The American Sentinel 5
April 17, 1890
“An Interesting Letter” The American Sentinel 5, 16, pp. 121-123.
HERE is a letter that explains itself. The California whence it is written is not the State of California, but the post-office of that name in Michigan. The ladies of the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union are ever welcome to a hearing in our columns. AMS April 17, 1890, page 121.1
California, March 11, 1890.
EDITOR AMERICAN SENTINEL:—
Your paper has become of late a regular visitor in my home, coming from some unknown source, and I cannot refrain from expressing nay astonishment and righteous indignation at the misleading statements and false charges made against the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union, in your issue of Feb. 13. In your statement that “the directors of the Young Men’s Christian Association of Milwaukee gave formal notice to the W.C.T.U. that they could no longer have the use of their building for the reason that having allied them-selves with the Prohibition party they must be treated as other political organizations are,” you have purposly [sic.] or otherwise omitted the most important fact concerning that action of which I cannot think you were ignorant. AMS April 17, 1890, page 121.2
Why did you not, like an honest man, give the real true reason for such action. Which was that they (the directors) were instigated to this deed by brewers who contributed to the building fund? AMS April 17, 1890, page 121.3
You could not have done this and then added as you did, “The management of the Y.M C.A. which through all the ups and downs of the day has kept it straight on its Christian course clear of all entanglements, is worthy of the highest admiration on the part of everybody, as it has it on the part of the AMERICAN SENTINEL.” It is only an evidence of receiving [sic.] bad dollars for a good object, and that never yet won the approval of God or the admiration of good men, your statement to the contrary nevertheless, and I am grieved to see a professedly Christian paper express their “admiration” of a deed that was instigated and accomplished by the saloon element. You say further, “The W.C.T.U. has ceased to be anything but a political club, and its work anything less than a continuous political campaign.” It is certainly the duty of people who make such grave charges, either to prove them or in honor cease to slander the brave organization that stands by the work of temperance reform unstampeded. This charge you cannot substantiate by any word or act upon record. The W.C.T.U. is organized mother love seeking to promote the interests of home and all that a Christian wife and mother holds sacred and dear—working with a determination that yields to no discouragement for the suppression of all that is impure and unholy, and for the advancement of all that is pure and true and good. In calmly reflecting upon your statement, from a personal knowledge of, and a long identification with, the work of the W.C.T.U. I am forced to one of these conclusions—that you are totally [sic.] ignorant regarding the work of the W.C.T.U. or you are wholly in sympathy with the saloon. AMS April 17, 1890, page 121.4
Was it the work of a “political campaign” or was it divine love that nerved the heart and brain of Mrs. Mary Hunt to labor and cease not until she had brought State and National protection to the aid of 12,000,000 of the children of our public schools, in securing in twenty-six States and Territories a Scientific Temperance Instruction law? Is the suppression of impure literature and the laws forbidding the sale of tobacco and cigarettes, to minors, the work of a “political campaign?” AMS April 17, 1890, page 121.5
Look at the record of the work of the W.C.T.U. among the railroad employes, the soldiers and sailors, the lumbermen; the work of the Flower Mission; ask the men in the jails and prisons of its influence upon them and then answer! We do not claim anything to boast of in our work, but very much to thank God for. In our own State during the past year, we have supported two missionaries in the lumber camps. The men have become acquainted with the name and work of our organization. One fellow said to the missionary, who asked him to sign the pledge, “Yes, I’ll sign it and keep it too, for the W.C.T.U. is the only organization that thinks we poor fellows have souls.” Is this and kindred work among the inmates of our jails, and prisons, and almshouses, that has been blessed of God to hundreds of souls the work of a “political campaign?” If you so regard it, your ideas of a political campaign must be vastly different from those of the majority of politicians. AMS April 17, 1890, page 121.6
Will you, as an honest man and a Christian, withdraw the base and false accusation, or will you stand with those who foster and protect the saloon with all its attendant misery and crime? Your statement is nothing less than a wicked and malicious slander of the W.C.T.U.—an organization which has for its chief object, the education of the whole people in the principles of Bible temperance and total abstinence and the ultimate over-throw of the saloon upon which the curse of God rests. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.1
I ask you now, will you look at the record of work done by any one of all of the forty different departments of the Union in the past year, or any year of, their existence which by the blessing of God has resulted in the conversion of many souls in this and foreign lands, and then say wherein it has been of the nature of a political campaign? AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.2
If you can say one word in defense of or proof of your statement, I shall be glad to hear from you. If you cannot, your Christian integrity is at stake and demands a retraction of your statement which is wholly devoid of truth as regards the work of the W.C.T.U. I ask only what is just and right. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.3
Refusal or failure to do this will be sufficient evidence that you cannot, or will not, and that your influence and sympathy are given to perpetuate the saloon. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.4
Respectfully, S. L. JEFFERS.
