The Universalist. [volume], October 02, 1897, Page 2, Image 2

About The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897

Image provided by: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library, Urbana, IL

                
THE NEXT GENERAL CONVENTION.
Forecast of ics Proceedings
BY JACOB STRAUB, D. D.
The Various Questions the Convention will Consider—The Creed,
Ministerial Fellowship, Increase of Representation.
dHERE are several matters that
will most likely claim consid
erable attention at the General Con
vention at Chicago in October, the
creed question, the fellowship of min
isters and the increase of representa
tion.
They will have their several merits,
no doubt, but the first will not be
without a large share of demerit,
considering the time it mu^t con
sume, the distractions it will incite,
and the discussion it will call up.
To make this the more likely, the
papers, with a different intention,
have called for a full discussion pre
liminary to its consideration in con
vention, which has been most gen
erously responded to, giving us a
museum of creed literature hardly
supposed possible.
So far the old creed outranks all
competitors by a large measure,
while the Meriden is likely to carry
off tbe booby prize. Tbe Winchester
might be rivalled by a few of the
proposed if they had upon them the
same years of general endorsement’
But some have still to learu what
they will some day attain to, that age
proves a creed, and that a century of
endorsement is a factor difficult to
overcome, especially when it is re
membered that during that time the
creed was under the attention of
minds no less trained to thinking
and weighing in the presence, for the
most part, of the same data that are
now urged against it. True enough,
if some of us were charged with
putting on its verbal dress we might
here and there use a different word,
but might or might not err in doing
so. We certainly could not put in any
that no fault would be found with
Dr. Miner said in the Peoria Con
vention when the creed question was
up some years ago,that no man could
write a sentence with which he could
not “ kick up a fuss.” That is hope
less, and of this many at the present
stage must be convinced, even such
as might not for the time have been
able to think so meanly of their own
productions.
In response to the general invita
tion, the Boston Ministers’ Meeting,
with commendable zeal and hard
work gave out a report of what they
deemed to be the best plan to put
in force, or at least in vogue, Tufts
leading off by her professor of
Church History. The plan is to ab
rogate the Winchester Profession and
in place use a statement of what are
“ the essential principles of the Uni
versalist faith,” which are as follows:
“The Fatherhood of God,” “The
spiritual leadership of Jesus Christ,”
“ The final harmony of all souls with
God.” “The historic creed of the
Universalist is to be commended as
containing these principles,” but
neither the creed, nor the principles
are required as a condition of fellow
ship, “ provided always that the prin
ciples above stated shall be substan
tially professed.”
This omits the Holy Scriptures,
save what may be implied in the allu
sion to the spiritual leadership of
Christ. And if one wishes to assume
this leadership to be by an imagin
ary Christ, as the fashion of some is,
there is none to say that he is not a
true and consistent Universalist.
This is following the lead of the
Unitarian Conference, and possibly
indicates the effect on a minor school
by the penumbrations of Harvaid.
The wonder is that this policy is
supposed to oonduce to unity, quiet,
strength, and general prosperity. Has
it accomplished this for the Unitar
ians? Should not their condition
admonish and in-truct? Are we an
exceptional human nature that we
would not suffer under the same
conditions and not tend to the same
end in following the same policy ?
But what have creedless churches
done compared with such as loyally
rally about a chosen symbol of faith?
And who can be loyal to a headless
state? Or what great ends can be
attained by a community of conflict
ing views and cross purposes? Whom
will it attract and assure and lead to
sacrificing in its behalf? The move
ment is alleged to be in the lauda
ble interest of good conscience—a
conscience that is, alas, too often be
lated beyond the incident of admis
sion under the creed.
