag rule allowing Mr. Andrews but three minutes to argue his appeal, and then disposed of the matter, with the following resolutions:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.23
1. Resolved, That the appellant, by his plea against his own public profession [the catechism], against the public profession of his church [the catechism] and her fundamental law [the catechism], can claim no rights under a law that he has renounced, and can have no standing in this court, or any court of the United Presbyterian Church. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.24
2. That this petition can in no sense be construed as an infringement upon the appellant’s personal liberty or his rights of conscience. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.25
Not a single reference to the Bible is to be found in the resolutions condemning Mr. Andrews. No attempt was made to sustain the action against him with Scripture. And this is the course pursued by a church claiming to be Protestant. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.26
The resolutions declare that this actions is not an infringement upon personal liberty or his rights of conscience. Doubtless Mr. Andrews considered his liberty infringed when he was confined to three minutes in arguing his appeal. But the attack on personal liberty and the rights of conscience is an after act. The United Presbyterian Church is doing everything in its power to secure the enactment and enforcement by the United States and by the several States, of laws enforcing the 59th Article of their creed—Sunday observance—upon all men, so that after excommunicating a member, they can, like the papacy, hand the offender over to the civil authorities for punishment. Mr. Andrews was refused an appeal to the Assembly, but will appear and enter a complaint. AMS February 21, 1895, page 60.27
“Will Try Moral Suasion” American Sentinel 10, 8, p. 61.
A FEW days since, the Woman’s Sabbath Alliance, so-called, of this city, adopted the following pledge, which the members of the society are required to sign:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.1
To resist by precept and example whatever tends to undermine the Sabbath as a day of rest and worship, such as the Sunday secular newspapers, social Sunday entertainments, and Sunday driving and traveling for personal convenience, gain or pleasure; and we further pledge ourselves to exert our influence to create a right sentiment on all aspects of the Sunday question, especially in reference to traffic of every kind on that day. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.2
Commenting upon this pledge, the Sun says:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.3
No fault whatever can be found with that pledge, on the ground that it proposes any invasion of personal liberty or any interference with the rights of anybody.... They simply bind themselves together “to create a right sentiment on all aspects of the Sunday question” as it seems to their own consciences, and to resist by their personal example and by their precept the present tendency “to undermine the Sabbath.” They pledge themselves not to read a Sunday newspaper nor to attend “social Sunday entertainments,” and not to drive and travel on that day for convenience or pleasure; but they do not assume to deny those privileges to anybody else. They will only try to induce other people to refrain from them, in obedience to their understanding of the Mosaic commandment. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.4
This, these women have a perfect right to do. Of course they err greatly in supposing that Sunday is the Sabbath. The Bible says: “The seventh day is the Sabbath,” and everybody knows that Sunday is not the seventh day but the first day. But the women of the Woman’s Sabbath Alliance have a perfect right to believe that the first day is the seventh, or that the Lord has changed his mind, or that he transferred the Sabbath to another day and neglected to tell anybody about it, or to believe any other absurdity they wish to believe; moreover, they have a perfect right to persuade everybody whom they can influence, to believe and practice as they do. But if they stop here they will indeed be unique among so-called Sabbath reformers. The logic of error is to compel everybody to obey, and in this the Sunday-sabbath advocates are not peculiar. Having no divine law they seek human legislation; having no divine judgments to declare against those who disregard the first day, they uniformly appeal to human law and to civil penalties. We shall confidently expect to see, erelong, this so-called Sabbath Alliance going the way of the American Sabbath Union in this matter, namely, appealing to the civil law. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.5
“Bones, Stones, and Miracles” American Sentinel 10, 8, p. 61.