This letter we willingly print. It is plain and to the point. We have not space to reply in detail, to all the statements made, but the principal ones we will notice. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.5
First, in regard to the Milwaukee affair, this letter contains the first and only intimation that we have had that the Young Men’s Christian Association, of Milwaukee, was instigated in that matter by the brewers. And this statement should be supported by proofs. As it stands we say plainly that we do not believe it. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.6
There are two reasons why we do not believe it. First, we are not ready to believe such a statement as that concerning the Young Men’s Christian Association upon ex parte statements, unsupported by any proofs whatever. Secondly, because the thing is improbable in itself, from the simple fact that a party contributing to the building fund of an association does not secure a shadow of authority or right to control the actions of that association. I may contribute to the building of a church or hall, as many people do, yet that gives me no right ever to have any voice in the control or use of such building. In such cases, contributors, as such, have no moral right to any control in the matter, and it is certain that they have no legal right. And therefore to believe that the directors of the Young Men’s Christian Association “were instigated to this deed by the brewers who contributed to the building fund,” is to go directly in the face of all moral and legal probability. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.7
For this reason we say to the writer of this letter,—and we say it respectfully,—that we do not believe that the statement given is the “true reason” for this action. If she has proofs to show that it is so, we will gladly print them, if she will send them to us. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.8
We do not believe that the saloon element controls, or can control, the Young Men’s Christian Association in any matter. And although this lady may be “grieved” to have us say so, and to express our admiration of the Young Men’s Christian Association, it seems to us that she ought to be no less grieved to give her authority to a charge which involves the Young Men’s Christian Association in the control of the saloon element. To us that seems to be a much more serious charge than to say that the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union is a political club. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.9
This brings us to the second, and in fact the main point. And that is, that the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union is political. We agree with the writer of this letter that it is the duty of those who make charges to prove them. And it is the settled policy of the SENTINEL to make no charges which it is not able to prove to the satisfaction of all fair minded people. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.10
But says the writer, “This charge you cannot substantiate by any word or act upon record.” Well that depends. We have some records, and we shall quote from them statements that show that there is at least some basis for the statement which we made. In the minutes of the New York convention printed in the Union Signal of November 8, 1888, there is this statement:— AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.11
Chairman Dickey appeared before the convention, and asked that Miss Willard be permitted or instructed to sit as a counseling member of the Prohibition Executive Committee. She was so instructed by the convention. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.12
Now the Prohibition party is political and nothing else. Its executive committee is a political body only. That body exists only for political purposes, and its members are such only for political purposes. Their counsels are nothing but political counsels. Therefore when the convention instructed its President to sit as a counseling member of the Prohibition executive committee, that convention did by that action distinctly commit itself to political action and alliance; and it did thereby make itself political. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.13
Notice, the convention was asked that Miss Willard “be permitted or instructed,” etc., and “she was instructed.” If she had been but permitted, no one could justly attach any more weight to it than to any other individual and voluntary action; but when the choice between these two steps was open to the convention, and the convention chose the stronger action and distinctly instructed its president to sit as a counseling member of the executive committee of the Prohibition party, that action became the action of the convention, and as certainly made the National Union political as any action could possibly do. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.14
Again, in the minutes of the same convention, we find that an important delegation so fully understood that the national body is political, that it presented a memorial asking the National Convention to compel the State Unions to conform to the national body in this. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.15
The Illinois Union, by its president, Mrs. Louise S. Rounds, presented a memorial in which is the following statement:— AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.16
We further believe that the pledge you gave the Prohibition party ... by such an overwhelming majority, gave to you as a logical sequence, a political policy, which no member of your honorable body has the right to antagonize. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.17
We believe precisely with the Illinois Union. We believe that the pledge which the National Union gave to the Prohibition party, and the alliance with that party which the National Union still holds, did give to the National Union as a logical sequence a political policy, and thereby made it a political organization. We believe that the Illinois Union was then considered loyal, and that it is still so to the National Union. Why then, should we be so harshly reproved for believing and saying the same thing that the Illinois Union itself believed and said. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.18
