S; IttS1119 S DECLARATION of PRINCIPLES 1. We believe in God, in the Bible as the Word of God, and in the separation of church and state as taught by Jesus Christ. 2. We believe that the Ten Commandments are the law of God, and that they comprehend man's whole duty to God and man. 3. We believe that the religion of Jesus Christ is founded in the law of love and of God, and needs no hu- man power to support or enforce it. Love cannot be forced. 4. We believe in civil government as divinely or- dained to protect men in the enjoyment of their natural rights and to rule in civil things, and that in this realm it is entitled to the respectful obedience of all. 5. We believe it is right, and should be the privilege, of every individual to worship or not to worship, accord- ing to the dictates of his own conscience, provided that in the exercise of this right he respects the equal rights of others. 6. We believe that all religious legislation tends to unite church and state, is subversive of human rights, per- secuting in character, and opposed to the best interests of both church and state. 7. We believe, therefore, that it is not within the province of civil government to legislate on religious questions. 8. We believe it to be our duty to use every lawful and honourable means to prevent religious legislation, and oppose all movements tending to unite church and state, that all may enjoy the inestimable blessings of • civil and religious liberty. 9. We believe in the inalienable and constitutional right of free speech, free press, peaceable assembly, and petition. 10. We believe in the golden rule, which says, "What- soever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them." Religious Liberty Association (an international body dedicated to freedom ,in religion for all peoples. Canadian Branch, Box 396, Oshawa, Ontario. J. A. Buckwalter, Secretary), Vol. XXIV � Editor, ROBERT BRUCE THURBER � MAY, 1944 � No. 5 • Published monthly, except in the month of May, when two numbers are issued, by the Signs of the Times Publishing Association, Oshawa, Ontario, Canada. Entered as second-class matter at the Post Office. Oshawa, Ontario, January, 1921. Subscription Rates: Single yearly subscription, S 1.00; six months' trial sub- scription, 60 cents; single copy, 10 cents. • Change of Address: Please give both old and new addresses. Expiration: unless renewed in advance. the magazine stops at the expiration date given on the wrapper. No magazines are sent except on paid subscriptions, so persons receiving the SIGNS OF THE TIMES without having subscribed may feel perfectly free to accept it. •Printed by Maracle Printing Company, Oshawa, Ontario. 2 � SIGNS OF THE TIMES A T the base of Brown's Monument on Parliament Hill at Ottawa the sculp- tor his placed a ballot box, a sword at • rest, an olive branch, and a banner upon which are inscribed the words: "GOVERNMENT BY •THE PEOPLE FREE INSTITUTIONS RELIGIOUS LIBERTY AND EQUALITY UNITY AND PROGRESS OF CONFEDERATION." These are fundamental principles of civil and religious liberty more enduring than the stone upon which they are inscribed. May this ever be the monumental posi- tion of a nation of liberty-loving peoples, unshackled by injustice and tyranny. The prayer of true Canadians everywhere is, "God grant that the sons of Britons never shall be slaves!" William E. Gladstone once said: "Na- tional injustice is the surest road to national downfall." How often in the history of mankind have civil and re- ligious liberties, the tranquillity of a na- tion and the welfare of its peoples, been shattered on the cruel rock of national injustice. In times of stress and emer- gency, the leaders of a nation must be exceptionally wide awake to the fearful results of the sacrifice or the compromise • • • eie/ft • CANADA FREE! Religious Liberty Is Basic iu Freedom By J. A. Buckwalter Secretary of the Religious Liberty Association of Canada The monument to the Honourable George Brown, famous journalist and statesman, on Parliament Hill, Ottawa. No nation can lift itself up by pull- ing the rights of its citizens down. of these all-important principles so com- prehensively engraved upon the stone of Brown's monument. It takes real statesmanship to steer the ship of state clear of the rocks of oppression and sup- pression amidst the anti-democratic bu- reaucratic storms of these tragic times. Happy is that nation whose statesmen, backed by the intelligent support of free peoples, can save it from self-seeking demagogues who would make personal capital of social. political, or religious discontent; and from clerical or secular oligarchies that would abridge the equal- ity of inalienable rights, dictate the pat- MAY, 1 9 4 4 tern of individual conscience, and out- law nonconformists. A free Canada must be spared from the bitterness of sup- pressed minorities subjected to ruthless cruelty. All honour to the statesmen who strive to keep Canada free! Not only will his- tory accord them honourable mention in the records of human achievement, but He who weighs the nations as the dust of the balance and renders the de- cisions of eternity, will mark with favour their faithful efforts for the preservation of the true liberty and freedom of the balanced way of life. As Lord Baldwin put it: "Freedom without discipline is license; discipline without freedom be- comes tyranny." It was a startling thought that the newspaper publisher, Frank Gannett, voiced in his recent address to a religious gathering. He estimated that "of the 4o.000.000,000 people who have lived on this planet since the birth of Christ, probably not more than one billion, or less than three per cent, have ever lived under a government where they might call their souls their own; where they were something more than human cat- tle. to be ordered about by the arbitrary will of someone in power." It is again becoming a rare privilege to live in a land where freedom reigns; and these thought-provoking figures Mr. Gannett has furnished are doubtless not far from correct. Nations hitherto con- sidered the unassailable bulwarks of hu- man freedom are facing in some form or other the subtle threat of clerical or secular slavery. One of the most blessed God-given rights of mankind is that of religious liberty, and it is timely to observe anew that one of the great lessons history teaches is that many a nation has travel- led to the abyss of disaster via the route of suppression and persecution of re- ligious minorities. Where this lesson remains unlearned or unheeded, tragedy ensues. Religious liberty comprises five free- doms, namely; freedom of conscience, freedom of worship, freedom of faith, freedom of evangelism, and freedom of education. These protestant and demo- cratic principles equally oppose the in- trusion of the civil magistrate and the arbitrary authority of the church in mat- ters pertaining to man's duties toward his Maker. They grant the right to all men everywhere to confess before the whole world: "Here I stand, God help- ing me, 1 can do no other!" True faith must forever remain a free act of the will of man, the voluntary answer of his own individual soul to the personal call of his God. Neither church nor state has any legitimate right to suppress that free 3 church and state have been advocated and have appeared during the course of human history. One group holds that the church is above the state, and that the latter should provide the police power for the former. Totalitarian pag- anism asserts that the state is above the church. Others contend that both are rightly united in a common aim and should pool their resources to enforc international righteousness. The fourth class hold that the only Christian posi- tion and the only one the Christian church dare take is Christ's position, that of the separation of church and state. At present, all four of these relationships exist in various parts of the world, and it is abundantly clear which one is the best. All lovers of freedom should take alarm at the formidable forces aligned against this principle of separation. There are three facts that all national and church leaders in the cause of free- dom should keep ever before them. They are as follows: 1. Contrary to a commonly believed fallacy held by many, a nation cannot be a truly Christian nation and establish any form of church-state union, for such union is anti-Christian and contrary to the laws of the founder of Christianity. 2. A free state cannot at one and the same time remain free and by its police enforce any form of worship or doctrine or creed. 3. No church, regardless of its numer- ical strength, can be safely granted fa- voritism to the exclusion of others, with- out laying the basis for the secular cur- tailment of the rights of conscience. Again, all honour to those statesmen who strive to keep Canada free! May the forces of freedom rally and awake to their task, and win for mankind the greatest victory that can possibly be achieved in this global crisis: Liberty for a liberated world! if they fail, the new Dark age which now threatens to en- velop the race will bring the final black- relationship, for, "whatsoever is not of faith is sin." Romans 14:23. State sup- pression can enforce a form but never a faith! Such suppression inevitably leads to the ruin of the modern State, the stifling of spiritual progress, and the usurping of the prerogatives of the Di- vine Spirit by the temporal power of the state. An ever-increasing tendency to deny these God-given rights of the soul is everywhere manifest. On every hand can be seen the sorry omens of the sin- ister subtlety of satanic slavery, slowly but surely swamping the sinking form of civilization. Free peoples and the states- men of free countries need to be awake as never before in the history of modern civilization. Adolph Keller, in his recent book "Christian Europe Today," writes: "All the totalitarian states of a Communist or Fascist type on the continent either refuse these liberties entirely or greatly restrict them. These states allow no un- restricted public expression to the in- dividual conscience, and try to confine religious liberty to liberty of worship." (p. 40) He closes the chapter with the worthy hope that a "common Christian appeal for religious liberty" be made at the coming peace conference. Every little while danger signs appear on this side of the waters also, and many thinking people are becoming consider- ably alarmed over the increasing fre- quency of their reappearance. The one question which more than any other con- stantly threatens to jeopardize the cause of freedom is that of church and state relationships. Freedom of conscience is the founda- tion stone of the free state and the free church, and without it civilization as we have known it here on the North Amer- ican continent cannot endure. Every- where the question of church and state relationships has been thrown into the The future greatness of a country ,,=. is measured by its attitude toward' the rights of the minority. Religion is indispensable, but it should not be dispensed by law under duress of the civil magistrate. foreground by current conditions, and it is no under-statement to refer to it as the major issue now confronting the civilized world. Never was there a time when this world was more desperately in need of a revival of true Godliness, and never was it more urgently in need of the warning that such a revival can- not be attained by any form of church- state union. The principles our Lord enunciated while on earth clearly indicate that no state, however religious, has any author- ity from God to invade the sphere of hu- man conscience. A failure to heed the Divine dictum of civil and religioiis lib- erty, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's", (Matt. 22: The oldest church building in Britain, Earls Barton, dating from the eighth century. 21) is fatal to the cause of freedom. Every tyranny that has ever cursed the history of humanity has transgressed this law, and no freedom worthy of the name has brought its blessings without recognition of these principles. Christ never called the sword of steel to the aid of the sword of the Spirit. When witnessing before Pilate, He de- clared: "My kingdom is not of this world: if My kingdom were of this world, then would My servants fight." John 18:36. If it were not proper to resort to force to save Jesus from abuse and death and make the world accept Him as their King and Deliverer, on what legitimate grounds can modern religionists call for gate legislation to enforce any creed or doctrine? Advocates of enforced Sunday legisla- tion should carefully consider the solemn words with which Christ clearly enun- ciated the eternal Christian principle of the separation of church and state. His dominion is distinct from secular domin- ion. It does not interfere with the right- ful jurisdiction of the State and in turn admits no rightful interference of the state in the rulership of the hearts and consciences of mankind. His dominion is maintained without the aid of the tax-gatherer, police magistrate, soldier, or secular court. He employs no coercion or force. Four theories of the relationship of No one is a true follower of Jesus who is tainted with religious bigotry and intolerance. Too much power is like too much alcohol—it goes to the head and intoxicates the brain. out of civilization. But even beyond that dismal darkness we see the final triumph of truth and freedom when, by the providential intervention of Heav- en, we "are delivered from the bondage of corruption" to inherit "the glorious liberty of the children of God." Rom. 8:21. May Providence strengthen the cause of freedom in our fair land, and grant that our national leaders shall ensure to the peoples of Canada for the days to come, "GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE FREE INSTITUTIONS RELIGIOUS LIBERTY AND EQUALITY UNITY AND PROGRESS OF CONFEDERATION." 4 � SIGNS OF THE TIMES The Canadian House of Commons in session at Ottawa • • Our Allegiance to GOD GOVERNMENT • T HE blessings of liberty enjoyed in the Anglo-Saxon world at large have come to be accepted by many as the outgrowth of the reasoning of men. It is safe to say, however, that apart from • the teaching of the Scripture, there has been no authoritative statement that gives to man his proper place. Where Christianity has not gone the individual has always been considered of little value. The monuments of antiquity that challenge our curiosity and arouse our astonishment are generally proofs of tyrannical power. When the traveller wonders how the pyramids were built, the answer is found in the fact that the absolute ruler had at his command untold thousands of slave labourers. The walls of ancient Babylon, its hanging gardens and its massive gates, tell the same story of subjects lashed by over- seers seeking the favour of a despot. The centre of the teaching of the Man of Nazareth is that the single in- dividual is of worth to his Creator. The value of man can be appreciated only when the price that was paid for his redemption is remembered. In the first sermon of Jesus, given in Nazareth, his home town, we find these words: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He hath annointed Me to preach the gos- pel to the poor; He hath sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance By Heber H. Votaw Secretary, International Religious Liberty Association to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised." Luke 4:18. Again the Master said: "If the Son therefore sh411 make you free, ye shall be free indeed." John 8:36. The civil government has a perfect right to demand certain things from its citizens. The Christian will give these freely and cheerfully. His sense of simple fairness will never permit him to accept and enjoy the privileges and additional security that can come only by the united efforts of a group without assum- ing the responsibility that must fall upon each one where a union exists. For in- stance, a fair share of taxes is never re- sented by the Christian. Jury service is accepted both as a duty and a priv- ilege. Appointment or election to an of- fice of public trust will not be shirked by the real Christian, even though it may mean a personal sacrifice. The best governments recognize the binding obligation of their citizens' consciences and provide for the protec- tion of minority groups. An excellent illustration of this is contained in the "Second Report of the Director of Selec- tive Service" of the United States, which was submitted to President Roosevelt by Major General Lewis B. Hershey under date of April 3, 1943. General Hershey, in dealing with the exemption from military service granted to ministers of religion, reveals a commendable wish to make the provisions of the Act broad enough to take care of the small groups who hold what might be thought to be peculiar ideas. Here are his striking words: "The ordinary concept of 'preaching and teaching' is that it must be oral and front the pulpit or platform. Such is not the test. Preaching and teaching have neither locational nor vocal limitations. The method of transmission of know- ledge does not determine its value or effect its purpose or goal. One may preach or teach from the pulpit, from the curbstone, in the fields, or at the residen- tial fronts. He may shout his message 'from housetops' or write it 'upon tablets of stone.' He may give his 'sermon