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

    February 1888

    “A Reply to ‘An Open Letter’” American Sentinel 3, 2, pp. 9, 10.

    ATJ

    IN the Christian Nation of December 14, 1887, there came to us “an open letter” from Mr. W. T. McConnell. Mr. McConnell lives in Youngstown, Ohio. He is a preacher of National Reform politics, and the president of the National Reform Prayer League: Somebody sent him a copy of the Sentinel, and it caused him to have “some reflections,” of which he gives us the benefit in his “open letter.” He proposes to comfort us by an endeavor to make it appear that the troubles are only “imaginary,” which we point out as certain to come upon the Nation in the train of the success of the National Reform movement.AMS February 1888, page 9.1

    He starts out with the usual National Reform compliment to an opponent—that of naming us along with “Liberal Leagues,” “the Freiheits Bund,” “and the Liquor Leagues.” But this is not enough relief to the pent-up charity of the Rev. W.T. McConnell; he graciously puts us in the fellowship of king Ahab in his murder of Naboth and the confiscation of Naboth’s vineyard; taking good care of course to give himself and his associates the companionship of Elijah, in the controversy, and even making Elijah to be “the General Secretary of the National Reform Association of his day.” Upon all this we shall offer no comment at all. Such transcendent modesty, and such benignant charity, as is displayed in this, we have not the heart to disturb by offering the slightest criticism.AMS February 1888, page 9.2

    Then he clothes the National Reformers with this rendition of Elijah’s answer to Ahab about who was the troubler of Israel:—AMS February 1888, page 9.3

    “I have not troubled Israel, said he, but you and the others who run this Government have made the trouble in that ‘ye have forsaken the commandments of the Lord.’”AMS February 1888, page 9.4

    Now as the National Reformers set themselves up as the special champions of the commandments of God, and as the enforced observance of Sunday is the grand aim of the National Reform project, we here ask Mr. McConnell, or any other National Reformer, or all of them put together, to show any commandment of God for keeping Sunday, or the first day of the week, commonly called Sunday. Come now, Mr. McConnell, Elijah could quote a plain commandment of God, in support of his opposition to Baal, and Ahab’s worship of him. You take it upon yourself to fill Elijah’s place in our day, in rebuking the Nation for desecrating Sunday, so please fill his place also in this, and cite us to a commandment of God for keeping Sunday. You take it upon yourself to rebuke this Nation for its sin against God in not keeping Sunday. Sin against God, is transgression of the law of God. Now please show the law of God that commands the keeping of Sunday. You may show it in the form of “an open letter” or in that of a sealed letter; in a public letter or in a private letter, just as you choose; but we insist that you show it. Come now, don’t dodge.AMS February 1888, page 9.5

    Then to give proof that our fears of trouble, in the event of the success of the National Reform, are wholly imaginary, Mr. McConnell tells us this:—AMS February 1888, page 9.6

    “You look for trouble in this land in the future, if these principles are applied. I think it will come to you if you maintain your present position. The foolhardy fellow who persists in standing on a railroad track may well anticipate trouble when he hears the rumble of the coming train. If he shall read the signs of the times in the screaming whistle and flaming headlight, he may change his position and avoid the danger, but if he won’t be influenced by these, his most gloomy forebodings of trouble will be realized when the express strikes him. So you, neighbors, if, through prejudice or the enmity of unregenerate hearts, you have determined to oppose the progress of this Nation in fulfilling its vocation as an instrument in the divine work of regenerating human society, may rightly expect trouble. It will be sure to come to you.”AMS February 1888, page 9.7

    Of course it will. That is precisely what we are trying to get the people to see. We are doing our very best to have the American people understand that the National Reform movement is nothing but a Satanic car of Juggernaut that proposes to relentlessly crush every person who refuses to submit to the dictum of its managers, every person who chooses to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience;—this we know will be, as surely as these men secure the power to enforce by law what they choose to call the will of God.AMS February 1888, page 9.8

    See again how sweetly he manifests the grace of Christian charity, in his attributing to us “the enmity of unregenerate hearts.” How do you know, Mr. McConnell, that our hearts are unregenerate? By what right do you mount the throne, and arrogate to yourself the prerogative of God, and pass judgment upon men’s hearts?AMS February 1888, page 9.9

