amendment wish for such an un-American condition? Would it be in harmony with Americanism to teach religion in our public schools? Let an up-to-date answer be given to these queries by Dr. Claxton. In an address before the National Reform Convention in Pittsburgh last November, Dr. Claxton said, among other most excellent things on the subject of religion and the public schools:

"The object of our public schools is to make good citizens for the state. . . . In this country we have, and I hope we shall continue to have, separation of church and state. It is not the prerogative of the public schools to impart religious teachings under our system of government. I take it for granted that no one here would want what some other countries of the past ages had. . . . We do not teach religion in our public schools, because it is at variance with the fundamental principles of our government the separation of church and state. If religion is not taught in communities, whose fault is it? . . . It is the business of the churches to teach religion. If there is a lack of religious teaching in the communities, somebody ought to begin to hold religious institutes in the churches.'

"Of course, we assume that all church schools are teaching the children geography, physiology, grammar, agriculture, domestic science, and history, as well as arithmetic, reading, spelling, and writing. But should the amendment pass and become part of the constitution, the church. and parochial schools would be closed, and, to our notion, the State would be deprived of the wholesome assistance, if anything, theretofore rendered. Do the promoters of the amendment realize that the public school system in that event would be sectarianized in course of time? Do they not know that sooner or later the public taxes would be seized upon to make our public schools religious and sectarian? If they do not, then, in our judgment, they are without discernment in matters of obvious meaning.

"From the Economical Viewpoint "The public is doubtless in possession of the fact that there are not enough school buildings at present, nor sufficient teachers to take proper care of the children of primary school age. Every day there is some mention in the press of the unprepared state of our educational department of the Government to meet the requirements. Dr. Claxton recently reported that some 18,000 schools were closed for lack of teachers. Now, if all the church and parochial schools are closed, tens of thousands of additional children will be thrown upon the public authorities to reckon with.

"At Variance with the Michigan
Constitution

"Not only is the proposed amendment unAmerican from the larger political standpoint,

and absolutely unnecessary, but it is at variance with our own constitution, Article XI, Section I, of which reads as follows:

666

Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.'

"Shall the citizens of Michigan vote themselves an unending and unnecessary amount of trouble and problem? Shall we keep hands off the lawfully conducted sectarian schools! or shall we open the door to the sectarianizing of our secular public schools? Which alternative will the better conserve the true principles of Americanism? In our judgment, and we believe in the judgment of all patriotic voters of the State of Michigan, the proposed amendment to the constitution prohibiting church or religious schools should be rejected."

Righteousness by Legislation

A

W. F. MARTIN

VERY apt note appeared in a recent issue of the Christian States

man, the official organ of the National Reform Association. Here it is: Making peace by joint resolution of the two Houses of Congress is almost as funny as the reform work of a reform board of aldermen in a Western city. They adopted this resolution: 'Resolved, that the red-light district be abol ished.' Then they went home, washed their hands, and said: 'We've done our part.'"

This is all true, very true indeed. We wonder why it is, however, that whoever wrote this cannot see that the same logic will apply to trying to bring in righteousness by law. A good deal was said in past years about a statement made by Justice Brewer to the effect that the United States Government is a Christian nation. Our friends who have been try ing so hard to inaugurate civic righteousness, caught up this bit of dictum, and seemed to think the matter settled. "Why not?" said they. The Supreme Court, the highest tribunal of the land, has given its "decision." Because of this, no one, they argued, should dispute the fact. "This must be a Christian nation," they said.

This reminds us of a story that is told, and possibly it is true, that when mes

began to doubt as to whether unbaptized infants were lost, a council of grave divines debated the question, and then took a vote. A majority decided, by a close vote, that the infants were not to be consigned to torment, and so, by this narrow margin, they were saved.

Somehow one is led to wonder just how much effect the decision of these men had on the question. It can be safely said, though, that it would have fully as much to do with it as a Supreme Court decision would have in really making a nation Christian.

A true Christian is a follower of the teachings and example of Christ. This comes from a nature that has been

changed by the grace of Christ, through the influence of the Holy Spirit. It is not possible for any legislative body to vote this condition into a single individual, much less into a community. It is eminently manifest that a court decision would be futile in making a nation or a community Christian.

In the past this has been tried, but not a soul has ever been saved by it; on the contrary, much persecution and distress. have resulted. Persuasion is the power used by even the Almighty in changing the heart. It is the one effective weapon given to ministers of the gospel. All other means have failed, and must continue to fail.

I

T seems that a bill has been framed by representatives of the National Association of Patriotic Instructors, with headquarters in this city, requiring all teachers in public, private, and parochial schools to take an oath of allegiance to the United States and to the State wherein they reside or are employed.

This oath binds those taking it to support not only the national and State constitutions, but all laws enacted under them.

This measure is styled "wholly American," but is it not in fact wholly unAmerican? The National Reformers, most of them Presbyterians and very good people and good citizens, would doubtless object most seriously to taking such an oath, for the reason that, as they view it, our national Constitution is a "godless" document, to which they demand an amendment recognizing Jesus Christ as the ruler of nations and his law as of supreme authority in Governmental affairs.

Now we do not agree with them in this, but they have a perfect right to hold and

to teach as they do, and to agitate, as they are doing and have long done, for their amendment.

In 1850 there was enacted by the Congress of the United States the FugitiveSlave Law, an act later upheld as Constitutional. This law made it a serious offense for any one even "to harbor or conceal" any person who was known to be a fugitive slave. But a great many good people did this very thing just the same, and did it believing that in so doing they were rendering God service. Some of the best people of the country helped to operate "the underground railroad," as it was called, or in other words, assisted fugitive slaves in making their way across the United States and into Canada.

Our forefathers violated law when they resisted the unjust exactions of George III, the very thing for which we now honor them. Had the American Revolution failed, probably all the signers of the Declaration of Independence would have been hanged as rebels; but

they succeeded, and we very properly honor them as patriots.

In his book, "Moral Science," published in 1892, President Fairchild, of Oberlin College, said:

"Conscientious men are not the enemies, but the friends, of any government but a tyranny. They are its strength, and not its weakness. Daniel, in Babylon, praying contrary to the law, was the true friend and supporter of the government; while those who, in their pretended zeal for the law and the constitution, would strike down the good man, were its real enemies.

It is only when government transcends its sphere, that it comes in conflict with the corsciences of men."

The proposed law is un-American, first, because it invades the realm of conscience; and second, because the principle involved would have prevented the American Revolution, and would even now turn the world back toward the Dark Ages. We do not believe that the American people will indorse such a measure

C. P. B.

A

GOOD Christian should follow the dictates of his conscience, and to this no one objects. If he chooses to go to church often and to pray fervently, that is his privilege; by so doing he can bring much good to himself and do no one else any harm, if he will only stop at that; but if he ceases to be a true Christian and becomes a fanatic, as such he is dangerous to himself and to the world at large. It is this class which today is endangering the liberties of the world, under the same methods and under the same tactics as those practised by the fanatics of old who hanged women for witchcraft, and murdered one another because they differed in religious opinions.

It required ages to bring woman to a political and domestic equality with man; yet we find woman today doing her best to deprive herself of that privilege, by allowing some man to do her thinking for her and to dictate to her how she shall use her vote - not the man who ages ago was termed "the head of the house," her husband,- but som strange man preaching from a pulpit oz advocating a hobby, or some other man who believes that the church should monopolize Sunday and the Sunday-show

^

business to itself. And herein is where the danger lies.

Now that woman has been given the vote in all the several States, what is she going to do with it? Will she exercise her own calm, sound judgment in matters upon which it is her privilege to vote, or will she accept the judgment of her preacher? Will she continue to enjoy the liberties obtained for her by the political man of the past, or will she be deprived of them by the political woman of today?

These are important and serious ques tions; for not only does woman's liberty depend upon them, but also the liberty of man as well. In other words, are we to enjoy our religious rights as we have enjoyed them in the recent past, or are we. through woman's vote, to return to the fanatical past, when men were compelled under penalty to attend church, and when women were mere chattels in the hands of men, subject to publie punishment as "scolds," or hanged by the neck for witchcraft? Will the right of franchise elevate woman to the plane of man mentally, or will it be used to reintroduce fanaticism into the world, with all its disastrous results?

Liberty

By H. G. Thurston

E

TERNAL vigilance is the price of liberty," and every effort put forth which invites possible persecution ould be opposed most earnestly by very one. The shackles are already beg forged for men in our Republic to ear. The bigotry which impels men to ppress their fellows is backed by an arnestness worthy of a better cause. When a yoke is placed upon a neighbor's eck, every true man will utter vigorous rotests; for a yoke upon a neighbor's eck means one upon your own also, and our protest against your own slavery omes too late if you fail to protect your eighbor against oppression.

Why do apparently honest men perseute or make it possible for others to ersecute? Jesus said they would do hese things "because they have not nown the Father, nor me." That is to ay, those who really do know God, never ppress their neighbors because of their eligious views. Blessed words from our ivine Lord!

Paul told who it is that persecutes, nd we quote his words:

"Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the ildren of promise. But as then he that was orn after the flesh persecuted him that was orn after the Spirit, even so it is now."

There is no exception to this rule. No hurch has any right to ask for any reliious law at the hands of the state; much ess to enforce one against those who iffer in matters of conscience. When ersecution comes, what does the apostle ohn say is the cause?

"Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, nd slew his brother. And wherefore slew he im? Because his own works were evil, and his rother's righteous." 1 John 3: 12.

There is no exception to this rule; and when men learn the meaning of the true

"golden rule," they will abhor every form of oppression, and especially that which is carried on in the name of religion.

The Sunday-law crusade is on in many places. Now and then we hear of its defeat, as in California and Oregon, but too often it is successful; and, as before noted, the only logical outcome is the oppression and persecution of those who differ.

The Spanish Inquisition, with its sickening record of torture; Puritan New England, with its "anti-kissing" and Sunday blue laws; the whipping of the Quakers; the whipping and banishing of the Baptists; the hanging of witches,these crimes all belong to the family of modern Sunday-closing crusaders. The relationship may not appear very desirable to broad-minded, liberty-loving people, but by a close observation the family resemblance will be found to be most striking.

B

EFORE the close of the Great War it was said that this was a SObered world."

But there has been a change, and instead of a sobered world we see a mad world, a world plunging into every sort. of excess.

The Washington Post said editorially in its issue of Nov. 6, 1919:

"The European governments are absolutely destitute of the spirit of altruism. . . There is not in the record a single act of voluntary renunciation on the part of any European nation in favor of another since the war began. The record stands complete in every detail in its revelation of unyielding and in

variable selfishness.

The kindest explanation

of this phenomenon is that the nations have been driven nearly to death, and are of necessity looking out for their own interests, not because they are heartless, but because the law of self-preservation is operating."

What is true of nations is true of individuals. From the horrors of war the world has been plunged into the horrors of commercial and industrial strife. People are naked and starving, not because clothing and food cannot be had, but because conditions have arisen that make them unavailable. As one man in Washington remarked, giving the reason for high prices," Every man is getting what he can while getting is good." Greed is rampant. Selfishness runs riot. This is what we see today instead of "

bered world" of only two years ago.

a so

B.

Notable Statesmanlike Sentiments

I

BY S. B. HORTON

T is rather fortunate for America that we have in public life stalwart men who stand for, and will stand by the true principles of Americanism. And at this time, when so much is being said in regard to Americanism, what it stands for and what it means, such statements as are hereinafter quoted, if constantly kept in mind by the American people, will enable the ship of state to follow the safe and straight course devised by our patriotic forefathers. should be said in this connection that the great Thomas Jefferson gave helpful warning of the coming danger, in these words:

It

It can

"The spirit of the times may alter, will alter. Our rulers will become corrupt, our people careless. A single zealot may commence persecution, and better men be his victims. never be too often repeated, that the time for fixing every essential right on a legal basis is while our rulers are honest, and ourselves united. From the conclusion of this war we shall be going downhill. It will not then be necessary to resort every moment to the people for support. They will be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves, but in the sole faculty of making money, and will never think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights."

Soon after his inauguration as VicePresident of the United States, Hon. Thomas R. Marshall, in a speech, presented an array of unanswerable sugges tive thoughts, in which he said:

"The kingdom of God was to be in the earth and not of it. I hope soon all church organizations will make it their exclusive mission to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ, and to reach the conclusion that the world is to be regenerated by regenerated men and women, and not by regenerated laws and ordinances. . . . If there is a weakness in the church organization of today, that weakness springs from the fact that too many of the followers of the Nazarene are more interested in some particu lar phase of evil in civil life than they are in proclaiming the original sin of mankind and its only sure remedy - an undoubting, unqualified, and everlasting hold upon the gospel of the Galilean.

"From my viewpoint, Jesus Christ was not a reformer in the usual and ordinary acceptation of that term. He lived when the greatest despotism that the world has ever known ruled the habitable globe. Yet the only recorded statement of anything he said with reference to the Roman Empire was, Render unto Cæsar the things which are Cæsar's; and unto God the things that are God's. Slavery had reached the very depths of degradation, and yet this great apostle to the Gentiles advised a runaway slave to return to his master. The Christ was not engaged in repealing bad laws nor in providing criminal punishments for the violators of good ones.

"Jesus Christ was more than a reformer. He was a regenerator. The church is to stand as the representative of the kingdom of God on earth, and except ye be born again,' ye cannot enter into the kingdom. He brooded over Jerusalem as a hen broods over her chickens, and yet he never strove to make bad Jerusalem appear to be good Jerusalem."

These are splendidly true sentiments, expressed in terse and comprehensive language, and are commended to those state-and-religion friends who imagine they are serving God by bringing in his kingdom through the gateway of politics.