on the mount,' heal the eyes of the blind, write upon the sands while a Magdalene kneels, wash disciples' feet or die upon the Cross. He may carry his message with the gentleness of a Father Damien to the bedside of the leper, or hurl ink- wells at the devil with all the crusading vigour of a Luther. But if in saying the word or doing the thing which gives ex- MAY, 1 9 4 4 � 5 vete CANADA Sawzo,re pression to the principle of religion, he conveys to those who 'have ears to hear' and 'eyes to see,' the concept of those principles, he both preaches and teaches. He may walk the streets in daily converse with those about him telling them of those ideals that are the foundation of his religious conviction, or he may trans- mit his message on the written or printed page, but he is none the less the minis- ter of religion if such method has been adopted by him as the effective means of inculcating in the minds and hearts of men the principles of religion." Such a concept of liberty is worthy of a follower of the Founder of Christianity, no matter to what nation he may chance to belong. Suppose, on the other hand, that the decision of a government official had sought to deny to any man the right to tell the story of the Cross as it appeals to him. Should he, as a Christian, keep silent about eternal verities? When the demands of the state conflict with the commands of God, the Christian is justi- fied in refusing to give obedience to his government. In such cases his duty is clear—he has no choice; he must obey God. Not only must the state recognize a man's right to worship as he may please, but it must also recognize his right to tell his fellows of his belief. Let us turn to the Scriptures for a story. The scene is Jerusalem. Peter and John are about to enter the temple. A man, lame from his mother's womb, begs for alms. The apostles fasten their eyes upon him and tell him to look at them, saying, "In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk." The man stands up and walks and leaps, praising God. The rulers and the elders, with the high priest and many of his kindred, demand an explanation. The apostles are brought in. The man who had been healed stands with them. The miracle When a religion lacks divine author- ity for its tenets, it resorts to legal authority to make up the lack. cannot be denied, but its effects must be stopped if possible. The rulers threaten Peter and John, and command them "not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus." To this the apostles "answered and said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye." Con- tinuing their work, the apostles find themselves again in conflict with the authorities, who said, "Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name?" Then Peter and the other apostles say, "We ought to obey God rather than men." The centuries that have elapsed since these memorable words were uttered have not changed the great principle enunciated. To-day the Chris- tian must be a good citizen, gladly obey- ing the laws of his land. But when com- manded to do what God has forbidden, or when urged to fail in obedience to God's command, he must, with the apostles of old, say, "We ought to obey God rather than men." 6 T O THE President of the United States of America, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, goes the honour of first enun- ciating the "Four Freedoms" for which most people in this hemisphere believe they are fighting and sacrificing to-day. Addressing the United States Con- gress on January 6th, 1941, the President said: "In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms. "The first is freedom of speech and ex- pression everywhere in the world. "The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way every- where in the world. "The third is freedom from want— which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings which will se- cure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants everywhere in the world. "The fourth is freedom from fear— which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of arma- ments to such a point and in such a thor- ough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical ag- gression against any neighbour—any- where in the world." It is being assumed by many that the above "Four Freedoms" were guaranteed in the Atlantic Charter, drawn up and By Eric A Beavon signed by Mr. Winston Churchill and Mr. Roosevelt on August 14th, 1941. Without attributing any sinister signifi- cance to the omission, we might as well recognize that two of the freedoms stressed by Mr. Roosevelt in his January speech were omitted from the Charter, namely, freedom of expression and re- ligious freedom. It may be surmised that in drawing up the Atlantic Charter the signatores agreed, out of deference to the political idiosyncracies of Soviet Russia and cer- tain Roman Catholic countries, to con- fine themselves to military and economic aims. That the reaction of Soviet Russia to their expressed objectives was being kept in mind is borne out by the fact that, two weeks after the meeting, a three-power conference convened in Mos- cow. On September ist, 1941, Lord Beaverbrook and Mr. Harriman issued a joint statement regarding the Moscow conference which concluded "by express- ing the hope that after Nazidom is finally wiped out, the nations represented . . will succeed in establishing a peace in which the nations of the world can live in security, free from fear or need." Here again the last two of Mr. Roose- velt's "Four Freedoms" are emphasized, SIGNS OF THE TIMES Winston Churchill, staunch sponsor of the "four Freedoms," — freedom of speech and of worship, freedom from want and from fear. National Film Board S • • National Fian Board The Justice Building, Ottawa. and the first two—freedom of speech and freedom of worship—omitted. ee We may have the profoundest confi- nce in Mr. Churchill's and Mr. Roose- lt's continued loyalty to those freedoms which are dearest of all to the hearts of Britons and Americans; freedoms, in- deed, without which neither the British nor the American "way of life" can pos- sibly survive. But thoughtful men and women cannot help deploring the fact that, for the sake of unity, two essential freedoms had to be omitted from so authoritative a statement of Allied war aims. It means that one or more of the great powers on earth—plus, perhaps, a large number of influential people in our own land—have not yet recognized as fundamental to the peace and prosperity of the world, two of the most elementary of human rights. It means that when the war is over, and the boys and girls come home, there is no guarantee that they may not find a gagged and regimented The inalienable rights of man can never be surrendered without des- troying the dignity of man. people at home, staggering under forms of taxation and abuses of authority which no one may oppose or question with im- punity. There is plenty of justification for seriously weighing this possibility. Only occasionally do we hear, from Can- adian parliamentarians, speeches favour- ing full civil and religious liberty. In 1938, members of the Canadian Senate fought with their backs to the wall against a united Lower House for pro- tection of Canadians against the provis- ions of the infamous "Brunelle Bill", which, had it become law, would have meant the indiscriminate gaoling of thou- sands of conscientious Canadians for op- posing the will of a handful of intoler- ant Protestant clergymen and the Quebec &unday Observance League. The Senate must not be abolished. More than once Canadian senators have demonstrated a keener interest in civil freedom and re- ligious liberty, and a better understand- ing of the principles underlying Chris- tianity and democratic government than members of the House of Commons. The checking power of the Senate has saved Canada much grief. Since the war started, many ancient rights and privileges have been ruth- lessly, and sometimes unnecessarily, set aside. Power is vested in officials and tribunals to veto laws enacted to safe- guard Canadian liberties. Articles 21 and 22 of the Defence of Canada Regu- lations, for instance, virtually nullify both Habeas Corpus and Trial by Jury, at least temporarily. Regulation 8 of Section 8 of the National War Services Regulations, 1940, declares: "No de- cision of a Board shall, by means of an injunction, prohibition, Mandamus, Cer- tiorari, Habeas Corpus, or other process issuing out of court . . . be questioned, reviewed, or reconsidered." As Sir William Muloch, "grand old man" of the Ontario law courts, has pointed out, there should be ample ap- peal allowed from the findings of •boards and commissions. "The drift of legisla- tion to-day, investing judical power in irresponsible bodies unskilled in the law is destroying justice . . . Don't take away the rights of any man to appeal." Conquest by an invading foe is not the only way by which a free people can be deprived of liberty. We must "stand on guard" lest, in winning the war, we lose some of those essential liberties for which we are fighting. Freedom of religion, above all, "freedom of every person to worship God in his own way," must be preserved if civilization is to survive. That the Prime Minister of England is loyal to this fundamentally British tradition was clearly seen in a hint Mr. Churchill recently threw out that in the post-war world every individual would be required to take part in the work of re-construction. Speaking in London to the National Liberal Club on August 27th, Mr. Churchill said: "In the days to come . . . much more exact definitions have to be established about the rights of the individual and the relation of the individual to the great framework of the state. There will be great tasks of build- ing to do." Then he added: "No one has a right to abstain except on grounds of intellectual or moral scruple . . ." By avoiding the expression "religious scruple," so commonly used, Mr. Winston Churchill extends the principle of re- ligious liberty to all classes of men, whether religiously inclined or not. There has been little comment on this speech in the press, but it marks another notable milestone in the march of Great Britain towards world-leadership in the matter of religious freedom. Almost every war that has ever been fought has been a war, at least on one side, for the preservation of civil, relig- ious, or economic liberty. Preserve lib- erty, and you preserve peace; jeopardize liberty, and you jeopardize peace. rye FOUR FREEDOMSc The influence and prestige of the church decreases in the same proportion as the church leaders become politically minded and intolerant. MAY, 1 9 4 4 � 7 An imposing little church T HREE hundred years after the Sav- iour taught the great principle of the separation of church and state in His memorable answer to the question of the Pharisees, "Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not?" to which our Lord re- plied, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Casear's; and unto God the things that are God's," Constan- tine brought about an affiliation between church and state, which changed the whole outlook of church history. Gradu- ally these two organizations which God has ordained to operate in separate spheres were fused together. "The church of Rome, Mixing two governments that ill assort, Hath missed her footing, fallen into the mire." In the first Protestant confession is set forth the view of the Reformers that "the ecclesiastical and civil powers are not to be confounded." The framers of the Constitution of the United States deliberately separated the state from the church. Justice Story made that point very clear when he said: "The framers of the Constitution were fully sensible of the dangers from this source, marked out in the history of other ages and countries."—"Commentaries on the Constitution," p. 691. Bancroft writing of the formation of in the Canadian Rockies. the Constitution of the United States says: "In the earliest states known to history, government and religion were one and indivisible . . . no one thought of vindicating liberty of religion for the conscience of the individual till a voice in Judea, breaking day for the greatest epoch in the life of humanity by estab- lishing for all mankind a pure, spiritual, and universal religion, enjoined to render to Caesar only .that which is Caesar's. The rule was upheld during the infancy of this gospel for all men. No sooner was the religion of freedom adopted by the chief of the Roman Em- pire. than it was shorn of its character of universality and enthralled by an un- holy connection with the unholy state; and so it continued till the new na- tion, . . . when it came to establish a government for the United States, re- fused to treat faith as a matter to be regulated by a corporate body, or having a headship in a monarch or a state."— "History of the United States," Vol. VI p. 444. Many people felt sure that the separa- tion of church and state in America would lead to the destruction of religion. Writing a century later than the framing of the Constitution, Lord Bryce said: "So far from suffering from the want of State support, religion seems in the SEPAL CHURCH • By A. United States to stand all the firmer." It is well for us to remember this, be- cause great efforts will doubtless be made in the near future to resurrect the power of the church. The Roman Pontiffs have always ful- minated against freedom of conscience. Pope Gregory XVI described the 19th century ideas about liberty of conscience as "that form of madness which declares that liberty of conscience should be as- serted and maintained for every one. For this most pestilential error, that full and immoderate liberty of opinion, paves the way which, to the injury of sound and civil government. is now spread far and wide, and which some with the utmost impudence have extolled as beneficial to religion." —"Encyclical," Aug. 15, 1832. In 1885 Pope Leo XIII expressed ap- proval of this idea enunciated so strongly by his predecessor, and added the thought that "the church judges it not lawful that the various kinds of divine worship should have the same right as the true religion." Of course it is to be understood that His Holiness meant that the Roman Catholic Church was "the true religion." This same Pope in a later Encyclical condemned what he called "The modern liberties (1) of worship, (2) of speech and of the press, (3) of teaching, and (4) of conscience." In this same document he referred to the separation of church and state as "a pernicious maxim." Further more, he adds: "From what has been said, it follows that it is in no way lawful • to demand, to defend, or to grant, prom- iscuous freedom of thought, of speech, of writing, or of religion, as if they were so many rights which nature had given to man." Instead of anathematizing liberty of conscience and freedom of speech and of the press, the Roman Catholic church should be grateful that in these en- lightened days we enjoy these inestim- � • able privileges, for there are many in dications warning us that we are in danger of losing them. While the State Church was predomin- ant in Ireland there was continual • • a The temptation exists among those in ho are blessed with numerical strength, with wealth and power, to expect the minority to submit to the majority in all controversial matters, whether the majority is in the right or in the wrong. S � SIGNS OF THE TIMES ATION STATE • Anderson uou �u u tuutut.0 t � niit „„t The Dominion Houses of Parliament, Ottawa. I 4 • trouble. Sydney Smith estimated that the maintenance of the State Church in Ire- land cost a million lives, and that until 1838 Ireland had to be as heavily gar- risoned as India. It is said that when local self-government was given to Bel- fast and Limerick in 1840, an English bishop considered that this move would "call down vengeance from God." So deep-seated had the idea of a union of church and state become in the minds of many clerics that any suggestion of a separation of these two organizations would be liable to wreck both. Neverthe- less, the success which was being attained in America, notwithstanding the fact that the thriving republic of the Western Hemisphere had separated church and state, was becoming obvious to all the world. The teachings of Communism, Naziism, and Fascism are, each and all, against liberty of conscience and freedom of the press. It is contrary to the spirit of a dictator that there should be granted to the people liberty of conscience, or free- dom of speech and of the press. No dicta- torship could exist in such company. When Hitler began his task as ruler of the German people it is claimed that he determined to be the protector and friend of the Christian churches. In "Mein Kampf" he indicated his inten- tion of keeping his hands off the church. "The man who thinks that one can come to a religious reformation by the way of a political organization," Adolf Hitler said, "only shows that he has no notion of the origin of religious ideas or even of credal doctrine and of their ecclesiastical development. . . . The Poli- tical Leader must always keep his hands off the religious doctrines and institu- tions of his people; otherwise he will have to be, not a politician, but a Re- former, if he has the qualifications for itl Any other attitude would, more par- ticularly in Germany, lead to disaster." Shortly after his seizure of power the Fuhrer said: "It will be my earnest en- deavour to protect the two great Chris- tian denominations in their rights, to shield them from attacks upon their doctrine; and, as regards their duties, to establish them in harmony with the ideas and requirements of the present State.” A few days later he said: "National Socialism is neither anti-ecclesiastical nor anti-religious; on the contrary, it rests upon the basis of a real Christian- ity." As long ago as 1925 Herr Hitler had foreseen the possibility of a struggle with the Church and explained his anxiety to avoid it: "When to-day from various quarters the attempt is made to use the People's Movement for the pur- pose of religious controversy," he said, "I detect there the beginning of the end. Religious Reformations cannot be achieved by political children. . . . At any rate it will be my supreme task to see to it that in the newly awakened Na- tional Socialist German Workers' Party the adherents of both denominations may be able to live together in peace, that they may stand together in the common struggle against that power which is the deadly enemy of any Christianity, no matter which denomination." Herr Hitler went on to make plain that his quarrel with the Centre Party was ex- clusively on political, and not at all on religious, grounds. On September 11th, 1935, he made a proclamation: "Neither in earlier times nor to-day has the Party the intention of waging any kind of war against Christianity."—"National Social- ism and the Roman Catholic Church," pp. 11- In 1933 a Concordat between the Reich and the Vatican was signed in order to bring about a "permanent settle- ment" in the questions which were dis- turbing the relations between the Roman Catholic Church and Germany. Within a few months grave difficulties arose be- tween the Roman Catholic Church and the Reich. Nazi dictatorship cannot pos- sibly harmonize with an "infallible papacy," no matter how strongly Hitler may voice his sentiments against a war on Christianity. The Roman Catholic Church which through its Popes has fulminated against liberty of speech and of the press, has learned some bitter les- sons in Germany where freedom of speech and of the press are unknown liberties. Almost the whole of Europe has been under the control of the Nazi regime, hence it may be concluded that freedom of speech and of the press no longer ex- ists in Europe. That our readers might get some little insight into what this means we have culled the following facts from "National Socialism and the Roman Catholic Church." "Every publisher of any newspaper, periodical, pamphlet, or book must be a member of the 'Literary Chamber of the The way to defeat error is not to crush it, but by demonstrating that uth, when left free, has sufficient virtue to defend iself, and produces the greater benefits. MAY, 1 9 4 4 � 9 Reich' (Reichsschrifttumskammer); only as such may he publish. If, therefore, any publisher give offence to the Party by any publication, or show any sign of recalcitrance, he is told that he is un- worthy to be a member of the 'Chamber', his membership is taken away, and he is ruined. Such is the strangle-hold of the Party on the publishing business. Simil- arly the `Schriftleitergesetz' ordains that the editor of every newspaper and period- ical must be a member of the appropri- ate 'Chamber'. This means that, at peril of the loss of his livelihood, every editor is bound to print whatever is re- quired of him by the Propaganda Minis- try and to refrain from printing any- thing that is not approved. The 'German News Bureau' of the Propaganda Minis- try delivers to newspapers, in words from which no deviation is allowed, the in- formation it wishes to disseminate. Cer- tain papers began to print such infor- mation accompanied by the initials `D.N.B.' (Deutsches Nachrichten-Bureau) in order to indicate its source; this was forbidden; the appearance of spontaneity must be maintained. The control of newspapers is exercised not merely through the News Bureau but also through constant talks from the officials of the Propaganda Ministry. For in- stance, the Propaganda Ministry will give private instructions that such and such information about an immorality case in the courts must be given in the paper, and that such and such information must be withheld. Cases before the courts may only be reported in the very words of the News Bureau." Dr. Edwin E. Slosson expressed a great truth when he said, "The problem of the church is the same as that of a govern- ment, that is, how to secure minority rights without surrendering majority rule. Progress comes only through minor- ities. Whenever a new idea comes into the world it has a majority of 1,750,- 000,00o against it, for a new idea comes into the mind of one man first." We need to protect the weak; the strong can care for themselves. When the rights of minorities are cared for we may be assured that liberty still lives in the hearts of men. Majori- ties lose nothing by manifesting a mag- nanimous attitude toward those who honestly differ from their views. This is especially true in religious matters for the opinions of majorities on religious dogmas are frequently very erroneous. Jesus was in a hopeless minority during His earthly ministry, but the heavenly principles He advocated were as much higher than the principles advocated by the religious rulers of His day as the heavens are higher than the earth. Neither ecclesiastical' nor civil dicta- tors recognize freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, or of the press. Let us therefore do everything to preserve our democratic liberties and privileges. 10 T HERE are mighty movements on foot among men in these days. The shape of the world to come is being planned. The whole world is in a state of expecta- tion. Things are taking place all about us that are staggering in their immensity. In the thoughts of men everywhere there is a sense that the times in which we live are pregnant with great events. We have arrived at one of the great crises of human history. Stupendous changes in the status of humanity itself are about to take place. Changes are in the mak- ing that are certain to affect the destinies of men and nations throughout all the world. The world we have known is passing to its certain doom. It will never again be the same. A new order is in the mak- ing. Men propose a new governmental structure which will exercise its power and exert its influence throughout the habitable globe. Out of the midst of the most tragic period in the history of the human race there has arisen a demand for a new world society in which war will be ban- ished forever, and in which peace will endure. It has caught the imagination of the world. The greatest statesmen of the world are even now making definite plans regarding its nature, its structure, its establishment. And the hopes of men everywhere are fixing themselves with eagerness upon, the possibility thus offered of a world in which the alarms of wars shall never again be sounded, and men shall live in peace and security. It has already been pointed out that this is not a new hope. It is the revival of an old, old hope. Since time began there has floated in the minds of men this all-engaging vision, the stupendous idea of the creation of a World State, to be constituted in perpetuity and clothed with powers calculated to promote and preserve peace among all peoples and be- tween all nations; to proscribe and pre- vent aggression; and to protect and de- fend all mankind in the exercise of their rights and the enjoyment of their free- doms. No man can study the history of the world without perceiving that it is little more than a chronicle of wars, spaced with short interims of peace. It is pro- posed now that the present era shall mark a change in this record, and from hence- forth there shall be no wars, but only peace. All the plans of men from the begin- ning have failed to take into account human inability to change or remedy the root cause of human misery. The conferences of Moscow, of Cairo, of Te- heran, have likewise failed to take this vital, determining factor into considera- tion. As a consequence the plans of men to banish war, conceived in the highest idealism as they have been, have failed. They are bound always to fail. It is not in men to make a good world or con- struct an ideal social order. There is something about this whole situation that statesmen do not take in- to account, which they leave out of their reckoning. It is this: there is that at the root of social and economic confusion, of human wretchedness and misery, that no scheme or arrangement of men, no po- litical philosophy or administration, can ever remove