    And if this “fool-hardy fellow” “shall read the signs of the times in the screaming whistle and flaming headlight, he may change his position and avoid the danger.” Oh yes, that is all that John Huss needed to do. If he had only read the signs in the “screaming whistle” of the Bishop of Lodi, and the “flaming headlight” of the Pope, he might have changed his position and avoided the danger. But “fool-hardy fellow” that he was, he wouldn’t be influenced by these, and so his most gloomy forebodings of trouble were realized when the Papal express struck him. His was “the enmity of an unregenerate heart” too. Devils were painted all round about him to prove that it was so, and he demonstrated it himself when he publicly refused to kiss the crucifix, and submit to the Papacy. He too, determined to resist the progress of that Nation in the worship of the Papacy. He too, rightly expected trouble, and it surely came to him, as it likewise came to multitudes beside him. And now these National Reformers are about to set up in this Nation the living image of the Papacy, and to compel all men to worship both it and the Papacy, and whoever lifts up his voice against such iniquitious “progress,” thereby shows “the enmity of an unregenerate heart,” and all such “may rightly expect trouble” for “it will surely come.” All these are their own words, and yet many men think the SENTINEL is performing a useless task in telling the people about it. Well, they may think so if they want to, but they shall not cause us to cease to tell of it; and when they find themselves fallen into the power of these men, they will wish they had believed the warning. We only wish and pray that they may believe it now.AMS February 1888, page 9.10

    Mr. McConnell closes his letter with an invitation to come over and join with them. He says:—AMS February 1888, page 10.1

    “We also have an invitation for all men of energy and power. There is room here for you, and a demand for all your talents. You may now be opposing this cause, but we frankly extend to you the invitation, ‘Come with us and we will do you good,’ for good is written concerning the work of our Reform Associations.”AMS February 1888, page 10.2

    Thank you, for the compliment, Mr. McConnell, but we are not going to “come.” There is plenty of room for us where we are, and there is urgent demand for all our talents in the work in which we are now engaged. Can’t you come over and join us, Mr. McConnell? There is room here for you. You could not do us good if we should go with you, for good is not written concerning the work of your Reform Associations; at least there is no good written of it by any authority that can do anybody any good. The best that the Scripture has written concerning it is that those who follow its pernicious ways “shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation.” Revelation 14:9, 10. Yes, we are now opposing that cause. And we intend by the grace of God, to continue to oppose it, with all our talents, all our energy, and all our power, till the day that Christ gives us the victory over it. Revelation 15:2.AMS February 1888, page 10.3

    We shall be glad to hear from you again, Mr. McConnell, especially in regard to that commandment about which we have asked. Please write soon.AMS February 1888, page 10.4

    A. T. J.

    “‘Misdirected Enthusiasm’” American Sentinel 3, 2, pp. 12, 13.

    ATJ

    THE annual address of the president of the National Woman’s Christian Temperance Union is an important document. Not for any particular views of temperance or temperance methods, but because of its views of religion and politics and of religio-political methods. We shall here note some of them. We could not attempt to notice the address in detail for it occupies more than seven solid pages of the Union Signal. We shall only quote the most striking passages. Addressing her beloved comrades, the president said:—AMS February 1888, page 12.1

    “The marshaling hosts of which you are the vanguard, represent the downfall of sectarianism in religion, and the death of sectionalism in politics. The bugle of your advance strikes the key-note of the church universal.... The Woman’s Christian Temperance Union, local, State, National, and world-wide, has one vital, organic thought, one all-absorbing purpose, one undying enthusiasm, and that 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.”AMS February 1888, page 12.2

    The “undying enthusiasm” of these enthusiastic ladies will be dead more than a thousand and one years before ever they see any such thing as that. For it is “THE WORLD,” mark it, not the world to come, of which they have so enthusiastically set themselves to make Him the King—king of its courts, camps, cloisters, commerce, etc., etc.—and no such thing as that will ever be. The word of God says that when Christ comes to “THIS WORLD” as King of kings, and Lord of lords, “Out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it be should smite the nations; and he shall rule them with a rod of iron; and he treadeth the winepress of the fieceness and wrath of Almighty God... And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, AND THEIR ARMIES, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army. And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshiped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth; and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.” See Revelation 19:11-21.AMS February 1888, page 12.3