It is also to remove an obstacle to
church membership on the part of a
desirable list, and ihe retention of
such as have become dissatisfied with
the creed. It has been my fortune
to serve churches, for the most part
of my ministry, where I was asso
ciated with people more or less cele
brated for learning and intellectual
habiis, and in no case has the creed
been an objection when they were
ready to join a church at all. That
there are instances, may be conced
ed, but I am impressed that they aie
rare until modeled over by the
preacher. Seeing the church as it is,
am] believing as it does, and himself
its minister and servant, the example
of Dr. Deere might well commend
itself to the preacher, to seek to bring
about bv suitable explanations, a
conscientious acceptance of the creed,
rather than proceed by the reverse
an 1 ask the creed to vacate.
However, there is nothing in the
laws and polity of the church that
would forbid a proper majority to so
slightly alter the wording of the
creed, as I understand would satisfy
the conscience of the eminent brother
and these with him of like religious
and theological standing, who have
been first in the movement and were it
not for starting the fatal fissure, the
move could well be commended. But
the objections by these brethrenseem
at most merely technical, and not
sufficient to justify the agitation. If
the creed should go, mainly because
of this word ‘'Kestore”not understood
rigorously alike by all, save inessen
tials, the Bible must itself also go,
for the fatal word is a part thereof.
And I am glad to think they are not
of the class to readily part with that
greatest of treasures to man. Besides
the dissent is based on an hypothe
sis merely, one that has neverattained
to that suffrage among the learned
to entitle it to bi ranked as science,
and to contend for it as such is cer
tainly premature and unbefitting to
be injected in theological disputations
and made a consideration in a relig
ious creed.
These bretheren must have some
recognition of the value of a creed in
ecclesiasticisras, and be unwilling to
venture forward without one. They
must also understand that the creed
question is not settled in the adop
tion of a new creed or the changing
of the old, but that such action would
be the invitation to an ever increas
ing class of agitators and malcon
tents who care more for such oppor
tunities to discuss and dispute, than
for those of aggressive work in the
reclaiming or restoration of lest ones.
They must recognize also that a
creed drawn to definitely declare any
thing pertaining to religious belief,
and apply to any considerable num
ber of people, would require conces
sions, from one as well as another,
and that without this spirit nothing
would be possible in this direction.
A creed to be of service cannot be
made to include all classes of views,
nor must it be too limited in its pro
visions. It cannot make place for
heterogenity nor a common home for
mutually destructive factions. There
can be a cre;d of Universalism, but
not of Universalisms. Some one
must be left to find a home elsewhere
in the neighborhood till he acquires
compatibility of views. To omit es
sentials defines nothing and is incon
sistent with a creed. Neither is the
naming of but universally accepted
facts. Here is where the Boston re
poit fails. In this day the terms of
the “principles” are current every
where and define no class of people,
and designate theUniversalist Church
no more than the Methodist church
or the Unitarian church. Some years
ago a Methodist doctor in answer to
my argument from Paul for the re
conciliation of all things, replied
promptly that the damned too would
be reconciled, knowing their damna
tion to be just. The same is a stock
argument with Calvinists. The soul
elected to be damned is “in final har
mony with God,” being damned, and
would be out of harmony with him,
if saved or "restored,” contrary to his
election and will. There is certainly
nothing peculiar to Universalism in
this “principle,” and it falls incom
parably below that clear cut sen
tence, “will finally restore the whole
family of mankind to holiness and
happiness.” Tnen again, “the Fa
therhood of God,” is a term hawked
about in the same fashion these days.
What Christian sect has not preached
and does not preach the Fatherhood
of God? What one has not repeated
the Lord’s Prayer? or the Apostle’s
Creed? The “pr nciple” says nothing
about the universal Fatherhood of
God. Besides, the nature and char
acter of this God are left undeiiaed,
whether he is pantheistic or theistic?
benevolent or malevolent? It is not
equivalent to the cherished words,
“One God, whose nature is Love, re
vealed in one Lord Jesus Cnrist,’
etc. Possibly for the same reason
that with the "principles” dared not
be included any thing pertaining to
“the inspiration of the Scriptures,”
that room be left for the opponents
this important doctrine, it might be
necessary to also withhold any defi
nition of the nature of God, that
pantheists might be included. All
in all, it must be contended that in
this report the Boston brethren did
scant justice to themselves, and less
to their fathers. As to settling the
creed question at the coming conven
tion, or at any convention, in the near
future, the only feasible plan in sight
would seem to be to refer the whole
matter again to a committee, instruct
ing them to report thereon at the end
of twenty years! This period would
be none too loDg for needed rest in
respect to it, nor for tbe deliberations
necessary ta conclude on one
likely to rival in favor the exist ng
one. Meanwhile the much delayed
work proper of the church could be
resumed and much advance,'.
The matter of reform in ministerial
fellowship recommended by the
beard is greatly important, though it
is difficult to prescribe remedies that
could be applied. There are too
f req uent ly fellowship committees that
do not sufficiently examine into the
antecedents of the candidate, his
moral and social qualities or theo
logical bases; and if he but. has the
liberal habit of thought and is a good
deil timer he has little difficulty in
passing. When once in, it is more
difficult to deal with a case unless it
is very extreme. But such are not
the ones who usually do the most
injury. It is the intriguing disloyal
demagogue of fair parts in other re
gards, who, fastening himself upon a
church, at once proceeds to propa
gate foreign sentiments, leading to
alienation aud final d slojalty and
practical separation into independ
ency and people’s churchism, from
whom most is to be feared. Their
methods usually are to gather in
from the outside people of like
thought and spirit to replace tho6eof
more conservative views till a trans
formation is accomplished. What
can be done to prevent this character
of offense, dominated as we are by a
peace at any price policy, is some
what of a problem. It might be sug
gested that it arises in large part
from the too frequent habit of allow
ing the outside element to dictate
who shall be called to the pastorate.
People who carenotenough forchurch
to identify themselves with it are not
usually the ones to care for the
preacher’s loyalty to it, or to Cnris
tianity, for that matter. Usually it
is more to their taste that he should
be abusive and defiant of both. It
undoubtedly would be a step for
ward, when the convenanted mem
bership, with such as are co-laborers,
would entrust themselves to their de
nominational advisors with the im.
port.ant matter of selecting a paster.
Otherdt nominations hold constant
surveillance over their ministers, and
thereby maintain a healthful meas
ure of uniformity and popular confi
dence. An examination is held or
reported at every conference or set
tlement, not only as to character but
doctrine. And a minister impatient
with this would be deemed an unsafe
custodian of the church’s interests.
And would a corporation of any kind
judge the policy unwise when ap
plied to their own affairs? And is
the Universalist Church an exception
to this law of corporate life? Ought
not as much care be exercised over
those to whom she commits her in
terests ?
Is there anything wrong about it
when she is entrusted with legacies
to apply to the supportand propaga
tion of the definite class of principles
and doctrines she stands for? Much
is vociferated in respect to conscience.
Might it not be well to note Lo.v it
would apply in these conditions?
There is a quite general outcry
against heresy trials among us and
by the secular press, and certainly
there would be nothing especially
pleasant about them. And usually
other methods can be made suffi
ciently effective, but a church with
out the means and disposition to sep
arate from itself the conditions that
peril its life is not in fit state to ask
for patronage and gifts.
The other matter to specially claim
the attention of the Convention is
that of enlarging the representation.
It is urged that the representation is
too small to command proper re
spect from the public. And the Uni
tarians are put in evidence again,
who, though much smaller than we,
numerically, muster bigger meetings
at their general convocations. Be it
so, then certainly something besides
big conventions is necessary to gen
eral prosperity. It is urged that it
would biing the people more in touch
with that body. If the Convention
were to be what it would most likely
become by such a resort—the occa
sion of a deluge of vociferous under
informed declamation, embarrassing
and obstructing business—that touch
might be most impolitic But it is
difficult to liud entertainment for
that body as it now is, ou accouut of
size. Besides as a rule, also, the
more select the body the better and
more plentiful the work, and indeed,
the grt afer and more commanding.
