Larger font
Smaller font
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "".
  • Weighted Relevancy
  • Content Sequence
  • Relevancy
  • Earliest First
  • Latest First
    Larger font
    Smaller font

    October 19, 1899

    “Front Page” American Sentinel 14, 41, p. 641.


    JESUS CHRIST conquered the world—not by shedding the blood of others, but his own.AMS October 19, 1899, page 641.1

    WHILE the church seeks the power that is from beneath, she need not expect to be endued with “power from on high.”AMS October 19, 1899, page 641.2

    THE armies and navies of the great military powers can speak like the whirlwind, earthquake, and fire; but God yet speaks in the “still small voice.”AMS October 19, 1899, page 641.3

    AMS THE man who controls themselves as a disposition to let other people alone, so the government which is “of the people” is not found meddling with the rights of a foreign race. But all this is changed when the principle of self-government is cast aside.AMS October 19, 1899, page 641.4

    MAN does not exist to direct law; the law exists to direct man. The law existed before man was created.AMS October 19, 1899, page 641.5

    MAN cannot make law. He cannot make a law of nature, and cannot make a moral law. It would be as easy to make the one as the other. The moral sphere was no more left without law at creation than was the physical sphere. And as man can only discover and apply physical laws, or laws of nature, so also he can but discover and apply the laws of morality. The law of gravitation is older than the law against murder or any other act destructive of rights.AMS October 19, 1899, page 641.6

    THE province of the human “law-maker” is to be a discoverer and not an inventor. He may invent some “moral” laws of his own, but he cannot improve on the moral legislation of the Creator, which covers every possible point of moral relations. As an inventor in the domain of legislation, no man is ever entitled to a patent.AMS October 19, 1899, page 641.7

    THE Creator of all things made the law for all, and therefore all law is just and perfect, and anything not just and perfect is not law. A bad “law” always sets at naught the real law of the point to which it applies; and to obey the one is synonymous with breaking the other.AMS October 19, 1899, page 641.8

    THE only power that man has of himself is the power to do wrong. The power to do right is a higher power, being the power of God. The power to do one righteous act is superior to the power to do all wrong acts.AMS October 19, 1899, page 641.9

    “The Government Cannot Speak for Peace” American Sentinel 14, 41, pp. 641, 642.


    A STRONG effort has been made, through mass meetings and petitions, to induce the Chief Executive of this Government to offer its services to Great Britain as arbitrator to avert war in the Transvaal.AMS October 19, 1899, page 641.1

    It is felt by very many that the influence of this Government exerted in such a way might be the means of averting a terrible war, a war that would be one of the greatest disasters and horrors of the century.AMS October 19, 1899, page 641.2

    The Government, in defining its position, declines to say anything in behalf of arbitration, and a semi-official statement bases the Government’s attitude upon its new “love for England,” begotten of its new policy of foreign conquest.AMS October 19, 1899, page 641.3

    The Government is probably aware that it could not consistently interfere with what Great Britain is doing in South Africa, while itself conducting an enterprise of precisely similar character in the Philippines. The supporters of this enterprise are aware of it, and almost without exception, so far as we have seen, side with Great Britain and the latter’s determination to extinguish the South African republics.AMS October 19, 1899, page 641.4

    And there is no question but that England would view the intervention of the United States in behalf of peace, as an exhibition of gross inconsistency and insincerity; for the English people discern nothing but the spirit of their own imperialism in the course of foreign conquest upon which the American Government has entered.AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.1

    More than this, the United States would be accused of gross ingratitude. For, as a London journal has said, the American bargain for Asiatic territory was made “under the protecting naval strength of England;” and (speaking for England) “we shall expect, to be quite frank, a material quid pro quo for this assistance. “It will be expected, among other things, that United States will look the other way and say nothing while Great Britain is ridding the earth of republics.AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.2

    That a word for peace from the United States, spoken under other circumstances, would have weight with Great Britain, there is good reason to believe. The friendship of the United States is, from both a commercial and a political point of view, of the utmost value to the British Isles, and of this the British government has shown itself to be fully aware. Standing isolated among the nations of Europe, England is in no position to lightly turn aside from the proffered friendship of a giant power across the sea.AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.3

    Who can say, therefore, that had the United States remain true to its foundation principle of government by consent of the governed, and as the mighty champion of free government, had expressed to Great Britain its wish for the preservation of peace and of republican government in South Africa, Great Britain would not have listened to its counsel, and left the settlement of Transvaal disputes to arbitration or other peaceable means? And who, therefore, can say but that the terrible war that is threatened and is even now reported as begun, will not stand in history as a fearful indictment of the American Republic for being recreant to republican principles?AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.4

    “A Valid Reason” American Sentinel 14, 41, p. 642.