or change. And that is the thing which is the root cause of all human ills, and which men cannot reach or deal with, cannot change or eliminate. It is bound to bring every human scheme of recovery and peace and security to defeat. It is not in man to recover. It is not in human ingenuity to create an ideal social state. It is not in man to abolish war. It is not in man to provide perman- ent peace. The thing that is wrong with the world, the thing which produces all hu- man maladjustments, all depression, all wars, all wretchedness and misery, all in- justice, all unfairness and oppression, is not bad politics. It is sinful human na- ture. It is not wrong governmental ar- rangements or regimes. It is wrong lives. It is not bad political philosophies. It is evil hearts. Sin is the root cause of all that is wrong in the world. And sin cannot be reached or destroyed or changed or modified or ameliorated by any political, economic, SIGNS OF THE TIMES The PROJECTED WORLD GOVERNMENT SOME FACTS WHICH ITS PLANNERS ARE NOT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT (Third in a Series of Articles on Post-War Peace) By Carlyle B. Haynes Our war-rent world is electric with social, or governmental arrangements which can be effected, even by the wisest and the best disposed statesmen in the world. Conferences of the noblest world leaders at Moscow, Cairo, Teheran, or elsewhere, may carry with them the hopes of humanity. All their plans, however, cannot realize those hopes. Human environments can be changed. Human conditions of life can be im- proved. New governmental structures can be built. New laws can be imposed. But when all this is done it does not change human nature. Change every social and economic ar- rangement and structure as you will, change the government, build a super- state, create a world family of democratic nations, change the whole political con- cept and philosophy of government; and when it is all done you have not changed fallen human nature one whit. Socialistic democracy is no more the • answer to the world's need than mon- archy, aristocracy, despotism, fascism. Naziism, or communism has proved to be. None of these has provided the remedy for the world's deep-seated trouble. No political system, no governmental manipulation or change, will ever bring recovery to fallen humanity. For no political system or change will change the human heart, and it is the evil human heart which has caused, and is causing, all the trouble of the world. Sin is at the root of all the trouble, and injustice, and wrong, and wars, of the world. And nothing that man can do will remove sin. Change the government as you will, and change every form of government it- self, and all that has been done has been to change one group of sinners for an- other group of sinners. Shift from one party to another to any extent, and you MAY, 1 9 4 4 Armstrong Roberts great hopes for universal peace. still have sinners in office. No difference in political philosophy makes a difference in the human heart. And human nature is just the same, operates just the same, functions just the same, responds to the same incentives, moves from the same motives, and is ruled by the same iniquity and sin, no matter what political banner it marches under. So put any political 'sys06n, any form of government, national or international. into power, and sin will still ruin it and make it ineffective. Notwithstanding all this, however, the situation of ' humanity is not hopeless. A remedy for sin has been' provided. It is an entirely adequate remedy. God's remedy is just Jesus Christ. He sent His Son into the world to meet sin, to grapple with it, to take all its dire penalty on Himself for every human being, to exhaust all its venom and mal- ice upon Himself, to go down into death to meet its dread punishment, and to conquer it, and finally take it all away, destroy it forever, banish it from the universe. Yes, sin is destined to be destroyed. Then, and not until then, will we have a warless world. And the time is nearly here when sin is to be finally disposed of, and the world freed from its curse. The time is about here for God's new social order to displace the wreckage of the world. The good is about to displace the evil. The blessing is about to take the place of the curse. The second Adam is at hand. With Him will come the kingdom and the glory. He will bring the cure. He will knit the broken world. He will re- buke disease and sorrow. He will ban- ish sin and death. He will abolish war• forever. He will establish peace. He will rifle the grave. He will deliver crea- tion. He will bring permanent world recovery. He will establish eternal codes of righteousness. He will put into effect one world government. He will assume world sovereignty. And on His right- eous, peaceful throne, He will reign for- ever and ever. There is no other remedy for a ruined world than this. There is no other pros- pect of genuine recovery than this. There is no possibility of lasting peace and a warless world than this. This is the one great hope of the whole creation. It is the only hope of a sorely burdened world which under His reign will at last know the blessedness of righteous rule. God's new social order is very near at hand, nearer than most of us are ready to believe. Jesus came the first time "to seek and save that which was lost." He was born. He lived. He taught. He laboured. He worked miracles. He gave Himself a sac- rifice for sin. He died. He was raised. He ascended to heaven. And is that all? If so, it is not enough. The very purpose of His coming de- mands something more. We are not sat- isfied with such a climax. So far as it goes, it is well. But it does not go far enough. If this is all, and the last we are to see of our Lord is His thrilling ascension to heaven nineteen hundred years ago, then His mission is a failure, and He might as well have remained in heaven. If the ages of the future are to go on in endless repetition of what has been; if the age-long battle between good and evil is to continue forever with only slight advantage to one side or the other, but without a definite outcome; if there is to be no decisive and triumphant con- clusion to the work which the Lord began, seeking and saving the lost, then there is an incompleteness about the entire gospel scheme which is not at all to be reconciled with the idea of its divine origin. It is not sufficient, in reply to this, to say, as some do, that Christianity is a plant whose roots are in the earth and its flowers in heaven; that the beginnings are below and its consummations above. No, what has been begun here should be finished here. If Christ came to save the world, then His work is not finished. it will never be finished, until the world is saved. Certainly it is not saved now. If Christ brought salvation into the world, then in this world it ought to be fully accomplished. All its blessings, all its achievements, should be seen in the very domain where they were first pro- jected. So the plan of God for this world, the purpose of God for the human race, the gospel of God for human salvation, are incomplete without the return of Jesus to finish the •salvation which He began in tears and blood. He must restore all things. He must destroy the works of the devil. He must save mankind. He must inaugurate His kingdom. Then the drama of redemption will find a fitting consummation in everlast- ing glory. 11 Co-operation and not coercion should be the spirit and motive power anima- ting the various sects of Christianity in their relationship to one another. 