{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_12744/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_12744","id":"gutenberg_12744","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/12744","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Christianity"],"text":"IN HIS IMAGE\n\nBy\n\nWilliam Jennings Bryan\n\n\n\n\n\n_In His Image_. James Sprunt Lectures. 12mo, cloth....$1.75\n\n_Heart to Heart Appeals_. 12mo, cloth....$1.25\n\nThe cream of Mr. Bryan's public utterances on Prohibition,\nMoney, Imperialism, Trusts, Labor, Income Tax, Peace, Religion,\nPan-Americanism, etc.\n\n_The Prince of Peace_. 12mo, boards....60c.\n\n_Messages for the Times_. 12mo, boards, each....35c.\n\n_The First Commandment._ In simple, unaffected language, the author\nenlarges upon the present-day breaches of the First Commandment.\n\n_The Message from Bethlehem_. A plea for the world-wide adoption of the\nspirit of the Angels' song--\"Good-will to Men.\" The context and import\nof this great principle has never been more understandingly set forth.\n\n_The Royal Art_. A lucid exposition of Mr. Bryan's views concerning the\naims and ideals of righteous government.\n\n_The Making of a Man_. A faithful tracing of the main lines to be\nfollowed if the crown of manhood is to be attained.\n\n_The Fruits of the Tree_. \"Either for the reinvigoration of faith or\nfor the dissipation of doubt, this little volume is a document of\npower.\"--_Continent_.\n\n\n\n\n\nIn His Image\n\nBy WILLIAM JENNINGS RYAN\n\n\"_ So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he\nhim_.\"--GEN. 1: 27.\n\n1922\n\n\n\n_Dedicated to the memory of my beloved parents_\n\n_SILAS LILLARD RYAN_\n\n_and\n\nMARIAH ELIZABETH RYAN_\n\n_to whom I am indebted for a Christian environment in youth, during\nwhich they instilled into my mind and imprinted upon my heart the\nreligious principles which I have set forth and applied in the lectures\ncontained in this volume_\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE JAMES SPRUNT LECTURES\n\n\nIn nineteen hundred and eleven, Mr. James Sprunt of Wilmington, North\nCarolina, by a gift to the Trustees of Union Theological Seminary in\nVirginia, established a lectureship in the Seminary for the purpose of\nenabling the institution to secure from time to time the services of\ndistinguished men as special lecturers on subjects connected with\nvarious departments of Christian thought and Christian work. The\nlecturers are chosen by the Faculty and a committee of the Board of\nTrustees, and the lectures are published after their delivery\nin accordance with a contract between the lecturer and these\nrepresentatives of the institution. The lecturers up to the present have\nbeen:\n\n  REV. DAVID JAMES BURRELL, D.D., LL.D.\n  SIR WILLIAM M. RAMSAY, D.D., LL.D.\n  REV. PROF. JAMES STALKER, D.D.\n  REV. A.F. SCHAUFFLER, D.D.\n  REV. HARRIS E. KIRK, D.D.\n  PROF. C. ALPHONSO SMITH, PH.D., LL.D.\n  REV. A.H. MCKINNEY, D.D.\n  REV. G. CAMPBELL MORGAN, D.D.\n  REV. PROF. J. GRESHAM MACHEN, D.D.\n  HON. WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN.\n  The tenth series is presented in this volume.\n\n  W.W. MOORE,\n  _President_.\n\n\n\n\nPreface\n\n\nThe invitation extended me by President Moore on behalf of Union\nTheological Seminary provided the opportunity for the presentation of an\nargument I had had in mind for years--an argument to the heart and mind\nof the average man, especially to the young. This purpose originated in\ntwo desires, one of which is to repay the debt of gratitude that I owe\nto my revered parents for having brought into my life the Christian\nprinciples upon which their own lives were builded. My appreciation of\nthe importance of this early training has grown with the years. As those\nwho brought me into the world, cared for me so tenderly during my early\nyears and so conscientiously guarded and guided me during the formative\nperiod of my life, have passed to their reward, I know of no way\nin which this appreciation can be effectively expressed, except by\ntransmitting these principles to others.\n\nThe second desire is to aid those who are passing from youth to maturity\nand grappling with problems incident to this critical age. Having spent\neight years away from home, in academy, college and law school, I have\nreason to know the conflicts through which each individual has to pass,\nespecially those who have the experience incident to college life. I\nnever can be thankful enough for the fact that I became a member of the\nChurch before I left home and therefore had the benefit of the Church,\nthe Sunday School and Christian friends during these trying days.\n\nIn these lectures I have had in mind two thoughts, first, the confirming\nof the faith of men and women, especially the young, in a Creator,\nall-powerful, all-wise, and all-loving, in a Bible, as the very Word\nof a Living God and in Christ as Son of God and Saviour of the world;\nsecond, the applying of the principles of our religion to every problem\nin life. My purpose is to prove, not only the fact of God, but the need\nof God, the fact of the Bible and the need of the Bible, and the fact of\nChrist and the need of a Saviour.\n\nTherefore, I have chosen \"In His Image\" as the title of this series of\nlectures, because, in my judgment, all depends upon our conception of\nour place in God's plan. The Bible tells us that God made us in His\nimage and placed us here to carry out a divine decree. He gave us the\nScriptures as an authoritative guide and He gave us His Son to reveal\nthe Father, to redeem man from sin and to furnish in His life and\nteachings an inspiring example by the following of which, man may grow\nin grace and in the knowledge of God.\n\n\"Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be\nacceptable in thy sight, O Lord, my strength, and my redeemer.\"\n\nW.J.B.\n\n_Miami, Fla._\n\n\n\n\nContents\n\n\nI. IN THE BEGINNING--GOD\n\nII. THE BIBLE\n\nIII. WHAT THINK YE OF CHRIST?\n\nIV. THE ORIGIN OF MAN\n\nV. THE LARGER LIFE\n\nVI. THE VALUE OF THE SOUL\n\nVII. THREE PRICELESS GIFTS\n\nVIII. HIS GOVERNMENT AND PEACE\n\nIX. THE SPOKEN WORD\n\n\n\n\nI\n\n\"IN THE BEGINNING--GOD\"\n\n\nReligion is the relation between man and his Maker--the most important\nrelationship into which man enters. Most of the relationships of life\nare voluntary; we enter into them or not as we please. Such, for\nillustration, are those between business partners, between stockholders\nin a corporation, between friends and between husband and wife. Some\nrelationships, on the other hand, are involuntary; we enter into them\nbecause we must. Such, for illustration, are those between man and his\ngovernment, between man and society, and between man and his Maker.\n\nTolstoy declares that morality is but the outward manifestation of\nreligion. If this be true, as I believe it is, then religion is the most\npractical thing in life and the thought of God the greatest thought that\ncan enter the human mind or heart. Tolstoy also delivers a severe rebuke\nto what he calls the \"Cultured crowd\"--those who think that religion,\nwhile good enough for the ignorant (to hold in check and restrain\nthem), is not needed when one reaches a certain stage of intellectual\ndevelopment. His reply is that religion is not superstition and does not\nrest upon a vague fear of the unseen forces of nature, but does rest\nupon \"man's consciousness of his finiteness amid an infinite universe\nand of his sinfulness.\" This consciousness, Tolstoy adds, man can never\noutgrow.\n\nEvidence of the existence of an Infinite Being is to be found in\nthe Bible, in the facts of human consciousness, and in the physical\nuniverse. Dr. Charles Hodge sets forth as follows the principal\narguments used to maintain the existence of a God:\n\n    I. The _a priori_ argument which seeks to demonstrate the being of a\n    God from certain first principles involved in the essential laws of\n    human intelligence.\n\n    II. The cosmological argument, or that one which proceeds after the\n    _posteriori_ fashion, from the present existence of the world as\n    an effect, to the necessary existence of some ultimate and eternal\n    first cause.\n\n    III. The teleological argument, or that argument which, from the\n    evidence of design in the creation, seeks to establish the fact that\n    the great self-existent first cause of all things is an intelligent\n    and voluntary personal spirit.\n\n    IV. The moral argument, or that argument which, from a consideration\n    of the phenomena of conscience in the human heart, seeks to\n    establish the fact that the self-existent Creator is also the\n    righteous moral Governor of the world. This argument includes the\n    consideration of the universal feeling of dependence common to\n    all men, which together with conscience constitutes the religious\n    sentiment.\n\n    V. The historical argument, which involves: (1) The evident\n    providential presence of God in the history of the human race. (2)\n    The evidence afforded by history that the human race is not eternal,\n    and therefore not an infinite succession of individuals, but\n    created. (3) The universal consent of all men to the fact of His\n    existence.\n\n    VI. The Scriptural argument, which includes: (1) The miracles and\n    prophecies recorded in Scripture, and confirmed by testimony,\n    proving the existence of a God. (2) The Bible itself, self-evidently\n    a work of superhuman wisdom. (3) Revelation, developing and\n    enlightening conscience, and relieving many of the difficulties\n    under which natural theism labours, and thus confirming every other\n    line of evidence.\n\nA reasonable person searches for a reason and all reasons point to a\nGod, all-wise, all-powerful, and all-loving. On no other theory can we\naccount for what we see about us. It is impossible to conceive of the\nuniverse, illimitable in extent and seemingly measureless in time, as\nbeing the result of chance. The reign of law, universal and eternal,\ncompels belief in a Law Giver.\n\nWe need not give much time to the agnostic. If he is sincere he does not\n_know_ and therefore cannot affirm, deny or advise. When I was a young\nman I wrote to Colonel Ingersoll, the leading infidel of his day, and\nasked his views on God and immortality. His secretary sent me a speech\nwhich quoted Colonel Ingersoll as follows: \"I do not say that there is\nno God: I simply say I do not know. I do not say that there is no life\nbeyond the grave: I simply say I do not know!\" What pleasure could any\nman find in taking from a human, heart a living faith and putting in the\nplace of it the cold and cheerless doctrine \"I do not know\"? Many who\ncall themselves agnostics are really atheists; it is easier to profess\nignorance than to defend atheism.\n\nWe give the atheist too much latitude; we allow him to ask all the\nquestions and we try to answer them. I know of no reason why the\nChristian should take upon himself the difficult task of answering all\nquestions and give to the atheist the easy task of asking them. Any one\ncan ask questions, but not every question can be answered. If I am to\ndiscuss creation with an atheist it will be on condition that we ask\nquestions about. He may ask the first one if he wishes, but he shall not\nask a second one until he answers my first.\n\nWhat is the first question an atheist asks a Christian? There is but one\n_first_ question: Where do you begin? I answer: I begin where the Bible\nbegins. \"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.\" I\nbegin with a Creative Cause that is sufficient for anything that can\ncome thereafter.\n\nHaving answered the atheist's first question, it is now my turn, and I\nask my first question of the atheist: \"Where do you begin?\" And then his\ntrouble begins. Did you ever hear an atheist explain creation? He cannot\nbegin with God because he denies the existence of a God. But he must\nbegin _somewhere_; it is just as necessary for the atheist as for the\nChristian to have a beginning point for his philosophy.\n\nWhere does the atheist begin? He usually starts with the nebular\nhypothesis. And where does that begin? \"In the beginning\"? No. It begins\nby _assuming_ that two things existed, which the theory does not try to\nexplain. It assumes that matter and force existed, but it does not tell\nus how matter and force came into existence, where they came from, or\nwhy they came. The theory begins: \"Let us suppose that matter and force\nare here,\" and then, according to the theory, force working on matter,\ncreated a world. I have just as much right as the atheist to begin with\nan assumption, and I would rather begin with God and reason down, than\nbegin with a piece of dirt and reason up. The difference between the\nChristian theory and the materialistic theory is that the Christian\nbegins with God, while the materialist begins with dull, inanimate\nmatter. _I know of no theory suggested as a substitute for the Bible\ntheory that is as rational and as easy to believe._\n\nIf the atheist asks me if I can understand God, I answer that it is\nnot necessary that my finite mind shall _comprehend_ the Infinite Mind\nbefore I admit that there _is_ an infinite mind, any more than it is\nnecessary that I shall understand the sun before I can admit that there\nis a sun. We must deal with the facts about us whether we can understand\nthem or not.\n\nIf the atheist tells me that I have no right to believe in God until I\ncan understand Him, I will take his own logic and drive him to suicide;\nfor, by that logic, what right has an atheist to live unless he can\nunderstand the mystery of his own life? Does the atheist understand the\nmystery of the life he lives? No; bring me the most learned atheist and\nwhen he has gathered all the information that this earth can give, I\nwill have a little child lead him out and show him the grass upon the\nground, the leaves upon the trees, the birds that fly in the air, and\nthe fishes in the deep, and the little child will mock him and tell him,\nand tell him truly, that he, the little child, knows just as much about\nthe mystery of life as does the most learned atheist. We have our\nthoughts, our hopes, our fears, and yet we know that in a moment a\nchange may come over any one of us that will convert a living, breathing\nhuman being into a mass of lifeless clay. What is it, that, having, we\nlive, and, having not, we are as the clod? We know as little of the\nmystery of life to-day as they knew in the dawn of creation and yet\nbehold the civilization that man has wrought.\n\nAnd love that makes life worth living is also a mystery. Have you ever\nread a scientific definition of love? You never will. Why? Because a man\ndoes not know what love is until he gets into it, and then he is not\nscientific until he gets out again. And even if we could understand the\nmysterious tie that brings two hearts together from out the multitude,\nand on a united life builds the home, earth's only paradise, we still\nwould be unable to understand that larger mystery that manifests itself\nwhen a human heart reaches out and links itself to every other heart.\n\nAnd patriotism, also, is a mystery--intangible, invisible, and yet\neternal. Because there has been in the past such a thing as patriotism,\nmillions have given their lives for their country. Patriotism could\ncommand millions of lives to-day. Our country is not lacking in\npatriotism; we have as much as can be found anywhere else, and it is\nof as high a quality. There ought to be more patriotism here than\nelsewhere; as citizenship in the United States carries more benefits\nwith it than citizenship in any other land, the American citizen should\nbe willing to sacrifice more than any other citizen to make sure that\nthe blessings of our government shall descend unimpaired to children\nand to children's children. The atheist knows as little about these\nmysteries as the Christian does and yet he lives, he loves and he is\npatriotic.\n\nBut our case is even stronger: Everything with which man deals is full\nof mystery. The very food we eat is mysterious; sometimes man-made food\nbecomes so mysterious that we are compelled to enact pure food laws\nin order that we may know what we are eating. And God-made food is as\nmysterious as man-made food, though we cannot compel Jehovah to make\nknown the formula.\n\nWe encourage children to raise vegetables; a little child can learn\n_how_ to raise vegetables, but no grown person understands the mystery\nthat is wrapped up in every vegetable that grows. Let me illustrate: I\nam fond of radishes; my good wife knows it and keeps me supplied with\nthem when she can. I eat radishes in the morning; I eat radishes at\nnoon; I eat radishes at night; I eat radishes between meals; I like\nradishes. I plant radish seed--put the little seed into the ground, and\ngo out in a few days and find a full grown radish. The top is green,\nthe body of the root is white and almost transparent, and around it I\nsometimes find a delicate pink or red. Whose hand caught the hues of a\nsummer sunset and wrapped them around the radish's root down there in\nthe darkness in the ground? I cannot understand a radish; can you? If\none refused to eat anything until he could understand the mystery of its\ngrowth, he would die of starvation; but mystery does not bother us in\nthe dining-room,--it is only in the church that mystery seems to give us\ntrouble.\n\nIn travelling around the world I found that the egg is a universal form\nof food. When we reached Asia the cooking was so different from ours\nthat the boiled egg was sometimes the only home-like thing we could find\non the table. I became so attached to the egg, that, when I returned to\nthe United States, for weeks I felt like taking my hat off to every hen\nI met. What is more mysterious than an egg? Take a fresh egg; it is not\nonly good food, but an important article of merchandise. But loan a\nfresh egg to a hen, after the hen has developed a well-settled tendency\nto sit, and let her keep the egg under her for a week, and, as any\nhousewife will tell you, it loses a large part of its market value. But\nbe patient with the hen; let her have it for two weeks more and she will\ngive you back a chicken that you could not find in the egg. No one can\nunderstand the egg, but we all like eggs.\n\nWater is essential to human life, and has been from the beginning, but\nit is only a short time ago, relatively speaking, that we learned that\nwater is composed of gas. Two gases got mixed together and could not get\napart and we call the mixture water, but it was much more important that\nman should have had water to drink all these years than it was to find\nout that water is composed of gas. And there is one thing about water\nthat we do not yet understand, viz., why it differs from other things\nin this, that other things continue to contract indefinitely under the\ninfluence of cold, while water contracts until it reaches a certain\ntemperature and then, the rule being reversed, expands under the\ninfluence of more intense cold? It does not make much difference whether\nwe ever learn _why_ this is true, but it is important to the world to\nknow that it is so.\n\nSometimes I go into a community and find a young man who has come in\nfrom the country and obtained a smattering of knowledge; then his head\nswells and he begins to swagger around and say that an intelligent man\nlike himself cannot afford to have anything to do with anything that he\ncannot understand. Poor boy, he will be surprised to find out how few\nthings he will be able to deal with if he adopts that rule. I feel like\nsuggesting to him that the next time he goes home to show himself off\nto his parents on the farm he address himself to the first mystery\nthat ever came under his observation, and has not yet been solved,\nnotwithstanding the wonderful progress made by our agricultural\ncolleges. Let him find out, if he can, why it is that a black cow can\neat green grass and then give white milk with yellow butter in it? Will\nthe mystery disturb him? No. He will enjoy the milk and the butter\nwithout worrying about the mystery in them.\n\nAnd so we might take any vegetable or fruit. The blush upon the peach is\nin striking contrast to the serried walls of the seed within; who will\nexplain the mystery of the apple, the queen of the orchard, or the nut\nwith its meat, its shell, and its outer covering? Who taught the tomato\nvine to fling its flaming many-mansioned fruit before the gaze of the\npasser-by, while the potato modestly conceals its priceless gifts within\nthe bosom of the earth?\n\nI learned years ago that it is the mystery in the miracle that makes it\na stumbling block in the way of many. If you will analyze the miracle\nyou will find just two questions in it: _Can_ God perform a miracle?\nAnd, would He _want_ to? The first question is easily answered. A God\nwho can make a world can do anything He wants to with it. We cannot deny\nthat God _can_ perform a miracle, without denying that God is God. But,\nwould God _want_ to perform a miracle? That is the question that has\ngiven the trouble, but it has only troubled those, mark you, who are\nunwilling to admit that the infinite mind of God may have reasons that\nthe finite mind of man does not comprehend. If, for any reason, God\ndesires to do so, can He not, with His infinite strength, temporarily\nsuspend the operation of any of His laws, as man with his feeble arm\novercomes the law of gravitation when he lifts a stone?\n\nIf among my readers any one has been presumptuous enough to attempt to\nconfine the power and purpose of God by man's puny understanding, let\nme persuade him to abandon this absurd position by the use of an\nillustration which I once found in a watermelon. I was passing through\nColumbus, Ohio, some years ago and stopped to eat in the restaurant\nin the depot. My attention was called to a slice of watermelon, and I\nordered it and ate it. I was so pleased with the melon that I asked the\nwaiter to dry some of the seeds that I might take them home and plant\nthem in my garden. That night a thought came into my mind--I would use\nthat watermelon as an illustration. So, the next morning when I reached\nChicago, I had enough seeds weighed to learn that it would take about\nfive thousand watermelon seeds to weigh a pound, and I estimated that\nthe watermelon weighed about forty pounds. Then I applied mathematics to\nthe watermelon. A few weeks before some one, I knew not who, had planted\na little watermelon seed in the ground. Under the influence of sunshine\nand shower that little seed had taken off its coat and gone to work; it\nhad gathered from somewhere two hundred thousand times its own weight,\nand forced that enormous weight through a tiny stem and built a\nwatermelon. On the outside it had put a covering of green, within that\na rind of white and within the white a core of red, and then it had\nscattered through the red core little seeds, each one capable of doing\nthe same work over again. What architect drew the plan? Where did that\nlittle watermelon seed get its tremendous strength? Where did it find\nits flavouring extract and its colouring matter? How did it build a\nwatermelon? Until you can explain a watermelon, do not be too sure that\nyou can set limits to the power of the Almighty, or tell just what He\nwould do, or how He would do it. The most learned man in the world\ncannot _explain_ a watermelon, but the most ignorant man can _eat_ a\nwatermelon, and enjoy it. God has given us the things that we need, and\nHe has given us the knowledge necessary to use those things: the truth\nthat He has revealed to us is infinitely more important for our welfare\nthan it would be to understand the mysteries that He has seen fit\nto conceal from us. So it is with religion. If you ask me whether I\nunderstand everything in the Bible, I frankly answer, No. I understand\nsome things to-day that I did not understand ten years ago and, if I\nlive ten years longer, I trust that some things will be clear that are\nnow obscure. But there is something more important than understanding\neverything in the Bible; it is this: If we will embody in our lives that\nwhich we _do_ understand we will be kept so busy doing good that we will\nnot have time to worry about the things that we do _not_ understand.\n\nIn \"The Grave Digger,\" written by Fred Emerson Brooks, there is one\nstanza which is in point here:\n\n  \"If chance could fashion but a little flower,\n    With perfume for each tiny thief,\n  And furnish it with sunshine and with shower,\n    Then chance would be creator, with the power\n  To build a world for unbelief.\"\n\nBut chance cannot fashion even a little flower; chance cannot create a\nsingle thing that grows. Every living thing bears testimony to a living\nGod and, if there be a God, then every human life is a part of that\nGod's plan. And, if this be true, then the highest duty of man, as\nit should be his greatest pleasure, is to try to find out God's will\nconcerning himself and to do it. When Job was asked, \"Canst thou by\nsearching find out God?\" a negative answer was implied, but we can see\nmanifestations of God's power everywhere; in the suns and planets that,\nrevolving, whirl through space, held in position by forces centripetal\nand centrifugal; we see it in the mountains rent asunder and upturned\nby a force not only superhuman but beyond the power of man to conceive.\nCaptain Crawford, the poet-scout, in describing the mountains of the\nWest has used a phrase which often comes into my mind: \"Where the hand\nof God is seen.\"\n\nWe see manifestation of God's power in the ebb and flow of the tides; in\nthe mighty \"shoreless rivers of the ocean\"; in the suspended water in\nthe clouds--billions of tons, seemingly defying the law of gravitation\nwhile they await the command that sends them down in showers of\nblessings. We behold it in the lightning's flash and the thunder's roar,\nand in the invisible germ of life that contains within itself the power\nto gather its nourishment from the earth and air, fulfill its mission\nand propagate its kind.\n\nWe see all about us, also, conclusive proofs of the infinite\nintelligence and fathomless love of the Heavenly Father. On lofty\nmountain summits He builds His mighty reservoirs and piles high the\nwinter snows, which, melting, furnish the water for singing brooks, for\nthe hidden veins, and for the springs that pour out their refreshing\nflood through the smitten rocks. At His touch the same element that\nfurnishes ice to cool the fevered brow furnishes also the steam to\nmove man's commerce on sea and land. He imprisons in roaring cataracts\nexhaustless energy for the service of man: He stores away in the bowels\nof the earth beds of coal and rivers of oil; He studs the canyon's\nfrowning walls with precious metals and priceless gems; He extends His\nmagic wand, and the soil becomes rich with fertility; the early and\nthe latter rains supply the needed moisture, and the sun, with its\nmarvellous alchemy, transmutes base clay into golden grain. He gives us\nin infinite variety the fruits of the orchard, the vegetables of the\ngarden and the, berries of the woods. He gives us the sturdy oak, the\nfruitful nut-tree and the graceful palm.\n\nIn compassion He makes the horse to bear our burdens and the cow to\nsupply the dairy; and He gives us the faithful hen. He makes the fishes\nto scour the sea for food and then yield themselves up to the table; He\nsends the bee forth to gather sweets for man and birds to sing his cares\naway. He paints the skies with the gray of the morning and the glow of\nthe sunset; He sets His radiant bow in the clouds and copies its colours\nin myriad flowers. He gives to the babe a mother's love, to the child a\nfather's care, to parents the joy of children, to brothers and sisters\nthe sweet association of the fireside, and He gives to all the friend.\nWell may the Psalmist exclaim, \"The heavens declare the glory of God;\nand the firmament showeth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech,\nand night unto night sheweth knowledge.\" Surely everything that hath\nbreath should praise the Lord.\n\nIt would seem that a knowledge of nature would be sufficient to convince\nany unprejudiced mind that there is a designer back of the design, a\nCreator back of the creation, but, for a reason which I shall treat\nmore fully in a future lecture, some of the scientists have become\nmaterialistic. The doctrine of evolution has closed their hearts to\nthe plainest of spiritual truths and opened their minds to the wildest\nguesses made in the name of science. If they find a piece of pottery\nin a mound, supposed to be ancient, they will venture to estimate the\ndegree of civilization of the designer from the rude scratches on its\nsurface, and yet they cannot discern the evidences of design which\nthe Creator has written upon every piece of His handiwork. They can\nunderstand how an invisible force, like gravitation, can draw all matter\ndown to the earth but they cannot comprehend an invisible God who draws\nall spirits upward to His throne.\n\nThe Bible's proof of God becomes increasingly necessary to meet the\nagnosticism and atheism that are the outgrowth of modern mind-worship. I\nshall speak of the Bible in my second lecture; I refer to it here merely\nfor the purpose of pointing out the harmony between the spoken word and\nthe evidence furnished by God's handiwork throughout the universe. The\nwisdom of the Bible writers is more than human; the prophecies proclaim\na Supreme Ruler who, though inhabiting all space, deigns to speak\nthrough the hearts and minds and tongues of His children.\n\nThe Christ of whom the Bible tells furnishes the highest evidence of\nthe power, the wisdom, and the love of Jehovah. He is a living Christ,\npresent to-day in the increasing influence that He exerts over the hearts\nof men and over the history of nations.\n\nWe not only have God in the Bible and God in nature but we have God in\nlife and accessible to all. It is not necessary to spend time in trying\nto comprehend God--a task too great for the finite mind; we can \"taste\nand see that the Lord is good.\" We can test His grace and prove His\npresence. The negative arguments of the atheist and the indecision of\nthe agnostic will not disturb the faith of one who daily communes with\nthe Heavenly Father, and, by obedience, lays hold upon His promise.\n\nBelief in God is almost universal and the effect of this belief is so\nvast that one is appalled at the thought of what social conditions\nwould be if reverence for God were erased from every heart. A sense of\nresponsibility to God for every thought and word and deed is the most\npotent influence that acts upon the life--for one man kept in the\nstraight and narrow way by fear of prison walls a multitude are\nrestrained by those invisible walls that conscience rears about us,\nwalls that are stronger than the walls of stone.\n\nAt first the fear of God--fear that sin will bring punishment--is\nneeded; \"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.\" But as one\nlearns to appreciate the goodness of God and the plenitude of His mercy,\nlove takes the place of fear and obedience becomes a pleasure; \"His\ndelight is in the law of the Lord; and in his law doth he meditate day\nand night.\"\n\nThe paramount need of the world to-day, as it was nineteen hundred years\nago, is a whole-hearted, whole-souled, whole-minded faith in the Living\nGod. A hesitating admission that there is a God is not sufficient; Man\nmust love with _all_ his heart, and with _all_ his soul, and with _all_\nhis mind, and with _all_ his strength,--and to love he must believe.\nBelief in God must be a conviction that controls every nerve and fibre\nof his being and dominates every impulse and energy of his life.\n\nBelief in God is necessary to prayer. It is not sufficient to believe\nthat there is an Intelligence permeating the universe; nothing less than\na _personal_ God--a God interested in each one of His children and ready\nto give at any moment the aid that is needed--nothing less than this\ncan lead one to communion with the Heavenly Father through prayer.\nEvolutionists have attempted to retain the form of prayer while denying\nthat God answers prayer. They argue that prayer has a reflex action\nupon the petitioner and reconciles him to his lot. This argument might\njustify one in thinking prayer good enough for _others_ who believe,\nbut it is impossible for one to be fervent in prayer himself if he\nis convinced that his pleas do not reach a prayer-hearing and a\nprayer-answering God. Prayer becomes a mockery when faith is gone, just\nas Christianity becomes a mere form when prayer is gone. If the words of\nthe Bible have any meaning at all one must believe that God \"_is_, and\nthat he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.\"\n\nBelief in God is necessary to that confidence in His providence which is\nthe source of the Christian's calmness in hours of trial. We soon reach\nthe limitations of our strength and would despair but for our confidence\nin the infinite wisdom of God. David expresses this when he says, \"Unto\nthe upright there ariseth light in the darkness. He ... shall not be\nafraid of evil tidings: his heart is fixed, trusting in the Lord\" (Ps.\n112).\n\nIn my youth, my father often had me read to him Bryant's \"Ode to a\nWaterfowl\" and it became my favourite poem. I know of no more comforting\nwords outside of Holy Writ than those in the last stanza:\n\n  \"He who from zone to zone,\n    Guides through the boundless sky thy certain flight;\n  In the long way that I must tread alone,\n    Will lead my steps aright.\"\n\nBelief in God gives courage. The Christian believes that every word\nspoken in behalf of truth will have its influence and that every deed\ndone for the right will weigh in the final account. What matters it to\nthe believer whether his eyes behold the victory and his voice mingles\nin the shouts of triumph, or whether he dies in the midst of the\nconflict!\n\n  \"Yea, tho' thou lie upon the dust,\n    When they who helped thee flee in fear,\n  Die full of hope and manly trust,\n    Like those who fell in battle here.\n\n  Another hand thy sword shall wield,\n    Another hand the standard wave,\n  Till from the trumpet's mouth is pealed,\n    The blast of triumph o'er thy grave.\"\n\nOnly those who believe attempt the seemingly impossible, and, by\nattempting, prove that one, with God, can chase a thousand and two put\nten thousand to flight. I can imagine that the early Christians, who\nwere carried into the Coliseum to make a spectacle for spectators more\ncruel than the beasts, were entreated by their doubting companions not\nto endanger their lives. But, kneeling in the center of the arena, they\nprayed and sang until they were devoured. How helpless they seemed, and\nmeasured by every human rule, how hopeless was their cause! And yet\nwithin a few decades the power which they invoked proved mightier\nthan the legions of the emperor and the faith in which they died was\ntriumphant o'er all the land. It is said that those who went to mock at\ntheir sufferings returned asking themselves: \"What is it that can enter\ninto the heart of man and make him die as these die?\" They were greater\nconquerors in their death than they could have been had they purchased\nlife by a surrender of their faith.\n\nWhat would have been the fate of the Church if the early Christians had\nhad as little faith as many of our Christians of to-day? And, if the\nChristians of to-day had the faith of the martyrs, how long would it\nbe before the prophecy were fulfilled--\"every knee shall bow and every\ntongue confess\"?\n\nBelief in God is the basis of every moral code. Morality cannot be put\non as a garment and taken off at will. It is a power within; it works\nout from the heart as a spring pours forth its flood. It is not safe for\na weak Christian to associate intimately with the world because he may\nbe influenced by others instead of influencing others. But one need\nnot fear when his morality derives its energy from connection with the\nHeavenly Father. Just as the water from a hose, because it comes from a\nreservoir above, will cleanse a muddy pool without danger of a single\ndrop of pollution entering the hose, so the Christian can go into\ninfected areas and among those diseased by sin without fear of\ncontamination so long as he is prompted by a sincere desire to serve and\nis filled with a heaven-born longing for souls.\n\nJoseph gives us a splendid illustration of strength inspired by faith.\nReason fails when one is punished for righteousness' sake; only a belief\nin God can sustain one in such an hour of trial and make him enter a\ndungeon rather than surrender his integrity.\n\nWe need this belief in God in our dealings with nations as well as in\nthe control of our own conduct; it is necessary to the establishment of\njustice. Without that belief one cannot understand how sin brings its\nown punishment. Among the beasts strength is accompanied by no sense of\nresponsibility; only man understands--and then only when he believes in\nGod--that he must restrain his power and respect the rights of others.\nOnly man understands--and then only when he believes in God--that the\nlaws of the Almighty protect the innocent by bringing upon the sinner\nthe effects of his own sin. No nation, however great, and no group of\nnations, however strong, can do wrong with impunity. The very doing of\nwrong works the ruin of those who are guilty, no matter how powerless\ntheir victims may be to protect or avenge themselves.\n\nMost of the crimes committed by nations are due to an attempt on the\npart of those in authority to establish for nations a system of morals\ntotally different from that which is binding upon the individual.\nNothing but a real belief in God and confidence in the immutability of\nHis decrees can stay the arm of strength in individual or nation.\n\nBelief in God is the basis of brotherhood; we are brothers because we\nare children of one God. We trace through the common parent of all\nthe tie that unites the offspring in one great family. The spirit of\nbrotherhood is impossible without faith in God, the Father, and peace,\nat home and abroad, is impossible without the spirit of brotherhood.\n\nOne must believe in God in order to be interested in the carrying out of\nthe Creator's plans. In the prayer which Christ suggested as a form for\nHis followers, interest in the coming of God's kingdom stands first.\nThe petition begins with adoration of the Supreme Being and in the next\nsentence the heart pours out its desire in an appeal for the coming of\nthat day when the will of God shall be done in earth as it is done in\nheaven. It is proof of the supreme importance of this attitude that this\npetition comes before the request for daily bread; it comes even before\nthe appeal for forgiveness. How quickly the prayer would be answered if\nall who utter it would rise from their knees and make the hastening of\nGod's kingdom the uppermost thought in their minds throughout the day!\n\nFinally, belief in God is necessary to belief in immortality. If there\nis no God there is no hereafter. When, therefore, one drives God out of\nthe universe he closes the door of hope upon himself.\n\nA belief in immortality not only consoles the individual, but it exerts\na powerful influence in promoting justice between individuals. If one\nactually thinks that man dies as the brute dies, he will yield more\neasily to the temptation to do injustice to his neighbour when the\ncircumstances are such as to promise security from detection. But if\none really expects to meet again, and live eternally with those whom he\nknows to-day, he is restrained from evil deeds by the fear of endless\nremorse even when not actuated by higher motives. We do not know what\nrewards are in store for us or what punishments may be reserved, but\nif there were no other it would be no light punishment for one who\ndeliberately wrongs another to have to live forever in the company of\nthe person wronged and have his littleness and selfishness laid bare.\n\nThe Creator has not left us in doubt on the subject of immortality. He\nhas given to every created thing a tongue that proclaims a life beyond\nthe grave.\n\nIf the Father deigns to touch with divine power the cold and pulseless\nheart of the buried acorn and to make it burst forth from its prison\nwalls, will He leave neglected in the earth the soul of man, made in\nthe image of his Creator? If He stoops to give to the rose-bush, whose\nwithered blossoms float upon the autumn breeze, the sweet assurance of\nanother springtime, will He refuse the words of hope to the sons of men\nwhen the frosts of winter come? If matter, mute and inanimate, though\nchanged by the forces of nature into a multitude of forms, can never\ndie, will the imperial spirit of man suffer annihilation when it has\npaid a brief visit like a royal guest to this tenement of clay? No, He\nwho, notwithstanding His apparent prodigality, created nothing without\na purpose, and wasted not a single atom in all His creation, has made\nprovision for a future life in which man's universal longing for\nimmortality will find its realization. I am as sure that we shall live\nagain as I am sure that we live to-day.\n\nIn Cairo, I secured a few grains of wheat that had slumbered for more\nthan thirty centuries in an Egyptian tomb. As I looked at them this\nthought came into my mind: If one of those grains had been planted\non the banks of the Nile the year after it grew, and all its lineal\ndescendants had been planted and replanted from that time until now,\nits progeny would to-day be sufficiently numerous to feed the teeming\nmillions of the world. An unbroken chain of life connects the earliest\ngrains of wheat with the grains that we sow and reap. There is in the\ngrain of wheat an invisible something which has power to discard the\nbody that we see, and from earth and air fashion a new body so much\nlike the old one that we cannot tell the one from the other. If this\ninvisible germ of life in the grain of wheat can thus pass unimpaired\nthrough three thousand resurrections, I shall not doubt that my soul has\npower to clothe itself with a body suited to its new existence, when\nthis earthly frame has crumbled into dust.\n\n\n\n\nII\n\nTHE BIBLE\n\n\nJesus Christ not only endorsed the Old Testament as authoritative, but\nbore witness to its eternal truth. \"Think not,\" He said, \"that I am come\nto destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to\nfulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot\nor one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled\"\n(Matt. 5: 17, 18).\n\nWhen one's belief in God becomes the controlling passion of his life;\nwhen he loves God with all his heart, with all his soul, with all his\nmind and with all his strength he is anxious to learn God's will and\nready to accept the Bible as the Word of God. All that he asks is\nsufficient evidence of its inspiration.\n\nAfter so many hundreds of millions have adopted the Bible as their guide\nfor so many centuries, the burden of proof would seem on those who\nreject it.\n\nThe Bible is either the word of God or the work of man. Those who regard\nit as a man-made book should be challenged to put their theory to the\ntest. If man made the Bible, he is, unless he has degenerated, able to\nmake as good a book to-day.\n\nJudged by human standards, man is far better prepared to write a Bible\nnow than he was when our Bible was written. The characters whose words\nand deeds are recorded in the Bible were members of a single race; they\nlived among the hills of Palestine in a territory scarcely larger than\none of our counties. They did not have printing presses and they lacked\nthe learning of the schools; they had no great libraries to consult, no\nsteamships to carry them around the world and make them acquainted with\nthe various centers of ancient civilization; they had no telegraph wires\nto bring them the news from the ends of the earth and no newspapers to\nspread before them each morning the doings of the day before. Science\nhad not unlocked Nature's door and revealed the secrets of rocks below\nand stars above. From what a scantily supplied storehouse of knowledge\nthey had to draw, compared with the unlimited wealth of information at\nman's command to-day! And yet these Bible characters grappled with\nevery problem that confronts mankind, from the creation of the world to\neternal life beyond the tomb. They gave us a diagram of man's existence\nfrom the cradle to the grave and set up warning signs at every dangerous\npoint.\n\nThe Bible gives us the story of the birth, the words, the works, the\ncrucifixion, the resurrection, and the ascension of Him whose coming\nwas foretold by prophecy, whose arrival was announced by angel voices,\nsinging Peace and Good-will--the story of Him who gave to the world a\ncode of morality superior to anything that the world had known before or\nhas known since.\n\nLet the atheists and the materialists produce a better Bible than ours,\nif they can. Let them collect the best of their school to be found among\nthe graduates of universities--as many as they please and from every\nland. Let the members of this selected group travel where they will,\nconsult such libraries as they like, and employ every modern means of\nswift communication. Let them glean in the fields of geology, botany,\nastronomy, biology, and zoology, and then roam at will wherever science\nhas opened a way; let them take advantage of all the progress in art and\nin literature, in oratory and in history--let them use to the full every\ninstrumentality that is employed in modern civilization; and when they\nhave exhausted every source, let them embody the results of their best\nintelligence in a book and offer it to the world as a substitute for\nthis Bible of ours. Have they the confidence that the prophets of Baal\nhad in their god? Will they try? If not, what excuse will they give? Has\nman so fallen from his high estate, that we cannot rightfully expect as\nmuch of him now as nineteen centuries ago? Or does the Bible come to us\nfrom a source that is higher than man?\n\nBut the case is even stronger. The opponents of the Bible cannot take\nrefuge in the plea that man is retrograding. They loudly proclaim that\nman has grown and that he is growing still. They boast of a world-wide\nadvance and their claim is founded upon fact. In all matters except\nin the \"science of how to live,\" man has made wonderful progress. The\nmastery of the mind over the forces of nature seems almost complete, so\nfar do we surpass the ancients in harnessing the water, the wind and the\nlightning.\n\nFor ages, the rivers plunged down the mountainsides and exhausted their\nenergies without any appreciable contribution to man's service; now they\nare estimated as so many units of horse-power, and we find that their\nfretting and foaming was merely a language which they employed to tell\nus of their strength and of their willingness to work for us. And, while\nfalling water is becoming each a day a larger factor in burden-bearing,\nwater, rising in the form of steam, is revolutionizing the\ntransportation methods of the world.\n\nThe wind, that first whispered its secret of strength to the flapping\nsail, is now turning the wheel at the well, and our flying machines have\ntaken possession of the air.\n\nLightning, the red demon that, from the dawn of Creation, has been\nrushing down its zigzag path through the clouds, as if intent only\nupon spreading death, metamorphosed into an errand-boy, brings us\nillumination from the sun and carries our messages around the globe.\n\nInventive genius has multiplied the power of a human arm and supplied\nthe masses with comforts of which the rich did not dare to dream a few\ncenturies ago. Science is ferreting out the hidden causes of disease and\nteaching us how to prolong life. In every line, except in the line of\ncharacter-building, the world seems to have been made over, but these\nmarvellous changes only emphasize the fact that man, too, must be born\nagain, while they show how impotent are material things to touch the\nsoul of man and transform him into a spiritual being. Wherever the moral\nstandard is being lifted up--wherever life is becoming larger in the\nvision that directs it and richer in its fruitage, the improvement is\ntraceable to the Bible and to the influence of the God and Christ of\nwhom the Bible tells.\n\nThe atheist and the materialist must confess that man should be able to\nproduce a better book to-day than man, unaided, could have produced in\nany previous age. The fact that they have tried, time and time again,\nonly to fail each time more hopelessly, explains why they will not--why\nthey cannot--accept the challenge thrown down by the Christian world to\nproduce a book worthy to take the Bible's place.\n\nThey have begged to their God to answer with fire--appealed to inanimate\nmatter with an earnestness that is pathetic; they have employed in the\nworship of blind force a faith greater than religion requires, but their\nGod is asleep. How long will they allow the search for strata of stone\nand fragments of fossil and decaying skeletons that are strewn around\nthe house to absorb their thoughts to the exclusion of the architect\nwho planned it all? How long will the agnostic, closing his eyes to\nthe plainest truths, cry, \"Night, night,\" when the sun in his meridian\nsplendour announces that noon is here?\n\nThose who reject the Bible ignore its claim to inspiration. This in\nitself makes them enemies of the Book of books, because the Bible\ncharacters profess to speak by inspiration, and what they say bears the\nstamp of the supernatural. \"Holy men of God spake as they were moved by\nthe Holy Ghost\" (2 Peter 1:21).\n\n    Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom\n    teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual\n    things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things\n    of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither\n    can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned (1 Cor.\n    2:13-14).\n\nThose who reject the Bible ignore the spirit that pervades it, the\natmosphere that envelopes it, the harmony of its testimonies and the\nunity of its structure, despite the fact that it is the product of many\nwriters during many centuries. Its parts were not arranged by man, but\nprearranged by the Almighty.\n\nThose who reject the Bible also ignore the prophecies and their\nfulfillment--\"History written in advance\"--proof that appeals\nirresistibly to the open mind.\n\nThose who reject the Bible even disparage the testimony which the\nSaviour bore to the inspiration of the Old Testament, and yet what could\nbe more explicit than His words? \"And beginning at Moses and all the\nprophets, he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things\nconcerning himself\" (Luke 24:27).\n\nAs Canon Liddon says:\n\n    \"For Christians, it will be enough to know that our Lord, Jesus\n    Christ, set the seal of His infallible sanction on the whole of the\n    Old Testament. He found the Hebrew canon as we have it in our\n    hands to-day, and He treated it as an authority which was above\n    discussion. Nay, more; He went out of His way--if we may reverently\n    speak thus,--to sanction not a few portions of it which modern\n    scepticism rejects.\"\n\nBesides open enemies, the Bible has enemies who are less frank--enemies\nwho, while claiming to be friends of Christianity, spend their time\nundermining faith in God, faith in the Bible, and faith in Christ. These\nprofessed friends call themselves higher critics--a title which--though\nexplained by them as purely technical--smacks of an insufferable\negotism. They assume an air of superior intelligence and look down with\nmingled pity and contempt upon what they regard as poor, credulous\nhumanity. The higher critic is more dangerous than the open enemy. The\natheist approaches you boldly and tries to blow out your light, but, as\nyou know who he is, what he is trying to do and why, you can protect\nyourself. The higher critic, however, comes to you in the guise of a\nfriend and politely inquires: \"Isn't the light too near your eyes? I\nfear it will injure your sight.