Your ShelfYour Projects

Review and Herald, Vol. 53, No. 13.

THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL

Review and Herald

Mar 27, 1879

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Mar 27, 1879

THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

ELD. D. M. CANRIGHT.

PAGAN AND CHRISTIAN DOCTRINES OF THE SOUL COMPARED.—CONCLUDED.

Mr. Dowling has brought a great amount of evidence showing that popery is little more than paganism with another name. “In tracing the origin of the corrupt doctrines and practices of the Romish church,” he says, “we have had frequent occasion, in the preceding chapters, to allude to the fact that most of its anti-scriptural rites and ceremonies were adopted from the pagan worship of Greece, Rome, and other heathen nations.”
In the year 1729, a distinguished scholar and divine of the Episcopal Church of England, Rev. Dr. Middleton, visited the city of Rome, not as a theologian, but as a classical scholar, to study the ancient classical antiquity of the Greek and Roman pagans. But when he reached Rome, so exact did he find the resemblance between the temples, the images, and the ceremonies of popery and paganism, that he came to the just conclusion that he could in no way so well acquaint himself with ancient paganism, in all its ceremonies of worship, as by studying the Roman Catholic worship. After carefully studying and comparing the two systems of worship, he wrote “A Letter from Rome, showing an exact conformity between popery and paganism; or the religion of the present Romans derived from that of their heathen ancestors.”
He has enumerated several points in which paganism and the papacy exactly agree. 1. The burning of incense. They practice this in just the same manner as the old heathens did. 2. The use of holy water. At the door of every Catholic church is a vessel of holy water, with which every one who enters is sprinkled. Just so it was in all the old heathen temples. 3. Burning wax candles in the daytime. Here, again, they follow the ancient pagans, as that was their custom. 4. Votive gifts and offerings. These are hung about the altars by those who have made a vow to God in some case of danger. Just so did the old idolaters. This was so rich a thing for the priests that it was soon imitated. 5. Adoration of idols and images. Pagans made images of their dead heroes, and others, and then bowed before them in prayer. So these Roman Christians make images of their martyrs and chief saints, and adore before them. 6. The gods of the pantheon turned into popish saints. The noblest heathen temple now remaining in the world is the pantheon in Rome, formerly dedicated by the heathen to Jove and all the gods. When the Christians got possession of it, it was re-consecrated to the Blessed Virgin, and all the saints. With this single alteration, it serves as exactly for all the purposes of Christian worship as it did for the pagan worship for which it was built. In many instances, even the old heathen idol was not taken down; but was only re-dressed, re-consecrated, and then worshiped as before, under another name! 7. Road-gods and saints. The pagans had their gods set up by the roadside at convenient distances for travelers to worship. The Catholics have the same. 8. Processions of worshipers. The religious pomps and processions of the heathen, according to the descriptions given of them, were so like those we see on every festival of the Virgin that none can fail to see their connection.
This comparison, says Dr. Middleton, might be easily carried on through many more instances. But the above are sufficient for my purpose. The learned doctor concludes his letter thus: “I have sufficiently made good what I undertook to prove,—an exact conformity, or uniformity rather, of worship between popery and paganism; for since, as I have shown above, we see the present people of Rome worshiping in the same temples, at the same altars, sometimes the same images, and always with the same ceremonies, as the old Romans, they must have more charity, as well as skill in distinguishing, than I pretend to have, who can absolve them from the same superstition and idolatry of which we condemn their pagan ancestors.”
In these facts all Protestants are agreed. They show clearly how terribly Christianity had become corrupted with heathen doctrines before the rise of the Reformation. But Protestants who came out from the papal church at the time of the Reformation did not rid themselves of every false doctrine received by their fathers from the pagans. It was too much to expect that they would cast off all their errors, and adopt all the truth. Hence there has been need of a continual reformation ever since, by such men as Wesley, Whitefield, and others. Very many Romish errors were retained, if I mistake not, by the reformers. Dr. Middleton was a member of the established church of England. Hence there is unfortunately too much truth in what Dr. Challoner, a Roman Catholic, says in his reply to Dr. Middleton’s letter from Rome. He thus turns Dr. M.’s arguments against himself and the Protestant church of England: “And by the selfsame way of arguing,” says Challoner, “by which he pretends to demonstrate an exact conformity between the religion of the present Romans and that of their heathen ancestors, these same gentlemen will, with a much fairer show of probability, prove an exact conformity between the religion by law established, and popery. The consequence of which will be, if the doctor be not mistaken in his parallel, that the English Protestant is no better than heathenish idolatry.”
With regard to the doctrine of the immortality of the soul and eternal misery, most of the Protestant churches have retained nearly all the tenets received by the Catholics from the pagans. With a few modifications, the orthodox Protestants still hold the same as the papists in their belief respecting the immortality of the soul. Hence, in proving the heathen origin of this doctrine among the Roman Catholics, we have shown its origin among all Christians.