THE beginning of the Reformation marked the decline of the veneration of relics and the miracles attributed to them, even among devout Romanists themselves. But now that the Reformation is disappearing from the minds and hearts of men, it logically follows that “shrines,” “relics,” and “miracles” should increase. And they are increasing. New York City has a shrine in which it is seriously asserted that there is to be seen a fragment of St. Anne procured of Pope Leo XIII. The press frequently announces the cure of some “incurable” case. Some imagine that these professed cures are confined to the obscure and ignorant, but this is not entirely true. The following clipping which is going the rounds of the press, announces the cure of a veteran policeman of this city at a shrine located at Auriesville, Montgomery Co., New York, under the control of the Jesuits. No one can fail to discover the patent medicine advertisement enterprise that inspired the publication of this article, and that it is published at this time with a view to drumming up next summer’s trade; but it is nevertheless serious because it is seriously put forth by that “infallible” church which is just now so deeply interested in the conversion of Americans and America to the “true church” and to a belief in the efficacy of “holy water” and pulverized stone as a cure for human ills:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.1
“I have been cured by his divine intervention, where all the doctors had failed to relieve me,” said Policeman Michael Griffin yesterday. Griffin wears five blue stripes on the sleeves of his uniform, showing that he has served more than a quarter of a century on the Metropolitan police force. He has been attached for several years to the Ordnance Department. After his health had been shattered by disease and exposure, he was transferred from active patrol duty to the comparative quiet of the courts. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.2
The policeman had never been well since he first joined the force. He had malaria in his spine that at times caused him most horrible suffering. He had consulted many physicians, but none of them had been able to effect a cure, and as the time passed his infirmities increased and it became more and more difficult for him to attend to his cuties. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.3
Many of the members of St. Francis Xavier’s Church planned a pilgrimage to Auriesville, Montgomery County, last August, and Griffin arranged to take his vacation at the time, so as to join the other pilgrims at the shrine of the Mother of Martyrs, to worship with the on Lord’s Day and to remain for a week. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.4
Auriesville is in a charming section of the Mohawk Valley, about one hundred and seventy-five miles from this city. Twelve acres of land—a hill over-looking the railroad station, and with the shrine on its summit—belong to the Jesuit fathers. Some improvements have already been made and many others are in contemplation, including a beautiful chapel on the hilltop and rows of trees in place of corn fields. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.5
The shrine marks the spot where Father Isaac Jogues, a missionary priest, was slain by Indians more than two hundred years ago. His associate, Rene Goupil, a scholastic, was murdered at the same time near by, and tradition has it that his remains were covered by a huge bowlder. In any event, the body was never found, but pilgrims have long assumed that a rock weighing three or four tons in a ravine not more than five minutes’ walk from the hill, had been rolled over him. A little stream passes through the ravine when the winter snows thaw, but dries during the warm weather. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.6
The rock is probably three feet high and rounded on the sides; the flat surface looks as though it had been the base, but had been overturned by some giant forced. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.7
Father Joigues’ piety and good deeds gained him wide fame, and one of the Indian maidens whom he converted, and who subsequently suffered martyrdom, is, it is said, to be canonized. Pilgrims have been going to the shrine for several years, but never were there as many as last summer. Griffin estimates that on August 15 there were one thousand from Amsterdam, N.Y., eight hundred from Albany and Troy, and probably one thousand others from different points in this State and Pennsylvania. There were impressive ceremonies, including a procession of pilgrims up the Hill of Prayer to the shrine, and teaching sermons, glorifying the martyrs. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.8
After the service the pilgrims scattered, and many of them broke off pieces of the rock under which Rene Goupil’s body was said to have been crushed. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.9
Griffin kept part of the stone he had brought to the city. He recently heard that one of the pilgrims who had been a cripple had been wholly cured, and he determined to test the efficacy of the stone in his own case. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.10
He crushed a portion of it in holy water from St. Ignatius’ about a month ago and applied it that night to the open wound, praying to God to help him in his affliction. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.11
The sore miraculously disappeared and Griffin became more robust than he had been for many years. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.12
His aches and pains were gone, and he recovered the light step and heart of his youth. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.13