Again, in that same convention, Mrs. Lathrap said in her speech that the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union “is political.” Again, we ask why should we be so chastised for saying of the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union what so prominent a representative, in open convention, said of it? AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.19
Once more, in the National Convention of the National Union held in Nashville, Tennessee, 1887, of which we have also an official copy of the minutes, the following words were spoken in the President’s annual address:— AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.20
The Woman’s Christian Temperance Union, local, State, National, and world-wide, has one vital, organic thought, one all-absorbing purpose, on undying enthusiasm, and it is that Christ shall be this world’s king. Yea, verily, THIS WORLD’S king in its realm of cause and effect; king of its courts, its camps, its commerce; king of its colleges and cloisters; king of its customs and its constitutions. Not a king who hears the Nation praising him far off from the lips outward but one who, dwelling in their hearts, radiates his presence into their daily doings, and make his word as much the text-book of their daily lives, as the multiplication table is of their business transactions. The kingdom of Christ is no poetic fancy with us white ribboners; no mystic dream. It is a solid sphere of fact.... The kingdom of Christ must enter the realm of law through the gateway of politics; as one of our own has said. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.21
Now as the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union, local, State, National, and world-wide has but the one purpose, the one thought, and that an “all-absorbing one,” of making Christ this world’s king; as that kingdom is “a solid sphere of fact,” and must enter the realm of law through the gateway of politics; then there is no other conclusion, than that the one organic thought and all-absorbing purpose of the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union, local, State, National, and world-wide, is political. This is the truth, is is political. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.22
We know that the Union “though its forty departments” does much good. We never thought of denying that. By this it has gained its power and influence. And upon this in strictness of truth we are compelled to make a statement that cannot be successfully denied, that is, that the influence which the National Union has gained by all these different lines of work, is used only for a political purpose. Instead of that influence being used to glorify Jesus Christ in a Christian way, it is used to glorify the Union and especially its leadership in a worldly, ambitious, and political way. AMS April 17, 1890, page 122.23
We believe that the evidence here given is sufficient to convince fair-minded people that our statement that the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union is political, was not wicked, nor malicious, nor slanderous. We merely stated what the records of the Union state; we only said what they say. Yet we are somewhat in doubt whether it will convince the writer of this letter or perhaps other members of the Union; because their ideas of what is political are different from those which are commonly supposed to be conveyed by that word. It seems as though every thing that they do is counted religious. That which to others is political, to them is religious. For instance, Mrs. Gougar was once making a regular campaign Prohibition speech. In the speech she personally called the name of a certain person. That person demanded to be heard in reply. He was prosecuted for disturbing a religious meeting. When such things as this are held to be religious, then it is hard to convince those who so hold, that anything is political. But even this refuge cannot protect them from the force of truth, because such a “religion” as that is political, and that only. Not only this, but wherever and whenever religion is connected with politics, that religion is political. Any religion which claims or uses political influence or political power, is political, and that only. AMS April 17, 1890, page 123.1
All this is spoken of the National Woman’s Christian Temperance Union as a body. We believe that there are connected with that body many individual humble Christian women, who do their Christian work in a Christian way, are content with that, and are grieved with the ways of the leadership and the body of the Union, who so persistently continue their political course. We know a number of such women who have separated themselves from the Union for this very reason. AMS April 17, 1890, page 123.2
We have not said any of these things out of enmity to the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union, and no fair-minded reader of the SENTINEL can justly accuse us of being a friend of the saloon. We have said these things simply in criticism of the political course of the Union. AMS April 17, 1890, page 123.3
Let the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union honestly be what its name demands that it shall be, that is, Christian. Let it work for Christian temperance, in a Christian way. The influence which it may gain by such Christian conduct let it use for the glory of Jesus Christ, and the honor of the Christian name. Let it do this and it will find no better friend in this world than the AMERICAN SENTINEL: but so long as it calls itself political and acts accordingly; so long as it seeks by alliance with the National Reform Association, the American Sabbath Union, and other religio-political organizations, in the effort to secure control of the civil power to enforce religious observances; so long as it works for Sunday laws; so long as it endorses, and calls for the adoption of, a religious amendment to the Constitution of the United States; so long as it holds that Jesus Christ shall be “this world’s king;” so long as it holds the kingdom of Christ to be political and attempts to establish it by political means; just so long, and in all these things, will the AMERICAN SENTINEL criticise its methods, and oppose its workings, and denounce its aims. AMS April 17, 1890, page 123.4
A. T. J.
“‘Shall Christ Be King of the Nation?’” The American Sentinel 5, 16, pp. 124, 125.