Let us now compare the pagan and Christian doctrine of the soul.
1. Plato held that the soul is immortal. Christians hold the same. This was not learned from the Bible; for the Scriptures never say a word about the immortality of the soul. It was learned from the heathen Platonic philosophers, as we have seen.
2. Plato held that the soul was of a very ethereal nature. Christians teach that it is immaterial. Neither was this learned from the Bible, as that book never once mentions such a thing.
3. One of the arguments on which Plato most relied to prove the immortality of the soul was its spirituality. So it is with Christians. Bible writers are never found using that argument.
4. Plato held the soul to be a part of God. The same is often heard from Christians. Says the Christian poet,—
“Our souls are his immortal breath.”
D. W. Clarke, D. D., a bishop in the M. E. Church, may be considered a fair exponent of orthodox faith on this subject. In his late popular work, “Man all Immortal,” he uses this language with regard to the soul: “Can we wonder that the undying spirit—that emanation of light and glory from the bosom of the Eternal—should rise above our comprehension?” Once more: “It is the high and indisputable proof of the divinity that dwells within us.” So exactly like the language and sentiments of the ancient heathen philosophers is the above, that one would readily suppose that he was listening to Plato himself, if he were not informed that this is the language of a Christian bishop! As we have seen, this idea that the soul is an emanation from God, a part of divinity, right from the bosom of the Eternal, is the very heart of the pagan doctrine of the soul. Who, then, can fail to see the heathen fountain whence this came? It did not come from the word of God, as nothing of the kind is there taught.
5. Plato, and all the pagans who argued for the soul’s immortality, likewise held to its pre-existence. Many of the early Christians held the same, and some hold it now.
6. Plato taught that the soul alone was the real man. So thought Origen, and so teach Christians now. How often we hear ministers of to-day say, as they point to a corpse, “This is not your friend. He is not dead. He is in Heaven. This is only the old tenement in which he lived,—the prison of his now freed soul.” The very original of this may be found in Plato’s Phaedo. Here it is: “Crito having asked him afterward in what manner he wished to be buried, ‘as you please,’ said Socrates, ‘if you can lay hold of me, and I do not escape out of your hands.’ At the same time looking upon his friends with a smile, ‘I can never persuade Crito,’ says he, ‘that Socrates is he who converses with you, and disposes the several parts of his discourse; for he always imagines that I am what he is going to see dead in a little while. He confounds me with my carcass, and therefore asks me how I would be interred.’”
7. Plato, and all pagans who taught the immortality of the soul, held that the body was the prison of the soul. Christians believe the same.
8. Plato taught that matter in the gross, and the body in particular, was naturally corrupt, and the origin of all evil. Many Christians teach the same.
9. This doctrine, when received among the pagans, immediately gave birth to that abominable set of gloomy and misanthropic men, the Eremites and Ascetics. So, as soon as this doctrine of the immortality of the soul was received among Christians, it produced an exactly similar class of men,—the Monks, Hermits, Anchorites, etc.
10. Plato and the pagans held that the soul not only does not die with the death of the body, but is actually a gainer in that catastrophe. Here, again, Christians teach exactly the same as those old pagans. 11. The pagans had a purgatory prepared, in which to partially purge impure souls immediately after death. The Catholics have the same.
12. Plato taught that those who were pure from all sin went immediately to Heaven on the death of the body. Exactly like this, Christians send their righteous saints straight to Heaven at the death of the body. In this they have again faithfully copied Plato.
13. Plato and the other heathens sent the incurably wicked straight to hell at death. Here, again, we have the original of the modern doctrine of sending the wicked immediately to hell at death.
14. The pagans deified their dead friends, exalted them into angels, demi-gods, and gods, made images of them, and then prayed to them for assistance. Christians have done the same thing with their saints. The saint and image worship of the Roman Catholics is a facsimile of the old pagan worship of heroes.
15. The pagans taught that little children would go to hell. Thus, Virgil describing the miseries of the damned, says,—
“And now wild shouts, and wailings dire, And shrieking infants, swell the dreadful choir.”
Christians, both Catholic and Protestant, teach the same horrid doctrine. “The condemnation of children dying without having been baptized,” says the Catholic Bossuet, “is an article of firm faith of the church. They are guilty, since they die in the wrath of God, and in the powers of darkness. Children of wrath by nature, objects of hatred and aversion, cast into hell with the other damned.” The Calvinistic doctrine on this point is well known. This tenet is well worthy of its heathen origin.
16. The heathens gave most terrible descriptions of hell, and the woe and torments of the damned there, comparing well with modern orthodox descriptions of hell.
Here are sixteen points of identity between the pagan and Christian doctrine of the immortality of the soul, which embraces the whole doctrine in about all its phases. This, with the historical evidence already presented, makes it quite certain where this doctrine originated, and how it came among Christians.