\" Then he moves the light away, a little\nat a time, until it is only a speck and then--invisible.\n\nSome who have used the title \"higher critic\" have approached their\nsubject in a reverent spirit and laboured earnestly in the vain hope of\nsatisfying intellectual doubts, when the real trouble has been with the\nhearts of objectors rather than with their heads. Religion is a matter\nof the heart, and the impulses of the heart often seem foolish to the\nmind. Faith is different from, and superior to, reason. Faith is a\nspiritual extension of the vision--a moral sense that reaches out toward\nthe throne of God and takes hold of verities that the mind cannot grasp.\nIt is like \"the blind leading the blind\" for a higher critic, however\nhonest, to rely on purely intellectual methods to convey truths that are\n\"spiritually discerned.\"\n\nAs a rule, however, the so-called higher critic is a man without\nspiritual vision, without zeal for souls and without any deep interest\nin the coming of God's Kingdom. He toils not in the Master's vineyard\nand yet \"Solomon in all his glory\" never laid claim to such wisdom as he\nboasts. He does not accept the Bible nor defend it; he mutilates it. He\nputs the Bible on the operating table and cuts out the parts that he\nthinks are \"diseased.\" When he has finished his work the Bible is no\nlonger the Book of books: it is simply \"a scrap of paper.\"\n\nThe higher critic (I speak now of the rule and not of the exceptions)\nbegins his investigations with his opinion already formed. After he has\ndiscarded the Bible because he cannot harmonize it with the doctrine\nof evolution, he labours to find evidence to support his preconceived\nnotions. In matters of religion the higher critic is usually a\n\"dyspeptic.\" The Bible does not agree with him; he has not the spiritual\nfluids in sufficient quantity to enable him to digest the miracle and\nthe supernatural. He is a doubter and spreads doubts.\n\nDr. Franklin Johnson, in Volume 2, of \"Fundamentals\" says (pages 55, 56,\n57): \"A third fallacy of the higher critics is the doctrine concerning\nthe Scriptures which they teach. If a consistent hypothesis of evolution\nis made the basis of our religious thinking, the Bible will be regarded\nas only a product of human nature working in the field of religious\nliterature. It will be merely a natural book.\"...\n\nAgain: \"Yet another fallacy of the higher critics is found in their\nteachings concerning the Biblical miracles. If the hypothesis of\nevolution is applied to the Scriptures consistently, it will lead us to\ndeny all the miracles which they record.\"...\n\nAnd: \"Among the higher critics who accept some of the miracles there is\na notable desire to discredit the virgin birth of our Lord, and their\ntreatment of this event presents a good example of the fallacies of\nreasoning by means of which they would abolish many of the other\nmiracles.\"\n\nProfessor Reeve, in a strong article in Volume 3 of \"Fundamentals\"\n(pages 98, 99) tells us of his own excursion into the fields of\nhigher criticism, of his disappointment and of his glad return to the\ninterpretations of the Bible that are generally accepted. Speaking of\nhis first impressions, he says:\n\n    \"The critics seemed to have the logical things on their side. The\n    results at which they had arrived seemed inevitable. But upon closer\n    thinking, I saw that the whole movement, with its conclusion, was\n    the result of the adoption of the hypothesis of evolution.\"...\n\n    \"It became more and more obvious to me that the great movement was\n    entirely intellectual, an attempt in reality to intellectualize all\n    religious phenomena. I saw also that it was a partial and one-sided\n    intellectualism, with a strong bias against the fundamental tenets\n    of Biblical Christianity. Such a movement does not produce that\n    intellectual humility which belongs to the Christian mind. On the\n    contrary, it is responsible for a vast amount of intellectual pride,\n    an aristocracy of intellect with all the snobbery which usually\n    accompanies that term. Do they not exactly correspond to Paul's\n    word, 'vainly puffed up in his fleshly mind and not holding fast the\n    head, etc.' They have a splendid scorn for all opinions which do not\n    agree with theirs. Under the spell of this sublime contempt they\n    think they can ignore anything that does not square with their\n    evolutionary hypothesis. The center of gravity of their thinking is\n    in the theoretical, not in the religious; in reason, not in faith.\n    Supremely satisfied with its self-constituted authority, the mind\n    thinks itself competent to criticize the Bible, the thinking of all\n    the centuries, and even Jesus Christ Himself. The followers of this\n    cult have their full share of the frailties of human nature. Rarely,\n    if ever, can a thoroughgoing critic be an evangelist or even\n    evangelistic; he is educational. How is it possible for a preacher\n    to be a power of God, whose source of authority is his own reason\n    and convictions? The Bible can scarcely contain more than good\n    advice for such a man.\"\n\nIn Volume 2 of \"Fundamentals\" (page 84), Sir Robert Anderson has this to\nsay:\n\n    \"The effect of this 'Higher Criticism' is extremely grave. For it\n    has dethroned the Bible in the home, and the good old practice of\n    'family worship' is rapidly dying out. And great national interests\n    also are involved. For who can doubt that the prosperity and power\n    of the nations of the world are due to the influence of the Bible\n    upon the character and conduct? Races of men who for generations\n    have been taught to think for themselves in matters of the highest\n    moment will naturally excel in every sphere of effort or of\n    enterprise. And more than this, no one who is trained in the fear of\n    God will fail in his duty to his neighbour, but will prove himself a\n    good citizen. But the dethronement of the Bible leads practically\n    to the dethronement of God; and in Germany and America, and now in\n    England, the effects of this are declaring themselves in ways, and\n    to an extent, well fitted to cause anxiety for the future.\"\n\nThe experience of Rev. Paul Kanamori, known as the \"Japanese Billy\nSunday\" furnishes an excellent illustration of the chilling effect of\nhigher criticism. He was converted when a student and, after a period of\npreaching, became a professor in a theological seminary in Japan. Dr.\nRobert E. Speer, in a preface to a published sermon of Mr. Kanamori,\nthus describes the great evangelist's temporary retirement from the\nministry and its cause:\n\n    \"He began to read upon the most recent German theology, with\n    the result that he was completely swept off his feet by the\n    rationalistic New Theology, Higher Criticism, etc. Not long after\n    that he published his new views under the title, 'The present and\n    future of Christianity in Japan,' and retired from the ministry....\n    He remained in this state of spiritual darkness for twenty years,\n    until the death of his wife brought him and his children into great\n    trouble, but after passing through these deep waters he came out\n    again with a clear and firm belief in the old-fashioned gospel\"\n    (\"The Three-Hour Sermon,\" page 8).\n\nSince Mr. Kanamori's return to the ministry he has been the means of\nleading nearly fifty thousand Japanese to Christ--probably more than the\ntotal number of souls brought into the Church by all the higher critics\ncombined.\n\nRev. T. De Witt Talmage, one of the great preachers of the last\ngeneration, thus speaks of the higher critics:\n\n    \"When I see ministers of religion finding fault with the Scriptures,\n    it makes me think of a fortress terrifically bombarded, and the men\n    on the ramparts, instead of swabbing out and loading the guns and\n    helping to fetch up the ammunition from the magazine, are trying\n    with crowbars to pry out from the wall certain blocks of stone,\n    because they did not come from the right quarry. Oh, men on the\n    ramparts, better fight back and fight down the common enemy, instead\n    of trying to make breaches in the wall.\"\n\nIt is a deserved rebuke. The higher critics throw ink at a Book that\nhas withstood the assaults of materialists for centuries, and are vain\nenough to think that they can blot out its vital truths. Although their\nlabours against the Bible have consumed years, they expect the public\nto accept their conclusions at sight. If they require so much time to\nformulate their indictment against Holy Writ, surely the friends of\nthe Bible should be allowed as much time for the inspection of the\nindictment.\n\nThe destructive higher critic is, as a rule, opposed to revivals; in\nfact, it is one of the tests by which he can be distinguished from other\npreachers. He calls the revival a \"religious spasm.\" He understands\nhow one can have a spasm of anger and become a murderer, or a spasm of\npassion and ruin a life, or a spasm of dishonesty and rob a bank, but he\ncannot understand how one can be convicted of sin, and, in a spasm of\nrepentance, be born again. That would be a miracle, and miracles are\ninconsistent with evolution. It shocks the higher critic to have the\nprodigal son come back so suddenly after going away so deliberately.\n\nMost of the higher critics discard, because contrary to the doctrine of\nevolution, the virgin birth of Jesus and His resurrection, although the\nformer is no more mysterious than our own birth--only different, and the\nlatter no more mysterious than the origin of life. The existence of God\nmakes both possible; and the proof is sufficient to establish both.\n\nIf the higher critic will but come into the presence of Christ and learn\nof Him he will express himself in the language of the father (whose son\nhad a dumb spirit), who, as recorded in Mark (9:24), \"cried out and said\nwith tears, Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.\"\n\nIf he would only mingle with humanity he might catch the spirit of the\nMaster; if his sympathies were broad enough to take in all of God's\npeople, he would be so impressed with the religious needs of sinful man\nthat he would hasten to break to him the \"Bread of Life\" instead of\noffering him a stone. The Bible, _as it is_, has led millions to\nrepentance and, through forgiveness, into life; the Bible, as the higher\ncritics would make it, is impotent to save.\n\nEnemies of the Bible have been \"blasting at the Rock of Ages\" for nearly\ntwo thousand years but in spite of attacks of open and secret foes, God\nstill lives, and His Book is still precious to His children.\n\nThe Bible would be the greatest book ever written if it rested on its\nliterary merits alone, stripped of the reverence that inspiration\ncommands; but it becomes infinitely more valuable when it is accepted\nas the Word of God. As a man-made book it would compel the intellectual\nadmiration of the world; as the audible voice of the Heavenly Father it\nmakes an irresistible appeal to the heart and writes its truths upon our\nlives. Its heroes teach us great lessons--they were giants when they\nwalked by faith, but weak as we ourselves when they relied upon their\nown strength.\n\nThe Bible starts with a simple story of creation--just a few words, but\nit says all that can be said. The scientists have framed hypotheses,\nthe philosophers have formulated theories and the speculators have\nguessed--some of them have darkened \"counsel by words without\nknowledge\"--but when the smoke of controversy rises we find that the\nfirst sentence of Genesis, still unshaken, comprehends the entire\nsubject: \"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.\" No\none has been able to overthrow it, or burrow under it or go around it.\n\nAnd so when we set out in search of a foundation for statute law; we dig\ndown through the loose dirt, the mould of centuries, until we strike\nsolid rock and we find the Tables of Stone on which were written the ten\ncommandments. All important legislation is but an elaboration of these\nfew, brief sentences, and the elaborations are often obscuring instead\nof clarifying.\n\nIf we desire rules to govern our spiritual development we turn back to\nthe Sermon on the Mount. In our educational system it takes many books\non many subjects to prepare a mind for its work, but three chapters\nof the Bible (Matthew 5, 6 and 7) applied to life, would have more\ninfluence than all the learning of the schools in determining the\nhappiness of the individual and his service to society.\n\nIf we want to understand the evils of arbitrary power, we have only to\nread Samuel's warning to the children of Israel when they clamoured for\na king (1 Sam. 8: 11, 17).\n\nIf we would form an estimate of the influence that faith can exert on\na human life, and, through it, upon a world, we follow the career of\nAbraham, \"the friend of God,\" and see how his trust in Jehovah was\nrewarded. He founded a race, than which there has never been a greater,\nand established the religion through which to-day hundreds of millions\nworship God.\n\nDavid showed us how a shepherd lad could become the \"warrior king\" and\nthe \"sweet singer of Israel,\" with virtues so big that, in spite of his\nenormous sins, he is described as \"a man after God's own heart.\"\n\nAnd what varied instruction we draw from the life of Moses! Hidden in\nthe bulrushes on the banks of the Nile by a mother who, by instinct or\nby divine suggestion, previsioned a high calling for her son; found,\nunder Providential direction, by a daughter of Pharaoh; reared in the\nenvironment of a palace and with the advantages of the most enlightened\ncourt of his day; compelled to flee into the wilderness because of an\noutburst of race passion; called to a great work by a Voice that\nspoke to him from a bush that \"burned but was not consumed\"; modestly\ndistrusting his ability yet dauntless as the spokesman of God--dispenser\nof plagues--wonder-working man! Born of an obscure family and buried in\nthe Land of Moab in a sepulcher which \"no man knoweth,\" and yet between\nthese two humble events he rose to a higher pinnacle than any uninspired\nman has ever reached--leader without comparison--lawgiver without a\npeer.\n\nHe teaches many lessons that, like all truths, can be applied in every\ngeneration in every land. Race sympathy made it possible for him to lead\nhis people out of bondage--no one not of their own blood could have\ndone it. This lesson needs to be heeded to-day. Our part in the\nevangelization of the world will be done through native teachers,\neducated here or in our missions, rather than directly. The reformer,\ntoo, finds in the hardening of Pharaoh's heart the final assurance of\nsuccess; when the \"fullness of time\" has come and any form of bondage is\nripe for overthrow, the taskmaster's demand for \"bricks without straw\"\ngives the final impulse and opens the way.\n\nJoseph has made the world his schoolroom. He enables us to understand\nthe words of Solomon; \"where there is no vision the people perish.\" He\nshows how, in the hour of trial, faith can triumph over reason--how God\ncan lead a righteous man through a dungeon to a seat by the side of the\nthrone--how the dreamer can turn scoffing into reverence when he has the\ncorn.\n\nSamuel is a standing rebuke to those who think \"wild oats\" a necessary\ncrop in the lives of young men. He heard the call of God when he was a\nchild; was reared for the Father's work and lived a life so blameless\nthat the people proclaimed him just when his official career came to an\nend.\n\nIn the Proverbs of Solomon we find a rare collection of truths,\nbeautifully expressed; in Job we find an inexhaustible patience set to\nmusic and an integrity that even Satan himself could not corrupt.\n\nThe Prophets alone would immortalize the Bible--rugged characters who\ndared to rebuke wickedness in high places, to reproach a nation for its\nsins and to warn of the coming of the wrath of God. See Elijah on Mount\nCarmel, mocking the worshippers of Baal; hear him thunder the Almighty's\nsentence against a king who, coveting Naboth's vineyard, broke three\ncommandments to get a little piece of land. And yet Elijah fled from\nwicked Jezebel and would have despaired but for the Voice that assured\nhim of the thousands who were still true to Israel's God--the obscure\nhosts who remained loyal even when the conspicuous became faint-hearted.\n\nElisha was a visible link in the chain of power. He was not ashamed to\nwear the mantle of his great predecessor; he was willing to take up an\nunfinished work. He bears unimpeachable testimony to the continuity of\nthe divine current when human conductors can be found to transmit it. It\nwas Elisha who drew aside the veil that concealed from his affrighted\nservant the horses and chariots that, upon the mountain, await the hours\nwhen they are needed to supplement the strength of those who fight upon\nthe Lord's side; it was Elisha, too, who proved to the warriors of his\nday that magnanimity is more potent than violence. He conquered by\nself-restraint--and \"the bands of Syria came no more into the lands of\nIsrael.\"\n\nDaniel is another man in whom faith begat courage and for whom courage\ncarved a large niche in the temple of imperishable fame. The Daniel who\ninterpreted to the trembling Belshazzar the fateful handwriting on\nthe wall; who, unawed by enemies, prayed with his windows open toward\nJerusalem, and who, in the lions' den, waited in patience until Darius\nhastened from a sleepless couch to call him forth and join him in\npraising Israel's God--this Daniel was the same intrepid servant of the\nMost High, who in his youth refused to drink wine from the king's table,\nand, demanding a test, proved that water was better--a verdict that\ntwenty-five centuries have not disturbed.\n\nPassing over many characters who would seem mountainlike but for the\nmajestic peaks that overshadow them, let us turn to the immortal seer\nwho, listening heavenward, caught the words of the song that startled\nthe shepherds at Bethelehem and, peering through the darkness of seven\ncenturies, saw the light that shone from Calvary. It was Isaiah who\nforetold more clearly and more fully than any one else the coming of\nthe Messiah, suggested the titles which He would earn, described the\nsufferings which He would endure and enumerated the blessings He would\nbring to mankind. In chapter nine verse six we read, \"For unto us a\nchild is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon\nhis shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The\nMighty God, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.\"\n\nIn chapter fifty-three, we learn of His vicarious atonement:\n\n    He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted\n    with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was\n    despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he hath borne our griefs,\n    and carried our sorrows; yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of\n    God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he\n    was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was\n    upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have\n    gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord\n    hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he\n    was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb\n    to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he\n    opened not his mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment:\n    and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of\n    the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he\n    stricken. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich\n    in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any\n    deceit in his mouth.\n\nIn chapter two, verse four, we are told of the glad day, which we are\nnow trying to hasten, when swords shall be beaten into ploughshares,\nand spears into pruning-hooks--when nations shall not lift up the sword\nagainst nations or learn war any more.\n\nIf the Old Testament is so fascinating what may we expect of the New? It\nis day as compared with dawn; it is the morning light, with which Moses\nand the Prophets beat back the darkness of the night, enlarged--until\nwe have the sun in its meridian glory. \"Old things have passed away;\nbehold, all things are become new.\"\n\nThe Old Testament gave us the law; the New Testament reveals the love\nupon which the law rests. John says: \"The law was given by Moses, but\ngrace and truth came by Jesus Christ\" (John 1: 17). The Old Testament\nrestrained by a multitude of \"Thou shalt nots\"; the New Testament\nawakens the monitor within and supplies a spiritual urge that makes the\nindividual find satisfaction in service and delight in doing good. David\nsoothes the dying with sweet assurance: \"Though I walk through the\nvalley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for thou art with\nme, thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me;\" Jesus inspires them with a\nliving hope: \"I go to prepare a place for you that where I am ye may be\nalso.\"\n\nGod is the center of gravity in the New Testament as in the Old, but the\ndrawing power of Jehovah became visible in Christ; the attributes of the\nFather were revealed in the Son--the supreme intelligence, the limitless\npower, the boundless love. Divinity surrounded itself with human\nassociates but spiritual enthusiasm crowded out the selfish element;\nHis presence purged their souls of dross. The characters of the New\nTestament are about their Father's business all the time. If a Judas\nis base enough to betray the Saviour, even he is so overwhelmed with\nremorse that life becomes unbearable.\n\nWe are introduced to a new group of characters, beginning with a Virgin\nwith a child and ending with her Son upon the cross--a galaxy of men and\nwomen whose words and deeds have travelled into every land. One poor\nwidow with two mites, wisely invested, purchased more enduring fame than\nany rich man was ever able to buy with all his money. Another, Tabitha,\nby interpretation called Dorcas, drew forth as eloquent a tribute as was\never paid. In the goodness of her heart she made garments for the poor,\nand the recipients, exhibiting them at her death-bed, expressed their\ngratitude in tears. The narrative suggests an epitaph which every\nChristian can earn--and who could desire more? viz., the night is darker\nbecause a life has gone out; the world is not so warm because a heart is\ncold in death.\n\nIn John the Baptist, we have the forerunner--\"the voice crying in the\nwilderness.\" The Apostles, chosen from among the busy multitude, carried\ntheir habits of industry into their new calling; some turned from\ncatching fish to become \"fishers of men,\" while Matthew employed the\naccuracy of a collector of customs in chronicling the life of the\nMaster. Even the weaknesses of men were utilized: Thomas consecrated his\ndoubts, and John, the disciple, baptized his ambition--each giving the\nGreat Teacher an opportunity to use a fault for the enlightening of\nfuture generations. The latter became the most intimate companion of the\nSaviour--\"the disciple whom Jesus loved\" and the one who most frequently\nused the word love.\n\nPeter and Paul stand out conspicuously among the exponents of early\nChristianity. In the case of Peter, Christ brought an impulsive nature\ninto complete subjection and gave a steadying purpose to an emotional\nfollower. In Paul, we see a giant intellect aflame with a holy zeal.\nBoth were bold interpreters of Christ's mission and both urged upon\nChristians the full gospel equipment.\n\nIn his second Epistle, chapter one, Peter exhorts:\n\n    And besides this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue;\n    and to virtue knowledge; and to knowledge temperance; and to\n    temperance patience; and to patience godliness; and to godliness\n    brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these\n    things be in you, and abound, they make you that you shall neither\n    be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.\n\nIn the sixth chapter of Ephesians, Paul pleads:\n\n    Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able\n    to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand\n    therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having\n    on the breastplate of righteousness; and your feet shod with the\n    preparation of the gospel of peace; above all, taking the shield of\n    faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of\n    the wicked. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the\n    Spirit, which is the Word of God: Praying always with all prayer\n    and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all\n    perseverance and supplication for all saints.\n\nPeter was a rock, hewn into shape and polished by the divine hand; Paul\nwas a \"chosen vessel\" to bear the Redeemer's Name before \"the Gentiles\nand kings and the children of Israel.\" Paul was an orator with a\npurpose; he was a man with a message. He was eloquent because he knew\nwhat he was talking about and meant what he said. No wonder, for he was\ncalled to service by a summons so distinct and unmistakable that he\nturned at once from persecuting to preaching. Paul is responsible for\none of the most inspiring sentences in the Bible--\"I was not disobedient\nunto the heavenly vision.\" It was the key to his whole life.\n\nLove is not blind, declares Tolstoy; it sees what ought to be done and\ndoes it. So with Paul. His eyes were open to the truth and he saw it;\nhe was sensitive to the needs of the Church and his epistles are filled\nwith wise counsel. He encouraged the worthy, admonished the erring and\nstrengthened the weak. Paul knew well the secret of liberality, as shown\nin 2 Corinthians 8: 5. The members of the Macedonian church \"first gave\ntheir own selves\"; giving was easy after that. Paul's religion could not\nbe shaken; read his vow as recorded in the eighth chapter of Romans:\n\n    For I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor\n    principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,\n    nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to\n    separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.\n\nHis sufferings developed patience and deepened devotion. They prepared\nhim to appreciate love and to define it as no other mortal has done.\n\nHis tribute to love, contained in the thirteenth chapter of 1\nCorinthians, is not approached by any other utterance on this subject.\n(I use the old version with the word charity changed to love.)\n\n    Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not\n    love, I am become as sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal. And though\n    I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all\n    knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove\n    mountains, and have not love, I am nothing. And though I bestow all\n    my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned,\n    and have not love, it profiteth me nothing. Love suffereth long, and\n    is kind; love envieth not; love vaunteth not itself, is not puffed\n    up, Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not\n    easily provoked, thinketh no evil; Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but\n    rejoiceth in the truth; Beareth all things, believeth all things,\n    hopeth all things, endureth all things; Love never faileth: but\n    whether there be prophecies they shall fail; whether there be\n    tongues they shall cease; whether there be knowledge it shall vanish\n    away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that\n    which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done\n    away. When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a\n    child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away\n    childish things; For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then\n    face to face; now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also\n    I am known. And now abideth faith, hope, love, these three; but the\n    greatest of these is love.\n\nI cannot leave the Book of Books without referring to one of the supreme\nmoments that it describes. The Bible is full of pictures; the painter\nhas found it an inexhaustible storehouse of suggestion. All the great\nclimaxes of sacred history speak to us from the canvas. Moses and\nPharaoh, Ruth and Naomi, Daniel at the Belshazzar Feast and in the\nLions' Den, Elijah at Mt. Carmel and before Ahab, Joseph and his\nbrethren, David and Goliath, Mary and the Child, Jesus, the Prodigal\nSon, the Sower, the Good Samaritan, the Rich Young Man, the Wise and the\nFoolish Virgins, Jesus in the Temple, Christ Entering Jerusalem, and in\nthe Garden of Gethsemane, and The Saviour on the Cross--these are but a\nfew of the word pictures that have inspired the artist's brush.\n\nBut there is another picture, unsurpassed in thrilling power\nand permanent interest, namely, that presented by the trial of\nChrist--tragedy of tragedies, triumph of triumphs!\n\nHere, face to face, stood Pilate and Christ, the representatives of the\ntwo opposing forces that have ever contended for dominion in the world.\nPilate was the personification of force; behind him was the Roman\ngovernment, undisputed ruler of the then known world, supported by\nits invincible legions. Before Pilate stood Christ, the embodiment of\nlove--unarmed, alone. And force triumphed; they nailed Him to the cross,\nand the mob that had assembled to witness His sufferings, mocked and\njeered and said: \"He is dead.\" But from that day the power of Caesar\nwaned and the power of Christ increased. In a few centuries the Roman\ngovernment was gone and its legions forgotten, while the Apostle of Love\nhas become the greatest fact in history and the growing figure of all\ntime.\n\nWho will estimate the Bible's value to society? It is our only guide. It\ncontains milk for the young and nourishing food for every year of life's\njourney; it is manna for those who travel in the wilderness; and it\nprovides a staff for those who are weary with age. It satisfies the\nheart's longings for a knowledge of God; it gives a meaning to existence\nand supplies a working plan to each human being.\n\nIt holds up before us ideals that are within sight of the weakest and\nthe lowliest, and yet so high that the best and the noblest are kept\nwith their faces turned ever upward. It carries the call of the Saviour\nto the remotest corners of the earth; on its pages are written the\nassurances of the present and our hopes for the future.\n\n    There are three verses in the first chapter of Genesis which mean\n    more to man than all other books outside the Bible. First; the\n    verse, \"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,\"\n    gives us the only account of the beginning of all things, including\n    life. Many substitutes have been proposed for this verse but none\n    that can be so easily understood, explained and defended.\n\n    Second: the 24th verse gives us the only law governing the\n    continuity of life on earth. If life is to continue, reproduction\n    must be according to law or lawless. _Reproduction according to\n    kind_ is the basic scientific fact in the world; all the books on\n    science combined do not state as much that is of value to man as\n    this one verse--it is the foundation of family life and of all human\n    calculations. No living thing has ever violated this law; even man\n    with all his power has never been able to persuade or compel that\n    intangible, invisible thing that we call life to cross the line of\n    species.\n\n    Third: the 26th verse--\"Let us make man in our image\"--gives us the\n    only explanation of man's presence on earth. Without revelation no\n    one has been able to explain the riddle of life. Man comes into the\n    world without his own volition; he has no choice as to the age,\n    nation, race, or family environment into which he shall be born. So\n    far as he is concerned, he comes by chance; he goes he knows not\n    when, and cannot insure himself for a single hour against accident,\n    disease or death; and yet, he is supreme above all other things.\n\n    The 26th verse reveals a truth of inestimable value. When man\n    knows that he is \"the child of a King,\" with the earth for an\n    inheritance--that the Creator, after bringing all other things into\n    existence, made him, not as other things were made, but in the\n    image of God, and placed him here as commander-in-chief of all that\n    is--when he understands that he is part of God's plan and here for a\n    purpose he finds himself. To do God's will becomes his highest duty\n    as well as his greatest pleasure and he learns that obedience links\n    happiness to virtue, success to righteousness, and makes it possible\n    for him to rise to the high plane that a loving Heavenly Father has\n    put within the reach of man.\n\n    Where in all the books in all the libraries can one find as much\n    that affects the welfare of man as is condensed into these three\n    verses?\n\n\n\n\nIII\n\nWHAT THINK YE OF CHRIST?\n\n\nThe question, What think ye of Christ? propounded to the Pharisees by\nthe Saviour Himself, demands an answer from an increasing number as each\nyear the circle of the Gospel's influence widens. It is a question that\ncannot be evaded. In every civilized land an answer is made, by word or\nact, by each individual who is confronted by the facts of His life.\nIt is in the hope that I may be able to assist some in answering this\nquestion that I devote this hour to the inquiry.\n\nWas Christ an impostor? Or was He deluded? Or was He the promised\nMessiah, \"the Way, the Truth, and the Life,\" as He declared Himself to\nbe?\n\nFew have dared to accuse Him of attempting a deliberate fraud upon the\npublic. Impostors sometimes kill others in carrying out their plans, or\nto escape detection, but they do not offer themselves as a sacrifice\nfor others. Christ's whole life gives the lie to the charge that He\npracticed deception. One recorded act would be sufficient to establish\nHis honesty of purpose. In the nineteenth chapter of Matthew we read:\n\n    And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good\n    thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto\n    him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is,\n    God; but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. He\n    saith unto him, which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou\n    shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear\n    false witness. Honour thy father and thy mother: and Thou shalt love\n    thy neighbour as thyself. The young man saith unto him, All these\n    things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? Jesus said\n    unto him. If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and\n    give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come\n    and follow me. But when the young man heard that saying, he went\n    away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.\n\nIf Christ had been an adventurer or was interested only in gaining a\nfollowing He would have welcomed this young man, who was not only rich,\nbut, according to Luke, a ruler. And what a splendid recommendation the\nyoung man gave himself; all of the commandments he had kept from his\nyouth up. How could one ambitious for worldly success afford to reject\nsuch an applicant? But Christ would not lower the standard a hair's\nbreadth even to secure the support of a rich young ruler who had led\na blameless life. He demanded the _first place_ in the heart--a very\nreasonable demand--and, seeing in the young man's heart the first place\noccupied by love of money, He demanded the throne. The young\nman, unwilling to purchase eternal life at that price, went away\nsorrowing--his heart still centered on his great possessions. Of whom\nbut an honest person could such a story be told?\n\nWas Christ deceived? That is the theory set forth in a little volume\nentitled \"A Jewish View of Jesus\" (published recently by the Macmillan\nCompany). The author, H.G. Emelow, pays the following high tribute to\n\"Jesus the Jew\" (and it is the most charitable view an orthodox Jew can\nhold):\n\n    \"Yet, these things apart, who can compute all that Jesus has meant\n    to humanity? The love He has inspired, the solace He has given, the\n    good He has engendered, the hope and joy He has kindled--all that is\n    unequalled in human history. Among the great and good that the human\n    race has produced, none has even approached Jesus in universality\n    of appeal and sway. He has become the most fascinating figure in\n    history. In Him is combined what is best and most enchanting and\n    most mysterious in Israel--the eternal people whose child He was.\n    The Jew cannot help glorying in what Jesus thus has meant to the\n    world; nor can he help hoping that Jesus may yet serve as a bond of\n    union between Jew and Christian, once His teaching is better known\n    and the bane of misunderstanding is at last removed from His words\n    and His ideal.\"\n\nBut could honest delusion produce a character who, in \"the love He has\ninspired,\" \"the solace He has given,\" and \"the hope and joy He has\nkindled\" is \"unequalled in human history\"? Is it not impossible that\nunder a _delusion_ one could (as Emelow says Jesus did) become \"the most\nfascinating figure in history\"--unapproachable in the \"universality of\nappeal and sway\"? The world has been full of delusions: have any of them\nproduced a character like Christ? Tolstoy says that the words of Christ\nto His friends and pupils have had a hundred thousand times more\ninfluence over the people than all the poems, odes, elegies and elegant\nepistles of the authors of that age. Lecky, the historian, says that\n\"the three short years of the active life of Jesus have done more\nto regenerate and soften mankind than all of the disquisitions of\nphilosophers and all the exhortations of moralists.\" Could this be said\nof a man labouring under a delusion as to his real character?\n\nWhat Christ _said_ and _did_ and _was_ establishes His claims. In a\nconversation with Peter (Matt. 16: 16), He approved that Apostle's\nanswer which ascribed to Him the title of \"Christ\" (the Greek equivalent\nfor Messiah) \"the Son of the living God.\" He not only approved of the\nanswer bestowing the title but\n\n\"Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: for\nflesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is\nin heaven.\" In John 10, verse 30, He declares, \"I and my Father are\none\"; in verse 36, same chapter, He denies that it was blasphemy to call\nHimself the Son of God. In the presence of death He refused to deny the\nclaim (Matt. 26: 63-64).\n\nThe deity of Christ is proven in many ways; some offering one line of\nproof and some another. Some are convinced by the prophecies that found\ntheir fulfillment in Christ; some give greatest weight to the manner of\nHis birth and His resurrection. Still others lay special emphasis upon\nthe miracles performed by Him. There is no need of comparison; all the\nproofs stand together and bear joint testimony to His supernatural\ncharacter, but I find myself inclined to use the method of reasoning\nadopted by Carnegie Simpson in his book entitled, \"The Fact of Christ.\"\nThose who reject Christ reject also the miraculous proofs offered in\nsupport of His divine character, but the _fact_ of Christ cannot be\ndenied. Christ lived; that is admitted. He taught; we have His words.\nHe died upon the cross; that we know; and we can trace His blood by its\ncleansing power as it flows through the centuries. Judged by His life,\nHis teachings, and His death, and the impression they have made upon the\nhuman race, we conclude that He was divine and that He has justified the\ntitles bestowed upon Him. No other explanations can account for Him.\nBorn in a manger; reared in a carpenter shop; with no access to sages\nliving and no knowledge of the wisdom of sages dead, except as that\nwisdom was recorded in the Old Testament, and yet when only about thirty\nyears of age He gave to the world a code of morality the like of which\nthe world had never known before and has not known since. He preached a\nshort time, gathered around Him a few disciples and was crucified; His\nfollowers were scattered and nearly all of the conspicuous ones put to\ndeath--and yet from this beginning His religion spread until thousands\nof millions have taken His name upon them and millions have been ready\nto die rather than surrender the faith that He put into their hearts.\nHow can you explain Christ? It is easier to believe Him to be the Christ\nwhose coming was foretold, the Jesus who was to save the people from\ntheir sins--the Son of God and Saviour of the World--than to account for\nHim in any other way.\n\nTo those who try to measure Him by the rules that apply to man He is\nincomprehensible; but take Him out of the man class and put Him in the\nGod class and you can understand Him. He also can be measured by the\nwork He came to perform; it was more than a man's task. No man aspiring\nto be a God could have done what He did; it required a God condescending\nto be a man.\n\nWhen once His divine character is admitted we have an explanation that\nclears away all the perplexities. We can believe that He was conceived\nof the Holy Ghost and born of the Virgin Mary. We can believe that He\nopened the eyes of the blind when among men--we see Him to-day giving a\nspiritual vision of life to those who have known only the flesh and the\npleasures that come through the flesh. We can believe that He wrought\nmiracles when upon earth--we see Him so changing hearts to-day that they\nlove the things they used to hate and hate the things they used to love.\nWe can even believe that at His touch life was called back to the body\nfrom which it had taken its flight--we have seen Him take men who had\nfallen so low that their own flesh and blood had deserted them, lift\nthem up, wash them and fill their hearts with a passion for service. A\nChrist who can do that _now_ could have broken the bonds of the tomb.\n\nVolumes innumerable have been written on theological distinctions, some\nof which have been made the basis of sects. The doctrine of the Trinity\nhas been one of the storm centers of discussion for centuries. It is not\ndifficult for me to believe in the Trinity when I see three distinct\nentities in each human being--a physical man, a mental man and a moral\nman. They are so inseparable that one cannot exist here without the\nother, and yet they are so separate and distinct that one can be\ndeveloped and the others left undeveloped. Who has not seen a splendidly\ndeveloped body with an ignorant brain to think for it and a puny\nspiritual life within? A weak body and an impoverished soul are\nsometimes linked to a highly trained mind: and an exalted character is\nsometimes found in a frail body, and even associated with a neglected\nintellect. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost, three in one, present no\nproblem that need perplex either the learned or the unlearned. We have\nthe evidence of the Father on every hand; the proof of the Son's growing\ninfluence is indisputable; the witness of the Holy Ghost is to be found\nin the heart of every believer. The three act in unison.\n\nThe fall of man is disputed by some who seem to find more satisfaction\nin the belief that they have risen from the brute and, therefore, are\nsuperior to their ancestors, than they do in the thought that man has\nfallen from a higher estate. But the facts do not support the brute\ntheory. Even if the \"missing links\" could be found, it would be as\nreasonable--though not so flattering to man's pride--to believe that the\nmonkey is a degenerate man as that man is an improved monkey.\n\nIt has often been pointed out as evidence of man's fall that he is the\nonly created thing that does not live up to his possibilities. In plant\nand bird and beast there is no disobedience--all fulfill the purpose of\ntheir creation, from the flower, that puts forth its bloom as perfectly\nwhen it \"wastes its sweetness on the desert air\" as when in the garden\nits beauty calls forth expressions of delight, to the bird that wakes\nthe echoes of trackless forests with its melody. Man, only man, mocks\nhis Maker by prostituting to evil the powers that might lift him within\nsight of the throne of God.\n\nIf so many men and women fall _now_, in spite of light and love and all\nthe incentives to noble living, is it incredible that the first pair\nshould have fallen when the race was young? Possibility becomes\nprobability when we remember that the conflict that rages between the\nmind and the heart is the one real conflict in every life. Reason versus\nfaith is the great issue to-day as in Eden. Faith says obey; reason\nasks, Why? The one looks up confidingly to a Power above; the other\nrelies on self and rejects even the authority of Jehovah unless the\nfinite mind can comprehend the plan of the Infinite.\n\nNo one will doubt the doctrine of original sin if he will study nature\nand then analyze himself. In the plant, in the animal and in the\nphysical man, the invisible thing which we call life is the only\nsustaining force; when it takes its flight, that which remains falls\nback to the earth and becomes dust. And so the spiritual in man is the\nonly force that can give him a moral nature and preserve it from decay;\nwhen his spiritual life departs the mind as well as the body rots.\n\nSome find a stumbling block in the doctrine of the Atonement. That one\nshould suffer for others, shocks their sense of justice, they say, and\nyet that is the law of life. Each generation borrows from generations\npast and pays the debt to the generations that follow. A certain\npercentage of the mothers die in childbirth--evidence that they are\nGod's handiwork is found in the fact they so willingly enter the valley\nof the shadow of death to attain to motherhood. Many a boy has been won\nback to rectitude by the sorrows of a parent; we are not infrequently\nhealed by the stripes that fall on others. In fact, great wrongs are\nseldom righted without the shedding of innocent blood--one dies and a\nmultitude are saved. These do not always illustrate the voluntary laying\ndown of life but there are enough cases of noble surrender of self for a\nfriend or for the public to make it easy for any one to understand how\nChrist could take upon Himself the sins of the world and become man's\nintercessor with the Father. Winning hearts through love expressed in\nsacrifice, is that strange? On the contrary, it is the only way. It is\nbecause the story of Jesus is a natural one that it has touched mankind.\nHearts understand each other. The heart, says Pascal, has reasons that\nthe mind does not understand because the heart is of an infinitely\nhigher character.\n\nThe sacrificial character of Christ's death and the atoning power of His\nblood are the basis of the New Testament. To discard this doctrine is to\nreject the plainest teachings of the Apostles and the words of Christ\nHimself.\n\nPeter, than whom there is no higher human authority, says (1 Peter\n2:24): \"Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that\nwe, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness; by whose stripes\nye were healed.\"\n\nJohn, the Beloved, speaks as clearly on this subject (John 3:16-17):\n\"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that\nwhosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting\nlife. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but\nthat the world through him might be saved.\" Paul was equally emphatic;\nhe says (1 Cor. 2:2): \"For I determined not to know anything among you,\nsave Jesus Christ and him crucified.\" And again (1 Cor. 1:30): \"But\nof him are ye in Christ Jesus who of God is made unto us wisdom and\nrighteousness, and sanctification and redemption.\"\n\nBut we have higher authority still--we have the words of Christ Himself.\nAt the last supper, with His disciples about Him, He spoke of His blood\nbeing \"shed for many for the remission of sins.\"\n\nIt is the story of His sacrifice for others--of His blood shed that the\nworld might through Him find forgiveness--that has been understood by\nthe unlettered as well as by scholars and has brought millions to the\nfoot of the cross. Even those who have not been in position to compare\nHis code of morals with the teachings of others have been able to\ncomprehend a plan of salvation by which one died for all and all find\nforgiveness in His sacrifice. It is this Gospel that has made it\npossible for the forgiven sinner to go forth to begin a new life, no\nlonger under conviction of sin and remembering his past only as an\nincentive to service.\n\nThe presence of Judas at the Last Supper has been the cause of much\nspeculation throughout the centuries. The indignation of Christians\nis stirred at the thought of a traitor being present on this solemn\noccasion when Christ instituted one of the great sacraments of the\nChurch. The Saviour not only knew what Judas was about to do but\ncalled attention to it and designated the guilty one, but there was no\nappearance of the anger which would be natural in a mortal; He knew the\nplan of salvation.\n\nBut why should the betrayal have come from one of the twelve? It is not\nnecessary to find a satisfactory answer to all the questions that may\narise from the reading of the Bible, and the finite mind should not\nbe discouraged if it fails to fathom the reasons of the Infinite\nIntelligence. If there are mysteries in the Bible that we cannot unravel\nthey are not greater than the mysteries in nature with which we must\ndeal whether we understand them or not.\n\nBut I venture to suggest one _effect_, produced by the fact that one of\nthe twelve proved a traitor, namely, the scrutiny that it has compelled\nmillions of Christians to turn upon themselves. \"Lord, is it I?\" each\nof the disciples anxiously inquired. Even Judas himself, coerced by the\naction of the others, asked, \"Master, is it I?\" So, to-day, there is\nreal betrayal of the Saviour by some who take His name upon them and\nbefore the world profess to be His followers. If Judas had been an\noutsider and had sold for money the knowledge he had gained as a\nlooker-on his name would not have become, as the name of Judas has, a\nsynonym for all that is base and contemptible; and the Christian world\nwould have been without the benefit of that glaring act of perfidy that\nhas sounded its warning through nineteen centuries. Judas sold the\nSaviour for money, just as many a professing Christian since then has,\nfor money, betrayed the Master. Who will calculate the restraint that\nthat one question, \"Lord, is it I?\" has exerted upon Christ's followers\nin the hour when some great temptation has made the believer hesitate\nupon the brink of sin?\n\nI will not attempt to enumerate all the ways in which Christ has and can\nbless mankind, but the living spring has taught me one way. The spring\nis the best illustration of the Christian life, just as a stagnant pool\nis the best illustration of a selfish life. The pool receives but gives\nforth nothing in return and, at last, becomes the center of disease and\ndeath. There is nothing more repulsive than the stagnant pool except a\nlife built upon that plan. The spring, on the other hand, pours forth\nconstantly of that which refreshes and invigorates and asks for nothing.