Tne whole church is present by its
delegates, and in touch.
If greater intimacy is desired, there
are the great denominational papers
loaded down with the reports in de
tail. These are the efficient avenues
in all denominations for holding the
people and superior bodiea, and the
whole church, in touch. And the
loyal pastor is ever alert for their dis
semination among his Hock, to the
exclusion, if present, of alien and
rival literature.
Chicago, Sept. 20. i»w.
SHEOL, HADES, GEHENNA.
Ixthe Old Testament the word (re
ferring to the place of punishment) in
question is Sbeol: but this word, un
fortunately, has been variously trans
lated. In thirty two places the word
has been translated “hell”; in thirty
one “grave,” and in three “pit.” * In
all such cases,” says a cautious and
reliable scholar, “and probably every
where throughout the Old Testament,
the rendering “grave,” or some nearly
equivalent expression should have
be< n adhered to.” The Jews, in
truth, had very little idea of a future
life; and still more vague were their
ideas concerning anything like our
modern hell. In such passages, there
fore, as Psalm xvi. 10,—“Thou wilt
not leave my soul in he 11, thou wilt
not suffer Thy holy one to see cor
ruption,” the meaning clearly is,
“Thou wilt not leave my soul in the
grave,” or in thegloomy under-world.
In Isaiah xxxviii. 18, the word is ren
dered "grave,”—“For the grave can
not praise Thee, death cannot cele
brate thee.” And yet it is the same
Hebrew word—“Sneol,” the word for
the dim, dreary, vague, under-world.
In the book of Jonah, containing
the absurd story of Jonah’s sojourn
inside the whale, he is represented as
praying to God “Out of the fish’s
belly,” and this is part of his prayer,
—“Out of the belly of hell cried I.”
Ceitaiuly his was not a place of eter
nal torments. But the case is useful
as showing how loosely the word
“hell” was used. So much, then, for
the Old Testament.
lu the New Testament we have not
one word to deal with but two. These
are Hades, and Gehenna. The woid
Hades was the word chosen bytte
Greek translators of the Old Testa
ment more than 2,000 years ago, as
the translation of the Hebrew’ word
Sheol; that word, therefore, follows
the fate of the original word; and
neither has anything to do with the
modeln hell. Hades, w’ith the ancient
Greeks (and it is their word) meant
the vast under-world, the general
gathering-place of departed souls. It
really means the invisible place,—in
fact, the place of spectres. The other
word is Gehenna. Of this w’ord, Dr.
Vance Smith says: “Now Gehenna,
it is well known, was the name of a
valley on the southwest of Jerusalem.
Here, in ancient times, children had
been burnt in sacrifice to the heathen
god Moloch. Hence, the place was
looked upon by the later Jews as
polluted and abominable. Its name,
associated with burning fires and
human sacrifices became the repre
sentative of the miserable state into
which, it was believed, the ungodly
would be cast at the coming of the
Messiah.” *»
This valley was made the recepta
cle for all kinds of offensive matter;
and huge smouldeiiog fires were kept
burning to consume what was flung
into it; and in places which the fire
had left, the offensive worm bred
Here you have all the circumstances
which enter into Christ’s reference to
the future place of misery, where the
fire is unceasing and the worm does
not die.
We push a mere illustration too
far if we transfer all the local facts
of the actual Gehenna near Jerusa
lem to the Gehenna of the unseen
world. The abominable concourse of
offensive matter illustrated something
concerning the place of misery here
after; the slow, unquenched fire also
illustrated something concerning it;
and the uuceasing worm furnished
another illustration. But we have
no right to take all these symbols
literally, aid say that in the other
life there is fire and there are worms.
The phrase translated “hell-fire’ is
really the fire of Geheona; and that
is as much a symbol as the saying of
Jesus, “1 am the bread of life;” “I
am the dcor by which the sheep
enter.” Jesus sirs that, iu the judg
ment, God will put the sheep on the
right hand, and the goats on the left.
What did he meau? He was speak
ing of two classes of men; and these
he calls “sheep” and “goats,” So
here, he speaks of Gehenna fire; but
the expression is clearly suggestive
and illustrative, and is one that be
comes even abs lrd when taken liter
ally; for how, in the spirit-world,
can there be worms and fire?
John Page Hopps.
RESTITUTION Of ALL THINGS.
Beecher says. “Who can foretell
wha new development the human
reason is capable ol! Now we think;
but in the higher forms of thinking
there is the intuition, the jump as it
were, the flash of thought. We call
it intuition or inspiration; but names
are not things. There is evidently a
hint of a wondrous disclosure of the
power of reason in the ages to come.”
Now we see as in a glass darkly; are
walking in our sleep; or afflicted with
hemiopia—thus seeing only half
truths at best. If our spiritual in
telligence were awake, how could we
celebrate a Te Deunr after a horrible
battle? If our sculs were attuned
to Christ, we should feel that a
group of war trophies paraded in a
public square, is ou a par with a
score of scalps at a Red Iudian’s
girdle. If we are thus obtuse to such
anomalous relics of the barbaric agj,
perhaps it is Utopian to look for the
refinements of Christian courtesy and
charity between sectaries, who would
raise a tempest on the difference be
tween sinning in Adam and sinning
by Adam. But wheu ‘‘we know as we
are known,” how we shall stand re
buked! An hour with Christ will dis
abuse us of a vast amount of encum
bering knowledge which is not wis
dom. As of old, Jupitep touched
Maia, and she, ensphered in light,
sprang into the heavens, so shall we
each rise in spiritual intelligence at
the magic touch of Christ.
Let us a«k some practical ques
tions. What are we doing to accel
erate the coming in of the times of
restitution; and what claims are we
establishing for consideration in the
grander stage of it? Wewillbearin
mind that all life is one, nor forget
the subtle links which bind the ages
together. Yon are costructing jour
own heaven today, and weaving the
garments in which jou will presently
be identified. Every one is making
history, for now and hereafter. We
are all unconsciously shaping our
future destiny; chalking the bound
ary of our sphere of operations; de
termining our dignity or degradation
in the ages to come. Transmigra
tion was, perhaps, after all, a shrewd
guess. We may go into higher or
lower forms at will.
Keep before you, that the future
is a spiritual condition, and every in
telligent moral act tends to affect
and give tone and character to joy
yonder. See thisorganist in Canter
bury Cathedral. Down here Le is
manipulating his keyboard; the or
gan is up out of sight somewhere,
but every touch produces harmony or
discord in the fretted roof. “We are
workers together with him.” Mind
what you do then, for you make your
future life. See the rings in this fal
len elm tree, some starved, some ex
pansive. That section reveals the
history of the t ee, tells the nature cf
the summers it enjoyed, and the use
it made of them. You know that we
are fishing out many secrets of the
past. Antiquarian research reports
of a dog which stepped on one of
Nebuchadnezzar’s bricks in Babylon
when soft, and made himself as im
mortal as Cuidias who so cuuningly
carved his name on the statue. So
we are unconsciously putting our
stamp and style on the future en
vircnment of our spirit. Whittier
truly sings:
“ We shape ourselves the joy or fear
Of which the coming life is made,
And fill our Future's atmosphere
With sunshine or with shade.
The tissue of the life to be
We weave with colors all our own,
And in the fields of Destiny
We reap as we have sown.”
Stiauge things greet our ears in
these noble times. In common par
lance we speak of telephones, of pho
nographs. Some of the secrets of
the bright intelligences are leaking
out. The genii, we suspect, have
known all this from the beginning.
“A good deal of our heart life is
cryptogamous,” unseen by those
around. Legions of souls are full of
dumb inarticulate longings.
“Alas for those who never sing,
But die with all their music in them.”
Anyway, these hidden feelings and
unuttered anthems will go to make
gracious poesy and rich melody yon
der. Lost chords will all be found
where they chant, without let or hin
drance, their Grand Amen.—Rev W.
J. Acomb.
ABNER GILE OF LA CROSSE.
Mr. Abner Gile, of La Crosse, Wie.,
passed from earth Tuesday evening,
Sept. 14,1897. We give below the faith
ful sketch of bis career which appeared
in the Morning Chronicle, of that city,
together with mention of the funeral ser
vice from the paper two days later. Mr.
Gile has been one of the most generous
supporters of the Universalist church of
La CrosBe, and the largest giver, by
common consent, because the ablest.
Before his departure, he had thought
fully arranged that bis support should
continue for several years after his
death.
The news that Abner Gile died early
last evening, will carry with it nothing
of surprise to this community, as his
condition has been such for some
weekB that death come6 as the inevita
ble and only relief from the pain he has
been suffering.
Mr. Gile is one of the foremost of our
successful pioneers. He comes of the
stock that made the beginnings of New
Kuglaod, his progenitor Samuel Gile
having settled in Dedham in 1636, and
later, in Haverhill, MaBe. His parentsi
Nathan and Lydia Yates Gile. were
both natives of Vermont. He was born
in Northern New York, January 3, 1820
8.) that he was nearing his 78th birth
day. was the rourtti or a family of
tea children.
Ho came wist in 1843 and located at
Waukegan, Illinois, where he built a
eao mill, docks, etc , and also engaged
in farming. In 1850 he got the gold
fever Hnd went to California, but re
mained only twelve months, and after
farming a little longer sold out and came
on to lilack river in November, 1854, and
immediately invested in logging and
lumbering. He was credited among the
pioneers of that day with bringing about
85,000 of capital with him, which was an
exceptionally large amount for those
days. In the spring of 1850 he settled
in Onalaeka and has ever since been a
resident of La Croese county.
In 1843 Mr. Gile was married to Mary
E. Smith, daughter of Orange Smith,
who was also a pioneer of this country,
settling at Halfway Creek about 1854.
Mrs.Gile was the mother of two children.
Mrs. Robert A. Scott of this city, nine
and Wales E., who died at the age of 9.
Mrs. Gile died in September, 1877t
mourned by all who knew her. She was
a woman of rare strength and beauty of
character.
Abner Gile began on Black river by
managing his own camps, and his suc
cess as a business man was steady and
sustained. He was never a man of pre
tensions. His methods were quiet and
he was always regarded as a man of ex
cellent sense and the best of conserva
tive business judgment. For many
years he has been identified with large
enterprises. He was one of the original
owners in the La Crosse Lumber Com
pany, the Linseed Oil mill, the Abattoir,
from all of which he had retired. At
this time bis larger active interests are
in the Batavian Back, of which he was
vice-president, the New Ojleans Cypress
Co., of New Orleans, La , the Island Mill
Co., of this city, of both of which he was
president. He was also a stockholder
with the Pauls and Senator Withee in
the East Coast Lumber Co. of Lake
City, Fla. He has built three good busi
ness blockp, and one of the handsomest
residences in this city, and has, in many
other ways, exhibited an interest in the
growth and welfare of La Crosse.
Mr. Gile was a man of the strictest
probity, and his unusual force and
strength of character have always been
recognized by those who knew him. He
never held or sought office. His dispo
sition was modest and retiring in respect
to public honors. He was always an
earnest and consistent Republican in
politics, and never failed to do his share
for his party at campaign time.
tiis career m this state covers a period
of 43 years and they were years of ac
tivity, and of practically uninterrupted
prosperity, aod it is probably within
bounds to say that he leaves a fortune
that will reckon somewhere from three
quarters of a million to a million of dol
lars, all worthily got and well invested.
The funeral of Mr, Gile was attended
on the 16 h at his late residence, Rev. C,
C. Conner, of the Universalist church
officiated and after prayer made an ad
dress appropriate to the passing away of
this worthy citizen. The pastor closed
by saying, "Those whose hearts were
closest to him and whose feelings were
tenderest toward his mortal weakness,
might only wish at the last, since he
hath been all to them he might he in
this life, that he Bhould be Bpared lirg
ering pain and wasting disease; that he
Bhould clo3e hie eyes in peace and enter
that rest which immortal love only will
break with quickening joy wherein the
s juI awakens in memory’s chamber to
tind its own again in "the House Beauti
ful'’above. All the advisedly named c >n
ditions were fulfilled in him woo hath
departed from us. Shall we not say,
it is well. The Lord gave and the Lord
hath taken away.”
A large numberof friends in carriages
followed the remains to their last rest
ing place in Oak Grove cemetary.
PBOHIBiriON IN MAINE.
BY ‘ CLERIOUS.”
A moral paralysis has certainly Beized
the people in some parte of Maine. The
town I describe is one of the most beau
tiful spots on this charming coast. ]f
I were to dwell on its natural scenery
alone, it would exhaust our list of ad
jectives toadiquately picture it. It is
a town of 1,700 inhabitants and live
places of worship. The people on the
whole are a lovely and honest and in
dustrious clasp. None are very rich
and none ate very poor. I had not bten
here long before I discovered signs of
drunkennesp, and tfu apparent shame
surprise, or attempt to conceal it. 1
began making inquiries as to the status
of the liquor traffic. Everybody with
whom I epoke was “indignant,” and
"would hold up both hands for the en
forcement of the prohibitory law.” I
called on leading men of all sects and
parties. They all epoke the taaie way,
but to commit themselves not a man of
them all was ready. I announced a
Temperance Sunday—the Fourth of
July—according to the vote of our Con
ference. We sought, ineffectually, the
co operation of other churches. We
stood alone. If the leading men of the
town were present, it was bv proxy only.
We discovered that the common talk of
the street declared that there were from
seven to twenty places where liquor was
sold. We continued to agitate the ques
tion both privately and publicly, and at
last succeeded in getting a union service
arranged for, but when it came to the
actual service cot a solitary soul would
do or say a thing excepting myself.
Even the clergyman of our sister church
was dumb, abd threw the whole respon
sibility of agitation upon me. The lo
cal paper neve* has a word to eay about
the condition of thingp. Everything
touching the liquor traffic and its attend
ant evile is suppressed. A few arrests
are made, false names are givea by the
victims, a nominal line is imposed, and
they ure free to go iuto the same dels
and repeat the same thing with other
names Names are easily invented.
They always say— perhaps th yare thus
posted by the learge-bearted officials—
“We did not get our liqu ir9 bore. We
brought them with us.” This is ingen
ious. It makes the court records prove
that liqnor cannot be bought here, and
that it is not our own boys, but strang
ers, that get drunk! The amazing thing
to me is that most of the leading men
are church cfficials and some of them
Sunday-school workers, and all support
ers of the c lurch.
No attempt to enforce the law is made
by the men who are elected and sworn
and paid to do it. Occasionally a pri
vate citizen is aroused at.d telle the
officers what tteir duties are. They
move, but it is sullenly and with sup
pressed malice against the private citi
Z9C. Their action against the rumseller
—the criminal of criminals—is involun
tarily brought. They tell the rumseller
that they are driven to it, and that he is
a kicked and much-abused man. The
W. C. T. U. has become a defunct in
stitution because of the gross indignities
heaped upon it by those who ought to
have made it unnecessary for them to
do any such work as they had to do.
The best women in the place shrink
from reorganization because of lack of
practical sympathy. In Bpite of all these
startling facts, and of all this opposition
or paralysis, it is ours “to do and dare.”
“He's a slave that dare not be
In the right with two or three.”
I have found that it is very easy to make
temperance addresses in a community
where everybody stands for the enforce
ment of law; but it is another thing
where every one shrinks from it. It is
our delight, nevertheless, to “cry aloud,
spare not, lift up the voice like a trum
et, and stow the people their siD.“
‘ ‘Right is light, since God is God,
And right the day must win.”