STARTLING RESULTS OF THE LATE WAR IN TURKEY.

WAR is always a terrible calamity, but the world has as yet gained only a very partial idea of the results of the late war in Turkey. It was unlike any European war of the present century. Although it was complicated by foreign invasion, it was essentially a civil war. It was also a religious war. It was at times a war of extermination. We know something in America of civil war, although, strictly speaking, our last war was of that character only in certain localities, as in Eastern Tennessee and Missouri; but happily we know nothing as yet of a religious civil war,—a war in which each town and village is divided against itself, and in which neighbors, separated for centuries by religious differences, regard each other as infidels worthy of death.
The war commenced in Herzegovina in July, 1875. It came to an end nominally in March, 1878, but in fact is still in progress in certain localities. Russia took part in it after April, 1877, for eleven months. There were few important battles, but the war has proved to be the most fatal of late years to the armies engaged. The number of soldiers who have perished cannot be less than a million. The Russians acknowledge a loss of over 300,000 in Europe and Asia. The Roumanians, Servians, and Montenegrins lost at least 50,000; the Austrians, not less than 30,000. There are, of course, no statistics in regard to the Turkish losses, but careful investigation as to the number drafted and the present force of the army makes it certain that the number exceeds 600,000. The present condition of the Turkish army is such that if there is no improvement, there will soon be very little left of it. There is a large force about twenty miles from Constantinople engaged in building fortifications. They are living in tents, with so little clothing that many are unable to leave their tents at all, with so little food that there have been days when their whole ration consisted of half a biscuit. If such is the condition of troops under the command of Baker Pasha, an Englishman, within twenty miles of Constantinople, what must be their fate in other places under Turkish officers?
It is sad to think of the sacrifice of a million brave men, but this is by no means the most startling result of this war. It has been accompanied by massacres, and by movements of population which remind us of De Quincey's famous story of the “Flight of a Tartar Tribe,” and which I think have no parallel in modern times.
This movement commenced in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1875, when the greater part of the Christian population fled to Austrian territory. Some went to Servia and Montenegro. The war from the outset was one of plunder, outrage, and massacre; but the Mussulman population, comprising most of the land holders and supported by the Turkish army, had every advantage over the Christian peasantry. Bands of rebels could maintain themselves in the mountains, but could do nothing to defend their homes and families. The great mass of the people had no choice but flight or massacre. They fled, and it is only since the Austrian occupation that they have been able to return. During their exile at least half have died of cold, hunger, and fever, although the Austrian government has expended large sums of money in aiding them. We may estimate the loss of life at 200,000 souls in these two provinces. Add to this the fear, anguish, torture, and distress of every kind, which have been suffered by the whole population, and we have a picture of misery to move the hardest heart.
In the spring of 1876 the Turkish government foresaw a Servian war, and ordered the Bulgarian massacres, to terrorize the province and insure their line of communication. About 12,000 were massacred, and a large number of towns were destroyed. This was followed by the flight of a large part of the Christian population of the district to the mountains and large cities, but, unfortunately, most of them were afterward induced to return. The war with Servia and Montenegro depopulated the frontier districts, but only for a time. When the Russians crossed the Danube, the tables were turned; and the Moslem population of the Dobrudscha and of Northern Bulgaria fled with precipitancy,—men, women, and children,—to take refuge in the Turkish fortified towns. At Rustchuck, Shumla, and Varna, for months, they crowded every house and even lived in the streets. The typhus raged among them, and great numbers died of want. Some came to Constantinople. Many, especially the Circassians, were transported to Asia Minor. The remnant have just now returned to their homes.
At the same time Suleiman Pasha, under orders from Constantinople, undertook to exterminate the Christian population of Eastern Roumelia. Great numbers were massacred, but most of the population fled over the Balkans, suffering untold misery and anguish; but their flight was in summer, and their suffering less than that of the great Mohammedan exodus, which took place when the Russians crossed the Balkans. It was mid-winter, and a season of unusual severity; but as the Russians approached, a wild panic seized upon the whole Moslem population. They seem to have felt that a terrible retribution was about to fall upon them for all the wrong which they had done to the Christians, and, without waiting to see a Russian soldier or hear a Russian gun, they fled. I think not less than a million of souls thus left their homes, some going toward Macedonia, but the majority seeking to reach Constantinople. They carried with them what they could, and plundered as they went; but their sufferings were terrible beyond description. Multitudes froze and starved to death by the road side. Epidemics broke out among them, and swept away hundreds. In some cases the Russians overtook them. Then they threw their children away or drowned them in the rivers, left everything, and fled. In one case the advancing Russians collected and cared for several hundred small Turkish children picked up in a single day. They crowded the trains for Constantinople, and died by the score in the cars. They died at Constantinople of epidemics, cold, and starvation. Of all this vast multitude very few have returned to their homes or ever will return. Probably half of them are already dead; a large number are now dying of starvation in the Rhodope Mountains; others have been sent to Syria and Asia Minor. Perhaps 50,000 remain in Constantinople and vicinity. By the treaty of Berlin, no Circassian is allowed to live in Bulgaria or Roumelia. The Bulgarians have returned, and it has become a thoroughly Christian province. The recent massacres in Macedonia and the retiring of the Russians from Thrace have also caused a large Christian emigration from these provinces into Eastern Roumelia. I think we may set down the loss of life in these various massacres and migrations in European Turkey at not less than 750,000, not including Bosnia and Herzegovina.
At the same time a similar movement of population has been going on in Asia Minor. When the war broke out, the half savage Kurds were armed and let loose upon the peaceful Armenian population of Eastern Asia Minor. They are still ravaging the country from time to time. Large numbers of Armenians have been massacred, many have been carried off as slaves, and it is said that about half of the Armenian population from the provinces of Erzroom and Van have emigrated to Russia. The suffering from fever, famine, and other causes, has been very great, but I have no means of estimating the loss of life.
Other small displacements of population have taken place. In Sukum Kaleh and vicinity the people were incited to insurrection by the Turks, and on their defeat were transported to Asia Minor. The loss of life in this emigration is said to have exceeded 25,000. There has also been some emigration from Lazistan since its annexation to Russia.
On the whole, the loss of life in these massacres and displacements of population must be more than one million of souls, and those who have escaped death have undergone hardships terrible beyond all imagination. Two millions of human lives, and all this incalculable human misery, is the price which has been paid for whatever has been gained in this war.—Christian Union.

Signs of Christ's Coming.

Why drag thy chariot wheels, O Time? How slow the moving hours! When will thy buds, O "blessed hope," Expand to perfect flowers?
When will the black and weary night, So full of sins and sighs, End, and the dawn of righteousness Upon the world arise?
Crowns tremble 'neath His "iron rod," Thrones sway in every blast; Dark shadows of events to come Upon the world are cast!
The stately pillars of our pride, On which we placed our trust, Like Jonah's gourd, in one brief hour Are leveled with the dust.
The pestilence, with fetid breath, Comes up from slum and pen, And stalks through hall and pauper hut To take the lives of men.
Are these His signal-flags unfurled— His watchfires in the night— To tell us of His near approach Who brings the promised light?
Then lift your heads, ye weeping ones! Look upward through your tears! Your night of sorrow soon shall end In Heaven's eternal years.
—Selected.

"A NEW DISCOVERY."

Dr. Hopewell, in his lecture on “The Bible and Science,” relates this amusing but most instructive anecdote. In various parts of the county of Durham, and indeed at many points all around the coasts of England, there are submarine forests,—trees which once grew on the dry land on the borders of the sea, now sunk beneath its surface, covered at high water, but exposed in part or altogether at low water. Some twenty years ago the great dock on the Tyne was made, and many trees and horns of ancient animals were found imbedded in the silt of Jarrow Slake. One of these was standing upright, but was without its head. Its top had evidently been cut off; there could not be any mistake about the fact.
Sir William Armstrong, the late Robert Stephenson, and Mr. Harrison, the North-eastern Company’s engineer, were greatly interested. It was concluded that some woodman of very ancient times had cut the tree, and that it was a most striking evidence of the extreme antiquity of the human race. In haste, Prof. Owen, the renowned palæontologist of the British Museum, was sent from London. One Sunday morning was spent by all these gentlemen wading in the slush and mud, inspecting this wondrous relic. Their conclusion was unanimous. The next morning a friend of mine, to whom Prof. Owen had sent his card with the expression of a wish to see some horns he had from the same site, was present also. He asked Prof. Owen to what conclusion they had come. The professor replied that they were all unanimous, and that the evidence was most satisfactory. My friend said, “You have not been inspecting an old cut, at any rate; for I had some pieces cut off that tree a few days ago, and have them now at home.” The assembled company declared it was impossible. My friend assured them of the fact, and said, “Have you seen the man who first uncovered this tree?” They said they had not, and Prof. Owen was at once struck with the importance of having that man’s evidence. The man was sent for. My friend told him what the man would tell him; for my friend knew all about it, and, besides that, would never have been so deceived, for reasons I could give, even if he had not known the true history; but I will let Prof. Owen tell the rest in his own words. He told the story himself at Leeds some years afterward, and this is what he said. After giving his account of the portion of the story I have already related, and saying that he had been told that the navvy who first uncovered the tree had himself cut the head of it off to lay down a sleeper for the tramway, he says:—
“This man was sent for, and on his arrival he declared that the tree pointed out was the one he had cut.” Prof. Owen goes on to say,—and we should mark this,—“It was endeavored to be explained that that was impossible, as the place had not been excavated before” (it had got covered up again since the excavation); “but looking,” said Prof. Owen, “with supreme contempt upon the assembly of geologists and engineers, the man persisted in the identification of his own work, and exclaimed, ‘The top of the tree must be somewhere;’ upon which,” says Prof. Owen, “I offered half a crown to the first navvy who would produce it. Away ran half a dozen of them, and in a few minutes they returned with the top. Never,” says Prof. Owen, “had I so narrow an escape from introducing ‘a new discovery’ into science, and never had I a more fortunate escape.”—Selected.

OBEYING THE NEW COMMANDMENT.

