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

    August 1888

    “Rome’s Influence” American Sentinel 3, 8, pp. 59, 60.

    ATJ

    IF anybody fails to see that the Papacy is now fast moving into the place of the greatest influence of any earthly organization, not only in Europe, but in this Nation as well, we can only wonder what he can be doing with his eyes. In Europe, to say nothing of Catholic countries, which, as a matter of course, are subject to the Pope, Germany is subject to the dictation of the Pope; England is glad to obtain his help in her political affairs; and even the autocrat of all the Russia is willing to make overtures to the Pope.AMS August 1888, page 59.1

    In our own country Rome’s influence is growing faster than any other one thing. Everybody knows that it was the word “Romanism” in an unfortunate alliteration that cost Blaine the presidency in 1884. The editor of the Converted Catholic says that more Senators and Representatives send their sons to the Jesuit College at Georgetown, than to all the other institutions of learning at Washington. This proves, either that a large number of Senators and Representatives are Catholics, or that Rome has more influence with Senators and Representatives than have all the other educational institutions in Washington put together.AMS August 1888, page 59.2

    L. Q. C. Lamar was lately Secretary of the Interior. He was charged with giving to Catholics more positions in his department than to other denominations. His reply was, that “if the Roman Catholics have been recognized to a greater extent than other denominations, it is only because they have asked more largely;” and explains this by saying that the Romish Church has at Washington “an energetic and tireless director, who is active to seize opportunities for extending missionary and educational work among the Indians.” The Government Superintendent of Indian Schools is a Catholic; and the Christian Union says that four-fifths of the Government Indian schools, under religious control, have been given to the Romish Church.AMS August 1888, page 59.3

    The Assistant Attorney-General of the Department of the Interior—Mr. Zach. Montgomery—is a Roman Catholic, with all the Roman Catholic enmity to the public schools, and hesitates not to use his official influence to show it. Not long since, in an address at Carroll Institute, he openly denounced the public-school system as godless, anti-parental, and destructive of happiness. And the Senate knew his enmity to the public schools when it confirmed him as Assistant Attorney-General.AMS August 1888, page 59.4

    We would not have a word to say against Catholics being given public and official positions in any department of Government, were it not that the allegiance of every Catholic is paid to the Pope before it is to the United States, and must be so paid, or else he ceases to be a good Catholic; every soul of them enters politics, or into official positions, as a Catholic; and the Pope has commanded all Catholics to do all in their power to cause the legislation of States to be shaped upon the model of the “true church.”AMS August 1888, page 59.5

    Next the secular press is captivated by the seductive influences of the Papacy. Not only is this true of that portion of the press which makes politics a trade, and which professedly follows, while it leads, public influence; it is equally true of the great magazines. In the Century for May, 1888, there was published a most flattering tribute to the Pope, with full-page portrait, under the title of “The Personality of Leo XIII.” And in the Forum for April, 1888, Rome forms the subject of two long articles—one, “Civil Government and Papacy,” the other, “Socialism and the Catholic Church.”AMS August 1888, page 59.6

    Next after the political world and the secular press, there is the “Protestant” religious world and its press. And in hardly anything does this take second place after the others, in this truckling flattery to the Papacy. The Evangelist, the Christian Union, the Christian at Work, the Independent, and other papers of lesser note, all pay flattering tribute to Rome. The Evangelist acknowledges Cardinal Gibbons as its “only Cardinal;” the Independent wishes the Pope “a long reign and Godspeed in his liberalizing policy;” the Christian at Work salutes him as “Holy Father,” and in the name of “the whole Christian world” glorifies him as “this venerable man whose loyalty to God and zeal for the welfare of humanity are as conspicuous as his freedom from many of the errors and bigotries of his predecessors, is remarkable;” and the Christian Union acknowledges him as “a temporal prince” and “Supreme Pontiff.” Nor are the “Protestant” doctors of divinity one whit behind these “Protestant” papers. Rev. Charles W. Shields, D. D., of Princeton College, writing of the reunion of Christendom, said of a certain position, that it would not do to take it, because—AMS August 1888, page 59.7