\nThere is nothing more inspiring than a living spring except the life\nthat it resembles.\n\nAnd why is the spring a spring? Because _it is connected with a source\nthat is higher than itself_. Christ brings man into such vital, living\ncontact with God that the goodness of God flows out to the world through\nhim. The frailest human being can thus become of inestimable value to\nsociety. It is only spiritual power, received from above, that counts\nlargely. If we measure man in units of physical power he is not much\nabove the beasts; if we measure him in units of intellectual power\nwe soon reach his limitations, but when we measure him in units of\nspiritual power his strength may be beyond human calculations. If, as\nwas the case in Wales, the prayer of a little girl could start a revival\nthat spread over that country, resulting in the conversion of thousands,\nwhat can a life accomplish if one's heart is full of love to God and\nman?\n\nThe wisdom of Christ could not have been supplied by others; there were\nnone to supply it. There was no source but the inexhaustible fountain of\nthe Almighty from which to draw that which He gave forth \"as one having\nauthority.\" \"Who among His Apostles or proselytes,\" asks John Stuart\nMill, \"was capable of inventing the sayings ascribed to Jesus or of\nimagining the life and character revealed in the Gospels?\"\n\nNo person, less than divine, could have carried the message or rendered\nthe service He did to mankind. How, for instance, could He have\nlearned from His own experience or from His environment the startling\nproposition that He embodied in His interpretation of The Parable of the\nSower? \"The care of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the\ntruth,\" and yet in that short sentence He gave an epitome of all\nhuman history. Reforms come up from the oppressed, not down from the\noppressors--a fact which Christ explains in a word.\n\nHe announced the divine order: \"Seek ye _first_ the kingdom of God and\nhis righteousness.\" Duty to God comes _first_--all other things that are\ngood for us will come in due time.\n\nHis parables stand alone in literature; they have no parallel in the\nexpression of great truths with beauty and simplicity through object\nlessons taken from every-day life. These truths covered a wide range and\nwere embedded in the language of the parable because of the unbelief\nof that day. They are increasingly appreciated as their practical\napplication to all time becomes more and more manifest.\n\nThe parable of the Prodigal Son is the most beautiful story of its kind\never told and is based on an experience through which nearly every\nperson passes, but few of whom, fortunately, carry the spirit of\nrebellion to the point of leaving home. At that period which marks\nthe transition from youth to maturity--from dependence on others to\nself-reliance--rebelliousness is likely to be exhibited to a greater or\nless extent even where the parents have done everything possible for the\nchild. Christ takes an extreme case where the wisdom and experience of\nthe father were scorned; where a wilful son insisted upon learning for\nhimself of the things against which the father had warned him. He was of\nage; parental authority could no longer be exerted for his protection.\nHe had his way, and as long as his money lasted he found plenty of\nassociates willing to help him spend it; the \"boys\" had what the wicked\ncall \"a good time.\" Then came the sobering up, the repentance, the\nhumility, the return, the father's welcome, the very natural complaint\nof the other son and the parental rebuke--all so lifelike and all\ndesigned to give emphasis to the love of the Heavenly Father and the joy\nin Heaven when a wanderer returns. How many souls it has awakened! The\nthought has been beautifully translated into song by Rev. Robt. Lowry,\nin \"Where Is My Wandering Boy To-night?\" which has probably touched more\nhearts than any sermon delivered since the song was written in 1877.\n\nIn passing, note the contrast between the Rich Young Man and the\nProdigal Son. The former, an exemplary youth, is lost because he put the\nlove of money first--we see his back as he retires into oblivion. The\nlatter, a reckless sinner, repentant and forgiven; we leave him at a\nbanquet, happy with father and friends who rejoice that one who \"was\ndead is alive again.\"\n\nThe parable of The Talents has shamed a multitude into activity, while\nthe parable of The Vineyard has been an encouragement to those who have\nneglected early calls to service. He used the great preservative, salt,\nto illustrate the saving influence His followers would exert on society\nand warned them not to lose this quality. He likened them to a city set\non a hill and to the light that illumines the entire house.\n\nChrist gave the world a philosophy that fits into every human need; He\nsounded all the depths. In the first and third of the Beatitudes He\nexalts humility--a virtue difficult to cultivate, and even to retain\nafter one has cultivated it. Some one has suggested that pride is\nsuch an insidious sin that the humble sometimes become proud of their\nhumility. Christ sets two prizes before the humble--the poor in spirit\nare to have the Kingdom of Heaven for their recompense while the meek\nare to be given the earth for their inheritance.\n\nThe mourners are to be comforted and the merciful are to obtain mercy.\nRighteousness is to be the reward of those who hunger and thirst\nafter it, and the peacemakers are to be crowned with one of the most\nhonourable of appellations, the children of God.\n\nHe devotes double space to those who are reviled and persecuted for His\nsake, foreseeing the fierce opposition which His Gospel would arouse. In\nthe study of the Beatitudes one Sunday, I asked the members of an adult\nclass which they considered first in importance. Although there was\nquite a wide difference in preference, the Sixth, \"Blessed are the pure\nin heart, for they shall see God,\" received the highest vote. And what\ncan be more important than the cleansing of the heart of all that\nobstructs one's view of God? The Creator is equally near to all His\ncreatures--He is no respecter of persons. It is man's fault if he allows\nanything to come between himself and the Heavenly Father. Surely,\nnothing is more to be desired than the unclouded vision. \"Thou shalt\nhave no other gods before me,\" is the first of the Commandments brought\ndown from Sinai and its primacy is endorsed by the Saviour: the sixth\nBeatitude expresses the same supreme requirement. No false gods, not\neven self--the most popular of all the false gods--must be permitted to\ncome between man and his Maker.\n\nChrist put into simple words some of the great rules for the\ninterpretation of life. \"By their fruits ye shall know them,\" has become\na part of the language of the civilized world. \"Do men gather grapes of\nthorns, or figs of thistles?\" He asks. \"A good tree cannot bring forth\nevil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.\" Here a\ngreat spiritual principle was announced. We must consider the _nature;_\nnothing less than a change in the nature can change the fruit. A bad\nheart is just as sure to bring forth bad thoughts and bad deeds as the\nthistle is to bring forth thorns. And so the good heart is just as sure\nto yield good deeds as the grape-vine is to yield grapes or the fig-tree\nis to yield figs. Look at the _tree_, therefore; the fruit will take\ncare of itself.\n\nIn the Sermon on the Mount, in which He embodied such a wealth of moral\nprecept and spiritual counsel, He warned against investments in that\nwhich would divert the affections from the great purpose of life. \"Lay\nnot up for yourselves treasures on earth, but lay up for yourselves\ntreasures in heaven.\" \"For where your treasure is, there will your heart\nbe also.\" It was the heart that He dealt with--always the heart, in\nwhich man does his decisive thinking and out of which are \"the issues of\nlife.\"\n\nThe Master dealt with the beginnings of evil. He did not wait until the\nsin had been completed or the wrong accomplished. He cut out the bad\npurpose at its birth before it had time to develop. He says:\n\n    And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from\n    thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should\n    perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. And if\n    thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for\n    it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and\n    not that thy whole body should be cast into hell (Matt. 3: 29).\n\nThis may seem like a harsh doctrine and yet it is merely an application\nto morals of a salutary principle that all understand when applied by\nthe surgeon. A finger is often removed in order to save the hand; a hand\nis removed to save the arm; and an arm is removed to save the body. An\neye, too, is often removed to save the sight of the remaining eye. Is\neye or arm or body more important than the soul?\n\nChrist understood relative values in the spiritual world. He used the\nmaterial things in life to illustrate values in the realm of the ideal;\nHe used the things that are seen to make understandable the eternal\nthings that the senses cannot comprehend.\n\nAnd what called forth this powerful illustration--the sacrificing of\nthe right eye and the right hand to save the body? He was laying the\nfoundation for a great moral reform, namely, the single standard of\nmorality. He was attacking a great sin and, as usual, He laid the axe at\nthe root of the tree. He was dealing with adultery and He traced the sin\nto its source. He would purge the heart of the unclean thought; He would\nput a ban on the desire before it found vent in accomplishment. He\nturned the thought from the body to the heart and to the soul.\n\nAnd He not only warned men against harbouring the seeds of this sin but\nHe rebuked them for injustice in dealing more harshly with woman than\nthey did with themselves. He did not condone sin; He forgave it, and\naccompanied forgiveness with the injunction, \"Sin no more.\"\n\nChrist dignified childhood next to womanhood. One of His most beautiful\nlessons was woven about a child which He summoned from the crowd. The\nchild's faith was made the test--\"Except ye be converted and become as\nlittle children ye shall not enter into the kingdom.\" And again, \"Suffer\nthe little children to come unto me and forbid them not: for of such is\nthe kingdom of heaven.\"\n\nHis depth of affection--His longing for souls--is beautifully set forth\nin Matthew 23: 37 when He uses the most familiar object in the animal\nkingdom to express His solicitude: \"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that\nkillest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how\noften would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen\ngathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!\"\n\nAnd yet this gentle spirit who would not break a bruised reed--who went\nabout doing good--was wont to blaze forth with hot indignation against\nsordidness and systematized injustice. Hear His fierce denunciation of\nthe \"scribes, Pharisees and hypocrites\" who devoured widows' houses\nand for a pretense made long prayers; and behold Him casting the\nmoney-changers out of the temple because they had turned the house of\nprayer into a den of thieves.\n\nIn a startling paradox He sets forth a great truth: \"Whosoever shall\nsave his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my\nsake, the same shall save it.\" When, before or since, has the littleness\nof the self-centered been so exposed and the nobility of self-surrender\nbeen so glorified? Wendell Phillips has given a splendid paraphrase of\nthis wonderful utterance. He says, \"How prudently most men sink into\nnameless graves, while now and then a few forget themselves into\nimmortality.\"\n\nBut the one doctrine which more than any other distinguished His\nteachings from those of uninspired instructors, is forgiveness. Time\nand again He brings it forward and lays emphasis upon it. In the very\nbeginning of His ministry He drew a contrast between the perverted\nmorals of that day and the spiritual life into which He would lead them\n(Matt. 5):\n\n    Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour,\n    and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless\n    them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for\n    them which despitefully use you and persecute you; That ye may be\n    the children of your Father which is in heaven, for he maketh his\n    sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the\n    just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what\n    reward have ye? Do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute\n    your brethren only, what do ye more than others? Do not even the\n    publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is\n    in heaven is perfect.\n\nA little later, He embodies the thought in the Lord's Prayer--\"Forgive\nus our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.\" He\nfollows that with a scathing arraignment of the cruel servant, who,\nhaving been forgiven a debt almost incalculable in amount, refused to\nforgive a small debt due to him. Even when in agony upon the cross the\nthought of forgiveness was uppermost in the Saviour's heart and He\nprayed: \"Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do!\"\n\nHe was not thinking of relief to wrong-doers when He made forgiveness a\ncardinal principle in the moral code that He promulgated. It was not,\nI am persuaded, to shield from just punishment one who does injury to\nanother, but to save the injured from the paralyzing influence of the\nthirst for revenge. It is only rarely that one has an opportunity to\nretaliate, but the desire for retaliation is a soul-destroying disease.\nChrist would purge the heart of hatred and make love the law of life.\n\nChristianity has been called \"The Gospel of the Second Chance\"; it is\nmore than that. There is no limit to the chances that it offers to the\nrepentant. When Christ was asked whether one should forgive a brother\nseven times He answered, \"Seventy times seven.\" Christianity is the only\nhope of the discouraged and the despondent. Walter Malone has put into a\npoem entitled \"Opportunity\" the exhaustless mercy that Christ holds out\nto men. I quote the concluding stanzas:\n\n  Though deep in mire, wring not your hands and weep:\n    I lend my arm to all who say \"I can\";\n  No shamefaced outcast ever sank so deep\n    But he might rise and be again a man!\n\n  Dost thou behold thy lost youth all aghast?\n    Dost reel from righteous retribution's blow?\n  Then turn from blotted archives of the past,\n    And find the future's pages white as snow.\n\n  Art thou a mourner? Rouse thee from thy spell;\n    Art thou a sinner? Sins may be forgiven.\n  Each morning gives thee wings to flee from hell,\n    Each night a star to guide thy feet to heaven.\n\nWhen the Heavenly Father reserved to Himself the right to avenge\ninjuries He conferred an incalculable benefit upon mankind, just as He\ndid when He imposed upon the organs of the body the task of keeping\nus alive. Not a heart could beat, nor could the lungs expand if their\nmovement had been left to the voluntary act of man. But God has relieved\nHis creatures of concern about blood and breath that man, freed from a\nlabour beyond his strength, may employ his time in the service of his\nMaker. And so man is relieved from the impossible task of avenging\nwrongs done him that he may devote himself to the public weal.\n\nI shall at another time speak of some of the present-day fruits of this\ndoctrine taught nineteen centuries ago; I present it now as one of the\nmost difficult of the Christian virtues to cultivate, but one of the\nmost prolific in the blessings that it bestows. It contributes largely\nto the securing of peace, and Christ is the Prince of Peace.\n\nAll the world is in search of peace; every heart that ever beat has\nsought for peace and many have been the methods employed to secure it.\nSome have thought to purchase it with riches and they have laboured to\nsecure wealth, hoping to find peace when they were able to go where\nthey pleased and buy what they liked. Of those who have endeavoured to\npurchase peace with money, the large majority have failed to secure\nthe money. But what has been the experience of those who have been\nsuccessful in accumulating money? They all tell the same story, viz.,\nthat they spent the first half of their lives trying to get money from\nothers and the last half trying to keep others from getting their money\nand that they found peace in neither half. Some have even reached the\npoint where they find difficulty in getting worthy institutions to\naccept their money; and I know of no better indication of the ethical\nawakening in this country than the increasing tendency to scrutinize the\nmethods of money-making. A long step in advance will have been taken\nwhen religious, educational and charitable institutions refuse to\ncondone immoral methods in business and leave the possessor of\nill-gotten gains to learn the loneliness of life when one prefers money\nto morals.\n\nSome have sought peace in social distinctions, but whether they have\nbeen within the charmed circle and fearful lest they might fall out, or\noutside and hopeful that they might get in, they have not found peace.\n\nSome have thought, vain thought! to find peace in political prominence;\nbut whether office comes by birth, as in monarchies, or by election, as\nin republics, it does not bring peace. An office is conspicuous only\nwhen few can occupy it. Only when few in a generation can hope to enjoy\nan honour do we call it a _great_ honour. I am glad that our Heavenly\nFather did not make the peace of the human heart to depend upon the\naccumulation of wealth, or upon the securing of social or political\ndistinction, for in either case but few could have enjoyed it. When He\nmade peace the reward of a conscience void of offense toward God and\nman, He put it within the reach of all. The poor can secure it as easily\nas the rich, the social outcast as freely as the leader in society, and\nthe humblest citizen equally with those who wield political power.\n\n\"Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give\nyou rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and\nlowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is\neasy, and my burden is light\" (Matt. 11:28-30).\n\nHere is a call to _all_--to every human being. No one is beyond the\nreach of Jesus' love. The yoke is the emblem of service and service\nis the price of happiness. We wear many yokes in common--the yoke of\nsociety, the yoke of government, and the yoke of custom, not to speak of\na multitude of yokes that are individual. Wherever the Gospel has been\ncarried there are two yokes between which a choice must be made--the\ndevil's yoke and the yoke of the Master.\n\nLet no one be deceived--if the devil would tempt the Saviour Himself,\nwill he not tempt you? Satan's service is alluring--it begins in\npleasure and ends in sorrow--\"the dead are there!\" Christ's service\nbegins in duty and ends in delight--\"Blessed is the man who endureth\ntemptation.\" The devil's path is like a forest road at eventide; it\ngrows darker and darker until all is lost in the blackness of the night.\nChrist's path leads from darkness into light.\n\n\"He is risen!\" What inspiration in these words! Nature proclaims a life\nbeyond the grave, but Christ proves it by His resurrection. Nature gives\ncircumstantial evidence that would seem conclusive; but Christ is the\nliving witness whose testimony establishes beyond controversy that the\nmortal can put on immortality. He comforts those who mourn; He dispels\nthe gloom by making death but a narrow, star-lit strip between the\ncompanionship of yesterday and the reunion of to-morrow. Christ not only\ngives us assurance of immortality but He adds the promise of His return.\nAs He ascended in like manner will He come again.\n\n\"And, lo, he goeth before you into Galilee.\" Yes, He is still going on\nbefore--still leading, and His leadership will continue until time shall\nbe no more.\n\nThe growth of Christianity from its beginning on the banks of the\nJordan, until to-day, when its converts are baptized in every part of\nthe world, is so graphically described by Dr. Charles Edward Jefferson,\nin his book entitled \"Things Fundamental,\" that I take the liberty of\ngiving the following extracts:\n\n    \"Christ in history! There is a fact--face it. According to the New\n    Testament, Jesus walked along the shores of a little sea known as\n    the Sea of Galilee. And there He called Peter and Andrew and James\n    and John and several others to be His followers, and they left all\n    and followed Him. After they had followed Him they revered Him, and\n    later on adored and worshipped Him. He left them on their faces,\n    each man saying, 'My Lord and my God!' All that is in the New\n    Testament.\n\n    \"But put the New Testament away. Time passes; history widens; an\n    unseen Presence walks up and down the shores of a larger sea, the\n    sea called the Mediterranean--and this unseen Presence calls men to\n    follow Him ...--another twelve--and these all followed Him and cast\n    themselves at His feet, saying, in the words of the earlier twelve,\n    'My Lord and my God!'\n\n    \"Time passes; history advances; humanity lives its life around the\n    circle of a larger sea--the Atlantic Ocean. An unseen Presence walks\n    up and down the shores calling men to follow Him .... --another\n    twelve--and these leave all and follow Him. We find them on their\n    faces, each one saying, '_My_ Lord and my God!'\n\n    \"Time passes; history is widening; humanity is building its\n    civilization around a still wider sea--we call it the Pacific Ocean.\n    An unknown Presence moves up and down the shores calling men to\n    follow Him, and they are doing it. Another company of twelve is\n    forming. And what took place in Palestine nineteen centuries ago is\n    taking place again in our own day and under our own eyes.\"\n\n    I conclude by calling attention to the comprehensiveness of Christ's\n    authority. After His crucifixion and resurrection--in His last\n    conference with His followers--He announces His boldest claim to\n    power universal and perpetual (Matt. 28):\n\n    ... _All_ power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye\n    therefore, and teach _all_ nations, baptizing them in the name of\n    the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; Teaching them to\n    observe _all_ things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am\n    with you _alway_, even unto the end of the world. Amen.\n\nHere is a Gospel intended for _every_ human being; here is a code of\nmorals that is to endure for _all time;_ here is a solution for _every_\nproblem that can vex a heart or perplex a world, and back of these is\n_all power in Heaven and in Earth_.\n\nThe word _all_ is used four times in a few sentences. There is nothing\nin reserve. We have the final word in religion--Jesus Christ for all,\nand for all time--\"The same yesterday, and to-day and forever.\"\n\n\n\n\nIV\n\nTHE ORIGIN OF MAN\n\n\nWhen the mainspring is broken a watch ceases to be useful as a\ntimekeeper. A handsome case may make it still an ornament and the parts\nmay have a market value, but it cannot serve the purpose of a watch.\nThere is that in each human life that corresponds to the mainspring of a\nwatch--that which is absolutely necessary if the life is to be what it\nshould be, a real life and not a mere existence. That necessary thing is\n_a belief in God_. Religion is defined as the relation between God and\nman, and Tolstoy has described morality as the outward expression of\nthis inward relationship.\n\nIf it be true, as I believe it is, that morality is dependent upon\nreligion, then religion is not only the most practical thing in the\nworld, but the first essential. Without religion, viz., a sense of\ndependence upon God and reverence for Him, one can play a part in both\nthe physical and the intellectual world, but he cannot live up to the\npossibilities which God has placed within the reach of each human being.\n\nA belief in God is fundamental; upon it rest the influences that control\nlife.\n\nFirst, the consciousness of God's presence in the life gives one a sense\nof responsibility to the Creator for every thought and word and deed.\n\nSecond, prayer rests upon a belief in God; communion with the Creator\nin the expression of gratitude and in pleas for guidance powerfully\ninfluences man.\n\nThird, belief in a personal immortality rests upon faith in God; the\ninward restraint that one finds in a faith that looks forward to a\nfuture life with its rewards and punishments, makes outward restraint\nless necessary. Man is weak enough in hours of temptation, even when he\nis fortified by the conviction that this life is but a small arc of\nan infinite circle; his power of resistance is greatly impaired if he\naccepts the doctrine that conscious existence terminates with death.\n\nFourth, the spirit of brotherhood rests on a belief in God. We trace our\nrelationship to our fellowmen through the Creator, the Common Parent of\nus all.\n\nFifth, belief in the Bible depends upon a belief in God. Jehovah comes\nfirst; His word comes afterward. There can be no inspiration without a\nHeavenly Father to inspire.\n\nSixth, belief in God is also necessary to a belief in Christ; the Son\ncould not have revealed the Father to man according to any atheistic\ntheory. And so with all other Christian doctrines: they rest upon a\nbelief in God.\n\nIf belief in God is necessary to the beliefs enumerated, then it follows\nlogically that anything that weakens belief in God weakens man, and, to\nthe extent that it impairs belief in God, reduces his power to measure\nup to his opportunities and responsibilities. If there is at work in the\nworld to-day anything that tends to break this mainspring, it is the\nduty of the moral, as well as the Christian, world to combat this\ninfluence in every possible way.\n\nI believe there is such a menace to fundamental morality. The hypothesis\nto which the name of Darwin has been given--the hypothesis that links\nman to the lower forms of life and makes him a lineal descendant of the\nbrute--is obscuring God and weakening all the virtues that rest upon the\nreligious tie between God and man. Passing over, for the present, all\nother phases of evolution and considering only that part of the system\nwhich robs man of the dignity conferred upon him by separate creation,\nwhen God breathed into him the breath of life and he became the first\nman, I venture to call attention to the demoralizing influence exerted\nby this doctrine.\n\nIf we accept the Bible as true we have no difficulty in determining the\norigin of man. In the first chapter of Genesis we read that God, after\ncreating all other things, said, \"Let us make man in our image, after\nour likeness; and let him have dominion over the fish of the sea, and\nover the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth,\nand over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God\ncreated man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male\nand female created he them.\"\n\nThe materialist has always rejected the Bible account of Creation and,\nduring the last half century, the Darwinian doctrine has been the means\nof shaking the faith of millions. It is important that man should have\na correct understanding of his line of descent. Huxley calls it the\n\"question of questions\" for mankind. He says: \"The problem which\nunderlies all others, and is more interesting than any other--is the\nascertainment of the place which man occupies in nature and of his\nrelation to the universe of things. Whence our race has come, what are\nthe limits of our power over nature, and of nature's power over us, to\nwhat goal are we tending, are the problems which present themselves anew\nwith undiminished interest to every man born in the world.\"\n\nThe materialists deny the existence of God and seek to explain man's\npresence upon the earth without a creative act. They go back from man to\nthe animals, and from one form of life to another until they come to the\nfirst germ of life; there they divide into two schools, some believing\nthat the first germ of life came from another planet, others holding\nthat it was the result of spontaneous generation. One school answers\nthe arguments advanced by the other and, as they cannot agree with each\nother, I am not compelled to agree with either.\n\nIf it were necessary to accept one of these theories I would prefer the\nfirst; for, if we can chase the germ of life off of this planet and out\ninto space, we can guess the rest of the way and no one can contradict\nus. But, if we accept the doctrine of spontaneous generation we will\nhave to spend our time explaining why spontaneous generation ceased to\nact after the first germ of life was created. It is not necessary to pay\nmuch attention to any theory that boldly eliminates God; it does not\ndeceive many. The mind revolts at the idea of spontaneous generation; in\nall the researches of the ages no scientist has found a single instance\nof life that was not begotten by life. The materialist has nothing but\nimagination to build upon; he cannot hope for company or encouragement.\n\nBut the Darwinian doctrine is more dangerous because more deceptive. It\n_permits_ one to believe in a God, but puts the creative act so far away\nthat reverence for the Creator--even belief in Him--is likely to be\nlost.\n\nBefore commenting on the Darwinian hypothesis let me refer you to the\nlanguage of its author as it applies to man. On page 180 of \"Descent of\nMan\" (Hurst & Company, Edition 1874), Darwin says: \"Our most ancient\nprogenitors in the kingdom of the Vertebrata, at which we are able to\nobtain an obscure glance, apparently consisted of a group of marine\nanimals, resembling the larvae of the existing Ascidians.\" Then he\nsuggests a line of descent leading to the monkey. And he does not even\npermit us to indulge in a patriotic pride of ancestry; instead of\nletting us descend from American monkeys, he connects us with the\nEuropean branch of the monkey family.\n\nIt will be noted, first, that he begins the summary with the word\n\"apparently,\" which the Standard Dictionary defines: \"as judged by\nappearances, without passing upon its reality.\" His second sentence\n(following the sentence quoted) turns upon the word \"probably,\" which is\ndefined: \"as far as the evidence shows, presumably, likely.\" His works\nare full of words indicating uncertainty. The phrase \"we may; well\nsuppose,\" occurs over eight hundred times in his two principal works.\n(See _Herald & Presbyter_, November 22, 1914.) The eminent scientist is\nguessing.\n\nAfter locating our gorilla and chimpanzee ancestors in Africa, he\nconcludes that \"it is useless to speculate on this subject.\" If the\nuselessness of speculation had occurred to him at the beginning of his\ninvestigation he might have escaped responsibility for shaking the faith\nof two generations by his guessing on the whole subject of biology.\n\nIf we could divide the human race into two distinct groups we might\nallow evolutionists to worship brutes as ancestors but they insist on\nconnecting all mankind with the jungle. We have a right to protect our\nfamily tree.\n\nHaving given Darwin's conclusions as to man's ancestry, I shall quote\nhim to prove that his hypothesis is not only groundless, but absurd and\nharmful to society. It is groundless because there is not a single fact\nin the universe that can be cited to prove that man is descended from\nthe lower animals. Darwin does not use facts; he uses conclusions drawn\nfrom similarities. He builds upon presumptions, probabilities and\ninferences, and asks the acceptance of his hypothesis \"notwithstanding\nthe fact that connecting links have not hitherto been discovered\" (page\n162). He advances an hypothesis which, if true, would find support on\nevery foot of the earth's surface, but which, as a matter of fact, finds\nsupport nowhere. There are myriads of living creatures about us, from\ninsects too small to be seen with the naked eye to the largest mammals,\nand, yet, not one is in transition from one species to another; every\none is perfect. It is strange that slight similarities could make him\nignore gigantic differences. The remains of nearly one hundred species\nof vertebrate life have been found in the rocks, of which more than\none-half are found living to-day, and none of the survivors show\nmaterial change. The word hypothesis is a synonym used by scientists for\nthe word guess; it is more dignified in sound and more imposing to the\nsight, but it has the same meaning as the old-fashioned, every-day\nword, guess. If Darwin had described his doctrine as a guess instead of\ncalling it an hypothesis, it would not have lived a year.[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: Dr. Etheridge, Fossiologist of the British Museum, says:\n\"Nine-tenths of the talk of Evolutionists is sheer nonsense, not founded\non observation and wholly unsupported by facts. This museum is full of\nproofs of the utter falsity of their views.\"\n\nProf. Beale, of King's College, London, says: \"In support of all\nnaturalistic conjectures concerning man's origin, there is not at this\ntime a shadow of scientific evidence.\"\n\nProf. Fleischmann, of Erlangen, says: \"The Darwinian theory has in the\nrealms of Nature not a single fact to confirm it. It is not the result\nof scientific research, but purely the product of the imagination.\"\n\nThe January issue of \"Science,\" 1922, contains a speech delivered at\nToronto last December by Prof. William Bateson of London before the\nAmerican Association for the Advancement of Science. He says that\nscience has faith in evolution but doubts as to the origin of species.]\n\nProbably nothing impresses Darwin more than the fact that at an early\nstage the foetus of a child cannot be distinguished from the foetus of\nan ape, but why should such a similarity in the beginning impress him\nmore than the difference at birth and the immeasurable gulf between the\ntwo at forty? If science cannot detect a difference, _known to exist_,\nbetween the foetus of an ape and the foetus of a child, it should\nnot ask us to substitute the inferences, the presumptions and the\nprobabilities of science for the word of God.\n\nScience has rendered invaluable service to society; her achievements are\ninnumerable--and the hypotheses of scientists should be considered with\nan open mind. Their theories should be carefully examined and their\narguments fairly weighed, but the scientist cannot compel acceptance\nof any argument he advances, except as, judged upon its merits, it is\nconvincing. Man is infinitely more than science; science, as well as\nthe Sabbath, was made for man. It must be remembered, also, that all\nsciences are not of equal importance. Tolstoy insists that the science\nof \"How to Live\" is more important than any other science, and is this\nnot true? It is better to trust in the Rock of Ages, than to know the\nage of the rocks; it is better for one to know that he is close to the\nHeavenly Father, than to know how far the stars in the heavens are\napart. And is it not just as important that the scientists who deal with\nmatter should respect the scientists who deal with spiritual things,\nas that the latter should respect the former? If it be true, as Paul\ndeclares, that \"the things that are seen are temporal\" while \"the things\nthat are unseen are eternal,\" why should those who deal with temporal\nthings think themselves superior to those who deal with the things that\nare eternal? Why should the Bible, which the centuries have not been\nable to shake, be discarded for scientific works that have to be revised\nand corrected every few years? The preference should be given to the\nBible.\n\nThe two lines of work are parallel. There should be no conflict between\nthe discoverers of _real_ truths, because real truths do not conflict.\nEvery truth harmonizes with every other truth, but why should an\nhypothesis, suggested by a scientist, be accepted as true until its\ntruth is established? Science should be the last to make such a demand\nbecause science to be truly science is classified knowledge; it is\nthe explanation of facts. Tested by this definition, Darwinism is not\nscience at all; it is guesses strung together. There is more science in\nthe twenty-fourth verse of the first chapter of Genesis (And God said,\nlet the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle and\ncreeping things, and beast of the earth after his kind; and it was so.)\nthan in all that Darwin wrote.\n\nIt is no light matter to impeach the veracity of the Scriptures in\norder to accept, not a truth--not even a theory--but a mere hypothesis.\nProfessor Huxley says, \"There is no fault to be found with Darwin's\nmethod, but it is another thing whether he has fulfilled all the\nconditions imposed by that method. Is it satisfactorily proved that\nspecies may be originated by selection? That none of the phenomena\nexhibited by the species are inconsistent with the origin of the species\nin this way? If these questions can be answered in the affirmative,\nMr. Darwin's view steps out of the ranks of hypothesis into that of\ntheories; but so long as the evidence adduced falls short of enforcing\nthat affirmative, so long, to our minds, the new doctrine must be\ncontent to remain among the former--an extremely valuable, and in the\nhighest degree probable, doctrine; indeed the only extant hypothesis\nwhich is worth anything in a scientific point of view; but still a\nhypothesis, and not a theory of species.\" \"After much consideration,\"\nhe adds, \"and assuredly with no bias against Darwin's views, it is our\nclear conviction that, as the evidence now stands, it is not absolutely\nproven that a group of animals, having all the characters exhibited\nby species in nature, has ever been originated by selection, whether\nartificial or natural.\"\n\nBut Darwin is absurd as well as groundless. He announces two laws,\nwhich, in his judgment, explain the development of man from the lowest\nform of animal life, viz., natural selection and sexual selection. The\nlatter has been abandoned by the modern believers in evolution, but\ntwo illustrations, taken from Darwin's \"Descent of Man,\" will show his\nunreliability as a guide to the young. On page 587 of the 1874 edition,\nhe tries to explain man's superior mental strength (a proposition more\ndifficult to defend to-day than in Darwin's time). His theory is that,\n\"the struggle between the males for the possession of the females\"\nhelped to develop the male mind and that this superior strength was\ntransmitted by males to their male offspring.\n\nAfter having shown, to his own satisfaction, how sexual selection would\naccount for the (supposed) greater strength of the male mind, he turns\nhis attention to another question, namely, how did man become a hairless\nanimal? This he accounts for also by sexual selection--the females\npreferred the males with the least hair (page 624). In a footnote on\npage 625 he says that this view has been harshly criticized. \"Hardly any\nview advanced in this work,\" he says, \"has met with so much disfavour.\"\nA comment and a question: First, Unless the brute females were very\ndifferent from the females as we know them, they would not have agreed\nin taste. Some would \"probably\" have preferred males with less hair,\nothers, \"we may well suppose,\" would have preferred males with more\nhair. Those with more hair would naturally be the stronger because\nbetter able to resist the weather. But, second, how could the males have\nstrengthened their minds by fighting for the females if, at the same\ntime, the females were breeding the hair off by selecting the males? Or,\ndid the males select for three years and then allow the females to do\nthe selecting during leap year?\n\nBut, worse yet, in a later edition published by L.A. Burt Company, a\n\"supplemental note\" is added to discuss two letters which he thought\nsupported the idea that sexual selection transformed the hairy animal\ninto the hairless man. Darwin's correspondent (page 710) reports that\na mandril seemed to be proud of a bare spot. Can anything be less\nscientific than trying to guess what an animal is thinking about? It\nwould seem that this also was a subject about which it was \"useless to\nspeculate.\"\n\nWhile on this subject it may be worth while to call your attention to\nother fantastic imaginings of which those are guilty who reject the\nBible and enter the field of speculation--fiction surpassing anything to\nbe found in the Arabian Nights. If one accepts the Scriptural account of\nthe creation, he can credit God with the working of miracles and with\nthe doing of many things that man cannot understand. The evolutionist,\nhowever, having substituted what he imagines to be a universal law for\nseparate acts of creation must explain everything. The evolutionist,\nnot to go back farther than life just now, begins with one or a few\ninvisible germs of life on the planet and imagines that these invisible\ngerms have, by the operation of what they call \"resident forces,\"\nunaided from without, developed into all that we see to-day. They cannot\nin a lifetime explain the things that have to be explained, if their\nhypothesis is accepted--a useless waste of time even if explanation were\npossible.\n\nTake the eye, for instance; believing in the Mosaic account, I believe\nthat God made the eyes when He made man--not only made the eyes but\ncarved out the caverns in the skull in which they hang. It is easy for\nthe believer in the Bible to explain the eyes, because he believes in a\nGod who can do all things and, according to the Bible, did create man as\na part of a divine plan.\n\nBut how does the evolutionist explain the eye when he leaves God out?\nHere is the only guess that I have seen--if you find any others I\nshall be glad to know of them, as I am collecting the guesses of the\nevolutionists. The evolutionist guesses that there was a time when eyes\nwere unknown--that is a necessary part of the hypothesis. And since\nthe eye is a universal possession among living things the evolutionist\nguesses that it came into being--not by design or by act of God--but\njust happened, and how did it happen? I will give you the guess--a piece\nof pigment, or, as some say, a freckle appeared upon the skin of an\nanimal that had no eyes. This piece of pigment or freckle converged the\nrays of the sun upon that spot and when the little animal felt the\nheat on that spot it turned the spot to the sun to get more heat. The\nincreased heat irritated the skin--so the evolutionists guess, and a\nnerve came there and out of the nerve came the eye! Can you beat it? But\nthis only accounts for one eye; there must have been another piece of\npigment or freckle soon afterward and just in the right place in order\nto give the animal two eyes.\n\nAnd, according to the evolutionist, there was a time when animals had no\nlegs, and so the leg came by accident. How? Well, the guess is that a\nlittle animal without legs was wiggling along on its belly one day when\nit discovered a wart--it just happened so--and it was in the right place\nto be used to aid it in locomotion; so, it came to depend upon the wart,\nand use finally developed it into a leg. And then another wart and\nanother leg, at the proper time--by accident--and accidentally in the\nproper place. Is it not astonishing that any person intelligent enough\nto teach school would talk such tommyrot to students and look serious\nwhile doing so?\n\nAnd yet I read only a few weeks ago, on page 124 of a little book\nrecently issued by a prominent New York minister, the following:\n\n\"Man has grown up in this universe gradually developing his powers and\nfunctions as responses to his environment. If he has _eyes_, so the\n_biologists_ assure us, it is because _light waves played upon the skin_\nand eyes came out in answer; if he has _ears_ it is because the _air\nwaves_ were there first and the ears came out to hear. Man never yet,\n_according to the evolutionist_, has developed any power save as a\nreality called it into being. There would be no fins if there were no\nwater, no wings if there were no air, no legs if there were no land.\"\n\nYou see I only called your attention to forty per cent. of the\nabsurdities; he speaks of eyes, ears, fins, wings and legs--five. I only\ncalled attention to eyes and legs--two. The evolutionist guesses himself\naway from God, but he only makes matters worse. How long did the\n\"light waves\" have to play on the skin before the eyes came out? The\nevolutionist is very deliberate; he is long on time. He would certainly\ngive the eye thousands of years, if not millions, in which to develop;\nbut how could he be sure that the light waves played all the time in one\nplace or played in the same place generation after generation until the\ndevelopment was complete? And why did the light waves quit playing when\ntwo eyes were perfected? Why did they not keep on playing until there\nwere eyes all over the body? Why do they not play to-day, so that we may\nsee eyes in process of development? And if the light waves created the\neyes, why did they not create them strong enough to bear the light? Why\ndid the light waves make eyes and then make eyelids to keep the light\nout of the eyes?\n\nAnd so with the ears. They must have gone _in_ \"to hear\" instead of\n_out_, and wasn't it lucky that they happened to go in on opposite sides\nof the head instead of cater-cornered or at random? Is it not easier to\nbelieve in a God who can make the eye, the ear, the fin, the wing, and\nthe leg, as well as the light, the sound, the air, the water and the\nland?\n\nThere is such an abundance of ludicrous material that it is hard to\nresist the temptation to continue illustrations indefinitely, but a few\nmore will be sufficient. In order that you may be prepared to ridicule\nthese pseudo-scientists who come to you with guesses instead of facts,\nlet me give you three recent bits of evolutionary lore.\n\nLast November I was passing through Philadelphia and read in an\nafternoon paper a report of an address delivered in that city by a\ncollege professor employed in extension work. Here is an extract from\nthe paper's account of the speech: \"Evidence that early men climbed\ntrees with their feet lies in the way we wear the heels of our\nshoes--more at the outside. A baby can wiggle its big toe without\nwiggling its other toes--an indication that it once used its big toe in\nclimbing trees.\" What a consolation it must be to mothers to know that\nthe baby is not to be blamed for wiggling the big toe without wiggling\nthe other toes. It cannot help it, poor little thing; it is an\ninheritance from \"the tree man,\" so the evolutionists tell us.\n\nAnd here is another extract: \"We often dream of falling. Those who fell\nout of the trees some fifty thousand years ago and were killed, of\ncourse, had no descendants. So those who fell and were _not_ hurt, of\ncourse, lived, and so we are never hurt in our dreams of falling.\" Of\ncourse, if we were actually descended from the inhabitants of trees, it\nwould seem quite likely that we descended from those that were _not_\nkilled in falling. But they must have been badly frightened if the\nimpression made upon their feeble minds could have lasted for fifty\nthousand years and still be vivid enough to scare us.\n\nIf the Bible said anything so idiotic as these guessers put forth in\nthe name of science, scientists would have a great time ridiculing the\nsacred pages, but men who scoff at the recorded interpretation of\ndreams by Joseph and Daniel seem to be able to swallow the amusing\ninterpretations offered by the Pennsylvania professor.\n\nA few months ago the _Sunday School Times_ quoted a professor in an\nIllinois University as saying that the great day in history was the day\nwhen a water puppy crawled up on the land and, deciding to be a land\nanimal, became man's progenitor. If these scientific speculators\ncan agree upon the day they will probably insist on our abandoning\nWashington's birthday, the Fourth of July, and even Christmas, in order\nto join with the whole world in celebrating \"Water Puppy Day.\"\n\nWithin the last few weeks the papers published a dispatch from Paris\nto the effect that an \"eminent scientist\" announced that he had\ncommunicated with the spirit of a dog and learned from the dog that it\nwas happy. Must we believe this, too?\n\nBut is the law of \"natural selection\" a sufficient explanation, or a\nmore satisfactory explanation, than sexual selection? It is based on the\ntheory that where there is an advantage in any characteristic, animals\nthat possess this characteristic survive and propagate their kind. This,\naccording to Darwin's argument, leads to progress through the \"survival\nof the fittest.\" This law or principle (natural selection), so carefully\nworked out by Darwin, is being given less and less weight by scientists.\nDarwin himself admits that he \"perhaps attributed too much to the action\nof natural selection and the survival of the fittest\" (page 76). John\nBurroughs, the naturalist, rejects it in a recent magazine article. The\nfollowers of Darwin are trying to retain evolution while rejecting the\narguments that led Darwin to accept it as an explanation of the varied\nlife on the planet. Some evolutionists reject Darwin's line of descent\nand believe that man, instead of coming from the ape, branched off from\na common ancestor farther back, but \"cousin\" ape is as objectionable as\n\"grandpa\" ape.\n\nWhile \"survival of the fittest\" may seem plausible when applied to\nindividuals of the same species, it affords no explanation whatever,\nof the almost infinite number of creatures that have come under man's\nobservation. To believe that natural selection, sexual selection or any\nother kind of selection can account for the countless differences we see\nabout us requires more faith in _chance_ than a Christian is required to\nhave in God.\n\nIs it conceivable that the hawk and the hummingbird, the spider and the\nhoney bee, the turkey gobbler and the mocking-bird, the butterfly and\nthe eagle, the ostrich and the wren, the tree toad and the elephant,\nthe giraffe and the kangaroo, the wolf and the lamb should all be the\ndescendants of a common ancestor? Yet these and all other creatures must\nbe blood relatives if man is next of kin to the monkey.\n\nIf the evolutionists are correct; if it is true that all that we see is\nthe result of development from one or a few invisible germs of life,\nthen, in plants as well as in animals there must be a line of descent\nconnecting all the trees and vegetables and flowers with a common\nancestry. Does it not strain the imagination to the breaking point to\nbelieve that the oak, the cedar, the pine and the palm are all the\nprogeny of one ancient seed and that this seed was also the ancestor\nof wheat and corn, potato and tomato, onion and sugar beet, rose and\nviolet, orchid and daisy, mountain flower and magnolia? Is it not more\nrational to believe in _God_ and explain the varieties of life in terms\nof divine power than to waste our lives in ridiculous attempts to\nexplain the unexplainable? There is no mortification in admitting that\nthere are insoluble mysteries; but it is shameful to spend the time that\nGod has given for nobler use in vain attempts to exclude God from His\nown universe and to find in chance a substitute for God's power and\nwisdom and love.