    Again:—AMS February 1888, page 12.4

    “The kingdom of Christ ‘must enter the realm of law through the gateway of politics.’ ... There are enough temperance men in both [the Democratic and Republican parties] to take possession of the Government and give us national prohibition in the party of the near future, which is to be the party of God... We pray Heaven to give them no rest ... until they shall ... swear an oath of allegiance to Christ in politics, and march in one great army ‘up to the polls to worship God.’ ... I firmly believe that the patient, steadfast work of Christian women will so react upon politics within the next generation that the party of God will be at the front.”AMS February 1888, page 12.5

    And this maps out the result:—AMS February 1888, page 12.6

    “Concerning the platform of our next National Prohibition Conv”ntion, I am content to leave it substantially where it is, save that it should declare Christ and his law to be the true basis of government, and the supreme authority in national as in individual life. I greatly desire and hope that we may use our influence to secure this end. Such a declaration must be clearly divested of anything that looks toward a union of Church and State, to which all enlightened Christians are thoroughly opposed, but must as explicitly recognize Christ as the great world-force for righteousness and purity, and enthrone him King of nations in faith, as he will one day be in fact, through Christian politics and laws, no less than Christian living.”AMS February 1888, page 12.7

    But how such a declaration as that is to be clearly divested of anything that looks toward a union of Church and State, is what we should like to know. We wish the worthy president of the National W. C. T. U. had given some instruction or at least some hint as to how it is to be done. Notice, “It should declare Christ and his law to be the true basis of government, and the supreme authority in national as in individual life;” it must explicitly recognize Christ, “and enthrone him King of nations in faith.” Now Christ is the head of the church, and the church is his body. Galatians 1:18. Therefore if Christ be enthroned in national affairs it is only the enthronement of the church in national affairs; if Christ be enthroned in the State, the church is thereby enthroned in the State, for the church is his body. To declare Christ and his law to be the supreme authority in national life, is inevitably to declare the church and its law to be the supreme authority in national life; and that is the most perfect union of Church and State; because the church is Christ’s body, and you can’t enthrone him without enthroning his body. This is the Scripture truth of the matter, and when the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union proposes to do what they here announce, and then at the same time proposes, to divest it of anything that looks toward a union of Church and State, they are simply proposing to divest Christ’s body of its head.AMS February 1888, page 12.8

    But that they can’t do. And in truth they do not intend to try to do it. They fully purpose to enthrone the church with their enthronement of its Head. It is impossible to do otherwise. And the veil, of their being “thoroughly opposed” to a union of Church and State, under which they, and the National Reformers, altogether, endeavor to hide it, is exceedingly thin. It is said of Augustus that he “was sensible that mankind is governed by names; nor was he deceived in his expectation, that the senate and people would submit to slavery, provided they were respectfully assured that they still enjoy their ancient freedom.” These workers for political power in religious things, seem not to have forgotten the opinion nor the tactics of Augustus. They too,seem to be fully sensible that mankind is still governed by names; and their expectation seems to be that the people of this Nation will submit to the slavery of a union of Church and State, provided that they are repeatedly told that there is no union of Church and State, and that “all enlightened Christians are thoroughly opposed” to it. The danger is that these aspirants to such illegitimate power will not be deceived in their expectation, any more than was Augustus in his.AMS February 1888, page 13.1

    Again we read:—AMS February 1888, page 13.2

    “To meet the new creation, how grandly men themselves are growing; how considerate and brotherly, how pure in word and deed.”AMS February 1888, page 13.3

    Yes indeed! And if you want to see the proof of it, just read the dispatches in any principal daily, any day, in any part of the land.AMS February 1888, page 13.4

    This also we read in the address:—AMS February 1888, page 13.5

    “The W. C. T. U. and Prohibition Party must join forces to stand for nationalism as against sectionalism; the future in politics as against the past; ... and the everlasting prohibition of sin as against any alliance between sin and the Government.”AMS February 1888, page 13.6

    Let “the W. C. T. U. and Prohibition Party” be told that no political power nor any civil government, can ever of right have anything whatever to do with the prohibition of sin. For further comment on this read the selection from Professor Harris on “Church and State,” page 15, of this paper.AMS February 1888, page 13.7

    In her suggestions for 1888, under the heading of “Legal” is this:—AMS February 1888, page 13.8

    “Respectfully to request our brothers of the Prohibition Party when the time shall come to consider names for the greater political movement into which that party is to merge itself, to consider carefully the merits of the name ‘Home Protection Party’ as embodying its purpose and as educational to the people; also request them to continue to stand firm for the American Christian Sabbath; the Bible in our public schools; the enfranchisement of women as a means to prohibition; and make an open declaration that Christ and his law are the supreme authority in such government as they seek to establish in this Republic.AMS February 1888, page 13.9

    “Designate a commission representative of the whole country, which shall bear these requests to our friends and allies, the men of the Prohibition Party.”AMS February 1888, page 13.10

    “To stand firm for the American Christian Sabbath,” as she says in another place, “as a sacred institution.” What is the American Christian Sabbath? and how did it become so? If it is Christian, how can it be American? And if it is American, what made it sacred? The Bible tells about the Sabbath of the Lord, but it nowhere speaks of any such thing as a “Christian” Sabbath, much less does it say anything about an “American Christian” Sabbath. That must be an institution that is found outside of the Bible; and the question again arises how did it become sacred?AMS February 1888, page 13.11

    “Stand firm for the Bible in our public schools.” Which Bible? The Protestant Bible, or the Catholic Bible? which? Your “brothers” of the National Reform Party proposes to put the Catholic Bible into our public schools, even into the hands of the children of Protestants, wherever the Catholics are in the majority—that is in New York, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, Minnesota, California, and a number of other States. Ladies, please define your position.AMS February 1888, page 13.12

    Of all this and a good deal more after the same sort, “the audience manifested its appreciation by universal hand-clapping and waving of hand-kerchiefs.” And “upon motion,” it was accepted by almost unanimous vote as expressing the principles of the National Woman’s Christian Temperance Union.” And by the same token it is abundantly shown that the National Woman’s Christian Temperance Union is pledged to carry civil government into the realms of conscience in this Nation.AMS February 1888, page 13.13

    A. T. J.

    “Is It Infidelity?” American Sentinel 3, 2, p. 14.

    ATJ

    LAMST fall one of the editors of the SENTINEL made a speech in Oakland, on the coming union of Church and State in this country. A National Reformer was present and heard it, and he has written in reply and sent to us manuscript copy sufficient to make more than two full pages of the SENTINEL, and asks that it may all be printed. But it is almost wholly made up of arguments for National Reform, which have been quite largely discussed already in the columns of the SENTINEL, from both sides of the question, and we do not deem it just to our subscribers to devote so much space to mere repetitions. There is, however, one point which demands notice in our own defense as well as for the principle involved.AMS February 1888, page 14.1

    This point our correspondent throws into the form of a question, as follows:—AMS February 1888, page 14.2

    “Are you aware, or being aware do you not care, that the ‘Demands of Liberalism,’ and of the ‘National Liberal League,’ are now clamoring for the abolition of these very things which National Reformers wish continued? And do you not know that these Liberalists oppose the amendment with great vehemence? so that in this controversy you are identifying yourselves with the infidel Liberalists. The third article of the National Liberal League states the specific objects of the association. Among these are the following: ‘The total discontinuance of religious instruction and worship in the public schools;’ ‘the abolition of State-paid chaplaincies;’ the abolition of the judicial oath; the non-appointment of religious fasts, and holidays, etc. In like manner the Liberalists demand that all laws looking to the enforcement of ‘Christian’ morality shall be abrogated. And all these people are furiously opposed to the amendment which we seek. They know that so long as the Constitution remains as it is, so long they and their cause are safe in case an appeal be made to the courts, whose decisions must be in accordance with the Constitution.”AMS February 1888, page 14.3

    We are perfectly aware that the National Reformers are ready on the instant to raise the cry of “infidel” or “atheist” against all who choose to oppose the religious amendment to the Constitution, even though they know that the opponents are avowed Christians. And being aware, we do not care. They may call us infidels, they may call us atheists, or may apply to us any other term of reproach that they please, and that to their hearts’ content, but it shall not make a particle of difference with us, in our attitude toward the religious amendment to the Constitution. We know that in His day they called our Master, Beelzebub; and we, doing our utmost to be counted worthy to be of his household, expect that much more they will call us of his household. Besides this we know that “it is only in the absence of argument that recourse is had to ridicule;” and as the worthy National Reformers cannot answer our arguments, we expect them to call us names. We derive our principles from the word of Christ; the principles which we advocate are those established by Christ; and when infidels advocate those principles, then we are perfectly willing to be classed with infidels. We would rather be classed with infidels in opposition to the tyranny of a religious despotism, than to be found on the side of those who call themselves Christians while promoting it. We know exactly where we stand, we know precisely what we are doing, in our opposition to the religious amendment to the United States Constitution, and to any sort of religious legislation under any Constitution. We know whom we believe, and for the National Reformers to call us infidels or atheists or anarchists, or to class us with all these, does not make us so, nor does it frighten us.AMS February 1888, page 14.4

    As for the “Demands of Liberalism,” and of the “National Liberal League,” we have never made them a subject of study; we have never seen a copy of them except as given in National Reform literature. But there is one thing which we know to be a fact, and that is, there was never any such thing heard of as the “Demands of Liberalism” until after the National Reformers had set on foot their movement to secure a religious amendment to the Constitution, endangering the civil and natural rights of men. Then it was that the Liberal League was formed, and their “Demands” were framed in direct op-position to the National Reform demands, and in defense of their own rights. We say “in defense of their own rights,” because we utterly refuse assent to the National Reform proposition, that if a man be an infidel he has no rights. And that then it was high time for them to do something in defense of their rights is shown by the words of our correspondent above quoted. He says:—AMS February 1888, page 14.5

    “They know that so long as the Constitution remains as it is, so long they and their cause are safe.”AMS February 1888, page 14.6

    Of course they are, and they ought to be safe. They ought to be just as safe as anybody else in the Nation. But they know, and we know, and the National Reformers know, that just as soon as the religious amendment to the Constitution is adopted, or religious legislation is sanctioned, just so soon they will not be safe. In view of this it is certainly time that somebody was maintaining the principles of the Constitution as it is, under which is their safety. But according to the charitable decision of the National Reformers, for even a Christian to do this it lands him at once into infidelity.AMS February 1888, page 14.7

    Anybody who will take the time to compare the “Demands of Liberalism,” as given by our correspondent, with the National Reform Constitution, will see at once that these “Demands” are aimed at that document, and that they are wholly defensive. And it is perfectly safe to say that if now there was no such thing in existence as the National Reform Association, there would likewise be no such thing as the “Demands of Liberalism.”AMS February 1888, page 14.8

    Taking these “Demands” as given by our correspondent, there are some of them that are perfectly proper in themselves. On the subject of the “discontinuance of religious instruction and worship in the public schools,” the position of the SENTINEL is well known to be in favor of it, because it is right. As for the abolition of State-paid chaplaincies, the SENTINEL is heartily in favor of that also; nor are we speaking at random on this subject. The writer of this article spent five full years in the United States army. He has seen State-paid chaplains in the East and in the West. He has attended their services. He has heard them pray, he has heard them preach, and has seen them about the garrisons. And he states it as his honest conviction that unless the State-paid chaplains whom he did not see, far surpass in efficiency those whom he did see, the whole lot of them put together, do not do either the Government or the soldiers as much good as would a bag of white beans.AMS February 1888, page 14.9

    And as for the abrogation of all laws “looking to the enforcement of ‘Christian’ morality,” we also heartily favor that because it is right. Any law or any proposition that looks to the enforcement of Christian morality, or anything else that is Christian, is contrary to every principle of the doctrine of Christ. And to advocate any such proposition is logically to advocate the Inquisition. The tyranny of the Papacy and the iniquity of the Inquisition, are the logical conclusions from the National Reform propositions throughout. And therefore the SENTINEL now is, and forever more shall be, outspokenly opposed to the whole National Reform scheme. If that be infidelity the National Reformers may make the most of it, while we continue to do our best to form our lives upon the model that God has set before the world in the life of Jesus Christ.AMS February 1888, page 14.10

    A. T. J.

    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents