The American Sentinel 13
January 27, 1898
“Editorial” American Sentinel 13, 4, p. 49.
IN Christianity, faith is the only avenue of power. AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.1
GOOD intentions cannot charge the character of a bad deed. AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.2
THERE is nothing that can get above right, or occupy a higher seat than that of justice. AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.3
TO separate the interests of the state from those of the individual, is fatal to both alike. AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.4
BEWARE how you take hold of another man’s conscience; for that conscience has God at the other end of it. AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.5
IT is a mistake for any legislative body to think it has the authority to define sin, or the power to punish it. AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.6
IF you are following the Lord yourself, your eyes are upon his perfection, and not upon your neighbor’s imperfection. AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.7
THE more a government reduces its individual subjects to the condition of automatons, the more despotism will there be under it. AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.8
THE right to believe is nothing without the right to act upon belief; and to deny the right to believe is to deny the right to think at all. AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.9
THE nature and effect of a piece of religious legislation are not in any wise changed by its being labeled “civil enactment” or “police regulation.” AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.10
FOR any human power to take from an individual that which divine power and authority has given him, is an act of amazing temerity, to say the least. AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.11
“AMS by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of One shall many be made righteous.” Romans 5:19. Neither sin nor salvation has any significance apart from the individual. AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.12
“The State and the Individual” American Sentinel 13, 4, pp. 49, 50.
THE doctrine that the State is everything and the individual nothing is exactly the opposite of that upon which all good and just government is established. AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.1
It is synonymous with the doctrine that government is instituted not to maintain the absolute inviolability of certain individual privileges known as “rights,” but only to secure “the greatest good to the greatest number.” AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.2
When the supposed interests of society or of the state come in conflict with individual rights, the latter are by this theory swept aside. “It is expedient that one man should die and not that the whole nation should perish.” AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.3
So reasoned the Jews when they committed the most awful mistake that it was possible for any people to commit. AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.4
It is said that the preservation of the state demands the enforcement of Sunday laws, and that when the individual conscience conflicts with the “state conscience” in such a matter, the individual conscience must give way. AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.5
We are asked to believe that it is sometimes necessary to sacrifice the individual for the good of the state or of society. AMS January 27, 1898, page 49.6
There is an illustration of this just now in France, where there is great excitement over the question of the innocence or guilt of an alleged traitor. The government seems to think that the good of France demands that the condemned individual should suffer his prescribed punishment, even though he may have been unjustly convicted. AMS January 27, 1898, page 50.1
In Russia, as notice elsewhere in this issue, little children and infants are ruthless torn from their parents’ arms in the night, by the government police, and taken away to be brought up as orthodox members of the state church. And this is done for the preservation of the state. AMS January 27, 1898, page 50.2
But the government of God holds to no such principle. That government, the maintenance of which is essential to the welfare of every being in the universe; that government, as compared with which in importance all earthly governments are as nothing,—would dissolve and go out of existence sooner than it would perpetrate a wrong upon one individual, however small, obscure, or humble. Sooner than do this, God himself would abdicate the throne of the universe. Yet an earthly government, a mere human and temporal affair, tries to justify itself in doing what would never at any hazard be dared by the government of Heaven. That which would dissolve the government of the universe, these earthly governments do for their “preservation”! AMS January 27, 1898, page 50.3
But there is nothing in it but dissolution for any government that does it, under any circumstances. The interests of the individual and of the state cannot be separated. When the state cuts loose from the individual and holds only to “the masses,” it cuts loose from safe principle, and starts upon the sure road to decline and ruin. AMS January 27, 1898, page 50.4
“Note” American Sentinel 13, 4, p. 50.