\n\nWhile evolution in plant life and in animal life _up to the highest form\nof animal_ might, if there were proof of it, be admitted without raising\na presumption that would compel us to give a brute origin to man, why\nshould we admit a thing of which there is no proof? Why should we\nencourage the guesses of these speculators and thus weaken our power\nto protest when they attempt the leap from the monkey to man? Let the\nevolutionist furnish his proof.\n\nAlthough our chief concern is in protecting man from the demoralization\ninvolved in accepting a brute ancestry, it is better to put the\nadvocates of evolution upon the defensive and challenge them to produce\nproof in support of their hypothesis in plant life and in the animal\nworld. They will be kept so busy trying to find support for their\nhypothesis in the kingdoms below man that they will have little time\nleft to combat the Word of God in respect to man's origin. Evolution\njoins issue with the Mosaic account of creation. God's law, as stated\nin Genesis, is _reproduction according to kind_; evolution implies\nreproduction _not_ according to kind. While the process of change\nimplied in evolution is covered up in endless eons of time it is\n_change_ nevertheless. The Bible does not say that reproduction shall\nbe _nearly_ according to kind or _seemingly_ according to kind. The\nstatement is positive that it is _according to kind_, and that does not\nleave any room for the _changes_ however gradual or imperceptible that\nare necessary to support the evolutionary hypothesis.\n\nWe see about us everywhere and always proof of the Bible law, viz.,\nreproduction according to kind; we find nothing in the universe to\nsupport Darwin's doctrine of reproduction other than of kind.\n\nIf you question the possibility of such changes as the Darwinian\ndoctrine supposes you are reminded that the scientific speculators have\nraised the time limit. \"If ten million years are not sufficient, take\ntwenty,\" they say: \"If fifty million years are not enough take one or\ntwo hundred millions.\" That accuracy is not essential in such guessing\nmay be inferred from the fact that the estimates of the time that has\nelapsed since life began on the earth, vary from less than twenty-five\nmillion years to more than three hundred million. Darwin estimated this\nperiod at two hundred million years while Darwin's son estimated it at\nfifty-seven million.\n\nIt requires more than millions of years to account for the varieties of\nlife that inhabit the earth; it requires a Creator, unlimited in power,\nunlimited intelligence, and unlimited love.\n\nBut the doctrine of evolution is sometimes carried farther than that.\nA short while ago Canon Barnes, of Westminster Abbey, startled his\ncongregation by an interpretation of evolution that ran like this: \"It\nnow seems highly probable (probability again) that from some fundamental\nstuff in the universe the electrons arose. From them came matter.\nFrom matter, life emerged. From life came mind. From mind, spiritual\nconsciousness was developing. There was a time when matter, life and\nmind, and the soul of man were not, but now they are. Each has arisen as\na part of the vast scheme planned by God.\" (An American professor in a\nChristian college has recently expressed himself along substantially the\nsame lines.)\n\nBut what has God been doing since the \"stuff\" began to develop? The\nverbs used by Canon Barnes indicate an internal development unaided from\nabove. \"Arose, came, emerged, etc.,\" all exclude the idea that God is\nwithin reach or call in man's extremity.\n\nWhen I was a boy in college the materialists began with matter separated\ninto infinitely small particles and every particle separated from every\nother particle by distance infinitely great. But now they say that it\ntakes 1,740 electrons to make an atom of infinite fineness. God, they\ninsist, has not had anything to do with this universe since 1,740\nelectrons formed a chorus and sang, \"We'll be an atom by and by.\"\n\nIt requires measureless credulity to enable one to believe that all that\nwe see about us came by chance, by a series of happy-go-lucky accidents.\nIf only an infinite God could have formed hydrogen and oxygen and united\nthem in just the right proportions to produce water--the daily need of\nevery living thing--scattered among the flowers all the colours of the\nrainbow and every variety of perfume, adjusted the mocking-bird's throat\nto its musical scale, and fashioned a soul for man, why should we want\nto imprison such a God in an impenetrable past? This is a living world;\nwhy not a _living_ God upon the throne? Why not allow Him to work _now_?\n\nDarwin is so sure that his theory is correct that he is ready to accuse\nthe Creator of trying to deceive man if the theory is not sound. On page\n41 he says: \"To take any other view is to admit that our structure and\nthat of all animals about us, is a mere snare to entrap our judgment;\"\nas if the Almighty were in duty bound to make each species so\nseparate from every other that _no one_ could possibly be confused by\nresemblances. There would seem to be differences enough. To put man in a\nclass with the chimpanzee because of any resemblances that may be found\nis so unreasonable that the masses have never accepted it.\n\nIf we see houses of different size, from one room to one hundred, we\ndo not say that the large houses grew out of small ones, but that the\narchitect that could plan one could plan all.\n\nBut a groundless hypothesis--even an absurd one--would be unworthy of\nnotice if it did no harm. This hypothesis, however, does incalculable\nharm. It teaches that Christianity impairs the race physically. That\nwas the first implication at which I revolted. It led me to review\nthe doctrine and reject it entirely. If hatred is the law of man's\ndevelopment; that is, if man has reached his present perfection by a\ncruel law under which the strong kill off the weak--then, if there is\nany logic that can bind the human mind, we must turn backward toward the\nbrute if we dare to substitute the law of love for the law of hate. That\nis the conclusion that I reached and it is the conclusion that Darwin\nhimself reached. On pages 149-50 he says: \"With savages the weak in body\nor mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a\nvigorous state of health. We civilized men, on the other hand, do our\nutmost to check the progress of elimination. We build asylums for the\nimbecile, the maimed and the sick; we institute poor laws; our medical\nexperts exert their utmost skill to save the lives of every one to the\nlast moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved\nthousands who from weak constitutions would have succumbed to smallpox.\nThus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No\none who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that\nthis must be highly injurious to the race of man.\"\n\nThis confession deserves analysis. First, he commends, by implication,\nthe savage method of eliminating the weak, while, by implication, he\ncondemns \"civilized men\" for prolonging the life of the weak. He\neven blames vaccination because it has preserved thousands who might\notherwise have succumbed (for the benefit of the race?). Can you imagine\nanything more brutal? And then note the low level of the argument. \"No\none who has attended the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that\nthis must be highly injurious to the race of man.\" All on a brute basis.\n\nHis hypothesis breaks down here. The minds which, according to Darwin,\nare developed by natural selection and sexual selection, use their power\nto suspend the law by which they have reached their high positions.\nMedicine is one of the greatest of the sciences and its chief object is\nto save life and strengthen the weak. That, Darwin complains, interferes\nwith \"the survival of the fittest.\" If he complains of vaccination, what\nwould he say of the more recent discovery of remedies for typhoid fever,\nyellow fever and the black plague? And what would he think of saving\nweak babies by pasteurizing milk and of the efforts to find a specific\nfor tuberculosis and cancer? Can such a barbarous doctrine be sound?\n\nBut Darwin's doctrine is even more destructive. His heart rebels against\nthe \"hard reason\" upon which his heartless hypothesis is built. He says:\n\"The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly the\nresult of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as a\npart of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered in the manner\nindicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our\nsympathy even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in\nthe noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself while\nperforming an operation, for he knows he is acting for the good of\nhis patient; but if we were to intentionally neglect the weak and the\nhelpless, it could be only for a contingent benefit, with overwhelming\npresent evil. We must therefore bear the undoubted bad effects of the\nweak surviving and propagating their kind.\"\n\nThe moral nature which, according to Darwin, is also developed by\nnatural selection and sexual selection, repudiates the brutal law\nto which, if his reasoning is correct, it owes its origin. Can that\ndoctrine be accepted as scientific when its author admits that we cannot\napply it \"without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature\"? On\nthe contrary, civilization is measured by the moral revolt against the\ncruel doctrine developed by Darwin.\n\nDarwin rightly decided to suspend his doctrine, even at the risk of\nimpairing the race. But some of his followers are more hardened. A few\nyears ago I read a book in which the author defended the use of alcohol\non the ground that it rendered a service to society by killing off the\ndegenerates. And this argument was advanced by a scientist in the fall\nof 1920 at a congress against alcohol.\n\nThe language which I have quoted proves that Darwinism is directly\nantagonistic to Christianity, which boasts of its eleemosynary\ninstitutions and of the care it bestows on the weak and the helpless.\nDarwin, by putting man on a brute basis and ignoring spiritual values,\nattacks the very foundations of Christianity.\n\nThose who accept Darwin's views are in the habit of saying that it need\nnot lessen their reverence for God to believe that the Creator fashioned\na germ of life and endowed it with power to develop into what we see\nto-day. It is true that a God who could make man as he is, could have\nmade him by the long-drawn-out process suggested by Darwin. To do either\nwould require infinite power, beyond the ability of man to comprehend.\nBut what is the _natural tendency_ of Darwin's doctrine?\n\nWill man's attitude toward Darwin's God be the same as it would be\ntoward the God of Moses? Will the believer in Darwin's God be as\nconscious of God's presence in his daily life? Will he be as sensitive\nto God's will and as anxious to find out what God wants him to do?\n\nWill the believer in Darwin's God be as fervent in prayer and as open to\nthe reception of divine suggestions?\n\nI shall later trace the influence of Darwinism on world peace when the\ndoctrine is espoused by one bold enough to carry it to its logical\nconclusion, but I must now point out its natural and logical effect upon\nyoung Christians.\n\nA boy is born in a Christian family; as soon as he is able to join words\ntogether into sentences his mother teaches him to lisp the child's\nprayer: \"Now I lay me down to sleep; I pray the Lord my soul to keep; if\nI should die before I wake, I pray the Lord my soul to take.\" A little\nlater the boy is taught the Lord's Prayer and each day he lays his\npetition before the Heavenly Father: \"Give us this day our daily bread\";\n\"Lead us not into temptation\"; \"Deliver us from evil\"; \"Forgive our\ntrespasses\"; etc.\n\nHe talks with God. He goes to Sunday school and learns that the Heavenly\nFather is even more kind than earthly parents; he hears the preacher\ntell how precious our lives are in the sight of God--how even a sparrow\ncannot fall to the ground without His notice. All his faith is built\nupon the Book that informs him that he is made in the image of God; that\nChrist came to reveal God to man and to be man's Saviour.\n\nThen he goes to college and a learned professor leads him through a book\n600 pages thick, largely devoted to resemblances between man and the\nbeasts about him. His attention is called to a point in the ear that is\nlike a point in the ear of the ourang, to canine teeth, to muscles like\nthose by which a horse moves his ears.\n\nHe is then told that everything found in a human brain is found in\nminiature in a brute brain.\n\nAnd how about morals? He is assured that the development of the moral\nsense can be explained on a brute basis without any act of, or aid from,\nGod. (See pages 113-114.)\n\nNo mention of religion, the only basis for morality; not a suggestion of\na sense of responsibility to God--nothing but cold, clammy materialism!\nDarwinism transforms the Bible into a story book and reduces Christ to\nman's level. It gives him an ape for an ancestor on His mother's side at\nleast and, as many evolutionists believe, on His Father's side also.\n\nThe instructor gives the student a new family tree millions of years\nlong, with its roots in the water (marine animals) and then sets him\nadrift, with infinite capacity for good or evil but with no light to\nguide him, no compass to direct him and no chart of the sea of life!\n\nNo wonder so large a percentage of the boys and girls who go from Sunday\nschools and churches to colleges (sometimes as high as seventy-five per\ncent.) never return to religious work. How can one feel God's presence\nin his daily life if Darwin's reasoning is sound? This restraining\ninfluence, more potent than any external force, is paralyzed when God\nis put so far away. How can one believe in prayer if, for millions of\nyears, God has never touched a human life or laid His hand upon the\ndestiny of the human race? What mockery to petition or implore, if God\nneither hears nor answers. Elijah taunted the prophets of Baal\nwhen their god failed to answer with fire; \"Cry aloud,\" he said,\n\"peradventure he sleepeth.\" Darwin mocks the Christians even more\ncruelly; he tells us that our God has been asleep for millions of years.\nEven worse, he does not affirm that Jehovah was ever awake. Nowhere does\nhe collect for the reader the evidences of a Creative Power and call\nupon man to worship and obey God. The great scientist is, if I may\nborrow a phrase, \"too much absorbed in the things infinitely small to\nconsider the things infinitely great.\" Darwinism chills the spiritual\nnature and quenches the fires of religious enthusiasm. If the proof in\nsupport of Darwinism does not compel acceptance--and it does not--why\nsubstitute it for an account of the Creation that links man directly\nwith the Creator and holds before him an example to be imitated? As the\neminent theologian, Charles Hodge, says: \"The Scriptural doctrine (of\nCreation) accounts for the spiritual nature of man, and meets all his\nspiritual necessities. It gives him an object of adoration, love and\nconfidence. It reveals the Being on whom his indestructible sense of\nresponsibility terminates. The truth of this doctrine, therefore,\nrests not only upon the authority of the Scriptures but on the very\nconstitution of our nature.\"\n\nI have spoken of what would seem to be the natural and logical effect of\nthe Darwin hypothesis on the minds of the young. This view is confirmed\nby its _actual_ effect on Darwin himself. In his \"Life and Letters,\" he\nsays: \"I am much engaged, an old man, and out of health, and I cannot\nspare time to answer your questions fully--nor indeed can they be\nanswered. Science has nothing to do with Christ, except in so far as the\nhabit of scientific research makes a man cautious in admitting evidence.\nFor myself, I do not believe that there ever has been any revelation. As\nfor a future life, every man must judge for himself between conflicting\nvague probabilities.\" It will be seen that science, according to Darwin,\nhas nothing to do with Christ (except to discredit _revelation_ which\nmakes Christ's mission known to men). Darwin himself does not believe\nthat there has ever been _any revelation_, which, of course, excludes\nChrist. It will be seen also that he has no definite views on the\n_future life_--\"every man,\" he says, \"must judge for himself between\n_conflicting vague probabilities_.\"\n\nIt is fair to conclude that it was _his own doctrine_ that led him\nastray, for in the same connection (in \"Life and Letters\") he says\nthat when aboard the _Beagle_ he was called \"orthodox and was heartily\nlaughed at by several of the officers for quoting the Bible as an\nunanswerable authority on some point of morality.\" In the same\nconnection he thus describes his change and his final attitude: \"When\nthus reflecting I feel compelled to look to a First Cause, having an\nintelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of man; and I deserve\nto be called a Theist. This conclusion was strong in my mind about the\ntime, as far as I can remember, when I wrote the 'Origin of Species';\nand it is since that time that it has very gradually, with many\nfluctuations, become weaker. But then arises the doubt: _Can_ the mind\nof man, which has, as I fully believe, been developed from a mind as low\nas that possessed by the lowest animals, be trusted when it draws such\ngrand conclusions?\n\n\"I cannot pretend to throw the least light on such abstruse problems.\nThe mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us; and I for\none must be content to remain an Agnostic.\"\n\nA careful reading of the above discloses the gradual transition wrought\nin Darwin himself by the unsupported hypothesis which he launched upon\nthe world, or which he endorsed with such earnestness and industry as\nto impress his name upon it He was regarded as \"_orthodox_\" when he was\nyoung; he was even laughed at for quoting the Bible \"_as an unanswerable\nauthority on some point of morality_.\" In the beginning he regarded\nhimself as a Theist and felt compelled \"to look to a First Cause, having\nan intelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of man.\"\n\nThis conclusion, he says, was strong in his mind when he wrote \"The\nOrigin of Species,\" but he observes that since that time this conclusion\nvery gradually became _weaker_, and then he unconsciously brings a\ntelling indictment against his own hypothesis. He says, \"_Can the mind\nof man_ (which, according to his belief, has been _developed from a mind\nas low as that possessed by the lowest animals) be trusted when it draws\nsuch grand conclusions_?\" He first links man with the animals, and then,\nbecause of this _supposed_ connection, estimates man's mind by brute\nstandards. Agnosticism is the natural attitude of the evolutionist. How\ncan a brute mind comprehend spiritual things? It makes a tremendous\ndifference what a man thinks about his origin whether he looks up or\ndown. Who will say, after reading these words, that it is immaterial\nwhat man thinks about his origin? Who will deny that the acceptance of\nthe Darwinian hypothesis shuts out the higher reasonings and the larger\nconceptions of man?\n\nOn the very brink of the grave, after he had extracted from his\nhypothesis all the good that there was in it and all the benefit that it\ncould confer, he is helplessly in the dark, and \"cannot pretend to throw\nthe least light on such abstruse problems.\" When he believed in God, in\nthe Bible, in Christ and in a future life there were no mysteries that\ndisturbed him, but a _guess_ with nothing in the universe to support\nit swept him away from his moorings and left him in his old age in the\nmidst of mysteries that he thought _insoluble_. He must content himself\nwith _Agnosticism_. What can Darwinism ever do to compensate any one for\nthe destruction of faith in God, in His Word, in His Son, and of hope of\nimmortality?\n\nIt would seem sufficient to quote Darwin against himself and to cite the\nconfessed effect of the doctrine as a sufficient reason for rejecting\nit, but the situation is a very serious one and there is other evidence\nthat should be presented.\n\nJames H. Leuba, a professor of Psychology in Bryn Mawr College,\nPennsylvania, wrote a book five years ago, entitled \"Belief in God and\nImmortality.\" It was published by Sherman French & Co., of Boston, and\nrepublished by The Open Court Publishing Company of Chicago. Every\nChristian preacher should procure a copy of this book and it should be\nin the hands of every Christian layman who is anxious to aid in the\ndefense of the Bible against its enemies. Leuba has discarded belief in\na personal God and in personal immortality. He asserts that belief in a\npersonal God and personal immortality is declining in the United States,\nand he furnishes proof, which, as long as it is unchallenged, seems\nconclusive. He takes a book containing the names of fifty-five hundred\nscientists--the names of practically all American scientists of\nprominence, he affirms--and sends them questions. Upon the answers\nreceived he asserts that _more than one-half_ of the prominent\nscientists of the United States, those teaching Biology, Psychology,\nGeology and History especially, have discarded belief in a personal God\nand in personal immortality.\n\nThis is what the doctrine of evolution is doing for those who teach our\nchildren. They first discard the Mosaic account of man's creation, and\nthey do it on the ground that there are no miracles. This in itself\nconstitutes a practical repudiation of the Bible; the miracles of the\nOld and New Testament cannot be cut out without a mutilation that is\nequivalent to rejection. They reject the supernatural along with the\nmiracle, and with the supernatural the inspiration of the Bible and the\nauthority that rests upon inspiration. If these believers in evolution\nare consistent and have the courage to carry their doctrine to its\nlogical conclusion, they reject the virgin birth of Christ and the\nresurrection. They may still regard Christ as an unusual man, but they\nwill not make much headway in converting people to Christianity, if they\ndeclare Jesus to be nothing more than a man and either a deliberate\nimpostor or a deluded enthusiast.\n\nThe evil influence of these Materialistic, Atheistic or Agnostic\nprofessors is disclosed by further investigation made by Leuba. He\nquestioned the students of nine representative colleges, and upon their\nanswers declares that, while only fifteen per cent. of the freshmen have\ndiscarded the Christian religion, thirty per cent. of the juniors and\nthat forty to forty-five per cent, of the men _graduates_ have abandoned\nthe cardinal principles of the Christian faith. Can Christians be\nindifferent to such statistics? Is it an immaterial thing that so\nlarge a percentage of the young men who go from Christian homes into\ninstitutions of learning should go out from these institutions with the\nspiritual element eliminated from their lives? What shall it profit a\nman if he shall gain all the learning of the schools and lose his faith\nin God?\n\nTo show how these evolutionists undermine the faith of students let me\ngive you an illustration that recently came to my attention: A student\nin one of the largest State universities of the nation recently gave me\na printed speech delivered by the president of the university, a year\nago this month, to 3,500 students, and printed and circulated by the\nStudent Christian Association of the institution. The student who gave\nme the speech marked the following paragraph: \"And, again, religion must\nnot be thought of as something that is inconsistent with reasonable,\nscientific thinking in regard to the nature of the universe. I go so far\nas to say that, if you cannot reconcile religion with the things taught\nin biology, in psychology, or in the other fields of study in this\nuniversity, then you should throw your religion away. Scientific truth\nis here to stay.\" What about the Bible, is it not here to stay? If he\nhad stopped with the first sentence, his language might not have\nbeen construed to the injury of religion, because religion is not\n\"inconsistent with reasonable, scientific thinking in regard to\nthe nature of the universe.\" There is nothing _unreasonable_ about\nChristianity, and there is nothing _unscientific_ about Christianity.\nNo scientific _fact_--no _fact_ of any other kind can disturb religion,\nbecause _facts are not in conflict with each other_. It is _guessing_ by\nscientists and so-called scientists that is doing the harm. And it is\n_guessing_ that is endorsed by this distinguished college president (a\nD.D., too, as well as an LL.D. and a Ph.D.) when he says, \"I go so far\nas to say that, if you cannot reconcile religion with the things taught\nin biology, in psychology, or in the other fields of study in this\nuniversity, then you should throw your religion away.\" What does this\nmean, except that the books on biology and on other scientific subjects\nused in that university are to be preferred to the Bible in case of\nconflict? The student is told, \"throw your religion away,\" if he cannot\nreconcile it (the Bible, of course,) with the things taught in biology,\npsychology, etc. Books on biology change constantly, likewise books\non psychology, and yet they are held before the students as better\nauthority than the unchanging Word of God.\n\nIs any other proof needed to show the irreligious influence exerted by\nDarwinism applied to man? At the University of Wisconsin (so a Methodist\npreacher told me) a teacher told his class that the Bible was a\ncollection of myths. When I brought the matter to the attention of the\nPresident of the University, he criticized me but avoided all reference\nto the professor. At Ann Arbor a professor argued with students against\nreligion and asserted that no thinking man could believe in God or the\nBible. At Columbia (I learned this from a Baptist preacher) a professor\nbegan his course in geology by telling his class to throw away all that\nthey had learned in the Sunday school. There is a professor in Yale of\nwhom it is said that no one leaves his class a believer in God. (This\ncame from a young man who told me that his brother was being led away\nfrom the Christian faith by this professor.) A father (a Congressman)\ntells me that a daughter on her return from Wellesley told him that\nnobody believed in the Bible stories now. Another father (a Congressman)\ntells me of a son whose faith was undermined by this doctrine in a\nDivinity School. Three preachers told me of having their interest in the\nsubject aroused by the return of their children from college with their\nfaith shaken. The Northern Baptists have recently, after a spirited\ncontest, secured the adoption of a Confession of Faith; it was opposed\nby the evolutionists.\n\nIn Kentucky the fight is on among the Disciples, and it is becoming\nmore and more acute in the Northern branches of the Methodist and\nPresbyterian Churches. A young preacher, just out of a theological\nseminary, who did not believe in the virgin birth of Christ, was\nrecently ordained in Western New York. Last April I met a young man who\nwas made an atheist by two teachers in a Christian college.\n\nThese are only a few illustrations that have come under my own\nobservation--nearly all of them within a year. What is to be done? Are\nthe members of the various Christian churches willing to have the power\nof the pulpit paralyzed by a false, absurd and ridiculous doctrine which\nis without support in the written Word of God and without support also\nin nature? Is \"thus saith the Lord\" to be supplanted by guesses and\nspeculations and assumptions? I submit three propositions for the\nconsideration of the Christians of the nation:\n\nFirst, the preachers who are to break the bread of life to the lay\nmembers should believe that man has in him the breath of the Almighty,\nas the Bible declares, and not the blood of the brute, as the\nevolutionists affirm. He should also believe in the virgin birth of the\nSaviour.\n\nSecond, none but Christians in good standing and with a spiritual\nconception of life should be allowed to teach in Christian schools.\nChurch schools are worse than useless if they bring students under the\ninfluence of those who do not believe in the religion upon which the\nChurch and church schools are built. Atheism and Agnosticism are more\ndangerous when hidden under the cloak of religion than when they are\nexposed to view.\n\nThird, in schools supported by taxation we should have a real neutrality\nwherever neutrality in religion is desired. If the Bible cannot be\ndefended in these schools it should not be attacked, either directly or\nunder the guise of philosophy or science. The neutrality which we now\nhave is often but a sham; it carefully excludes the Christian religion\nbut permits the use of the schoolrooms for the destruction of faith and\nfor the teaching of materialistic doctrines.\n\nIt is not sufficient to say that _some_ believers in Darwinism retain\ntheir belief in Christianity; some survive smallpox. As we avoid\nsmallpox because _many_ die of it, so we should avoid Darwinism because\nit _leads many astray_.\n\nIf it is contended that an instructor has a right to teach anything\nhe likes, I reply that the parents who pay the salary have a right to\ndecide what shall be taught. To continue the illustration used above, a\nperson can expose himself to the smallpox if he desires to do so, but he\nhas no right to communicate it to others. So a man can believe anything\nhe pleases but he has no right to teach it against the protest of his\nemployers.\n\nAcceptance of Darwin's doctrine tends to destroy one's belief in\nimmortality as taught by the Bible. If there has been no break in the\nline between man and the beasts--no time when by the act of the Heavenly\nFather man became \"a living Soul,\" at what period in man's development\nwas he endowed with the hope of a future life? And, if the brute theory\nleads to the abandonment of belief in a future life with its rewards and\npunishments, what stimulus to righteous living is offered in its place?\n\nDarwinism leads to a denial of God. Nietzsche carried Darwinism to its\nlogical conclusion and it made him the most extreme of anti-Christians.\nI had read extracts from his writings--enough to acquaint me with his\nsweeping denial of God and of the Saviour--but not enough to make me\nfamiliar with his philosophy.\n\nAs the war progressed I became more and more impressed with the\nconviction that the German propaganda rested upon a materialistic\nfoundation. I secured the writings of Nietzsche and found in them a\ndefense, made in advance, of all the cruelties and atrocities practiced\nby the militarists of Germany. Nietzsche tried to substitute the worship\nof the \"Superman\" for the worship of God. He not only rejected the\nCreator, but he rejected all moral standards. He praised war and\neulogized hatred because it led to war. He denounced sympathy and pity\nas attributes unworthy of man. He believed that the teachings of Christ\nmade degenerates and, logical to the end, he regarded Democracy as the\nrefuge of weaklings. He saw in man nothing but an animal and in that\nanimal the highest virtue he recognized was \"The Will to Power\"--a will\nwhich should know no let or hindrance, no restraint or limitation.\n\nNietzsche's philosophy would convert the world into a ferocious conflict\nbetween beasts, each brute trampling ruthlessly on everything in his\nway. In his book entitled \"Joyful Wisdom,\" Nietzsche ascribes to\nNapoleon the very same dream of power--Europe under one sovereign and\nthat sovereign the master of the world--that lured the Kaiser into a sea\nof blood from which he emerged an exile seeking security under a foreign\nflag. Nietzsche names Darwin as one of the three great men of his\ncentury, but tries to deprive him of credit (?) for the doctrine that\nbears his name by saying that Hegel made an earlier announcement of it.\nNietzsche died hopelessly insane, but his philosophy has wrought the\nmoral ruin of a multitude, if it is not actually responsible for\nbringing upon the world its greatest war.\n\nHis philosophy, if it is worthy the name of philosophy, is the ripened\nfruit of Darwinism--and a tree is known by its fruit.\n\nIn 1900--over twenty years ago--while an International Peace Congress\nwas in session in Paris the following editorial appeared in _L'Univers_:\n\n\"The spirit of peace has fled the earth because evolution has taken\npossession of it. The plea for peace in past years has been inspired by\nfaith in the divine nature and the divine origin of man; men were\nthen looked upon as children of one Father and war, therefore, was\nfratricide. But now that men are looked upon as children of apes, what\nmatters it whether they are slaughtered or not?\"\n\nI have given you above the words of a French writer published twenty\nyears ago. I have just found in a book recently published by a prominent\nEnglish writer words along the same line, only more comprehensive. The\ncorroding influence of Darwinism has spread as the doctrine has been\nincreasingly accepted. In the American preface to \"The Glass of\nFashion\" these words are to be found: \"Darwinism not only justifies\nthe sensualist at the trough and Fashion at her glass; it justifies\nPrussianism at the cannon's mouth and Bolshevism at the prison-door.\nIf Darwinism be true, if Mind is to be driven out of the universe and\naccident accepted as a sufficient cause for all the majesty and glory of\nphysical nature, then there is no crime or violence, however abominable\nin its circumstances and however cruel in its execution, which cannot be\njustified by success, and no triviality, no absurdity of Fashion which\ndeserves a censure: more--there is no act of disinterested love and\ntenderness, no deed of self-sacrifice and mercy, no aspiration after\nbeauty and excellence, for which a single reason can be adduced in\nlogic.\"\n\nTo destroy the faith of Christians and lay the foundation for the\nbloodiest war in history would seem enough to condemn Darwinism, but\nthere are still two other indictments to bring against it. First, that\nit is the basis of the gigantic class struggle that is now shaking\nsociety throughout the world. Both the capitalist and the labourer\nare increasingly class conscious. Why? Because the doctrine of the\n\"Individual efficient for himself\"--the brute doctrine of the \"survival\nof the fittest\"--is driving men into a life-and-death struggle from\nwhich sympathy and the spirit of brotherhood are eliminated. It is\ntransforming the industrial world into a slaughter-house.\n\nBenjamin Kidd, in a masterful work, entitled, \"The Science of Power,\"\npoints out how Darwinism furnished Nietzsche with a scientific basis for\nhis godless system of philosophy and is demoralizing industry.\n\nHe also quotes eminent English scientists to support the last charge in\nthe indictment, namely, that Darwinism robs the reformer of hope. Its\nplan of operation is to improve the race by \"scientific breeding\" on a\npurely physical basis. A few hundred years may be required--possibly a\nfew thousand--but what is time to one who carries eons in his quiver and\nenvelopes his opponents in the \"Mist of Ages\"?\n\nKidd would substitute the \"Emotion of the Ideal\" for scientific breeding\nand thus shorten the time necessary for the triumph of a social reform.\nHe counts one or two generations as sufficient. This is an enormous\nadvance over Darwin's doctrine, but Christ's plan is still more\nencouraging. A man can be born again; the springs of life can be\ncleansed instantly so that the heart loves the things that it formerly\nhated and hates the things that it once loved. If this is true of _one_,\nit can be true of _any number_. Thus, a nation can be born in a day if\nthe ideals of the people can be changed.\n\nMany have tried to harmonize Darwinism with the Bible, but these\nefforts, while honest and sometimes even agonizing, have not been\nsuccessful. How could they be when the natural and inevitable tendency\nof Darwinism is to exalt the mind at the expense of the heart, to\noverestimate the reliability of the reason as compared with faith and to\nimpair confidence in the Bible. The mind is a machine; it has no morals.\nIt obeys its owner as willingly when he plots to kill as when he plans\nfor service.\n\nThe Theistic evolutionist who tries to occupy a middle ground between\nthose who accept the Bible account of creation and those who reject God\nentirely reminds one of a traveller in the mountains, who, having fallen\nhalf-way down a steep slope, catches hold of a frail bush. It takes so\nmuch of his strength to keep from going lower that he is useless as an\naid to others. Those who have accepted evolution in the belief that it\nwas not anti-Christian may well revise their conclusions in view of the\naccumulating evidence of its baneful influence.\n\nDarwinism discredits the things that are supernatural and encourages the\nworship of the intellect--an idolatry as deadly to spiritual progress as\nthe worship of images made by human hands. The injury that it does would\nbe even greater than it is but for the moral momentum acquired by the\nstudent before he comes under the blighting influence of the doctrine.\n\nMany instances could be cited to show how the theory that man descended\nfrom the brute has, when deliberately adopted, driven reverence from\nthe heart and made young Christians agnostics and sometimes\natheists--depriving them of the joy, and society of the service, that\ncome from altruistic effort inspired by religion.\n\nI have recently read of a pathetic case in point. In the Encyclopaedia\nAmericana you will find a sketch of the life of George John Romanes,\nfrom which the following extract is taken: \"Romanes, George John,\nEnglish scientist. In 1879 he was elected fellow of the Royal Society\nand in 1878 published, under the pseudonym 'Physicus,' a work entitled,\n'A Candid Examination of Theism,' in which he took up a somewhat defiant\natheistic position. Subsequently his views underwent considerable\nchange; he revised the 'Candid Examination,' and, toward the close of\nhis life, was engaged on 'A Candid Examination of Religion,' in which\nhe returned to theistic beliefs. His notes for this work were published\nafter his death, under the title 'Thoughts on Religion,' edited by Canon\nGore. Romanes was an ardent supporter of Darwin and the evolutionists\nand in various works sought to extend evolutionary principles to mind,\nboth in the lower animals and in the man. He wrote very extensively on\nmodern biological theories.\"\n\nLet me use Romanes' own language to describe the disappointing\nexperiences of this intellectual \"prodigal son.\" On page 180 of\n\"Thoughts on Religion\" (written, as above stated, just before his death\nbut not published until after his demise) he says, \"The views that I\nentertained on this subject (Plan in Revelation) when an undergraduate\n(_i.e._, the ordinary orthodox views) were abandoned in the presence of\nthe theory of Evolution.\"\n\nIt was the doctrine of Evolution that led him astray. He attempted to\nemploy reason to the exclusion of faith--with the usual result. He\nabandoned prayer, as he explains on pages 142 and 143: \"Even the\nsimplest act of will in regard to religion--that of prayer--has not been\nperformed by me for at least a quarter of a century, simply because it\nhas seemed impossible to pray, as it were, hypothetically, that, much as\nI have always desired to be able to pray, I cannot will the attempt.\nTo justify myself for what my better judgment has often seemed to be\nessentially irrational, I have ever made sundry excuses.\" \"Others have\ndoubtless other difficulties, but mine is chiefly, I think, that of an\nundue regard to reason as against heart and will--undue, I mean, if so\nit be that Christianity is true, and the conditions to faith in it have\nbeen of divine ordination.\"\n\nIn time he tired of the husks of materialism and started back to his\nFather's house. It was a weary journey but as he plodded along, his\nappreciation of the heart's part increased until, on pages 152 and 153,\nhe says, \"It is a fact that we all feel the intellectual part of man to\nbe 'higher' than the animal, whatever our theory of his origin. It is\na fact that we all feel the moral part of man to be 'higher' than the\nintellectual, whatever our theory of either may be. It is also a fact\nthat we all similarly feel the spiritual to be 'higher' than the moral,\nwhatever our theory of religion may be. It is what we understand\nby man's moral, and still more his spiritual, qualities that go to\nconstitute character. And it is astonishing how in all walks of life it\nis character that tells in the long run.\"\n\nOn page 150 he answered Huxley's attack on faith. He says, \"Huxley,\nin 'Lay Sermons,' says that faith has been proved a 'cardinal sin' by\nscience. Now this is true enough of credulity, superstition, etc., and\nscience has done no end of good in developing our ideas of method,\nevidence, etc. But this is all on the side of intellect. 'Faith' is\nnot touched by such facts or considerations. And what a terrible hell\nscience would have made of the world, if she had abolished the 'spirit\nof faith,' even in human relations.\"\n\nIn the days of his apostasy he \"took it for granted,\" he says on page\n164, \"that Christianity was played out.\" When once his eyes were\nreopened he vied with Paul himself in recognizing the superior quality\nof love. On page 163 he quoted the eloquent lines of Bourdillon:\n\n  The night has a thousand eyes,\n    And the day but one;\n  Yet the light of a whole world dies\n    With the setting sun.\n\n  The mind has a thousand eyes,\n    And the heart but one;\n  Yet the light of a whole life dies\n    When love is done.\n\nHaving quoted this noble sentiment he adds: \"Love is known to be all\nthis. How great then, is Christianity, as being the religion of love,\nand causing men to believe both in the cause of love's supremacy and the\ninfinity of God's love to man.\"\n\nBut Romanes still clung to Evolution and, so far as his book discloses,\nhis mind would never allow his heart to commune with Darwin's far-away\nGod, whose creative power Romanes could not doubt but whose daily\npresence he could not admit without abandoning his theory.\n\nHis is a typical case, but many of the wanderers never return to the\nfold; they are lost sheep. If the doctrine were demonstrated to be true\nits acceptance would, of course, be obligatory, but how can one bring\nhimself to assent to a series of assumptions when such a course is\naccompanied by such a tremendous risk of spiritual loss?\n\nIf, as it does in so many instances, it causes the student to choose\nDarwinism, with its intellectual delusions, and reject the Bible, with\nthe incalculable blessings that its heart-culture brings, what minister\nof the Gospel or Christian professor can justify himself before the bar\nof conscience if, by impairing confidence in the Word of God, he wrecks\nhuman souls? All the intellectual satisfaction that Darwinism ever\nbrought to those who have accepted it will not offset the sorrow that\ndarkens a single life from which the brute theory of descent has shut\nout the sunshine of God's presence and the companionship of Christ.\nHere, too, we have the testimony of the distinguished scientist from\nwhom I have been quoting. In his first book--the attack on Theism--he\nsays: (page 29, \"Thoughts on Religion\") \"I am not ashamed to confess\nthat with this virtual negation of God the universe to me has lost its\nsoul of loveliness; and, although from henceforth the precept to 'Work\nwhile it is day' will doubtless gain an intensified force from the\nterribly intensified meaning of the words that 'the night cometh when no\nman can work,' yet when at times I think, as think at times I must, of\nthe appalling contrast between the hallowed glory of that creed which\nonce was mine, and the lonely mystery of existence as now I find it,--at\nsuch times I shall ever feel it impossible to avoid the sharpest pang of\nwhich my nature is susceptible.\"\n\nRomanes, during his college days, came under the influence of those\nwho worshipped the reason and this worship led him out into a starless\nnight. Have we not a right to demand something more than _guesses,\nsurmises,_ and _hypotheses_ before we exchange the \"hallowed glory\" of\nthe Christian creed for \"the lonely mystery of existence\" as Romanes\nfound it? Shall we at the behest of those who put the intellect\nabove the heart endorse an unproved doctrine of descent and share\nresponsibility for the wreckage of all that is spiritual in the lives of\nour young people? I refuse to have any part in such responsibility. For\nnearly twenty years I have gone from college to college and talked to\nstudents. Wherever I could do so I have pointed out the demoralizing\ninfluence of Darwinism. I have received thanks from many students who\nwere perplexed by the materialistic teachings of their instructors and I\nhave been encouraged by the approval of parents who were distressed by\nthe visible effects of these teachings on their children.\n\nAs many believers in Darwinism are led to reject the Bible let me, by\nway of recapitulation, contrast that doctrine with the Bible:\n\nDarwinism deals with nothing but life; the Bible deals with the entire\nuniverse--with its masses of inanimate matter and with its myriads of\nliving things, all obedient to the will of the great Law Giver.\n\nDarwin concerns himself with only that part of man's existence which is\nspent on earth--while the Bible's teachings cover all of life, both here\nand hereafter.\n\nDarwin begins by assuming life upon the earth; the Bible reveals the\nsource of life and chronicles its creation.\n\nDarwin devotes nearly all his time to man's body and to the points at\nwhich the human frame approaches in structure--though vastly different\nfrom--the brute; the Bible emphasizes man's godlike qualities and the\nvirtues which reflect the goodness of the Heavenly Father.\n\nDarwinism ends in self-destruction. As heretofore shown, its progress is\nsuspended, and even defeated, by the very genius which it is supposed\nto develop; the Bible invites us to enter fields of inexhaustible\nopportunity wherein each achievement can be made a stepping-stone to\ngreater achievements still.\n\nDarwin's doctrine is so brutal that it shocks the moral sense--the heart\nrecoils from it and refuses to apply the \"hard reason\" upon which it\nrests; the Bible points us to the path that grows brighter with the\nyears.\n\nDarwin's doctrine leads logically to war and to the worship of\nNietzsche's \"Superman\"; the Bible tells us of the Prince of Peace and\nheralds the coming of the glad day when swords shall be beaten into\nploughshares and when nations shall learn war no more.\n\nDarwin's teachings drag industry down to the brute level and excite a\nsavage struggle for selfish advantage; the Bible presents the claims of\nan universal brotherhood in which men will unite their efforts in the\nspirit of friendship.\n\nAs hope deferred maketh the heart sick, so the doctrine of Darwin\nbenumbs altruistic effort by prolonging indefinitely the time needed for\nreforms; the Bible assures us of the triumph of every righteous cause,\nreveals to the eye of faith the invisible hosts that fight on the side\nof Jehovah and proclaims the swift fulfillment of God's decrees.\n\nDarwinism puts God far away; the Bible brings God near and establishes\nthe prayer-line of communication between the Heavenly Father and His\nchildren.\n\nDarwinism enthrones selfishness; the Bible crowns love as the greatest\nforce in the world.\n\nDarwinism offers no reason for existence and presents no philosophy of\nlife; the Bible explains why man is here and gives us a code of morals\nthat fits into every human need.\n\nThe great need of the world to-day is to get back to God--back to a real\nbelief in a living God--to a belief in God as Creator, Preserver\nand loving Heavenly Father. When one believes in a personal God and\nconsiders himself a part of God's plan he will be anxious to know God's\nwill and to do it, seeking direction through prayer and made obedient\nthrough faith.\n\nMan was made in the Father's image; he enters upon the stage, the climax\nof Jehovah's plan. He is superior to the beasts of the field, greater\nthan any other created thing--but a little lower than the angels. God\nmade him for a purpose, placed before him infinite possibilities and\nrevealed to him responsibilities commensurate with the possibilities.\nGod beckons man upward and the Bible points the way; man can obey and\ntravel toward perfection by the path that Christ revealed, or man can\ndisobey and fall to a level lower, in some respects, than that of the\nbrutes about him. Looking heavenward man can find inspiration in his\nlineage; looking about him he is impelled to kindness by a sense of\nkinship which binds him to his brothers. Mighty problems demand his\nattention; a world's destiny is to be determined by him. What time\nhas he to waste in hunting for \"missing links\" or in searching for\nresemblances between his forefathers and the ape? In His Image--in this\nsign we conquer.\n\nWe are not progeny of the brute; we have not been forced upward by a\nblind pushing-power; neither have we tumbled upward by chance. It is a\ndrawing-power--not a pushing-power--that rules the world--a power which\nfinds its highest expression in Christ who promised: \"I, if I be lifted\nup from the earth, will draw all men unto me.\"\n\n\n\n\nV\n\nTHE LARGER LIFE\n\n\nI have chosen this subject because I have found some young men, and even\nsome young women, who seem to misunderstand the invitation extended\nby the Master. The call of the Gospel falls, at times, upon deaf ears\nbecause religion is regarded as a thing that is necessary only when one\ncomes to prepare himself for the life beyond. In earlier times many\nChristians misinterpreted the Christian religion and, withdrawing\nthemselves from companionship with their fellows, devoted their time\nwholly to preparation of themselves for heaven. _Christ went about doing\ngood_.\n\nI present my appeal to the young to accept Christ and to enter upon the\nlife He prescribes, not because they may _die_ soon but because they may\n_live_. They need Christ as their Saviour _now_ and they need Him\nas their guide throughout life. Some complain of the Parable of the\nVineyard because the man who began work at the eleventh hour received\nthe same pay as those who toiled all day. Surely, those who complain\nhave not tasted the joys of a Christian life. No one who follows the\nteachings of Christ will begrudge the reward promised to those who\nrepent at the last moment and are saved. The eleventh-hour Christians\nare the ones to mourn because they have lost the happiness that they\nwould have found in service during the livelong day.\n\nYoung people sometimes postpone becoming Christians on the ground that\nthey want to have a good time for a while longer. Who can be happier\nthan the Christian? Our religion fits into the needs of all of every\nage. If there are any amusements enjoyed by the world from which members\nof the church feel it a duty to abstain it is because more wholesome\namusements crowd out the objectionable ones. It ought not to be\nnecessary to forbid a Christian to do harmful things; he ought to avoid\nthem because he has no taste for them--because he finds more real\npleasure and more enduring satisfaction in the things that are innocent\nand helpful.