By Chas. B. Reynolds

“A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.” John 13:34.
God is love. God’s law is love. The way to gain eternal life is by obedience to the great law of love; not such obedience as that of the Jews, who had this commandment from the beginning,—“Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” Lev. 19:18. We are to obey as Jesus obeyed, love as he loved us. Obedience in such a spirit of perfect love was new indeed to the Jews. Moses had said, “And it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us.” Deut. 6:25. Christ found them ostensibly keeping the law, committing no overt violation, claiming to be very moral men; yet he declared, “For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of Heaven.” Matt. 5:20. We are thus enjoined not to ostentatiously claim to be commandment-keepers while observing only outward forms, but to love God and our neighbor in very deed and truth, obedience to the new commandment being declared the test of our discipleship. “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.” John 13:35.
Let us apply this test to ourselves. Are we obeying the new commandment? Are we, by our love and sympathy for one another, proving to all men our discipleship; or do we rejoice in iniquity, especially in those to whom we have taken a dislike? Are we easily provoked, continually thinking evil in regard to those who may have unintentionally, perhaps all unconsciously, provoked our ire? Are we throwing out evil surmisings, hints, and innuendoes,—secretly seeking to discourage them and cripple their usefulness,—yet all the time zealous and ostentatious in giving of our means, and in outward observance of all forms and ceremonies? To all such, notwithstanding the boasted possession of all the light of present truth, the commandment of Christ must be very new indeed.
How solemn the warning of the Master: “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of Heaven, but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in Heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you; depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” Matt. 7:21–23. To lack that charity described by the apostle in 1 Cor. 13, is to be devoid of the love of God; to be devoid of the love of God is to be devoid of all true knowledge of God, and, consequently, of all hope of salvation. “He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.” 1 John 4:8. “Love worketh no ill to his neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.” Rom. 13:10. The law of God, enjoined by Christ, demands that we manifest our love to God by our love to one another. This we must do, if we would gain eternal life. “And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbor as thyself. And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right; this do, and thou shalt live.” Luke 10:25–28.
Every member of the church has solemnly vowed before God, the holy angels, and his brethren to do this,—to keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. We have covenanted to live in active benevolence toward all men, and more especially toward those of the household of faith (Gal. 6:10), and every pulsation of our being must be brought into subjection to this main principle: “If any man have not the spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” Rom. 8:9. No man is really and truly converted until he is made more loving and more lovable. If we have the spirit of Christ, it will be manifest. The old love of self, with its pride, stubbornness, and utter indifference to the feelings of others or aught that concerns them only so far as they can be made to minister to our gratification, will be taken away. All who come in contact with us will realize the change. The old man with a confirmed shrew for a wife, who, fearing that some doubted the genuineness of his conversion, cried out, “I know I’ve got the genuine article; if you think I am not truly converted, just ask my wife,” had the true idea, though he did excite all in the meeting to laughter. Doubtless the old lady found him as much a new creature as he had found the command to love as Jesus loved a new commandment.
Such a conversion prompts a man to study the character of those around him; makes him gentle, patient, humble, forbearing; and induces him to dwell with delight upon the good qualities of others, instead of ever harping on their short-comings and faults. If a man in the spirit of Christ obeys the new commandment, it will first be manifest in his home. He will be more gentle, patient, and forbearing. His neighbors will know it. The poor will have reason to rejoice at it. The very tones of his voice become more kindly. All that was harsh, ungracious, and irritating in his manner departs—changes to gentleness and love. He will diffuse an atmosphere of love and kindly feeling wherever he may go, that will prove wondrously contagious; and though some may cavil at what they term the strangeness of his doctrine, all will respect and promptly testify to the reality of his religion. A man makes his own path bright and cheerful by striving to make other people’s so. No man can keep this new commandment, and retain his stinginess, his pride, his passionate temper, or indulge in evil surmisings, contention, hate, or evil speaking. He that wounds, grieves, wrongs,—causes sighs, tears, and sorrow,—is doing the work of Satan. He that by love and sympathy removes one pang, or causes one throb of joy to a human heart, is doing the work of Jesus.
But there are those who prove false to their profession,—those who by words and acts bring disgrace upon the cause of Christ. Will it mend the matter if we too prove false to our covenant, and cease to love them? We are to love as Jesus loved. He could not love pride, lust, lying, or any evil in us. We may not love or sanction sin in any one; but we are at all times, under all circumstances, to deal gently with the erring. It is the common practice to drive them from us, to treat them with coldness, contempt, and scorn; but this is neither right nor Christ-like. We should endeavor to win them back to virtue and to right; and however much we may have been wronged by them, upon the first sign of repentance, we should forgive, even as we hope to be forgiven.
But if those who do evil are allowed to remain in the church, the world’s people consider that we encourage and abet them in their wrong doings, and the usefulness of the church will be utterly destroyed. If you have real or imagined cause of grievance against any one in the church, how should you act? Should you nurse your grievance, tell it over in pretended confidence to this one and that one, misrepresent, indulge all kinds of evil surmisings, bear false witness, seek to injure, to excite distrust and prejudice against such a one? The new commandment enjoins us to love. When those we dearly love do wrong, we are very loth to believe it, are very zealous in their defense. Only with great reluctance and true sorrow do we yield belief to the proved facts of their unworthiness. Even then we seek eagerly to find for them some excuse or palliation of their guilt. What says Jesus?—“Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone; if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church; but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican. Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven.” Matt. 18:15–18.
This is Christ’s instruction to his true disciples,—those who are obeying the new commandment, loving as he loved. Such would never go to an erring brother with pride and wrath, surlily or tauntingly denouncing his fault. We should first, realizing our own weakness and proneness to err, in deep humility examine our own hearts—confess our sins to God, entreating pardon in Jesus’ name, till remembrance of the long-suffering, forbearance, and pitying mercy of our Heavenly Father toward us shall make us more lenient and forgiving toward our erring brother. If you are actuated by the spirit of Christ, the greater your brother’s error, the greater reason there is that you should pray for him. You should pray that God may give words of wisdom and love that shall recall him to the straight and narrow way. If guilty, he demands your pity, compassion, and help. He is on the road to eternal death; then agonize before God in his behalf, as you would were he your dearest earthly friend in like peril of mortal death.
“But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more.” Seek those most likely to have influence with him; and with love in your heart, and the earnest desire that the erring one may be saved, won back to God, help plead with him.
It seems that if such a course were pursued, the hardest heart would be softened, the most wilful and obdurate would be melted to repentance; but should one remain unmoved, then tell it to the church. If he will not hear the church, then there must be no shirking duty. The world knows the wrong, knows that love has failed to win to repentance. You cannot defend him. He must be to you as a heathen man and a publican. Ah! now you are done with him! Now you can despise him, hate him, refuse to speak to him! No; the new commandment forbids such a course; every teaching, every example of Jesus forbids it. He is justly punished, but you are bound to love him, notwithstanding. You are not to sympathize with him in his wrong-doing, nor to so seek his society, that it could possibly appear that you countenance in the least his evil course. Some acts of seeming kindness would look like rewarding vice and offering a premium to sin. You are to regard him just as you would a heathen man or a publican; but if you would enter into the joy of our Lord, you must seek to win heathen men and publicans to repentance and the cross. And you must make constant, prayerful effort for the conversion of your erring brother. Is it less a gain to the army of Immanuel to win back the veteran than to enlist the young recruit? Christ says, “Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven.” Matt. 18:18. Then here is double need to use every means to win this lost one back, lest his blood be demanded at your hands.
“Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him, let him know that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.” James 5:19, 20. What a blessed privilege, to have saved a soul from death! All the fame, honor, and riches of the whole world were naught in comparison. May God help us prayerfully to meditate upon, and seek grace to obey, the new commandment,—to love one another even as Jesus loved us. “Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning. Again, a new commandment I write unto you, which thing is true in him and in you; because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth.” 1 John 2:7, 8.
CHAS. B. REYNOLDS.

AN ANCIENT MORNING HYMN.

My God was with me all the night, And gave me sweet repose; My God did watch e'en while I slept, Or I had ne'er arose.
How many groaned, and wished for sleep Until they wished for day, Measuring slow hours by their quick pain, While I securely lay!
While I did sleep all dangers slept: No thieves did me affright; No evening wolves, those beasts of prey, Disturbers of the night;
No raging flames nor winds did rend The house that I was in; I heard no dreadful cries without, No doleful groans within.
Sweet rest hath gained to me that strength Which labor did devour; My body lay in weakness down, It rises in new power.
Now for the mercies of the night My daily thanks I pay, And unto Thee I dedicate The first-fruits of the day.
May this day praise thee, O my God, And so let all my days; And O may my eternal day Be thine eternal praise.
—Selected.
Continue reading: A DIALOGUE