THAT wicked spirit of enforced militarism—miscalled patriotism—is becoming more widespread, and becomes more bold, unreasoning, and vicious, as it spreads. At Appleton, Wis., there is an institution called Lawrence University that is making for itself a reputation in this species of despotism. AMS January 27, 1898, page 50.1
There is at this “university” a student who is studying for the ministry, and who, quite oddly for these days of military Christianity, has enough of the spirit of Christ to enable him to see that training for the ministry of Christ and training to kill people are not consistent; that the Spirit of Christ and the spirit of war are not in any sense compatible. He has therefore refused to engage in the military drills, or to belong to the militia, of the “university.” For this he “is to be court-martialed” by the “university authorities.” AMS January 27, 1898, page 50.2
The Milwaukee correspondent of the Chicago Times-Herald reports on the matter thus:— AMS January 27, 1898, page 50.3
“The parents of Otto Haefner, the student at Lawrence University, Appelton, who is to the court-martialed or [sic.] refusing to drill, live at 591 Reed Street in this city, and fully sustain their son in his action. When see to-day Mrs. Haefner said she could not understand why the university authorities should take such a step. ‘My son,’ she said, ‘is studying for the ministry and has no taste for the militia. It does not seem fair that he should be obliged to drill when his inclinations are in an entirely different direction. He has been a good student, and the letters we have received from him have told how well he is getting along. He has worked hard in his studies, and certainly ought not to be punished for not being in sympathy with a military training. If he needs help, we will go to him.’” AMS January 27, 1898, page 50.4
Yes, and so should the people of the whole State of Wisconsin and of the whole United States, come to the boy’s help. For it is perfectly evident that this evil spirit of enforced militarism, of despotic “patriotism,” proposes to stop at nothing; but will override all individual right, all right of conscience, and even of God himself. AMS January 27, 1898, page 50.5
Wherever there yet remains any person who has any real respect for individual right, for the right of conscience, or of God, it is high time that his voice were being heard as far as it can be made to sound. AMS January 27, 1898, page 50.6
A. T. J.
“Who Provides the Sabbath?” American Sentinel 13, 4, pp. 50, 51.
IN the city of Boston, last month, representatives of the Presbyterian, Baptist, Unitarian, and Congregationalist churches met to discuss the question of Sunday observance, and passed a resolution saying, “We favor every wise effort to secure such speedy legislation as shall compel every transportation company to provide one day’s rest out of every seven.” AMS January 27, 1898, page 50.1
We believe as much as anybody does that people ought to have one day of rest in seven—the seventh day—but we have been under the impression that God himself has provided this rest for everybody; and if this is so, we do not see the force of asking the legislatures to provide it. AMS January 27, 1898, page 50.2
If the seventh day of rest is not yet provided for people, then it is no sin for the people to work on the Sabbath; for how can they have a rest which is not provided for them? and on the other hand, if the rest is provided, then it only remains for the people to take it, and there is no necessity for calling for legislative action in the matter. AMS January 27, 1898, page 50.3
Why should a legislature be asked to provide the people with something they already have? AMS January 27, 1898, page 50.4
Now there is a plain command of the Lord given in the Bible that all persons should “remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy,” not doing any work upon it. But if God commands the people to take a rest which is not provided them, he is unreasonable and asks them to do an impossibility. This is altogether contrary to our conception of God. AMS January 27, 1898, page 50.5
“Freethinkers” and other non-Christians say that God is unreasonable and that his requirements are unjust; and when Christian bodies get together and gravely pass a resolution calling upon the legislatures to provide the people a chance to do what God has enjoined upon them all to do, the contention of the “freethinkers” is sustained. But we would urge upon all Christians the propriety of giving no support by word or deed to the doctrines of infidelity. AMS January 27, 1898, page 50.6
The weekly day of rest is already provided; and all that any person who wants it has to do, it to take it. If you doubt this, try it, and be convinced. Accept God as the provider of all good things, and don’t make a god out of the legislature. AMS January 27, 1898, page 51.1
“To Which Kingdom?” American Sentinel 13, 4, p. 51.
WE sincerely desire to help the Christian Citizen and all those who with it are becoming the Christian citizenship movement that is represented in the Christian Citizen. AMS January 27, 1898, page 51.1
We have no desire for controversy; and what we write on this subject is not written in the spirit of controversy. We simply desire, if possible, to fix the attention of these people upon certain Christian principles to which, from their attitude, it seems certain that they have not given due weight. AMS January 27, 1898, page 51.2
This is not a question of policy, but solely of principle. It is not a question of what men may think; but of what Jesus Christ says. It is not a question of what a professed Christianity may consider proper; but what does the Christianity of Jesus Christ teach and require. AMS January 27, 1898, page 51.3
It is altogether a question of Christianity. These people attach to their enterprise the term “Christian.” In the bame of Christianity they urge their movement. It is therefore not simply proper but essential that this thing which is urged upon the people as Christian, shall be brought to the test of the Christianity of Jesus Christ. AMS January 27, 1898, page 51.4
The principles of the Christianity of the Lord Jesus are given to the world in his Word. If this professed Christian citizenship movement will bear the test of the words of the Lord Jesus, all honor to it; but if it fails to bear this test, it is not Christianity and is not to be trusted at all. We have seen already that, in one instance at least, the Christian Citizen is obliged to set aside the words of Christ to save itself from destructive conclusions. This is not a promising prospect of bearing, throughout, the test of the Christianity of the word of Christ; yet it is only fair to examine the question further and as broadly as possible. AMS January 27, 1898, page 51.5
With this object and in this spirit solely, we ask the candid consideration of the Christian Citizen and its people to certain scriptures which from time to time we shall examine in the SENTINEL. AMS January 27, 1898, page 51.6
Here is one for this time: “Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews.” AMS January 27, 1898, page 51.7
His kingdom is not of this world. Then can any man belong to this world, and to Christ’s kingdom at the same time?—Christ himself has answered this question. He said to his disciples of all time, “Ye are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.” “I have chosen you out of the world.” Again, “If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight.” If his kingdom were of this world, then for what kind of a kingdom would his servants fight?—For a kingdom of this world. Then, what kind of kingdom is it for which men do fight, and for which alone they can fight?—For kingdoms of this world. But his kingdom is not of this world; therefore, in the sense in which Jesus here used the word “fight,” no man can ever fight for the kingdom of Christ. And any kingdom for which any man can fight, in the sense in which Jesus here used the word, is not, and cannot be, a kingdom of Christ or of God. AMS January 27, 1898, page 51.8
Again, “If my kingdom were of this world then would my servants fight.” This word testifies positively that the only possible consideration upon which the servants of Christ could fight, is that his kingdom were of this world. But it is positively stated by him, that his kingdom is not of this world. Therefore it is certain that the positive teaching of Jesus Christ is that when any who profess to be his servants do fight, they fight only for a kingdom of this world, whatever their pretensions may be. Any who fight for a kingdom that is of this world, who contend for place or power in any kingdom that is of this world, by that very thing plainly show that they are not of the kingdom of Jesus Christ. And any who profess to be of Christ’s kingdom who will fight for any kingdom, even His own, testify by that that they are not of his kingdom; for his kingdom is “not of this world,” and only upon the consideration that his kingdom were of this world, could his servants fight at all. AMS January 27, 1898, page 51.9
Yet all this is precisely what those who are leading in this Christian citizenship movement propose to do. They do seek to get possession of the kingdoms of this world as such. They do aspire and work to put themselves into positions of power to rule the United States and the other governments of this world: and to fight, actually to fight, for governments of this world. And by all of this, they proclaim with the loudest possible voice that they are altogether of this world, and not of the kingdom of Christ at all; for he has proclaimed forever, “My kingdom is not of this world.” AMS January 27, 1898, page 51.10
The kingdom of Christ and the kingdoms of this world will not mix. The subjects of Christ’s kingdom will never be mercenaries to fight for a kingdom to which they do not belong; and they cannot fight for the one to which they do belong. AMS January 27, 1898, page 51.11
A. T. J.
“Notes” American Sentinel 13, 4, pp. 51, 52.
IT has been forcibly said, as regards the supposed physical needs of mankind for Sunday rest, that to eat heartier meals on Sunday than on other days, as is the prevalent fashion, while taking little or no physical exercise, puts a person in poorer physical condition than he was in before. This is the way most Sunday observers do, and yet they imagine they are getting great physical benefit from their Sunday observance, and that everybody else ought to be made by law to do likewise. AMS January 27, 1898, page 51.1