NOTES.
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.