=1. Insults to Paul and to Christ.=--See Acts xxiii, 1-5.
"Scarcely had the apostle uttered the first sentence of his
defense, when, with disgraceful illegality, Ananias ordered the
officers of the court to smite him on the mouth. Stung by an
insult so flagrant, an outrage so undeserved, the naturally
choleric temperament of Paul flamed into that sudden sense of
anger which ought to be controlled, but which can hardly be
wanting in a truly noble character. No character can be perfect
which does not cherish in itself a deeply-seated, though
perfectly generous and forbearing, indignation against
intolerable wrong. Smarting from the blow, 'God shall smite
thee,' he exclaimed, 'thou whitewashed wall! What! Dost thou sit
there judging me according to the Law, and in violation of law
biddest me to be smitten?' The language has been censured as
unbecoming in its violence, and has been unfavorably compared
with the meekness of Christ before the tribunal of his enemies.
[See John xviii, 19-23.]
'Where,' asks St. Jerome, 'is that patience of the Savior, who--as a
lamb led to the slaughter opens not his mouth--so gently asks the
smiter, "If I have spoken evil, bear witness to the evil; but if well,
why smitest thou me?" We are not detracting from the apostle, but
declaring the glory of God, who, suffering in the flesh, reigns above
the wrong and frailty of the flesh.' Yet we need not remind the reader
that not once or twice only did Christ give the rein to righteous
anger, and blight hypocrisy and insolence with a flash of holy wrath.
The bystanders seemed to have been startled by the boldness of St.
Paul's rebuke, for they said to him, 'Dost thou revile the high priest
of God?' The apostle's anger had expended itself in that one outburst,
and he instantly apologized with exquisite urbanity and self-control.
'I did not know,' he said, 'brethren, that he is the high priest';
adding that, had he known this, he would not have addressed to him the
opprobrious name of 'whited wall,' because he reverenced and acted
upon the rule of scripture, 'Thou shalt not speak ill of a ruler of
thy people.'"--Farrar, _The Life and Work of St. Paul_, pp. 539-540.
=2. Peter's Teaching's Regarding Submission to Law.=--A special "duty
of Christians in those days was due respect in all things lawful, to
the civil government.... Occasions there are--and none knew this
better than an apostle who had himself set an example of splendid
disobedience to unwarranted commands [Acts iii, 19, 31; v, 28-32;
40-42]--when 'we must obey God rather than men.' But those occasions
are exceptional to the common rule of life. Normally, and as a whole,
human law is on the side of divine order, and, by whomsoever
administered, has a just claim to obedience and respect. It was a
lesson so deeply needed by the Christians of the day that it is taught
as emphatically by St. John [John xix, 11], and by St. Peter, as by
St. Paul himself. It was more than ever needed at a time when
dangerous revolts were gathering to a head in Judea; when the hearts
of Jews throughout the world were burning with a fierce flame of
hatred against the abominations of a tyrannous idolatry; when
Christians were being charged with 'turning the world upside-down'
[Acts xvii, 6]; when some poor Christian slave, led to martyrdom or
put to the torture, might easily relieve the tension of his soul by
bursting into apocalyptic denunciations of sudden doom against the
crimes of the mystic Babylon; when the heathen, in their impatient
contempt, might wilfully interpret a prophecy of the final
conflagration as though it were a revolutionary and incendiary threat;
and when Christians at Rome were, on this very account, already
suffering the agonies of the Neronian persecution. Submission,
therefore, was at this time a primary duty of all who wished to win
over the heathen, and to save the Church from being overwhelmed in
some outburst of indignation which would be justified even to
reasonable and tolerant pagans as a political necessity.... 'Submit,
therefore,' the apostle says, 'to every human ordinance, for the
Lord's sake, whether to the emperor as supreme [the name "king" was
freely used of the emperor in the provinces], or to governors, as
missioned by him for punishment of malefactors and praise to
well-doers; for this is the will of God, that by your well-doing ye
should gag the stolid ignorance of foolish persons; as free, yet not
using your freedom for a cloak of baseness, but as slaves of God.
'Honor all men' as a principle; and as your habitual practice, 'love
the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the King.'" [See I Peter ii,
13-17.]--Farrar, _Early Days of Christianity_, pp. 89-90.
=3. The Law of God, and the Law of Man.=--The teaching of the Church
of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints respecting the duty of its
members in obeying the laws of the land wherein they live, is more
comprehensive and definite than is that of many other Christian sects.
In January, 1899, an association of the free Evangelical churches of
England officially published "a common statement of faith in the form
of a new catechism." Touching the relation between church and state,
the following formal questions and prescribed answers occur:--
"36. Q.--What is a free church? A.--A church which acknowledges none
but Jesus Christ as Head, and, therefore, exercises its right to
interpret and administer His laws without restraint or control by the
state.
"37. Q.--What is the duty of the church to the state? A.--To observe
all the laws of the state unless contrary to the teachings of Christ,"
etc.
According to the report of the committee in charge of the work of
publication, the catechism "represents, directly or indirectly, the
beliefs of not less, and probably many more, than sixty millions of
avowed Christians in all parts of the world."
=4. Discontinuance of Plural Marriage.=--The official act terminating
the practice of plural marriage among the Latter-day Saints was the
adoption by the Church, in conference assembled, of a manifesto
proclaimed by the President of the Church. The language of the
document illustrates the law-abiding character of the people and the
Church, as is shown by the following clause:--"Inasmuch as laws have
been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have
been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I
[President Wilford Woodruff] hereby declare my intention to submit to
those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church
over which I preside to have them do likewise." In the course of a
sermon immediately following the proclaiming of the manifesto,
President Woodruff said regarding the action taken:--"I have done my
duty, and the nation of which we form a part must be responsible for
that which has been done in relation to that principle" (i.e., plural
marriage).
=5. A Striking Instance of Submission to Secular
Authority.=--"Governments are instituted of God, sometimes by His
direct interposition, sometimes by His permission. When the Jews had
been brought into subjection by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, the
Lord commanded through the prophet Jeremiah (xxvii, 4-8) that the
people render obedience to their conqueror, whom He called His
servant; for verily the Lord had used the pagan king to chastise the
recreant and unfaithful children of the covenant. The obedience so
enjoined included the payment of taxes and extended to complete
submission." See "Jesus the Christ," p. 564, Note 2.