A better day is coining. Thank God
for this hope!— Zion's Herald.
Asia and the Future Christian Civili
zation.
Iq the ebb and how of human affairs,
under thoee mysterious impulses, the
origin of which is sought by some in a
personal Providence, by some in laws
not yet fully understood, we stand at
the opening of a period when the per
plexing question is to be settled de
cisively, though the issue may be long
delayed, whether Eastern or Western
civilization is to dominate throughout
the earth and to control its future. The
great task now before the world of civil
ized Christianity, its great mission,
which it must fulfil or perish, is to re
ceive into its own bosom and raise to its
own ideals those ancient and different
civilizations by which it is surrounded
and outnumbered—the civilizations at
the head of which eland Chine, India,
and Japan. This, to cite the most strik
ing of the many forms in which it is pre
seated to up, is surely the mission which
Great Britain, sword ever at hand, has
been discharging towards India; but
that stands not alone. The history of
the present century has been that of a
constant iucreasing pressure of our own
civilization upon these older ones, till
n jw, us we cast our eyes in any direction,
there is everywhere a stirring, a roue'
ing from sleep, drowsy for the most part,
but real, unorganized as yet. but con.
scious that that which rudely interrupts
their dream of centuries possesses over
them at least two advantages—power
and material prosperity—the things
which unspiritual humanity, the world
over, most craves.
Wuat the ultimate result will be it
would be vain to prophesy; the data for
a guess even are not at hand; but it is
not equally impossible to note present
conditions, and to suggest present con
siderations, which may shape proximate
action, and tend to favor the preponder
ance of that form of civilization which
we cannot but deem the most promising
for the future, not of our race only, but
of the world at large.—Harper's Maga
zine for September.
The Kingdom of Character.
Jesus was an absolute and unreserved
believer in character, and was never
weary of insisting that a man’s sluI wbs
more than his environment, and that he
must be judged not by what he held
and had, but by what he was and did.
Nothing could be tasier than to say,
“Lord, Lord,” but that did not count.
Jesus’ demand was to do “the will of my
Father which is in heaven,” and all of
this kind made one family. He only
has founded a kingdom on the basis of
character; he only has dared to believe
that character will be omnipotent. No
weapon in Jtsus' view would be so win
some, so irresistible, as the beatitudes in
action. His disciples were to use no
kind of force, neither tradition, nor
the sword, nor money. They were to
live as he lived, and influence would con
quer the world. Jesus elected twelve
men—one was a failure—and trained
them till they thought with him and
saw with him. St. John did not imitate
Jesus, he assimilated Jesus, Each dis
ciple became a center himself, and so
the kingdom grows by multiplying and
widening circles of influence. — Rev.
John Watson, in “The Mind of the
Master." _
English Divorce Laws.
The child) en of the marriage are the
husband’s if he chooses to have them,
but if he does not care to perform a fa
ther’s duty the wife must support them,
if be is unfaithful to her, she cannot di
vorce him (in Eugland) unless he has
also committed the ungentlemanly sin
of personal cruolty, and in all cases of
divorce and separation it is a mans
reading of the man made laws that en
tirely uecides nut only the case, but the
cons' quencee, as to the custody of the
children and the amount of alimony.
And if, despairing of justice, the faith
ful wife endures patientl. through life
for the sake of her children's future,
the Eiglish lav permits an unfaithful
husband and father at death to will
away every penny of hie property from
his wife and children to a charity, a
stranger or a mistress, possibly leaving
those whom the law made his depend
ents dependent on the ratepayers of bis
parish. This is not possible in Scotland,
nor was it formerly possibe in England.
The law of dower protected the widow
until thie century, when meu tinkered
the lawB so as to gain a larger latitude
for themselves. The operation of this
masculine privilege often gives oppor
tunity for cruel oppressions not dreamed
of by right minded men. In fact, it ia
only because tbe large majority of men
are better than the laws allow them to
be that society is poBsible,— Humanita
rian.