{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_25018/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_25018","id":"gutenberg_25018","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25018","summary":null,"tags":["Amusements -- Religious aspects","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Christian life","Sermons, American"],"text":"*Amusement: A Force in Christian Training*\n\n                                  By The\n\n                          Rev. Marvin R. Vincent\n\n           Pastor of the First Presbyterian Church, Troy, N.Y.\n\n                     Wm. H. Young, 8 & 9 First Street\n\n                                Troy, N.Y.\n\n                                   1867\n\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\nPreface.\nReligion And Amusement.\nThe True Nonconformist.\nThe Church And The Young Man.\nThoughts For The Clergy on the Amusement Question.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\n\nThese discourses are not presented as a series. With the exception of the\nlast, which was prepared merely for publication, they were delivered at\nconsiderable intervals, and to meet certain aspects of the subject as they\npresented themselves. As they all develop substantially the same\nprinciples, they will probably contain some repetitions. The interest\nawakened by the publication of the essay before the Albany Convention, and\nthe very general desire expressed to see the second and third of these\ndiscourses in print, have decided the author against remoulding the whole\ninto one treatise which he at one time contemplated. He therefore sends\nthem forth in their original shape, with earnest prayer that the great\nHead of the church may use them, with all their imperfections, to awaken\nChristian thought and friendly discussion on a subject of vital importance\nto the welfare of our youth.\n\nMarvin R. Vincent.\n\nTroy, _Jan. 9th, 1867_.\n\n\n\n\n\nRELIGION AND AMUSEMENT.\n\n\n    An Essay, Delivered at the International Convention of Young Men\u2019s\n                         Christian Associations,\n\n\n                      Held In Albany, June 1, 1866.\n\n\nThe religious thought of the age must soon face this subject more fairly\nthan it has yet done; and seek for some more satisfactory adjustment of\nit. At present its status is very indefinite. The church is by no means at\none concerning it. The pulpit too often evades it. Private Christians\nwaver between the results of independent thought and of early education,\nundecided whether to approve or condemn; while extremists take advantage\nof this hesitation to lay down the sternest dogmas, and to thunder\ndenunciations at every head that will not bow to their _ipse dixit_. The\nquestions at issue are not to be dismissed with a sneer at fanaticism and\nover-scrupulousness on the one hand, and with a protest against\nunwarrantable liberality on the other. The whole subject must be\nre\u00ebxamined with reference to fundamental gospel principles by both\nparties, in a spirit of Christian moderation, and with the desire of\nascertaining not only what is _safe_, but what is _right_.\n\nTo prosecute thoroughly such an examination within the limits assigned me,\nis, of course, impossible. I can only deal with a few of the great\nprinciples underlying the case, and urge their application to a single\npractical question which has arisen in the experience of our own, and it\nmay be, of other Christian associations.\n\nThe idea of _development_, which is perhaps the fundamental one of\nChristianity, has been to a very great extent swallowed up in the idea of\n_safety_. It is not an uncommon error to regard Christianity almost\nexclusively in a defensive aspect; the Christian merely as a _safe_ man,\nprotected by Divine safe-guards from temptation, rescued by Divine mercy\nfrom the terrors of death and judgment. Correspondingly with this mistake,\nthe tendency has grown to strengthen the defenses of character, rather\nthan to foster its growth. To keep it from temptation, rather than to\nteach it to overcome temptation. To teach it its danger from the world,\nrather than its duty to the world. Consequently we have heard more about\nkeeping unspotted from the world, than of going into _all_ the world, and\npreaching the gospel to every creature. More about coming out and being\nseparate, than of knowing the truth which shall make free. More of\nseparating wheat from tares, than of leavening lumps.\n\nThe false instinct of self-preservation, which sent the Romanist into\ncloisters and convents, and tore him from the sweet sanctities of domestic\nlife, has perpetuated itself more than some of us think in Protestant\nthought and church legislation. And in nothing has this tendency revealed\nitself more distinctly than in the matter of amusements. For amusement,\nhaving the effect to make men feel kindly toward the world, and, more\nreadily than duty, falling in with human inclination, has been regarded as\nunsafe, and therefore as a thing to be kept at arm\u2019s length by the church,\nand admitted to her folds only under the strictest surveillance, and in\ngyves and handcuffs.\n\nThe developments of this spirit are so familiar that I need not stop to\nenumerate them. The important thing now is to discover the right\nstand-point for discussion. And here let me say what, until recently, I\nhad supposed there was no need of saying: that amusement is a necessity of\nman\u2019s nature as truly as food, or drink, or sleep. Physiology, common\nsense, experience, philosophy, are all at one on this point. Man needs\nsomething besides change of employment. He needs something pursued with a\nview solely to _enjoyment_. Those who deny this are ignorant of the\nsimplest fundamental laws of mind and matter. Men who assert publicly that\nthey need no amusements, and \u201cwant to die in the harness,\u201d will have the\nopportunity of dying in the harness some years earlier than would be\ndemanded in the ordinary course of nature. Nature will not suffer even\nzealous Christian men to violate this law with impunity. She forbids man\nto labor continuously, and if he persists in disregarding her prohibition,\nshe will revenge herself by imbecility, uselessness, or death.\n\nThis must be assumed in all discussions of the subject; and it being a\nreligious, no less than a physical truth, it throws into new prominence\nthe question, how, as Christians, we are to discharge this duty without\nbeing led away by the temptation which adjoins it so closely.\n\nLet it be borne in mind that we are not now dealing with individual cases\nof conscience, but with general laws. While then there is obviously a\ndistinction between amusements\u2014while it is granted that some develop\ngreater capabilities of abuse than others, the attempt to adjust this\nquestion on the basis of _discriminating between amusements_ must result\nin failure. It always has, and it always will. This basis is secure only\nin a question between an innocent amusement, and one involving a palpable\nviolation of the law of God. The advocate of any particular amusement is,\non this ground, shut up to the necessity of proving that what he approves\nand practices is _absolutely pure, and incapable of perversion_. The\nmoment it is admitted that it can, by any possibility, be turned to base\nuses, the lists are thrown open to all corners, and the utterly insoluble\nquestion arises, _just what degree of capacity for perversion entitles an\namusement to approval or rejection?_ Insoluble, I say, because, not to\nspeak of any other difficulty, one is obliged to confront the fact that no\none amusement presents a similar temptation to abuse to all alike. That in\nwhich the slightest indulgence might tend to lead one man to ruinous\nexcess, excites no interest in another. It might possibly be dangerous for\none man to play at backgammon, while to another it would prove no\namusement, but only a tedious method of killing time. On this ground, in\nshort, it is utterly impossible to adjust this matter satisfactorily or\nconsistently. The only consistent or safe rule in this view of the case,\nis _rigorously to exclude all_, because all are partakers of the universal\ntaint of sin.\n\n\n    \u201cThe trail of the serpent is over them all.\u201d\n\n\nIt is innocent for boys to play marbles, but sinful to play dominoes.\nWherein, pray? They can learn to gamble with one as well as with the\nother. It is sinful to play billiards, but highly graceful and innocent to\nplay croquet. But why? Really, when it comes to a comparison, the first is\ninfinitely the more beautiful and intellectual game. The ethical\ndistinctions are positively bewildering between balls of ivory and balls\nof wood; between mallets and cues; between green baize and green grass. A\nChristian household must not sit down and play at whist, but they are\nengaged in a Christian and laudable manner if they spend an evening over\nDr. Busby, or Master Rodbury cards. Really, it is hard to draw the moral\nline between cards bearing aces and spades, and cards with the likenesses\nof Dr. Busby\u2019s son and servant, Doll the dairymaid, and the like. When it\ncomes to a question of profit, one is an amusement involving a good deal\nof healthy, mental exertion, while the other is about as silly and\nprofitless a way of spending an evening as can well be imagined. Youth\nmust not dance, but they may march to music in company, and go through\ncalisthenic exercises, involving a good deal more motion than dancing. But\nif people may march to music and be guiltless, it is very hard to see how\nskipping to music converts the exercise into sin. It is said that the\n_associations_ make the difference; but the advocate of this theory is\nshut up to proving that the associations are inseparable from the\namusements. And here is the place to remark that the best amusements are\nthe ones most likely to be abused\u2014the ones which experience shows _are_\nmost abused, and about which cluster the most evil associations. The\nchildren of this world are wiser in their generation than the children of\nlight. Men do not care to counterfeit a coin of inferior value; and the\nworld is very clear-sighted to discern the best and richest sources of\nworldly pleasure, and utterly unscrupulous in appropriating them entirely\nto itself. The amusements which are most abused, are commonly those which,\nfrom their intrinsic value, call most loudly upon virtue to rescue them\nfrom their abuses.\n\nThe above method of reasoning, in short, will not stand the test of plain\ncommon sense. It is trifling, ignoring all distinctions which rest on\nprinciples, and substituting factitious ones; and Christians who assume\nthis ground, lay themselves open without defense to the logic and ridicule\nof any intelligent man of the world who may be disposed to test the\nreasons for their scrupulousness. They condemn themselves in those things\nwhich they allow. The amusements they approve cannot, in many cases, be\ncompared with those which they deprecate, either in elegance, profit, or\nthe amount of intelligence they require.\n\nWhat point then shall we take for the consideration of this subject? We\nare confined to one\u2014the stand-point of the Bible. As Christian\nassociations we have but one question to ask: \u201c_What saith the Word_.\u201d\n\nIn the New Testament we find little said about the _degrees_ of sin. The\nthought which it throughout tries to impress is, that sin is everywhere;\nand under any form, or in any degree, is a horrible and fatal thing. The\ntares are gathered _in bundles_ and burned; no matter if one grows a\nlittle shorter, and another a little longer. The lustful glance is placed\nin the same category with the licentious act. The angry thought is of the\nsame piece with the act of murder. The gospel contemplates the sins of the\nrace very much as a man looks at an orange: the rind is full of little\nprotuberances, and a close scrutiny will show that some of these rise\nhigher than others. But nobody pretends to notice these variations; they\nall spring from one spherical surface, and their variation is not such as\nto destroy the general effect of roundness. So all these fearful\ndevelopments of sin spring from one plane, and God hath concluded the\nwhole sinful world in unbelief.\n\nThe gospel, therefore, wastes no time in making distinctions between sins,\nbut aims straight at remedying the great fact of _sin_ as it exists\neverywhere. Nor does it leave us in doubt as to its method. It assumes its\nown power to purify anything, and therefore lays down as its great law of\noperation, _the law of contact_.\n\nThis law it sets forth under a parable: The kingdom of heaven is like\nleaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal till the\nwhole was leavened. The great truth here illustrated, is the innate power\nof the gospel to pervade and assimilate to its own nature the whole\nworldly order of things, just as leaven thus pervades and assimilates the\nlifeless lumps of dough. This then, is its simple lesson: Put the gospel\ninto contact with everything sinful\u2014the heart of man, the life of man, the\nemployments of man, the amusements of man\u2014into society, its customs, laws,\ninstitutions, and it will purge them of evil, and bring them into harmony\nwith the Divine order.\n\nBut be sure and note, that the entire success of this action depends upon\nthe contact\u2014upon _the putting the leaven into the lump_. Fail in this, and\nthe lump remains heavy. It matters very little whether the salt have lost\nhis savor or not, if the meat remain in one dish and the salt in the\nother.\n\nHow thoroughly and beautifully this truth was carried out in the life and\nteachings of Christ, will appear to us more clearly, if we shall recognize\nthe uniform policy of the gospel _to work for the destruction of evil,\nchiefly through the lodgment and development of good_. Both Christ and his\napostles are exhibited in the gospel story as engaged chiefly in asserting\nand illustrating the truth, and not in combating error. Christ comes into\na world lying in wickedness\u2014besotted by it, plagued and tormented by it;\nfull of abominations starting boldly out without pretense of concealment,\nfrom every phase of private, social and civil life. But he does not\napproach these as a mechanic would an old building, saying, \u201cthis beam is\nrotten and must come down; this roof is decayed and must be stripped off;\nthis floor is unsafe and must be pulled up.\u201d He does not propose to his\ndisciples to enter upon a wholesale denunciation of profanity and\nlicentiousness. He points out and condemns many of these things it is\ntrue; but the main lever of his teaching is the assertion of the great\ngospel principles. For these he seeks a place of lodgment everywhere. The\nold tables of the law contained but one commandment that was not\nprohibitory. Every line portrayed a crime, with a law standing on guard\nbeside it, and warning men away with its \u201cThou shalt not!\u201d Christ asserts\nthe authority of the law; but in the new table it is seen beckoning toward\nthe commandment, \u201cThou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart.\u201d\nHis instructions to his disciples do not so much concern the things which\nthey are to avoid, as they tend to fix upon their minds right conceptions\nof his character and mission. So, I repeat, Christ\u2019s work is less a\ncrusade against evil, than an assertion of good by precept and example as\nthe surest means in the end of removing evil. Look, too, at Paul at\nAthens, surrounded by heathen temples, statues and altars. He does not\nproceed to demonstrate to the curious multitude that the philosophies of\nZeno or Epicurus are wrong; or that the worship of Hermes or Athene is\nabsurd. He throws out at once, bold and stern as a mountain headland, the\nassertion of the Divine unity, and follows it up with the doctrines of\nsalvation through Christ, the resurrection, and the final judgment. In a\nfew bold strokes he delineates to the astonished skeptics some salient\npoints of natural and revealed religion, and then leaves the truth to\ngerminate and crowd out the evil in its own way and time.\n\nThere is indeed a sublimity in this invincible faith in the power of truth\nexhibited by the Son of Man. In the calmness with which he moves amid the\nmoral ruin that encompasses him, without that anxious haste, and longing\nfor immediate results, which characterize so many modern reformers. The\nworld would have expected a direct and tremendous onslaught upon evil. It\nwould have said that the dropping of a seed of positive truth here and\nthere, would never result in anything. Christ knew better. He knew the\nlatent power of truth; its inherent capability of growth; and he knew that\nwherever it should find a lodgment, it would grow; and wherever it should\ngrow, it would shake down from its branches, like the mighty tree of the\ntropics, the germs of a thousand growths like itself. Now it is this very\nfaith in the power of gospel truth, as the most effective destroyer of\nevil, prompting to put the good boldly into the evil to leaven it, which\nis sorely needed in the moral movements of the age. Bring the subject of\namusements to this test. Compare the action of the church upon it, with\nthe principles so evidently regulating Christ\u2019s dealing with evil, and see\nwhether it gains by the comparison. Is it not true, rather, that the\nChristian world has, to a very large extent, acted upon an entirely\nopposite principle? It has spent much time in peering into amusements to\nsee what evil they contained, and has kept digging away at this, instead\nof putting Divine grace into them, in simple faith in God, and letting\n_that_ at once purge and regulate them. It has been so absorbed in\nferreting out and declaiming against the evil, as to have forgotten\nmeasurably that a corresponding duty lay upon it to develop the good.\nOverlooking, or at least slighting the great philosophical truth, that\namusement is as necessary to man as bread, and fixing its gaze upon the\nfact that it is capable of perversion, it has most signally failed in the\n_regulation_ of popular amusements, and in teaching how to use, without\nabusing them. It has withdrawn utterly from many most innocent sources of\npleasure; crying, \u201ccome out from among them;\u201d they are not _safe_;\nChristians must have nothing to do with them. And with its withdrawal, the\nDevil has come in and taken full possession, and their last state is worse\nthan the first. When the church has touched the subject of amusements, it\nhas generally done so, I think, in a censorious spirit. It has selected\ncertain amusements as sinful, and issued decretals and resolutions against\nthem; it has prescribed penalties against church members who should engage\nin them; leaving the question in its broader relations untouched. It has\nfenced off this and that corner of the field of recreation, and put up\nsigns: \u201c_all church members are warned against trespassing on these\ngrounds, under penalty of the law_,\u201d instead of trying to teach Christians\nhow to avail themselves, with profit and safety, of any part of the field.\nWe are cut off from Hamlet, and Lear, and Othello and Macbeth. We cannot\navail ourselves of the interpretation of these by the best histrionic\ntalent, because the theater has been suffered to fall so completely into\nthe Devil\u2019s hands, that a Christian cannot countenance what is good in it,\nwithout at the same time countenancing much that is profane, licentious\nand indecent. But if the intelligence and culture of a community endeavor\nto apply the principle I have been advocating, and, in the shape of\nprivate theatricals, to furnish a refined, beautiful, and instructive\ndramatic exhibition, the outcry is little less than if they had leased\nWallack\u2019s or Niblo\u2019s, with a first class troupe; and those Christians who\nwitness it, are condemned as inconsistent and backsliders. Just so with\ndancing. The idea of Christianity having the remotest connection with this\namusement has been scouted as absurd. A procrustean law has been\nenacted\u2014\u201c_Thou shalt not dance_.\u201d And surely, one would think from some\nexhibitions of this amusement, that Christian leaven _had_ been pretty\nthoroughly withdrawn from it. One cannot much wonder at the disgust\nexcited by those importations from Paris brothels, the round dances,\nwhich, with the present style of female attire, really leave modest men at\nsome loss what to do with their eyes. Let us have as much thundering at\nthese as you will. Let us not mince words. Let ridicule, and sarcasm, and\ndenunciation exhaust their armories, for these are abuses; positive evils.\nBut these abuses are not inseparable from the amusement, which, in proper\nforms, is healthy, graceful, innocent, and highly commendable. Just here\nan incident occurs to me which so forcibly illustrates this last remark\nthat I must relate it as the involuntary testimony of an enemy. An amiable\nand most excellent clergyman of this state, happened to be present one\nevening when some young ladies went through a quadrille. He looked on with\ngreat apparent pleasure. The next morning he was rallied by some of his\ntownsmen on having countenanced dancing by his presence; when he roundly\ndenied the charge, and asserted that no dancing had taken place, but only,\nas he expressed it, \u201c_a most beautiful exercise_.\u201d Now, I ask, in the name\nof common sense, why not devote a little Christian care to separating from\nits abuses, and regulating in its conduct an exercise which improves the\nbearing of our youth, tends to relieve their natural awkwardness in\nsociety, and gives them innocent exhilaration? But no! _Thou shalt not\ndance._ That is Alpha and Omega. Dancing is liable to abuse, and\ntherefore, O most astoundingly consistent logic, leave it to become a prey\nto all manner of abuses and abominations. So, if a Christian household\nmakes the attempt to leaven this unfortunate lump, and claims that it can,\nand does introduce graceful and modest dancing into its family gatherings\nand social reunions, it is too often denounced as an enemy of Christ and a\ncorrupter of the young. For one I am glad that certain Christian families\nof high standing in the church of all denominations, have at last asserted\ntheir right to act out their own convictions in this matter, and have\ndemonstrated that even this much berated amusement may be elevated,\nrefined, and made a source of social pleasure and profit by the infusion\nof Christian principle.\n\nOne more case in point. When our Young Men\u2019s Christian Association of Troy\nfurnished their new rooms, they did so on the principle that prayer\nmeetings and religious periodicals, though important in their place, would\nnot, of themselves, suffice to attract young men from without. They had\ntried the experiment in their forlorn rooms under a machine shop, in an\nout-of-the-way place, furnished as a miniature chapel, and a very seedy\none at that, and the result was that about six months ago the Association\nwas in a fair way to die, and make no sign. Young men would not go to that\ndismal hole to spend an evening when more attractive places abounded in\nthe city; and I would not if I had been in their place. But the\nAssociation got a new lease of life. It engaged large, airy, pleasant\nrooms, in a central position. It kept its prayer meeting room neatly and\nappropriately furnished, but it added a large social parlor, its walls\nadorned with pictures, a fine piano invitingly open, the best current\nperiodicals, secular and religious, upon the tables, and games of\ncheckers, chess, and dominoes distributed about the room. The young men\ncame in crowds. They were thrown at once into contact with the Christian\nyouth of every church in the city; with the city pastors; with committees,\nspecially appointed by the churches to take strangers in charge, with good\nmusic, religious literature, and innocent amusement. For one I thanked God\nwith all my heart. I thought the Association had done a great Christian\ndeed. I hailed it as a happy omen that the Christianity of our city was\nbeginning to see that the Devil had tools which _it_ might use to\nadvantage, and was going to take them away from him. But so did not think\nothers who turned their backs on the Association, and denounced it as\n_encouraging gambling_.\n\nThis, in short, is the course pursued to a very great extent with this\nwhole subject of amusements: assuming that the gospel has no business with\nit except to denounce and warn; taking the leaven away from the lump,\ninstead of putting it in. Creating a wide separation between two things,\nwhich, of all others in the world need to be brought into contact\u2014religion\nand pleasure.\n\nAnd the practical results of this policy are before us. It may be said\nthat the tendency now is altogether in the direction of excess; that some\nChristians are becoming much too liberal, and are fast obliterating all\nold landmarks. All I have to say to this is, that the more true it is, the\nbetter for my position. For, granting, for argument\u2019s sake, all that is\nasserted, this fact shows that there is a reaction from an old and false\nsentiment, which even if excessive, is a healthy indication. And the one\nerror goes to prove the other; for excessive reactions are pretty sure to\ngrow out of excessive stringency in another direction. At any rate, the\ngreat error of the church on this subject is clearly exposed, namely: her\nfailure to regulate amusements. She ought to have been the gospel\u2019s\ninstrument in purifying them from abuse; but she has not been. She has\nbeen afraid of them; has stood aloof from them; has been almost totally\nabsorbed in detecting their evil tendencies; and, on account of these,\nforbidding Christians all contact with them. And to-day she stands\ncomparatively powerless in this matter. Church assemblies meet and pass\nstrong and elaborate resolutions on this or that amusement, condemning it,\nand those who engage in it; and a few persons are deterred by these. But\nevery year the class is increasing that utterly disregards these mandates.\nIt has been said, I know, that in proportion as the church or individuals\nare engaged in religious efforts, the desire for amusement declines, the\nimplication being that a desire for amusement characterizes only a low\nstate of religion. This deduction is entirely unwarranted, and the process\nby which it is reached is fallacious.\n\nIt is true that in a season of deep religious interest in a church, there\nwill be less disposition to amusements. But the same is true of other than\nreligious interests. Under _any_ absorbing, popular excitement, men do not\nturn to amusement. A special religious interest will draw men\u2019s minds from\n_business_ as well as from pleasure; and the inference to the condemnation\nof business is just as legitimate as to that of amusement.\n\nAgain, the statement is not borne out in the ordinary religious life of\nindividuals. Many, very many of the best, most efficient, and most\nsteadily growing Christians in the church exhibit habitually a keen relish\nfor amusements, and for some which are most sternly condemned, and\nparticipate in them most heartily.\n\nAnd once more: while at revival seasons in individual churches, a\ntemporary decrease of amusements may be seen, the more important fact is\nthat the aggregate of Christian society has been for many years past\ndeveloping a steadily increasing interest in the subject, and a\ncorresponding liberality of sentiment respecting it. Scores of Christian\nmen have billiard tables in their houses. Colleges, from which in years\npast, students would have been summarily expelled for rolling ten pins,\nhave now bowling alleys of their own. Even in the corridors of staid old\nWilliams the sound of the balls may be heard; and the revival record of\nthe college does not indicate that even this stupendous innovation has\nwrought to the banishment of the Spirit of God. The assertors of this\ninverse ratio between piety and amusement must, in short, dispose as best\nthey can, of the fact that along with the growth of Christian\nintelligence, Christian benevolence, and Christian activity, there has\nbeen developed in the church itself a growing sympathy with many of the\nvery forms of amusement most condemned by the religious sentiment of an\nearlier age.\n\nAnd this too, not on the part of the careless, and pleasure loving, and\nhalf-hearted members of churches, but of men and women high in position in\nthe church; persons of liberal culture and unquestionable piety. These\npersons, as well qualified to understand the teachings of God\u2019s word on\nthis subject as any of the clergy, are asserting their right to act out\ntheir own conscientious convictions in their amusements: claiming that\nthey owe to the resolutions of synods, and conventions and conferences, no\nmore than candid and respectful consideration, maintaining the privilege\nof adopting or rejecting them at pleasure; and accordingly they are\nthrowing open their homes to certain banned amusements, very much to the\nenhancement of home attractions; very much to the detriment of the\nsaloons; very much to the increase of their children\u2019s attachment to home.\nChurch legislation on this subject has been a humiliating failure. It has\nnot compassed its intent. Nay, more, it has over-reached itself. It has\nkept noble and intelligent youth out of the church by insisting on their\nrelinquishment of certain amusements, in the proper and moderate use of\nwhich they were unable to see evil. It has tended by this insistence to\nfoster that too common sentiment which paints religion with sombre hues,\nand couples it with the most forbidding associations. It has tended to\ndrive some to seek in the more liberal atmosphere of Unitarianism the\nliberty of conscience denied them by orthodoxy; and all this it might have\navoided by a clearer recognition of the gospel teaching on this subject:\nby being less afraid for the purity of the truth, and by throwing\nChristian presence, and Christian participation, and Christian sentiment\nboldly into the midst of the people\u2019s amusements, with a view less to\nexscind than to regulate.\n\nI say, \u201cless afraid for the purity of the truth.\u201d For Christians shrink\nfrom an experiment so bold, especially after so large a proportion of\namusements has been usurped by the Devil through their neglect to\ninterfere. The church is shy of a faith in the power of good which comes\neating and drinking; which sits at the table of publicans and sinners. The\nconviction grows on me that Christians have too little faith in the\ngospel. They do not trust it enough in popular reforms. They realize that\nevil is a tremendous power, alike to be feared, whether it wear the armor\nof Goliath, or sing its sweet seductions in the form of a siren; and their\ninstinct of preservation extends beyond themselves to the truth itself.\nThey regard truth as a tender stripling, to be rolled up in mufflers, and\nsuffered to walk out only in charge of certain staid nurses of theory; and\nnot as a man of war in panoply, and with strength enough to take care not\nonly of itself, but of them and their trusted theories too. They are\nafraid the evil will overwhelm or corrupt the truth; that the leaven,\ninstead of imparting virtue, will be spoiled by the deadness of the lump.\nWe need have no such fear for it. All the developments of the age show\nthat the world needs it in closer contact with its evil than it has ever\nbeen yet. It is sometimes urged that in pursuing this course, Christians\nwill bring upon themselves from the world the charge of inconsistency, and\nmoreover will grieve weak Christian brethren. But surely this principle\nmay be pushed too far. With the very fullest recognition of the obligation\nupon Christians not to let their good be evil spoken of, and not to wrong\nthe weak conscience\u2014concessions made for the sake of Christian charity are\nsurely not required to extend to all the vagaries of individual prejudice,\nnor to the abandonment of principle. And there is a principle involved in\nthis question of amusements, a principle of far greater importance than\nmany are willing to admit; and to which, if the Christian thought of this\nage do not take more pains to define it and act upon it, the eyes of the\nchurch will be most painfully opened by and by. There is a question here\ninvolving not only the enjoyments, but to a great extent the moral welfare\nof our youth. The young will have amusements, and the question is whether\nthe devil or the church shall furnish them. Whether home, or the ball\nroom, and drinking saloon, and gambling house shall be the more\nattractive. Whether Christians will resolutely take up good and noble\namusements, and give them to youth purged of their evil,\u2014or whether they\nshall let them remain girt with all their allurements, yet more widely\nseparated from good, and gathering yearly to themselves new elements and\nassociations of evil. Very probably the world, and much of the church will\nassail the Christian who, in this view of the subject oversteps the line\nof received opinion, with a cry of inconsistency. But remember that the\nworld judges the church out of its own mouth, independently of the real\nmerits of the case; and requires that it be consistent, not with _their_\nviews, but with its own as publicly expressed. Yet sometimes it is better\nto be _right_ than even to be _consistent_; and if the church has with all\nsincerity, yet with mistaken zeal, fostered a false sentiment on any\nsubject, do not Christians who discern the error owe to society the\nbenefit of their clearer light? Have they a right to withhold it for fear\nsociety should turn on them and call them inconsistent? One would think\nfrom a sentiment like this that the gospel process was to be reversed.\nThat not the Christian is to leaven the world, but the world the\nChristian. Christian sentiment is not to wait for popular sentiment. It\nclaims to be in advance of it. It is to Christians and not to the world\nthat the promise is given, \u201c_Ye shall know the truth_;\u201d and Christian\nthought, so far from waiting for the movement of these ever shifting\npopular tides, is the luminary which God has set high in the darkness of\nthis world\u2019s sin to draw the tides in his appointed channels. The\npractical value of truth like that of money, consists in its circulation.\nIt is worth nothing hoarded up or used secretly. If it is ever to be worth\nanything in correcting false impressions which society may have formed of\nChristian teaching, it will be by letting it out into society to speak for\nitself. Nor am I begging the question at issue here. Even an error is\nbetter outspoken than cherished in secret. It comes into the field of\ndiscussion, and is turned over and examined and exposed, and so truth is\nthe gainer after all. But I think it will be difficult to prove an error\nin this case. The gospel truth is \u201c_put the leaven into the lump_;\u201d and\nwhy the gospel should not be put into our amusements, even into those\nwhich are confessedly abused, I cannot see. The more liable to abuse they\nare, the more they need regulating; and the practical workings of this\nprinciple when men have the courage to face prejudice and carry it out,\ntriumphantly vindicate it. The man who furnishes his son a billiard table\nin his own house, where he can practice that beautiful game with his\nfriends without the adjuncts of liquor and rowdyism, does a good deed. He\nkeeps the youth at home, he keeps his associations under his own eye; he\ngives him a good, healthy, intellectual amusement purged of its abuses.\nThe college board that erects a bowling alley for the students; that says\nto young men, \u201crolling ten pins is not evil, but rolling ten pins in bar\nrooms, surrounded by drunkards and swearers and indecent pictures _is_\nevil, and we therefore give you the amusement without these associations,\nand bid you enjoy it, and draw health and strength from it,\u201d\u2014that college\nboard I say, has promoted something more than _muscular_ Christianity. It\nhas given the young men a better opinion of religion; has withdrawn them\nfrom the influence of temptations to which they expose themselves only\nbecause they cannot find the amusements freed from these vile\nassociations. It has drawn just so much patronage from the grog shop. The\nparents in whose family circle dancing in proper modes and with approved\nassociates and within reasonable hours is encouraged, are doing just so\nmuch to keep their daughters from the unhealthy hours, the immodest\ndisplays, and the indiscriminate associations of the ball room. They\ndeserve the thanks, not the reprobation of the church. They are the\nfriends, not the enemies of religion. Let us not be scared by names. Let\nus not deal, as the pulpit has dealt too much, in vague generalities on\nthis subject. Let us see what those terrible words \u201cbilliards\u201d and\n\u201cdancing,\u201d and others of a similar cast mean. Let us see if they are evil\nand evil only. Let us not assume that our youth are attracted to them only\nby their native depravity; but see if there be not some goodness, some\nbeauty, some intellectual stimulus which renders them so fascinating. If\nthey need regulating, surely Christian wisdom can regulate them if\nanything. If any can use them safely, it is Christians who are taught by\nDivine grace to use this world as not abusing it, and not those who are\nswayed by impulse and love of pleasure only. But the church does not\nregulate them, and she never will or can regulate them on the old theory\nof separation. Never, so long as she persists in wholesale denunciations\nwhich she can sustain neither by scripture nor by logic, and against which\nthe common sense of the educated and thoughtful rebels. A more liberal\npolicy in the past, a juster appreciation of the gospel teachings on this\nsubject, would not only have done much towards separating amusements from\ntheir abuses, but would have saved her from her present humiliating\nattitude as the declared enemy of many forms of amusement, from\nparticipation in which she has no power to restrain her members.\n\nThis principle has been assailed on the ground that the world will abuse\nit. That they will read in words like these the church\u2019s endorsement and\nlicense for unlimited indulgence. But if the world draws unwarranted\ninferences to suit its own depraved wishes, surely that is no reason for\nsuppressing the truth, but rather calls for the full and most careful\nstatement of it. If the world read the gospel wrongly, and wrest it to its\nown destruction, those who set forth gospel principles are not\nresponsible, unless, as has too often been the case with reference to this\nsubject, the trumpet give an uncertain sound. And the world is too ready\nto pervert this truth, and does pervert it. Christians, if properly\ninstructed, are so far from being disqualified to use amusements safely,\nthe best qualified of all others to develop their highest uses, and to\nenjoy without abusing them. The world regards only the permission to\nenjoy, and ignores the corresponding rule of restraint. In this respect it\nis like the prince in the Arabian tale, who mounted the enchanted horse,\nand set him in motion without having informed himself as to the means of\nguiding or stopping him.\n\nFor, let me be clearly understood, I do not lay down this general\nprinciple without recognizing the existence of practical limitations to\nits action, though I assert that the fixing of these limitations belongs\nchiefly if not entirely to the individual Christian conscience. I have\nsaid that the tendency of religious teaching with reference to this and\nkindred subjects has been to make the idea of _safety_ more prominent than\nthat of _development_. Yet I do not overlook, as was implied in the\nremarks of one who objected to my views, the defensive aspect of the\ngospel. I admit both the fact and its urgent necessity I could not do\notherwise, knowing that the heart is deceitful, and remembering the prayer\nwhich Christ puts into every man\u2019s mouth, \u201cLead us not into temptation.\u201d I\nam pleading for the restraints as well as for the privileges of the gospel\nin the matter of men\u2019s amusements; for more and not less care and\nwatchfulness to be brought to bear upon their future regulation.\n\nBut withal, I am not bound to abandon the general gospel principle of\npurging amusements by a closer contact of religion with them, because in\ncertain cases this regulation becomes a matter of extreme difficulty and\ndelicacy; because I cannot precisely say _how_ the gospel leaven is to be\nconveyed into certain forms of amusement. Just as consistently might I\nhave refused to denounce slavery as a crime against God and humanity\nbecause I could not prescribe an effectual scheme for abolishing it. And\nthat such difficulties do arise in the applications of this principle, I\nfreely admit.\n\nThere, for example, is the theatre. I believe this principle applies to\nthat as well as to any other amusement. For myself I wish that I could\noccasionally see Shakespeare interpreted by the best histrionic talent,\nwith all adjuncts of scenery and costume. To me it would be a rich\npleasure and a source of intellectual improvement. But as the theatre is\nnow conducted and sustained, I am clearly of the opinion that no Christian\nought to frequent it. He cannot do so without, I think, in the great\nmajority of instances, committing himself to very much that is indecent\nand coarse. And just how this difficulty is to be surmounted, how\nscholarly, Christian men who love such entertainments and are qualified to\nprofit by them, are to be furnished with them freed from their abuses, I\nam not now prepared to say. I think it might be done; but the theatre, as\nit now is, is no place for a Christian.\n\nThis, however does not, as before observed, in the least invalidate the\ngeneral principle. It is merely a question of means. Nor, as was very\nroundly asserted, does the principle lead to this conclusion that every\nChristian man must have his box at theatre or opera. It by no means\nfollows that such a course would produce the desired effect. It would be\njust about as pertinent to argue that because a sewer in a certain street\nneeded cleansing, and because a proper array of men and buckets and brooms\nwould cleanse it, therefore every man and woman on the streets, grave\ndoctors of divinity, stately Mr. Dombey, Flora McFlimsey and Edmund\nSparkler, should each shoulder broomstick or bucket, and plunge pell mell\ninto the reeking filth. This argument proceeds upon the assumption that\nChristians can purge amusements only by using them in the forms and with\nthe appliances attendant upon the world\u2019s abuse of them. This is assuming\naltogether too much. We must get religion into these things, but there are\nvarious ways of doing it. You cannot sow broadcast in all soils.\n\nI do not know whether I ought notice one other line of reply to these\nremarks; but as it seems to be a favorite one, and moreover was adopted by\nsome who I was surprised to see descending to it, I will add a few words\non this.\n\nIt may be described as an attempt to invalidate a principle by showing\nthat its application to persons of widely different times and\ncircumstances involves an absurdity and then from the absurdity inferring\na sin. I do not pretend to give the exact words used, but they were in\nthis style: \u201cThink of Paul dancing; or Peter playing billiards! Do you\nthink we shall have checker-boards in heaven?\u201d And much more of the same\nkind.\n\nNow this is not argument. It is sheer nonsense; and most unworthy trifling\nover a serious subject. The reasoning, if it be worthy the name, is simply\nthis; Certain things appear incongruous with our ideas of the character\nand work of certain men: therefore these things are sinful. It is the\neasiest thing in the world to invent situations of this kind. Such men as\nPaul and Peter are associated in our minds with but one set of ideas;\u2014with\none great, glorious, solemn work; and their association with any inferior\nmatter affects us unpleasantly at first. Even when we think of Paul making\ntents, there is at first view something that clashes in our mind with the\nspeech on Mars Hill, and the healing of the cripple at Lystra. But who\nthinks of disputing from this the propriety of Paul\u2019s own hands\nministering to his necessities? After all, if there is no sin in rolling\nten pins, I know not why Peter should not have participated in that very\nexcellent and healthful recreation with as much propriety as any of the\nnumerous ministers of the present day who \u201croll\u201d with so much zest and\nassiduity at our fashionable watering places. Think of Paul dancing! Well,\nthink of him! Think of Paul wearing a blue swallow-tailed coat with brass\nbuttons! How he would have looked under the shadow of the Acropolis, the\nwinds of the \u00c6gean gently swaying his cerulean skirts, and the eager faces\nof Stoic and Epicurean reflected in the bright buttons! Think of Peter\nskating; cutting figures of eight, and performing \u201couter edge backwards!\u201d\nThink of John in a white cravat; or of Bartholomew putting up seidlitz\npowders; or of Timothy running with a fire-engine! How _would_ they have\nlooked? Therefore hasten ye trim gentlemen, to doff your guilty blue and\nbrass, and don the toga. Lay aside your skates, boys. Peter would have\nlooked very strangely skating, therefore it is sinful to skate. Tear off\nyour white chokers, ye Reverends, and throw away your pestles ye\napothecaries, and be like the apostles. Shall we have checker-boards in\nheaven? No, brother, I presume not. Neither shall we marry, nor be given\nin marriage; but pray don\u2019t condemn us to celibacy on that ground while we\nremain upon earth. \u201cWould you play chess on your death-bed?\u201d Probably not,\nmy friend. Neither would I put on my boots, or do a great many other very\ninnocent things. Death stands out in startling contrast to _all_ our\nemployments: to business and study, as well as to recreation; and you\nwould find it vastly inconvenient to act upon the principle that nothing\nmust be done which you would not do on your death-bed.\n\nBut enough of this. I come now to the one practical application of these\nprinciples out of which this whole discussion has grown.\n\nWhen our Troy Christian Association adopted the practice of introducing\ngames into their rooms, I gave it my hearty approval. My opinion on this\nsubject has been confirmed by what I have seen and heard of the results of\nthe experiment. It was based on the principles I have been advocating in\nthis paper, and on the farther consideration, growing out of these, that\nwe must take some of the devil\u2019s weapons and sanctify them before we could\nsuccessfully fight him on his own ground. As remarked already,\nprayer-meetings will not draw irreligious young men into the sphere where\nwe want them. Give them first well lighted and warmed apartments,\nhandsomely furnished, where they can find music and books and newspapers\nand games, and you stand some chance then of drawing them into the\nprayer-meetings. And indeed the direct religious influence of these\nassociations, while highly important, is nevertheless subordinate to their\nwork in bringing young men into contact with the various churches of the\ncommunity, where the religious appliances are of course more perfect. The\ngreat point is to get them into some position where the churches can reach\nthem. They will not come to church, many of them, when they first enter\nthe community. The church has but limited facilities for finding them out\nin their stores and boarding-houses and schools; and it may find therefore\na powerful auxiliary in these associations, which bring the stranger youth\nwhere it can bring its influences to bear on them. But for this purpose\nthe place of rendezvous must be made attractive. We must have\nhead-quarters as pleasant as the devil\u2019s. I hope all of you have read the\narticle in _Guthrie\u2019s Sunday Magazine_ for January, 1866, entitled \u201c_The\nhouse that beats the public house;_\u201d that splendid iron structure in\nColne, Lancashire, built expressly for the irreligious working class.\nThere are fountains, and pictures, and games, cabinets and books and\nnewspapers. There are quiet reading rooms, there are refreshment rooms,\neven smoking rooms. There is a school room, there are musical\nentertainments on stated nights, there are religious services on Sabbath\nevenings. \u201cOn Christmas eve, 1863,\u201d says the writer, \u201cthe musicians at one\nof the public houses piped for some time, but no dancers presented\nthemselves, till at length the players themselves adjourned to the meeting\nat the Iron School. An attempt to open the theatre that winter failed\nthrough the same influence. The actors, after struggling for a week in the\nface of empty benches, left the place in despair.\u201d\n\nHere is a clear and successful recognition of the truth that religion has\nnot such strong alliance with the unregenerate heart that she can afford\nto dispense with all legitimate aids and recommendations. The firemen have\ntheir upper parlor in the engine house furnished richly and tastefully.\nThe drinking saloons are invested with all the attractions that marble,\nand glass, and drapery and pictures can give them. One man who appeared\nlast week before the excise commissioners, said he had expended ten\nthousand dollars in fitting up his saloon. He knew it would pay; and we\ncannot expect irreligious young men to be drawn away from these by mere\nreligious appliances. We must employ other attractions. We must make our\nhouses beat the public houses. We must sanctify new forces for this end.\nPictures and cabinets, carpets and draperies, music and games are not the\ndevil\u2019s any more than they are ours. Young men will have some retreat\nbeside their comfortless boarding-houses; some society besides their\nlandlord\u2019s family, and it is a match between the devil and the church\nwhich of us shall furnish these. Depend upon it, if the church do not give\nthem amusement, regulated on a liberal Christian basis, the devil will\ngive them abundance that is unregulated. God forbid that Christian\nsqueamishness should suffer them to turn aside to the house whose gates\nlead to hell, and to habits which shall make mothers curse the day they\ngave them birth.\n\nI will give two incidents showing the practical working of this new system\nin the Troy Association. A member of my church, walking in the street one\nevening, saw three young men just before him, and overheard one say to the\nothers, \u201cCome, let\u2019s go and take a drink.\u201d One of the others replied, \u201cNo,\nI don\u2019t care to take a drink. Let\u2019s go to the Christian Association\nRooms.\u201d \u201cPshaw!\u201d said the third, \u201cI don\u2019t want to go there to prayer\nmeeting.\u201d \u201cNo, no,\u201d was the response; \u201cthey\u2019ve got a right nice place\nthere, and we can have a good time.\u201d He went on describing the rooms, and\nthen added: \u201c_and they\u2019re for just such fellows as we are_.\u201d He gained his\npoint, and they followed him to the rooms.\n\nThree clubs of young men, or boys rather, were broken up soon after the\nnew rooms were opened. I do not know their character fully, but have been\ntold that drinking was practiced at their meetings. They now frequent the\nrooms of the society, and pay over into its treasury their club\nsubscriptions. There are many more of such cases. They speak with trumpet\ntongues as to the value of this policy. They show that its practical\ninfluence is against the groggery and the gambling saloon, and if it work\nno other result, that of itself is vindication enough.\n\nAnd now I leave the subject. I do not shrink from the application of this\nBible principle to our amusements. The other, the separative policy, the\nkeeping of leaven and lump apart, has been tried, and has failed, utterly\nfailed.\n\nWill it not be well to try another policy? I want for our youth a\nChristianity that shall not relax one iota of its obligation to God or to\nman. That shall not bate one jot from an entire consecration of heart and\nlife to God; that shall walk closely with God, and feel as deeply as human\nweakness can feel, the necessity of watchfulness and of divine care to\nkeep it from temptation. I challenge any man to draw undue license from\nthe principles I have asserted. But I want more joy brought out of the\nworld by Christians. I want the gospel carried boldly into some things\nfrom which it has been kept aloof. I want Christian life to be in the\nspirit more than in the letter. I do not plead for less but for more\nconformity to the spirit and teaching of Christ. Not for a lower but for a\nhigher Christian life; for a wider application of gospel principles, a\nmore implicit trust in the leavening power of truth; a more practical\nbelief in the assertion that the weapons of our warfare are mighty through\nGod to the pulling down of strongholds. I want Christian conscience\nclothed with principles and not with dogmas. I want the word of God read\nand interpreted fairly, and that allowed which it allows. I protest\nagainst its being twisted and perverted into rules for the unnecessary\nabridgment of Christian liberty, where it lays down only general\nprinciples for the conscience. I want less of the religion that is\n\n\u201cDark as a funeral scarf from stem to stern,\u201d\n\nand more of that which is full of child-like trust in the love of God and\nthe power of truth, and of freedom purged by love from license.\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE TRUE NONCONFORMIST.\n\n\n              A Communion Sermon, Delivered Sept. 16, 1866,\n\n\n              In The First Presbyterian Church, Troy, N. Y.\n\n\n    Rom. xii, 2. \u201c_And be not conformed to this world: but be ye\n    transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what\n    is that good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God_.\u201d\n\n\nBy itself, this command is ambiguous. Common sense testifies that, in very\nmany things, every Christian _must_, more or less, conform to the world.\nMany of the world\u2019s customs are not only harmless, but salutary,\nbeautiful, ennobling, necessary to the very being of society. We need some\ntest by which to interpret this command.\n\nLet us first endeavor, as a means of discovering it, to clear away a\npreliminary error, viz.: the not uncommon idea that difference from the\nworld is a matter of any value or consequence of itself. A great many\npersons, lamenting over real or supposed deficiencies of Christians, make\nthis the staple of their complaint; _you cannot distinguish them from the\nworld:_ and when urging upon them some duty, or the relinquishment of some\npractice, enforce it by the argument, Christians should aim to be distinct\nfrom the world.\n\nThere is truth in this, but there is also falsehood. Christians, _real_\nChristians, will always be distinct from the world, and the distinction\nwill be very clearly defined. But Christians should not make it their\n_object_ to be distinct from the world. They should aim to be Christians,\nand let the distinction follow in its natural order and degree.\nSingularity, in itself, is no virtue. It is just as likely to be a vice. A\nman is not necessarily better because he is unlike the rest of the world.\nDifference from the world, therefore, is not an _end_ of Christian\ndiscipline, but a result and concomitant of it. This distinction is of the\nutmost importance. If distinctiveness is regarded as an _object_ of\nChristian effort, its value is sacrificed. Its tendency is to formality;\nto the substitution of a variety of _outward_ standards of duty for a\nsingle _inward_ regulative principle. To pride and self-righteousness on\nthe ground of singularity. Such have been its developments, for instance,\nin certain religious sects who insisted on plainness of dress as a duty.\nUndoubtedly the spirit which originally prompted the requisition was good,\nChristlike. It was the desire to take from the useless adornment of the\nperson and bestow upon objects of Christian effort and charity. It was the\ndesire to remove temptations to vanity and idle display. But in too many\ncases these things were forgotten. Christians received the precept in the\nletter and not in the spirit. They came to insist on plainness of dress as\na mark of a true Christian, and forgot that materials of plain or sad\ncolors might be as costly and rich as gayer ones. They came to pride\nthemselves on their plainness as a distinction from the rest of the world.\nThey said bitter and unchristian things against the man who should carry a\ngold watch or the woman who should wear a feather or a ribbon. They\nperverted scripture to uphold this ridiculous whim, and brought scorn upon\nthemselves and reproach upon the cause of Christ, because they turned\ntheir eyes from the inward, regulative power of the gospel to one of its\nnatural developments, and looked at that until it grew out of all\nproportion.\n\nHow then are we rightly to apply this command?\n\nThe apostle, in giving us an answer, takes up the question at the very\npoint at which most inquirers do, viz.: at the matter of _sacrifice_. For\nthis is the way in which it presents itself to most minds. In order not to\nbe conformed to the world, I must sacrifice much that is of the world.\nWhat, now, may I retain, and what must I relinquish?\n\nAnd in Paul\u2019s answer, he strikes directly at any such method of putting\nthe question. Non-conformity to the world involves sacrifice, it is true,\nbut not a sacrifice made in any such spirit as this\u2014a spirit that ere it\ngives itself to Christ, sits down and begins to sort its possessions,\npleasures, pursuits, into two piles, saying: \u201cthis for God, this for the\nworld: this goes back to my treasure house, this I throw away.\u201d Not so. He\nsweeps the whole into one heap, and says, \u201cI beseech you brethren, by the\nmercies of God, that ye _present your bodies a living sacrifice, and be\ntransformed by the renewing of your mind_.\u201d He asks that the _whole man_,\nwith all his belongings, be made an offering to God, even as he says in\nanother place, \u201cthe very God of peace sanctify you _wholly_, and I pray\nGod your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the\ncoming of our Lord Jesus Christ.\u201d He rises above details of sacrifice to a\nsacrifice which includes and regulates all details; and in so doing he is\nbut insisting upon the precept of Christ: \u201cIf any man will be my disciple,\nlet him _deny himself_.\u201d And notice particularly the meaning of this\nprecept which is so generally but half understood. It is not, let him cut\nhimself off from this thing or that thing, but let him _deny himself_;\nliterally, let him _say that self is not_, and that the will of Christ is\n_everything_. Holding fast this principle a man cannot greatly err. The\nwill of Christ and the will of the world are so diametrically opposite,\nthat he cannot go toward the one without going away from the other. A man\nhas no business to waste time pondering over the _details_ of his\nsacrifice for Christ\u2019s sake, tormenting himself with deciding between what\nis right and what is wrong; what is worldly and what is heavenly. The will\nof Christ once heartily embraced as a rule of life will teach him to\ndecide. Christ received into the heart will regulate its affinities and\nrepulsions. The law of the _spirit_ of life in Christ Jesus shall make the\nsoul free from the law of sin and death, so that it shall hate the things\nit once loved, and love those it once despised.\n\nYoung people often come to their pastor saying: \u201cIf I become a Christian,\nmust I give up such and such things? Must I discharge such and such\nduties?\u201d And for myself I reply to them\u2014\u201cI have no answer to give you. I\nwill not encourage you to come to Christ in this mean, bargain-making\nspirit. If your conscience tells you a thing is wrong, as it does in many\ncases, you have no need to ask me if Christ will require its\nrelinquishment. You know he will, without any compromise. But when it\ncomes to any doubtful matter, waive that question. You have nothing\nwhatever to do with it now. Christ requires of you to be willing to obey\nhim implicitly in all things, without regard to your own feelings or\npreferences, your own prosperity or safety, no matter what duties or\nsacrifices obedience involves; and I simply ask you _are you willing to do\nthis?_ If you are not, Christ does not want you. A young man goes to a\nrecruiting office to enlist. The sergeant examines him, and says: \u2018you are\njust the kind of man I want. Here, put down your name. Your bounty is so\nmuch; your pay will be so much.\u2019 The recruit takes the pen in his hand,\nbut stops suddenly in the act of writing his name, and says: \u2018How far\nshall I be required to march daily? What kind of a tent shall I have? Must\nI do picket duty beyond regular hours? To what kind of a climate am I to\nbe sent?\u2019 How long do you suppose the officer would keep patience with\nsuch a man? How many of these questions would he pretend to answer, even\nif he could? He would simply say to the man: \u2018we make no terms with you,\nsir, beyond your bounty and pay. If you enlist, you do so with the\nunderstanding that a soldier has nothing to do but obey orders; to serve\nwhere, when, and how he may be directed. If you want to know these things,\nenlist, and you will find out when you are in service.\u2019 Just so I say to\none who begins inquiring into the details of Christ\u2019s service: If you want\nto find out, enlist. Commit your life to Christ\u2019s keeping. Devote yourself\nto Christ\u2019s service, and \u2018if any man _wills_ to do his will, he shall know\nof the doctrine.\u2019 An inquirer for salvation, tormenting himself about what\nhe must do and what relinquish, forgets that he is in no condition to\ndecide such a question. To decide it he wants just that spiritual insight\nand those new affinities which faith in Christ and the consequent renewal\nof his nature will give him. He wants to see these things from a\nstand-point which he has not yet attained. He had far better let them go\nfor the present, and concentrate his resolution on this one point: \u2018I give\nmyself to Jesus without reserve. Whatever he tells me I may enjoy I will\nendeavor to enjoy in his love and fear. Whatever he bids me cast away,\nthough it be a right hand, I will cut it off and cast it from me.\u2019 \u201d A\nyoung man once came to me saying: \u201cThere seems to be but one thing in the\nway of my entire surrender to Christ. If I become a Christian, and a\nmember of the church, I don\u2019t see how I can ever take any public part in\nthe religious meetings. If I could only decide whether God required this\nof me, I think my way would be clear.\u201d I said to him, \u201cMy brother, you are\nnot called on to settle that question now. You have no means of deciding\nit. You had better drop it altogether for the present. God has promised\nthat if you will commit your ways unto him he will direct you. Now I\nbelieve you sincerely want to do God\u2019s will, and that you are ready,\nwhenever he shall show it you, to pledge yourself to do your duty. Leave\nthe matter there; and if, at any time, this duty should be thrust upon\nyou, do it in God\u2019s name and strength.\u201d He soon after joined the church,\nand has borne himself since with a fidelity and devotion which speak well\nfor the thoroughness of the work of grace in him.\n\nNow this is what the apostle means by a _living_ sacrifice. This spirit of\nconsecration infused into sacrifice fills it with life. The sacrifice\nbecomes \u201cliving\u201d only when self dies; when the man says\n\n\u201cHere Lord, I give myself away:\n\u2019Tis all that I can do.\u201d\n\nThe other method of securing nonconformity to the world by acting for the\nmere sake of difference or according to circumstances, constitutes a dead\nsacrifice. Such were the sacrifices of the Pharisees. They thanked God\nthey were not as other men; but the difference was but outward. To the\nspectator\u2019s eye they were not conformed to the world. They did not dress\nlike it. Their prayers were longer and more frequent. They did not eat\nwith publicans and sinners. But these differences had become the chief end\nof their religious life. Their development was like arranging the limbs of\na corpse for exhibition. They were not the natural, spontaneous outgrowths\nof a living inward principle; and hence the Pharisees have passed into\nhistory as the representative hypocrites of all time.\n\nThe essential character of this self-sacrifice will farther appear from a\ncorrect understanding of the phrase _reasonable service_. On this, two\nthings must be remarked. 1st, that the expression does not belong to the\nwords \u201c_living sacrifice_\u201d alone, but to the whole exhortation. In other\nwords, it is not the _living sacrifice_ which is a reasonable service, but\nthe presenting the bodies a living sacrifice, \u201choly, acceptable unto God.\u201d\n2dly, it is to be noted that the expression \u201c_reasonable __ service_\u201d is\nvery commonly misunderstood to mean a service which is proper or becoming;\nwhich we have the best of all reasons for rendering. This is all true; but\nthis is not what the text means. It signifies a service whose main spring\nis in the _thinking, reasoning, spiritual_ department of man\u2019s nature\u2014a\nspiritual service rendered to a God who is a spirit, and who requireth to\nbe worshiped in spirit and in truth. Of such Peter says: \u201cye also, as\nlively stones, are built up _a spiritual house_, a holy priesthood, to\noffer up _spiritual sacrifices_ acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.\u201d In\npursuance of this idea, the apostle, in our text, after speaking of the\npresenting of _the body_ as a living sacrifice, and of such a presentation\nas a _reasoning_ service, gives us the key to the whole thought by his\nfinal exhortation, \u201cbe ye transformed by the _renewing of your mind_;\u201d so\nthat it is clear that the outward conformity of the body to God\u2019s will, is\nmade both a living sacrifice and a reasoning service by having its\nmainspring in a renewed mind. Only thus will the body be offered alive to\nGod. Only thus will the mind be truly transformed. All the outward\ndevelopments of the life will then bear the stamp of a reasoning service.\nThe way of peace will be chosen from conviction. The will, self-impelled,\nwill set toward God. The conscience will be alive with a divinely inspired\nsensitiveness. All the affections and desires, of their own accord, will\nstretch their hands towards Christ, and the renewed man will daily realize\nthat the water which Jesus gives is _in_ him, living water, springing up\ninto everlasting life.\n\nIt is then clear, I think, from what has been said, that nonconformity to\nthe world is not the _aim_, but one of the incidents of Christian life.\nThe Christian\u2019s _aim_ is distinctly stated here to be the proving of the\nwill of God\u2014that which is good, acceptable and perfect. Yet nonconformity\nto the world will develop itself as a _necessary incident_ of Christian\nliving. Being transformed by the renewing of the mind, the outward life\nwill necessarily be transformed also, and will cease to be conformed to\nthe world. The soul which desires that which is good, acceptable, perfect,\ncan no longer find affinity with that which is bad, imperfect, and\ndispleasing to God. The differences are not incidental, they are generic.\nThe Christian and the world belong to different orders; are regulated by\ndifferent laws. The Christian is, as it were, grafted upon the new stock,\nand can no more bear the fruit of his old sinful life, than the ingrafted\nbranch can bear its former fruit. Old things have passed away. All things\nhave become new. He is a new creature in Christ Jesus. These differences\nhave not to be marked by finely drawn lines of casuistry. There are indeed\npoints at which the worldly and the Christian life run for a little way\nparallel. Points where neither party can very well act differently from\nthe other. But for all that, the divergence is wide enough at many other\npoints to leave no doubt. I am speaking now of _true_ Christians,\nthoroughly renewed in the spirit of their mind; courageous, unflinching,\nconsistent Christians: not of those whifflers and compromisers who call\nthemselves Christians, and who try to trim between God and the world, so\nas to relinquish no advantages on the side of either. A man cannot live\nmany hours by the rule of Christ without coming into direct issue with the\nworld. And now, as to these points of difference, they are, of course, too\nnumerous to be dealt with in detail. And I can, therefore, only call your\nattention to one or two classes of them.\n\n1st: On which I need not dwell, is the class of _worldly sins_. Of course\nthe transformed man will not be conformed to the world in these. Not that\na Christian never errs, by any means, but that the general current of his\nlife will set in the direction of pleasing God, and away from those things\nwhich are plainly contrary to his will.\n\n2d. A marked difference develops itself in the region of the motives, the\ntempers, the dispositions, and the principles of action. Sometimes it is\ndifficult to pronounce upon these differences with certainty, yet some of\nthem are easily recognizable. Two men will often do precisely the same\nthing from different motives. A Christian and a worldly man, for example,\nare foully abused by a profane ruffian. Both receive the abuse in silence,\nand go their way without bestowing any attention upon him. But the two are\ncommonly actuated by very different impulses. The one turns away with\nanger and loathing, and is silent because it is beneath his dignity to\nreply, or to notice the aggressor. The other, though tempted to anger,\nremembers the example of him whom he serves. Who, when he was reviled,\nreviled not again and leaves the railer, striving to pity his ignorance,\nand to forget his insult. Pride accomplishes, outwardly, in the one case,\nwhat Christian humility does in the other. So in cases of great\naffliction, it is sometimes hard to decide, from outward indications,\nwhether divine grace or native force of will is the stronger. The worldly\nman will exhibit equal composure with the Christian; will seem, for the\ntime, to accept the visitation with no less equanimity than the other. But\nthose who are much with men under such circumstances, and come perhaps as\nclose to their hearts as it is possible for man to do, recognize a very\ndecided difference. They know that the composure which springs from\nstoicism, iron nerve, indomitable will, is a different thing from that\nwhich is born of submission and resignation to the will of God. That the\none but crowds the sharp grief deeper into the heart, and shuts up the\nfountain of healing tears, and makes the man hard and sullen and defiant,\nand chills his sympathies, and disposes him to solitary brooding, and\nafter all, gives way at last, and leaves him a broken reed, while the\nother finds in the breach which God made in his cherished plans, an\nopening through which heaven smiles on him, rises on the ruins of his\nwrecked hopes to a purer and more unselfish life, draws sweetness out of\nhis sorrow, and wins a firmer trust in God, and a deeper and more\ncomprehensive sympathy for his sorrowing brethren everywhere. These\ndifferences are endless. They cover every variety of experience. The world\ntalks of the dignity of man, asserts his knowledge and his unimpaired\njudgment. The Christian distrusts his deceitful heart and fallen nature,\nand becomes a little child that he may know the truth. The world walks by\nsight and sneers at faith. Faith is the Christian\u2019s atmosphere, out of\nwhich he cannot breathe freely. The world talks of law, the Christian of\nprovidence. The world knows God, either vaguely, as a deity to be feared\nfor his power, and but dimly apprehended by man, or as a mere aggregate of\nlaws divorced from any real, apprehensible personality. The Christian\ncommunes and walks with him daily as a tender, loving, and wise father.\n\nBut I hasten to a third class of differences, with which I shall deal more\nat length: I mean those which appear in the Christian\u2019s conduct respecting\nthose things which he uses in common with the world. Under this head falls\nthat large class of actions, which, _in themselves considered_, have no\nmoral value, but acquire one from the end they are made to serve, the\nmanner in which they are pursued, or the motive in which they originate.\nOn these arise the most perplexing of all moral questions, the most subtle\ncases of conscience, and too often, I grieve to say, the most acrimonious\ndiscussions. Under this head are included most of those vexed questions as\nto amusements, dress, meat and drink, and the like. And this text, I am\nsorry to say, has been made the basis for inculcating some most false and\npernicious doctrines concerning these things.\n\nNow it seems to me that very many of the difficulties which arise on these\nsubjects are quite unnecessary, and would be in great part destroyed by\nresting upon the simple, unequivocal testimony of the Bible. I do not\nthink that God\u2019s Word is at all wanting in explicitness on these points.\nHere is this text for instance. Nothing can be plainer. It tells us our\nfirst great duty is to submit our wills to God\u2019s will; to commit ourselves\nto his guidance without reserve, a living sacrifice; to be transformed;\nand that when this shall have been done, we shall know what the will of\nGod is; we shall practically prove what is good and acceptable and\nperfect, and, as a matter of course, shall not be conformed to the sinful\nprinciples and practices of the world. Now it follows from this that\nwhatever is good and acceptable and perfect, not opposed to the new\nprinciple of life in us, is ours, given us by God to use and enjoy; and\nthat in the use and enjoyment of it within the limits he prescribes, we\n_are not conformed to the world_ in any bad sense. I say this, well aware\nthat every one of these things contains capabilities for abuse, and that\nthe world does most sadly abuse them; and this brings me directly to my\npoint that the difference between Christians and the world as respects\nthese things is to be developed _in the proper use and regulation by\nChristians of what the world abuses_. Christians are not to be driven from\nevery point which the world sees fit to occupy by the hue and cry of\nnonconformity. They are to remember that in these things there is a duty\nto be done as well as a pleasure to be enjoyed, and that they are to show\ntheir nonconformity, not by abandoning, but by refusing to conform to the\nworld\u2019s excesses, and by insisting on the restraining principles of God\u2019s\nWord. Let us here hold closely by the opening thought of our discussion,\nthat conformity to the world _in itself_ is no sin, and nonconformity _in\nitself_ no virtue. Conformity to the world is sinful when the world\u2019s\npractice is sinful and not otherwise.\n\nNow this is a very plain rule. It is Christ\u2019s rule. Paul takes it directly\nfrom Christ. But I am aware that another question enters here, namely,\nthat of expediency. There may be private considerations tending to make\nthe relinquishment of a harmless thing expedient for you or for me. There\nmay be considerations growing out of your relations to others which may\nrender use inexpedient. In such cases, expediency, of course, assumes _to\nyou_ the obligation of law. But as regards these cases no man can decide\nfor you. The Bible throws them on your own conscience. Let every man be\nfully persuaded _in his own mind_. Expediency is a matter for individuals.\nNo law can be laid down for it. The two things necessarily exclude each\nother. If you lay it down that such a course is expedient for _every one_,\nyou remove the matter at once from the region of expediency, and put it on\nthe ground of law; and this course no man nor body of men is ever\njustified in pursuing. Such a step trenches on the sacred enclosure of the\nindividual moral sense, a holy of holies, into which man and his Maker\nalone enter. At the same time, abundant light will be given to every\nhumble, faithful child of Christ, to settle these questions of expediency.\nWhen love to God is the moving principle of a man\u2019s life, it develops in\nhim an insight which guides him unerringly through questions where\ncasuistry would become hopelessly entangled. You may see the same truth\nillustrated in your own homes. See that loving, obedient child, whose\nhighest delight is to perform your behest and anticipate your wishes. How\nvery few errors that child commits, even in cases where you have laid down\nno rule. It reaches the knowledge of your wishes through a kind of\ninstinct as reliable as it is undefinable. Surely faith ought to teach us\nto expect a clew through such mazes from a Father who has promised that he\nwill direct the paths of those who acknowledge him.\n\nAnd here, I insist, whether the question be one of law or of expediency,\nhas been a grave error of the church in not trusting enough to this inward\nprinciple of life in the soul, to this insight of love, to regulate the\noutward developments of the life, and to prevent the obliteration of the\nlines between the church and the world. She has busied herself too much\nwith details, and not enough with that which lies back of them; too much\nwith the circumference and not enough with the centre. Christ teaches us\nthat if the fountain be pure, the streams must be pure. But the church, in\nher unconscious distrust of the purifying power of the fountain, has\nthrown into the streams such abundance of mint, anise, and cummin, that\nthe taste of the original water is sometimes sadly impaired. Too often,\nwhile she has been busy with the streams, the fountain head has been\ngathering unsuspected poison. While I recognize the church\u2019s duty to watch\ncarefully over Christ\u2019s flock, to counsel, rebuke, restrain, I think that\nshe has encouraged, in many cases, by her want of faith in the power of\nthe relation between Christ and the believer, an artificial religious\nlife, a factitious conscience, a life wanting the freedom and naturalness\nof movement properly engendered by the gospel. I think she should have\ninsisted more on having this clearly defined and constantly maintained,\nmore on a full assurance, and a lively faith, and an ever burning love,\nand less on details which these would have regulated of themselves. I\nbelieve that if she had done this, and moreover had preached the word\nliterally and boldly to the people, had told the people their privilege to\nuse God\u2019s gifts, and pointed them to the principle of love to God as\ncompetent to regulate use, and not twisted its declarations into warrants\nfor the abridgment of Christian liberty,\u2014there would be in the church\nto-day more simple, strong, manly, intelligent piety, and far less\nconformity to the world. This distinction between safe and unsafe truths\nis a Romish and not a Protestant idea; and the temporary gain secured by\nacting upon it is more than counterbalanced by the final pernicious\nresult.\n\nIt is far safer for me and for you that I preach this truth to you boldly\nand plainly; and I have a special object in bringing it to your notice\nnow, at this solemn season when you are reviewing the past, and making a\nnew consecration of yourselves to the service of Christ.\n\nHere, as you renew your original vow to come out from the world, it is\nwell that you do this with no vague idea of what you promise. What I shall\nnow say applies to most if not all of you, but especially to the younger\nmembers of the church. As you enter upon a season of special religious\nactivity, you also enter upon a season which society is wont to devote\nlargely to pleasure. Ere another communion season shall have come round,\nthe season for evening entertainments and festal gatherings, will be at\nits height. From the nature of circumstances you will be called upon to\nparticipate in these more or less; and it is at these points that the\ntemptation to conformity to the world will be most likely to assail you.\n\nMost of you are probably aware of the ground I have recently taken before\nthe public on the subject of amusements; a position which has excited\nconsiderable comment, and some censure. I do not see why it should. There\nis nothing novel in my views on this subject. I have merely stated the\ngospel principle, the principle which Christ propounded, and by which he\nlived\u2014that the proper and only way to preserve our pleasures or anything\nelse from abuse, is to put Christian leaven into them. That our duty in\nsuch matters, is not to give them over bodily to the devil and to the\nworld, to be abused and perverted at their pleasure; but to save them from\nsuch perversion, and make them legitimate instruments of Christian joy and\ngrowth, by using them in the name and under the law of Christ. If these\nthings are evil, we have no right to have anything to do with them. If\nthey are, though not evil in themselves, so under the dominion of evil,\nand so dependent upon evil for support, as the theatre, for example, is,\nthat Christian participation cannot separate them from their abuses, we\nought to abandon them. But as to the general principle, that it is abuse\nand not proper use which Christ condemns, and that many of the things\nwhich the devil has usurped, are as much yours as his, there can be no\ndoubt. I have not one word to modify or retract of what I have written on\nthis subject. Challenged, I would reiterate it word for word, if I knew I\nshould go from this pulpit to my grave. And I dare any Christian to draw\nfrom what I have written, or from what I have said to-day, license for\nimproper conformity to the world. If you do so, depend on it, _you_ and\nnot _I_ will be condemned. And I rejoice especially to-day, in having\nassumed this position; because I have never had so good ground from which\nto counsel you as to your intercourse with the world of pleasure. If I\nwere to put this matter to you on the ground of men\u2019s rules and decrees,\nif I were to try and show you, by subtle hair-splitting, that this thing\nis one degree more capable of abuse than that thing; and that, therefore,\nyou may use that, and must abandon this, I should expose myself to\nmerciless logic, and to just ridicule. I leave this ground entirely. I put\nmyself on God\u2019s word, and say to you this morning, be not conformed to\nthis world. I say to you as the first, the indispensable requisite for\ndeciding in what conformity consists, see that your relations to Christ\nare properly adjusted. Present yourselves living sacrifices to him. Be\ntransformed by the renewing of your mind. Submit your will to the will of\nGod without reserve. Then shall you be able to prove what is his will,\nwhat is good and acceptable and perfect. Then shall your judgment be so\nenlightened as to enable you to render a reasoning, a reasonable, a\nthoughtful and discriminating service. This is the first thing.\n\nFor this I pray for you. For this I am anxious for you, that you be\nvitally united to Christ; that you have a living, active faith in him; a\nclear witness of your acceptance with him, an ever burning love for him.\nIf you have these, I know that the details of your lives, whether they\nconcern your pleasures, or your business, or your studies, will take care\nof themselves. But remember this prerequisite. Do not go away saying, \u201cmy\npastor says I may lawfully indulge in this or that, and I need give myself\nno further trouble about it.\u201d I say to you no such thing. I say that you\nwant your whole nature renewed by the indwelling of Christ, and that\nwithout this you are not safe in the world one moment. That without this\nyou are in continual danger of conformity to the world. Without this you\nare in no condition to decide in what you may engage, or how far you may\nengage in it without abuse. Withal, you _will_ need to trouble yourself\nabout these matters; to study God\u2019s law; to watch closely your own heart\nand life; to avoid needless temptation; to exercise strong resolution when\npleasure beckons you beyond the bounds erected by Christian duty. I bid\nyou rejoice in your youth. I bid you use those amusements which are\ninnocent in themselves, freely and with gratitude to God, but to beware of\ntheir abuse. I can safely tell you some things which God\u2019s word will teach\nyou as to this matter. It will tell you that where you make pleasure the\nend and rule of your life, and duty the exception, you are guilty of\nabuse. It will tell you that when pleasure saps the fountains of your\nhealth, when it steals away your hours of sleep, and tempts you to\nexcessive indulgence of appetite at an hour which nature prescribes for\nthe rest and recuperation of your organs, when it leads you to expose\nyourself to sickness by inadequate clothing\u2014it is a gross abuse for which\nGod will hold you accountable. It will tell you that when any description\nof pleasure trenches on the limits of modesty, it is an abuse; that the\npublic embracing of young men and women in the vile dances of the day, is\nan offense against decency, an abomination against which manly nobleness\nand maidenly delicacy ought to cry out with all their power. It will tell\nyou that when pleasure of any kind interferes with your covenant\nobligations to the church, and keeps you from the ordinances of God\u2019s\nhouse, it is an abuse; a conformity to the world, against which God warns\nyou in this text.\n\nCome then and give yourselves to Christ, not repelled by any false,\nascetic views of his religion, but believing, as his word entitles you to\nbelieve, that it is the promoter of innocent joy, of healthy and grateful\nrecreation, of the highest and purest pleasures. Come, and he shall show\nyou by his own life how to be in the world, yet not of it. How to live in\nstrictest conformity to duty, and yet be free indeed, and exhibit to the\nworld a broad, noble, generous Christian life\u2014a life in the spirit and not\nin the letter. He shall teach you to live by the insight of love, and not\nby the prescriptions of a bare scheme of duty. Oh, that you may grow to\nthe stature of perfect men and women in Christ; that you may be living\nexamples of a reasoning service, models of a piety, enthusiastic yet\njudicious; all aglow with the love of Christ carried into every detail of\nyour lives, into your pleasures, your conversation, your business;\nbringing everything, great and small, into conformity with the law of\nChrist, and making the whole life move sweetly and harmoniously round him.\nYou will not then be a worldly church. You will not then be stumbling\nblocks to the kingdom of Christ. You will be living epistles, read and\nknown of all men, and they, seeing your good works, shall glorify your\nfather which is in Heaven.\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE CHURCH AND THE YOUNG MAN.\n\n\n         A Sermon Delivered on Sabbath Morning, November 4, 1866,\n\n\n                 In The First Presbyterian Church, Troy,\n\n\n         At The Request of The Young Men\u2019s Christian Association.\n\n\n    2 Sam. xviii, 5. \u201c_And the king commanded Joab and Abishai and\n    Ittai saying, deal gently for my sake with the young man, even\n    with Absalom._\u201d\n\n\nThere are few passages of Holy writ more beautiful or suggestive than\nthis. Notwithstanding the astounding character of Absalom\u2019s rebellion;\nthough the mind of the sovereign and father of his people is torn with\nindignation at this outrage upon his throne and person, and is busy with\nplans for the security of his kingdom and the repulse of the invader;\nthough David is stunned and bewildered at this high handed display of\ningratitude and rebellion on the part of his favorite child, the father\nfinds place to assert itself amid the cares of the sovereign, and to\nbreathe a word of caution to his generals respecting the person of his\ndearly loved boy.\n\nIn accordance with the request of the Young Men\u2019s National Christian\nConvention to the churches, I propose to devote this service to a\ndiscussion of their relations to the church. I take this text as setting\nforth a similar charge given by our Lord and King Christ to his militant\nchurch, to deal gently with the young man. I therefore invite your\nattention to the following points respecting the relations of young men to\nthe church:\n\nI. The church _must_ deal with them.\nII. The church _ought_ to deal with them.\nIII. How the church should deal with them.\n\nI. _The church must deal with young men._\n\nAbsalom, however foolish and wicked his revolt, however strange his\nrebellion against his royal father, notwithstanding his youth and\ninexperience, was a stubborn fact, with which the leaders and counselors\nand armies of the kingdom found themselves obliged to deal. Otherwise\nDavid would have been dethroned and his authority violently usurped. If\nnot dealt with so as to suppress him, he must be dealt with in the more\nunpleasant capacity of a suppressor and tyrant.\n\nYoung men are a fact in society; and as such cannot be without relations\nto the church. Not only so, they are an important fact; a prominent fact;\na potent fact. They are a force in the business, the social, the\npolitical, the governmental relations of the community. If they have not\nwisdom, they have strength and energy. If they have not caution, they have\nenterprise. If they have not experience, they have tact, intelligence and\nknowledge. If they refuse to follow old rules, they succeed ofttimes in\nthe use of their own methods. Society concedes much to them, entrusts them\nwith serious responsibilities, seeks them for positions of power and\ninfluence, is powerfully swayed in whatever direction they choose, as a\nbody, to throw themselves, applauds and welcomes their success.\n\nThe relations of such a body to the church of Christ must be important.\nThis mass of manly strength, energy, independence, intelligence and\nenterprise must, if set on fire with Christian ardor and enlisted on her\nbehalf, greatly conduce to her prosperity; while it cannot but be a\nserious hindrance to her success if this element is neutral, or arrayed\nagainst her. If neutral, indeed, it is against her. If she have not the\nyoung men incorporated with her membership, at work in her sabbath\nschools, in regular attendance on her ordinances, woven into her social\nrelations, throwing their strength and generosity and enthusiasm into her\nbenevolent enterprises, contributing their fresh thought to her\nassemblies, working, through the closer intimacies which mark their age,\nto increase her numbers, she will have to move under the drag applied by\ntheir indifference, resist their fascinations exerted in drawing others\naway from her standard, contend sharply against the skepticism to which\nyouth is naturally prone, and if they are won at last, win them when the\nfreshness of youth is gone, and by a double expenditure of power. The\nchurch _must_ deal with them as the friends or as the enemies of religion;\nmust appropriate or resist their power. They come to her in the flush of\ntheir manly strength, like the Roman envoys to Carthage, holding in their\nrobes peace and war, and offering the church her choice.\n\nII. _The church ought to deal with them._\n\n1. In simple consistency with her own principles. Not only to touch them\nwhere she must, but where she can. Not to regard them as aside from her\npeculiar work, but as constituting a peculiarly important and interesting\npart of her work. She professes to labor for the salvation of men, where\ncan she find excuse for failing to provide _special_ appliances if need\nbe, for the salvation of young men? She professes to be an _educator_ as\nwell as an evangelizer. Here is material in its most inviting shape, and\nat the stage best adapted for her moulding. She professes to provide for\nthe extension of her doctrine and spirit. Can she, with any show of\nreason, neglect the force furnished her in this mass of youthful energy\nand enthusiasm. She professes to rescue men from danger. Does she see any\ndanger more imminent than those which menace young men, any temptations\nmore seductive, any ruin more pitiable? Does she see any more susceptible\nof these influences than youth with their high spirits, superfluous energy\nand glowing passion? Does she see any victims which appeal more powerfully\nto her compassion than these sons and brothers in whose success and virtue\nare bound up the hopes and affections of thousands of parents, every one\nof whom cries to the world and to the church, \u201cdeal gently for my sake\nwith the young man?\u201d\n\n2. But the church ought to deal with them, in the absence of other\nappliances to reach them. The church has few enough, far too few; but\nthere are fewer elsewhere. Take business. What does it furnish? It deals\nwith the young man. Not always gently either. It deals with his youthful\nstrength; with his clear and active brain; with his enterprise and energy.\nIt uses these to build up trade and accumulate wealth. It deals, I say,\nnot always gently. It is often exacting and severe. It often binds burdens\ntoo heavy for youthful shoulders. It often refuses leisure which health\nimperatively demands, and denies compensations which might furnish less\ntemptation to crime. But I am not here to speak of these now. How does it\ndeal with the young man morally? Does business take into the account, to\nany great extent, the fact that young men are moral and intellectual\nbeings? How much leisure does it afford them for mental or religious\nculture? Alas, with the most charitable view of the case, with the noble\nexceptions clearly recognized, business presents a sad aspect in this\nregard. The maxim \u201c_business is business_\u201d is carried too far. What the\n_world_ may think or do in this matter is not the question here; but to\nChristian men, who believe or profess to believe that religion belongs\neverywhere, business should be something more than business. How many\nChristian business men recognize in its contact opportunities for the\nexertion of Christian influence as well as for making money? How many see\nin their clerks something besides the hired arms or brains to carry on\ntheir trade? How many recognize them as beings with social instincts as\nwell as with sharp wits; immortal souls as well as clear heads;\nsusceptibilities to temptation as well as to self-interest; young men who\nare to fill a place in these democratic communities, to cast their votes,\nexert their influence, be each the centre of a greater or smaller circle,\nbe fathers to train up children and perpetuate their own moral character\nand sentiments whatever they be? How many consider the influence which\ntheir position of employer gives them over the moral destiny of these\nyouth; the power they may wield through the truly affectionate and\nconfidential relations subsisting between them? How many concern\nthemselves as to where their clerks go after business hours, what\nassociations they form, whether they have a place of worship or not? How\nmany of you business men, here to-day, are in the habit of asking the\nyoung men in your employ to accompany you to church, or to Bible class, or\nto prayer-meeting?\n\nTake the community at large. _Its_ influence, if exerted in this\ndirection, must be chiefly confined to furnishing some counter attraction,\nmoral, but not necessarily religious, to the attractions of the haunts of\nsin. And a great work can be done here, in which men of the most opposite\nreligious theories, and men with no religion at all can unite. There, for\ninstance, is the temperance question. There is a variety of views on the\nsubject; but all agree that intemperance is an awful evil, and one which\nall moral and religious men are called on to resist and suppress by every\npossible means. _We_ believe that the only effectual method of reforming a\ndrunkard, or of keeping a man from becoming one, is to make him a\nChristian. That will reform in _all_ respects. But we cannot bring the\ncommunity to agree on this platform. Here then is one where all can unite,\nnamely, in organizing some force to overbalance the attractions of the\ndram shop. It need not be distinctively religious, only free from vicious\nassociations. The saloon keeper understands perfectly that not one young\nman in ten comes to his haunt originally to drink or in which to gamble.\nHe wants a warm and pleasant room to sit down and chat with his companion;\nto read his evening paper, or it may be to procure a meal. So this\nminister of corruption proceeds to make provision for these natural and\nhealthy cravings, that, through them, he may excite those unnatural and\ndepraved desires, the satisfaction of which constitutes his chief source\nof profit. He furnishes his rooms tastefully and comfortably. He provides\nfood of all kinds prepared to please the most fastidious palate. A small\nsum will secure a quiet and cosy retreat where the youth and his friends\nmay pass an evening. But he furnishes the bar with its tempting array of\nliquors. He gathers there his array of well dressed and gentlemanly\nconfederates who are always ready to challenge to drink, and to sneer at\nthe principle which refuses. He has his licentious pictures to stimulate\nthe passions, and abundant facilities for their gratification. And\nthousands of youths who went thither at first, only because they could\nfind no other retreat, have come at last to frequent it for the\ngratification of the basest appetites, and have gone from its doors at\nlast, hopeless, homeless drunkards.\n\nNow suppose a community should say (and no individual with a shadow of\nmoral sense could say otherwise), the rumseller takes an unfair advantage.\nHe unites things which may just as well be separated. There is no\nnecessity that all the light and comfort and retirement should be\nassociated with liquor and licentiousness. Let us furnish these to the\nhundreds of poor young men who have no retreat but their offices and\nboarding houses. Let us build a house or hire a large suite of rooms. Let\nus have a suitable person employed to dispense proper refreshments at a\nreasonable price. Let us have a reading room furnished with the best\npapers and periodicals, and with a good library. Let us have a\nconversation room, where young men can chat or play their game of chess or\nbackgammon. Let us have a ten pin alley, and even a smoking room. Would\nnot this be in the interest of temperance as well as of many other\nvirtues? Would it not keep scores of young men from the gin palaces? Could\nnot society, independently of any religious views, easily inaugurate and\ncarry out such a plan? It has been done, and has worked wonders. The\nslight approach towards it made by our Young Men\u2019s Christian Association,\nsaying nothing now of the religious adjuncts, has proved what a strong,\nwell organized effort might effect in this direction. And yet what has our\ncommunities of this character? What organized appliance have our cities\nanywhere to act upon young men? There I know are the Young Men\u2019s\nAssociations, and they are good as far as they go; but they make provision\nchiefly for intellectual wants. Their libraries, and reading rooms, and\nlecture courses are doing a good work; but after all it is for the\ncommunity at large, male and female, as well as for young men. There is a\nlower class of wants peculiar to young men, and to young men of a certain\nclass, which will be supplied somehow, and which a proper effort may\nsupply judiciously, without injury to the youth, and in a way to create\nwants and lead to associations of a higher character. If the moral and\nChristian part of the community do not supply them, the immoral part will.\n\n3. But the church ought to deal with young men, _because she has the\nmeans_. She has organization. The community at large is not organized to\ncarry out such efforts. Special organizations have to be made when such a\nmovement is undertaken by it; and even then the _personal sympathy_ and\ncooperation of individuals, except perhaps through their purses, is not\nsecured. A moral movement agitated outside the church requires a good deal\nof time and effort to bring it into contact with men\u2019s minds, and to get\nthem enlisted in it. It has to work principally upon individuals. But the\nmoment a question of moral reform starts with the church, it works from\nthe very first upon and through an organization. That is the reason why\nthe agents of all great benevolent enterprises and reform movements try\nfirst to get before the churches. The subject is presented to masses. It\nreaches the larger part of the community through their religious\ndetachments, so to speak, and by the mouth of their chosen and respected\nreligious instructors. The organization is already formed to discuss the\nquestion, to decide upon it, to raise means for carrying out the\nenterprise, to delegate men to represent this or that branch of the church\nin it. Added to this is the personal sympathy evoked. As a moral question\nit is brought home to the church on her own ground. If it concerns the\nsalvation of men, every individual, as well as the church at large has to\ndo with it. It appeals to him as a man and as a brother; to his prayers,\nto his pocket, to his effort.\n\nThe church has the wealth. I need only say, that the church represents by\nfar the largest proportion of the money of our communities. Take our own\ncity for instance, and count up our wealthiest men, and you will find that\nthe most of them are not only members of congregations, but also members\nof churches.\n\n4. The church ought to deal with young men, _because she represents the\nonly restraining and reforming power_.\n\nNo reform that is not Christian in its essence is radical. No restraint\nthat is not Christian is permanently effective. Other influences are\npartial in their operation. They modify one side of character. They\nprotect it partially at one or two weak points. They touch the outward\ndevelopments of the life merely; trying to regulate it from the\ncircumference. This goes to the very seat of life, purges the fountain\nhead of impulse and desire, creates a new man to do new works, and does\nnot simply ingraft new works on the old character, putting the new piece\ninto the old garment. This brings the thought and will into conformity\nwith the law of Christ, and develops the man _as a whole_, makes him\nsomething, as well as restrains him from evil. Without this, who can say\nthat any restraint will be effectual; that any memories will be sacred\nenough, any admonitions forcible enough, any associations attractive\nenough, any moral purpose strong enough to keep one pure? Alas, the shore\nof life is strewn so thickly with wrecks of youthful hope and promise, the\nannals of crime embrace so many youth of noble aims and high attainments,\nreared under the holiest influences of home and sanctuary, that we may\nwell ask\u2014who is safe?\n\nWhile then, I would not discourage an effort at reform made in good faith\nby society, yet without any distinctively religious character, while I\nbelieve that many such efforts have done good in their sphere, I say\ndistinctly, that their sphere is not large enough. Their influence does\nnot reach deep enough. They help reform or restrain certain developments\nof the life; but they do not inaugurate any positive moral development.\nNay, the very fact that many of them are forced, as a condition of their\nexistence, to denude themselves of anything but the most general and vague\nreligious character, makes them incapable of fostering any high moral\ndevelopment. To take the instance cited a few moments since. The community\nestablishes a coffee room, or reading room, or resort of any kind for\nyoung men, without the vicious attractions of the fashionable restaurant\nor saloon. It does a good and laudable thing. Its influence is good as far\nas it goes, in keeping young men away from worse places. But the moral\ninfluence exerted, depends entirely upon these outside appliances. In\nother words, this institution keeps them from evil so long as they can\nhave recourse to it, but does not implant within them a principle which,\nin the event of their being deprived of this privilege, would cause them\nto forego their comfort and recreation, rather than seek them amid\ndebasing associations.\n\nOn this point then I am avaricious. I want the church to control all\nschemes of reform. I want them to originate in the church as their only\nlegitimate source, so that in every effort put forth for the protection,\nor restoration, or training of youth, the gospel of Christ, the only power\nwhich can ever thoroughly regenerate individual or society, may be\nparamount: so that the effort may be not only a conservative but an\naggressive force, winning youth to Christ as well as keeping them away\nfrom Satan, creating positive developments of character as well as\nsecuring simple safety or harmlessness, narrowing the boundaries of the\ndevil\u2019s empire as well as keeping Christ\u2019s from infringement. For this\nreason I am anxious that instead of its being left for secular\norganizations to inaugurate such movements, the church should enlarge her\nChristian organizations so as to take in and sanctify every force that is\nrequisite to meet the demands of the various characters with which she has\nto deal.\n\nAnd just at this point, I want to call your attention to a thought which\nbears especially upon our city churches.\n\nIt is commonly thought that the city is the fountain head of all vice, and\nwith some reason I admit. Parents have a traditional horror of sending\ntheir sons into large cities. They think they are going into the very jaws\nof death and destruction. They draw a fearful picture of the gayeties and\nthe temptations of city life. They look upon young men reared in cities\nwith suspicion. They are inclined to regard them all as loose in morals,\nand as taking naturally to sin.\n\nNow I do not believe that, as a rule, young men or any other men are worse\nin cities than elsewhere. Sin is pretty much the same thing, I apprehend,\namong grain and trees, as it is on sidewalks. Propensities just as\nvicious, passions just as furious and debased, exhibitions of vice quite\nas disgusting, more so, perhaps, because more coarse and pronounced, are\nto be seen in farming districts and in country villages as in cities. The\nappliances of vice are quite up to the proportion of the population in the\nformer, both in quantity and in quality. A good deal of injustice is done\nthe city in this respect. It is often said that a young man\u2019s ruin\ncommences from the time he leaves his quiet country home and goes to the\ncity. But the fact is that, in many cases, the city only completes what\nwas well begun at home, begun in evenings spent in country grocery stores,\nand on the piazzas of village taverns.\n\nBut there is another aspect of this matter which would perhaps startle\nthose who think that all piety and orthodoxy reside in the rural\ndistricts; and that is, that the city, _as it is_, affords far greater\nencouragements to well developed piety than the country; and that if the\nchurch were fully awake to her duty towards young men, and actually\nemploying all the means afforded her by her wealth, organization and\ninfluence to shield, restrain, influence and reform them, the city would\nbe the safest place on earth for a youth. If the city is the stronghold of\nvice, it is in the church\u2019s power to make it the stronghold of virtue. For\nit is admitted that, in other respects, the city affords superior\nadvantages. Young men leave the country store and come thither if they\ndesire to learn business on a large scale. They are obliged to seek the\ncity for large literary opportunities. The great popular literary\nattractions seldom move out of the track of the cities. Here the pulse of\nlife beats quicker. Men live faster. Thought is more energetic and prompt.\nThe same is in a measure true of religious life. It develops more\nactivity, more benevolence. It invests religious instruction with more\nattractions, and throws more life and power into social worship. Go into\nsuch a prayer meeting, for instance, as you can find in scores of churches\nin our large cities, where the large numbers present augment the sympathy\nof each with the common object, where thoughtful, practical, energetic men\npour into the common treasury streams of fresh, living thought, where the\nsinging is an inspiration, and say what you will, a man will be stirred\nand stimulated as he cannot be in the thin assemblies of too many country\nchurches, where the minister is chiefly depended on to give interest to\nthe meeting, where the singing is faint and slow. I know God is often in\nthe one place as in the other. I know there is true religious life there,\nand that souls are converted there. But so long as men remain human, their\npiety will not be insensible to such influences. So too, the influences of\nthe city churches tend more to develop young men. My impression is that in\ncountry districts age is a prime qualification for responsibility; young\nmen are kept back, and not expected to bear a prominent part in religious\nservices until later in life. With us, it is part of our creed to educate\nyoung men by responsibility. We love to hear them speak or pray, not only\nbecause they bring us good and fresh and profitable thoughts, but because\nwe know that these exercises are developing them into strong men for the\nfuture leaders of the church. Not only so, but our larger religious\nmachinery, the wider sphere of our activity, furnish places for them to\nwork. We must depend largely upon them to carry on our mission schools,\nand to carry out other practical schemes of benevolence. Under these\ninfluences, I say, they develop faster, and as I think better. As a rule,\nthe young man of a city church is more capable, more efficient, than one\nof the same age and of equal natural abilities in a rural district.\n\nBut then these influences do not reach the class of unconverted youth\ndirectly. They have no interest in prayer meetings, little in sermons.\nThis is the plain question before us then:\n\nIII. _How shall the church deal with the Absaloms_: the erring youth or\nthose of no religious bias, the careless and pleasure loving? _There is\nsuch a class._ Are you surprised at my stating a fact which seems self\nevident? I state it because it seems to have been practically forgotten.\nSome men frame their schemes of reform on the principle that every one\nmust be appealed to by the same influences which appeal to them. For\ninstance, when it is proposed to furnish, under Christian supervision,\ncertain innocent appliances which may counterbalance the attractions of\nthe saloon, and perhaps lead to the exercise of some more distinctively\nreligious influence, we are flatly told by some that there is no need of\nrecreation. Youth are on the brink of the grave, and should find enjoyment\nin singing psalms. Others tell us there is recreation enough in the\ncontemplation of the heavenly bodies, and of the beauties of nature, and\nthat these ought to satisfy the soul without its having recourse to lower\njoys. Now you and I like to sing psalms. They are suggestive to us of many\nrich and comforting thoughts. Some of you can find sufficient enjoyment in\nthe beauties of nature, not only because God has opened your eyes to see\nhim in all things, but because study and knowledge have prepared your mind\nto discern and appreciate the wonders of creation. I don\u2019t think you\nparticularly loved to sing psalms before Christ touched your heart. And\nthe practical point we have got to meet, and meet as Christians and with\nChristian methods is, that there is a large class that cannot be appealed\nto by the beauties of nature and the charms of literature, and the glory\nof the starry heavens. Have we anything to do with these? Just as\nindubitably as David\u2019s army had to do with the erring Absalom. And we have\ngot to deal gently with them too; not force them upon the procrustean bed\nof our methods, and give them their choice of these or none. If the church\nsays to these unconverted, careless ones, \u201cIf you will not come to our\nprayer meetings, if you will not listen to our sermons, we have done our\nduty and cleared our skirts, and you may go on to perdition as fast as you\nplease,\u201d I say the church is awfully in error. Her skirts, are in that\nevent, soaked with the blood of ruined youth, and it cries aloud against\nher from the ground.\n\nWhat are we to do then? If the church has a duty to this class, has she\nalso means to discharge it? Is it in her power to make the city the best\nplace for irreligious as well as for pious youth? I say, yes. But she will\nbe obliged to enlarge her scheme of work. She must sanctify new forces to\nthis end, if she has to take them out of the devil\u2019s hand. She must\ninstitute new attractions, under her own control, to draw youth within the\nsphere of her influence, and to hold them when drawn. She must employ\nforces with a view merely to restrain from worse influences, until she can\nbring direct religious influences to bear. Without compromising principle\none iota, abstaining from the very appearance of evil, she is nevertheless\nto press into her service everything that she can separate from low\nassociations, everything that will enhance her own social attractions,\neverything which will amuse, interest, instruct, to keep these away from\nthe palaces of hell, and to draw them into contact with the influences of\nthe gospel. The wisdom of Christianity is shown in its dealing with men as\nthey are. In reaching them at their own level; and the church will best\nshow her wisdom by not trying to be wiser than her Lord. The mountain will\nnot go to Mahomet, and Mahomet must go to the mountain. We have a variety\nof characters to deal with, and must use a variety of means. Gather such a\nband of youth together, and preach to them that they ought to be satisfied\nwith the beauties of nature, or with books, or the like, and you simply\ndrive them the faster from religious influences, and cut every tie between\nyou. Here is one young man who loves books. Let the church give him books.\nLet him know that he receives this high and pure pleasure from the hand of\nChristianity. Here is another that loves pictures. Let Christian art adorn\nthe walls, and Christian liberality pay the price. But here is another of\na lower grade of culture. Not vicious, not specially inclined to\ndissipation, but finding little interest in books or pictures. Throw him\namong these higher influences, of course, for they will insensibly educate\nhim; but if a checker board or a game of dominoes will attract him, and\nkeep him for an evening away from the liquor saloon or the theatre, pray\ntell me why Christian hands should not furnish him these, and a pleasant,\nquiet place in which to play his innocent game, where no profanity greets\nhis ears, where no bar presents its seductions. Another loves music; why\nshould not Christian liberality furnish him the gratification of this\ntaste, and Christian hands and voices join with him in swelling the\nharmony in which his heart delights?\n\nIt is, of course, impossible for me to go into details here, but the\ngeneral principle I think is clear. It seems to me that the only way in\nwhich the church can reach any large proportion of these young men, is by\nthe judicious union of attractive and direct influences; by bringing under\nher own control and using all those appliances which appeal to the social\ninstinct, to the taste, to the intellect, to the necessity for recreation,\nfreeing them from debasing associations, and thereby drawing the\nunconverted youth within the range of direct religious influences. She\nmust be content to keep them out of the hands of evil for the time, if she\ncannot fully commit them to piety. But then, let it be clearly understood\nthat these things are to be under the control of religion. That the\n_salvation_ of the young men is the great end toward which these are only\nmeans. The moment our Young Men\u2019s Christian Associations, to which we must\nchiefly look to carry out this plan, let their rooms become mere lounging\nplaces; the moment the prayer meeting is dropped; the moment the young men\ncease to be on the watch for opportunities to speak the word of religious\ncounsel, that moment they are no longer the allies of the church; they\nwill have become no better than clubs. I want to say to the young men of\nour own association who have so boldly and, thus far, so successfully\ncarried out this theory, you must guard yourselves here. The Troy\nAssociation has drawn the eyes of the church throughout a large part of\nthe country upon itself by its course in this matter. It is thought by\nmany a bold experiment. By many it is openly denounced. Many predict that\nthe result will be the ruin instead of the salvation of young men. If you\nwould silence and convert your opponents, if you would convert the\nwavering into enthusiastic supporters of your policy, guard well the\nreligious side of your work. Infuse the gospel spirit into everything.\nStrictly enforce the rules which Christian prudence lays down for the use\nof means and attractions not distinctively religious. Let the word\n_Christian_ be in the largest letters on your sign. Remember your great\nobject, the duty thrown upon you by the nature of the case, thrown upon\nyou by similarity of age, by congeniality of taste and pursuits, thrown\nupon you by the church, thrown upon you by Christ; the church\u2019s head, is\nthe _salvation_, not the entertainment of the young men. You use these\nappliances to entertain, only that thereby you may bring other forces to\nbear, which may make them Christians, add their power to the various\nchurches of the community, and unite them with you in the work of saving\nothers. The moment you forget this, Ichabod will be written upon your\nbanners, and the cause of Christ receive a blow which all the good you\nhave heretofore accomplished can scarcely heal.\n\nThe practical working of this theory is the best answer to its opponents.\nWe have this answer among us to-day, and I am thankful from my inmost\nheart that the Young Men\u2019s Christian Association is to-day, what it was\nnot two years ago, among the great religious forces of our city. Those who\nhave opposed its later proceedings have some stubborn facts to get round.\nThese facts demonstrate this: that since the Young Men\u2019s Christian\nAssociation inaugurated the policy of _attracting_ youth to its\nhead-quarters, its _distinctively religious force has increased ten-fold_.\nAs one evidence of this, the city missionary says, \u201csince we entered upon\nour present plan, a larger number of young men than ever before have been\nbrought to sympathize with me and my work, are ready to sit up with the\nsick, to visit the needy, to labor for the spiritual good of their\nfellows. Our rooms have resulted in increasing the effective force of\nspiritual co-laborers with me, more than _ten-fold_.\u201d Last month, the\ndaily prayer meeting from twelve to one, was attended by an average of\ntwenty-two daily, mostly young persons, and generally conducted by young\nmen converted under the agency of the association. Some of you remember\nthe old noonday prayer meeting, and to such I need say nothing as to the\ncontrast. The call for this noonday meeting was signed by about fifty\nyoung men. The call itself was drawn and circulated by a young man who,\nsix months ago, came to our city penniless, was made to feel at home in\nour rooms, was furnished with employment by the agencies of the\nassociation, came to the weekly prayer meeting, was converted, and is now\ncounted among our most earnest Christian workers. Young men are being\nconverted through this agency. I give you one instance out of a number. A\nyoung man visited the rooms on Thursday night, and was invited with others\ndown to the young men\u2019s prayer meeting. He went, and was deeply\ninterested, and immediately after the meeting returned to the parlor, and\nwas seen earnestly studying a Bible at one of the reading tables. At the\nhour of closing, some of the Christian young men accompanied him home, and\nurged upon him the subject of personal religion. They followed him up for\ntwo or three days, until he gave his heart to God; and he has since been\nan active co-laborer with the young men in the work of the association.\n\nOne more incident. A young man came to one of the members of this church\nsometime since, saying, \u201cI came to the city two years ago. I was a member\nof a church at home; but here, no man seemed to care for my soul. I have\nneglected my duty, have sought for no church home; but I was attracted to\nyour rooms. I went to the association prayer meeting. My heart was\nstirred, and I became ashamed of my neglect and inconsistency; and now I\nwant to know when your next communion season is, that I may give my letter\nto your pastor.\u201d\n\nI could give you others, but these speak volumes for the value of this\npolicy; and, from the bottom of my heart this morning, I say God bless the\nYoung Men\u2019s Christian Association, and pledge them my poor efforts and\ninfluence, and prayers to help forward the work so nobly begun.\n\nI know not where to stop. My heart is so full that it seems as if I could\nspend the day on this theme. But I must stop, and, in conclusion I say,\nfirst to the church, accept frankly the responsibility which God throws on\nyou in the persons of these young men. You are the appointed agency, the\nproper agency, and the only agency to save and restrain and protect them.\nYou cannot shirk it, especially as city churches. Into these centres of\ntrade and education God pours the young men, and he asks you and me this\nmorning if we are ready for them; if, while business and education are\nmultiplying their facilities, the gospel of Christ, represented by the\nchurches, is multiplying its facilities to make the city the _best place_\nfor the education of young men in virtue. He asks these churches if there\nis nothing significant, no message to her in the concentration of the mass\nof our young men and the mass of Christian culture, organized power, and\nwealth, at one point? Have these things no relation to each other? Yes,\nbrethren, they have. There is no evading it. The finger of Providence\npoints unswervingly to these city churches as the great sources of\nChristian influence upon young men. Let us not fail to hear these voices.\nThe ten thousand appliances of vice, confronting the church with brazen\ndefiance, or with devilish ingenuity and secresy sapping the foundations\nof manly honor and integrity, call to us, deal gently with the young man.\nFathers and mothers, the yearnings of whose hearts you read full easily in\nyour love for your own sons, whose happiness, whose very lives are bound\nup in the honor and prosperity of these sons and brothers, call to us from\ntheir distant homes in quiet villages, and on the open farm lands, call to\nus with agonizing earnestness\u2014deal gently for our sakes with the young\nman. Our community, our country, calls to us. Oh, when I look upon society\nand see what characters ride rampant there, when I look at government and\nsee the awful corruption festering there, when I see how men in power,\nfrom the chief magistrate of the nation down to the humblest postmaster,\nwill sell their souls for party, and betray their country to its enemies\nthrough lust of power, or something else, God knows what; when I see\ndrunkenness holding high carnival in the nation\u2019s capitol, reeling in the\nseat of the President, and retailing its maudlin declamation before a\nsickened country from Washington to Chicago, I can only turn to God and\nthe future. Our only hope is in the work of the Christian church through\nall its agencies, social, ecclesiastical and educational, moulding out of\nthe glorious material so abundantly at its disposal, a band of men who\nshall convert the seats of power into seats of righteousness, and make\ngovernment and purity synonymous terms. The young men themselves appeal to\nus. This mass of intelligence, clear wit, energy, tact, education; these\nnoble brows on which God has set the seal of power; these frank, manly,\ngenerous natures, these enthusiastic impulses, all speak to us, saying,\ndeal gently with us, and teach us by the power of Christian love how to\nuse our power; they speak to us, and warn us against letting so much power\nand energy and culture be turned against us, or left to hang as a drag on\nour wheels. And Christ speaks to the church, Christ who loves these young\nmen, Christ who died for these young men; Christ who from his seat of\nglory at the Father\u2019s right hand, yearns over these young men, Christ is\ncalling to his church to-day, to you, to me, to all the pastors and\ncongregations of this city, \u201c_take care of them, take care of them, deal\ngently for MY sake with the young men_.\u201d\n\nChristian young men, you have heard the call, and in some sort are obeying\nit. In proportion as you have not feared to use the range of gospel\nagencies, in proportion as your love has been kindled for the souls of\nthese youths, and your hands and tongues have been devoted to this end,\nGod has blessed you. Go on as you have begun. Go on, not defiantly, but\nfirmly, boldly, prudently. Dare to be singular, if it will compass your\nend. Take the word of God as your highest authority. Use no means that is\nnot sanctioned by it. Use none of doubtful expediency, but enlarge the\nrange of your agencies. Wrest from the devil attractions which belong to\nyou rather than to him. Leaven them. Separate them from the debasing\nassociations with which sin has identified them, and in the name of Christ\nyour Master, set up your banners, rally your forces and join the churches\nin their work of salvation.\n\nAnd you, unconverted young men, one word to you. For your own souls\u2019 sake,\nfor the sake of your best interests, for the sake of the parents who love\nand hope in you, for the sake of your country, for Christ\u2019s sake, deal\ngently with yourselves. Remember, the only true manhood is Christian\nmanhood. No restraints which the church can throw round you will ensure\nyour safety against temptation; no strength of resolution on your part\nwill keep you pure, if you be not the children of Christ. Come to Jesus.\nCome this very morning. Come and learn of him. He will deal very gently\nwith you. His yoke is easy, his burden is light. The life he gives you is\nfull of the highest impulses and of the purest enjoyments\u2014a living spring\nof water\u2014and the eternal rewards he promises are such as eye hath not\nseen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived.\n\n\n\n\n\nTHOUGHTS FOR THE CLERGY ON THE AMUSEMENT QUESTION.\n\n\nAs pastors, we can no longer evade this question. Our people are hearing,\nreading, and being influenced by discussions of the subject in various\nquarters. Obviously, we must not let our congregations form their\nconclusions on so important a matter, independently of their chosen\nspiritual guides. The word of each pastor will carry with it, in most\ncases, a weight which can attach to no other\u2019s word. Let us see to it that\nwe separate ourselves, as much as possible, from prejudice in our\nexamination of this question. Let us face the facts fairly, and inquire\nwhat provision is furnished by the gospel to meet them. We have nothing to\ndo with any other consideration. Whether the gospel principles and methods\napplicable to this case appear to us safe or unsafe, we have no right to\nadvocate any other. We have no right to be silent.\n\nWhat are the facts?\n\n1. _The youth, as a class, are vitally important to the church and to the\nstate._ Our work as Christian teachers reaches beyond our own generation.\nWe owe to the future the proper training of the men and women who are to\nmould its destinies. The present youth are the future leaders of church\nand state. How they shall lead them, depends very much upon us. These\ntruths are self-evident.\n\n2. _They are exposed to peculiar dangers calling for special effort on\ntheir behalf._\n\nSpecial efforts are being made to ruin them. The self-interest of vice is\ninterested in this work; for to youth its appliances look chiefly for\nsupport. As one has happily expressed it, \u201cAge has few passions to which\nprofligacy can appeal; and the proselytism of decrepitude and years are\nenlistments of little value.\u201d The withdrawal of young men from the rolls\nof the intemperate and licentious, would leave two-thirds of the drinking\nsaloons and brothels bankrupt. The passions to which these appliances\nappeal are such as are most active and dangerous in youth. They offer the\nfreedom and license which youth loves. They throw off the shackles which\nyouth hates. Our cities and villages swarm with traps set expressly for\nthem. Thousands are freely expended to invest the bar room and the\ngambling hall with the cozy attractions of the parlor. The harlot\u2019s palace\nopens wide its doors. The public ball room displays its fascinations.\nDissipation draws round itself the attractions of wealth and taste and\nfashion, and in its splendid club rooms secures for itself the pleasures\nwhich expediency forbids it to seek more publicly. Vice literally flaunts\nits banners in the face of the public. But a few days since I saw from my\nwindow a banner carried through the streets, blazoned with the name and\nattractions of one of the vilest fashionable groggeries in the city, and\npreceded by the music of a drum and fife. The snug retreat, known only to\nthe initiated few, where licentiousness and drunkenness are secluded, and\nthousands lost and won, was never more popular than now. Practiced decoys\nlie in wait for the daughters of our families, and the whirl of general\nsociety in which so many of them, at a tender age, are madly revolving\nnight after night, is no poor preparation for the fatal success of these\nwiles. Young girls, who come from quiet country homes to seek employment,\ncast adrift on these surging tides of life without a friend or an adviser,\nreadily fall victims to the wiles of young seducers whose social position\nensures their security. In a certain city, I was informed not long since,\nof one keeper of a fashionable brothel who had removed her trade, because\nit was too largely usurped by victims of this class to render it any\nlonger profitable. Young men, too, are coming to the cities in crowds, to\nengage in business or study. They must have society and recreation; and\nthe votaries of vice are sparing neither pains nor expense to give them\nabundance of both, fraught with ruin to soul and body.\n\nWithout going outside of our special sphere as pastors, viewing this\nsubject solely with reference to the youth of our congregations, as, in\ncommon with others subjected to these and other temptations, _what ought\nto be our influence in arresting and counteracting these evils_?\n\nIt ought to be second to none but parental influence. If the name pastor\nmean anything, our position as the chosen religious teachers of\ncongregations ought to give us free access to every household in our\nflocks, and the strongest influence over the youth whose moral training we\ndirectly or indirectly shape. We ought to be not only _respected_ and\n_reverenced_, but so loved as to be the familiar advisers and confidants\nof the youth of our charges. Our word ought, next to the parents\u2019, to have\nweight in turning them from improper courses and associations, and in\nkeeping them from such. Moreover, our influence ought not to be merely\nrestrictive and admonitory. We should be sufficiently in sympathy with\nthem, familiar enough with the demands of their age and with the best\nmeans of satisfying them, to be able to offer positive suggestions\nrespecting their employments, recreations, society, reading, and the like.\nIf we sustain proper relations to the youth of our charges, they will be\nas likely to refer such questions to us, as matters of theology or\npractical morality.\n\nNow, the question of the amusements of our youth is as good a test\nquestion in this matter as we need ask. _What, then, is the influence of\nthe clergy at large in regulating the diversions of the youth?_\n\nI appeal to the experience of the mass of ministers, not with the few\n_special friends_ and admirers, which most of them have among the young\npeople of their congregations, but with the _mass of the youth_. I appeal\nto those judicious, farseeing Christians, who are wont to observe\ncarefully the tendencies of society, _if this influence is not a\ncomparative nullity_. In a question which, perhaps, as much as any other,\nconcerns the welfare of our youth, which has the most vital relations to\nthe attractions of home, which will enter, whether we may think it right\nor not, into the considerations which influence the choice or rejection of\na religious life; at a point which the ministers of vice are fortifying\nmost strongly, wresting the best diversions to themselves, striving to\nmake them peculiarly their own, and to invest them permanently with\nassociations which shall exclude them from Christian homes; here, I say,\nthe Christian church, the appointed regulator and instructor in the ethics\nof amusement, is, to a great extent, _at open issue with her own\nintelligent youth, and practically powerless to execute her own decrees_.\n\nIt is well for us as ministers, to look this fact squarely in the face,\nand to call things by their right names. How many pastors are in the\nconfidence of their youth with respect to the amusements of the latter? Is\nnot the fact rather that there is a tacit antagonism recognized between\nthe youth and the clergy on this subject, an antagonism growing, too,\nevery year less tacit and more avowed? Can it be denied that a very large\nproportion of our youth regard their ministers as the foes to recreation,\nand would sooner think of consulting them on any subject than on this? Is\nit not the fact that while presbyteries and conferences and conventions\npass long and stringent resolutions on the subject of dancing and on the\nuse of cards and billiards, multitudes of Christian families practice\ndancing; scores of them may be found playing whist at their own firesides,\nand scores more with their billiard rooms fitted up in their own houses?\nIt will not answer to say that those who practice these things are\nbackslidden in heart and worldly minded, and that, if they were truly\nChrist\u2019s children, they would neither practice nor desire them. This is\nbegging the whole question at issue, and moreover is flatly contradicted\nby facts. Many of those who engage in these recreations are among the most\ndevoted, enlightened, faithful members and even ministers of our churches.\nIs it not the fact, again, that the pastors of these individuals would be\nvery much at a loss to administer discipline in such cases? Do they not\nknow that any attempt at authoritative interference would be regarded as\ntrenching upon individual rights of conscience, and would send scores of\nactive and faithful members to other communions? The truth is, and there\nis no shirking it, that, in the cities especially, in the largest and most\npowerful churches, the clergy are practically brought to a stand in this\nmatter. They do not and cannot control it. A vast mass of enlightened\nChristian sentiment is against their attempts to enforce the traditional\nchurch doctrines on this subject. Their people pay little or no heed to\nthe official utterances of church assemblies. Many of them treat them with\nridicule. There is no denying these facts. Hundreds of pastors are\npainfully impressed with them. The church\u2019s position in this matter is\nmost humiliating.\n\nWhat then is the course of the clergy?\n\nSome of them are more than half persuaded that the more liberal view of\ntheir people is correct. They fully sympathize, perhaps, with that view,\nyet they remain silent. They cannot conscientiously reprove; they refuse\nto come boldly forward and define their position for fear of awakening\nprejudice, or for fear their views may be misunderstood or misconstrued.\nIn short they think it is not safe. And yet, all the while, the initiated\nin the congregation know pretty well the general drift of their minister\u2019s\nsentiments; that, though he says little, he winks a tacit encouragement to\nmany indulgences which far over-step the bounds of ancient orthodoxy. But\nis _this_ safe? Is it safe or honorable for the church to be impotent to\ncarry out her own dogmas? Is it safe for her to be under the charge of\ninconsistency from the world because her statute books and the practice of\nher members are at open variance? Is it safe for the views of an\ninfluential Christian teacher to be known only generally and vaguely, that\nhis church and the world may draw undue license therefrom? If he is\nconvinced that the church has been mistaken in this matter, and has in\npast years committed herself to undue stringency, is it safe to let the\nerror remain untouched, and going on working its pernicious consequences?\nIf the gospel teaches a larger liberty, a broader conception of Christian\nliving and Christian enjoyment than the church has preached, has that\nminister who conscientiously believes the fact any right to withhold the\ntruth because he deems it unsafe, and to let a falsehood (as he believes)\ngain currency and power, and forfeit moreover the attraction presented to\na sinful world by his more cheering and liberal conception of Christ\u2019s\nteachings? Not safe! Will not God take care of his truth? Doubtless men\nwill misconstrue it. Doubtless they will wrest the preaching of gospel\nliberty to the confirmation of worldly license. But the greater the danger\nof this, the more reason why the truth, the _whole truth_, should be\nproclaimed loudly, boldly, distinctly, frequently. When the water is first\nlet into a reservoir, it is apt to be very muddy; but that is no reason\nwhy the reservoir should remain dry forever. The water will settle by and\nby, and the whole people be refreshed. If there is truth in these more\nliberal views of amusement, it is in vain for religious newspapers to\nshirk the discussion of the question. It is in vain for influential\nministers to beg young men\u2019s Christian conventions not to raise it. It is\nin vain for the pulpit to preserve a discreet silence. The thing will out.\nThe truth will stay swathed in no cave in the rock. The things that have\nbeen spoken in the ear in closets will be proclaimed upon the house tops.\nThe Christian public will the sooner attain correct views on this subject\nthrough free discussion. If the thing be not of God, it will sooner come\nto nought through this process than through any other. But by their love\nfor souls, and by their sworn loyalty to God and truth, let the clergy run\nthe sword of the Spirit through and through this matter, that the world\nmay know the truth and detect the falsehood.\n\nIt is confessed by some that they have given the subject no attention.\nThey have accepted the traditions of the church as they found them, have\npreached and have tried to enforce them, or else have settled down upon\nthe assumption that the matter is of minor importance. I simply ask if\nthis is justifiable in view of the facts; in view of the contradictory\nposition of the church on this subject; in view of the important part\nwhich amusements must play in the education of youth; in view of their\ngreat and patent abuses; in view of the point urged in these discourses\nthat many of the popular diversions of the day may be wrested from the\ndevil\u2019s hands and turned to good purpose in keeping the young from evil\ninfluences and associations?\n\nSome _positively refuse_ to consider the question under any new aspect. It\nis settled, once and for all. The books are balanced, shut and sealed. The\nwisdom of a past generation exhausted the question. Its dictum is to be\nreceived as gospel. Little needs to be said here. Such declarations demand\nthe utmost stretch of Christian charity. They betray an ignorance which,\nin a popular teacher, is unpardonable, and a blind acquiescence in the\nconclusions of the past which is pitiable.\n\nThe truth, moreover, is not promoted, _in any direction_, by abusing those\nof more liberal views on this question. The man who conscientiously\nbelieves them wrong, and boldly says so, and does not simply declaim\nagainst them but opposes them by fair argument drawn from scripture, is to\nbe honored. I would there were more such. But it will not in the least\ntend to conciliate favor for the more stringent aspect of the question,\nfor its advocates to cast slurs upon the sincerity and piety of those who\ndiffer from them, to announce them as corrupters of youth, enemies of the\nchurch, underminers of pure religion, and the like. The day for this has\ngone by. The best men may differ even on this question, which some think\nso firmly settled; and the liberal view of this subject is supported by\ntoo many shining names in the Christian ministry, by too large a mass of\nChristian devotion and consistency and learning and intelligence, to\nentitle such assertions to any notice whatever. The want of Christian\ncharity which leads one public teacher to asperse his brother\u2019s Christian\nconsistency and purity of motive upon such grounds, is at least as\nreprehensible as the holding of liberal sentiments on dancing or\nbilliards.\n\nOnce more. The pulpit, in some places, though alive to the importance of\nthe subject, is holding sternly by its old, stringent views. It is laying\ndown the law authoritatively, decrying as sinful all but a very limited\nallowance of amusements.\n\nThe results of this policy so long and so thoroughly tried, are before us.\nWith all this preaching, the prevalence and variety of amusements steadily\nincreases. Year after year such utterances of the pulpit fall with less\nweight. Year after year the character and standing of those who openly set\nthem at defiance renders it more and more difficult to back them by\ndiscipline. The clergy are not gaining ground with the youth. Hundreds of\nthe latter, repelled by this teaching, are tearing themselves away from\nthe churches of their fathers, to unite with folds where a more liberal\ngospel is preached. A prominent merchant of the Methodist church, a man\nwhose name is known in both hemispheres, wrote me, not more than a month\nago, \u201cthe teachings of my own church on this subject have had the effect\nto drive nearly my whole family into the Protestant Episcopal church.\u201d\n\nIt is sometimes said: \u201cLet them go. We are better without such. We do not\nwant members who will not relinquish these suspected amusements. We do not\nwant half way Christians, conformed to the world, trying to hold fast to\npleasure and secure heaven at the same time.\u201d But such statements do not\nfairly represent the case. Again, the whole question is begged. Many of\nthose who refuse to conform to the churches dicta on these subjects care\nnothing whatever for the amusements in question. The matter is entirely\none of principle. They leave our churches, not because conscience is\nrelaxed, but because it is acutely sensitive, and because they would keep\nit unsullied. The above method of putting the case assumes that all the\nconscience is on one side; that, while it operates strongly to condemn, it\ncannot possibly operate to approve. Many of these persons resort to other\ncommunions, because they are too honest to compromise with conscience;\nbecause they cannot see these questions in the light in which their own\nchurches present them; and rather than go to God\u2019s altars with even an\nimplied falsehood upon their consciences, or embrace the alternative of\nremaining outside of Christ\u2019s fold, they will sever life-long ties,\nentwined with some of their dearest and tenderest recollections, and go\nalone with their conscience and their God to altars where no such tests\nare imposed. And in these new associations they bear themselves with all\nChristian fidelity. They bring forth rich fruits of grace. They walk\nhumbly and consistently with God. They are exemplary fathers and mothers.\nThey are liberal in their gifts to the cause of Christ, and active in\npromoting schemes to advance it. Our churches have been driving away such\nmen and women as these who would have been their ornaments and bulwarks,\nbecause they have sought unduly to constrain Christian conscience on these\nsubjects.\n\nWorse than this. This course is keeping youth away from _all_ church\ncommunions; away from Christ. Few pastors have not received this answer,\nwhen urging young persons to come to the Savior. \u201cIf I become a Christian,\nI must be very solemn. I must repress my lightness of heart. I must\nrelinquish all my cherished enjoyments.\u201d Admit that these views are\ngreatly exaggerated, as doubtless they are, the question forces itself\nupon us, _why do we meet such views so often_? Why are they so generally\nprevalent among our youth? Why does the immense amount of preaching,\nforcible, eloquent preaching, on the comforts and joys of a Christian life\nproduce, seemingly, so little impression upon them? Why is it that they\npersist in regarding _Christian_ joy as a sickly, stunted thing, and\nreligion as the enemy of all light and hilarity and taste and freedom?\n\nIs all this result of native depravity? I cannot believe it. I cannot\ndissociate a large measure of this most lamentable result from the old\nteaching and practice of the church on the subject of recreation. It is of\nno use to preach to ardent, active youth, that Christianity is a religion\nof joy, unless they see some joy brought out of it besides mere smiles and\na class of recreations which to them as a class are insipid. To them\n_Christian_ cheerfulness appeals as being less cheerful than any other\nkind; as a sort of mild, repressed gayety, from which their quick\nsensibilities and stirring blood revolts. They feel that in the church\nthey must be cheerful only in the way the church directs. Those ministers,\nthey reason, can be very cheerful, and even laugh uproariously over a\ndiscussion on decrees; but what do I care for decrees? Those elderly\nChristians can be cheerful in a quiet conversation on politics or on the\nchurch. But if I want to be cheerful in a merry dance in proper society\nand at proper hours, if I want to go to my friend\u2019s billiard table and\nplay a quiet game, if I want to make merry over a few hits of backgammon,\nor give my energy full vent in rolling ten-pins for an hour, I am a\nheathen and a publican and unfit for the society of Christians.\n\nAs already observed, these views are doubtless greatly exaggerated by the\nyoung. Yet does not the state of the case warrant us in asking carefully\nand prayerfully if there is no connection between the stringent dogmas of\nthe church on the subject of recreation, and the general suspicion of\nreligion which characterizes the mass of unconverted youth?\n\nBe this as it may, the case is narrowed down to this. Of all the subjects\nnaturally under the church\u2019s supervision, there is not one in which her\ninfluence is less than in this. She neither represses nor regulates. One\nof two courses she must pursue if she would escape the stigma of\nimpotency. Either she must reassert her old dogmas, and back them by the\nseverest discipline, or she must modify them, and openly commit herself to\na larger liberty. Is she prepared for the first of these courses? Is she\nprepared, first of all, to defend it from God\u2019s Word. Every other defense\nis worthless here. Is she ready to cut off remorselessly the man or the\nwoman, the youth or the maid who dances, however properly and modestly? Is\nshe ready to expel or suspend every minister who shall roll a ten-pin\nball, or while away an hour with chess or backgammon? Is she ready to lay\nviolent hands upon every member who fingers a card or handles a cue, or\nstrikes a croquet ball? If so, I tremble for the results of the\nexperiment. She will pause before she undertakes this course. Or will she\nopenly confess to undue stringency in the past, and write a new motto upon\nher banners\u2014\u201cMore abundant life?\u201d Here what seems a formidable objection\nis often preferred with great confidence. Grant that these more liberal\nviews are correct, still public sentiment is not yet such as to make it\nsafe to promulgate them. The argument, both in its character and result,\nvery strongly resembles that which used to be such a favorite with the\nadvocates of slavery. The negro is not fit for freedom. It recoiled on\nthose who advanced it. Who made the negro unfit for freedom but those who\nheld him in bondage until his imbruted nature ceased to prize or to desire\nliberty? Similarly I say, if there is such a state of public sentiment,\n_why is it so?_ How came this thing there? Who is responsible for a state\nof sentiment in the church which makes it inexpedient to declare the plain\nteachings of Christ on _any_ subject? There can be but one answer. The\nresponsibility lies between the church and the world, and the world surely\nhas not done it. The church herself has made this sentiment, has created\nthe factitious conscience, has awakened the morbid sensibility, by\npreaching on this subject a theory which shrivels at the touch of Christ,\nand which she has clearly shown her inability to carry into practice. And\nthe fact that such a sentiment exists, so far from calling for silence, is\nthe strongest of all reasons why the church should speak out with a voice\nof thunder, and set herself right with the vast mass of conscience which\nshe so powerfully influences.\n\nWould you then, says one, free this matter entirely from the restraints of\nthe church? By no means. On the contrary, I am calling upon the church to\nregain influence which she has forfeited. I am pleading for a _regulation_\nof these things by the church which does not now exist. Indulgence is\ngoing too far in the church itself. But from her present stand-point on\nthis question, the church is, from the very nature of the case, almost\npowerless to regulate. Assuming that the recreations in question are evil\nand only evil, she _must not_ regulate. That would be compromising. She\nmust _crush_. Hence the matter resolves itself into a war of extermination\non both sides. Either these forms of amusement must be exterminated from\nthe church, or they must get the upper hand of the church\u2019s statutes, in\nwhich case the church has no law for them. She has only provided for\ndestroying them; and failing in this, must stand and see them run riot in\nher very courts.\n\nI would not have the church compromise one hair\u2019s-breadth with sin. Better\nthat she should err in excessive stringency. But I would have her gain a\nnew vantage ground _by being simply true_, and not proclaiming unmixed\nevil, where evil and good are blended in liberal proportions. By not\nundertaking the task of _extermination_, where her duty is that of\n_discrimination_. The moment she begins upon the principle of _analyzing_\nthese mixed elements, casting only the bad away, and using, developing and\nenjoying the good, that moment she mounts to a point from which she can\nregulate _any_ matter which falls under her jurisdiction. And to be thus\ntrue, she must go direct to Christ. His word and example are conclusive,\nand we may safely preach what we find there. Do we find any such principle\nof repression as the church has preached for years past? No; we find abuse\ncondemned, and use allowed and approved. The Savior is at the hilarious\nmerry-making of the marriage, contributing to the festivity. His own\nparable is on record, bidding men put the gospel into all the forms and\ndevelopments of life, to refine and fit them for human enjoyment. The long\nlist of exceptions with which men are forbidden to bring the gospel leaven\ninto contact has been added by men, not by Christ. He was condemned for\nthe very same reason for which hundreds condemn a so called liberal\nChristian to-day; because he used the world which other men used, and\nthought it not necessary to abstain from use because others abused. These\nteachings are there if anything is there. They are for all time. The\nconditions of no age can justify Christians in refusing to preach and to\napply them just as they stand. Nine-tenths of the really sinful indulgence\nover which the church is mourning to-day, is simply because of the failure\nto do this faithfully. Because good men have been startled by the\nmagnitude and power of evil, and have been too timid to meet it with\nmethods which seemed so slow, and which even gave room for the charge of\ncompromise. In being wiser than her Lord, the church has drawn the reins\ntoo tightly, and the results speak for themselves. Much is said about\nexpediency; and Paul\u2019s words about meat offending his brother, have been\nsaddled with more burdens than any ten other passages of scripture; but\nafter all, the result proves simply this, that it is always most expedient\nto follow Christ implicitly.\n\nI would, moreover, that the church in dealing with this question, would\nconsent to meddle less with its details, and leave them more where they\nproperly belong, with the individual conscience. No one man can decide\nthese things for another. No man has a right to insist that his standard\nof expediency shall be his brother\u2019s. Where God\u2019s law is explicit, both\nare bound alike. When it throws a decision upon conscience, neither has a\nright to complain if the paths diverge. Both paths may not be right, but\nto his own Master shall each traveler stand or fall.\n\nThe church, indeed, can do better than to busy herself with such details,\nor, to speak more correctly, she can deal with them much more successfully\nby shifting her point of power from the circumference to the centre. Her\nduty in this case will be very much simplified and lightened, if she will\ngive more attention to the _springs_ of Christian life, to the conformity\nof the _heart_ to the mind and will of Christ, to fostering an\nenthusiastic devotion to him. Then these details and distinctions will\nmostly take care of themselves. The church has lacked faith in the\nregulative power of this principle, and has sought to supply its assumed\ndefects by innumerable special provisions; and the consequent tendency of\nthis course has been to fetter Christian individuality, and to insist that\nlove to Christ should express itself only in such modes as the church\nmight prescribe. Hence the sentiment often expressed, a true Christian\nwill have no taste for these things. But here again the whole question is\nbegged. You do not know, you cannot know what affinities a Christian life\nmay develop. All that you can with any confidence assert is the general\nfact that he will love all that is good, acceptable, perfect, and hate all\nthat is essentially evil. As to other matters, things whose moral value\narises entirely from circumstances, a love to Christ as sincere and as\nardent as yours, may lead him in a direction the very opposite of yours.\nTherefore it will be more in the interest of a true Christian\nindividuality, of a higher and more generous Christian manhood, for the\nchurch to throw the soul more on its love to Christ as the great\nregulative principle. Let her probe the hearts committed to her, deeply\nfor this. Let her strengthen this sentiment by every possible safeguard.\nLet her urge her members earnestly to higher attainments in this, and her\ndifficulties in the regulation of the amusement question, and of every\nsimilar question will, in a great degree, disappear. Her courts will be\nfull of the richest developments of grace, the most varied activities, the\nmost glorious examples of that wondrous unity in diversity which\nChristianity alone displays.\n\nMight not the church, moreover, profitably ask herself if there be not a\npositive duty toward these much abused things, as well as a privilege of\nletting them alone? If a thing has good in it, does Christ teach that our\nduty to it is discharged in letting it alone for the sake of the evil\nmixed with it? That is the easier way, I know. It is a good deal easier to\nthrow overboard good and evil together, than to separate them carefully\nand to develop the good into a power. But if easier, is it better? I\ncannot avoid quoting just here the exquisite words of Trench on the\nMarriage at Cana, as bringing out clearly our Savior\u2019s example on this\npoint: \u201cWe need not wonder to find the Lord of life at that festival; for\nhe came to sanctify all life, its times of joy, as its times of sorrow;\n_and all experience tells us that it is times of gladness, such as this\nwas now, which especially need __ such a sanctifying power, such a\npresence of the Lord_. In times of sorrow the sense of God\u2019s presence\ncomes most naturally out; in these it is in danger to be forgotten. He was\nthere, and by his presence struck the key-note to the whole future tenor\nof his ministry. He should not be as another Baptist, to withdraw himself\nfrom the common paths of men, a preacher in the wilderness; but his should\nbe at once a harder and a higher task, to mingle with and purify the\ncommon life of men, to witness for and bring out the glory which was\nhidden in its every relation.\u201d To the same purpose are the pertinent words\nof Alford: \u201cTo endeavor to evade the work which he has appointed for each\nman, by refusing the bounty to save the trouble of seeking the grace, is\nan attempt which must ever end in degradation of the individual motives\nand in social demoralization, whatever present apparent effects may follow\nits first promulgation.\u201d\n\n\u201cA terrible responsibility you are taking on yourself,\u201d say some to the\nwriter. \u201cYouth are going to perdition on your authority, pleading your\nword and example as a Christian minister.\u201d I have only to say I fear not\nto meet such before the highest of all tribunals. If any man shall, after\ncarefully reading these four discourses, say that they give his worldly\nheart full license to indulge its will, I tell him to his face, he is\neither a fool or a hypocrite. Not proudly, I trust, but in humble reliance\nupon him for whose sake every line has been penned, I bow my shoulders to\nevery morsel of responsibility which the utterance of these truths\ninvolves. No youth will go to perdition on their authority. If he shall\ninfer the right to abuse from a plea for moderate Christian use, his\nperdition be on his own head. The truth I have uttered shall condemn him.\nIf I err, God will bring this thing to nought: and I, who have erred in\ngood faith, and with an honest conscience, shall be dealt with by a tender\nSavior as lovingly and leniently as I believe he will deal with those who,\nwith equal sincerity and zeal, may possibly have erred in so presenting to\nyouth a gospel of light and joy and freedom, as to make some of them\nprefer the risk of perdition to embracing it.","title":"Amusement: A Force in Christian Training","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":27400}