    “You would exclude the Roman Catholic Church, the mother of us all; the church of scholars and saints, of Augustine, and Aquinas, and Bernard, and Fenelon; the church of all races, ranks, and classes, which already gives signs of being American as well as Roman, and the only church fitted, by its hold upon the working masses, to grapple with that labor problem before which our Protestant Christianity stands baffled to-day.”—New York Evangelist, February 9, 1888.AMS August 1888, page 59.8

    Yes, the Catholic Church does give signs of becoming American as well as Roman, and the surest sign of this is the readiness with which Americans and professed Protestants surrender to her all their dearest interests of man in order to secure her influence.AMS August 1888, page 59.9

    Now to all these elements add the National Reform Association, which, under the name and form of Protestantism, proposes to unite all Protestant bodies in one, and then to trade them off bodily to Rome for her influence, for the sole purpose of securing to the church the control of the civil power, and the scheme is completely sketched, as it now stands.AMS August 1888, page 60.1

    At the present rate, how long will it be before Rome’s influence will be supreme everywhere? This question is worth thinking about.AMS August 1888, page 60.2

    A. T. J.

    “The National Reform Vice-Presidency” American Sentinel 3, 8, p. 60.

    ATJ

    IN his report in the SENTINEL for June our correspondent from the Philadelphia National Reform Convention, made a remark which lets considerable light upon the National Reform method of getting the names of so many eminent men in its list of vice-presidents. It has been a puzzle to some of these gentlemen, whom they run as their vice-presidents, to know how they ever became vice-presidents of an association whose objects they utterly oppose. The following sentence reveals the secret:—AMS August 1888, page 60.1

    “The motion was made and supported that all those citizens of Philadelphia whose names were attached to the call for the convention, should be made vice-presidents of the association, when, without discussion, it was put and unanimously carried. By this simple act, and without the consent of the persons concerned, seventy-eight new officers were elected.”AMS August 1888, page 60.2

    Now everybody knows that it is the easiest thing in the world to get names, and the names of eminent men too, signed to a petition or call for a convention or public meeting to consider important questions. Men will sign such a call without even fairly looking at it, much less reading and considering it. So the National Reformers circulate a “Call for a National Conference on the Christian Principles of Civil Government,” and get a large number of signatures to it. That is a most innocent-looking thing; who would not sign it? And in the circular sent out it is distinctly stated that “the sessions of the Conference will be distinct from the sessions of the National Reform Association.” That makes doubly innocent the “Call for a Conference.” But, lo! at one of the sessions of the association, all who signed the call for the conference are at one swoop made vice-presidents of the National Reform Association; and henceforth those names, whether their owners be living or dead, will be made to do service for all they are worth in behalf of National Reform and as officers of its association.AMS August 1888, page 60.3

    More than this, the National Reform managers know that not all of those gentlemen are in favor of the object of the association. In the circular before referred to, it is plainly stated that—AMS August 1888, page 60.4

    “Some of the signatures of citizens concurring in the ‘Call for the National Conference’ are those of persons who ... have not yet been convinced of the necessity for the proposed Christian amendment to the National Constitution. An eminent representative of this class is found in Bishop O. W. Whitaker, of the diocese of Pennsylvania.”AMS August 1888, page 60.5

    And yet Bishop O. W. Whitaker, with all the rest of these gentlemen “who have not yet been convinced,” is now a vice-president, in eminent standing, of the association whose sole purpose is to secure just such an amendment. That is to say, they are all vice-presidents of an association whose sole object is to do a thing of the necessity of which they have not yet been convinced.AMS August 1888, page 60.6

    In 1872 the National Reformers played this same trick on Marshall Jewell. They got his signature to a call for a convention, and then swung him in as a vice-president of the association. But Mr. Jewell issued a circular in which he said:—AMS August 1888, page 60.7