THIS is the title of a production by Jenny Bland Beauchamp, which we find in the Union Signal of February 6, 1890. It is rich in sense and in nonsense, and the two are about equally divided, with a third portion which strongly bears toward that which is worse than nonsense. It begins by saying that “every loyal Christian heart must answer this question in the affirmative,” which is not true. Christ never will be king of this Nation, nor of any other nation except that “holy nation” which he will redeem from among the unholy nations of which this is one. Then she inquires, “But in what sense will Christ be king of the Nation? and proceeds to answer her question thus:— AMS April 17, 1890, page 124.1
The proud, world-renowned city of Florence, at one time, moved by the eloquence of Savonarola, actually elected Jesus Christ king of Florence. They did it by a fair count and a free vote, just as a nation would declare its allegiance to a foreign prince. They had dethroned the perfidious Medici, and, removing the shields of the King of France and the Pope of Rome, placed the name of Jesus on a tablet over the entrance into the palace. Did that make him king of Florence? AMS April 17, 1890, page 124.2
Would it make Jesus king of America to put his name on the tablet of our Constitution? Jesus himself rejects such hypocrisy, saying, “Why call ye me Lord! Lord! and do not the things I command?” We could not make him king of America by making the distinctively New Testament laws civil laws. The distinctively New Testament laws are baptism, and the Lord’s Supper, and laws in regard to church order and church officers. The laws primarily founded upon the decalogue are not distinctively New Testament laws; nor is the new commandment, “ye shall love one another,” for the Saviour tells us this is a brief compendium of the moral law. Nor can we make him king of this Nation by incorporating the morality of the gospel into our civil code. For instance, how could we convict and punish a man for what the Saviour defines the crime of adultery? The laws of Christ were made for a spiritual kingdom, and could not possibly be executed by a civil magistrate. Jesus was an obedient subject of the Hebrew commonwealth, paid his taxes, fled when the Jews would have made him a king, and refused to support his authority by the secular sword. AMS April 17, 1890, page 124.3
We do not worship a dead Christ. Jesus lives and is to-day more intimately connected with the affairs of the nations than when he walked the hills of Judea. He is not here in person, but the Church is here to represent his body. He has not changed his idea in regard to secular matters, so the Church should not accept any civil authority. We are all agreed on that point. All nations are to be given to Christ; Jesus is going to reign over the hearts of his people through the gospel. AMS April 17, 1890, page 124.4
Now this is sense, and it is good sense too. There is more good, sound, genuine sense in that than we have seen from National Reform or Union Signal sources since—well, we don’t know when. AMS April 17, 1890, page 124.5
Next we print the portion which immediately follows the above and it runs thus:— AMS April 17, 1890, page 124.6
The gospel will supersede the law, i.e. the moral law, and our civil code is primarily based upon this. The gospel will so permeate the masses as to be a controlling factor in government. The gospel contains all the morality of the decalogue. If the law compels one to go a mile, a free man in Christ Jesus will go two. If it takes away his coast he will let it have his cloak too. He will do this because of the abounding love in his heart. So far from injuring his neighbor he will seek in all possible ways to bless and benefit mankind. The gospel will bring in the universal reign of love. Love not only fulfills the law but in its beneficence goes far beyond it. AMS April 17, 1890, page 124.7
Now this is worse than is worse than nonsense. The idea that the gospel shall supersede the moral law is destructive of the moral law, of morality, and even of the gospel itself. The is ordained to maintain the integrity of the moral law, and yet enable God to save the transgressor of the law. The gospel is ordained that God may be just and yett the justifier of the unjust who believe in Jesus Christ, who is the embodiment of the gospel. The gospel is declared to be “the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth.” That salvation is salvation from sin but sin is defined by the word of God to be “the transgression of the law.” The gospel being ordained to save men from the transgression of the law, would be robbed of all its force if the law be superseded which points out the sin. Again it is written, “By the law is the knowledge of sin.” The gospel, being the power of God to save from sin, would be robbed of all its force if the law be superseded by which alone is the knowledge of sin. Once more, it is written, “Where no law is there is no transgression,” and “sin is not imputed when there is no law.” Now by any means to supersede or take away the law is to take away all transgression or imputation of sin, which at once nullifies the gospel; because it is alone the remedy for sin, and is the power of God unto salvation from sin. If there be no sin there can be no gospel. To offer pardon to the innocent, is an imposition and an insult; and therefore any proposition to supersede the law by the gospel, or by any other means, is worse than nonsense, because it strikes at the foundation of God’s throne which is justice and judgment, and so uproots all morality. God is the source of morality, the foundation of his throne is justice and judgment, and the gospel is ordained in order that he might be just and yet the justifier of him who believeth in Jesus. AMS April 17, 1890, page 125.1