    MR. HOMERULE to Mr. Forcerule: My friend, why do you shoot down these poor savages to whom we have come for their benefit?AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.1

    MR. FORCERULE (looking at some savages he has killed): I told them to submit to my authority, and as they refuse, I had to shoot them.AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.2

    Mr. H. but might you not have left them alone, even though they did not want to be under your authority?AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.3

    Mr. F. No, indeed; for if I had, they would probably have got to quarreling and might kill each other!AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.4

    “The Only True Remedy for War” American Sentinel 14, 41, pp. 642, 643.


    THE Independent says that “none but a Quaker will assert that war is never right.” Then there are a good many Quakers in the world who are not recognized as Quakers. And from the vast numbers of people who profess to be Christians, there should be millions who would “assert that war is never right” whether they were Quakers or not.AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.1

    War is never right simply because the conditions which allow war to be possible are absolutely wrong. There was war in heaven. That is the first war that ever was. It was made by the devil. And plainly it was not right. That was the origin of war: and that is the spirit of it ever. How, then, can it ever possibly be right?AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.2

    Yet when it is said with reference to the nations as they are, that war is never right, it is like saying to the natural man that sin is never right.AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.3

    It is true that sin is never right; but the natural man will still continue to sin. He cannot do anything but sin a long as he is the only the natural man, so long as his nature is unchanged.AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.4

    To tell a man whose nature is unchanged, who is not spiritual, that sin is never right, and expect him not to sin, while retaining that unchanged nature, would be but a mocking platitude. And to tell him that sin is right, would be worse. And this would argue that the one who expected him not to sin while retaining his unchanged nature, also expected him to be his own saviour: and this because he who expected all this knew of no Saviour who can give another nature and change the natural man to a spiritual man, from sin to righteousness.AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.5

    He who knows the Saviour who can change the natural man to a spiritual man, who can give him another nature, who can deliver him from sin and from sinning, does not expect the natural man not to sin. While he may tell him that sin is never right, he will also tell him that the only way that he can cease from sin and do the right, is by being saved from sin, by being made partaker of the divine nature, by being changed from the natural to the spiritual man, by being born again.AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.6

    It is precisely so as to war. War is never right. Yet so long as men possess the warring nature, they will make war. And for the churches to tell the nations that war is wrong, and then expect the nations not to make war, while still unchanged from the warring nature, is but a mocking platitude. And for the churches to tell the nations that war is right, is far worse.AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.7

    For the churches to expect the nations not to make war, while still possessing the warring nature, is nothing but to argue that the people of the nations can change their own natures, can deliver themselves from themselves, and can be their own saviours. And that is nothing but for those churches to confess that they know of no change for deliverance from the warring nature to the peaceful one.AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.8

    And that in turn is for those churches to confess that in nature they are only like the warring nations; that in nature there is no distinction between the churches and the nations; and that there is essentially a union of the churches and the nations.AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.9

    But that is all wrong. There is an essential distinction between the true church and any nation. And this because of the essential distinction between the natures. The nations are natural; the church is spiritual. The nations are human only; the church, though composed of human beings, is composed of human beings who are all partakers of the divine nature. The nations are of this world only; the church is not of this world. And being thus essentially distinct in their natures the church and the nations can never have any fellowship, any union, nor any connection to any extent in any way whatever.AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.10

    And so the church can and does tell to the nations that while it is true that war is wrong, yet the only way that they can ever be free from war is to be freed from the warring nature, and made partakers of the divine nature of the God of peace as manifested in the Prince of peace. The only way is for each one to be born again, to be born from above, to be translated into the kingdom of God’s dear Son, which kingdom is “righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.”AMS October 19, 1899, page 642.11

    A. T. J.

    “A National Anti-Polygamy Crusade” American Sentinel 14, 41, pp. 643, 644.


    WE have received from the Salt Lake Ministerial Association (Utah), an organization embracing Methodists, Baptist, Congregational, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, and Lutheran clergymen, some printed communications and asking our coöperation in an effort to prevent the seating in Congress of an alleged polygamous, Brigham H. Roberts, of Salt Lake City, and to put polygamy under the ban of national law. The association calls for “a constitutional amendment prohibiting polygamy and polygamous cohabitation in every State and Territory of our Union.”AMS October 19, 1899, page 643.1

    The SENTINEL is unqualifiedly opposed to polygamy, as it necessarily must be in standing for the preservation of natural rights. It therefore stands with those who seek by every lawful means, to restrict the existence of this evil within the smallest possible limits.AMS October 19, 1899, page 643.2

    As polygamy is against natural rights, and civil government is instituted to preserve such rights, civil government can properly do nothing to justify or sanction polygamy; and the Government of the United States cannot properly allow a polygamist to take a seat in Congress.AMS October 19, 1899, page 643.3

    Polygamy is immoral; but Congress cannot unseat Mr. Roberts on that ground. It is unchristian; but Congress cannot take action against him on that ground. It cannot unseat a member on the ground that he is a sinner. Congress is not constituted to be a judge of morality, or to try to enforce a standard of morality. Congress is invested with authority to enact laws for the best interests of all the people, within the lawful sphere of civil government, which is the preservation of rights. If polygamy were consistent with the preservation of human rights, it could properly be opposed only by the agencies God has instituted to combat sin.AMS October 19, 1899, page 643.4

    It is altogether probable that the effort to unseat Mr. Roberts in Congress will be successful; but more than this is desired by his opponents. They want measures to be taken for the suppression of polygamy itself, and is stated, they propose a national law in the shape of a constitutional amendment “prohibiting polygamy and polygamous cohabitation in every State and Territory of our Union.”AMS October 19, 1899, page 644.1

    We are entirely in favor of the suppression of polygamy. But when we consider the question of the means to be employed, and especially the means that is proposed, we are reminded that the popular sentiment necessary to enforce even a constitutional law against polygamy in this country has become an uncertain quantity. For it is a recognized fact that the divorce evil, which by its nature is allied with polygamy as the flow of domestic virtue and happiness, has become so widespread throughout the Union as to alarm thoughtful men in the church and in the state, and has stirred them up to demand some action suited to a national emergency. The country is yet talking about the action taken at the late Episcopal diocesan convention in which Bishop Potter and others called for some stringent legislation by the church to check the increasing prevalence of divorce. When the people themselves throughout the Union given the evidence of such general moral obliquity touching the matter of the domestic relations as the records of the divorce courts show, what can seriously be expected from them in the way of support for a law against polygamy? Can one who practises or views without concern the practice of what may be termed consecutive polygamy, be expected to be seriously concerned over the spread of that form of polygamy which is unattended by divorce-court scandals?AMS October 19, 1899, page 644.2

    It is one thing to have a law, and another thing to have the law enforced; one thing to be against an evil outwardly, and another thing to condemn it in the heart; one thing to be a Pharisee, and another thing to be an “Israelite indeed.” The latter part of the first chapter of St. Paul’s epistle to the Romans depicts an anomalous condition of society illustrating this distinction, and that has been only too frequently a reality in human history. The apostle describes a class of men who were “filled with all unrighteousness,” guilty of every crime against God and man, “who, knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but had pleasure in them that do them.” And this class actually existed in Roman society and predominated in the empire at the time the apostle addressed this letter to the Roman church. The laws of the Roman empire forbade such acts and made them punishable with death, by which the Romans testified their knowledge “that they which commit such things are worthy of death”; but everywhere, from the emperor down to the people, these very things were done, almost as if there were no laws against them in existence. Law, even with the death penalty affixed, was no barrier then to the grossest immortality; and civil law, in itself, has no greater power to-day.AMS October 19, 1899, page 644.3

    Another fact presents itself upon the side of the question; and that is that the United States Government has but lately countenanced polygamy by the treaty made with the Sultan of Sulu, who will henceforth practice and maintain polygamy in a part of the Philippine Islands under American authority. Having given this virtual sanction to polygamy abroad, the Government has greatly weakened the hands of those who oppose it at home. This is a part of the evil advantage of the policy of foreign conquest.AMS October 19, 1899, page 644.4

    The Salt Lake Ministerial Association will not do well to oppose polygamy by the power of a constitutional law, in preference to the power of godliness, which it is their special mission to reveal to the world.AMS October 19, 1899, page 644.5

    “Back Page” American Sentinel 14, 41, p. 656.


    NO NATION can survive indefinitely upon a policy which sets aside the law of justice and the rights of mankind. History exists to attest this fact to the people of to-day. When a nation sets out upon the path that diverges from the path of justice, it sets out upon the road to its own extinction. The nations of former times did this and came to their end one after the other, though they were warned by the messengers of God against taking a wrong course. And to-day there is nothing more appropriate for the times than to sound the same warning, as the AMERICAN SENTINEL and other agencies are doing.AMS October 19, 1899, page 656.1

    BEYOND certain limits, the expansion of national domain must mean the addition of power in the hands of men who already have more power than they know how to handle properly. Great power concentrated in the hands of one person or of a few individuals always cursed the world, and is one of the worst of the evils that darken the outlook to-day.AMS October 19, 1899, page 656.2

    THE greatest republic on the earth ought naturally to be the friend of the lesser republics, at least to the extent of speaking a word for peace when one of them is threatened with extinction by an imperial power.AMS October 19, 1899, page 656.3

    THE grace of God is given freely, but can be received only by him who takes it freely; that is, of his own free will. Hence there can be no slavery in the service of God, but religious liberty in the true sense.AMS October 19, 1899, page 656.4

    WHEN evil is overcome with good, the victory is lasting.AMS October 19, 1899, page 656.5

    Larger font
    Smaller font