    “Such action on the part of the association was entirely unwarranted, and, so far from consenting to it, I desire that my name be stricken from the list. I should have refused my name had I received notice of it. After giving the matter considerable thought, I am entirely opposed to the movement, and the objects sought to be accomplished by it, believing that it is impracticable and uncalled for. If the people at large do not acknowledge in their actions the divine authority, it is worse than useless to attempt a national acknowledgement.”AMS August 1888, page 60.8

    Such, therefore, is the National Reform method of securing such abundance of eminent “names of men” as vice-presidents to their association. And it is in perfect keeping with other of the methods which they employ to make their movement a success. Anything for influence seems to be their motto.AMS August 1888, page 60.9

    A. T. J.

    “Russia and Religion” American Sentinel 3, 8, pp. 60, 61.

    ATJ

    IN the April Century, Mr. George Kennan gave an invaluable article on the “Russian Penal Code,” from which we make the following extract on the subject of religion. In reading it it must be borne in mind that Russia is a “Christian nation,” that the religion of Russia is a national religion, and that what is there called Christianity is the national religion. Also in reading it, it will be well to bear in mind the National Reform scheme to make the United States a “Christian nation,” to establish here a national religion, and to make what the National Reformers call Christianity, the national religion. At the same time, too, may very properly be borne in mind the National Reform proposition in regard to dissenters from their national religion when they get it established, which is as follows:—AMS August 1888, page 60.1

    “If the opponents of the Bible do not like our Government and its Christian features, let them go to some wild, desolate land; and ... stay there till they die.”AMS August 1888, page 60.2

    Let the reader compare this with the Russian Penal Code on “Crimes against the Faith,” and tell, if he can, what would be the difference between this and the oft-repeated Russian penalty of “exile for life to the most remote part of Siberia.”AMS August 1888, page 60.3

    Mr. Kennan says:—AMS August 1888, page 60.4

    “The first important title or division of the Russian penal code is that which comprises what are called ‘Crimes against the Faith,’ and the severity with which such crimes are punished furnishes a striking illustration of the importance which the State attaches to the church as the chief bulwark of its own authority. The first section, which may be taken as fairly indicative of the spirit of the whole title, is as follows:AMS August 1888, page 60.5

    “‘SECTION 176. Whoever dares, with premeditation, and publicly in a church, to blaspheme [literally, “to lay blame upon”] the glorious Triune God, or our Most Pure Ruler and Mother of God, the ever-Virgin Mary, or the illustrious Cross of the Lord God Our Saviour Jesus Christ, or the incorporeal Heavenly Powers, or the Holy Saints of God and their images, such person shall be deprived of all civil rights, and exiled for life, with not less than twelve nor more than fifteen years of penal servitude. If such crime shall be committed not in a church but in a public place, or in the presence of a number of assembled people, be that number large or small, the offender shall be deprived of all civil rights and exiled for life, with not less than six nor more than eight years of penal servitude.’AMS August 1888, page 60.6

    “The next section, which deals with another aspect of the same crime, is as follows:—AMS August 1888, page 60.7

    “‘SECTION 177. If the offense described in the foregoing section [No. 176] be committed not in a public place nor before a large assemblage of people, but nevertheless in the presence of witnesses, with an intention to shake the faith of the latter, or lead them astray, the offender shall be deprived of all civil rights, and exiled for life to the most remote part of Siberia.’AMS August 1888, page 60.8

    “SECTION 178 provides that ‘whoever, with premeditation, in a public place and in the presence of a large or small assemblage of people, dares to censure [or condemn] the Christian faith, or the orthodox church, or to revile [or abuse] the sacred Scriptures or the holy sacraments [literally, “mysteries”], such person shall be deprived of all civil rights, and exiled for life, with not less than six nor more than eight years of penal servitude. If such crime shall be committed not in a public place nor in the presence of an assemblage of people, but nevertheless before witnesses, and with an intention to shake the latter’s faith, and lead them astray [literally, “to seduce them”], the offender shall be deprived of all civil rights, and exiled for life to the most remote part of Siberia.’AMS August 1888, page 60.9