The last sentence, “Love not only fulfills the law, but in its beneficence goes far beyond it,” is worse than nonsense because it is an insult to the law of God and to its Author. It is written, “Love is the fulfilling of the law.” That law being supreme, and love being the fulfillment it, it is impossible for love to go beyond it to any degree whatever; for wherever genuine love is, it is nothing less than the expression of the law, the fulfillment of which is love. More than this, the law of God is but the expression of his will. It is only the reflection of his character. And “God is love.” To say, then, that love goes far beyond the law which is but the reflection of the mind and will of him who is love, is to say that loves goes far beyond God, and that to deny God, and is not far removed from blasphemy, even though we wot that through ignorance she said it. AMS April 17, 1890, page 125.2
The next portion of this production is as follows:— AMS April 17, 1890, page 125.3
When men are holy, wars will cease, litigations will cease. The criminal officers will lose their occupation, for there will be no civil offenses. The secular sword will rust in its sheath. Jails and penitentiaries will stand open for want of an inmate. The judge will convene the court only to find nothing on the docket. The State, rid of the depredations of evildoers, will be free to work out her mission on a higher plane. She will expend her wealth and her energies in directing and ennobling her people—in educating the young, in improving and beautifying the public domain, in fulfilling her beneficent mission among the nations. Then our temples of justice will be converted into temples of love. The reign of love will actually supersede the reign of law. Then will Christ be the king of this Nation and the civil power, acknowledging his allegiance, will exclaim with the apostate Julian, “Oh, Gallilean, thou hast conquered!” AMS April 17, 1890, page 125.4
That is considerably mixed. It is true that when men, if it be all men, are holy, wars will cease and litigation will cease. But the time will never come in this world when that will be so. The Scriptures declare that when this world ends, multitudes of men will yet be wicked, and will then be destroyed because they are wicked. When all the holy people shall be gathered unto the kingdom of God there will be neither criminal officers nor civil offenses. There will be no secular sword to rust in its sheath even if there were a sheath. There will be neither jails nor penitentiaries to stand open. There will be neither earthly judge nor earthly court. There will be no State to have a mission, nor to have money, nor to educate the young, nor will there be a “public domain.” The reign of love will never supersede the reign of the law, because the expression of the supreme law is love itself. Christ will never be king of this Nation; and though the civil power should acknowledge such allegiance and make such an exclamation, it would not be true in any such sense as is here conveyed. AMS April 17, 1890, page 125.5
Besides this, Julian was no more of an apostate than were Constantine and his “pious sons” and many others of that ilk whom we might name. And more than this, Julian never exclaimed, “Oh, Gallilean, thou hast conquered!” AMS April 17, 1890, page 125.6
The last of the article is as follows:— AMS April 17, 1890, page 125.7
So Christ will become king of this Nation, not by putting his name in the Constitution, nor by making New Testament laws the fundamental laws of the land, nor by turning court-houses into churches, nor magistrates into bishops. His reign will not come in by civil commotion. It will come silently as the dew, and gently as the blessed sunlight. AMS April 17, 1890, page 125.8
“He shall come down like rain upon the mown grass; as showers that water the earth.” AMS April 17, 1890, page 125.9
“In his days shall the righteous flourish; and abundance of peace so long as the moon endureth.” AMS April 17, 1890, page 125.10
In the councils of eternity the Father and the Son entered into a covenant called the covenant of redemption. By virtue of this covenant the Son was to make an atonement for sin by the death on the cross, in consideration to which the Father was to give him all the nations of the earth. “Ask of me and I will give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.” AMS April 17, 1890, page 125.11
So the nation that finally rejects his authority is doomed to destruction. “Be wise now therefore, oh ye kings; be instructed, ye judges of the earth. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. AMS April 17, 1890, page 125.12
The scriptures that are quoted there are good, and sound, and true. But all of it that is not actual Scripture is actual nonsense. And how any one could start out with so clear a statement of sound sense, as this writer does, and then close up with such a medley of bad sense and worse doctrine, interlarded with good scripture, is a mystery. AMS April 17, 1890, page 125.13
A. T. J.