12 Ree4coad Intolerance la a HOLD-UP By Claude W E ARE living in an age of unparal- leled progress. During the last century there has been greater advance- ment in science and discovery than in fifty centuries before. By his in- genuity and research man has increased many times his powers of brain and brawn. Medical knowledge and surgical skill have alleviated his physical suffer- ing and lengthened his life. Yet with all his genius and efficiency man has not been able to produce a serum that will reduce the fever of racial hatred; he has no antidote for the poison of religious intolerance; nor can he provide a balm for broken hearts and mutilated bodies wrecked by malicious persecution. Sometimes it looks as if man had suc- ceeded in making some parts of the world safe from some of these evils. But they are only in hiding, waiting for an op- portunity to torture mankind again. What about the four freedoms—free- dom of speech, of worship, from want, and from fear? Why is it necessary to em- phasize again and again the need for these self-evident rights? Is it possible that in this, the twentieth century, in an era of unprecedented progress and en- lightenment, with the evils and cruelties of the past an open book, that men are still being deprived of their God-given liberties. Yes, it is a fact, that with all our boasted advancement in science, educa- tion, art, industry, and biblical know- ledge, religious tyranny and intolerance are marching on apace. Race, colour, and creed are still at swords points. There is no visible evidence that condi- tions will be different in the future than they have been in the past. Why are efforts made to force men into uniformity of religious belief and practice? Such schemes are as hopeless as to attempt to change the course of the sun through the heavens. Man cannot change his own mind at will, much less can he alter it at the command of some one else. Only facts and clear, consistent reasoning can cause one to reverse his convictions and take new positions. This cannot be ac- compishled by coercion and threats. The old saying is true: "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still." Tyranny, intolerance and bigotry come from Satan. He is the archenemy of God and man. In his travels up and down the earth he noted that the man Job (Job 1:7) had strong religious convic- tions, and that he had been honoured by God for his fidelity and integrity. This aroused enmity and hatred in Satan. In a conversation with God, as recorded in the Scriptures (Job 1:12), he claimed that he could cause Job to change his attitude and opinions if he could perse- cute him. No one knows the true meaning of religious liberty who believes that religious freedom is for his own faith only. But the devil's philosophy was proved to be false. He tortured Job physically with boils; he confiscated his property by bringing gangster bands to steal his flocks and herds; and he caused him mental sorrow and suffering by destroy- ing his family. But to no avail. job re- mained true to God and his convictions. "Though He slay me, yet will I trust in Him," was his victorious cry. Chap. 13: t5. As the result of this experience God "blessed the latter end of Job more than his beginning." Chap. 42:12. Down through the ages Satan, by control of evil human agents, has also caused mil- lions of saints to suffer because of their religious beliefs. He has deprived them of their possessions, cast them into prison, SIGNS OF THE TIMES S • When the Christian religion depends upon the state for support, it confesses that it is a weak, sickly thing, and not Christianity. 13 Reee9i-oad Ireedom SAFETY E. Holmes • to be tortured and often put to death. For the encouragement of these liar- rassed souls, Christ Himself sent this mes- sage: "Blessed are they which are perse- cuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you." Matt. 5:10,11. The apostle Paul, in his roll of honour, counts as men of faith those who "had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprison- ment." Heb. 11:36. King Darius had the law and the lions on his side when the unchanging statute of the Medes and Persians con- demned Daniel to death for following the dictates of his conscience. (Daniel, chap. 6.) God showed his disapproval of such practices by closing the mouths of the lions and thus making the law of no effect. But his persecutors had no such protection. When they were thrown into the same den they were destroyed be- fore they ever reached the bottom. There is no blessing for those who interfere The denial of fundamental liberties to the people is what drives them to the overthrow of their govern- ment. with the divine right of men to choose their own religion. Religious intolerance lowers the dig- nity of man and makes him a slave; for it deprives him of his God-given right of choice. Religious intolerance is wasteful. It dissipates the energies of the church, which should be directed toward preach- ing the gospel and winning souls, and stirs up hatred and cruelty in the hearts of its members rather than love and sympathy. Religious intolerance injures the state by influencing the law-making powers to concoct synthetic crimes out of legitimate and harmless acts and beliefs, thereby making martyrs or hypo- MAY, 1 9 4 4 crites of otherwise good citizens. Religious intolerance destroys domes- tic tranquillity, for it stirs up religious bigotry and controversy and makes spies and snoopers out of those who should be friends and good neighbours. Religious intolerance creates oppos- ing classes among the people; for it fa- vours those who cater to the dominating religious power and discriminates against those who dissent. Religious intolerance sets a bad ex- ample before unbelievers. Viewing the hatred and inhumanity of professed Christians toward their fellow beings who disagree with them, unbelievers look with abhorrence upon all religion. Religious intolerance strikes at the laws of the Creator. Man is responsible for the proper use of his time and talents to the God who gave them. When hu- man authorities infringe upon them, and he is forced, contrary to his convic- tions, to follow others' schemes, then he is restricted in his development. Religious intolerance sets up an in- fallible creed, supported by force of government, thus precluding the search for further truth or of acceptance of new light. Hence it hampers progress in re- ligious matters. Religious intolerance is an absolute failure when it seeks to control the re- ligious beliefs and practices of man. It can shackle the body but not the mind and conscience. It is finally death to all that a virtuous man holds dear. The church or state which really wishes to make a contribution to modern civil- ization should espouse the rights of man. A chain is no stronger than its weakest link. A state or church is no freer than the liberty which it guarantees to its humblest follower. Miller St. Peter's, of the religious glory that is Rome. EXACTLY WHAT Are the Influences Now Working Which Curtail Our Liberties? Laws making compulsory the teach- ing of religion in schools supported by the taxes of people of all religions; BE- CAUSE it is discriminatory legislation, and opens the way for some particular religion to be taught to children of par- ents of other religious beliefs. Using public tax funds to support parochial schools; BECAUSE such a practice compels people of a religion not thus favoured, or people of no re- ligious belief at all, to pay for some- thing to be taught their children which they consider gross error. Proposals to legislate against anyone who speaks, publishes, or acts in such a way as to discriminate against another person because of his class, race, or creed; BECAUSE such legislation abridges the freedom of speech and of the press; and places in the judgment of one man or a few men the defini- tion of such discrimination. Laws al- ready enacted deal with defamation of character, libel, and slander. Laws, commonly called Sunday Laws, which force the closing of business houses, command the cessation of physi- cal labour, and restrict like means of gaining a livlihood, upon any one day of the week, BECAUSE this is definitely religious legislation, and is repugnant to that liberty which states that men shall be free to worship where, when and in a manner which they choose. 14 PRIEST AND KING A STORY comes out of the Teheran conference to the effect that one of the conferees suggested that the Pope of Rome sit in at the peace negotiations after the war is over. Marshal Stalin is reported to have said, "The pope) How many divisions does he have?" Which implies, we take it, that the pope should not have a part in arranging world peace when lie has not had any fighting part in the war, according to the U. S. S. R. Whatever the arguments in such a con- troversy, the question is a pertinent one. The pope, as such, is the head of a religious body. That body has millions of adherents on both sides in this war. This gigantic conflict is not between re- ligions, nor between nations and reli- gions. It is nations against nations, wholly political. Why, then, a religious leader in an international set-up for peace? The answer will come, But the Vatican is also political. It is true that Vatican City is accredited as a nation. The pope is also a king. No other proof is neces- sary than that at his court he receives ambassadors from nations, not churches, just as every other nation does. Then may the pope, as a political ruler, legitimately sit in at the peace parleys? No doubt, he may, if the parties to the peace recognize his political status. And they have been doing that for a number of years. Vatican City, however, for reasons not far to seek, has remained neutral all DANGERS ea FREEDOM through the present strife. The only parts a neutral could play in the settle- ment after