binding upon men everywhere, and at all times.
All men are bound, alwavs, to do right.
The question What is the Taw? is theretore
not the question ving at the foundation of one's
duty in any religious or spiritual matter which is
brought before him. There is another question
ving deeper than this, and that is the question
What 1s right? Sometimes injustice becomes
cothroned in law: but this does not put upon
any person an obligation to do morally wrong.
He is still bound to do right, stull bound by con
science to the higher law of God. This higher
Law mitast be obeved at any cost.
A statute commanding one to commit mur-
der on certain occasions, or to steal, or to swear
falsely, would not be binding on anvone, and
would not be obeveds and the reason given for
disobedience tot would be that 1 was unjust.
No one would clam that 1t ought to be obeyed
simply because was “the law and what would
be true of such a statute would be true ot every
cnactiment that is contrary to the law of God.
Unjust enactments do not derive any sanctity
from bene on the statute books. They ought to
be repealed, not enforced.
In secular affairs the prindple of matory
rule is at the foundation of governments and this
is proper and necessary, But in matters of con
science majority rule has no place. An individual's
duty toward God cannot be determined bya
le land
ight fully
majority vote. Every individual's relation to God is
a direct relation, not sustained through any other
individuals or through the government. “Every
one of us shall give account of himself to God.”
Faith, which is the essence ot Christianity, 1s
individual belief of God's Word, irrespective of
the beliet or opinions of any or all other per-
sons. In religion the majority have always been
on the wrong side. tis the majority that throng
the broad wav leading to destruction, and only
the small minority who travel the narrow way
leading unto life. Thus the spheres of religion
and of civil government must be wholly sepa-
rate rom cach other.
Within its legitimate sphere the ail power
should have the unhesitating obedience of all
persons. Only the higher claims of duty toward
God can justify anvone in refusing obedience to
the aval ruler. Only a plain contlict with the
higher law of God can justify any disobedience
to the laws of men. The legitimate realm of the
civil power is that of preserving the rights of the
people, and within this realm it has the sanction
of God. No one can, under a plea of conscien-
tious conviction of duty, be permitted to invade
the natural rights of another person. These
rights do not conthict, and cach one must
respect the rights of others. ['
Lo Saith, editor of Liberty magazine in 1906.
clBeRiy TEPTEMPEBEH
DCT DEE H
15