\n\nThere is another class to which I desire to address myself to-day,\nnamely, those who call themselves more liberal than Christians--who look\nupon our religion as narrowing in its influence. Christianity is the\nbroadest of creeds because it takes in everything that touches human\nlife, here and hereafter. The Christian life is the most comprehensive\nlife known; it is as deep as the heart; it is as wide as the world; and\nit is as high as heaven.\n\nPaul, the great Apostle, tells us that Christ came to \"bring life and\nimmortality to light\"--not immortality alone, but life also, and the\nword Life comes before the word Immortality.\n\nBut we have higher authority even than Paul. Christ, in explaining His\nmission, said, \"I am come that they might have life, and that they might\nhave it more abundantly.\" It is to the _more abundant_ life that Christ\ncalls us. He was the master of mathematics, yet He used only addition\nand multiplication; subtraction has no place in His philosophy.\n\nLet me illustrate, as I see it, the gift that Christ brings to man. Let\nus suppose that the people living in an agricultural section had, by\nintelligent cultivation, brought from the soil all that it could yield\nin material wealth. If a stranger came into the community and announced\nthat the people, by sinking a shaft one hundred feet deep, could find\na vein of coal, they would, if they believed the statement true,\nimmediately sink a shaft; and, if they found the coal, they would add\nit to the wealth that they derived from the surface of the ground. They\nwould be grateful to the person who told them of the additional riches\nwhich they possessed but of which they were not aware. They might not\nthink to thank him immediately--they might be too busy acquiring money\nto express their gratitude. But after the man was dead, if not before,\nthey would pause long enough to erect a monument to testify to their\nappreciation of the service he had rendered.\n\nAnd, to complete the illustration, suppose after the people had adjusted\nthemselves to the added income, another stranger appeared and assured\nthem that, if they would sink the shaft one hundred feet deeper, they\nwould find a vein of precious metals from which to draw money enough to\npurchase everything everywhere that the heart could wish. They would,\nif they gave credit to his statement, dig down and find gold and silver\nand, with still greater joy, add this new possession to those that\nthey already had. Again they would be grateful. They might not express\nthemselves during the benefactor's life, but after a while visitors to\nthe community would see two monuments reared by grateful hands to those\nwho had brought blessings to the neighbourhood.\n\nThis illustration presents the idea that I would impress upon you,\nnamely, that Christ came to _add_ to all the good things man possessed\nwithout requiring the surrender of any good thing in exchange. Long\nbefore the coming of Christ man had taken possession of the body and had\ngathered from it all the joys that the flesh can yield. Man had also\nexplored the farther reaches of the mind and possessed himself of the\ndelights of the intellect. Christ not only brought redemption but opened\nto man the vision of a spiritual world and showed him what infinite\ngreatness the Father has placed within the reach of one made in His\nimage, if he will only use the powers that he has--powers unknown to him\nuntil revealed by the Spirit.\n\nEvery human being is travelling every day in one direction or the\nother--either upward toward the highest plane that man can reach, or\ndownward toward the lowest level to which man can fall; Christ gives us\na vision of our possibilities and the strength to realize them.\n\nIf Christ had demanded something in return for the great gifts that\nHe came to bestow man might be justified in asking for time for\ninvestigation. He would want to weigh the value of that which is\noffered against the value of that which must be given up. To do this\nintelligently would require a long period of training and ample time for\ncomparison. The difficulty is even greater, for it would be impossible\nfor one to weigh or calculate in advance the value of those things which\nare spiritually discerned. He could see the body; he could comprehend\nthe mind; but he could not know the inestimable value of the things\nthat Christ offers. But how can he hesitate when Christ demands not one\nsingle sacrifice, but gives, as the spring gives, desiring nothing in\nreturn except appreciation which it is pleasant to manifest?\n\nThe Saviour not only gives without reducing the other enjoyments, but\nHis gift increases the value of that which we have. The body without\ncontrol will exhaust itself--actually wear itself out in the very riot\nof pleasure. It is only when the body is the servant of a spiritual\nmaster that it can develop its greatest strength and prolong its vigour.\n\nTwo illustrations suggest themselves. The use of intoxicants has wrought\ndisaster since man came upon the earth. Drink is not only ruinous when\nused continuously and in large quantities, but it is injurious even when\nused moderately. The life insurance tables show that a young man who, at\nthe age of twenty-one, begins the regular use of intoxicating liquors,\nreduces his expectancy by more than ten per cent., or more than four\nyears in forty. That is the average. In proportion as the body is left\nto its own control the appetite becomes destructive of the body itself\nas well as of the body's value to others. Just in proportion as the body\nis under spiritual control is it in position to enjoy itself and to\nextend the period of enjoyment.\n\nReference need hardly be made to the diseases that follow in the wake of\nimmorality. The wages of sin is death--death to the body, death to the\nmind and death to the soul. Races have rotted and passed into oblivion\nbecause the body was put in command of the life. Both drunkenness and\nunchastity curse the generations that follow as well as the generations\nthat are guilty--the sins of the fathers and mothers being visited upon\nthe children and children's children.\n\nAnd so, too, with the mind; it would run wild but for the sovereign\nsoul of man. There are temptations that come through the\nintellect--temptations that are as destructive as those that come\nthrough the body. Only when the mind is guided and directed by a\nspiritual conception of life is it capable of its highest and noblest\nwork.\n\nThe soul is greater than the mind as it is greater than the body. Would\nyou have proof? Recall the days of the martyrs. What is it in man that\ncan take the body and hold it in the fire until the flames consume the\nquivering flesh? The soul of man that can coerce the body to its death\nis greater than the body itself. And the soul is likewise greater than\nthe mind. It can take the imperial mind of man, purge it of vanity and\negotism and infuse into it the spirit of humility and a passion for\nservice. The soul that can thus harness the mind and make it bear the\nburdens of the World is greater than the mind itself.\n\nRemember, also, that the spiritual gifts which Jesus bestows are vastly\nricher than all that man possessed before. Who can measure the value\nof salvation--the peace that comes with sins forgiven and the joy of\nconstant communion with the Heavenly Father whom Christ reveals? And,\nthen, consider the moral code that is revolutionizing the world. I only\nhave time to mention a few of the fundamental teachings of Christ.\n\nChrist gave the world a new definition of love. Husbands had loved their\nwives and wives their husbands; parents had loved their children,\nand children their parents; and friend had loved friend, but Christ\nproclaimed a love as boundless as the sea.\n\nChrist founded a religion and built a Church on love--on love, the\ngreatest force in the world. Love furnishes an armour which no weapon\ncan pierce. When physical warfare is forgotten, love will still call its\nhosts to battle; the effort then will be, not to kill one another but to\nexcel in doing good.\n\nChrist has been called \"_visionary\"_--that is a favourite word with\nthose who pride themselves upon being practical. But as a matter of\nfact, one of the great virtues of Christ's teachings is that they are\n_practical_. He deals with the every-day things of ordinary life and in\nHis quiet way irons out difficulties and makes rough paths smooth. His\nphilosophy is easily comprehended and readily applied. His words need no\ninterpretation; they are the words of the people, the language of the\nmasses. If He were a teacher of rhetoric He would surpass all other\nteachers because the art of discourse reaches its maximum in His\nsentences. The learned sometimes speak over the heads of their hearers,\nusing words that are unusual and long-drawn-out. Jesus talked to the\nmultitude and they not only understood Him but \"_the common people heard\nhim gladly.\"_\n\nLet me recall to your minds just a few illustrations of the simplicity\nof His thought and language. Take, for instance, the supreme virtue,\nlove, upon which He always places emphasis. Note how He weaves it into\nhuman experience.\n\n    \"Therefore,\" He says (Matt. 5:23), \"if thou bring thy gift to the\n    altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against\n    thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar and go thy way; first be\n    reconciled to thy brother.\"\n\nReconciliation is preferred to sacrifice. The gift upon the altar can\nwait; but enmity between brothers must have attention at once. What\ninfinite woe and heartache will be prevented when this lesson is learned\nand applied throughout the world. What untold blessings will be realized\nwhen even among those who profess the name of Christ it is always\nemployed. A word spoken in anger has often cost a life because neither\nparty to the quarrel was big enough to obey the best promptings of the\nheart and beg pardon. Families have been rent asunder; communities have\nbeen divided; nations have gone to war, just because some one lacked\nthe spirit of the Saviour and refused the plain and easy road to\nreconciliation. Well may religious rites be suspended for the moment\nwhile love removes offense and binds together hearts that were\nestranged. We know that \"To err is human,\" and we believe that \"To\nforgive is divine;\" to _ask_ forgiveness requires as much grace as to\nforgive.\n\nIn his first epistle (chapter 4:2) John makes a striking application of\nChrist's doctrine of love: \"If a man say 'I love God' and hateth his\nbrother, he is a liar.\"\n\nThese are harsh words but the Apostle was dealing with a very serious\nsubject, viz., the glaring inconsistency between love of God and hatred\nof a brother.\n\nThere are many ways in which one can manifest hatred of his brother, and\nit must be remembered that hatred is a sin that is proven by acts rather\nthan admitted. First, there is indifference--a wide-spread sin--and\nit is to be found inside the church as well as outside. As love is a\npositive virtue, a failure to love is a violation of obligations. A\nparticipation in the services of the church, even communion at the\nLord's Table--does not always awaken in Christians the interest they\nshould feel in each other.\n\nIf I may be permitted to illustrate my thought, allow me to call\nattention to the fact that church members are sometimes compelled to pay\ncut-throat rates for short-time loans when there are within the same\ncongregation members who are loaning at lawful rates to non-church\nmembers. Does it not seem incredible that the money of Christians is\navailable for the outside world and yet not within reach of needy\nbrethren? It would be easy for each church to organize within its\nmembership a loan society and use the money supplied by the well-to-do\nfor the accommodation of those temporarily embarrassed. Sometimes the\nchattel mortgage sharks collect one hundred per cent, or more and the\nbanks, which are established for the purpose of making small short-time\nloans, usually collect twenty to thirty per cent. Why should a church\nmember be driven to these extremities when the loanable money in the\nchurch is sufficient for all needs? Surely church membership ought to\nbe better security for a small amount than either a chattel or a real\nestate mortgage.\n\nAnother illustration; the fraternities are splendid organizations and\nare founded on high principles, but the church might be expected to do\nfor its members some of the work left to fraternities. They care for the\nsick and bury the dead! Is it not a reflection on the church that its\nmembers should ever be compelled to go outside for assistance in such\nemergencies?\n\nThere are many other forms of indifference, but indifference is the\nleast harmful of the manifestations of the lack of brotherhood. We have\ncases of positive and deliberate injury practiced against those who\nstand in the relation of brothers. We have had a riot of exploitation in\nthis country; profiteering has been carried on on an appalling scale:\nmen have been thrusting their larcenous hands into the pockets of their\nchurch brethren, as well as into the pockets of the public.\n\nWe have also the unequal combat between the tax-eater and the taxpayer,\nand we have the perennial conflict between the different groups of\ntaxpayers, each trying to shift the burden onto the other, not to speak\nof that very considerable company who, for profit, cultivate vice as the\nfarmer cultivates his crops. All conscious and deliberate injustice is\nproof of hatred and to such as engage in such wrong-doing the language\nof John ought to come as a stinging rebuke. It would work a revolution\nin society as well as in the Church if all the members proved their love\nof God by fair dealing with their fellowmen.\n\nChrist confines Himself usually to the laying down of broad, fundamental\nprinciples instead of supplying rules and formulae. He cleanses the\nheart and then gives to life the law of love which should pervade all\nhuman relationships, as the law of gravitation pervades the universe.\nBut the Master at times went from generalities into details, making the\npath of duty so plain that no one can excuse himself if he strays there\nform.\n\nAn illustration is found in Matthew's Gospel, chapter 25:34-46.\n\n    Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye\n    blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the\n    foundation of the world:\n\n    For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye\n    gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:\n\n    Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in\n    prison, and ye came unto me.\n\n    Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee\n    an hungered, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?\n\n    When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed\n    thee?\n\n    Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?\n\n    And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto\n    you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my\n    brethren, ye have done it unto me.\n\n    Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me,\n    ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his\n    angels:\n\n    For I was an hungered, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye\n    gave me no drink:\n\n    I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me\n    not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.\n\n    Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee\n    an hungered, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in\n    prison, and did not minister unto thee?\n\n    Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch\n    as ye did it not to one of the least of these ye did it not to me.\n\n    And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the\n    righteous into life eternal.\n\nNo one should waste time in waiting for some great opportunity for\nservice; there are opportunities everywhere. It is impossible for man to\nrender any service to Jehovah Himself. There is nothing that we can do\nfor Him except to love Him with heart and mind and soul and strength. It\nis _to the neighbour_ that we pay the debt that we owe to the Heavenly\nFather; it is _through the neighbour_ that we publish to the world our\nreal selves. This is, like music, an universal language that all can\nunderstand.\n\nNietzsche, the atheistic philosopher, gave to one of his books the title\n\"Joyful Wisdom\"--an absurd misnomer. That which he mistook for joy was\nthe delirium of an unbalanced mind. The philosophy of _Christ_ might\nwith propriety be called Joyful Wisdom; it leads one into the path of\nhappiness that is real and permanent.\n\nCarl Hilty, a Swiss writer, has published a book entitled \"Happiness,\"\nin which he points out that, as those have the poorest health who spend\ntheir time travelling from one health resort to another looking for\nit, so those are least happy who do nothing but hunt for pleasure. He\ninsists that to be happy one must have employment for the hands, the\nhead and the heart. The hands must be busy, the mind must be occupied,\nand the heart must be satisfied.\n\nChrist leads His followers into happiness through this route. No one\nwho partakes of His spirit can be an idler. The world is full of work\nawaiting labourers; the harvest is ripe. Those who try to imitate Christ\nwill be planning for the extension of His Kingdom and for the comfort\nof God's creatures. The heart of the Christian--the center of life and\nlove--will find satisfaction in being in sympathetic touch with all that\nis good and noble.\n\nI have dwelt upon this point because the worldly are in the habit of\npicturing the Christian life as gloomy and forbidding. It is a libel; a\nlong-faced Christian is a poor Christian, if a Christian at all. \"Be of\ngood cheer,\" is a Christian salutation; Christ used it repeatedly. In\nMatthew 9:2 He said to the man sick of the palsy, \"Son, be of good\ncheer; thy sins be forgiven thee.\"\n\nIn Matthew 14:27 He quieted the fears of His disciples, \"Be of good\ncheer; it is I; be not afraid.\" In John 16:33 He inspired the Apostles,\n\"Be of good cheer, I have overcome the world.\"\n\nHere we have three of the greatest sources of happiness--Forgiveness of\nsins: the presence of the Saviour and triumph over the world.\n\nIn Acts we find Him using the same words in addressing Paul and later\nPaul uses them in encouraging his companions.\n\nReligion--real, heartfelt religion--transforms its possessor. It moulds\nthe disposition and disposition determines expression. No beauty doctor\ncan make a face as winsome as the face of one whose heart overflows with\nloving kindness; just as no face specialist can impose from without such\nlines of strength and intelligence as can be written upon it by the\nthoughts that pass through the brain.\n\nThe Christian life is the simple life. Charles Wagner sounded a note\nthat echoed around the world when, some two decades ago, he issued his\neloquent protest against the burdensome complexities of modern life. He\nmade a plea for the natural life in which each individual will be his\nown master instead of being the servant of his possessions. Wagner's\nbook, though first published in Paris, had a larger circulation in the\nUnited States than in any other nation--not because our people have\nwandered farther than others into artificial social forms, but because\nthey are sensitive to high ideals and free to reject harmful customs.\n\nSocial intercourse should be an expression of friendship, and friendship\nis both embarrassed and obscured by vulgar display. The home should be a\nplace of rest, where congenial spirits can gather for communion. There\nis nothing edifying or satisfying in the mere comparing of apparel.\nThe aim of entertainment should be to refresh the guest and stimulate\nfriendship; the end is defeated by a rivalry in extravagance that\nawakens concern as to one's ability to return courtesies extended. The\nincreasing costliness of social functions not only robs entertainment\nof the enjoyment that it is intended to bring, but it leads many\nyoung couples to ruin themselves financially in an effort to keep up\nappearances and pay their social debts. It is impossible to calculate\nthe benefit which would be brought to the social world if Christ's\nspirit could pervade it and infuse into it a wholesome sincerity and\nfrankness. Christ put the accent on the things that are worthy and\nbanished the shallow pretenses upon which so much time is wasted and so\nmuch money squandered.\n\nChrist gave the world a balm for that worry that is more wearing than\nwork. He condemned the petty vanities and irritating anxieties. He\ntaught a perfect trust that leads one to do his best and then leave the\nresult with the Heavenly Father who is ever near and always ready to\ngive good gifts to His children.\n\nIn Matthew 6, we find this soothing rebuke:\n\n    Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye\n    shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye\n    shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than\n    raiment? Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do\n    they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your Heavenly Father feedeth\n    them. Are ye not much better than they? Which of you by taking\n    thought can add one cubit unto his stature? And why take ye thought\n    for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they\n    toil not, neither do they spin: And yet I say unto you, That\n    even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.\n    Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to-day is,\n    and to-morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe\n    you, O ye of little faith?\n\nReasoning unanswerable. He argues from the less to the greater and with\nincomparable beauty woos man away from the distracting thoughts that\ndissipate his strength without yielding him any advantage. The Creator\nwho cares for the birds will not forget man made in His image; He\nwho clothes the fields in the beauty of the flower and gives to the\ntrembling blade of grass the nourishment that it needs for its fleeting\nday, will not desert man, His supreme handiwork.\n\n\"Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof,\" is a rebuke aimed at\nthose who borrow trouble. Let not the past distress you--it has gone\nbeyond recall; let not the morrow intrude upon you--it will bring its\ncargo of cares when it comes. Man lives in the present and can claim\nonly the moment as it passes, but Christ teaches him how to so use each\nhour as to make the days that are gone an echoing delight and the days\nthat are yet to come a radiant hope.\n\nChrist has been called a sentimentalist. Let it be admitted; it is no\nreproach. He is the inexhaustible source of sentiment, and sentiment\nrules the world. \"The dreamer lives forever; the toiler dies in a day.\"\n\nA striking illustration of the emphasis that Christ placed upon\nsentiment is found in Matthew 26:7-13:\n\n    There came unto him a woman having an alabaster box of very precious\n    ointment, and poured it on his head, as he sat at meat. But when his\n    disciples saw it, they had indignation, saying, To what purpose is\n    this waste? For this ointment might have been sold for much, and\n    given to the poor. When Jesus understood it, he said unto them, Why\n    trouble ye the woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me. For\n    ye have the poor always with you, but me ye have not always. For in\n    that she hath poured this ointment on my body, she did it for my\n    burial. Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be\n    preached in the whole world, there shall also this, that this woman\n    hath done, be told for a memorial of her.\n\nEight verses devoted to an alabaster box of ointment! This is more space\nthan was given to many incidents seemingly more important, and at the\nvery crisis of His career, too. But who will estimate the value of this\nnarrative?\n\nJudas complained that it was an inexcusable waste of money--Judas, the\nthief, as Mark calls him, pretended concern about the poor. The poor\nhave received immeasurably more from the use made of this ointment than\nthey would have received had it been sold and the proceeds distributed\nthen. It was an expression of love, and love is the treasury box from\nwhich the poor can always draw. That box of ointment has spread its\nfragrance over nineteen hundred years. Give a man bread and he hungers\nagain; give him clothing and his clothing will wear out; but give him\nan ideal--something to look up to through life--and it will be with him\nthrough every waking hour lifting him to a higher plane and filling his\nlife with the beauty and the bounty of service. The money spent for a\nloaf of bread may stay the pangs of hunger for a few brief hours,\nbut the same amount invested in the \"bread of life\" will give one an\ninexhaustible feast. A drink of water refreshes for the moment; the\nsame amount invested in the \"water of life\" may make of one a spring\noverflowing with blessings.\n\nA Bible costs a few cents and yet upon it may be built a life that is\nworth millions to the human race. It was a Bible that made William Ewart\nGladstone for a generation the world's greatest Christian statesman;\nit was a Bible that made Jos\u00c3\u00a9 Rodrigues for a quarter of a century the\ngreatest moral force in Brazil. The Bible has given us great leaders in\nthe United States. It is the Bible that has sent missionaries throughout\nthe world to plant in little communities everywhere the teachings of the\ngreatest of sentimentalists--and, at the same time, the most practical\nof philosophers. Christ has taught us the true value of those things\nwhich touch the heart and, through the heart, move the world.\n\n\"Suffer little children to come unto me;\" Christ used the child to\nadmonish those older grown. The Church is following in His footsteps\nwhen it makes the child the subject of constant thought and solicitude.\nIt is when we deal with the child that we get the clearest conception of\nthe superiority of faith over reason. The foundations of character are\nlaid in faith and not in reason; they are laid before the reason can be\naccepted as a guide. No one who exalts reason above faith can lead a\nchild to God, but a child can understand the love of the Saviour and the\ntender care of the Heavenly Father. For this reason the Sunday school\nincreases in importance. Its lessons build character; its songs echo\nthroughout our lives.\n\nThe law arbitrarily fixes the age of twenty-one as the age of legal\nmaturity. No matter how precocious a young man be, the presumption of\nlaw is against his intelligence until he is twenty-one. He cannot vote;\nhe cannot make a valid deed to a piece of land. Why? His reason is not\nmature, and yet the moral principles that control his life are implanted\nbefore he reaches that age. His ideals come into his life long before\nthe reason can be regarded as a safe guide. Before the reason is mature\nhe believes in God or has rejected God. If he lives in a Christian\ncommunity he has accepted the Bible as the Word of God or rejected it\nas the work of man; if he is acquainted with Christ he has accepted or\nrejected Him. A child's heart cannot remain a vacuum. It is filled with\nreverence or irreverence. Those who think that the mind can remain\nunbiassed until one becomes of age and then be able to render impartial\ndecisions, know little of human experience. Love comes first, reason\nafterward; the child obeys and later learns why it should obey. Morality\nrests upon religion and religion, taking hold upon the heart, exercises\na control far greater than any logic can exercise over the mind.\n\nLook back over your lives and see how much of real moral principle you\nhave added since you became of age. You can better explain your faith;\nyour will is more firm, your determination more deeply rooted, but what\nnew seed of morality has been sown since you reached the age when the\nreason is presumed to be mature?\n\nWhile Christianity builds upon the affirmations of the New Testament and\nthe positive virtues taught by the Saviour it is loyal, as Christ was,\nto the Commandments which God gave to the people through Moses. Most of\nthese commandments--those relative to man's duty to man--are written\nunto the statutes of state and nation; they form the basis of our laws.\nThose which relate to man's duty to God and which are not, therefore,\nlegally binding are binding on the conscience of Christians.\n\nThe Christian Church from its earliest beginnings has enforced respect\nfor parents. Parental authority is not only essential to the child's\nwelfare during youth but it is necessary as a foundation upon which to\nbuild respect for government and for laws. The Christian home is the\nnursery of the State as well as of the Church. Loyalty to God and\nloyalty to government are easily learned by those who from infancy are\ntaught obedience to those who have the right to instruct and direct.\n\nThe Christian Church stands also for Sabbath observance. The right\nto worship God according to the dictates of one's conscience is an\ninalienable right and any attempt to interfere with the full and free\nexercise of this right would and should arouse universal protest. Those\nwho do not worship at all have no fear of molestation, but freedom of\nconscience is not interfered with by laws that provide opportunity for\nrest and guarantee leisure for worship.\n\nMan's body needs relaxation from toil and man's mind needs leisure as\nwell. These needs are so obvious that they are universally admitted.\nThe spiritual nature requires refreshment also and this need is as\nimperative as the needs of body and brain. As the spiritual man is the\ndominant force in life and the measure of the individual's usefulness,\nthe nation cannot be less concerned about the people's spiritual growth\nand welfare than about their health and intellectual strength.\n\nIt is both natural and proper that the day which is observed religiously\nby the general public should be selected as the day of rest also,\nrespect being shown to those who conscientiously observe another day.\nDifferences of opinion may exist in different localities as to what\nshould be permitted on the Sabbath day, but experience has supported two\npropositions: first, that every citizen should be guaranteed _time_\nfor rest and for worship, and, second, that every citizen should be\nguaranteed the _peace_ and _quiet_ necessary for both rest and worship.\n\nHere, as in nearly every other issue that concerns human welfare, the\ncontroversy is not between those who differ in opinions as to what\nis right and proper but between those, on the one side, who have a\npecuniary interest in the promotion of things which are objectionable,\nand those, on the other, who seek to promote the common good. In\nother words, it is the old conflict between money and morals: between\nselfishness and the public weal.\n\nWhile Christ was all love and all compassion and all tenderness He never\nhesitated to draw the line and draw it rigidly against folly as well as\nagainst sin. The parable of the Ten Virgins is a case in point. Five\nwere wise and five were foolish, the evidence of the difference being\nfound in the fact that five were prudent enough to supply themselves\nwith oil sufficient for an emergency. The other five, lacking wisdom,\ntook only the oil that they could carry in their lamps. When the need\ncame the foolish turned to the wise and said, \"Give us of your oil,\" but\nthe wise refused lest they should not have enough for themselves and\nthe others. Were they censured? No. The parable teaches one of the most\nimportant lessons to be learned in life, namely, that the foolish cannot\nbe saved from punishment. It is punishment that converts folly into\nwisdom and saves the world from a race of fools.\n\nThe parable has wide-spread application. The foolish parent cannot be\nsaved from the sorrow inflicted by a spoiled child; the idle cannot be\nsaved from hunger and want; the lazy cannot be given the rewards of the\ndiligent. The success that attends effort and rewards character cannot\nbe awarded to the undeserving without paralyzing all the incentives to\nvirtue and industry. Christ came not to destroy the law--either that\nrevealed in the Word of God or that which was written on nature--He came\nto fulfill. In the brief years that He taught His disciples and the\nmultitude He quoted the law and illustrated it. He did not come to\nrelieve men of responsibility--He came to light the way--\"That they\nmight have life and that they might have it more abundantly.\"\n\nChrist's doctrines are not limited in time or to numbers. They apply to\neverybody and last for all time. Paul, in Romans 12: 20, interprets the\nMaster's teachings and applies them. \"Therefore, if thine enemy hunger,\nfeed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap\ncoals of fire on his head.\" How different this way of dealing from the\nway the carnal man acts, and yet who can question the wisdom of the\nSaviour's plan? Hatred begets hatred; retaliation invites retaliation\nand the feud grows. The mountains of Kentucky have furnished numerous\nillustrations of the futility of revenge. Families were arrayed against\nfamilies and sons took up inherited hatreds and died violent deaths\nbequeathing the spirit of revenge to their descendants.\n\nWe see the same false philosophy at work among nations. One war lays the\nfoundation for another; generation after generation is sworn to avenge\nthe crimes of preceding generations; and much of it is done in the name\nof patriotism and glorified as if it were service to the country.\n\nPaul gives us the remedy and it is based upon the injunction that Jesus\ngave, namely, Love your enemies. Feeding an enemy is more effective than\nthreats of punishment. It is a manifestation of love, and love is the\nweapon for which there is no shield. The philosophy that Paul applies\nto the individual is just as effective when applied to larger groups.\nNations that have been at war cannot be reconciled by the methods of\nwar. They can be suppressed by force but unless won by friendship there\ncan be no reunion.\n\nPaul concludes this chapter with a command \"Be not overcome of evil, but\novercome evil with good.\" There never was a time in the world's history\nwhen this kind of doctrine was more imperatively needed for the healing\nof the wounds of the unprecedented conflict through which the world has\npassed. Christ has a remedy: Let the wrongs of the past be forgiven\nand forgotten; let the world be invited to build on friendship and\ncooperation. Let the rivalry be in the showing of magnanimity. Who dares\nto say that the plan will fail? The alternative policy has failed and\nfailed miserably. Why not employ the only untried remedy for the ills\nwhich afflict civilization?\n\nAnd the gifts of the Man of Galilee are permanent; they survive the\ntomb. As one nears the end of life he becomes conscious of an inner\nlonging to attach himself to institutions that will outlive him. His\naffections having gone out to his fellows, and his heart having entwined\nitself with the causes that embrace all humankind, he does not like to\ndrop out and be forgotten. His sympathies expand and sympathy is the\nreal blood of the heart, forced by the pulsations of that major organ\nthrough all the arteries of society. Have you thought how few of each\ngeneration are remembered after death by any one outside of a small\ncircle of friends? We have an hundred millions of people living in the\nlargest republic in history--one of the greatest nations the world has\never known--and yet how many names will survive for a century after\nthose who bore the names are buried? The vanity of man is rebuked by a\nvisit to any old, neglected cemetery. As Bryant puts it\n\n  \"The world will laugh when thou art gone\n  And solemn brood of care plod on\n  And each one as before will chase his favourite\n      phantom.\"\n\nIt is partly to escape this dread oblivion that men and women, blessed\nwith means, endow hospitals and colleges and charitable institutions.\nThey yearn for an immortality on earth as well as in the world beyond,\nand nothing but the spiritual has promise of the life everlasting.\n\nIf we examine our expense accounts we will be ashamed to note how large\na proportion of our money we spend on the _body_. We buy it the food\nthat it most enjoys, and the raiment that most adorns it; we give it\nhabitations of comfort and beauty, and yet the body is responsible for\nmost of our easily besetting sins and its aches and pains fill life with\nmuch of its misery. We spend the first twenty years of life in an effort\nto develop the body, the second twenty years of life in an effort to\nkeep it in a state of health and twenty more trying to preserve it from\ndecline, and then the threescore years have passed. And, no matter how\nsuccessful we may be in lifting the body toward physical perfection, we\nhave no assurance that any physical perfection can be made use of in the\nworld above. I believe in the resurrection of but I have not spent much\ntime during the later years in worrying about what particular body I\nshall have over there. According to the scientists the body changes\nevery seven years. If that be true, I have done little more than\nexchange an old body for a new one during the more than sixty years that\nI have lived. I had a baby body and a boy's body, then the body of a\nyoung man, and so on until I am now well along with my ninth body. I do\nnot know which one of these will be best for me in the next world, but\nI know that the God who made this world and gave me an existence in\nit will give me, in the land beyond, the body that will best serve me\nthere.\n\nNeither have we any assurance that the perfections of the mind survive\nthe day of death. We spend a great deal of time on the mind, for this is\nan age of intellectual enthusiasm. My experience has not been different\nfrom the experience of others. My mother taught me at home until I was\nten; then my parents sent me to the public school until I was fifteen;\nthen I spent two years in an academy preparing for college; then four\nyears in college and then two years in a law school. After nearly twenty\nyears of schooling I took part in my last \"Commencement,\" and then I\nbegan to learn, and have been learning ever since. I have accumulated\nsomething of history, something of science, a bit of poetry and\nphilosophy, and I have read speeches without number. I have accumulated\na large amount of information on politics and politicians that I know I\nshall not need in Heaven, if Heaven is half as good a place as I\nexpect it to be. How much of the intellectual wealth that we have so\nlaboriously acquired can we carry with us? We do not know.\n\nBut we know that that which is spiritual does not die--that the heart\nvirtues will accompany us when we enter the future life. In the parable\nof the Tares, Christ explains that, just as the tares and the wheat grow\ntogether until the harvest, so the righteous and the unrighteous live\ntogether in this world, but that on the day of judgment they shall be\nseparated. Then shall the righteous \"shine forth as the sun in the\nkingdom of their Father.\" We have no promise that the body will shine\neven as a star, or that the mind will shine even as one of the planets,\nbut the sun in its splendour is used to illustrate the brightness with\nwhich those will shine who are counted righteous in that day.\n\nI esteem it a privilege to be permitted to present the claims of the\nLarger Life to which Jesus, the Christ, calls all of the children of\nmen. Why will one choose a life that is small and contracted, when there\nis within his reach the life that is full and complete--the Larger Life?\nWhy will he be content with the pleasures of the body and the joys of\nthe mind when he can have added to them the delights of the spirit? How\ncan he delay acceptance of Christ's offer to ennoble that which he has,\nand to add to it the things that are highest and best and most enduring?\nThis is the life that Christ brought to light when He came that men\nmight have _life_ and have it more _abundantly_.\n\n\n\n\nVI\n\nTHE VALUE OF THE SOUL\n\n\nThe fact that Christ dealt with this subject is proof conclusive that\nit is important, for He never dealt with trivial things. When Christ\nfocused attention upon a theme it was because it was worthy of\nconsideration--and Christ weighed the soul. He presented the subject,\ntoo, with surpassing force; no one will ever add to what He said. Christ\nused the question to give emphasis to the thought which He presented in\nregard to the soul's value.\n\nOn one side He put the world and all that the world can contain--all the\nwealth that one can accumulate, all the fame to which one can aspire,\nand all the happiness that one can covet; and on the other side He\nput the soul, and asked the question that has come ringing down the\ncenturies: \"What shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world and\nlose his own soul?\"\n\nThere is no compromise here--no partial statement of the matter. He\nleaves us to write one term of the equation ourselves. He gives us all\nthe time we desire, and allows the imagination to work to the limit, and\nwhen we have gathered together into one sum all things but the soul, He\nasks--What if you gain it all--ALL--ALL, and lose the soul? What is the\nprofit?\n\nSome have thought the soul question a question of the next world only,\nbut it is a question of this world also; some have thought the soul\nquestion a Sabbath-day question only, but it is a week-day question as\nwell; some have thought the soul question a question for the ministers\nalone, but it is a question which we all must meet. Every day and every\nweek, every month and every year, from the time we reach the period of\naccountability until we die, we--each of us--all of us, weigh the soul;\nand just in proportion as we put the soul above all things else we\nbuild character; the moment we allow the soul to become a matter of\nmerchandise, we start on the downward way.\n\nTolstoy says that if you would investigate the career of a criminal it\nis not sufficient to begin with the commission of a crime; that you must\ngo back to that day in his life when he deliberately trampled upon his\nconscience and did that which he knew to be wrong. And so with all of\nus, the turning point in the life is the day when we surrender the soul\nfor something that for the time being seems more desirable.\n\nMost of the temptations that come to us to sell the soul come in\nconnection with the getting of money. The Bible says, \"The love of money\nis the root of all evil.\" Or, as the Revised Version gives it, \"A root\nof all kinds of evil.\"\n\nBecause so many of our temptations come through the love of money and\nthe effort to obtain it, it is worth while to consider the laws of\naccumulation. We must all have money; we need food and clothing and\nshelter, and money is necessary for the purchase of these things. Money\nis not an evil in itself--money is, in fact, a very useful servant. It\nis bad only when it becomes the master, and the love of it is hurtful\nonly because it can, and often does, crowd out the love of nobler\nthings.\n\nBut since we must all use money and must in our active days store up\nmoney for the days when our strength fails, let us see if we can agree\nupon God's law of rewards. (See lecture on \"His Government and Peace.\")\n\nHow much money can a man rightfully collect from society? Surely, there\ncan be no disagreement here. He cannot rightfully collect more than he\nhonestly earns. If a man collects more than he earns, he collects what\nsomebody else has earned, and we call it stealing if a man takes that\nwhich belongs to another. Not only is a man limited in his collection of\nwhat he honestly earns, but will an honest man _desire_ to collect more\nthan he earns?\n\nIf a man cannot rightfully collect more than he honestly earns, it is\nthen a matter of the utmost importance to know how much money a man can\nhonestly earn. I venture an answer to this, namely, that a man cannot\nhonestly earn more than fairly measures the value of the service which\nhe renders to society. I cannot conceive of any way of earning money\nexcept to give to society a service equivalent in value to the money\ncollected. This is a fundamental proposition and it is important that it\nshould be clearly understood, for if one desires to collect largely from\nsociety he must be prepared to render a large service to society; and\nour schools and colleges, our churches and all other organizations\nfor the improvement of man have for one of their chief objects the\nenlargement of the capacity for service.\n\nThere is an apparent exception in the case of an inheritance, but it is\nnot a real exception, for if the man who leaves the money has honestly\nearned it, he has already given society a service of equivalent value\nand, therefore, has a right to distribute it. And money received by\ninheritance is either payment for service already rendered, or payment\nin advance for service to be rendered. No right-minded person will\naccept money, even by inheritance, without recognizing the obligation\nit imposes to render a service in return. This service is not always\nrendered to the one from whom this money is received, but often to\nsociety in general. In fact, most of the blessings which we receive come\nto us in such a way that we cannot distinguish the donors and must make\nour return to the whole public. If one is not compelled to work for\nhimself he has the larger pleasure of working for the public.\n\nBut I need not dwell upon this, because in this country more than\nanywhere else in the world we appreciate the dignity of labour and\nunderstand that it is honourable to serve. And yet there is room for\nimprovement, for all over our land there are, scattered here and there,\nyoung men and young women--and even parents--who still think that it is\nmore respectable for a young man to spend in idleness the money some one\nelse has earned than to be himself a producer of wealth. As long as this\nsentiment is to be found anywhere there is educational work to be done,\nfor public opinion will never be what it ought to be until it puts the\nbadge of disgrace upon the idler, no matter how rich he may be, rather\nthan upon the man who with brain or muscle contributes to the Nation's\nwealth, the Nation's strength and the Nation's progress.\n\nBut, as I said, the inheritance is an apparent, not an actual,\nexception, and we will return to the original proposition--that one's\nearnings must be measured by the service rendered. This is so vital a\nproposition that I beg leave to dwell upon it a moment longer, to ask\nwhether it is possible to fix in dollars and cents a maximum limit to\nthe amount one can earn in a lifetime.\n\nLet us begin with one hundred thousand dollars. If we estimate a working\nlife at thirty-three and one-third years--and I think this is a fair\nestimate--a man must earn _three_ thousand dollars per year on an\naverage for thirty-three and one-third years to earn one hundred\nthousand dollars in a lifetime. I take it for granted that no one will\ndeny that it is possible for one to earn this sum by rendering a service\nequal to it in value, but what shall we say of a million dollars? Can a\nman earn that much? To do so he must earn _thirty_ thousand dollars a\nyear for thirty-three and one-third years. Is it possible for one to\nrender so large a service? I believe it is. Well, what shall we say\nof ten millions? To earn that much one must earn on an average _three\nhundred_ thousand dollars a year for thirty-three and one-third years.\nIs it possible for one to render a service so large as to earn so vast\na sum? At the risk of shocking some of my radical friends I am going to\naffirm that it is possible.\n\nBut can one earn an _hundred million_? Yes, I believe that it is even\npossible to serve society to such an extent as to earn a hundred million\nin the span of a human life, or an average of _three million_ a year for\nthirty-three and one-third years. We have one man in this country who is\nsaid to be worth five hundred million. To earn five hundred million one\nmust earn on an average _fifteen_ million a year for thirty-three and\none-third years. Is this within the range of human possibility? I\nbelieve that it is. Now, I have gone as high as any one has yet gone\nin collecting, but if there is any young man here with an ambition to\nrender a larger service to the world, I will raise it another notch, if\nnecessary, to encourage him. So almost limitless are the possibilities\nof service in this age that I am not willing to fix a maximum to the sum\na man can honestly and legitimately earn.\n\nNot only do I believe that one _can_ earn five hundred million, but I\nbelieve that men _have_ earned it.\n\nIn this and other countries many in public life might be mentioned,\nfor even in politics men have great opportunities, which, if rightly\nimproved, enable them to render incalculable service to their fellowmen.\n\nBut let us go outside of politics. What shall we say of the man who gave\nto the world a knowledge of the use of steam and revolutionized the\ntransportation of the globe? How much did he earn? And the man who\nbrought down lightning from the clouds and imprisoned it in a slender\nwire so that it lights our homes, draws our traffic across the land and\ncarries our messages under the sea; what did he earn? And what of the\nman who showed us how to hurl our messages thousands of miles through\nspace without the aid of wire? And how much did the man earn who taught\nus how to wrap the human voice around a little cylinder so that it can\nbe laid away and echo throughout the ages?\n\nTake a very recent invention, the gasolene engine. It has already given\nus the automobile and the flying machine, and heaven only knows what yet\nmay come with that gasolene engine. My first ride in an automobile was\ntaken in the campaign of 1896; since then something like seventeen\nmillion automobiles have been brought into use.\n\nHave you thought of the value of the ice machine? In Apalachicola,\nFlorida, they have erected a little monument to a former citizen, Dr.\nJohn Gorry. A statue of him will be found in the capitol at Tallahassee,\nand the state of Florida has put another in the Hall of Fame at\nWashington. Out of his brain came the idea that made it possible for the\nworld to have ice to-day without regard to the temperature outside. What\ndid Gorry earn when he gave the world the ice machine?\n\nWhen I first visited the Patent Office at Washington I saw a model of\nthe first sewing machine. On it was a card on which was written:\n\n  \"Mine are sinews superhuman,\n    Ribs of brass and nerves of steel;\n  I'm the iron needle woman,\n    Born to toil but not to feel.\"\n\nWhat did the man earn who gave the world a sewing machine?\n\nThese are only a few of the great inventions. Let us take up another\ngroup. To show how wide is the field of measureless endeavour, I call\nattention to the work of scientists. Who will measure the value of\nanesthetics in the treatment of disease and injury? What of vaccination\nand the labours of Pasteur? Who will estimate the value of the service\nrendered by the man who gave us a remedy for typhoid? In 1898 hundreds\ndied of typhoid fever in the little army that was raised for the war\nwith Spain--twenty-seven of my regiment died of that disease. Now we\nhave a remedy so complete that of the nearly a million men who reached\nthe battle-line in France not one died of typhoid, and only one hundred\nand twenty-five of the four millions called to the colours.