the war would be those cif arbitrator or judge. And those are the ill parts the papacy would like to play, particularly the latter. We can come to no other conclusion when we examine the time-established claims of the pope to be "vicar of Christ," "Lord God on earth," and "King of kings." "The kingly power is not superior to the pontifical but is subject to it, and is bound to obey it." "Decretals of Gregory IN," (R. C.), book 1, title 33, chapter 6. Thus the pope of Rome (regardless of the fact that he has no "divisions" en- gaged in the war) may be seated at the peace conference as a go-between, in his political role. And when thus in- stalled in the inner circle, may press his claim as judge of all the earth, acting in the place of God, and may virtually dictate the peace terms. Such an out- come is perfectly consistent with the historic manoeuvres and present assump- tions of the papacy. "Rome never changes." And this power and prestige, which we have every reason to believe will be ac- corded the heirarchy of Rome, will come as an outgrowth of the Christian and non-Christian world's recognition of die right of one man to exercise the dual role of priest and king—a close union of religion and politics. We � hold that the papal system, a cementing of church and state with the church dominant, is wrong in principle and practice. For inevitably it leads on to the state becoming simply a tool in the hands of the church to dictate doc- trines and persecute dissenters. Not only in history, but also at the present time, the Roman Catholic Church, in countries where its adherents are in the majority, does this very thing. It is now doing everything in its power to exclude Protestant missionaries from the pre- dominantly Catholic nations of South and Central America. A church-domin- ated State, whatever the religion of that church, is certain to be intolerant and bigoted when dealing with minorities. There can be no world tranquillity and enduring international peace with religion taking a prominent part in for- mulating its terms. For religion and politics, like oil and water, do not mix. Each may be as good as may be, in itself; but, thrown together and given power, they are sure to take a course that denies freedom of conscience to smaller groups. The state has a duty to protect the church, all churches, in their religious liberties; and the church has a duty to support the state within the sphere of that which properly belongs to govern- ment, and according to democratic pro- cedure. Other than this, their two spheres are best kept apart. We have no fond expectations, how- ever, that religion and politics will be SIGNS OF THE TIMES Will they be tortured with the "stocks' as were their great-grandfathers? ea de CURRENT SCENE 'kept separate during the coming peace negotiations and after. The churches have gone too far in meddling with political affairs to turn back now. Let the reader watch developments, during the months and years to come, as re- ligion endeavours to coerce, or secure control of, governments. Our warning is not a guess, or human foresight alone. It is based on divine prophecy for these times. NATIONS WITH "MISSIONS" WE WOULD call the attention of our readers to an aspect of church and state union which scarcely ever receives any notice. It is that of a nation which con- ceives the idea that it has a "mission" to perform in the world to bring all other nations, either by persuasion or force, to its way of thinking. Sooner or later such a crusade takes on the forms of a religion, or it is supported by some cult, perhaps because religion has always been the strongest missionary force in the world. Fired by ambitious leaders, one na- tion becomes obsessed with its own racial superiority, takes extreme meas- ures to purge its people of alien blood, and formulates global plans to bring all other races under its authority, and eventually to merge the best of them in- to itself, crushing the others to death. The State becomes the religion of its subjects, its leader their tutelary god, and it starts on its "mission" to save the world. A budding empire is convinced that it has the best system of government ever tried since Nimrod of antiquity set up rulership. Backed up by a mighty church body that is already strong in almost every nation under heaven, it launches a grandiose scheme to subdue and con- vert the nations to its political ideals. A national colossus that sits astride two continents adopts a system of eco- nomic security which suits its millions of class-ridden serfs. Completely satisfied with its benefits, the nation sends its agents to every corner of the world to foment revolution against capitalism and thus start a class war. Its intellectuals believe it has a "Messianism", a "world redeeming mission," and that some day it will "rule the world and Spiritualism will be the world's religion." A virile and fecund nation has for its deity an emperor-god, human yet a sup- posed descendant of divinity, whom it worships with fanatical devotion. It visions first the greatest continent on earth under its sway, and then the world at its feet. Its religion is to absorb all other religions gradually, and cover the globe as the waters cover the sea. Powerful religious interests are at work in a great democracy to unite every spirit- ual element in an effort to force the peace-making nations to make peace terms to their liking, and this by sheer MAY, 1 9 4 4 weight of church-member votes. The "mission" of this nation is conceived to be the shaper and guarantor of durable peace because it is based on Christian principles. An earth-circling commonwealth has in it a religious body which is sure that its king will some day sit "on the throne of his father David", and rule the world in a pleasant millennium, claiming the ful- fillment of all the shining promises made to ancient Israel and not yet come to pass. These earmarks of religio-political power and ambitions are easily recogniz- able. Before our eyes they grow into a whole which threatens mankind with tyranny over conscience and with a black- out of political and religious freedom. Characteristic of our times is an un- equal and dangerous marriage of the church and the world. The church and political governments may each be complete in its own sphere, neither, having need of the other to fur- ther its distinctive objectives. For "righteousness exalteth a nation" and af- fords it strength and prestige; and a church should be dependent on God, and God alone, to accomplish its divinely ap- pointed purposes. In short, religion can do infinitely more to save the world from war, and in- itiate an enduring peace, by special- izing on its mission to preach the gospel that saves individual men from sin, rather than by seeking to influence the State by vote pressure. "The Lord's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; . . . but your iniquities have sep- arated between you and your God." Isaiah 59: 1,2. LIBERTY ROCKETS The best governed nation is the least governed. The dictates of conscience refuse to surrender to any other dictatorship in religious matters. Artificial Christianity will never reform the world, even when sus- tained by law. A consent to limit the inalienable rights of the people means their ultimate forfeiture. A legal religion confesses there is no inherent virtue or merit to rec- ommend it to the public. A holier-than-thou Pharisee is never satisfied until he has enacted his re- ligious notions into law. It is just as impossible to make an unrighteous person a Christian by law as it is to square a circle. A wise man never prejudges a case, but reserves his judgment until all the facts are known. Talent and virtue left unfettered will produce a real man to whom the government need give no bounties. (These "Rockets" and those on other pages are credited to Charles S. Longacre, Associate Secretary of the International Religious Liberty Association.) 15 .2e4een Vidoitia getspealatt Am. � B4-disit emizi4e "Firmly relying ourselves on the truth of Christianity, and acknowledging with gratitude the solace of religion, we disclaim alike the right and the desire to impose our convictions on any of our subjects. We declare it to be our royal will and pleasure that none be in any wise favoured, none molested or disquieted, by reason of their religious faith observance, but that all shall alike enjoy the equal and impartial protection of the law, and we do strictly charge and enjoin all those who may be in authority under us, that they abstain from all interference with the religious belief or worship of any of our subjects, on pain of our highest dis- pleasure."—From the famous proclamation of 1858, by Her Majesty, Queen Victoria.