He determined to test the efficacy of the stone on another sufferer. His landlady, Mrs. McDonald, was afflicted with many of the ills brought by old age. She had become blind, and pains racked her limbs. Her worst trouble consisted of cramps or spasms in her legs at night, that made sleep impossible. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.14
She had found temporary relief by applications of hot bricks, and her daughters were compelled to get up frequently to prepare them for her comfort. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.15
Griffin told Mrs. McDonald what the relic had done for him, gave her some of the powdered stone in holy water, and when the pain attacked her, her daughters rubbed her legs with the marvel-workig preparation. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.16
She was immediately quieted and fell into a peaceful slumber, and since then she has had no cause to complain of any ache. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.17
“She is very, very old,” said Griffin. “I should say she is from seventy-five to eighty years old, and has long been entirely confined to her house, but she now hopes to soon be able to go to St. Francis Xavier’s Church, that she used to attend regularly. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.18
“She next rubbed the stone and holy water on her sightless eyes, and when she sat down at the table with her daughters she cried, ‘Glory be to God, I can see my cup!’ AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.19
“When she was helped upstairs she was able to see the banister on which she had to bear for support. I went to the house last night, and Mrs. McDonald held out her hand to me. I was not standing directly opposite her, but just a little to one side, and I asked her if she could see my hand. She could, and she demonstrated the fact by grasping it in her own.” AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.20
Griffin says God in his ineffable way has positively revealed to his faithful ones that the rock marks the place where Rene Goupil, the scholastic, became a martyr. Other miracles, he reports, have been accomplished through the agency of the stone, and are known to the fathers of the church. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.21
There will be another pilgrimage to the beautiful Mohawk Valley next summer, and it will be far larger than the last one. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.22
“If God spares me, in his mercy, till then,” says Griffin, “I shall go to Auriesville for my vacation. Last year’s pilgrims assemble at a special mass at half-past six on the morning of the 15th of each month, when there are many prayers uttered to the everlasting glory of the Mother of Martyrs.” AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.23
Now all this did not come in France, Spain, South America, or the province of Quebec, but it is claimed that it occurred in the Empire State and in the American metropolis. AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.24
There are several questions which are suggested by this account. What will be done when the pilgrims have chipped away all this stone? If it is so efficacious it will not last long. And suppose after the stone has disappeared they do not find Rene Goupil’s body? Would it not be safer to take a pick and dig under the stone and thus ascertain for certain whether the body is there, rather than to trust to “miracles” to sustain the supposition? AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.25
One of two things is true; either these people are the victims of a designing priesthood which is making merchandise of the bodies and souls of men, or if the priests believe that miracles are actually wrought, and these cures are real, then the deception is still deeper and they are all the victims of the devil who, according to Scripture, was to work with “all power and signs and lying wonders” before the second coming of Christ. It cannot be that miracles are wrought in the name of Rene Goupil, for “there is none other name under heaven give among men, whereby we must be saved” except the name of “Jesus Christ of Nazareth.” AMS February 21, 1895, page 61.26
“Back Page” American Sentinel 10, 8, p. 64.
PROF. G. W. COLCORD, President of the Seventh-day Adventist academy at Graysville, Tenn., is one of the twenty now under indictment there, charged with violating the Sunday law. The six charges against him are for permitting students to labor on the college premises on Sunday. Since the indictments were found, a strong local sentiment has developed against these prosecutions, led by the editor of the Dayton (Tennessee) Leader, and the result is left in doubt. Meanwhile the accused manifest a meek and quiet, yet courageous spirit. AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.1
THE Christian Statesman of Feb. 9, contains the following editorial paragraph:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.2
Popery affirms its interpretation of God’s law through its so-called infallible head to be binding upon the consciences of all men. It leaves no room for dissent. It compels, so far as it has the power, acceptance of its interpretation. It denies the blessing of Christ to all who do not accept its interpretation as the one and only sound and valid interpretation of the divine law. However sure we may be that our views of truth and duty are scripturally sound, we are following in the foot-steps of Romanism the moment we assume to judge brethren in Christ in any such way as directly affirms or indirectly implies that they have not the same right to interpret and apply God’s law for themselves, and to expect his blessing in their honest and sincere endeavors to do his holy will. AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.3
The element represented by the Christian Statesman interprets the law of God to mean that the first day of the week and not the seventh day is the Sabbath, and is leaving no stone unturned in the effort to force this interpretation on all men by means of civil law. It denies the right of men “to interpret and apply God’s law for themselves” and is therefore, according to its own definition, “following in the footsteps of Romanism.” AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.4