\n\nHave you tried to estimate the service rendered by Reed, who, in finding\na remedy for yellow fever, made the tropics habitable and made it\npossible for the United States to add the Panama Canal to our great\nachievements?\n\nBut the field is larger still. Raikes established a Sunday school and\nnow we have Sunday schools all over the world; Williams organized a\nYoung Men's Christian Association and now there are nine thousand\nassociations and more than a million and a half members march under the\nbanners of that organization, half of them in the United States. Forty\nyears ago a young preacher in Portland, Maine, gathered a few young\npeople about him and formed a Christian Endeavour Society; now it\nnumbers more than four million members. That young preacher, Dr. Francis\nE. Clark, is now one of the great religious leaders of the world and is\nCommander-in-Chief of this militant organization which is larger than\nthe army that did our part in the World War. What has he earned?\n\nNear Rochester, New York, there is a little town that has the proud\ndistinction of being the birthplace of Frances Willard. There was\nnothing to distinguish her from other little girls when she was in\nschool, but when she reached womanhood she gave her heart to a great\ncause; she became president of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union,\nprobably the greatest of the organizations among women ever formed.\nUnder her leadership that organization brought into the schools of the\nland instruction as to the effect of alcohol upon the system and\nthat did more than any other one thing, I think, to bring National\nProhibition. The state of Illinois has placed the statue of this great\nwoman in the Hall of Fame in the National Capitol; she is the first\nwoman to be thus honoured. What has she earned?\n\nAnd so I might continue, for the name of the world's great benefactors\nis legion. And besides those whose services were of incalculable value\na multitude have earned lesser sums ranging down to a modest fortune.\nEvery one can earn enough to supply all needs. Every time I speak to\nthe students of a college, high school, or primary grade I cannot help\nthinking that within the room there may be a boy or girl who will catch\na vision of great achievement and, consecrating a life of service, do a\nwork so valuable that all the arithmetics will not compute its worth.\n\nBut if I could furnish you a list containing the names of all who since\ntime began rendered a service worth five hundred millions, one thing\nwould be true of every one of them; namely, that never in a single case\ndid the person collect the full amount earned. Those who have earned\nfive hundred millions have been so busy earning it that they have not\nhad time to collect it, and those who have collected five hundred\nmillions have been so busy collecting it that they have not had time\nto earn it. Then, too, it must be remembered that those who render the\ngreatest service serve more than their own generation--some serve all\nwho live afterward so that it is never possible to compute what they\nhave earned.\n\nAnd what is more, those who render the largest service do not care to\ncollect the full amount earned. What could they do with the sum that\nthey actually earn? Or, what is more important, what would so great a\nsum _do with them_?\n\nIn that wonderful parable of the Sower, Christ speaks of the seeds that\nfell and of the thorns that sprang up and choked them, and He Himself\nexplained what He meant by this illustration, namely: That the care of\nthis world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the truth. If the great\nbenefactors of the race had been burdened with the care of big fortunes,\nthey could not have devoted themselves to the nobler things that gave\nthem a place in the affection of their people and in history.\n\nIt seems, therefore, that while one cannot rightfully collect more than\nhe honestly earns, he may earn more than it would be wise for him to\ncollect. And that brings us to the next question: How much should one\ndesire to collect from society? I answer, that no matter how large a\nservice one may render or how much he may earn, he should not desire to\ncollect more than he can wisely spend.\n\nAnd how much can one wisely spend? Not as much as you might think--not\nnearly as much as some have tried to spend. No matter how honestly money\nmay be acquired, one is not free to spend it at will. We are hedged\nabout by certain restrictions that we can neither remove nor ignore. God\nhas written certain laws in our nature--laws that no legislature can\nrepeal--laws that no court can declare unconstitutional, and these laws\nlimit us in our expenditures.\n\nLet us consider some of the things for which we can properly spend\nmoney. We need food--we all need food, and we need about the same\namount; not exactly, but the difference in quantity is not great. The\nrange in expenditure is greater than the range in quantity, because\nexpenditure covers kind and quality as well as quantity. But there is a\nlimit even to expenditure. If a man eats too much he suffers for it. If\nhe squanders his money on high-priced foods, he wears his stomach out.\nThere is an old saying which we have all heard, viz., \"The poor man is\nlooking for food for his stomach, while the rich man is going from one\nwatering place to another looking for a stomach for his food.\" This\nis only a witty way of expressing a sober truth, namely, that one is\nlimited in the amount of money he can wisely spend for food.\n\nWe need clothing--we all need clothing, and we need about the same\namount. The difference in quantity is not great. The range in\nexpenditure for clothing is greater than the range in quantity, because\nexpenditure covers style and variety as well as quantity, but there is a\nlimit to the amount of money one can wisely spend for clothing. If a\nman has so much clothing that it takes all of his time to change his\nclothes, he has more than he needs and more than he can wisely buy.\n\nWe need homes--we all need shelter and we need about the same amount. In\nfact, God was very democratic in the distribution of our needs, for\nHe so created us that our needs are about the same. The range of\nexpenditure for homes is probably wider than in the case of either food\nor clothing. We are interested in the home. I never pass a little house\nwhere two young people are starting out in life without a feeling of\nsympathetic interest in that home; I never pass a house where a room is\nbeing added without feeling interested, for I know the occupants have\nplanned it, and looked forward to it and waited for it; I like to see a\nlittle house moved back and a larger house built, for I know it is the\nfulfillment of a dream. I have had some of these dreams myself, and I\nknow how they lead us on and inspire us to larger effort and greater\nendeavour, and yet there is a limit to the amount one can wisely spend\neven for so good a thing as a home.\n\nIf a man gets too big a house it becomes a burden to him, and many have\nhad this experience. Not infrequently a young couple start out poor and\nstruggle along in a little house, looking forward to the time when they\ncan build a big house. After a while the time arrives and they build a\nbig house, larger, possibly, than they intended to, and it nearly always\ncosts more than they thought it would, and then they struggle along the\nrest of their lives looking back to the time when they lived in a little\nhouse.\n\nWe speak of people being _independently rich_. That is a mistake; they\nare _dependency rich_. The richer a man is the more dependent he is--the\nmore people he depends upon to help him collect his income, and the more\npeople he depends upon to help him spend his income. Sometimes a couple\nwill start out doing their own work--the wife doing the work inside the\nhouse and the man outside. But they prosper, and after a while they are\nable to afford help; they get a girl to help the wife inside and a man\nto help the husband outside; then they prosper more--and they get two\ngirls to help inside and two men to help outside, then three girls\ninside and three men outside. Finally they have so many girls helping\ninside and so many men helping outside that they cannot leave the\nhouse--they have to stay at home and look after the establishment.\n\nThis is not a new condition. One of the Latin poets complained of \"the\ncares that hover about the fretted ceilings of the rich!\" It was this\ncondition that inspired Charles Wagner to write his little book entitled\n\"The Simple Life,\" in which he entered an eloquent protest against the\nmaterialism which makes man the slave of his possessions; he presented\nan earnest plea for the raising of the spiritual above the purely\nphysical. I repeat, that there is a limit to the amount a man can wisely\nspend upon a home.\n\nI need not remind you that the rich are tempted to spend money on the\nvices that destroy--money honestly earned may thus become a curse rather\nthan a blessing.\n\nBut a man can give his money away. Yes, and no one who has ever tried it\nwill deny that more pleasure is to be derived from the giving of money\nto a cause in which one's heart is interested, than can be obtained from\nthe expenditure of the same amount in selfish indulgence. But if one\nis going to give largely he must spend a great deal of time in\ninvestigating and in comparing the merits of the different enterprises.\nI am persuaded that there is a better life than the life led by those\nwho spend nearly all the time accumulating beyond their needs and then\nemploy the last few days in giving it away. What the world needs is not\na few men of great wealth, doling out their money in anticipation of\ndeath--what the world needs is that these men link _themselves_ in\nsympathetic interest with struggling humanity and help to solve problems\nof to-day, instead of creating problems for the next generation to\nsolve.\n\nBut you say, a man can leave his money to his children? He can, if he\ndares. A large fortune, in anticipation, has ruined more sons than it\nhas ever helped. If a young man has so much money coming to him that he\nknows he will never have to work, the chances are that it will sap his\nenergy, even if it does not undermine his character, and leave him a\ncurse rather than a blessing to those who brought him into the world.\n\nAnd it is scarcely safer to leave the money to a daughter. For, if a\nyoung woman has a prospective inheritance so large that, when a young\nman calls upon her, she cannot tell whether he is calling upon her\nor her father, it is embarrassing--especially so if she finds after\nmarriage that he married the wrong member of the family. And, I may add,\nthat the daughters of the very rich are usually hedged about by a social\nenvironment which prevents their making the acquaintance of the best\nyoung men. The men who, twenty-five years from now, will be the leaders\nin business, in society, in government, and in the Church, are not the\npampered sons of the rich, but the young men who, with good health and\ngood habits, with high ideals and strong ambition, are, under the spur\nof necessity, laying the foundation for future achievements, and these\nyoung men do not have a chance to become acquainted with the daughters\nof the very rich. Even if they did know them they might hesitate to\nenter upon the scale of expenditure to which these daughters are\naccustomed.\n\nI have dealt at length with these fixed limitations, although we all\nknow of them or ought to. The ministers tell us about these things\nSunday after Sunday, or should, and yet we find men chasing the almighty\ndollar until they fall exhausted into the grave. Dr. Talmage dealt with\nthis subject; he said that a man who wore himself out getting money that\nhe did not need, would finally drop dead, and that his pastor would\ntell a group of sorrowing friends that, by a mysterious dispensation of\nProvidence, the good man had been cut off in his prime. Dr. Talmage said\nthat Providence had nothing to do with it, and that the minister ought\nto tell the truth about it, and say that the man had been kicked to\ndeath by the golden calf.\n\nSome years ago I read a story by Tolstoy, and I did not notice until\nI had completed it that the title of the story was, \"What shall it\nprofit?\" The great Russian graphically presented the very thought that\nI have been trying to impress upon your minds. He told of a Russian who\nhad land hunger--who added farm to farm and land to land, but could\nnever get enough. After a while he heard of a place where land was\ncheaper and he sold his land and went and bought more land. But he had\nno more than settled there until he heard of another place among a\nhalf-civilized people where land was cheaper still. He took a servant\nand went into this distant country and hunted up the head man of the\ntribe, who offered him all the land he could walk around in a day for a\nthousand rubles--told him he could put the money down on any spot and\nwalk in any direction as far and as fast as he would, and that, if he\nwas back by sunset, he could have all the land he had encompassed during\nthe day. He put the money down upon the ground and started at sunrise to\nget, at last, enough land. He started leisurely, but as he looked upon\nthe land it looked so good that he hurried a little--and then he hurried\nmore, and then he went faster still. Before he turned he had gone\nfurther in that direction than he had intended, but he spurred himself\non and started on the second side. Before he turned again the sun had\ncrossed the meridian and he had two sides yet to cover. As the sun was\nslowly sinking in the west he constantly accelerated his pace, alarmed\nat last for fear he had undertaken too much and might lose it all. He\nreached the starting point, however, just as the sun went down, but he\nhad overtaxed his strength and fell dead upon the spot. His servant dug\na grave for him; he only needed six-feet of ground then, the same that\nothers needed--the rest of the land was of no use to him. Thus Tolstoy\ntold the story of many a life--not the life of the very rich only, but\nthe story of every life in which the love of money is the controlling\nforce and in which the desire for gain shrivels the soul and leaves the\nlife a failure at last.\n\nI desire to show you how practical this subject is. If time permitted I\ncould take up every occupation, every avocation, every profession and\nevery calling, and show you that no matter which way we turn--no matter\nwhat we do--we are always and everywhere weighing the Soul.\n\nIn the brief time that it is proper for me to occupy, I shall apply the\nthought to those departments of human activity in which the sale of a\nsoul affects others largely as well as the individual who makes the\nbargain.\n\nTake the occupation in which I am engaged, journalism. It presents a\ngreat field--a growing field; in fact, there are few fields so large.\nThe journalist is both a news gatherer and a moulder of thought. He\ninforms his readers as to what is going on, and he points out the\nrelation between cause and effect--interprets current history. Public\nopinion is the controlling force in a republic, and the newspaper gives\nto the journalist, beyond every one else, the opportunity to affect\npublic opinion. Others reach the readers through the courtesy of the\nnewspaper, but the owner of the paper has full access to his own\ncolumns, and does not fear the blue pencil.\n\nThe journalist occupies the position of a watchman upon a tower. He is\noften able to see dangers which are not observed by the general public,\nand, because he can see these dangers, he is in a position of greater\nresponsibility. Is he discharging the duty which superior opportunity\nimposes upon him? Year by year the disclosures are bringing to light the\nfact that the predatory interests are using many newspapers and even\nsome magazines for the defense of commercial iniquity and for the\npurpose of attacking those who lift their voices against favouritism and\nprivilege. A financial magnate interested in the exploitation of the\npublic secures control of a paper; he employs business managers,\neditors, and a reportorial staff. He does not act openly or in the\ndaylight but through a group of employees who are the visible but not\nthe real directors. The reporters are instructed to bring in the kind of\nnews that will advance the enterprises owned by the man who stands back\nof the paper, and if the news brought in is not entirely satisfactory,\nit is doctored in the office. The columns of the paper are filled with\nmatter, written not for the purpose of presenting facts as they exist,\nbut for the purpose of distorting facts and misleading the public. The\neditorial writers, whose names are generally unknown to the public, are\ntold what to say and what subjects to avoid. They are instructed\nto extol the merits of those who are subservient to the interests\nrepresented by the paper, and to misrepresent and traduce those who dare\nto criticize or oppose the plans of those who hide behind the paper.\nSuch journalists are members of a kind of \"Black Hand Society\"; they are\nassassins, hiding in ambush and striking in the dark; and the worst of\nit is that the readers have no sure way of knowing when a real change\ntakes place in the ownership of such a paper notwithstanding the fact\nthat a recent law requires publication of ownership.\n\nThere are degrees of culpability and some are disposed to hold an\neditorial writer guiltless even when they visit condemnation upon the\nsecret director of the paper's policy. I present to you a different--and\nI believe higher--ideal of journalism. If we are going to make any\nprogress in morals we must abandon the idea that morals are defined by\nthe statutes; we must recognize that there is a wide margin between that\nwhich the law prohibits and that which an enlightened conscience can\napprove. We do not legislate against the man who uses the printed page\nfor the purpose of deception but, viewed from the standpoint of morals,\nthe man who, whether voluntarily or under instructions, writes what he\nknows to be untrue or purposely misleads his readers as to the\ncharacter of a proposition upon which they have to act, is as guilty of\nwrong-doing as the man who assists in any other swindling transaction.\n\nAnother method employed to mislead the public is the publication of\neditorial matter supplied by those who have an interest to serve. This\nevil is even more common than secrecy as to the ownership of the paper.\nIn the case of the weekly papers and the smaller dailies, the proprietor\nis generally known, and it is understood that the editorial pages\nrepresent his views. His standing and character give weight to that\nwhich appears with his endorsement. A few years ago, when a railroad\nrate bill was before Congress, a number of railroads joined in an effort\nto create public sentiment against the bill. Bureaus were established\nfor the dissemination of literature, and a number of newspapers entered\ninto contract to publish as editorial matter the material furnished by\nthese bureaus. This cannot be defended in ethics. The secret purchase of\nthe editorial columns is a crime against the public and a disgrace to\njournalism, and yet we have frequent occasion to note this degradation\nof the newspaper. A few years ago Senator Carter, of Montana, speaking\nin the United States Senate, read several printed slips which were sent\nout by a bankers' association to local bankers with the request that\nthey be inserted in the local papers as editorials, suggestion being\nmade that the instructions to the local bankers be removed before they\nwere handed to the papers. The purpose of the bankers' association was\nto stimulate opposition to the postal savings bank, a policy endorsed\naffirmatively by the Republican party and, conditionally, by the\nDemocratic party, the two platforms being supported at the polls by more\nthan ninety per cent, of the voters. The bankers' associations were\nopposing the policy, and, in sending out its literature, they were\nendeavouring to conceal the source of that literature and to make it\nappear that the printed matter represented the opinion of some one in\nthe community.\n\nThe journalist who would fully perform his duty must be not only\nincorruptible, but ever alert, for those who are trying to misuse the\nnewspapers are able to deceive \"the very elect.\" Whenever any movement\nis on foot for the securing of legislation desired by the predatory\ninterests, or when restraining legislation is threatened, news bureaus\nare established at Washington, and these news bureaus furnish to such\npapers as will use them free reports, daily or weekly as the case may\nbe, from the national capitol--reports which purport to give general\nnews, but which in fact contain arguments in support of the schemes\nwhich the bureaus are organized to advance. This ingenious method\nof misleading the public is only a part of the general plan which\nfavour-holding and favour-seeking corporations pursue.\n\nDemosthenes declared that the man who refuses a bribe conquers the man\nwho offers it. According to this, the journalist who resists the\nmany temptations which come to him to surrender his ideals has the\nconsciousness of winning a moral victory as well as the satisfaction of\nknowing that he is rendering a real service to his fellows.\n\nThe profession for which I was trained--the law--presents another line\nof temptations. The court-room is a soul's market where many barter away\ntheir ideals in the hope of winning wealth or fame. Lawyers sometimes\nboast of the number of men whose acquittal they have secured when they\nknew them to be guilty, and of advantages won which they knew their\nclients did not deserve. I do not understand how a lawyer can so boast,\nfor he is an officer of the court and, as such, is sworn to assist in\nthe administration of justice. When a lawyer has helped his client to\nobtain all that his client is entitled to, he has done his full duty as\na lawyer, and, if he goes beyond this, he goes at his own peril. Show\nme a lawyer who has spent a lifetime trying to obscure the line between\nright and wrong--trying to prove that to be just which he knew to be\nunjust, and I will show you a man who has grown weaker in character year\nby year, and whose advice, at last, will be of no value to his clients,\nfor he will have lost the power to discern between right and wrong. Show\nme, on the other hand, a lawyer who has spent a lifetime in the search\nfor truth, determined to follow where it leads, and I will show you a\nman who has grown stronger in character day by day and whose advice\nconstantly becomes more valuably to his client, because the power to\ndiscern the truth increases with the honest search for it.\n\nNot only in the court-room, but in the consultation chamber also the\nlawyer sometimes yields to the temptation to turn his talents to a\nsordid use. The schemes of spoliation that defy the officers of the law\nare, for the most part, inaugurated and directed by legal minds. I was\nspeaking on this very subject in one of the great cities of the country\nand at the close of the address, a prominent judge commended my\ncriticism and declared that most of the lawyers practicing in his court\nwere constantly selling their souls.\n\nThe lawyer's position is scarcely less responsible than the position of\nthe journalist; if the journalists and lawyers of the country could be\nbrought to abstain from the practices by which the general public\nis overreached, it would be an easy matter to secure the remedial\nlegislation necessary to protect the producing masses from the constant\nspoliation to which they are now subjected by the privileged classes.\n\nIf a man who is planning a train-robbery takes another along to hold a\nhorse at a convenient distance, we say that the man who holds the horse\nis equally guilty with the man who robs the train; and the time will\ncome when public opinion will hold as equally guilty with the plunderers\nof society the lawyers and journalists who assist the plunderers to\nescape.\n\nI would not be forgiven if I failed to apply my theme to the work of the\ninstructor. The purpose of education is not merely to develop the mind;\nit is to prepare men and women for society's work and for citizenship.\nThe ideals of the teacher, therefore, are of the first importance. The\npupil is apt to be as much influenced by what his teacher _is_ as by\nwhat the teacher _says_ or _does_. The measure of a school cannot be\ngathered from an inspection of the examination papers; the conception of\nlife which the graduate carries away must be counted in estimating the\nbenefits conferred. The pecuniary rewards of the teacher are usually\nsmall when compared with the rewards of business. This may be due in\npart to our failure to properly appreciate the work which the teacher\ndoes, but it may be partially accounted for by the fact that the teacher\nderives from his work a satisfaction greater than that obtained from\nmost other employments.\n\nThe teacher comes into contact with the life of the student and, as\nour greatest joy is derived from the consciousness of having benefited\nothers, the teacher rightly counts as a part of his compensation the\ncontinuing pleasure to be found in the knowledge that he is projecting\nhis influence through future generations. The heart plays as large\na part as the head in the teacher's work, because the heart is an\nimportant factor in every life and in the shaping of the destiny of the\nrace. I fear the plutocracy of wealth; I respect the aristocracy of\nlearning; but I thank God for the democracy of the heart. It is upon the\nheart level that we meet; it is by the characteristics of the heart\nthat we best know and best remember each other. Astronomers tell us the\ndistance of each star from the earth, but no mathematician can calculate\nthe influence which a noble teacher may exert upon posterity. And yet,\neven the teacher may fall from his high estate, and, forgetting his\nimmeasurable responsibility, yield to the temptation to estimate his\nwork by its pecuniary reward. Just now some of the teachers are--let\nus hope, unconsciously--undermining the religious faith of students by\nsubstituting the guesses of Darwin for the Word of God.\n\nLet me turn for a moment from the profession and the occupation to the\ncalling. I am sure I shall not be accused of departing from the truth\nwhen I say that even those who minister to our spiritual wants and, as\nour religious leaders, help to fix our standards of morality, sometimes\nprove unfaithful to their trust. They are human, and the frailities of\nman obscure the light which shines from within, even when that light is\na reflection from the throne of God.\n\nWe need more Elijahs in the pulpit to-day--more men who will dare to\nupbraid an Ahab and defy a Jezebel. It is possible, aye, probable, that\neven now, as of old, persecutions would follow such boldness of speech,\nbut he who consecrates himself to religion must smite evil wherever he\nfinds it, although in smiting it he may risk his salary and his social\nposition. It is easy enough to denounce the petty thief and the\nback-alley gambler; it is easy enough to condemn the friendless rogue\nand the penniless wrong-doer, but what about the rich tax-dodger, the\nbig lawbreaker, and the corrupter of government? The soul that is warmed\nby divine fire will be satisfied with nothing less than the complete\nperformance of duty; it must cry aloud and spare not, to the end that\nthe creed of the Christ may be exemplified in the life of the nation.\n\nWe need Elijahs now to face the higher critics. Instead of allowing the\nmaterialists to cut the supernatural out of the Bible the ministers\nshould demand that the unsupported guesses be cut out of school-books\ndealing with science.\n\nNot only does the soul question present itself to individuals, but it\npresents itself to groups of individuals as well.\n\nLet us consider the party. A political party cannot be better than its\nideal; in fact, it is good in proportion as its ideal is worthy, and its\nplace in history is determined by its adherence to a high purpose. The\nparty is made for its members, not the members for the party; and a\nparty is useful, therefore, only as it is a means through which one may\nprotect his rights, guard his interests and promote the public welfare.\nThe best service that a man can render his party is to raise its ideals.\nHe basely betrays his party's hopes and is recreant to his duty to his\nparty associates who seeks to barter away a noble party purpose for\ntemporary advantages or for the spoils of office. It would be a\nreflection upon the intelligence and patriotism of the people to assert,\nor even to assume, that lasting benefit could be secured for a party\nby the lowering of its standards. He serves his party most loyally who\nserves his country most faithfully; it is a fatal error to suppose that\na party can be permanently benefited by a betrayal of the people's\ninterests.\n\nIn every act of party life and party strife we weigh the soul. That\nthe people have a right to have what they want in government is a\nfundamental principle in free government. Corruption in government comes\nfrom the attempt to substitute the will of a minority for the will of\nthe majority. Every important measure that comes up for consideration\ninvolves justice and injustice--right and wrong--and is, therefore, a\nquestion of conscience. As justice is the basis of a nation's strength\nand gives it hope of perpetuity, and, as the seeds of decay are sown\nwhenever injustice enters into government, patriotism as well as\nconscience leads us to analyze every public question, ascertain the\nmoral principle involved and then cast our influence, whether it be\ngreat or small, on the side of justice.\n\nThe patriot must desire the triumph of that which _is_ right above the\ntriumph of that which he may _think_ to be right if he is, in fact,\nmistaken; and so the partizan, if he be an intelligent partizan, must be\nprepared to rejoice in his party's defeat if by that defeat his country\nis the gainer. One can afford to be in a minority, but he cannot afford\nto be wrong; if he is in a minority and right, he will some day be in\nthe majority.\n\nThe activities of politics center about the election of candidates to\noffice, and the official, under our system, represents both the party\nto which he belongs and the whole body of his constituency. He has two\ntemptations to withstand; first, the temptation to substitute his\nown judgment for the judgment of his constituents, and second, the\ntemptation to put his pecuniary interests above the interests of those\nfor whom he acts. According to the aristocratic idea, the representative\nthinks _for_ his constituents; according to the Democratic idea, the\nrepresentative thinks _with_ his constituents. A representative has no\nright to defeat the wishes of those who elect him, if he knows their\nwishes.\n\nBut a representative is not liable to knowingly misrepresent his\nconstituents unless he has pecuniary interests adverse to theirs. This\nis the temptation to be resisted--this is the sin to be avoided. The\nofficial who uses his position to secure a pecuniary advantage over the\npublic is an embezzler of power--and an embezzler of power is as guilty\nof moral turpitude as the embezzler of money. There is no better motto\nfor the public official than that given by Solomon: \"A good name is\nrather to be chosen than great riches, and loving favour rather than\nsilver and gold.\" There is no better rule for the public official to\nfollow than this--to do nothing that he would not be willing to have\nprinted in the newspaper next day.\n\nOne who exercises authority conferred upon him by the suffrages of his\nfellows ought to be fortified in his integrity by the consciousness of\nthe fact that a betrayal of his trust is hurtful to the party which\nhonours him and unjust to the people whom he serves, as well as\ninjurious to himself. Nothing that he can gain, not even the whole\nworld, can compensate him for the loss that he suffers in the surrender\nof a high ideal of public duty.\n\nIn conclusion, let me say that the nation, as well as the individual,\nand the party, must be measured by its purpose, its ideals and its\nservice. \"Let him who would be chiefest among you, be the servant of\nall,\" was intended for nations as well as for citizens. Our nation is\nthe greatest in the world and the greatest of all time, because it is\nrendering a larger service than any other nation is rendering or has\nrendered. It is giving the world ideals in education, in social life,\nin government, and in religion. It is the teacher of nations; it is the\nworld's torch-bearer. Here the people are more free than elsewhere to\n\"try all things and hold fast that which is good\"; \"to know the truth\"\nand to find freedom in that knowledge. No material considerations\nshould blind us to our nation's mission, or turn us aside from the\naccomplishment of the great work which has been reserved for us. Our\nfields bring forth abundantly and the products of our farms furnish food\nfor many in the Old World. Our mills and looms supply an increasing\nexport, but these are not our greatest asset. Our most fertile soil\nis to be found in the minds and the hearts of our people; our most\nimportant manufacturing plants are not our factories, with their smoking\nchimneys, but our schools, our colleges and our churches, which take in\na priceless raw material and turn out the most valuable finished product\nthat the world has known.\n\nWe enjoy by inheritance, or by choice, the blessings of American\ncitizenship; let us not be unmindful of the obligations which these\nblessings impose. Let us not become so occupied in the struggle for\nwealth or in the contest for honours as to repudiate the debt that we\nowe to those who have gone before us and to those who bear with us the\nresponsibilities that rest upon the present generation. Society has\nclaims upon us; our country makes demands upon our time, our thought and\nour purpose. We cannot shirk these duties without disgrace to ourselves\nand injury to those who come after us. If one is tempted to complain of\nthe burdens borne by American citizens, let him compare them with the\nmuch larger burdens imposed by despots upon their subjects.\n\nI challenge the doctrine, now being taught, that we must enter into\na mad rivalry with the Old World in the building of battleships--the\ndoctrine that the only way to preserve peace is to get ready for wars\nthat ought never to come! It is a barbarous, brutal, un-Christian\ndoctrine--the doctrine of the darkness, not the doctrine of the dawn.\n\nNation after nation, when at the zenith of its power, has proclaimed\nitself invincible because its army could shake the earth with its tread\nand its ships could fill the seas, but these nations are dead, and we\nmust build upon a different foundation if we would avoid their fate.\n\nCarlyle, in the closing chapters of his \"French Revolution,\" says that\nthought is stronger than artillery parks and at last moulds the world\nlike soft clay, and then he adds that back of thought is love. Carlyle\nis right. Love is the greatest power in the world. The nations that are\ndead boasted that people bowed before their flag; let us not be content\nuntil our flag represents sentiments so high and holy that the oppressed\nof every land will turn their faces toward that flag and thank God that\nit stands for self-government and for the rights of man.\n\nThe enlightened conscience of our nation should proclaim as the\ncountry's creed that \"righteousness exalteth a nation\" and that justice\nis a nation's surest defense. If there ever was a nation it is ours--if\nthere ever was a time it is now--to put God's truth to a test. With an\nocean rolling on either side and a mountain range along either coast\nthat all the armies of the world could never climb we ought not to be\nafraid to trust in \"the wisdom of doing right.\"\n\nOur government, conceived in liberty and purchased with blood, can be\npreserved only by constant vigilance. May we guard it as our children's\nrichest legacy, for what shall it profit our nation if it shall gain the\nwhole world and lose \"the spirit that prizes liberty as the heritage of\nall men in all lands everywhere\"?\n\n\n\n\nVII\n\nTHREE PRICELESS GIFTS\n\n\nThe Bible differs from all other books in that it never wears out. Other\nbooks are read and laid aside, but the Bible is a constant companion. No\nmatter how often we read it or how familiar we become with it, some new\ntruth is likely to spring out at us from its pages whenever we open\nit, or some old truth will impress us as it never did before. Every\nChristian can give illustrations of this. Permit me to refer briefly\nto four. My first religious address, \"The Prince of Peace,\" was the\noutgrowth of a chance rereading of a passage in Isaiah. This I have\nreferred to in my lecture entitled \"His Government and Peace.\"\n\nThe argument presented in my lecture on the Bible, in which I defend\nthe inspiration of the Book of Books, was the outgrowth of a chance\nrereading of Elijah's prayer test. I was preparing an address for the\ncelebration of the Tercentenary of the King James' Translation when, on\nthe train, I turned by chance to Elijah's challenge to the prophets of\nBaal. It suggested to me what I regard as an unanswerable argument,\nnamely, a challenge to those who reject the Bible to put their theory to\nthe test and produce a book, the equal of the Bible, or admit one of two\nalternatives, either that the Bible comes from a source higher than man\nor that man has so degenerated that less can be expected of him now than\nnineteen hundred years ago.\n\nIn preparing a Sunday-school lesson on Abraham's faith I was so\nimpressed with the influence of faith on the life of the patriarch and,\nthrough him, on the world, that I prepared a college address on \"Faith,\"\na part of which I have reproduced in my lecture on \"The Spoken Word.\"\n\nIt was a chance rereading of an extract from the account of the Ten\nLepers which led me to prepare the lecture reproduced in this chapter.\nThe subject to which I invite your attention is as important to-day as\nit was when the Master laid emphasis upon it. As He approached a certain\nvillage ten lepers met Him; they recognized Him and cried out, \"Jesus,\nMaster, have mercy upon us.\" He healed them; when they found that they\nhad been made whole, one of them turned back and, falling on his face at\nJesus' feet, poured forth his heart in grateful thanks. Christ, noticing\nthe absence of the others, inquired, \"Were there not ten cleansed, but\nwhere are the nine?\" This simple question has come echoing down through\nnineteen centuries, the most stinging rebuke ever uttered against the\nsin of ingratitude. If the lepers had been afflicted with a disease\neasily cured, they might have said, \"Any one could have healed us,\"\nbut only Christ could restore them to health, and yet, when they had\nreceived of His cleansing power, they apparently felt no sense of\nobligation; at least, they expressed no gratitude.\n\nSome one has described ingratitude as a meaner sin than revenge--the\nexplanation being that revenge is repayment of evil with evil, while\ningratitude is repayment of good with evil. If you visit revenge upon\none, it is because he has injured you first and the law takes notice of\nprovocation. Ingratitude is lack of appreciation of a favour shown; it\nis indifference to a kindness done.\n\nIngratitude is so common a sin that few have occupied the pulpit for a\nyear without using the story of the Ten Lepers as the basis of a sermon;\nand one could speak upon this theme every Sunday in the year without\nbeing compelled to repeat himself, so infinite in number are the\nillustrations. Those who speak of ingratitude usually begin with\nthe child. A child is born into the world the most helpless of all\ncreatures; for years it could not live but for the affectionate and\ndevoted care of parents, or of those who stand in the place of parents.\nIf, when it grows up, it becomes indifferent; if its heart grows cold,\nand it becomes ungrateful, it arouses universal indignation. Poets and\nwriters of prose have exhausted all the epithets in their effort to\ndescribe an ungrateful child. Shakespeare's words are probably those\nmost quoted:\n\n  \"How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is\n  To have a thankless child.\"\n\nBut it is not my purpose to speak of thankless children; I shall rather\nmake application of the rebuke to the line of work in which I have been\nengaged. For some thirty years my time, by fate or fortune, has\nbeen devoted largely to the study and discussion of the problems of\ngovernment, and I have had occasion to note the apathy and indifference\nof citizens. I have seen reforms delayed and the suffering of the people\nprolonged by lack of vigilance. Let us, therefore, consider together for\na little while some of the priceless gifts that come to us because we\nlive under the Stars and Stripes--gifts so valuable that they cannot be\nestimated in figures or described in language--gifts which are received\nand enjoyed by many without any sense of obligation, and without any\nresolve to repay the debt due to society.\n\nThese gifts are many, but we shall have time for only three. The first\nis education; it is a gift rather than an acquirement. It comes into our\nlives when we are too young to decide such questions for ourselves. I\nsometimes meet a man who calls himself \"self-made,\" and I always want to\ncross-examine him. I would ask him when he began to make himself, and\nhow he laid the foundations of his greatness. As a matter of fact, we\ninherit more than we ourselves can add. It means more to be born of a\nrace with centuries of civilization back of it than anything that we\nourselves can contribute. And, next to that which we inherit, comes that\nwhich enters our lives through the environment of youth. In this country\nthe child is so surrounded by opportunities, that it enters school as\nearly as the law will permit. It does not _go_ to school, it is _sent_\nto school, and we are so anxious that it shall lose no time that, if\nthere is ever a period in the child's life when the mother is uncertain\nas to its exact age, this is the time. I heard of a little boy, who,\nwhen asked how old he was, replied, \"I am five on the train, seven in\nschool and six at home.\" The child is pushed through grade after grade,\nand, according to the statistics, a little more than ninety per cent,\nof the children drop out of school before they are old enough to decide\neducational questions for themselves. They are scarcely more than\nfourteen.\n\nTaking the country over, a little less than one in ten of the children\nwho enter our graded school ever enter high school, and not quite one\nin fifty enter college or university. As many who enter college do not\ncomplete the course, I am not far from the truth when I say that only\nabout one young man in one hundred continues his education until he\nreaches the age--twenty-one--when the law assumes that his reason is\nmature. I am emphasizing these statistics in order to show that we are\nindebted to others more than to ourselves for our education. That which\nwe do would not be done but for what others have already done. Even\nthose who secure an education in spite of difficulties have received\nfrom some one the idea that makes them appreciate the value of an\neducation.\n\nWhen we are born we find an educational system here; we do not devise\nit, it was established by a generation long since dead. When we are\nready to attend school we find a schoolhouse already built; we do not\nbuild it, it was erected by the taxpayers, many of whom are dead. When\nwe are ready for instruction we find teachers prepared by others, many\nof whom have passed to their reward.\n\nHow do we feel when we complete our education? Do we count the cost to\nothers and think of the sacrifices they have made for our benefit? Do we\nestimate the strength that education has brought to us and feel that we\nshould put that strength under heavier loads? We are raised by our study\nto an intellectual eminence from which we can secure a clearer view of\nthe future; do we feel that we should be like watchmen upon the tower\nand warn those less fortunate of the dangers that they do not yet\ndiscern? We _should_, but do we? I venture to assert that more than nine\nout of ten of those who receive into their lives, and profit by, the\ngift of education are as ungrateful as the nine lepers of whom the Bible\ntells us--they receive, they enjoy, but they give no thanks.\n\nBut it is even worse than this; the Bible does not say that any one of\nthe nine lepers used for the injury of his fellows the strength that\nChrist gave back to him. All that is said is that they were ungrateful;\nbut how about those who go out from our colleges and universities? Are\nnot many of these worse than ungrateful? I would not venture to use my\nown language here; I will quote what others have said.\n\nWendell Phillips was one of the learned men of Massachusetts and a great\norator. In his address on the \"Scholar in a Republic,\" he said that\n\"The people make history while the scholars only write it.\" And then he\nadded, \"part truly and part as coloured by their prejudices.\"\n\nWoodrow Wilson, while president of Princeton University, said:\n\n    \"The great voice of America does not come from seats of learning.\n    It comes in a murmur from the hills and woods, and the farms and\n    factories and the mills, rolling on and gaining volume until it\n    comes to us from the homes of common men. Do these murmurs echo in\n    the corridors of our universities? I have not heard them.\"\n\nPresident Roosevelt, while in the White House, presented an even\nstronger indictment against some of the scholars. In a speech delivered\nto law students at Harvard he declared that there was scarcely a great\nconspiracy against the public welfare that did not have Harvard brains\nbehind it. He need not have gone to Harvard to utter this terrific\nindictment against college graduates; he might have gone to Yale, or\nColumbia, or Princeton, or to any other great university, or even to\nsmaller colleges. It would not take long to correct the abuses of which\nthe people complain but for the fact that back of every abuse are the\nhired brains of scholars who turn against society and use for society's\nharm the very strength that society has bestowed upon them.\n\nLet me give you an illustration in point, and so recent that one will be\nsufficient: A few months ago the Supreme Court at Washington handed\ndown a decision overturning every argument made against the Eighteenth\nAmendment and the enforcement law. Who represented the liquor traffic in\nthat august tribunal? Not brewery workers, employees in distilleries, or\nbartenders; these could not speak for the liquor traffic in the Supreme\nCourt. No! Lawyers must be employed, and they were easily found--big\nlawyers, scholars, who attempted to overthrow the bulwark that society\nhas erected for the protection of the homes of the country.\n\nEvery reform has to be fought through the legislatures and the courts\nuntil it is finally settled by the highest court in our land, and there,\nvanquished wrong expires in the arms of learned lawyers who sell their\nsouls to do evil--who attempt to rend society with the very power that\nour institutions of learning have conferred upon them. All of our\nreforms would be led by scholars, if all scholars appreciated as they\nshould the gift of education. There are, of course, a multitude of noble\nillustrations of scholars consecrating their learning to the service of\nthe people, but many scholars are indifferent to the injustice done to\nthe masses and some actually obstruct needed reforms--and they do it for\npay.\n\nMy second illustration is even more important, for it deals with the\nheart. I am interested in education; if I had my way every child in\nall the world would be educated. God forbid that I should draw a line\nthrough society and say that the children on one side shall be educated\nand the children on the other side condemned to the night of ignorance.\nI shall assume no such responsibility. I am anxious that my children\nand grandchildren shall be educated, and I do not desire for a child or\ngrandchild of mine anything that I would not like to see every\nother child enjoy. Children come into the world without their own\nvolition--they are here as a part of the Almighty's plan--and there is\nnot a child born on God's footstool that has not as much right to all\nthat life can give as your child or my child. Education increases\none's capacity for service and thus enlarges the reward that one can\nrightfully draw from society; therefore, every one is entitled to the\nadvantages of education.\n\nThere is no reason why every human being should not have _both_ a _good\nheart_ and a _trained mind_; but, if I were compelled to choose between\nthe two, I would rather that one should have a good heart than a trained\nmind. A good heart can make a dull brain useful to society, but a bad\nheart cannot make a good use of any brain, however trained or brilliant.\n\nWhen we deal with the heart we must deal with religion, for religion\ncontrols the heart; and, when we consider religion we find that the\nreligious environment that surrounds our young people is as favourable\nas their intellectual environment. As in the case of education, lack\nof appreciation may be due in part to lack of opportunity to make\ncomparison. If we visit Asia, where the philosophy of Confucius\ncontrols, or where they worship Buddha, or follow Mahomet, or observe\nthe forms of the Hindu religion, we find that except where they have\nborrowed from Christian nations, they have made no progress in fifteen\nhundred years. Here, all have the advantage of Christian ideals, and\nyet, according to statistics, something more than half the adult males\nof the United States are not connected with any religious organization.\nSome scoff at religion, and a few are outspoken enemies of the Church.\nCan they be blind to the benefits conferred by our churches? Security of\nlife and property is not entirely due to criminal laws, to a sheriff in\neach county, and to an occasional policeman. The conscience comes first;\nthe law comes afterward.\n\nLaw is but the crystallization of conscience; moral sentiment must be\ncreated before it can express itself in the form of a statute. Every\npreacher and priest, therefore, whether his congregation be large or\nsmall, who quickens the conscience of those who hear him helps the\ncommunity. Every church of every denomination, whether important or\nunimportant, that helps to raise the moral standards of the land\nbenefits all who live under the flag, whether they acknowledge their\nobligations or not.\n\nBut lack of appreciation on the part of those outside the Church would\nnot disturb us so much if all the church members lived up to their\nobligations. How much is it worth to one to be born again? Of what value\nis it to have had the heart touched by the Saviour and so changed that\nit loves the things it used to hate and hates the things it formerly\nloved? Of what value is it to have one's life so transformed that,\ninstead of resembling a stagnant pool, it becomes like a living spring,\ngiving forth constantly that which refreshes and invigorates? What is it\nworth to the Christian, and what is it worth to those about him, to\nhave his life brought by Christ into such vital living contact with the\nHeavenly Father, that that life becomes the means through which the\ngoodness of God pours out to the world?