    “SECTION 179 declares that if any person shall witness or have personal knowledge of the commission of the crimes set forth in sections 176-178, and shall fail to inform the authorities thereof, he shall be imprisoned for not less than four nor more than eight months, according to the circumstances of the case.AMS August 1888, page 60.10

    “SECTION 181 is as follows: ‘Whoever, in a printed work, or even in a written composition, if the latter be by him in any manner publicly circulated, indulges in blasphemy, or speaks opprobriously of the saints of the Lord, or condemns the Christian faith or the orthodox church, or reviles the sacred Scriptures or the holy sacraments, such person shall be deprived of all civil rights, and exiled for life to the most remote part of Siberia. The same punishment shall be inflicted upon all persons who knowingly sell, or in any other way publicly circulate, such works or compositions.’AMS August 1888, page 60.11

    “SECTION 182 provides that ‘all persons who shall be found guilty of so-called scoffing—that is, of making sneering or sarcastic gibes that show manifest disrespect for the rules or ceremonies of the orthodox church, or for Christianity in general—shall be imprisoned for not less than four nor more than eight months.’AMS August 1888, page 61.1

    “It would be hard, I think, to find in the criminal laws of any other civilized State punishments of such severity attached to crimes of such a nature. In most countries an insulting or contemptuous reference, even in a church and during service, to the `Incorporeal Heavenly Powers’ [the angels] would be regarded merely as a misdemeanor, and would be punished with a small fine, or with a brief term of imprisonment, as a disturbance of the public peace. In Russia, however, disrespectful remarks concerning the ‘Saints of the Lord and their Images,’ even although such remarks be made to three or four acquaintances, in the privacy of one’s own house, may be punished with ‘deprivation of all civil rights, and exile for life to the most remote part of Siberia’—that is, to the coast of the Arctic Ocean in the territory of Yakutsk....AMS August 1888, page 61.2

    “Blasphemous or disrespectful remarks concerning holy persons or things are not, however, the only offenses contemplated by Title II, and included among ‘Crimes against the Faith.’ One whole chapter is devoted to heresy and dissent, and punishments of the most cruel severity are prescribed for adjuration of the orthodox faith, for secession from the true church, and for the public expression of Heretical opinions. Section 184, for example, provides that if a Jew or Mohammedan shall, by persuasion, deception, or other means, induce an orthodox Christian to renounce the true church and become an adherent of the Jewish or Mohammedan faith, he shall be deprived of all civil rights, and exiled for life, with not less than eight nor more than ten years of penal servitude.AMS August 1888, page 61.3

    “SECTION 187 declares that if any person tempt or persuade an adherent of the Russo-Greek Church to leave that church and join some other Christian denomination, he shall be banished to Siberia for life.AMS August 1888, page 61.4

    “SECTION 188 provides that if any person shall leave the orthodox church and join another Christian denomination, he shall be handed over to the ecclesiastical authorities for instruction and admonition; his minor children shall be taken into the custody of the Government; his real estate shall be put into the hands of an administrator; and until he abjures his errors he shall have no further control over either.AMS August 1888, page 61.5

    “Parents who are required by law to bring up their children in the true faith, but who, in violation of that duty, cause such children to be christened or educated in accordance with the forms and tenets of any other Christian church, shall be imprisoned for not less than eight nor more than sixteen months. During such time the children shall be taken in charge by orthodox relatives, or shall be turned over to a guardian appointed by the Government. [Section 190.]AMS August 1888, page 61.6

