The American Sentinel 14
March 30, 1899
“Front Page” American Sentinel 14, 13, p. 193.
THE wedlock of church and state made never an unfruitful union. AMS March 30, 1899, page 193.1
POLITICS may be purified, but cannot be a means of purification. AMS March 30, 1899, page 193.2
THE State never made a success in playing the role of a missionary. AMS March 30, 1899, page 193.3
EARTHLY power was never joined with the church to accomplish a heavenly purpose. AMS March 30, 1899, page 193.4
THE law of man is in no sense a supplement to the law of God. The divine law is complete in itself. AMS March 30, 1899, page 193.5
THE more beams we have in our own eyes, the more easily can we see motes in the eyes of our neighbors. AMS March 30, 1899, page 193.6
A SUNDAY law represents an effort of the “Sabbath Trust” to “put up the price” on the Sabbath. The Sabbath is God’s free gift. AMS March 30, 1899, page 193.7
THE State’s right, or lack of right, to enforce Sunday observance, may be quickly discovered by asking, Would such a right be claimed for the State if it was known that Sunday is not the “Lord’s day,” or in any sense sacred? AMS March 30, 1899, page 193.8
THE Sabbath is a benefit to humanity, because it is divine. Take the divinity out of it, and the benefit is gone with it. AMS March 30, 1899, page 193.9
YOU can create hatred by law, but not love; hypocrisy, but not piety; and since love is not in human law, such law has no business in the realm of love. AMS March 30, 1899, page 193.10
THE Almighty has ordained the “powers that be,” but He has not gone into partnership with them in governing the world. AMS March 30, 1899, page 193.11
“Power for the Church” American Sentinel 14, 13, pp. 193, 194.
THE church to-day wants power. She wants to bring about reforms in society and in politics, and with these in view she is seeking to get control of the machinery of the State. She confesses that she has not now the power that she wants. AMS March 30, 1899, page 193.1
But the church professes to be proclaiming to the world the gospel of God; and that itself is power. It is the very power of God, and God is all-powerful. AMS March 30, 1899, page 193.2
The gospel is power; the realization of this fact seems to have been almost lost, notwithstanding its tremendous importance. The gospel is not a discourse about power. The Jews of old, we read, were astonished at the teaching of Christ, because “his word was with power.” That was the gospel. The same was true of the preaching of the apostles. “My speech and my preaching,” wrote the apostle Paul to the Corinthians, “was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the spirit and of power.” AMS March 30, 1899, page 193.3
We must conclude then that where the gospel is, there is the power of God, which is certainly all the power required, and all that can be had, for any moral work. And where the power is not, on the other hand, there is no gospel. AMS March 30, 1899, page 193.4
What then is the trouble to-day? Is it with the gospel? or with the church? Is it the church’s duty to go into politics? or to get politics out of her sanctuary, and the power of God into it? AMS March 30, 1899, page 193.5
“Not by Politics, But by the Gospel” American Sentinel 14, 13, p. 195.
THE United States Government has entered and taken possession of the Philippine Islands, for the purpose, professedly, of lifting the inhabitants to a higher level of moral, social, and political life. In justification of this policy the President said:— AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.1
“Did we need their consent to perform a great act for humanity? We had it in every aspiration of their minds, in every hope of their hearts. We were obeying a higher moral obligation which rested upon us, and which did not require anybody’s consent.” AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.2
This work of uplifting the Filipinos has been undertaken by the Government. It must therefore be carried out through politics. But is there any power in politics to accomplish the intended work? AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.3
Is it politics, or is it the gospel and savage alike? The Word of God, the highest authority for all Christians, affirms unequivocally that man has no power to save either his fellowmen or himself from any state of moral degradation; that salvation must come alone from the power of God, which is the gospel. Romans 1:16. AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.4
And what is the United States Government now doing, in the fulfillment of this high moral obligation which it has assumed in the Philippines? It is actually slaughtering the wretched Filipinos by hundreds and by thousands. It has done this, and nothing more. This illustrates how a great work “for humanity” is performed by a civil government, through politics. AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.5
The gospel proceeds upon a different plan. The gospel never slaughters people. It always gives, and never “benevolently assimilates” the possessions of people against their will. The gospel slaughters vice and all immorality and wickedness in the hearts of men, but leaves the people themselves alive. It overcomes the opposition of people without killing them. AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.6
There is, therefore, another way of dealing with the Philippine problem—of discharging this “high moral obligation” resting upon the American people—which from the standpoint of regard for human life is infinitely preferable to the political methods employed by the Government. From the standpoint of economy, also, its superiority is no less evident. AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.7
This tremendous truth is realized by some at least who are interested in work “for humanity.” Mr. W. H. Rice, writing in Our Day for March, pleads for “a higher plane on which to carry on the work of assimilating the people of our new possessions” than “the plane of politics.” In his article he says:— AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.8
“The Indian is to-day the exemplification of the uselessness of political effort in lifting a people out of their degradation. The maxim of the politician is ‘To the victors belong the spoils,’ and the best way to treat the Indian is to despoil him. The work of the politician is purely mercenary. There may have been exceptions, but they are few. AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.9
“Socially, the North American Indians were no longer in the scale than the Sandwich Islander or the natives of Australia when our missionaries first went among them, yet in sixty years the Hawaiians were a Christianized and civilized people fit to take their place among favored nations. AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.10
“And mark this, the cost to the American Board was only a million and a quarter dollars for sixty years’ work. AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.11
“Contrast this with the following:— AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.12
“‘“Poor Lo” is an expensive burden. Since the United States Government was formed 19,000 ... men, women, and children have been slain in Indian wars and affrays and about 30,000 Indians, at an expense to our Government of $807,073,658. To this immense sum must be added the civil expenditures of the Government on behalf of the Indians, which, between 1776 and 1890 amounted to $259,944,082, making a total of $1,067,017,740 for civil and military expenses in connection with the noble red man.’—Chicago Tribune, October 26, 1898. AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.13
“What made the work in Hawaii such a success? AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.14
“Certainly not politics nor parties. It was by the inoculation of moral principles. The basis of action was the principle that ‘righteousness exalteth a nation,’ and where this principle has been permitted free play, the Indian has been elevated thereby.” AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.15
He cites also the results of missionary work done among certain of the Indians of Alaska:— AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.16
“In Metlakahtla there is no need of a jail, for there are no criminals, and the money that would in other towns be spent for enforcing law and order and caring for the poor, is here used for education and improvements. There are no filthy streets and no ‘communal houses,’ with their ten or fifteen families each, as in most Alaskan towns. Metlakahtla is a village of neat, pretty cottages, with well-cultivated gardens for each separate family. Here is an unanswerable argument for the power of the gospel to transform the degraded and ignorant, and a clear proof that it is worth while to seek to save the Indians. To allow these industrious, peace-loving, and godly Indians to be disturbed would be an everlasting disgrace to a nation claiming to be both civilized and Christian.”—Missionary Review, July, 1898.” AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.17
Who in the face of this testimony—and especially what Christian—will still say that the divine mission of this nation to the Philippines ought to be carried out by the Government through politics,—by the gospel of force rather than the gospel of love? If it ought not so to be, then a terrible mistake is being made, and the Government is perpetrating a terrible wrong, and every Christian in America ought to raise his voice in protest against it. The sentiment of the Christian church ought never to support (as it now does) the idea of regeneration. AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.18
“This Catholic Nation” American Sentinel 14, 13, pp. 195, 196.
ARCHBISHOP IRELAND, who is as well known for his supposed Americanism as for his Catholicism, in a reply to the pope’s recent letter on “Americanism,” said:— AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.1
“The whole episcopate of the United States, in their own names and in the names of their people, are ready to repudiate and condemn those errors. We cannot but be indignant that such an injury has been done us—to our bishops, to our faithful people, to our nation—in designating by the word ‘Americanism,’ as certain ones have done, such errors and extravagances as these.” AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.2
“An injury” “to our nation”; mark the words. The “errors” condemned by the pope’s letter as being out of harmony with the teaching and practice of the papacy, do not represent Americanism, says this Catholic prelate. To say that they do, is to insult the nation. What then is true Americanism?—Why, of course, that, and only that, which is in harmony with the mind of the pope! What else but this can be the meaning of the archbishop’s language? AMS March 30, 1899, page 195.3
The prelates of Rome have not forgotten the Supreme Court decision that “This is a Christian nation.” AMS March 30, 1899, page 196.1
“The Revival of Puritanism” American Sentinel 14, 13, pp. 196, 197.
“HISTORY repeats itself;” not by accident, but because human nature is the same in all ages. AMS March 30, 1899, page 196.1
Human nature is the fallen nature. It is passionate, vindictive, superstitious. Out of the passions of human nature have arisen the persecutions which have stained the pages of history. Persecution is less seen to-day not because human nature has changed, not because men hate each other less than formerly, but because men hate each other less than formerly, but because the times have changed, and the methods which bigotry was once free to employ are no longer sanctioned. AMS March 30, 1899, page 196.2
But history will repeat itself in persecution, as in other things. “The spirit of the times may alter, will alter.” The cruel channels through which hatred most delights to move, now barred by custom and popular sentiment, will be reopened. Public sentiment is susceptible to change, and familiarity breeds contempt for injustice, in the place of fear. The spirit which calls for religious legislation—the spirit of the Sunday laws—has already begun to familiarize the public mind with scenes of religious persecution. It is the identical spirit of former persecutions, and is working—as it must—in the same way, and toward the same ends. AMS March 30, 1899, page 196.3
But the people of this generation are not familiar with the workings of this spirit, and the results that follow; and herein lies one of the chief dangers of the present time. The experiment of enforcing morality will be the more readily tried to-day because it is new; and the “new broom sweeps clean.” There is a demand for the revival of Puritanism; and the movement for enforced morality means the re-establishment of Puritanism and nothing less. But what is Puritanism? In view of the manifest signs of the times, this question may well be asked by Americans and its answer kept constantly in mind. A full answer is given in early American history. AMS March 30, 1899, page 197.1
The nature of Puritanism is best shown by its acts. As an example of these, we cite the execution of Giles Corey, of Salem, Mass., for the crime of “witchcraft.” The following account is taken from “The Blue Laws of Connecticut,” a compilation from the early records, published by the “Truth Seeker” Company, New York City:— AMS March 30, 1899, page 197.2
“Giles Corey’s case was a hard one. He was a sufferer under High Priest Parris and his female accusers. His wife had been complained of, and he knowing her innocence, spoke strongly in her defense. He was arraigned before the same court, but could not be induced to make a plea either of guilty or not guilty. He was a man of some property and he wished what he had to go to his children. He knew that if he confessed or pleaded guilty, his effects, in case of conviction, instead of going to his heirs would be grabbed either by the church or the court that convicted him. He adhered to his resolution, confessing nothing, and making no plea though three times brought before the legal dignitaries. In consequence of the silence he maintained, the sentence of peine forte et dure, from the code of King James I., was passed upon him, which was that he be remanded to his low damp dungeon, to be there laid upon his back on the bare floor, naked for the most part, a board to be laid upon him, and weights enough piled on the board to nearly crush the life out of him, and to have no sustenance, save on the first day three morsals of very poor bread, and on the second day three drafts of standing or stagnant water, the nearest to be found to the prison door, and this to be alternately his daily diet until he died. AMS March 30, 1899, page 197.3
“This horrible sentence was carried out and the suffering that man passed through cannot be conceived... It is said the last act in this diabolical tragedy was enacted in an open field near the prison. The wretched sufferer begged his executioners to increase the weights which were crushing him that his agonies might be ended. The hope, however, that he would yield and acknowledge his guilt, so that his property could be secured, induced them not to hurry his death. But he assured them that it was of no use to expect him to yield; that there could be but one way of ending the matter, and that they might as well pile on the rocks and have the matter ended. Calef says that as his body yielded to the pressure, his tongue protruded from his mouth, and an official forced it back with his cane. This inhuman act is attributed to the pious Parris, who made himself so officious in the Salem trials and executions. Upham, in narrating this horrid cruelty, says: ‘For a person more than eighty-one years of age this must be allowed to have been a marvelous exhibition of prowess; illustrating, as strongly as anything in human history, the power of a resolute will over the utmost pain and agony of body, and demonstrating that Giles Corey was a man of heroic nerve and a spirit that could not be subdued.’ This was a case of Christian persecution, where the recipient was, as has been the case in thousands of other instances, vastly superior, in everything that constitutes manhood, to the person who inflicted it.” AMS March 30, 1899, page 197.4
And this, in company with all the other persecutions of that time, was done by men “of like passions” with the men of to-day. The lapse of two centuries has made no change in human nature. Human nature, inflamed by hatred, still delights in scenes of torture; and the burning of negroes at the stake, in this country, takes place even in defiance of the Constitution, which asserts that “cruel and unusual punishments shall not be inflicted.” Let the Constitution be changed (and it is now being changed); let the spirit of religious legislation—of enforced “morality”—be revived (and it is being revived); let the public mind be familiarized with civil prosecutions for conscience’ sake (and it is being familiarized with such scenes); and the way will be fully open for a return of Puritanism, and the final extinguishing of the torch of “Liberty enlightening the world.” AMS March 30, 1899, page 197.5
“Back Page” American Sentinel 14, 13, p. 208.
WE must have purity in politics to sweep away the corruption that exists in the community, it is said: so the community is called on to go to the primaries and polls and purify politics. But which must we have first—pure politics? or a pure community? If we have the pure community we do not need to have it purified by politics; and if we have a corrupt community, how is such a community going to purify politics? AMS March 30, 1899, page 208.1
From the corrupt community comes corruption in politics; and from the corrupt hearts of men comes the corruption that taints the community. The heart is the fountain head of the whole stream: and from God, through repentance and faith, must come the purity that is to cleanse the heart. AMS March 30, 1899, page 208.2
OUTRAGES against Protestant missionaries in Ecuador are being reported from that country, and the United States Government is asked to protect them, they having been sent out by churches in the United States. AMS March 30, 1899, page 208.3
In Christian missionary work, the foremost consideration must always be that of how the cause of Christianity can be best advanced. Will it be by the protecting arm of the civil government? Of this, in the light of missionary history, there is room for serious doubt. Frequently the best interests of the missionary cause have demanded the sacrifice of the lives of the missionaries. Dependence upon God is a vital principle of Christianity, and this cannot well be taught in connection with an appeal to the civil power. God sent the missionaries; they went out to represent his government; and to his government—not to one which did not send them—they may properly look for protection. Why should Christian missionary work be put on a different basis now from that on which it was conducted in the days of Christ and the apostles? AMS March 30, 1899, page 208.4