\n\nBut, I go a step farther and ask whether the Church as an\norganization--not any one denomination, but the Church\nuniversal--appreciates its great opportunities, its tremendous\nresponsibility, and the infinite power behind it. If the Church is what\nwe believe it to be it must be prepared to grapple with every problem,\nindividual and social, whether it affects only a community or involves\na state, a nation, or a world. There must be _some_ intelligence large\nenough to direct the world or the world will run amuck. We believe that\nGod is the only intelligence capable of governing the world, and God\nmust act through the Church or outside of it. If the Church is not big\nenough to act as the mouthpiece of the Almighty--not in the sense that\nthe Church ought to exercise governmental authority, but its members,\nseeking light from the Heavenly Father through prayer, should be able to\nact wisely as citizens--if, I repeat, the Church is not big enough to\ndeal with the problems that confront the world, then the Church must\ngive way to some more competent organization. Christians have no other\nalternative; they _must_ believe that the _teachings of Christ can be\nsuccessfully applied to every problem that the individual has to meet\nand to every problem with which governments have to deal_. I have\nin another lecture in this series called attention to Christ's\nall-inclusive claim set forth in the closing verses of the last chapter\nof Matthew, but I must repeat it here because it is the basis of what I\ndesire to say on this branch of the subject. Christ declared that _all_\npower had been given into His hands; He sent His followers out to make\ndisciples of _all_ nations; and He promised to be with them _always_,\neven unto the end of the world. If the Church takes Christ at His word\nand claims to be His representative on earth it cannot shirk its duty.\n\nIf Christians are as grateful to God, to Christ, and to the Bible as\nthey should be, they will give attention to every problem that affects\nthe individual, the community, and the larger units of society and\ngovernment. They will consider it their duty to _carry their religion\ninto business and politics_ and to apply the teachings of Christ to\nevery subject that affects human welfare. In another lecture I call\nattention to the Church's duty to reconcile capital and labour, and to\nteach God's law of rewards.\n\nThe third gift to which I would call your attention is the form of\ngovernment under which we live. Ours is a government in which the people\nrule from the lowest unit to the highest office in the nation. Nearly\nall of our officials are elected by popular vote, and those appointed\nare appointed by officers who are elected. The tendency is everywhere\nmore and more toward popular government. Some people are afraid of\nDemocracy but a larger number of people believe that \"more democracy\nis the cure for such evils as have been developed under popular\ngovernment.\" The Christian is a citizen of the republic as well as a\nmember of the church and must _practice_ his religion. I have not time\nto speak of our government in detail; it is rather my purpose at this\ntime to call attention to the gift of popular government as we find it\nin the nation.\n\nLet us begin, then, with a presidential election. I shall not yield to\nthe strong temptation to describe a presidential election; suffice\nto say that our campaigns begin with the election of delegates to a\nNational Convention (I hope they will some day begin with the nomination\nof presidential candidates at primaries held by all the parties, in all\nthe states, on the same day). The campaigns last long enough to make the\ncandidates so weary that they gladly resign themselves to any result if\nthey can only live to election day.\n\nThe campaigns increase in intensity week after week and expire, or\nexplode, in a blaze of glory the night before election, at which time\nthe committees of the leading parties set forth the reasons that make\neach side certain of success. On election day a hush spreads over the\nland and the voters wend their way to the polling places, where each\nvoter is permitted to register a sovereign's will. Usually by midnight\nthe wires flash out the name of one who is to be added to the list of\nPresidents. We give him a few weeks to rest and get ready and then, on a\ncertain day in March and at a certain hour, he goes to the White House\ndoor and knocks. The occupant opens the door, and with a wearied look\nupon his face, and yet a smile, says, \"I was expecting you just at this\nmoment.\" Then the man on the inside of the White House goes out and\nbecomes a private citizen again, while the man on the outside goes in,\ntakes the oath of office and is clothed with authority such as no other\nhuman being, but a President, ever exercised.\n\nHe writes an order and ships go out to sea with their big-mouthed guns;\nhe writes another order and the ships return. At his command armies\nassemble and march and fight, and men die; at his word armies dissolve\nand soldiers become citizens again. This goes on for just so many years\nand months and weeks and days--for just so many hours and minutes and\nseconds, and then there is another knock on the White House door and\nanother man comes with a new commission from the people.\n\nIs it not a great thing to live in a land like this where the people\ncan, at the polls, select one of their number and lift him to this\npinnacle of power? And is it not greater still that the people are able\nto reduce a President to the ranks as well as to lift him up? When they\nelevate him he is just common clay, but when they take him down from his\nhigh place they separate him from those instrumentalities of government\nwhich despots have employed for the enslavement of their people.\n\nAnd why is it that we live under a government resting upon the consent\nof the governed, and in a land in which the people rule? Because\nthroughout the centuries millions of the best and the bravest have given\ntheir lives that we might be free. Every right of which we boast is a\nblood-bought right, and bought by the blood of others, not our own.\nWould you not think that people who inherit such a government as this\nwould be grateful for the priceless gift and live up to every obligation\nof citizenship? It would seem so, and yet those acquainted with politics\nknow that the difficult task is to get the vote out. Even in a hotly\ncontested presidential election we never get the full vote out. If\nninety per cent of the vote is polled we are happy; if eighty-five per\ncent, is polled we are satisfied. If it is an intermediate election the\nvote may be less than eighty per cent., or even seventy-five. In a\nprimary, which is often more important than an election, the vote\nsometimes falls below fifty, or even forty per cent.\n\nAnd what excuses do men give? Often the most trivial. One man says that\nhe had some work to do and could not spare the time--as if any work\ncould be more important than voting in a Republic. Another was visiting\nhis wife's relatives and a family dinner made it inconvenient for him\nto return in time to vote. A few years ago I met a man on the train who\ntold me that he had not voted for ten years. When I asked him why, he\nexplained that he had voted for a neighbour for a state office--he\ndeclared that the neighbour could not have been elected without his\nhelp--and yet when the election was over the successful candidate failed\nto invite him to a dinner given to celebrate the victory. \"And,\" he\nadded, \"I just made up my mind that if I could be so deceived by a man\nwho lived next door to me I did not have sense enough to vote, and I\nhave not voted since.\"\n\nWe are all liable to make mistakes, but a mistake at one election is no\njustification for failure to vote at other elections. We must do the\nbest we can; and we must not be discouraged if the men elected do not do\nall that we expect of them. The government is not perfect and never will\nbe, no matter what party is in power. When the Democrats are in power\nI can prove by all the Republicans that the government is not perfect;\nwhen the Republicans are in power I can prove by the Democrats that the\ngovernment is not perfect. Governments are administered by human beings;\nwe must expect honest men to make mistakes and we must not be surprised\nif, occasionally, an official embezzles power and turns to his own\nadvantage the authority entrusted to him to use for the public good. We\nshould punish him and try to safeguard the people. The initiative and\nreferendum are valuable because they enable the people to protect\nthemselves from misrepresentation.\n\nBut even if the government could be made perfect to-day it would be\nimperfect to-morrow. Times change and new conditions arise that make new\nlaws necessary. As the remedy cannot precede the disease and cannot be\napplied until the public becomes acquainted with the disease and has\ntime to choose the remedy, there is always something that needs to be\ndone. If Christians do not make it their business to understand their\ngovernment's needs and to propose laws that are necessary, others will.\nAre any more worthy to be trusted than Christians?\n\nEven constitutions must be changed in order that our government may be\nin the hands of the living rather than in the hands of the dead. Those\nwho wrote our Constitution were very wise men and yet the wisest thing\nthey did was to include a provision which enabled those who came after\nthem to change anything that they wrote into the Constitution.\n\nJefferson thought a constitution should be brought up to date by every\ngeneration. Nineteen changes have been made in our Constitution by\namendment since the Constitution was adopted and four of these have been\nadopted within the last ten years. I venture to call attention to the\nlater ones for two purposes; first, to show how long it takes to amend\nthe Constitution and why; second, to remind you that these four great\namendments have been adopted by joint action by the two great parties.\n\nIt required twenty-one years to secure the amendment providing for\npopular election of United States Senators after the amendment was first\nendorsed by the House of Representatives at Washington. For one hundred\nand three years after the adoption of the Federal Constitution the\npeople tolerated the election of Senators by legislatures before there\nwas a protest that rose to the dignity of a Congressional resolution.\nA Republican President, Andrew Johnson, recommended the change in a\nmessage to Congress. Some ten years later, General Weaver, a Populist\nRepresentative in Congress from Iowa, introduced a resolution proposing\nan amendment providing for the popular election of Senators, but\nno action was taken at that time. In 1902 a Democratic House of\nRepresentatives at Washington passed a resolution, by the necessary\ntwo-thirds vote, submitting the proposed amendment. Hon. Harry St.\nGeorge Tucker, of Virginia, was the chairman of the committee when this\nresolution passed the House. A similar resolution passed the House on\nfive separate occasions afterward (twice when the House was Democratic\nand three times when it was Republican) before it could pass the Senate.\nThe amendment was finally submitted by joint action of a Democratic\nHouse and a Republican Senate and was ratified in a short time,\nDemocratic and Republican states vying with each other in furnishing the\nnecessary number. In 1913 it became my privilege, as Secretary of State,\nto sign the last document necessary to make this amendment a part of the\nConstitution. I have dwelt upon this contest at some length in order to\ncall attention to the time it took to secure the change and to the fact\nthat the two parties share the honour of making the change.\n\nIt took seventeen years to secure the amendment to the Constitution\nauthorizing an income tax. The Income Tax Law, enacted in 1894, was\ndeclared unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court, by a\nmajority of one, in 1895. In 1896 the fight for a constitutional\namendment was inaugurated and the amendment was ratified and became\na part of the Constitution early in 1913. This amendment, like the\namendment providing for popular election of United States Senators,\nrequired many years, and for the same reason, viz., that the people were\nnot alert as they should have been, not as vigilant as they should be.\nIn the case of the Income Tax Amendment also, as in the case of the\nother, the two parties contributed to the change in the Constitution and\nshare the glory together. The first amendment brought the United States\nSenate nearer the people and opened the way for other reforms; the\nsecond made it possible to apportion more equitably the burdens of the\ngovernment.\n\nThe Income Tax Amendment was adopted just in time to enable the\ngovernment to collect the revenue needed for the recent war. During\nthe seventeen years covered by the struggle for this amendment the\ngovernment was impotent to tax wealth; it could draft the man but not\nthe pocketbook. What would have been the feeling among the people if we\nhad entered the late war under such a handicap? How would conscription\nhave been received if it applied to father, husband and son and not to\nwealth also?\n\nAnd then, too, the Income Tax Amendment came just in time to answer the\nlast argument made in favour of the saloon. Those engaged in the liquor\ntraffic, after being defeated on all other points, massed behind the\nproposition that the government needed the revenue from whiskey, beer,\nand saloons. As soon as the government was able to collect an income tax\nthe friends of prohibition were able to look the liquor dealers in the\nface and say, \"Never again will an American boy be auctioned off to a\nsaloon for money to run the government; we now have other sources from\nwhich to draw.\"\n\nThe third of the amendments was also a long time in coming and was\nfinally brought by joint action of Democrats and Republicans. It is not\nnecessary to trace the growth of this reform. Suffice it to say that\nthe Christian churches were the dominating force behind the prohibition\nmovement and that the South played a very prominent part in driving out\nthe saloon. More than two-thirds of the Senators and members from the\nSouthern States voted for the submission of National Prohibition after\nnearly all the Southern States had adopted prohibition by individual\nact. The first four states to ratify were Southern Democratic\nStates--Mississippi, Virginia, Kentucky, and South Carolina. It is only\nfair, however, to say that the West contested with the South the honour\nof leading in this fight, and that the Northern States finally did\nnearly as well as the Southern States in the matter of ratifying. And\nit is better that the victory should be a joint one, expressing the\nconscience of the nation regardless of party, than that it should be\nmerely a party victory.\n\nBut the real credit for leadership belongs not to any party or to any\nsection, but to those whose consciences were quickened by the teachings\nof the Bible. Total abstinence was naturally more prevalent among church\nmembers than among those outside of the church, and this, of course, was\nthe foundation upon which prohibition rested. The arguments against the\nuse of liquor are the basis of the arguments in favour of prohibition.\nBecause liquor is harmful the saloon is intolerable.\n\nI venture to set forth the fundamental propositions upon which the\narguments for prohibition rested.\n\n    First: God never made a human being who, in a normal state, needed\n    alcohol.\n\n    Second: God never made a human being strong enough to begin the use\n    of alcohol and be sure that he would not become its victim.\n\n    Third: God never fixed a day in a human life _after_ which it is\n    safe to begin the use of intoxicating liquors.\n\nThese three propositions can be stated without limitation or mental\nreservation. They apply to all who now live and to all who ever lived;\nand will apply to all who may live hereafter. To these may be added\nthree propositions which apply especially to Christians.\n\nFirst: The Christian is a Christian because he has given himself in\npledge of service to God and to Christ. What moral right has he to take\ninto his body that which he knows will lessen his capacity for service\nand _may_ destroy even his desire to serve?\n\nSecond: What moral right has a Christian to spend for intoxicating\nliquor money needed for the many noble and needy causes that appeal to a\nChristian's heart? The Christian, repeating the language taught him by\nthe Master, prays to the Heavenly Father, \"Thy kingdom come;\" what right\nhas he to rise from his knees and spend for intoxicating liquor money\nthat he can spare to hasten the coming of God's kingdom on earth?\n\nThird: What right has a Christian to throw the influence of his example\non the side of a habit that has brought millions to the grave? We shall\nhave enough to answer for when we stand before the judgment bar of God\nwithout having a ruined soul arise and testify that it was a Christian's\nexample that led him to his ruin. Paul declared that if meat made his\nbrother to offend he would eat no meat. What Christian can afford to say\nless in regard to intoxicants? If the Christian drinks only a little\nit is a small sacrifice to make for the aid of his brother; if the\nChristian drinks enough to make stopping a real sacrifice he ought to\nstop for his own sake, on his family's account and out of respect for\nhis church.\n\nWhile the harmfulness of liquor was the foundation upon which the\nopposition to the saloon was built, it may be worth while to add that\npopular government, by putting responsibility upon the voters, compelled\nthe Christian to vote against the saloon licenses. In all civilized\ncountries the sale of liquor is now so restricted that it cannot be\nlawfully offered for sale without a license. As the license is necessary\nto the existence of the saloon--as necessary as the liquor sold over the\nbar--the Christian who voted for a license became as much a partner in\nthe business as the man who dispensed it, and he had even less excuse.\nThe manufacturer and the bartender could plead in extenuation that they\nmade money out of the business and money has led multitudes into sin.\nFor money many have been willing to steal; for money some have been\nwilling to murder; for money a few have been willing to sell their\ncountry; for money one man was willing to betray the Saviour. The\nChristian who voted for licenses had not even the poor excuse of those\nwho engaged in the business for mercenary reasons. As the consciences\nbecame awakened, therefore, Christians, in increasing numbers, refused\nto share responsibility for the saloon and what it did.\n\nScience contributed largely to the final victory. People used to say\nthat drinking did not hurt if one did not drink too much. But no one\ncould define how much \"too much\" was. The invisible line between \"just\nenough\" and \"too much\" is like the line of the horizon--it recedes as\nyou approach until it is lost in the darkness of the night.\n\nScience proved that it is not immoderate drinking only, but\n_any_ drinking that is harmful, and, therefore, that the real line is\nthat between not drinking and drinking.\n\nScience has also demonstrated, as I have shown in another lecture, that\ndrinking decreases one's expectancy, according to insurance tables; a\nyoung man at twenty-one must deliberately decide to shorten his life by\nmore than ten per cent. if he becomes an habitual drinker.\n\nBut, what is worse, science has shown that alcohol is a poison that runs\nin the blood, so that the drinking of the father or mother may curse a\nchild unborn and close the door of hope upon it before its eyes have\nopened to the light of day.\n\nBusiness aided us also, as large corporations increasingly discriminated\nagainst those who drank.\n\nPatriotism furnished the last impulse; war threw a ghastly light upon\nthe evils of intemperance and upon the sordid greed of those engaged in\nthe liquor business.\n\nThe reform will not turn back. Enforcement will become more strict in\nthis country as its benefits are more clearly shown and prohibition will\nspread until the saloon will be abolished throughout the world. Although\nnow past sixty-one I expect to live to see the day when there will not\nbe an open saloon under the flag of any civilized nation.\n\nWe are now able to prevent typhoid fever, the individual being made\nimmune by a treatment administered before he has been exposed to the\ndisease. Total abstinence resembles this preventive; no total abstainer\nis in danger of alcoholism.\n\nBut we also have a preventive for yellow fever, namely, the destroying\nof the breeding place of the mosquito which carries the germ of the\ndisease. Prohibition resembles this preventive. The saloon was found\nto be the breeding place of alcoholism and prohibition strikes at the\nsource of the danger. These two, total abstinence and prohibition,\nwill eliminate the drink evil as typhoid and yellow fever have been\neliminated.\n\nThe fourth amendment adopted in recent years extended equal suffrage\nto women. Like the three to which I have referred, it was a long time\ncoming and came at last by joint action of the two great parties.\nA majority of both parties in both Senate and House voted for the\nsubmission of this amendment and it required both Democratic and\nRepublican states to ratify it. The opposition which the amendment met\nin the South was not due to lack of confidence in women, for nowhere in\nthe world is woman more highly estimated or more fully trusted. Such\nlocal opposition as there was was due to the race question. Now that\nwoman can express herself at the polls, her influence will be felt as\nmuch in the South as in other sections; it will throughout the United\nStates seal the doom of the liquor traffic. The women will stand guard\nat the grave of John Barleycorn and make sure that he will never know a\nresurrection morn.\n\nDrawing their inspiration from the Bible, even to a greater extent than\nthe men do, the women will hasten the triumph of every righteous cause.\nThey will throw their influence on the side of every moral reform. The\nadoption of the single standard of morals will be made possible by\nwoman's advent into politics. Her ballot will make it easier to lift man\nto her level in the matter of chastity and to distribute more equitably\nthan man has done, the punishments imposed for acts of immorality.\n\nWoman has come into power in politics at a time when she can aid in the\npromotion of world peace by compelling the establishment of machinery\nwhich will substitute reason for force in the settlement of\ninternational disputes. Her first great triumph at the polls may be the\nfulfilling of the prophecy, spoken more than two thousand years ago,\nthat swords shall be beaten into ploughshares and that nations shall\nlearn war no more. She will be repaid for all her patience and her\nwaiting if now, by her ballot, she can make it unnecessary for another\nmother's son to be offered upon the altar of Mars. That this nation is\nin a better position than ever before to lead the world in every good\ncause is due to the gifts that have come with American citizenship, only\nthree of which I have had time to mention.\n\nEvery citizen should be honest with himself, examine his own heart and\nanswer to his own conscience. What estimate does he place upon the\neducation which he has received? What value does he put upon the\nreligion that controls his heart? How highly does he prize the form of\ngovernment under which he lives? Let him put his own appraisement upon\nthese three great gifts; these sums added together will represent his\nacknowledged indebtedness to society; then let him resolve to pay so\nmuch of this incalculable debt as is within his power.\n\nWe live in a goodly land. No king can shape our nation's destiny; not\neven a President can have the final word as to what our nation is to be.\nEach citizen, no matter how humble that citizen may be, can have a part.\nLet us do our part; joining together, let us solve the problems with\nwhich we have to deal, and, by so doing, bless our country and, through\nit, other lands. Let us join together and raise the light of our\ncivilization so high that its rays, illumining every land, may lead the\nworld to those better things for which the world is praying.\n\n\n\n\nVIII\n\n\"HIS GOVERNMENT AND PEACE\"\n\n\nBy way of introduction, allow me to say that I fully recognize the\ndifference between a _presentation_ of fundamental principles and an\n_application_ of those principles to life. While an _application_\nof principles arouses greater interest it is more apt to bring out\ndifferences of opinion and to excite controversy. But the Christian is\nalways open-minded because he desires to _know_ the right and to do it.\nHe \"prove(s) all things and hold(s) fast that which is good.\" Therefore,\nhe welcomes light on every subject, from every source. It is in this\nspirit that I speak to you and it is this spirit that I invoke. I speak\nfrom conviction, formed after prayerful investigation, and am as anxious\nto be informed as I am to inform.\n\nSome twenty years ago I turned back to the sixth verse of the ninth\nchapter of Isaiah to refresh my memory on the titles bestowed on the\nMessiah whose coming the prophet foretold. After reading verse six, my\neyes fell on verse seven and it impressed me as it had not on former\nreadings. This was probably because I had recently been giving attention\nto governmental problems and had occasionally heard advanced a very\ngloomy philosophy, namely, that a government, being the work of\nman, must, like man, pass through certain changes that mark a human\nlife--that is, be born, grow strong, and then, after a period of\nmaturity, decline and die. It is a repulsive doctrine and my heart\nrebelled against it. It offends one's patriotism, too, to be compelled\nto admit that, in spite of all that can be done, our government _must\nsome day perish_. In verse seven we read of a government that _will not\ndie_:\n\n\"Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, ...\nto establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even\nforever.\"\n\nThe fault in the philosophy to which I have referred lies in the fact\nthat while government is each day in control of those then living,\nit really belongs to generations rather than to individuals. As one\ngeneration passes off the stage another comes on; therefore, there is no\nreason why this government should ever be weaker or worse than it is now\nunless our people decline in virtue, intelligence and patriotism. It\nshould grow better as the people improve.\n\nIn the verse quoted we find that the enduring government--the government\nof Christ--is to rest on justice. And so, our government must rest on\njustice if it is to endure. But what is justice? We are familiar with\nthis word but how shall it be interpreted in governmental terms? Christ\nfurnished the solution--He presented a scheme of Universal Brotherhood\nin which justice will be possible.\n\nTo show how important this doctrine of brotherhood is, let us consider\nfor a moment the alternative relationship. There are but two attitudes\nthat one can assume in regard to his fellowmen--the attitude of brother\nand the attitude of the brute; there is no middle ground.\n\nThis is the choice that each human being must make--a choice as distinct\nand fundamental as the choice between God and Baal; and it is a choice\nnot unlike that.\n\nOne may be a very weak brother or a very feeble brute, but each person\nis, consciously or unconsciously, controlled by the sympathetic spirit\nof brotherhood or he hunts for spoil with the savage hunger of a beast\nof prey.\n\nI am not making a new classification; I am merely calling attention to\na classification that has come down from the beginning of history. Many\nyears ago I heard a man from New Zealand tell how a cannibal in that\ncountry once supported his claim to a piece of land on the ground that\nthe title passed to him when he ate the former owner. I accepted this\nstory as a bit of humour, but it accurately describes an historic form\nof title. Even among the highly civilized nations governments convey to\ntheir subjects or citizens land secured by conquest, the lands being\ntaken from the conquered by the conquerors. A tramp, so the story goes,\nbeing ordered out of a nobleman's yard, questioned the owner's title.\nThe latter explained that the title to the land had come down to him\nin unbroken line from father to son through a period of 700 years,\nbeginning with an ancestor who fought for it. \"Let's fight for it\nagain,\" suggested the tramp.\n\nTo show how ancient is the distinction that I am trying to make clear, I\nremind you that both the Psalmist and Solomon used the word \"brutish\"\nin describing certain kinds of men, and one of the minor prophets calls\ndown wrath upon those who build a city with blood. Christ, it will be\nremembered, denounced the hypocrites who devoured widows' houses and for\na pretense made long prayers.\n\nThe devouring did not cease with that generation; it is to-day a menace\nto stable government and to civilization itself. In times of peace we\nhave the profiteer who is guilty of practices which violate all rules\nof morality even when they do not actually violate statute law. In this\n\"Land of the free and home of the brave,\" we have been compelled to\nenact laws to restrain brutishness--not only laws to prevent assault,\nmurder, arson, the white slave traffic, etc., but also laws to restrain\nmen engaged in legitimate business. Pure food laws prevent the\nadulteration of that which the people eat--men were willing to destroy\nhealth and even life in order to add to their profits. Child labour laws\nhave become necessary to keep employers from dwarfing the bodies, minds\nand souls of the young in their haste to make larger dividends.\n\nUsury laws are necessary to protect the borrowers from the lenders, and,\nfrom occasional violations, we can judge what the condition would be if\nthe very respectable business of banking was not strictly regulated by\nlaw. We have an anti-trust law intended to prevent the devouring\nof small industries by large ones--law made necessary by injustice\nnation-wide in extent.\n\nCongress and the legislatures of the several states are constantly\ncompelled to legislate against so-called \"business\" enterprises that are\nbeing conducted on a brute basis--some are combinations in restraint of\ntrade, others are merely gambling transactions. For a generation the\nagriculturists, who constitute about one-third of our entire population,\nhave been at the mercy of a comparatively small group of market gamblers\nwho, by betting, force prices up or down for their own pecuniary gain.\nAn anti-option law has been recently enacted after an agitation of\nnearly thirty years, and also a law regulating the packers. These are\nonly a few illustrations; they could be multiplied without limit. They\nshow how unbrotherly society sometimes is even in this highly favoured\nnation.\n\nHow can Christ's teachings relieve the situation? Easily. He dealt with\nfundamentals, and gave special attention to the causes of evil. He\ntaught, first, that man should love God--the basis of all religion;\nsecond, He taught that man should commune with the Heavenly Father\nthrough prayer--the basis of all worship; third, He proclaimed the\nexistence of a future life in which the righteous shall be rewarded and\nthe wicked punished. These three doctrines contribute powerfully to\nmorality, the basis of stable government. In another address I have\ncalled attention to the destructive influence exerted by the doctrine of\nevolution, as applied to man, and have pointed out how Darwinism\nweakens faith in God, makes a mockery of prayer, undermines belief in\nimmortality, reduces Christ to the stature of a man, lessens the sense\nof brotherhood and encourages brutishness. It is unnecessary, therefore,\nto dwell upon this subject in this address.\n\nChrist warned against the sins into which man is sure to fall when the\nheart is not wholly devoted to the service of God. He shows how evil in\nthe heart will manifest itself in the life. Greed is at the bottom of\nmost of the wrong-doing with which government has to deal. The Bible\nsays \"the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil.\"\n\nIt surely is responsible for unspeakable ills. The case is so plain that\nhuman reason would seem sufficient to furnish a cure. It ought not to\nbe difficult to agree upon the principles that should govern legitimate\naccumulations.\n\nThere are two propositions that cover the whole ground; one is economic\nand the other rests upon religion. Both are based upon the laws of God,\nbut one can be enforced by the government, while the other is binding on\nthe conscience alone.\n\nThe divine law of rewards is self-evident. When God gave us the earth\nwith its fertile soil, the sunshine with its warmth and the rains with\ntheir moisture, His voice proclaimed as clearly as if it had issued from\nthe skies: Go work, and in proportion to your industry and ability so\nshall be your reward. This is God's law and it will prevail except where\nforce suspends it or cunning evades it. It is the duty of the Church to\nteach, and the duty of Christians to respect, God's law of rewards.\n\nIt is the duty of the government to give free course and full sway to\nthe divine law of rewards; first, by abstaining from interference with\nthat law; and second, by preventing interference by individuals. No\ndefense need be made of the righteousness of this law; just in so far\nas the government can make it possible for each individual to draw from\nsociety according to his contribution to the welfare of society it will\nencourage the maximum of effort on the part of the individual and,\ntherefore, on the part of society as a whole. If some receive more than\ntheir share, others will necessarily receive less than their share--the\nvery essence of injustice; the former will become indolent because work\nis not required of them and the latter will grow desperate because\ntheir toil is not fairly rewarded. Injustice is the greatest enemy of\ngovernment.\n\nBut there is a sphere which the government cannot and should not\ninvade. The government's work ends when it has insured just rewards by\npreventing unjust profits, but even a just government cannot bring about\nan equal distribution of happiness. It can and should guarantee equality\nbefore the law--that is, equality of opportunity and equal treatment at\nthe hand of the government--but that will not insure equal prosperity to\neach or bestow on all an equal amount of enjoyment. Ability will have to\nbe taken into consideration, and likewise, industry, integrity and many\nother factors.\n\nWhile the government can encourage all the virtues it cannot compel\nthem; there is a zone between that Which can be legally required and\nthat which is morally desirable. When the government has done all in\nits power--all that it can do and all that it should do--there will be\ninequalities in success, based upon inequalities in merit. There must,\ntherefore, be a spiritual law to govern when the statute law, based upon\neconomic principles, has reached its limit.\n\nChrist suggests such a law--the law of stewardship. We hold what we\nhave--no matter how justly acquired--in trust. That which is ours by\neconomic right and by the government's permission, is not ours to waste.\nWe have no more moral right to squander it foolishly than we have to\nthrow away our bodily strength, our mental energy or our moral worth.\n\nWhen we analyze ourselves we find that there is little of real value in\nus for which we can claim sole credit. We inherit much from ancestry\nand draw much from environment long before we are able to choose our\nsurroundings. The ideals which come to us from others will account for\nnearly all that we do not derive from the past and from those among whom\nwe spend our youth. If one has accepted Christ, received forgiveness of\nsin and been brought into living contact with the Heavenly Father,\nhe becomes indebted beyond the power of language to describe. Our\nindebtedness if discharged at all must be paid not, as a rule, to those\nwho have contributed most largely to making us what we are, but by\ngeneral service to those now living and to those who succeed us. Our\ndebtors are as impersonal as our creditors.\n\nNothing could contribute more to the security of the government than\nan approximation to the divine standard of rewards, and if all then\nrecognized and obeyed the law of stewardship nearly all the complaint\nthat would still exist would be silenced by the volunteer service\nrendered by the fortunate to the unfortunate.\n\n\"The mob\"--the terror of orderly government--has been described by\nVictor Hugo as \"the human race in misery.\" When the brotherhood of\nChrist is established a just standard of rewards will abolish law-made\nmisery and private benevolence will relieve such suffering as may come\nupon the members of society without their fault and in spite of all the\ngovernment can do.\n\nBut plain as are the dangers arising from love of money, and reasonable\nas seem the means of meeting them, the mad race for riches goes on all\nover the world. The mind is powerless to call a halt; intellectual\nprocesses fail--man needs a voice that can speak with authority--a voice\nthat must be obeyed. He needs even more--he needs to be born again. His\nheart must be cleansed and his thoughts turned to higher things. It is\nto such that Christ appeals when He asks: \"What shall it profit a man if\nhe shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?\" Let man cease\nto be brutish and become brotherly and he will need few restraining\nstatutes.\n\nIf it is brutish to turn so-called legitimate business into grand\nlarceny, what shall be said of those forms of money-making that deprave\nboth parties to the transaction? The liquor traffic furnished the best\nillustration of the power of the dollar to blind the eyes of greedy men\nto the crime and misery produced by drink. The beneficiaries of this\nwicked business formerly included high church officials--and does yet in\nsome countries--who swelled their incomes with the dividends collected\nfrom vice; they included also highly respected brewers and distillers as\nwell as saloon-keepers of all degrees. The fact that the liquor traffic\nmanufactured criminals, ruined men and women, produced poverty,\ndisrupted families, lowered the standard of education, lessened\nattendance upon worship and even afflicted little children before their\nbirth, was not sufficient to deter people from engaging in it--even\nsome calling themselves Christians. The handling of intoxicating drinks\ncontinued openly until these centers of pollution were closed by an\nemphatic expression of the nation's conscience.\n\nNow, the fight is against the bootlegger and the smuggler. The man who\npeddles liquor, like the man who sells habit-forming drugs, is an outlaw\nand his trade is branded as an enemy of society. The sanction given to\nprohibition by the law brings to its support all who respect orderly\ngovernment and reduces the enemies of prohibition to those whose\nfondness for drink, or for the profits obtainable from its illicit sale,\nis sufficient to overcome conscientious scruples and a sense of civic\nduty. Those who oppose prohibition now are shameless enough to become\nvoluntary companions of the lawless members of society, but this number\nwill constantly decrease as the virtue of the country asserts itself\nat the polls in the election of officials who are in sympathy with the\nenforcement of the law.\n\nThe unrest which pervades the industrial world to-day also threatens the\nstability of government. The members of the Capitalistic group and the\nmembers of the Labour group are becoming more and more class-conscious;\nthey are solidifying as if they looked forward with a vague dread\nto what they regard as an inevitable class conflict. The same plan,\nUniversal Brotherhood, can reconcile all class differences. Is there any\nother plan? Christ died for all--the employer as well as the employee;\nHe is the friend of those who pay wages as well as of those who work for\nwages; the children of one class are as dear to Him as the children of\nthe other. His creed brings man into harmony with God and then teaches\nhim to love his neighbour as himself. To put human rights before\nproperty rights--the man before the dollar, is simply to put the\nteachings of the Saviour into modern language and apply them to\npresent-day conditions.\n\nThe whole code of morals of the Nazarene is a protest against the\nattitude of antagonism between capital and labour. He pleads for\nsympathy and fellowship. Every worker should give to society the maximum\nof his productive power--but he cannot do this unless he is a willing\nworker. Every employer should give to society the maximum of his\norganizing and directing ability, but he cannot do it unless he is a\nsatisfied employer. What plan but the plan of Christ can fill the world\nwith _willing workers_ and _satisfied employers?_ Capitalism, supported\nby force, cannot save civilization; neither can government by any\nclass assure the justice that makes for permanence in government. Only\nbrotherly love can make employers willing to pay fair compensation for\nwork done and employees anxious to give fair work for their wages.\n\nOne of the first fruits of the spirit of brotherhood will be\ninvestigation before strike or lockout, just as our nation has provided\nfor investigation before war. If these bloody conflicts cannot be\nentirely abolished to-day the civilized nations should at least know\n_why_ they are to shoot before they begin shooting. The world, too,\nshould know. War is not a private affair; it disturbs the commerce of\nthe world, obstructs the ocean's highways and kills innocent bystanders.\nNeutral nations suffer as well as those at war. If peacefully inclined\nnations cannot avoid loss and suffering _after_ war is begun, they\ncertainly have a right to demand information as to the nature and merits\nof the dispute _before_ any nation begins to \"shoot up\" civilization.\n\nThe strike and the lockout are to our industrial life what war is\nbetween nations, and the general public stands in much the same position\nas neutral nations. The number of those actually injured by a suspension\nof industry is often many times as great as the total number of\nemployers and employees in that industry combined.\n\nIf, for instance, ninety-five per cent, of the people are asked to\nfreeze while the mine owners and the mine workers (numbering possibly\nfive per cent.) fight out their differences, have they not a right to\ndemand information as to the merits of the dispute before the shivering\nbegins? If the home builders are asked to suspend construction while\nthe steel manufacturers and steel workers (but a small fraction of the\npopulation) go to war over the terms of employment, have they not a\nright to inquire why before they begin to move into tents? And so with\ndisputes between railroads and their employees.\n\nCompulsory _arbitration_ of _all_ disputes between labour and capital\nis as improbable as compulsory arbitration of _all_ disputes between\nnations, but the compulsory _investigation_ of all disputes (before\nlockout or strike) will come as soon as the Golden Rule--an expression\nof brotherhood--is adopted in industry. When each man loves his\nneighbour as himself all rights will be safeguarded--the rights of\nemployees, the rights of employers and the rights of the public--that\nimportant third party that furnishes the profits for the employer and\nthe wages for the employee.\n\nAmbition has been a disturbing factor in government. The ambitions of\nmonarchs have overthrown governments and enslaved races. In republics,\nthe ambitions of aspirants for office have caused revolutions and\ncorrupted politics. No form of government is immune to the evils that\nflow from ambition, or proof against those who plot for their own\npolitical advancement. For this evil, too, Christ has a remedy. He\nchanges the point of view. It seems a simple thing, but behold the\ntransformation! \"Let him who would be chiefest among you be servant of\nall.\" He makes service the measure of greatness. This is one of the most\nimportant of the many great doctrines taught by the Saviour. It puts\nthe accent on _giving_ instead of _getting_; it measures a life by the\n_outflow_ rather than by the _income_. Men had been in the habit of\nestimating their greatness by the amount of service they could coerce or\nbuy; Christ taught them to measure their greatness by service rendered\nto others. A wonderful transformation will take place in this old world\nwhen all are animated by a desire to contribute to the public good\nrather than by an ambition to absorb as much as possible from society.\n\nBrotherhood is easily established among those who \"in honour prefer one\nanother\"--who are willing to hold office when they are needed, but\nas willing to serve under others as to command. It is impossible\nto overestimate the contribution that Christ has made to enduring\ngovernment in suppressing unworthy ambition and in implanting high and\nennobling ideals.\n\nWar may be mentioned as the fourth foe of enduring government. It is the\nresultant of many forces. Love of money is probably more responsible for\nmodern wars than any other one cause; commercial rivalries lead nations\ninto injustice and unfair dealing.\n\nWars are sometimes waged to extend trade--the blood of many being shed\nto enrich a few. The supplying of battleships and munitions is so\nprofitable a business that wars are encouraged by some for the money\nthey bring to certain classes. Prejudices are aroused, jealousies are\nstirred up and hatreds are fanned into flame. Class conflicts cause wars\nand selfish ambitions have often embroiled nations; in fact, war is like\na boil, it indicates that there is poison in the blood. Christ is the\ngreat physician whose teachings purify the blood of the body politic and\nrestore health.\n\nIn dealing with the subject of war we cannot ignore another great\nfoundation principle of Christianity, namely, forgiveness. The war\nthrough which the world has recently passed is not only without a\nparallel in the blood and treasure it has cost, but it was a typical war\nin that nearly every important war-producing cause contributed to the\nfierceness of the conflict. Personal ambition, trade rivalries, the\ngreed of munition-makers, race hatreds and revenge--all played a part in\nthe awful tragedy. Thirty millions of human lives were sacrificed; three\nhundred billion dollars' worth of property was destroyed; more than two\nhundred billion dollars of indebtedness was added to the burden that\nthe world was already carrying. The paper currency of the nations was\nswollen from seven billions to fifty-six and the gold reserve dwindled\nfrom seventy per cent. to twelve.\n\nAnd, oh, the pity! nearly every great nation engaged in the war was a\nChristian nation and every important branch of the Church was involved!\nAnd this occurred nineteen hundred years after the birth of the Saviour,\nat whose coming the angels sang, \"on earth, peace, good-will to men.\"\n\nThe world is weary of war. If blood is necessary for the remission of\nsins, enough has been spilled to atone for the wrong done by all who\nlive upon the earth; if sorrow is necessary to repentance and reform,\nenough tears have been shed to wash away all the crimes of the past.\nThis last plague would seem to have been sufficient to release the world\nfrom bondage to force--if so, mankind is ready to turn over a new leaf\nand set about the task of finding a way to prevent war.\n\nAs Christ can remove the pecuniary cause of war by purging the heart of\nthat love of money which leads men into evil doings, the class-conflict\ncause by stimulating brotherly love, and the ambition cause, by setting\nup a new measure of greatness; so He can subdue hatred and silence the\ncry for revenge.\n\n\"Vengeance is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord,\" should be a\nrestraint, but Christ goes farther and commands us to love our enemies.\nThat was the complete cure for which the world was not ready when God\nmade Moses His spokesman. \"Thou shalt not,\" came first; \"Thou shalt,\"\ncame later. Christ's creed compels positive helpfulness and love is the\nbasis of that creed.\n\nLove makes money-grabbing seem contemptible; love makes class prejudice\nimpossible; love makes selfish ambition a thing to be despised; love\nconverts enemies into friends.\n\nIt may encourage us to expect Christ's teachings to bring world peace\nif we consider for a moment what has already been accomplished in the\nestablishing of peace between individuals. Take, for instance, the\ndoctrine of forgiveness as applied to indebtedness. In Christ's time\ndebtors were not only imprisoned but members of the family could be sold\ninto bondage to satisfy a pecuniary obligation. In Matthew (chap. 18)\nwe have a picture of the cruelty which the creditor was permitted to\npractice:\n\n    Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king,\n    which would take account of his servants. And when he had begun\n    to reckon, one was brought unto him, which owed him ten thousand\n    talents [ten million dollars]. But forasmuch as he had not to pay,\n    his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children, and\n    all that he had, and payment to be made. The servant therefore fell\n    down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and\n    I will pay thee all. Then the lord of that servant was moved with\n    compassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt. But the same\n    servant went out, and found one of his fellow-servants which owed\n    him an hundred pence [seventeen dollars]; and he laid hands on him,\n    and took him by the throat, saying, Pay me that thou owest. And his\n    fellow-servant fell down at his feet, and besought him, saying, Have\n    patience with me, and I will pay thee all. And he would not: but\n    went and cast him into prison, till he should pay the debt. So when\n    his fellow-servants saw what was done, they were very sorry, and\n    came and told unto their lord all that was done. Then his lord,\n    after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant,\n    I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me: Shouldest\n    not thou also have had compassion on thy fellow-servant, even as I\n    had pity on thee? And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the\n    tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him.\n\nIf Christ were to reappear to-day he would find imprisonment for debt\nabolished throughout nearly all, if not the entire, civilized world. The\nlaw stays the hand of the creditor, or rather withholds from him the\ninstruments of torture which he formerly employed. Here we have the\ndoctrine of forgiveness applied in a very practical form. It is based on\nmercy, and yet in a larger sense it rests on justice and promotes the\nwelfare of society.\n\nBut compassion has gone further; we have the exemption law which secures\nto the debtor the food necessary for his family and the tools by which\nhe makes his living. Christ's doctrine has been applied further still;\nwe have the bankruptcy law which gives a new lease of life to an\ninsolvent debtor if his failure is without criminal fault on his\npart. By turning over to his creditors all the property he has above\nexemptions he can go forth from court free from all legal obligations\nand begin business unembarrassed. Some who take advantage of these\nprovisions of the law may be indifferent to the Teacher whose loving\nspirit has thus conquered the hard heart of the world, but the triumph\nmarks a step in human advance and suggests possible changes in other\ndirections as the principle is increasingly applied to daily life.\n\nInternational law still permits greater cruelty in war than accompanied\nimprisonment for debt. National obligations are enforced by killing the\ninnocent as well as the guilty. Ports are blockaded, cities are besieged\nand even bombed, and non-combatants are starved and drowned.\n\nAs imprisonment for debt has disappeared and as duelling is giving way\nto the suit at law, so war will be succeeded by courts of arbitration\nand tribunals for investigation. All real progress toward peace is in\nline with the teachings of the Nazarene and this progress hastens the\ncoming of governments that shall endure.\n\nWith the conclusion of the World War our nation confronts such an\nopportunity as never came to any other nation--such an opportunity as\nnever came to our nation before. We were the only great nation that\nsought no selfish advantage and had no old scores to settle, no spirit\nof revenge to gratify. Our contributions were made for the world's\nbenefit--to end war and make self-government respected everywhere. We\nentered the conflict at the time when we could render the maximum of\nservice with a minimum of sacrifice. At the peace conference we asked\nnothing for ourselves--no territorial additions, no indemnities, no\nreimbursements--just world peace, universal and perpetual. That was to\nbe our recompense.\n\nIt is not entirely the fault of other nations that they do not stand\nexactly in the same position that we do. In many respects their\nsituations are different from ours. They have received from the past an\ninheritance of race and national hostility; they have their commercial\nambitions; they have their military and naval groups with antiquated\nstandards of honour, not to speak of those who, feeding on war\ncontracts, feel that they have a vested interest in carnage. Besides\nthese hindrances to peace they lack several advantages which we enjoy\nover any other nation of importance, viz., more complete information in\nregard to other people, a more general sympathy with other nations and a\ngreater moral obligation to them. Our nation being made up of the best\nblood of the nations of Europe, we learn to know the people at home\nthrough the representatives who come here. Because of our intimate\nconnection with the foreign elements of our country our sympathy goes\nout to all lands; and because we have received from other nations as no\nother nation ever did, we are in duty bound to give as no other nation\nhas given.\n\nWe have given the world a peace plan that provides for the investigation\nof all disputes before a resort to arms--a plan that gives time\nfor passions to subside and for reason to resume her sway. We have\nsubstituted the maxim: \"Nothing is final between friends,\" for the\nold-fashioned diplomacy based on threats and ultimatums. We have turned\nfrom the blood-stained precedents of the past and invoked a spirit of\nbrotherhood for the purpose of preventing wars. These treaties contain\na provision which, though seemingly very simple, is profoundly\nsignificant. In former times treaties ran for a certain number of years\nand then lapsed unless renewed. The thirty treaties negotiated by our\nnation in 1913 and 1914 with three-quarters of the world, providing for\n_investigation_ of _all_ disputes before hostilities can begin, run for\nfive years and then, instead of lapsing, continue until one year after\none of the parties to the treaty has formally demanded its termination.\nNote the difference: the old treaties gave the presumption to war--the\nnew treaties give the presumption to peace. As our constitution requires\na two-thirds vote for ratification of a treaty, a minority of the Senate\n(as few as one-third plus one) could prevent the renewal of a treaty;\nunder the new plan the treaty continues indefinitely until a majority\ndenounce it.\n\nBut while we have made a splendid beginning as the leader of the peace\nmovement in the world much remains to be done. Our nation should lead in\nthe crusade for disarmament; no other nation is so well qualified for\nleadership in this movement so necessary for civilization. The desire\nfor peace, intensified by the agonies of an unprecedented war, ought to\nbe sufficient to bring about disarmament; it should be unnecessary\nto invoke financial reasons. But national debts have increased so\nenormously as to have become unbearable and the world must disarm or\nface universal bankruptcy. The reaction against militarism is more\nadvanced, but the reaction against navalism is just as sure to come--one\ncannot survive without the support of the other. Rivalry in the building\nof battleships will not long be tolerated after rivalry in land forces\nhas been abandoned.\n\nThe United States should be the champion of the Christian method of\npreserving peace--and the world is ready for it. The devil never won\na greater victory than when he persuaded statesmen to make the absurd\nexperiment of trying to prevent war by getting ready for it. \"Arm\nyourselves,\" he whispered, \"and you will never have to use your\nweapons.\" How his Satanic majesty must have gloated over the gullibility\nof his dupes.\n\nJohn Bright, Quaker statesman of Great Britain, pointed out the fallacy\nof this policy. He called it, \"Worshipping the scimitar\" and predicted\nthat it would invite war instead of preventing it. But the din of the\nmunition factories drowned the voice of protest and the civilized\nworld--yes, the Christian world--went into a prepared war, each nation\nprotesting that it was drawn into the conflict against its will.\n\nPermanent peace cannot rest upon terrorism; friendship alone can inspire\npeace, and friendship has no swagger in its gait; it does not flourish a\nsword. Our nation has invited the world to a conference to consider the\nlimitation of armaments; if disarmament by agreement fails we should\nenter upon a systematic policy of reduction ourselves and by so doing\narouse the Christians, the friends of humanity and the toilers of the\nworld to the criminal folly of the brute method of dealing with this\nquestion.\n\nWe should also join the world in creating a tribunal before which every\ncomplaint of international injustice can be heard. If reason is to be\nsubstituted for force the forum instituted for the consideration of\nthese questions must have authority to hear all issues between nations,\nin order that public opinion, based upon information, may compel such\naction as may be necessary to remove discord.\n\nIt does not lessen the value of such a tribunal to withhold from it the\npower to enforce its findings by the weapons of warfare. In the case of\nour own nation, we have no constitutional right to transfer to another\nnation authority to declare war for us, or to impair our freedom of\naction when the time for action arrives.\n\nThen, too, the judgment that rests upon its merits alone, and is not\nenforceable by war, is more apt to be fair than one that can be executed\nby those who render it. A persuasive plea appeals to the reason; a\ncommand is usually uttered in an entirely different spirit.\n\nThere is another difference between a recommendation and a decree; if\nthe European nations could call our army and navy into their service\nat any time they might yield to the temptation to use our resources\nto advance their ambitions. As the man who carries a revolver is more\nlikely than an unarmed man to be drawn into a fight, so the European\nnations would be more apt to engage in selfish quarrels if they carried\nthe fighting power of the United States in their hip pocket. For\ntheir own good, as well as for our protection and for the saving of\ncivilization, it is well to require a clear and complete statement of\nthe reasons for the war and of the ends that the belligerents have in\nview, before we mingle our blood with theirs upon the battle-field.\n\nOur nation is in an ideal position; it has financial power and moral\nprestige; it has disinterestedness of purpose and far-reaching sympathy.\nWhen to these qualifications for leadership independence of action is\nadded we can render the maximum of service to the world.\n\nIt matters not what name is given to the cooperative body; it may be a\nLeague of Nations or an Association of Nations or anything else. The\nname is a mere form; the tribunal should be the greatest that has ever\nassembled. Our delegates should be chosen by the people _directly_, as\nour senators, our congressmen, our governors, and our legislators are,\nand as our President virtually is. Representatives chosen to speak for\nthe American people on such momentous themes as will be discussed in\nthat body should have their commissions signed by the sovereign voters\nthemselves. We cannot afford to intrust the selection of these delegates\nto the President or to Congress. The members of our delegation should\nnot be discredited by any flavour of presidential favouritism or by any\ntaint of Congressional log-rolling.\n\nDelegates, selected by popular vote in districts, would reflect the\nsentiment of the entire country, and their power would be enhanced\nrather than decreased if they were compelled to seek endorsement of\ntheir views on vital questions at a referendum vote. Their authority to\ncast the nation's vote for war ought to be subject to the approval of\nthe people, expressed at the ballot box. Those who are to furnish the\nblood and take upon themselves the burden of war-debts ought to be\nconsulted before the solemn duties and the sacrifices of war are\nrequired of them.\n\nOur nation can, by its example, teach the world the true meaning of that\ndemocracy which was to be made safe throughout the world. The essence of\ndemocracy is found in the right of the people to have what they want,\nand experience shows that the best way to find out what the people want\nis to ask them. There is more virtue in the people themselves than can\nbe found anywhere else; the faults of popular government result chiefly\nfrom the embezzlement of power by representatives of the people--the\npeople themselves are not often at fault. But, suppose they make\nmistakes occasionally: have they not a right to make _their own\nmistakes_? Who has a right to make mistakes for them?\n\nThe Saviour not only furnished a solution for all of life's problems,\nindividual and governmental, national and international, but He also\ncalled His followers to the performance of the duties of citizenship:\n\"Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things\nthat are God's,\" was the answer that Christ made to those who were\nquibbling about the claims of the government under which they lived.\n\nThe citizen is a unit of the community in which he lives and a part of\nhis government. Our government derives its power from the consent of the\ngoverned; what kind of a government would we have if all Christians were\nindifferent to its claims? No rule can be laid down for one citizen that\ndoes not apply to all; each citizen, therefore, should bear his share of\nthe burden if he is to claim his share of the government protection. The\nteachings of Christ require that we should respect the rights of others\nas well as insist upon the recognition of our own rights. In fact, the\nrecognition of the rights of others is a higher form of patriotism than\nmere insistence upon that which is due us and the spirit of brotherhood\nis calculated to create just such a community of interest. Each will\nfind his security in the safety of all--the welfare of each being the\nconcern of the whole group.\n\nIn a government like ours the Christian is compelled by conscience to\navoid sins of omission as well as sins of commission; he must not only\navoid the doing of evil, but he must not permit wrong-doing by law if\nhe can prevent it. In other words, the conscientious citizen must\nunderstand the principles of his government, the methods employed by his\ngovernment and the policies that come before the government for\nadoption or rejection. He is a partner in a very important business--a\nstockholder in the greatest of all corporations. If the good people of\nthe land do not do their duty as citizens they may be sure that bad\npeople will use the power and instrumentalities of government for their\nown advantage and for the injury of the many.\n\nAn indifferent Christian? It is impossible. A Christian cannot be\nindifferent without betraying a sacred trust. And yet every bad law, and\nevery bad condition that can be remedied by a good law, proclaims an\nindifferent citizenship or a citizenship lacking in virtue, for popular\ngovernment is merely a reflection of the character of its active\ncitizenship.\n\nThe charitable view to take of a nation's failure to have the best\ngovernment, the best laws and the best administration possible, is not\nthat the citizenship is lacking in virtue and good intent, but that\nit is lacking in information. It is the business of the good citizen,\ntherefore, to encourage the spread of accurate information--the\ndissemination of light--in order that those who \"love darkness rather\nthan light because their deeds are evil\" may not be able to work under\ncover. No evil can stand long against a united Christian citizenship;\nwitness how prohibition came as soon as the churches united against the\nsaloon.\n\nHaving faith in the power of truth to win its way when understood,\nChristians believe in publicity and are not afraid to call every evil\nbefore the bar of public judgment. Believing in the superhuman wisdom of\nChrist, as well as in the saving power of His blood, they are bold to\napply His code of morals to every problem. His is a name that will\nincreasingly arouse the hosts of righteousness to irresistible attacks\non the brutishness that endangers government, society and civilization.\n\nI am so confident that the Christian citizenship of this country will\nprove faithful to every trust and rise to the requirements of every\nemergency that I venture to repeat a forecast of our nation's future,\nmade more than twenty years ago:\n\nI can conceive of a national destiny which meets the responsibilities\nof to-day and measures up to the possibilities of to-morrow. Behold\na republic, resting securely upon the mountain of eternal truth--a\nrepublic applying in practice and proclaiming to the world the\nself-evident propositions that all men are created equal; that they are\nendowed with inalienable rights; that governments are instituted among\nmen to secure these rights; and that governments derive their just\npowers from the consent of the governed. Behold a republic, in which\ncivil and religious liberty stimulate all to earnest endeavour and in\nwhich the law restrains every hand uplifted for a neighbour's injury--a\nrepublic in which every citizen is a sovereign, but in which no one\ncares to wear a crown. Behold a republic, standing erect, while empires\nall around are bowed beneath the weight of their own armaments--a\nrepublic whose flag is loved while other flags are only feared. Behold\na republic, increasing in population, in wealth, in strength and in\ninfluence; solving the problems of civilization, and hastening the\ncoming of an universal brotherhood--a republic which shakes thrones\nand dissolves aristocracies by its silent example and gives light and\ninspiration to those who sit in darkness. Behold a republic, gradually\nbut surely becoming the supreme moral factor to the world's progress and\nthe accepted arbiter of the world's disputes--a republic whose history\nlike the path of the just--\"is as the shining light that shineth more\nand more unto the perfect day.\"\n\n\n\n\nIX\n\nTHE SPOKEN WORD\n\n\nSome have prophesied that with the spread of the newspaper public\nspeaking would decline--but the prediction has not been fulfilled and\nits failure is easily explained. In the first place, the written\npage can never be a substitute for the message delivered orally. The\nnewspaper vastly multiplies the audience but they hear only the echo,\nnot the speech itself. One cannot write as he speaks because he lacks\nthe inspiration furnished by an audience. Gladstone has very happily\ndescribed the influence exerted by the audience upon the speaker,\nan influence which returns to the audience stamped with his own\npersonality. He says that the speaker draws inspiration from the\naudience in the form of mist and pours it back in a flood. It need\nhardly be added that this refers to speaking without manuscript, but\nreading, while always regrettable, is sometimes necessary--especially\nwhen accuracy is more important than the immediate effect.\n\nIn order to secure both accuracy and animation it is well to prepare the\nspeech in advance and then revise it after delivery.\n\nWith increased intelligence a larger percentage of the population are\nable to think upon their feet, to take part in public discussions and\nto give their community and country the benefit of their conscience and\njudgment. The fraternities and labour and commercial organizations have\nlargely aided in the development of speaking by the exchange of views at\ntheir regular meetings. The extension of popular government naturally\nincreases public speaking as it brings the masses into closer relation\nto the government and makes them more and more a controlling force in\npolitics.\n\nThe newspapers, instead of making the stump unnecessary, often increase\nthe necessity for face to face communication in order that both sides\nmay be represented and, sometimes, in order that misrepresentations may\nbe exposed.\n\nNo substitute can be found for the pulpit. Earnestness which finds\nexpression through the voice cannot be communicated through the printed\npage. If we are thrilled by what we read it gives us only a glimpse of\nthe power of speech to stir the soul. If the spoken word is to continue\nto play an important part in the communication of information and in the\ncompelling of thought it is worth while to consider some of the rules\nthat contribute to the effectiveness of the pulpit and the platform.\n\nSometimes I receive a letter from a young man who informs me that he is\na born orator and asks what such an one should do to prepare him for his\nlife-work. I answer that while an orator must be born like others his\nsuccess will not depend on inheritance, neither will a favourable\nenvironment in youth assure it. An ancestor's fame may inspire him to\neffort and the associations of the fireside may stimulate, but ability\nto speak effectively is an acquirement rather than a gift.\n\nEloquence may be defined as the speech of one who _knows what he is\ntalking about_ and _means what he says_--it is _thought on fire_. One\ncannot communicate information unless he possesses it. There is quite a\ndifference in people in this respect; we say of one that he knows more\nthan he can tell and, of another, that he can tell all he knows, but it\nis a reflection upon a man to say that he can tell more than he knows.\n\nThe first thing, therefore, is to know the subject. One should know his\nsubject so well that a question will aid rather than embarrass him. A\nquestion from the audience annoys one only when the speaker is _unable_\nto answer it or does not _want_ to answer it. Many a speaker has\nbeen brought into ridicule by a question that revealed his lack of\ninformation on the subject; and a speaker has sometimes been routed by\na question that revealed something he intended to conceal. Before\ndiscussing a subject one should go all around it and view it from every\nstandpoint, asking and answering all the questions likely to be put by\nhis opponents. Nothing strengthens a speaker more than to be able\nto answer every question put to him. His argument is made much more\nforcible because the question focuses attention on the particular point;\na ready answer makes a deeper impression than the speaker could make\nby the use of the same language without the benefit of the question to\nexcite interest in the proposition.\n\nBut knowledge is of little use to the speaker without earnestness.\nPersuasive speech is from heart to heart, not from mind to mind. It is\ndifficult for a speaker to deceive his audience as to his own feelings;\nit takes a trained actor to make an imaginary thing seem real. Nearly\ntwo thousand years ago one of the Latin poets expressed this thought\nwhen he said, \"If you would draw tears from others' eyes, yourself the\nsigns of grief must show.\"\n\nIf one is master of an important subject and feels that he has a message\nthat must be delivered he will not lack a hearing. As there are always\nimportant subjects before the country for settlement there will always\nbe oratory. In order to speak eloquently on one subject a man need not\nbe well informed on a large number of subjects, although information on\nall subjects is of value. One who can in a general way discuss a large\nnumber of subjects may be entirely outclassed by one who knows but one\nsubject but knows it well and _feels_ it.\n\nThe pulpit has developed many great orators because it furnishes the\nlargest subject with which one can deal. The preacher who knows the\nBible and feels that every human being needs the message that the Bible\ncontains cannot fail to reach the hearts of his hearers. Dr. E. Benjamin\nAndrews, once the President of Brown University and later Chancellor\nof Nebraska University, told me of a sermon that he heard Jasper, the\ncoloured preacher of Richmond, deliver late in life on an anniversary\noccasion. Jasper claimed nothing for himself but attributed his long\npastorate and whatever influence he had to the fact that he preached\nfrom only one book--the Bible.\n\nWhen I was in college I heard a visitor draw a contrast between Cicero\nand Demosthenes. I am not sure that it is fair to Cicero but it brings\nout an important distinction. As I recall it, the speaker said, \"When\nCicero spake the people said, 'How well Cicero speaks'; when Demosthenes\nspake his hearers cried, 'Let us go against Philip.'\" One impressed\nhimself upon his audience while the other impressed his subject. It need\nhardly be said that in all effective oratory the speaker succeeds in\nproportion as he can make his hearers forget him in their absorption\nin the subject that he presents. I may add that there is a practical\nadvantage in the speaker's diverting attention from himself. There is\nonly one of him and he would soon become monotonous if he continually\nthrust himself forward; but, as subjects are innumerable, he can give\ninfinite variety to his speech by putting the emphasis upon the theme.\n\nIt is better that the audience, when it breaks up, should gather into\ngroups and discuss what the speaker said than to go away saying, \"What a\ndelightful speech it was,\" and yet not remember the things said. Whether\nthe statements made are true or not it does no harm to have them\nchallenged; if some dispute what has been said and others defend the\nspeaker it is certain that thought has been aroused, and thinking leads\nto truth. That is why freedom of speech is so essential in a republic;\nit is the only process by which truth can be separated from error and\nmade to stand forth in all its strength. We should, therefore, invite\ndiscussion.\n\nWhile acquaintance with the subject and heartfelt interest in it are the\nfirst essentials of convincing speech, there are other qualities that\ngreatly strengthen discourse. First among these I would put _clearness\nof statement_. Jefferson declared in the Declaration of Independence\nthat _certain_ truths are self-evident. It is a very conservative\nstatement of an important fact; it could be made stronger: _all truth is\nself-evident_. The best service one can render a truth, therefore, is to\nstate it so clearly that it can be understood. This does not mean that\nevery self-evident truth will be immediately accepted because there are\nmany things that interfere with the acceptance of truth.\n\nFirst, let us consider depth of conviction. Some people take their\nconvictions more seriously than others. In India I heard a missionary\nspeak of another person as having \"no opinions--nothing but\nconvictions\"; while one of the enemies of Gladstone described him as\nbeing the only person he ever knew who \"could improvise the convictions\nof a lifetime.\" Depth of conviction gives great force to an individual\nwhen he is going in the right direction, but he is difficult to change\nif he is going in the wrong direction. When I visited the Hermitage for\nthe first time they told me of an old coloured man, formerly a slave of\nJackson's, who survived his master many years. He was, of course, an\nobject of interest and many questions were asked in regard to Jackson's\ncharacteristics. One visitor inquired of him if he thought Andrew\nJackson went to heaven. He quickly responded, \"If he sot his head that\nway, he did.\"\n\nPrejudice also delays the spread of truth. People sometimes brace\nthemselves against arguments. If I may be pardoned a personal\nillustration I will cite a case of political prejudice that came under\nmy own observation. I was speaking in a town in western Nebraska, an\nout-of-the-way place that I had seldom visited. A friend heard a man\nsay, \"Well, I never heard him and I thought I would come and see what he\nhas to say.\" And then, with a determined look upon his face he added,\n\"But he will not convince me.\" Political prejudice is not so hard to\novercome as race prejudice and race prejudice is not so deep-seated as\nreligious prejudice; but prejudice of any kind, whether it be personal,\npolitical, race, or religious, seriously interferes with the progress of\ntruth.\n\nNarrowness of vision often obstructs acceptance of truth. One must be\nmade to feel interested in the subject before he will listen to that\nwhich is said about it. Aristotle has suggested a means by which each\none can measure himself. \"If he is interested in himself only he is\nvery small; if he is interested in his family he is larger; if he is\ninterested in his community he is larger still.\" Thus he grows in size\nas his sympathies expand--the largest person being the one whose heart\ntakes in the whole world. In proportion as we can enlarge the horizon of\nthe hearer we can increase the number of subjects to which he will give\nattention. The minister has an advantage in that he deals with the one\nsubject about which all mankind thinks. The soul yearns for God: it is\nman's highest aspiration and his most enduring concern. When one's\nheart is changed--when he is born again--he listens to, understands and\naccepts arguments that he rejected before.\n\nSelfish interest is one of the most common obstructions to the advance\nof truth. Very often this difficulty can be overcome by showing that\nthe party is mistaken as to the effect of the proposed measure upon his\ninterests. Fortunately in matters of government a large majority of the\npeople have interests on the same side and the real task is to make this\nplain. Where there is a real opposing interest, argument is of little\nuse unless it can be shown that the public welfare outweighs the\npersonal interest--that is, that a public interest is large enough to\nswallow up the interest that is private and personal.\n\nWhenever one refuses to admit such a self-evident truth, for instance,\nas that it is wrong to steal, don't argue with him--search him; the\nreason may be found in his pocket.\n\nNext to clearness of statement, I would put conciseness--the condensing\nof much into a few words. This is a great asset to a speaker. The\nmoulder of public opinion does not manufacture opinion; he simply puts\nit into form so that it can be remembered and repeated; just as my\nfather used bullet-moulds to make bullets when he was about to go\nsquirrel hunting. The moulds did not create the lead, they simply put\nit into effective form. Jefferson was the greatest moulder of public\nopinion in the early days of this country. He did not create Democratic\nsentiment; he simply took the aspirations that had nestled in the\nhearts of men from time immemorial and put them into appropriate and\nepigrammatic language, so that the nation thought his thoughts after\nhim, as the world is now doing. The proverbs of Solomon are priceless\nfor the same reason; they are full of wisdom--wisdom so expressed that\nit can be easily comprehended.\n\nWhen I was a boy my father would call me in from work a little before\nnoon, read to me from Proverbs and comment on the sayings of the Wise\nMan. After his death (when I was twenty) I recalled his fondness for\nProverbs and read the thirty-one chapters through each month for a year.\nI was increasingly impressed with their beauty and strength. I have used\nmany of them in speeches. The one I have most frequently used in the\nadvocacy of reforms reads: \"A prudent man foreseeth the evil and hideth\nhimself; but the simple pass on, and are punished.\"\n\nI have often used a story to illustrate how much can be said in a few\nwords. A man said to another, \"Do you drink?\" The man to whom the\nquestion was addressed, replied rather indignantly, \"That is my\nbusiness, sir.\" \"Have you any other business?\" asked the first man. The\nstory is not only valuable as an illustration of brevity but it has a\nmoral side; if a man drinks much he soon has no other business.\n\nIn this connection I will speak of the words to be employed. Our use of\nbig words increases from infancy to the day of graduation. I think it is\nsafe to say that with nearly all of us the maximum is reached on the day\nwhen we leave school. We use more big words that day than we have\never used before or will ever use again. When we go from college into\nevery-day life and begin to deal with our fellowmen we drop the big words\nbecause we are more interested in making people understand us than we\nare in parading our learning. The more earnest one is the smaller the\nwords used. If a young man used big words to assure his sweetheart of\nhis affection she would never understand him, but the word love has but\none syllable, just as the words life, faith, hope, home, food, and work\nare one-syllable words. Remember that nearly every audience is made up\nof people who differ in the amount of book learning they have received.\nIf you speak only to those best educated you will speak over the heads\nof those less educated. A story is told on a great scientist who made\ntwo holes in the back fence and showed them to his wife, explaining that\nthe big hole was for the cat and the small hole for the kitten. \"But\ncannot the kitten go through the same hole as the cat?\" inquired his\nwife. If you use little words you can reach not only the least learned,\nbut the most learned as well.\n\nIllustration is one of the most potent forms of argument; we understand\nnew things by comparing them with what we know. Christ was a master of\nillustrations--the master. No one of whom history tells us has ever used\nthe illustration as effectively as He. He took the objects of every-day\nlife and made them mirrors which reflected truth. His parables give us a\nwide range of illustration--the Sower going forth to sow, the Wheat and\nthe Tares, the Prodigal Son, the Wise and Foolish Virgins--in fact, all\nthe illustrations that He used might be cited to prove the power of this\nform of argument.\n\nThe question has been used throughout history; at every great crisis the\norators of the day have used the question form of argument. Its strength\ndepends upon the completeness with which the speaker includes all of the\nessentials involved in summing up the situation. The greatest question\never presented as an argument was that in which Christ concentrated\nattention upon the value of the soul. No one will ever place a higher\nestimate upon the soul than Christ did when He asked, \"What shall it\nprofit a man if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul?\"\nNo greater question was ever asked, or can be asked. (See Lecture, \"The\nValue of the Soul.\")\n\nCourage is the last attribute to which I shall invite your attention.\nThe speaker must possess moral courage, and to possess it he must have\nfaith.\n\nFaith exerts a controlling influence over our lives. If it is argued\nthat works are more important than faith, I reply that faith comes\nfirst, works afterward. Until one believes, he does not act, and in\naccordance with his faith, so will be his deeds.\n\nAbraham, called of God, went forth in faith to establish a race and a\nreligion. It was faith that led Columbus to discover America, and faith\nagain that conducted the early settlers to Jamestown, the Dutch to New\nYork and the Pilgrims to Plymouth Rock. Faith has led the pioneer across\ndeserts and through trackless forests, and faith has brought others in\nhis footsteps to lay in our land the foundations of a civilization the\nhighest that the world has known.\n\nI might draw an illustration from the life of each one of you. You have\nfaith in education, and that faith is behind your study; you have faith\nin this institution, and that faith brought you here; your parents\nand friends have had faith in you and have helped you to your present\nposition. And back of all these manifestations of faith is your faith in\nGod, in His Word and in His Son. We are told that without faith it\nis impossible to please God, and I may add that without faith it is\nimpossible to meet the expectations of those who are most interested in\nyou. Let me present this subject under four heads:\n\nFirst--You must have faith in yourselves. Not that you should carry\nconfidence in yourselves to the point of displaying egotism, and yet,\negotism is not the worst possible fault. My father was wont to say that\nif a man had the big head, you could whittle it down, but that if he had\nthe little head, there was no hope for him. If you have the big head\nothers will help you to reduce it, but if you have the little head, they\ncannot help you. You must believe that you can do things or you will\nnot undertake them. Those who lack faith attempt nothing and therefore\ncannot possibly succeed; those with great faith attempt the seemingly\nimpossible and by attempting prove what man can do.\n\nBut you cannot have faith in yourselves unless you are conscious that\nyou are prepared for your work. If one is feeble in body, he cannot have\nthe confidence in his physical strength that the athlete has, and, as\nphysical strength is necessary, one is justified in devoting to exercise\nand to the strengthening of the body such time as may be necessary.\n\nIntellectual training is also necessary, and more necessary than it used\nto be. When but few had the advantages of a college education, the\nlack of such advantages was not so apparent. Now when so many of the\nministers, lawyers, physicians, journalists, and even business men, are\ncollege graduates, one cannot afford to be without the best possible\nintellectual preparation. When one comes into competition with his\nfellows, he soon recognizes his own intellectual superiority, equality\nor inferiority as compared with others. In China they have a very\ninteresting bird contest. The singing lark is the most popular bird\nthere, and as you go along the streets of a Chinese city you see\nChinamen out airing their birds. These singing larks are entered in\ncontests, and the contests are decided by the birds themselves. If, for\ninstance, a dozen are entered, they all begin to sing lustily, but as\nthey sing, one after another recognizes that it is outclassed and gets\ndown off its perch, puts its head under its wing and will not sing any\nmore. At last there is just one bird left singing, and it sings with\nenthusiasm as if it recognized its victory.\n\nSo it is in all intellectual contests. Put twenty men in a room and let\nthem discuss any important question. At first all will take part in the\ndiscussion, but as the discussion proceeds, one after another drops out\nuntil finally two are left in debate, one on one side and one on the\nother. The rest are content to have their ideas presented by those who\ncan present them best. If you are going to have faith, therefore, in\nyourselves, you must be prepared to meet your competitors upon an equal\nplane; if you are prepared, they will be conscious of it as well as you.\n\nA high purpose is also a necessary part of your preparation. You cannot\nafford to put a low purpose in competition with a high one. If you go\nout to work from a purely selfish standpoint, you will be ashamed\nto stand in the presence of those who have higher aims and nobler\nambitions. Have faith in yourselves, but to have faith you must\nbe prepared for your work, and this preparation must be moral and\nintellectual as well as physical. The preacher should be the boldest of\nmen because of the unselfish character of his work.\n\nSecond: Have faith in mankind. The great fault of our scholarship is\nthat it is not sufficiently sympathetic. It holds itself aloof from the\nstruggling masses. It is too often cold and cynical. It is better to\ntrust your fellowmen and be occasionally deceived than to be distrustful\nand live alone. Mankind deserves to be trusted. There is something good\nin every one, and that good responds to sympathy. If you speak to the\nmultitude and they do not respond, do not despise them, but rather\nexamine what you have said. If you speak from your heart, you will\nspeak to their hearts, and they can tell very quickly whether you are\ninterested in them or simply in yourself. The heart of mankind is sound;\nthe sense of justice is universal. Trust it, appeal to it, do not\nviolate it. People differ in race characteristics, in national\ntraditions, in language, in ideas of government, and in forms of\nreligion, but at the heart they are very much alike. I fear the\nplutocracy of wealth; I respect the aristocracy of learning; but I thank\nGod for the democracy of the heart. You must love if you would be loved.\n\"They loved him because he first loved them\"--this is the verdict\npronounced where men have unselfishly laboured for the welfare of the\nwhole people. Link yourselves in sympathy with your fellowmen; mingle\nwith them; know them and you will trust them and they will trust you.\nIf you are stronger than others, bear heavier loads; if you are more\ncapable than others, show it by your willingness to perform a larger\nservice.\n\nThird: If you are going to accomplish anything in this country, you must\nhave faith in your form of government, and there is every reason why\nyou should have faith in it. It is the best form of government ever\nconceived by the mind of man, and it is spreading throughout the world.\nIt is best, not because it is perfect, but because it can be made as\nperfect as the people deserve to have. It is a people's government, and\nit reflects the virtue and intelligence of the people. As the people\nmake progress in virtue and intelligence, the government ought to\napproach more and more nearly to perfection. It will never, of course,\nbe entirely free from faults, because it must be administered by human\nbeings, and imperfection is to be expected in the work of human hands.\n\nJefferson said a century ago that there were naturally two parties in\nevery country, one which drew to itself those who trusted the people,\nthe other which as naturally drew to itself those who distrusted the\npeople. That was true when Jefferson said it, and it is true to-day.\nIn every country there are those who are seeking to enlarge the\nparticipation of the people in government, and that group is growing. In\nevery country there are those who are endeavouring to obstruct each\nstep toward popular government, and that group is diminishing. In this\ncountry the tendency is constantly toward more popular government, and\nevery effort which has for its object the bringing of the government\ninto closer touch with the people is sure of ultimate triumph.\n\nOur form of government is good. Call it a democracy if you are a\ndemocrat, or a republic if you are a republican, but help to make it a\ngovernment of the people, by the people, and for the people. A democracy\nis wiser than an aristocracy because a democracy can draw from the\nwisdom of the people, and all of the people know more than any part of\nthe people. A democracy is stronger than a monarchy, because, as the\nhistorian, Bancroft, has said: \"It dares to discard the implements of\nterror and build its citadel in the hearts of men.\" And a democracy is\nthe most just form of government because it is built upon the doctrine\nthat men are created equal, that governments are instituted to protect\nthe inalienable rights of the people and that governments derive their\njust powers from the consent of the governed.\n\nWe know that a grain of wheat planted in the ground will, under the\ninfluence of the sunshine and rain, send forth a blade, and then a\nstalk, and then the full head, because there is behind the grain of\nwheat a force irresistible and constantly at work. There is behind moral\nand political truth a force equally irresistible and always operating,\nand just as we may expect the harvest in due season, we may be sure of\nthe triumph of these eternal forces that make for man's uplifting. Have\nfaith in your form of government, for it rests upon a growing idea, and\nif you will but attach yourself to that idea, you will grow with it.\n\nFourth, the subject presents itself in another aspect. You must not only\nhave faith in yourselves, in humanity and in the form of government\nunder which we live, but if you would do a great work, you must have\nfaith in God. I am not a preacher; I am but a layman; yet, I am\nnot willing that the minister shall monopolize the blessings of\nChristianity, and I do not know of any moral precept binding upon the\npreacher behind the pulpit that is not binding upon the Christian and\nwhose acceptance would not be helpful to every one. I am not speaking\nfrom the minister's standpoint but from the observation of every-day life\nwhen I say that there is a wide difference between the desire to live\nso that men will applaud you and the desire to live so that God will be\nsatisfied with you. Man needs the inner strength that comes from faith\nin God and belief in His constant presence.\n\nMan needs faith in God, therefore, to strengthen him in his hours of\ntrial, and he needs it to give him courage to do the work of life. How\ncan one fight for a principle unless he believes in the triumph of\nright? How can he believe in the triumph of the right if he does not\nbelieve that God stands back of the truth and that God is able to bring\nvictory to His side? He knows not whether he is to live for the truth or\nto die for it, but if he has the faith he ought to have, he is as ready\nto die for it as to live for it.\n\nFaith will not only give you strength when you fight for righteousness,\nbut your faith will bring dismay to your enemies. There is power in the\npresence of an honest man who does right because it is right and dares\nto do the right in the face of all opposition. That is true to-day, and\nhas been true through all history.\n\nIf your preparation is complete so that you are conscious of your\nability to do great things; if you have faith in your fellowmen and\nbecome a colabourer with them in the raising of the general level of\nsociety; if you have faith in our form of government and seek to purge\nit of its imperfections so as to make it more and more acceptable to our\nown people and to the oppressed of other nations; and if, in addition,\nyou have faith in God and in the triumph of the right, no one can set\nlimits to your achievements. This is the greatest of all ages in which\nto live. The railroads and the telegraph wires have brought the corners\nof the earth close together, and it is easier to-day for one to be\nhelpful to the whole world than it was a few centuries ago to be\nhelpful to the inhabitants of a single valley. This is the age of great\nopportunity and of great responsibility. Let your faith be large, and\nlet this large faith inspire you to perform a large service.\n\nBecause the preacher has consecrated himself to God's service and seeks\ndivine guidance from the Bible and through prayer, he is able to speak\nwith absolute confidence. His trust is the measure of his strength;\nbecause he _knows_ what Christ has done for him he knows what Christ can\ndo for others. His own experience is the foundation of his trust in the\nGospel that he preaches. Because a miracle was wrought in his own life\nhe knows that the day of miracles is not past; because one heart has\nbeen regenerated he knows that all hearts can be, and that Christ,\nthrough His power to transform the life of each individual, can\ntransform a world.\n\nI beg you to prepare yourselves to proclaim the Word of God by voice\nas well as with pen. You have a mighty message for a waiting world--a\nmessage worthy of all your powers of heart and mind and tongue.\n\n\n\n\nBIBLE STUDY\n\n\n_P. WHITWELL WILSON Author of the \"Christ We Forget_\"\n\nThe Vision We Forget\n\nA Layman's Reading of the Book of Revelation. $2.00\n\n\"Certainly this is the most entertaining treatise on the Revelation ever\nwritten. Will make the Revelation a new book in the reading of many\nChristians. It brings the Revelation down into the present day and makes\nit all intensely vital and modern.\"\n\n_C.E. World_.\n\n\n_J.J. ROSS\n\nThe author of \"The Kingdom in Mystery.\"_\n\nThinking Through the New Testament\n\nAn Outline Study of Every Book In the New Testament. $1.75\n\nA course of study in the books of the New Testament. Dr. Ross has\nprepared a volume which can be used by the individual student as well as\nby study groups.\n\n\n_FREDERIC B. OXTOBY_\n\nMaking the Bible Real\n\nIntroductory Studies in the Bible. $1.00\n\nIn simple, direct language, Dr. Oxtoby brings his readers into close,\nintimate contact with the wonderful story of God's chosen People, their\nLand, their History, their Prophets and their Literature.\n\n\n_PHILIP MAURO Author of \"The Number of Man\"_\n\nBringing Back the King\n\nAnother Volume on the Kingdom. $1.00\n\nContinuing his study of the Kingdom, the author in this volume sets\nforth the relation of King David with the Gospel.\n\n\n_PHILIP MAURO_\n\nOur Liberty in Christ\n\nA Study in Galatians. $1.25\n\nAn exposition of Galatians from the standpoint that its main theme is\n\"the Liberty wherewith Christ has made us free.\" Special attention is\ngiven to the unfolding of the remarkable \"allegory\" in Chapter IV.\n\n\n\n\nWORK AMONG YOUNG PEOPLE\n\n\n_HUGH T. KERR_\n\nChildren's Gospel Story-Sermons\n\nA New Volume of Talks to the Young. $1.25\n\nThe stories are drawn from history, mythology, the daily newspapers,\nbiography, and fiction. They are all interesting, and the author\nalways makes a plain, sensible, evangelical application of them, well\ncalculated to help boys and girls.\n\n[Illustration: Children's Gospel Story-Sermons.]\n\n\n_S.D. CHAMBERS_\n\n_Author of \"If I Were You_.\"\n\nTo Be or Not To Be\n\nBrief Talks with Children and Young Folks. $1.25\n\nIn Mr. Chambers' new volume of \"Five Minute Talks\" he aims at helping\nthe children to right decisions--to determine whether they will, or will\nnot, acquire certain good and bad qualities, calculated to either make\nor mar their characters and lives. A useful series, quite above the\nordinary.\n\n\n_W. RUSSELL BOWIE_\n\n_Rector St. Paul's Episcopal Church, Richmond, Va. Author of \"The\nChildren's Year,\" etc_.\n\nSunny Windows\n\nand Other Sermons for Children. $1.25\n\n\"Every pastor has the rich opportunity of speaking to the children, and\ndesires to magnify this opportunity for indoctrination to the highest\ndegree. The advantage of this book lies in the fact that the preacher\nhas had unusual success in his ministry with the children in which\nhe has made use of all the materials here accumulated.\" _Christian\nAdvocate_.\n\n\n_WADE O. SMITH_\n\n_Author of \"The Little Jets\", etc._\n\n\"Say, Fellows!\"\n\nChummy Talks with Young Men about the Game of Life. $1.25\n\nA volume of the famous talks from Wade Smith's Boys' Class: \"Say\nFellows, the finest and biggest and most thrilling game of all is the\nlife game, in which our adversary is the devil. The forces of the devil\nare most powerfully organized to overthrow the forces of God's Kingdom.\"\n\n\n\n\nEVANGELISTIC WORK\n\n\n_OZORA S. DAVIS_\n\n_President, Chicago Theological Seminary_\n\nEvangelistic Preaching\n\nWith Sermon Outlines and Talks to Children and Young People. $1.50\n\n\"The best help on this important subject that we have ever seen. Sets\nforth with skill and completeness the method of evangelism that best\nappeals to the men and women of the present day.\"--_C.E. World_.\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\n_WILLIAM E. BIEDERWOLF_\n\n_Sec. The National Federated Evangelistic Committee_\n\nEvangelism\n\nIts Justification--Operation--Value. $1.75\n\n\"It is a text-book and a call. Every chapter is full of value. It tells\nhow to give the invitation and how to conduct the after-meeting. It is a\nbook for every one who is interested in doing evangelistic work.\"\n\n_Herald and Presbyter_.\n\n\n_FREDERICK L. FAGLEY_\n\n_Executive Secretary Commission on Evangelism Congregation Churches_.\n\nParish Evangelism\n\nAn Outline of a Year's Program. $1.00\n\nMr. Fagley lays down a sensible, workable plan of work, including the\nformalities and maintenance of an evangelistic committee, a program of\npreaching, methods of personal work, deepening of the prayer-life, etc.\n\n\n_J.W. PORTER_\n\nThe Assurance of Salvation\n\nAnd Other Evangelistic Sermons. $1.25\n\n\"Sermons of the distinctly orthodox type and suggestive in outline and\nillustration. Warm the soul and stimulate the thought.\"--_Evangelical\nMessenger_.\n\n\n_CHARLES FORBES TAYLOR (The Boy Evangelist)_\n\nThe Riveter's Gang\n\nand Other Revival Addresses. $1.25\n\n\"The value of this book lies not alone in the anecdotes and sermons that\nit contains, but in the illustration of how a successful evangelistic\npreacher may enforce his teaching.\"--_Lookout_.\n\n\n\n\nSELF-HELP\n\n\n_ROGER W. BABSON_\n\n_Pres. Babson's Statistical Organization_\n\nMaking Good in Business $1.25\n\nThe famous Business Expert here applies a fundamental knowledge of\nbusiness principles to daily business life. The latest work by the\nauthor of \"Fundamentals of Prosperity\" is crammed with the most valuable\nsort of hints and suggestions for the attainment of a successful\nbusiness career.\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\n_WILLIAM GEORGE JORDAN_ _Author of \"Self Control\", etc._\n\nThe Trusteeship of Life\n\nA Study in the True Values of Existence $1.25\n\nA new volume of Mr. Jordan's winning Essays which have called forth\nthe hearty praise of Henry van Dyke who said: \"They are suggestive\nand stimulating. His philosophy has three big little words--courage,\ncheerfulness and charity.\"\n\n\n\n\nBIOGRAPHY, etc.\n\n\n_FREDERICK LYNCH Educational Secretary of The Church Peace Union_\n\nPersonal Recollections of Andrew Carnegie $1.50\n\n\"Happily Dr. Lynch's little volume of personal recollections of Andrew\nCarnegie admirably supplements the autobiography. These two books\ntaken together will explain the real Carnegie to his countrymen.\"\n_Independent_.\n\n\n_PHILIP I. ROBERTS_\n\n\"Charlie\" Alexander\n\nA Study in Personality. $1.00\n\n_Dr. Edgar Whitaker Work says_. \"Brief as it is, it serves its purpose\nsuccessfully. It leaves a picture of the great singer in the mind that\ncannot be forgotten.\"\n\n\n_DAVID GREGG, D.D._\n\nA Book of Remembrance\n\nSelections from the writings of Dr. David Gregg. Compiled by Frank\nDilnot. $2.00\n\nA book of rare stimulus and devotional charm overflowing with precious\nthoughts selected from the works of the well-known preacher and\ndevotional writer by one well qualified for the task.","title":"In His Image","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":72267}