    “If a Jew or a Mohammedan shall marry an orthodox Christian and shall fail to bring up the children of such marriage in the orthodox faith, or shall throw obstacles in the way of the observance by such children of the rules and forms of the orthodox church, the marriage shall be dissolved, and the offender shall be exiled for life to the most remote part of Siberia. [Section 186.]AMS August 1888, page 61.7

    “All persons who shall be guilty of aiding in the extension of existing sects, or who shall be instrumental in the creation of new sects hostile or injurous to the orthodox faith, shall be deprived of all civil rights, and exiled for life, either to Siberia or to the Trans-Caucasus. [Section 196.]AMS August 1888, page 61.8

    “I met large numbers of dissenters exiled under this section, both in the Caucasus and in all parts of Siberia. It is the unvarying and universal testimony of both the civil and military officers of the Russian Government that these dissenting Christians form the most honest, the most temperate, the most industrious, and altogether the most valuable part of the whole population in the regions to which they have been banished. The ispravnik, or chief police officer, of Verkhni Udinsk, in Eastern Siberia, speaking to me of three or four settlements of dissenters in his okrug, or circuit, said: ‘If all the people in my territory were only exiled heretics, I could shut up the jails and should have little or nothing to do; they are the best people within my jurisdiction.’ I need hardly comment upon the cruel injustice of sending good citizens like these to the remotest part of Eastern Siberia simply because they do not believe in worshiping images and kissing bones, or because they cross themselves with two fingers instead of three.AMS August 1888, page 61.9

    “It would be easy to fill pages with illustrative examples of the unjust and oppressive character of Russian penal legislation in the field of religious crime. Every paragraph fairly bristles with threats of ‘imprisonment,’ ‘exile,’ and ‘penal servitude,’ and the whole title seems to the occidental mind to breathe a spirit of bigotry and intolerance. One might perhaps expect to find such laws in a penal code of the Middle Ages; but they strike one as an extraordinary anachronism when they appear in a code which was revised and amended in the capital of a so-called Christian State in the year of our Lord 1885.”AMS August 1888, page 61.10

    And yet, in the face of such an infamous code as that, Prince Gortschakoff, Chancellor of the Russian Empire, declared, in 1871, that Russia is “the most tolerant country in the world.” Now, with this Russian code and the Russian Chancellor’s idea of tolerance, read the following proposition of the National Reform Association upon the subject of tolerance, as announced by Rev. Jonathan Edwards, D. D., one of its Vice-Presidents, bearing in mind that Mr. Edwards holds that all who oppose National Reform are atheists:—AMS August 1888, page 61.11

    “What are the rights of the atheist? I would tolerate him as I would tolerate a poor lunatic.... So long as he does not rave, so long as he is not dangerous, I would tolerate him. I would tolerate him as I would a conspirator.... Yes, to this extent I will tolerate the atheist, but no more.... Tolerate atheism, sir? There is nothing out of hell that I would not tolerate as soon. The atheist may live, as I said, but, God helping us, the taint of his destructive creed shall not defile any of the civil institutions of all this fair land! Let us repeat, atheism and Christianity are contradictory terms. They are uncompatible systems. They cannot dwell together on the same continent.”AMS August 1888, page 61.12

    Let the reader compare this with the Russian Penal Code and Prince Gortschakoff’s idea of tolerance, and then honestly say, if he can, whether the establishment of the National Reform principles in this Government would not be the establishment of the same sort of a despotism that now reigns in Russia—with the advantage, however, in favor of Russia. For whereas Russia will allow the victims of her tolerance to dwell on the same continent with her, the National Reformers will not allow the victims of their tolerance to dwell on the same continent with them. And yet we are compelled to contemplate, and are asked to condone, the fact that the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union is a close and fond ally of the National Reform Association, and that Joseph Cook, President Seelye, Bishop Huntingdon, Dr. Crafts, and scores of others like them, are Vice-Presidents of it!AMS August 1888, page 61.13

    A. T. J.

    “That Sunday Commandment” American Sentinel 3, 8, pp. 62, 63.

    ATJ

    IN the February SENTINEL, in reply to Mr. McConnell’s first “open letter” to us, we asked him or any other of the National Reformers to cite us to a commandment of God for keeping Sunday. Mr. McConnell accepted the invitation, and in the Christian Nation of April 11, devoted to the task a six-column article, the columns the same size as those of the SENTINEL. But we did not ask for arguments, we asked for a commandment. We did not ask the National Reformers for statements of their own, we asked for a commandment of God.AMS August 1888, page 62.1

    After four and a half columns of special pleading Mr. McConnell says:—AMS August 1888, page 62.2

    “The most important testimony is that in Paul’s letter to the Corinthian Church (1 Corinthians 16:2). This constitutes our warrant for observing the first day of the week as the rest day or Sabbath.”AMS August 1888, page 62.3

    Very well, now let us read 1 Corinthians 16:2, and see what it says. Here it is:—AMS August 1888, page 62.4

    “Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.”AMS August 1888, page 62.5

    And “this,” says the Rev. W. T. McConnell, “constitutes our warrant for observing the first day of the week as the rest day or Sabbath.” This then is the commandment for the keeping of Sunday, or the first day of the week, as a rest day! But what is said there about resting or about a rest day, or anything of the kind? Not a single word. It seems to us that anybody who can find in that a commandment for the keeping of a rest day, must be hard pushed and easily satisfied. But Mr. McConnell not only chooses to find there such a commandment, but he wants a National law which shall compel everybody else to keep Sunday because he chooses to find a warrant for it in a text which says not a word about it. He seems to be conscious of the weakness of his case, for he begs off, after this manner:—AMS August 1888, page 62.6

    “If anyone has time or inclination to quibble about the possible interpretation of subordinate clauses in the verse quoted, let such please themselves, remembering, if they please, that ‘the letter killeth but the spirit maketh alive.’”AMS August 1888, page 62.7

    But we have no confidence in the leading of any spirit which leads, not only contrary to the letter of the word of God, but contrary to the whole spirit and purpose of the word of God. And that only such is W. T. McConnell’s application and interpretation of this text, we shall conclusively show, and that in but few words. The whole connection in which the verse is found, is this: “Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. And when I come, whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters, them will I send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem. And if it be meet that I go also, they shall go with me.” 1 Corinthians 16:1-4.AMS August 1888, page 62.8

    From this it is seen at a glance that the subject of rest, or a rest day, was not in the apostle’s thoughts at all, but that the direction is wholly concerning collections for the poor Christians; and that the matter might be systematically followed up, he directed that upon the first day of the week each one was to lay by him in store as God had prospered him, what he should choose to give for this purpose. But into this manifest and only purpose of the apostle’s the Rev. W. T. McConnell proposes to read a “warrant for observing the first day of the week as the rest day, or Sabbath,” and thereby to clothe himself and his fellow National Reformers with the prerogative of enforcing its observance, by National power, upon everybody in the Nation.AMS August 1888, page 63.1

    The way in which Mr. McConnell gets into this text a warrant for the observance of a rest day is by claiming that that was the day on which the Corinthians met for worship, and that this text, in view of that, means that “it is more than likely that the money was separated from the rest to be put that day into the treasury of the church, if one existed.”AMS August 1888, page 63.2

    That is to say, When Paul said, “Let every one of you lay by him in store,” the money he would send to the poor, he meant, Let every one of you put into the hands of others, as God hath prospered him. He meant no such thing. A year afterward he wrote again to the Corinthians on this very subject, and said to them:—AMS August 1888, page 63.3