THE New York Observer, of Jan. 24, 1895, attacks the Roman Catholic mass on this wise:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.5
There is not, in all the Word of God, a passage that can be quoted in support of an early and fasting communion. AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.6
The Catholic Union and Times, of Buffalo, replies as follows:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.7
Neither is there a single text of Scripture to authorize you to change the Lord’s day from the seventh to the first day of the week. Why have you done so? Because the Catholic and Apostolic Church, from earliest Christian days, has substituted Sunday for the Jewish Sabbath, for solid and resplendent reasons. AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.8
Of course, the Observer replied to this retort by maintaining the customary silence. What a pity that Protestants should stultify themselves and destroy their ability to wield the Word of God against papal errors by tenaciously clinging to one of the most fatal of these errors. AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.9
THE reason why the pope is so anxious to hitch America to his chariot is clearly stated by O. A. Brownson, in his work, “Conversations on Liberalism and the Church.” The author is a convert to Romanism from Protestantism, and so highly is he esteemed among them that steps have been taken to erect a monument to his memory. Mr. Brownson says:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.10
All heresies and infidelity are disintegrating and destructive, if you will, but really hostile to progress. They interrupt the work of the church, they interpose obstacles to her influence, deny or obscure the principles of progress, and as far as their power extends, so prevent their development and practical application, and not only peril souls, but hinder or retard the progress of civilization. Heretical nations [like the United States] are running the same career the ancient Gentile nations ran, and their influences, aided by the flesh, the world and the devil, extends even to orthodox nations, and neutralizes, to a fearful extent, the power of the church to apply her principles to her own children, so that these nations became almost as unprogressive as heretical nations themselves.—Page 170. AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.11
Yes, the religious liberty principles of the Constitution of this heretical nation have neutralized to a fearful extent the “power” of the Roman Catholic Church over her own children, so much so that she has stopped burning them for heresy. There was no United States Constitution to “interpose obstacles to her influence” on Huss and Jerome and the millions of others murdered by her “influence;” hence the earnest solicitude of the pope and the papacy to capture the United States Government and obtain “the favor of the laws and the patronage of public authority.” AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.12
WHAT the papacy will do for all nations and all people when the scheme of the pope is realized, is to be learned from a study of the history of the Dark Ages. There are people who are just foolish enough to believe that the “infallible” church has come to regard her cruel, medieval history with becoming abhorrence. All such should read the following, quoted from Brownson’s work, which the writer purchased within a week, from the Catholic publishing house of D. & J. Sadlier & co., 31 Barclay St., New York:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.13
Christian nations alone are living and progressive nations. And never have Christian nations advanced in all that makes the true glory of civilization so rapidly as they did from the downfall of Rome to the rise of what you [Protestants] call the Reformation.—Page 170. AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.14
No real progress of civilization since the epoch of the Reformation.—Page 176. AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.15
Always will the period from the sixth to the end of the fifteenth century stand out as the most glorious in the annals of the race.—Page 182. AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.16
Comment is unnecessary. AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.17
THE Evangelist comments quite numorously [sic.] upon the recent papal encyclical, making in a pleasant way several good points against it; and turning each of them likewise against the assumption of papal power by the Presbyterian General Assembly. The Evangelist concludes its criticism with these words:— AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.18
We have no quarrel with the pope; he lives “near St. Peter’s,” and has authority. To Leo’s credit, be is said, he uses his authority discreetly, and on the side of morality and civil order. The pope we fight is the self-made dictator of Presbyterian opinion and law, whether he be one or many; the creature which, like self-perpetuating prosecuting committees, creates and inquisition and forges instruments of torture for the miserable “minority.” AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.19
This is valuable from the standpoint of the SENTINEL, chiefly because of the recognition of the fact by the Evangelist that the pope that is to be feared is not merely the pope of Rome but the popish spirit; that the man who is dominated by that spirit is a pope wherever he is or whatever position he may occupy. It is this spirit that appeals to the civil power to enforce Sunday-keeping, demands exemption of church property from taxation, etc. AMS February 21, 1895, page 64.20