VERSE 1. And in the second year of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams, wherewith his spirit was troubled, and his sleep brake from him.
There had been some perplexity over this date. Daniel was carried captive in the first year of Nebuchadnezzar. For three years he was placed under instructors, during which time he would not, of course, be reckoned among the wise men of the kingdom, nor take part in public affairs. Yet in the second year of Nebuchadnezzar the transactions recorded in this chapter took place. The explanation lies in the fact that Nebuchadnezzar reigned for two years conjointly with his father Nabopolassar. From this point the Jews reckoned; while the Chaldeans reckoned from the time he commenced to reign alone, on the death of his father. Hence, the year here mentioned was the second year of his reign, according to the Chaldean reckoning, but the fourth, according to the Jewish. It thus appears that even the next year after Daniel had completed his preparation to participate in the affairs of the Chaldean Empire, the providence of God brought him into sudden and wonderful notoriety throughout all the kingdom.
VERSE 2. Then the king commanded to call the magicians, and the astrologers, and the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans, for to show the king his dreams. So they came and stood before the king.
The magicians were such as practiced magic, using the term in its bad sense; that is, practiced all the superstitious rites and ceremonies of fortune-tellers, casters of nativities, &c. Astrologers were men who pretended to foretell future events by the study of the stars. The science, or the superstition, of astrology, was extensively cultivated by the eastern nations of antiquity. Sorcerers were such as pretended to hold communication with the dead. In this sense, we believe it is always used in the Scriptures. Modern Spiritualism is simply ancient heathen sorcery revived. The Chaldeans here mentioned were a sect of philosophers similar to the magicians and astrologers, who made physic, divinations, &c., their study. All these sects or professions abounded in Babylon. The end aimed at by each was the same, namely, the explaining of mysteries, and the foretelling of future events, the principal difference between them being the means by which they sought to accomplish their object. The king’s difficulty lay equally within the province of each to explain; hence he summoned them all. With the king it was an important matter. He was greatly troubled, and hence concentrated upon the solution of his perplexity the whole wisdom of his realm.
VERSES 3, 4. And the king said unto them, I have dreamed a dream, and my spirit was troubled to know the dream. Then spake the Chaldeans to the king in Syriac, O King, live forever; tell thy servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation.
Whatever else the ancient magicians and astrologers may have been deficient in, they seemed to have thoroughly schooled themselves in the art of drawing out sufficient information to form a basis for some shrewd calculation, or of framing their answers in so ambiguous a manner that they would be equally applicable, let the event turn either way. In the present case, true to their cunning instincts, they called upon the king to make known to them his dream. If they could get full information respecting this, they could easily agree on some interpretation which would not endanger their reputation. They addressed themselves to the king in Syriac, a dialect of the Chaldean language which was used by the educated and polished classes. From this point to the end of chapter 7, the record continues in Chaldee.
VERSES 5–13. The king answered and said to the Chaldeans, The thing is gone from me; if ye will not make known unto me the dream, with the interpretation thereof, ye shall be cut in pieces, and your houses shall be made a dunghill. But if ye show the dream, and the interpretation thereof, ye shall receive of me gifts and rewards and great honor; therefore show me the dream, and the interpretation thereof. They answered again and said, Let the king tell his servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation of it. The king answered and said, I know of certainty that ye would gain the time, because ye see the thing is gone from me. But if ye will not make known unto me the dream, there is but one decree for you; for ye have prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before me, till the time be changed; therefore tell me the dream, and I shall know that ye can show me the interpretation thereof. The Chaldeans answered before the king, and said, There is not a man upon the earth that can show the king’s matter; therefore there is no king, lord, nor ruler, that asked such things at any magician, or astrologer, or Chaldean. And it is a rare thing that the king requireth, and there is none other that can show it before the king, except the gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh. For this cause the king was angry and very furious, and commanded to destroy all the wise men of Babylon. And the decree went forth that the wise men should be slain; and they sought Daniel and his fellows to be slain.
These verses contain the record of the desperate struggle between the wise men, so-called, and the king, the former seeking some avenue for escape, seeing they were caught on their own ground, and the latter determined that they should make known his dream, which was no more than their profession would warrant him in demanding. Some have severely censured Nebuchadnezzar in this matter, as acting the part of a heartless, unreasonable tyrant. But what did these magicians profess to be able to do?45To reveal hidden things; to foretell future events; to make known mysteries entirely beyond human foresight and penetration; and to do this by the aid of supernatural agencies. If then their claim was worth anything, could they not make known to the king what he had dreamed? They certainly could. And if they were able, knowing the dream, to give a reliable interpretation thereof, would they not also be able to make known the dream itself when it had gone from the king? Certainly, if there was any virtue in their pretended intercourse with the other world. There was therefore nothing unjust in Nebuchadnezzar’s demand that they should make known his dream. And when they declared, verse 11, that none but the gods whose dwelling was not with flesh could make known the king’s matter, it was a tacit acknowledgment that they had no communication with these gods, and knew nothing beyond what human wisdom and discernment could reveal. For this cause, the king was angry and very furious. He saw that he and all his people were being made the victims of deception. He accused them, verse 9, of endeavoring to dally along till the “time be changed,” or till the force of the matter had so passed from his mind that his anger at their duplicity should abate, and he either recall the dream himself, or be unconsciously whether it be made known and interpreted or not. And while we cannot justify the extreme measures to which he resorted, dooming them to death, and their houses to destruction, we can but feel a hearty sympathy with him in his condemnation of a class of miserable impostors. The severity of his sentence was more owing to the customs of those times, than to any malignity on the part of the king. Yet it was a bold and desperate step. Consider who these were who thus incurred the wrath of the king. They were numerous, opulent, and influential sects. Moreover, they were the learned and cultivated classes of those times; yet the king was not so wedded to his false religion as to spare it even with all this influence in its favor. If the system was one of fraud and imposition, it must fall, however high its votaries might stand in numbers or position, or however many of them might be involved in its ruin. The king would be no party to dishonesty or deception.
VERSES 14–18. Then Daniel answered with counsel and wisdom to Arioch the captain of the king’s guard, which was gone forth to slay the wise men of Babylon. He answered and said to Arioch the king’s captain, Why is the decree so hasty from the king? Then Arioch made the thing known to Daniel. Then Daniel went in, and desired of the king that he would give him time, and that he would show the king the interpretation. Then Daniel went to his house, and made the thing known to Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, his companions; that they would desire mercies of the God of Heaven concerning this secret; that Daniel and his fellows should not perish with the rest of the wise men of Babylon.
In this narrative we see the providence of God working in several remarkable particulars. 1. It was providential that the dream of the king should leave such a powerful impression upon him as to raise him to the greatest height of anxiety, and yet the thing itself be held from his mind. This led to the complete exposure of the false system of the magicians, &c.; for when put to the test to make known the dream, it was found that they were unable to do what their profession made incumbent on them. 2. It was remarkable that Daniel and his companions, so lately pronounced by the king ten times better than all his magicians and astrologers, should not sooner have been consulted, or rather should not have been consulted at all, in this matter. But there was a providence in this. Just as the dream was held from the king, so he was unaccountably held from appealing to Daniel for a solution of his mystery. For had he called on Daniel at first, and had he at once made known the matter, the magicians would not have been brought to the test. But God would let the heathen systems of the Chaldeans have the first chance. He would let them try and ignominiously fail, and confess their utter incompetency, even under the penalty of death, that they might be the better prepared to acknowledge his hand when he should finally reach it down in behalf of his captive servants, and for the honor of his own name. 3. It appears that the first intimation Daniel had of the matter was the presence of the executioners, come for his arrest. His own life being thus at stake, he would be led to seek the Lord with all his heart till he should work for their deliverance. 4. Daniel gains his request of the king for time to solve the matter; a privilege which probably none of the magicians could have secured, as the king had already accused them of speaking lying and corrupt words, and of seeking to gain time for this very purpose.
(To be Continued.) U. S.
THE TEACHINGS OF PAUL.—CONTINUED
By C. W. Stone
Is the Soul Immortal?—No. 17.
THE TEACHINGS OF PAUL.—CONTINUED.
ANOTHER reason for thinking that Paul did not believe in the immortal-soul theory is that he preached the resurrection. Both doctrines cannot be true. The immaterialist says that the body is a clog, that the spirit, the deathless soul, when freed from its prison house, the body, enters at once upon a higher life, and is capable of higher enjoyments. If this is true, why have a resurrection? Why call those pure spirits from Heaven, raise that old body, and thrust them into it again, when they are so much better off without it? No man would thank God for a resurrection so much worse than useless.
But the resurrection is no such miserable farce as that. It is something very desirable. It is the great step in the fulfillment of God's “promises” to the prophets, the event in which the hope of the true church centers. Let us prove this by Paul. In Heb. 11 he speaks of Abel, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, and others; and he says, “These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off.” Verse 40 indicates that they have not received them yet, and will not receive them until we are ready to join with them. These promises embraced eternal life and the earth for an inheritance. Gen. 22 : 17, 18 ; 26 : 4 ; Isa. 66 : 22, 24 ; Matt. 5 : 5. As they died not having received the promises, the first step in the fulfillment of God's promises must be the resurrection.
In Acts 26, in his speech before Agrippa, Paul says, “and now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers; unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night hope to come. For which hope's sake, King Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews. Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead?”
Here we see that this hope for which Paul was imprisoned was a hope in the resurrection. He had been preaching it, affirming that Jesus had been raised from the dead, Acts 25 : 19, and he says the twelve tribes hope to come to that promise. Paul says that he was willing to lose all things in this world if he might by any means attain unto the resurrection of the dead. Phil. 3 : 8–11. He regarded it as something of very great importance, which it would not be, were the soul capable of living without the body, and did it go to Heaven at death.
Finally, the imperative necessity of a resurrection in order to realize the promises is so clearly set forth in 1 Cor. 15 that the question of the condition of man in death is fairly settled thereby. Paul says, “For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised; and if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.”
Yes, if there is no resurrection from the dead, the righteous ones are lost. This proves conclusively that the righteous do not go to be with Christ at death, for if they did they would be just as well off without a resurrection as with one, and better too, according to the popular theory; but Paul says that if the dead rise not, even those who sleep in Jesus are lost. The only way to understand this is that they are DEAD, and then we can see why they are eternally lost without a resurrection.
The points we have endeavored to sustain in this number and our last are these:—
1. That Paul teaches that men do not go to Heaven at death.
Reasons. (a) Paul teaches that the Judgment is future, thus rendering it impossible to dispose of cases at death. (b) He teaches that in the Judgment day, one class to be judged are dead. These cannot be in Heaven; and it is evident that the other class, the quick, or living, are those living on the earth during the Judgment, just before the coming of Christ.
2. Paul declares that even the righteous who die cannot get to Heaven without a resurrection; for if the dead rise not, they are perished.
On this point, he has given us the case of David to illustrate; and Paul and Peter establish the fact that David is yet in his grave.
C. W. STONE.
The Two Laws.
By Dudley Marvin Canright
MANY claim that the law of God has been abolished. They can read in many passages that a law has been done away. Thus they claim that there was but one law in the Old Testament, hence it has all gone by the board. If there was but one law, their argument is sound. But this is a mistake. There are two laws brought to view in the Old Testament. 1. There is the law of God, the ten commandments. This was spoken by God himself, written with his own finger, on tables of stone, and placed in the ark. See Deut. 12:13; Ex. 24:12; Deut. 10:1–5. 2. The law of Moses. Moses himself spoke this law to the people, wrote it himself in a book and placed it in the side of the ark. Deut. 1:5, 6:31:9, 24–26. This distinction is preserved throughout the Old Testament. Thus in 2 Kings 21:8, “Only if they will observe to do according to all that I have commanded them, and according to all the law that my servant Moses commanded them.” Here is a plain distinction between the law that God commanded and the law that Moses commanded.
Again Nehemiah 9:13: “Thou camest down also upon Mount Sinai and spakest with them from Heaven, and gavest them right judgments and true laws, good statutes and commandments.” Here is a law that is called right, true and good. It is said that God declared this law from Mount Sinai. Now we read of quite a different law in Ezekiel 20:24, 25. “Because that they had not executed my judgments, but had despised my statutes, and had polluted my Sabbaths, and their eyes were after their fathers’ idols, wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they shall not live.” Here is a law that is not good, and by which they could not live. This must be a different law from the one which is good, right, and true.
The same distinction is preserved in the New Testament. Rom. 7:7: “What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid; nay, I had not known sin, but by the law, for I had not known lust except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.” Here he quotes one of the ten commandments, showing what law he means. In verse 12, he says of this law, “the law is holy and the commandments are holy, and just and good.” In verse 14, he says, “the law is spiritual.” In verse 22, he calls it, “the law of God.” James 2:9–12. James quotes two of the ten commandments and calls that law the “law of liberty”; hence, there is a law in the New Testament which is holy, just and good, a spiritual law, a law of liberty, the royal law, the law of God; and Paul said that he delighted in that law. We find also quite a different law in the New Testament. It is called the law of Moses. Acts. 15:5. “But there arose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees, which believed, saying, that it was needful to circumcise them and to command them to keep the law of Moses.” Speaking of this law in verse 10, he says, “Now therefore why tempt ye God to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?” Here this law of Moses is called a heavy yoke which none are able to bear? In Heb. 7:14, we read of a law of a “carnal commandment,” and verse 19 says that this “law made nothing perfect.” It seems as though none could fail to see that these different characteristics do not belong to the same law.
Now let us see what law is done away. In Ephesians 2:15, we read, “Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace.” So of the law of which Peter spoke, calling it the law of Moses, and saying it was a grievous yoke to bear. In Col. 2:14, we read: “Blotting out the hand-writing of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.” Here again the law which is done away, is very particularly described. 1. It is the law of hand-writing. 2. It is the law of ordinances. 3. It was against us. 4. It was contrary to us. This law was nailed to the cross. Now we read of the law of God thus, “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid. Yea, we establish the law.” Rom. 3:31. Jesus himself says, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets, I am not come to destroy but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled. Whosoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven.”
Thus we find one law written by God himself, which is called holy, just, and good, a spiritual law, law of liberty, royal law, and the delight of the saint. Paul says that this law is established, and Jesus says that not one jot or tittle shall pass away from it, &c. We have found another law which was written by Moses in a book. It is called a law that was not good, a carnal law, law of ordinances, a heavy yoke to bear, a law that was against us, contrary to us, the enmity, &c. It is said that this law was nailed to the cross. From the above we conclude that there were two laws, one of which was abolished at the cross, and the other is to last till heaven and earth pass away.
D. M. CANRIGHT.
Lived It Down.
An honest blacksmith was once grossly insulted and his character infamously defamed. Friends advised him to seek redress by means of law, but to one and all he replied, “No; I will go to my forge, and there in six months I will have worked out such a character, and earned such a name as all the judges, law courts, and lawyers in the world could not give me.” He was right. It is by honest labor, manly courage, and a conscience void of offense, that we assert our true dignity and prove our honesty and respectability.
The Churches.
(Condensed from Review and Herald.)
Wisconsin.
WASHINGTON ISLAND.—This island, which lies in the mouth of Green Bay, has a population of about five hundred, mostly Danes, though some are Americans, some Irish, and some Icelanders. They have one church edifice and two school-houses, but no minister of any kind. Eld. John G. Matteson, who has just commenced to labor here, has held one meeting in the church which, he says, “was well attended and made a good impression on the minds of the people.” He also received permission to use the school-house on the south side of the island for Danish meetings, and gave out an appointment. But, as the school-board afterward forbid the use of the school-house, the meeting was held in a private house just opposite. Some over twenty came together. About half of them were Icelanders. “We have started a petition,” says Eld. M., “for a special school-meeting. It is signed by thirteen voters. There is good prospect of getting the house yet.”
FREMONT.—Eld. H. W. Decker says of the brethren here: “They have just completed one of the nicest meeting-houses in the State. They now have enough pledged to pay all of their indebtedness, and have twenty-five dollars left.” Sunday forenoon the house was crowded full to witness the dedication services.
Minnesota.
NEW AUBURN.—Eld. D. P. Curtis, writing from this place under date of Jan. 14, says: “Yesterday we presented the covenant, and twenty-one signed it. Five of these are members of the S. D. B. church, who cast in their influence with the company of beginners, to help them in their new life of obedience and faith.” Bro. Ellis designs to remain here over another Sabbath, and then to commence meetings in Hutchinson.
New York.
ROME.—At the meetings held here several weeks ago by Eld. Canright, several new ones took a stand for the truth. He gave four lectures on the subject of health reform. Nearly all in the church who used tobacco have now quit the habit, and in many families the work of reform has been begun in earnest. At the close of the meeting Eld. C. baptized twelve souls in the Mohawk river, and several others are now ready to be baptized at the first opportunity.
Ohio.
LIBERTY CENTER.—At the close of a series of meetings in this place, Elder T. J. Butler reports that fourteen signed the covenant and nearly all that were present at the last meeting voted that the seventh day was the right day to observe as the Sabbath.
CLEVELAND.—This church numbers sixteen members. Eld. H. A. St. John spent Sabbath and Sunday, Jan. 6 and 7, with them, and says: “We think the prospects fair for worthy additions to their number. One excellent family near Bro. Edgerton’s is coming into the truth, having first become interested by reading the Signs. On Sunday we re-organized the church, Bro. L. W. Carr, M. D., being chosen and ordained elder, and Bro. I. Edgerton deacon.” Owing to failing health Eld. St. John feels it his duty to remain here some time and recuperate if possible.
Texas.
DECKMAN.—Bro. A. B. Rust writes: “Last Sabbath was our first Sabbath meeting in this place. Less than a year ago the truth had never been heard of here. We now have thirteen adult Sabbath-keepers, and a Sabbath-school for the children.”
Anna’s Difficulty.
Our friend Anna came home from school one day with her sunny face all in a cloud, and looking as if it might presently get a sprinkling of tears. There was one to whom she always went in trouble, besides that other One to whom she tried first to speak, and she sought that best earthly friend now.
“Mother, I do think it is really mean and rude in the P.’s that they pass me by when nearly all the class of girls are invited. I don’t want to feel bad about such a thing, but I can’t help it. I don’t know as anybody likes to be slighted.”
“Of course not, my daughter,” said Mrs. A.; “the feeling of having been rudely treated is always uncomfortable. What do you suppose is the reason you are not included in the party?”
“It is because the P.’s feel above us, mother. The girls dress in finer clothes than I do, and have more accomplishments; and then we work for a living, and they do not. But, mother, I believe I am as intelligent and as well-bred as they. I can’t bear it, mother.”
“It is not pleasant, to be sure, Anna; but think again, darling, before you say you cannot bear it.”
“Well, mother, who could? Nobody but you, who seem to have a way of getting round hard places, or walking through them.”
“I have had many more years of experience in life than you, ought I not to have learned something of its philosophy? But I wish you to think now whether there is not some way for you to bear this little vexation.”
“Oh, yes, mother, I know what you always say, and that, of course, is right; but I don’t see how feeling and acting like a Christian takes away one’s natural feeling about being slighted and ill-treated by others.”
“Perhaps it does not. I sometimes think one’s sensibilities are greatly intensified by the better life. A Christian, by trying to bring his own character up to the point of perfect love and honor, often becomes exacting of such perfection in others, and failing to find it, feels exquisite pain. Yet the pain will oftener be that God’s great principles of right are violated, than that his personal feelings are hurt. Which is easier for you, child, to be wounded in personal feeling, or to see what is wrong against God?”
“I never thought exactly; it is dreadful to see the wrong, but one feels in the other a sense of shame—feels so wronged—it is quite different.”
“My precious one,” said Mrs. A., “when you have so learned the love of God as to know no difference between the interests and the honor of his law and your own comfort and pleasure and good name, you will see more clearly how this is, and feel, it is likely, the sense of shame and wrong in a different way.”
“But, mother, haven’t we a right to feel all that hurt when we are wronged or slighted—I mean personally hurt?”
“Yes; but maybe if we looked a little deeper into the principles of things, or our own principles, we should not suffer so much. What is the secret of your feeling hurt by the P.’s? Does the slight make your real self in any respect less or worse? Does it injure you in the estimation of others?”
“Why no, mother, I suppose not; but I am as good and as much respected as they are; and I don’t like to have it seem that I am beneath them because I am not so rich, and all that.”
“My dear, I believe we have talked this subject over before, and long ago understood that we desire no position, no companionship which is not ours by right of moral and intellectual character. It is the Christian principle to live in all things for the true and the right; to be willing to take our own place in business and society, and fill it well; to think less of what others think of us than of what we in ourselves are; to appear to be only what we are, and be willing to appear thus, while we are always looking up to something wiser, and lovelier, and better. I never could get the idea of a Christian’s being above or beneath any one in the sense you mean. His associations are, or should be, such as Christ’s were in his walk among men. Christ, infinitely endowed with all excellence and beauty, was also infinitely humble. He neither sought nor shunned any for his own sake, but lived out the divine fullness of his life of suffering and love without regard to his position or popularity with men. I said he did not seek others, but I must except the beloved John, and the household at Bethany, and a few others whom he loved undoubtedly for their own sake, with a personal, human sort of attachment.”
“You don’t mean, mother, that we should never seek people for their own sake or our own pleasure?”
“No, surely; but only those who are congenial in principles and life. Treat others with courtesy and generosity, and after that allow them to be as indifferent to you as you are to those whom you do not prefer. Every person has a right to select his companions, and every one should possess enough personal dignity and generosity not to be offended if he is not preferred. I suspect you are wrong about the P.’s. If they do not prefer you for your own sake, they have the right not to do so, and you should accord it to them just as you take the privilege of not inviting certain others who might feel so of yourself. And more than this, Anna; if the P.’s live for different principles, making friends for other reasons than you do, why, indeed, should you care for their especial regard? A friendship built upon the accidents of fortune, distinction or show, has but a sandy foundation at best.”
“There is no security of happiness in any earthly advantage. Only take care to be in yourself what in your circumstances is noble and beautiful and good, and you will find the right position without any particular seeking. The love and approval of the good and pure will come to you, and that is what you want, and nothing more, do you, of any friendship? Half the personal ill-feeling in the world comes of people’s aspiring to what they have no fitness for; they have neither the dignity nor the humility to take the place God in his providence assigns them; and instead of reaching out of it by making themselves nobler and better, they attempt to build up by some appearance which is not more than half true. The real Christian will not want a name or reputation he does not by right of goodness or talent deserve; but by living well where he may be, he makes any duty, any position, honorable and good. He has nothing to do with the false; he can afford to seem in all things what he is, and to depend for love and favor on his consciousness of worth.”
“But, mother, I never thought of depending upon anything else. The P.’s know I am their equal in the school-room, and for all the qualities they ought to respect.”
“You remember we spoke of a right of choice on their part; and now are you, a Christian, going to be hurt because fashionable people do not court you? Can you not yet think of a way to bear the vexation? Is it, indeed, so much of a trial, as you think it all through and through? You know, little one, that Christians can look at these things only in the light the Christ-life sheds on their souls, on all their earthly relations, on the path that leads them up to the Source of light and truth and right. Think of it, and tell me to-morrow if you can bear to be slighted by the P.’s.”
“Well, Anna,” said Mrs. A., the next day, “have you come to a conclusion?”
“Really, mother,” said Anna, “you have a great way of taking the sting out of uncomfortable things. I wonder if I shall ever get so as not to care for my own sake.”
“That will depend upon how closely you are united to God. If you live the true Christ-life, nothing of the sort will hurt you much; the consciousness of being right, the joy of his approval, will suffice you. But what about the P.’s?”
“Why, mother, nothing about them; I don’t think I shall feel badly any more. If they do not care for me, I shall not care for them, only to be kind and polite; and I am sure I want no one’s favor who does not love me for just what I am, and for trying to become better than I am. I shall go to school very happy to-day. I always thought the idea of being above or below any one, as we commonly hear it, had a sort of meanness in it.”
“So it has; and, Anna, always remember this: Every soul is created by the same God—purchased by the blood of the same Saviour, and has an individual life as dear to God as any other life. The Christian is peculiarly precious to him, and however humble in this world’s estimate, is an heir to his eternal glory and happiness; and so the Christian should, whatever may be his gifts or calling, possess that quietness and dignity of spirit—that resting in the consciousness of God’s love and approval—that he will not be greatly moved by the applause or the displeasure of his fellows.”
“And so, mother, it saves a great many uncomfortable feelings to be a Christian.”
“It saves a great amount of disappointed pride and wounded vanity, gives many a sweet night’s sleep in thinking God will take care of our reputation, being willing to be what and where he will have us to be. On the whole, Anna, it is a happier, more comfortable thing, for the relations of this life, to be a Christian; not a half-way disciple, but a whole-heart-and-soul believer, who keeps no reserves to sting conscience with. He will not feel a thousand things that sting other men; and the real troubles he must bear are shared by Him whose office it is to carry our human sorrows. Be at peace with God, dear child, and let the love which that peace brings speak in your tones, and manners, and ways, and you need not be embarrassed if duty takes you to a palace or a hovel.”
“I shall get my lessons better to-day for that thought, mother. I shall not feel half so vexed if I fail when I have done the best I can.”
“That is the intention of religion always, my child, to keep the possessor calm, assured, and quite aside from the little jostlings and harrassments of a self-seeking life.”