    “For as touching the ministering to the saints, it is superfluous for me to write to you; for I know the forwardness of your mind, for which I boast of you to them of Macedonia, that Achaia was ready a year ago; and your zeal hath provoked very many. Yet have I sent the brethren, lest our boasting of you should be in vain in this behalf; that, as I said, ye may be ready; lest haply if they of Macedonia come with me, and find you unprepared, we (that we say not, ye) should be ashamed in this same confident boasting. Therefore I thought it necessary to exhort the brethren, that they would go before unto you, and make up beforehand your bounty, whereof ye had notice before, that the same might be ready, as a matter of bounty, and not as of covetousness.” 2 Corinthians 9:1-5.AMS August 1888, page 63.4

    Now if Mr. McConnell’s theory be correct, that the Corinthians were to separate this money from the rest and put it “that day into the treasury of the church,” and if that is what Paul meant that they should do, then why should he think it “necessary” to send brethren to Corinth, before he should come, “to make up” this bounty, so “that it might be ready” when he came? If Mr. McConnell’s invention be correct, what possible danger could there have been of anybody finding them “unprepared”? The truth is that Mr. McConnell’s theory is contrary both to the Scripture and to the facts. And that is the “warrant” under authority of which the Rev. W. T. McConnell proposes to arrest the demon of Sabbath-breaking in this nation. Mr. McConnell, your warrant is bogus. It is forged.AMS August 1888, page 63.5

    Further says Mr. McConnell:—AMS August 1888, page 63.6

    “In giving this direction for the performance of religious duties, the apostle Paul, incidentally, but positively, locates a time for such duties in the Christian church at Corinth, but with the statement that he had given the same apostolic instructions to the other gentile churches, he extends the appointment of a day to all under the apostolic jurisdiction.”AMS August 1888, page 63.7

    Now for the sake of the argument, and for that reason only, let us grant all that Mr. McConnell here claims—suppose that we grant that in this scripture the apostle Paul extends the appointment of a day to all under the apostolic jurisdiction. Then we want to know by what right it is that the National Reformers claim the power to extend that appointment beyond the apostolic jurisdiction? The apostolic jurisdiction extends only to those within the bounds of the church. The bounds of the church extend only to those who voluntarily take upon them the obligations of the name of Christ. Those who are not members of the church are not under the apostolic jurisdiction. Again we ask, By what right is it that the National Reformers claim the power to enforce the apostolic instructions upon those who are not subject to the apostolic jurisdiction? It can be by no right whatever. It is downright usurpation. To attempt to extend the apostolic jurisdiction beyond the distinct bounds of the church of Christ, is of the very spirit of the Papacy. But this is precisely what the National Reformers propose to do. They intend to make National the power and jurisdiction of the church, and whoever will not submit to the appointments of the church cannot remain in the Nation. And that is but the Papacy over again.AMS August 1888, page 63.8

    But Mr. McConnell and the National Reformers as such, are not alone in this project. Every person who claims the right to enforce the claims of the “Christian” Sabbath upon those who are not Christians is guilty of the same usurpation. No person who is not a Christian has any right to partake in any way in the celebration of Christian days or in the observance of Christian solemnities. If the Sabbath be, as is almost unanimously claimed, the Christian Sabbath, then not only have its advocates no right to enforce its observance upon those who are not Christians, but those who are not Christians have no right, even voluntarily, to observe it, any more than they have to partake of the Lord’s Supper. Christian institutions and Christian ordinances are for Christians only.AMS August 1888, page 63.9

    Then in closing Mr. McConnell makes his “application” thus:—AMS August 1888, page 63.10

    “Now in closing, a word of application. The National Reform Association has a ‘plain commandment’ for its demand that the Nation shall by law direct the keeping of a rest day.”AMS August 1888, page 63.11

    And, according to the National Reform “warrant,” the Nation shall direct the keeping of a rest day, by commanding everyone “upon the first day of the week” to “lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him.” Is that it, Mr. McConnell? If not; by what right shall the Nation direct the observance of what is not in the “warrant”?AMS August 1888, page 63.12

    Dear boy, you had better study your lesson some more, and try again.AMS August 1888, page 63.13

    A. T. J.

    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents