fAH* 
 
 wise 
 
 /t^vr 
 
 Money and the Kingdom. 
 
 BEING CHAPTER XV. 
 
 “Our Country,” 
 
 PUBLISHED BY THE BAKER & TAYLOR CO., 
 NEW YORK. 
 
 ■ • 
 
 BY 
 
 REV. JOSIAH S TRONG. D. D., 
 
 GENERAL SEC’y OF THE EVANGELICAL ALLIANCE, 
 FOR THE UNITED STATES. 
 
 AMERICAN TRACT SOCIETY, 
 
 lO EAST 23d STREET, NEW YORK. 
 
4 
 
 in the Nestorian Seminary, who became a 
 preacher of Christ. Five times she gave fifty 
 dollars, earning the nioney in a factory, and 
 sent out five native pastors to Christian work. 
 When more than sixty years old, she longed 
 to furnish Nestoria with one more preacher of 
 Christ; and, living in an attic, she took in 
 sewing until she had accomplished her cher¬ 
 ished purpose. In the hands of this conse¬ 
 crated woman, money transformed the facto¬ 
 ry girl and the seamstress into a missionary of 
 the cross, and then multipled her six-fold. 
 God forbid that I should attribute to money 
 power which belongs only to faith, love, and 
 the Holy Spirit. In the problem of Christian 
 work, money is like the cipher, worthless 
 alone, but multiplying many fold the value 
 and effectiveness of other factors. 
 
 THE WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY 
 
 Enjoyed by this generation in the United 
 States lays on us a commensurate obligation. 
 Our wealth is stupendous. If our responsi¬ 
 bility is without a precedent, the plenitude of 
 our power is likewise without a parallel. Is 
 not the lesson which God would have us learn 
 so plain that he who runs may read it ? Has 
 not God given us this matchless power that it 
 may be applied to this matchless work ? 
 
 A REFORMATION NEEDED. 
 
 The kingdoms of this world wdll not have 
 become the kingdoms of our Lord until the 
 money power has been Chrislianiz'^d. “Tal¬ 
 ent has been Christianized already on a large 
 scale. The political power of states and 
 
5 
 
 kingdoms has been long assumed to be, and 
 now at last really is, as far as it becomes their 
 accepted office to maintain personal security 
 and liberty. Architecture, arts, constitutions, 
 schools, and learning have been largely Chris¬ 
 tianized. But the money power, which is 
 one.of the most operative and grandest of all, 
 is only beginning to be ; though with prom¬ 
 ising tokens of a finally complete reduction 
 to Christ and the uses of his kingdom . . . 
 That day, when it comes, is the morning, so 
 to speak, of the new creation.’'* Ts it not 
 time for that day to dawn ? If we would 
 Christianize our Anglo - Saxon civilization, 
 which is to spread itself over the earth, has 
 not the hour come for the church to teach 
 and live the doctrines of God’s Word touch¬ 
 ing possessions ? Their general acceptance 
 on the part of the church would involve a 
 reformation scarcely less important in its 
 results than the great Reformation of the 
 sixteenth century. 
 
 NOT PROPRIETORS BUT TRUSTEES. 
 
 What is needed is not simply an increased 
 giving, an enlarged estimate of the “Lord’s 
 share,” but a radically different conception of 
 our relations to our possessions. Most Chris¬ 
 tian men need to discover that they are not 
 proprietors, apportioning their own, but sim¬ 
 ply trustees or managers of God’s property. 
 All Christians would admit that there is a 
 sense in which their all belongs to God, but 
 deem it a very poetical sense, wholly unprac¬ 
 tical and practically unreal. The great ma- 
 
 * Bushnell’s Sermons on Living Subjects, pp. 264, 265. 
 
6 
 
 jority treat their possessions exactly as they 
 would treat property, use their substance ex¬ 
 actly as if it were their own. 
 
 Christians generally hold that God has a 
 thoroughly real claim on some portion of 
 their income, possibly a tenth, more likely 
 no definite proportion ; but some small part, 
 they acknowledge, belongs to him, and they 
 hold themselves in duty bound to use it for 
 him. This low and unchristian view has 
 sprung apparently from a misconception of 
 the Old Testament doctrine of tithes. 
 
 god’s claim. 
 
 God did not, for the surrender of a part, 
 renounce all claim to the remainder. The Jew 
 was taught, in language most explicit and oft- 
 repeated, that he and all he had belonged 
 absolutely to God. “Behold, the heaven 
 and the heaven of heavens is the Lord’s, thy 
 God, and the earth also, with all that therein 
 is” (Deut. 10:14), “The earth is the Lord’s, 
 and the fullness thereof; the world, and they 
 that dwell therein” (Psa. 24:1). “The silver 
 is mine and the gold is mine, saith the Lord ” 
 (Hag. 2:8). “Behold, all souls are mine ; 
 as the soul of the father, so also the soul of 
 the son is mine” (Ezek. 18:4). When the 
 priest was consecrated, the blood of the ram 
 was put upon the right ear, the thumb of the 
 right hand, and the great toe of the right 
 foot, to indicate that he should come and go, 
 use his hands and powers of mind, in short, 
 his entire self, in the service of God. These 
 parts of the body were selected as representa¬ 
 tive of the whole man. The tithe was like- 
 
7 
 
 wise representative. ‘‘For, if the first fruit 
 be holy, the lump is also holy ’' (Rom. 11:16). 
 Tithes were devoted to certain uses, specified 
 by God, in recognition of the fact that all be¬ 
 longed to him. 
 
 THE PRINCIPLE STATED. 
 
 God’s claim to the whole rests on exactly 
 the same ground as his claim to a part. As 
 the Creator, he must have an absolute owner¬ 
 ship in all his creatures ; and, if an absolute 
 claim could be strengthened, it would be by 
 the fact that he who gave us life sustains it, and 
 with his own life redeemed it. “Ye are not 
 your own; for ye are bought with a price’’ 
 (i Cor. 6:19, 20). Manifestly, if God has 
 absolute ownership in us, we can have abso¬ 
 lute ownership in nothing whatever. If we 
 cannot lay claim to our own selves, how 
 much less to that which we find in our hands. 
 When we say that no man is the absolute 
 owner of property to the value of one penny, 
 we do not take the socialistic position that 
 private property is theft. Because of our 
 individual trusts, for which we are held per¬ 
 sonally responsible, we have individual rights 
 touching property, and may have claims one 
 against another; but, between God and the 
 soul, the distinction of thme and mine is a 
 snare. Does one-tenth belong to God ? Then 
 ten-tenths are his. He did not one-tenth 
 create us and we nine-tenths create ourselves. 
 He did not one-tenth redeem us and we nine- 
 tenths redeem ourselves. If his claim to a 
 part is good, his claim to the whole is equally 
 good. His ownership in us is no joint affair. 
 
__ 8 —^ 
 
 We are not in partnership with him. All that 
 we are and have is utterly his, and his only. 
 
 god’s ownership. 
 
 When the Scriptures and reason speak of 
 God’s ownership in us they use the word in 
 no accomodated sense. It means all that it 
 can mean in a court of law. It means that 
 God has a right to the service of his own. It 
 means that, since our possessions are his prop¬ 
 erty, they should be used in his service—not 
 a fraction of them, but the whole. When the 
 lord returned from the far country, to reckon 
 with his servants to whom he had entrusted 
 his goods, he demanded not simply a small 
 portion of the increase, but held his servants 
 accountable for both principal and interest— 
 “mine own with usury.” Every dollar that 
 belongs to God must serve him. And it is 
 not enough that we make a good use of our 
 means. We are under exactly the same obli¬ 
 gations to make the best use of our money 
 that we are to make a good use of it; and to 
 make any use of it other than the best is a 
 maladministration of trust. Here, then, is the 
 principle always applicable, that of our entire 
 possessions, every dollar, every cent, is to be em¬ 
 ployed in the way that will best honor God. 
 
 THE PRINCIPLE APPLIED. 
 
 The statement of this principle at once 
 suggests difficulties in its application. Let 
 us glance at some of them. 
 
 I. An attempt to regulate personal expen¬ 
 ditures by this principle affords opportu¬ 
 nity for fanaticism on the one hand and for 
 
9 
 
 self-deception on the other; but an honest 
 and intelligent application of it will avoid 
 both. 
 
 Surely, it is right to supply our necessities. 
 
 But what are our necessities ? Advancing civ¬ 
 ilization multiplies them. Friction matches 
 were a luxury once, they are a necessity now. 
 
 And may w^'e allow ourselves nothing for the 
 comforts and luxuries of life? Where shall 
 we draw the line between justifiable and un¬ 
 justifiable expenditure? 
 
 The Christian has given himself to God, or, 
 rather, has recognized and accepted the divine 
 ownership in him. He is under obligations 
 to apply every power, whether of mind, body, 
 or possessions, to God's service. He is bound 
 to make that service as effective as possible. 
 Certain expenditures upon himself are neces¬ 
 sary to his highest growth and usefulness, and 
 are, therefore, not only permissible, but obli¬ 
 gatory. All the money which luillyield a larger X 
 return of usefulness in the world, of greater good 
 to the Kingdom, by being spent on oursetves or 
 families than by being applied otherwise, is used 
 for the glory of God, and is better spent than it 
 would have been if given to missions. And what¬ 
 ever money is spe 7 it on self that woutd have yielded 
 larger returns of usefulness if applied otherwise, 
 is misapplied; and, if it has been done mtelligent- 
 ly, it is a case of embezzlement. 
 
 CHARACTER THE SUPREME END. 
 
 A narrow view at this point is likely to lead 
 us into fanaticism. We must look at life in 
 its wide relations, and remember that charac¬ 
 ter is its supreme end. Character is the one 
 
lO 
 
 thing in the universe, so far as we know, which 
 is of absolute worth, and therefore beyond all 
 price. The glory of the Infinite is all of it the 
 glory of character. Every expenditure which 
 serves to broaden and beautify and upbuild 
 character is worthy. The one question ever 
 to be kept in mind is whether it is the wisest 
 application of means to the desired end. Will 
 this particular application of power in money 
 produce the largest results in character! 
 
 V 
 
 BUT WHAT OF THE BEAUTIFUL? 
 
 How far may we gratify our love of it ? A 
 delicate and difficult question to answer, espe- 
 cially to the satisfaction of those living in the 
 midst of a luxurious civilization. Our guiding 
 principle holds here as every where, only its ap¬ 
 plication is difficult. It is difficult to deter¬ 
 mine how useful the beautiful may be. Doubt¬ 
 less, at times, as Victor Hugo has said, “ The 
 beautiful is as useful as the useful; perhaps 
 more so. ’' The ministry of art widens with the 
 increasing refinement of the nervous organiza¬ 
 tion. There are those to whom the beautiful 
 is, in an important sense, a necessity. God 
 loves the beautiful. Each flower would yield 
 its seed and perpetuate its kind as surely if 
 each blossom were not a smile of its Creator. 
 The stars would swing on in their silent, sol¬ 
 emn march as true to gravitation, if they did 
 not glow like mighty rubies and emeralds and 
 sapphires. The clouds would be as faithful 
 carriers of the bounty of the sea, if God did 
 not paint their morning and evening glory 
 from the rainbow as his palette. Yes ; God 
 loves the beautiful, and intended we should 
 
love it; but he does not have to economize 
 his power; his resources are not limited. 
 When he spreads the splendors of the rising 
 East, it is not at the cost of bread enough to 
 feed ten thousand starving souls. Art has an 
 educational value in our homes and schools 
 and parks and galleries; but how far m*ay one 
 who recognizes his Christian stewardship con¬ 
 scientiously go in the encouragement of art 
 and the gratification of taste ? 
 
 THE CONDITION OF SOCIETY NOT IDEAL. 
 
 If every man did his duty, gave according to 
 ability, there would be abundant provision for 
 all Christian and philanthropic work, and sub¬ 
 stance left for the patronage of art. But not 
 one man in a hundred is doing his duty ; hence 
 those who appreciate the necessities of Chris¬ 
 tian work must fill the breach, and are not at 
 liberty to make expenditures which would oth¬ 
 erwise be wholly justifiable. Many expendi¬ 
 tures are right abstractly considered. That 
 is, would be right in an ideal condition of 
 society. But the condition of the world is 
 not ideal; we are surrounded by circumstan¬ 
 ces which must be recognized exactly as they 
 are. Sin is abnormal, the world is out of 
 joint; and such facts lay on us obligations 
 which would not otherwise exist, make sac¬ 
 rifices necessary which would not otherwise 
 be binding, forbid the gratification of tastes 
 which are natural and might otherwise be 
 indulged. Thrice true is this of us who live 
 in this great national crisis and world emer¬ 
 gency. It is well to play the violin, but not 
 when Rome is burning. 
 
12 
 
 AN ILLUSTRATION. 
 
 Here is a large family of which the husband 
 and father is a contemptible lounger (if loaf¬ 
 ers had any appreciation of the eternal fitness 
 of things, they Vv^ould die) ; he does simply 
 nothing for the support of the family. Ex¬ 
 ceptional cares are, therefore, laid on the 
 wife and mother. She must expend all her 
 time and strength to secure the bare necessa¬ 
 ries of life for her children ; and with the 
 utmost sacrifice on her part they go hungry 
 and cold. If her wretched husband did his 
 duty, she could command time and means to 
 beautify the home and make the dress of her¬ 
 self and children attractive ; but, under the 
 circumstances, it would be worse than foolish 
 for her to spend her scant earnings on vases 
 and flowers, laces and velvets. 
 
 HIGH USES MUST YIELD TO THE 
 HIGHEST. 
 
 God has laid upon Christian nations the 
 work of evangelizing the heathen world. He 
 has laid on us the duty of Christianizing our 
 own heathen, and under such conditions that 
 the obligation presses with an overwhelming 
 urgency. If this duty were accepted by all 
 Christians, the burden would rest lightly upon 
 each ; but great multitudes in the church are 
 shirking all responsibility. So far as the work 
 of missions is concerned, these members of 
 the household of faith are loungers. The un¬ 
 faithful many throw unnatural burdens on the 
 faithful few. Under these circumstances he 
 who would be faithful must accept sacrifices 
 
13 
 
 which would not otherwise be his duty. That 
 is, the principle always and everywhere appli¬ 
 cable, that we are under obligations to make 
 the wisest use of every penny, binds him to ?J 
 use of his means which, if every Christian did 
 his duty, would not be necessary. Notwith¬ 
 standing all the sacrifices made by some, 
 there are vast multitudes, which the estab¬ 
 lished channels of beneficence have placed 
 within our reach, who are starving for the 
 Bread of Life. As long as this is true, must 
 not high uses of money yield to the highest ? 
 It is not enough to be sure that we are mak¬ 
 ing a good use of means ; for, as the Germans 
 say, the good is a great enemy of the best. 
 The expenditure of a large sum on a work of 
 art may be a good use of money, but can any 
 one not purblind with selfishness fail to see 
 that, when a thousand dollars actually repre¬ 
 sents the salvation of a certain number of 
 souls, there are higher uses for the money ? 
 
 AS TO LUXURIES. 
 
 The purchase of luxuries is often justified 
 by the following fallacy : “lam giving work 
 and hence bread to the poor; and it is much 
 wiser thus to let them earn it than to encour¬ 
 age them in idleness by bestowing the price 
 of the lace in charity.'’ Thus many justify 
 extravagance and make their luxuries flatter 
 their pride into the complacent conviction that 
 they are unselfish. An economy in truth— 
 forcing the same act to minister at once to 
 self-indulgence and self-righteousness ! Does 
 it make no difference to the world how its 
 labor is expended, whether on something use- 
 
14 — 
 
 ful or useless, for high uses or low? Your 
 one elegant dress has given many days’ work 
 to many persons. But is there no selfishness 
 in the fact that their labor was consumed on 
 yourself alone when it might have clothed a 
 score or more who are now shivering in rags ? 
 “ Do not cheat yourself into thinking that all 
 the finery you can wear is so much put into 
 the hungry mouths of those beneath you : it 
 is not so; it is what you yourselves, whether 
 you will or no, must sometime instinctively 
 feel it to be—it is what those who stand shiv¬ 
 ering in the streets, forming a line to watch 
 you as you step out of your carriages, know it 
 to be ; those fine dresses do not mean that so 
 much has been put into their mouths, but 
 that so much has been taken out* of their 
 mouths. The real politico-economical sig¬ 
 nification of every one of those beautiful toil¬ 
 ettes is just this : that you have had a certain 
 number of people put for a certain number of 
 days wholly under your authority by the 
 sternest of slave-masters—hunger and cold ; 
 and you have said to them, ‘ I will feed you, 
 indeed, and clothe you, and give you fuel for 
 so many days : but during those days you 
 shall work for me only; your little brothers 
 need clothes, but you shall make none for 
 them ; your sick friend needs clothes, but you 
 shall make none for her; you yourself will 
 soon need another and a warmer dress, but 
 you shall make none for yourself. You shall 
 make nothing but lace and roses for me ; for 
 this fortnight to come you shall work at the 
 patterns and petals, and then I will crush and 
 consume them away in an hour. ’ . . . As long 
 
15 
 
 as there are cold and nakedness in the land 
 around you, so long there can be no ques¬ 
 tion at all but that splendor of dress is a crime. 
 In due time, when we have nothing better to 
 set people to work at, it may be right to let 
 them make lace and cut jewels ; but, as long 
 as there are any who have no blankets for 
 their beds and no rags for their bodies, so 
 long it is blanket-making and tailoring we 
 must set people to work at—not lace,' ’* 
 
 WEALTH NOT WISELY USED. 
 
 These principles which Mr. Ruskin applies 
 to splendor of dress are equally applicable to 
 all luxuries, and are an answer to all those 
 self-deceivers who excuse their selfish expendi¬ 
 tures on the ground that they give work to 
 persons needing it. “ Many hold that an enor¬ 
 mous expenditure of wealth is highly com¬ 
 mendable, because it ‘makes trade.' They 
 forget that waste is not wealth-making ; war, 
 fire, the sinking of a ship also ‘make trade,' 
 because by destroying existing capital they 
 increase demand. The wealth thus wasted 
 would, more wisely used, give work to many 
 more people in creating more wealth."*!* 
 
 Again, the advocates or excusers of self- 
 indulgence pose as the vindicators of God's 
 love. They tell us that he gave all good 
 things for the uses of his children, and that 
 he rejoices in their delight. Yes ; God is 
 even more benevolent than such suppose. So 
 greatly does he desire our joy that he is not 
 
 * True and Beautiful, pp. 421, 422. 
 
 t Economic Tract No. X. Of Work and Wealth, by R. R. 
 Bowker. 
 
content to see us satisfied with the low de¬ 
 lights of self-gratification, but would fain have 
 us know the blessednes's of 
 
 SELF-SACRIFICE FOR OTHERS. 
 
 The writer has no sympathy with asceti¬ 
 cism. There is no virtue in deformity; 
 good taste is not unchristian ; beauty often 
 costs no more than ugliness. Away with the 
 idea of penance. It belies God and carica¬ 
 tures the Christian religion.' It differs from 
 the self-sacrifice which Christ taught and ex¬ 
 emplified as widely as the suicide of Cato 
 differed from the heroic death of Arnold von 
 Winkelried. Christ did not die for the sake 
 of dying, but to save a world ; and he does 
 not inculcate self-denial for the sake of self- 
 denial, but for the sake of others. 
 
 Many practice self-denial, if not for its own 
 sake, only for the sake of saving, and with 
 little or no reference to giving. Let a Japan¬ 
 ese heathen show us a more excellent way. 
 I take the following account from The Chris¬ 
 tian Herald (Sept., 1885). In a certain place, 
 and generation by generation, the owner and 
 relatives of a certain house prospered greatly. 
 Year by year those persons, on the second day 
 of the New Year, assembled and worshipped 
 the god Kannin Daimiyo-jin-san. The mean¬ 
 ing of the name in English is 
 
 “ THE GREAT BRIGHT GOD OF SELF- 
 RESTRAINT.’' 
 
 After engaging in worship, the head of the 
 house opened the Kannin-bako (self-restraint 
 box), and distributed to the needy money 
 
17 
 
 enough to enable them to live in comfort for 
 a time. The money in the box was the an¬ 
 nual accumulation of his offering to his god. 
 
 Outsiders, learning of the prosperity, wor¬ 
 ship, and large giving to the needy which 
 characterized this family, were astonished, 
 and presented themselves to inquire into the 
 matter. The master of the house, in reply, 
 gave the following account of the practice of 
 his household : 
 
 “From ancient times my family has be¬ 
 lieved m and worshipped ‘ the great, bright 
 god of self-restraint.’ We have also made a 
 box, and called it ‘the self-restraint box,’ for 
 the reception of the first-fruits and other per¬ 
 centages, all of which are offered to our god. 
 
 “As to percentages, this is our mode of 
 proceeding : If I would buy a dollar gar¬ 
 ment, I manage by self-restraint and econ¬ 
 omy to get it for eighty cents, and the remain¬ 
 ing twenty cents I drop into ‘ the self-restraint 
 box or if I would give a five-dollar feast to 
 my friends, I exercise self-restraint and econ¬ 
 omy, and give it for four, dropping the re¬ 
 maining dollar into the box; or if I determine 
 to build a house that shall cost one hundred 
 dollars, I exercise self-restraint and economy, 
 and build it for eighty, putting the remaining 
 twenty dollars into the box as an offering to 
 Kannin Daimiyo-jin-san, ... In proportion 
 to my annual outlays, the sum in this box is 
 large or small. This year my outlays have 
 been large ; hence, by the practice of the vir¬ 
 tues named, the amount in ‘ the self-restraint 
 box ’ is great. Yet, notwithstanding this, we 
 are living in comfort, peace and happiness.” 
 
 2 
 
Among us, outlays and benefactions are apt 
 to be in inverse, instead of direct, ratio. I 
 am strongly inclined to think that Christians 
 could gain easy forgiveness for a little idolatry 
 of “the great, bright god of self-restraint.” 
 And if the “self-restraint box” were marked 
 Home and Foreign Missions, and the savings 
 resulting from our self-denial were dropped 
 into it, our oft'erings to each might be in¬ 
 creased tenfold. 
 
 DAILY SELF-DENIAL. 
 
 The general acceptance, by the church, of 
 the Christian principle that every penny is^to 
 be used in the way that will best honor God, 
 would cause every channel of benevolence to 
 overflow its banks, and occasion a blessed 
 freshet of salvation throughout the world. 
 “But,” says some one, “that principle de¬ 
 mands daily self-denial.” Undoubtedly; and 
 that fact is the Master s seal set to its truth. 
 “If any man will come after me, let him 
 deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and 
 follow me.” (Luke 9 : 23). 
 
 NO EXCEPTIONS. 
 
 2. And there are no exceptions to this law 
 of sacrifice; it binds all alike. Christian 
 people will agree that missionaries are called 
 to make great sacrifices for Christ; but why 
 does the obligation rest on them any more 
 than on all ? Does the missionary belong 
 absolutely to God ? No less do we. Do the 
 love and sacrifice of Christ lay him under 
 boundless obligation? Chi::t dL.l for every 
 man. Why is not the rich man in America 
 
19 
 
 under as great obligation to practice self- 
 sacrifice for the salvation of the heathen as 
 the missionary in Central Africa, provided his 
 sacrifice can be made fruitful of their good ? 
 And that is exactly the provision which is 
 made by missionary boards to-day. They 
 establish channels of inter-communication 
 which bring us into contact with all heathen¬ 
 dom, and make Africa, which, centuries ago, 
 fell among thieves, and has ever since been 
 robbed and sore wounded, our neighbor 
 
 LEGACY NOT SUFFICIENT. 
 
 To live in luxury, and then leave a legacy for 
 missions, does hot fulfill the law of sacrifice. 
 Every steward is responsible for the disposi¬ 
 tion of his trust made by will. The obliga¬ 
 tion still rests upon him to bestow his posses¬ 
 sions where, after his death, they will do most 
 for God. Legacies to benevolent societies 
 ought to be greatly multiplied, and would be, 
 if the principle of Christian stewardship were 
 accepted; but such a legacy cannot com¬ 
 pound for an unconsecrated life. If the priest 
 or Levite, who passed by on. the other side, 
 wrote a codicil to his will, providing for 
 wounded wayfarers, I fear it was hardly 
 counted unto him for righteousness, was 
 hardly a proof that he loved his neighbor as 
 himself. 
 
 THE MEASURE OF SACRIFICE IS THE 
 SAME FOR ALL. 
 
 Christ said: “Go ye into all the world, 
 and preach the gospel f and he did not 
 say it to the twelve, but to the whole body 
 
20 
 
 of believers. If we cannot go in person 
 we are under obligations to go by proxy. 
 The rich man has more power to send than 
 the missionary has to go ; he can, perhaps, 
 send a dozen. And why is he not called to 
 make as great sacrifices in sending as the mis¬ 
 sionary in going The obligations of all 
 men rest on the same grounds. The law of 
 sacrifice is universal. “ If any man will come 
 after me that means Dives and Lazarus 
 alike; the terms are all-inclusive. And not 
 only must all men sacrifice, but the measure of 
 sacrifice is the same for all. God does not ask 
 of any two the same gift, because to no two 
 are his gifts the same; but he does require of 
 every man the same sacrifice. “Whosoever 
 he be of you that forsaketh not all that he 
 HATH, he cannot be my disciple.(Luke 
 14 : 33). To give the little all is as hard as 
 to give the abounding all. In both cases the 
 sacrifice is the same; for it is measured less 
 by what is given than by what remains. Only 
 when the sacrifice is all inclusive is it perfect 
 and entire. It is the sacrifice, not the gift, 
 which is the essential thing in God’s eye. 
 What he demands of every soul is a complete 
 
 * Glance at some of the sacrifices of missionaries who go 
 to the frontier. Writing to the “Congregational Union ” for 
 aid to build a parsonage, one says : “ My wife and myself, 
 with our daughter of six years, have been doing our best to 
 live (if it can be called living) in an attic of a store. It is all 
 unfinished inside. By putting up a board partition we have 
 tw'O rooms. We are doing our best to keep warm; but with 
 mercury twenty degrees below zero we do not find it easy.” 
 
 Another, writing for a loan, says : “My family of .seven 
 lived all summer in a house twelve by sixteen, having only 
 two rooms.” 
 
 Many are heroically enduring hardship for the Kingdom 
 at the front, whose sacrifices would be less if ours were 
 greater, whose sufferings could be relieved if our luxuries 
 were curtailed. 
 
21 
 
 sacrifice — the absolute surrender of self, of 
 all powers and all possessions; not the ahan- 
 dofiing of the latter any more than of the for¬ 
 mer, but their entire surrender to God to be 
 used honestly for him. In George Herbert’s 
 noble words : 
 
 “ Next to Sincerity, remember stib, 
 
 Thou must resolve upon Integrity. 
 
 God will have all thou hast : thy mind, thy will, 
 Thy thoughts, thy words, thy works.” 
 
 Whatever their occupation, Christians have 
 but one business in the world; viz., the ex¬ 
 tending of Christ’s kingdom ; and merchant, 
 mechanic, and banker are under exactly the 
 same obligations to be wholly consecrated ta 
 that work as is the missionary. 
 
 A QUESTION OF PROPORTION. 
 
 3. One who believes that every dollar be¬ 
 longs to God, and is to be used for him, will 
 not imagine that he has discharged all oblb 
 gation by “giving a tenth to the Lord.” 
 One who talks about the “Lord’s tenth,” 
 probably thinks about “his owm” nine-tenths. 
 The question is not what proportion belongs 
 to God, but having given all to him, what 
 proportion will best honor him by being ap¬ 
 plied to the uses of myself and family, and 
 what proportion will best honor him by be¬ 
 ing applied to benevolent uses. Because 
 necessities differ this proportion will differ. 
 One man has a small income and a large fam¬ 
 ily ; another has a large income and no family 
 at all. Manifestly the proportion which will 
 best honor God by being applied to benevo¬ 
 lence is much larger in the one case than in 
 tbe other. God, therefore, requires a differ- 
 
22 
 
 ent proportion to be thus applied in the two 
 cases. If men’s needs varied directly as their 
 incomes, it might, perhaps, be practicable and 
 reasonable to fix on some definite proportion 
 as due from all to Christian and benevolent 
 worfi. But while men’s wants are quite apt 
 to grow with their income, their needs do 
 not.* A man whose income is five hundred 
 dollars may have the same needs as his neigh¬ 
 bor whose income is fifty thousand. 
 
 There are multitudes in the land who, after 
 having given one-tenth of their increase, might 
 fare sumptuously every day, gratify every 
 whim, and live with the most lavish expendi¬ 
 ture. Would that fulfill the law of Christ, 
 “If any man will come after me let him deny 
 himself, and take up his cross daily and fol¬ 
 low me 
 
 There is always a tendency to substitute 
 form for spirit, rules for principles. It is so 
 much easier to conform the conduct to a rule 
 than to make a principle inform the whole 
 life. Moses prescribed rules; Christ incul¬ 
 cated principles— 
 
 RULES FOR CHILDREN, PRINCIPLES FOR 
 
 MEN. 
 
 The law of tithes was given when the race 
 was in its childhood, and the relations of 
 money to the kingdom of God were radically 
 different from what they are now. The Is¬ 
 raelite was not held responsible for the con¬ 
 version of the world. Money had no such 
 
 * When John Wesley’s income was £30, he lived on £28, 
 and gave two ; and when his income rose t© £60, and after¬ 
 wards to £120, he still lived on £28, and gave all the re¬ 
 mainder. 
 
spiritual equivalents then as now ; it did not 
 represent the salvation of the heathen. The 
 Jew was required simply to make provisions 
 for his own worship ; and its limited demands 
 might appropriately be met by levying upon 
 a certain proportion of his increase. Pales¬ 
 tine was his world and his kindred the race ; 
 but, under the Christian dispensation the 
 world is our country and the race our kin¬ 
 dred. The needs of the world to - day are 
 boundless; hence, every man’s obligation to 
 supply that need is the full measure of his 
 ability; not one-tenth, or any other fraction 
 of it. And no one exercises thai full measure 
 until he has sacrificed. 
 
 BY ALL MEANS LET THERE BE SYSTEM. 
 
 It is as valuable in giving as in anything else. 
 Proportionate giving to benevolence is both 
 reasonable and scriptural—“ as God hath pros¬ 
 pered.” It is well to fix on some proportion 
 of income, less than which we will not give, 
 and then bring expenses within the limit thus 
 laid down. But when this proportion has 
 been given—be it a tenth, or fifth, or half— 
 it does not follow necessarily that duty has 
 been fully done. There can be found in rules 
 no substitute for an honest purpose and a 
 consecrated heart. 
 
 APPLICABLE TO CAPITAL. 
 
 4. The principle that every dollar is to bt 
 used in the way that will best honor God is 
 as applicable to capital as to increase or in¬ 
 come, and in many cases requires that a por¬ 
 tion of capital be applied directly to benevo- 
 
24 
 
 lent uses. ‘' But,says one, ' ‘ I must not 
 give of my capital, because that v/ould impair 
 my ability to give in the future. I must not 
 kill the goose that lays, the golden egg. ’’ The 
 objection is of weight, especially in ordinary 
 times ; but these are times wholly extraordi¬ 
 nary ; this is the world’s emergency. It may 
 be quite true that giving one dollar now out 
 of your capital would prevent your giving five 
 dollars fifteen years hence. But it should be 
 remembered that there are missionary fields 
 where one dollar now is worth ten dollars 
 fifteen years later. 
 
 Money, like corn, has a two-fold power— 
 that of ministering to want and that of repro¬ 
 duction. If there were a famine in the land, 
 no matter how sore it might be, it would be 
 folly to grind up all the seed-corn for food. 
 But, on the other hand, suppose, in the 
 midst of the famine, after feeding their fam¬ 
 ilies and doling out a handful in charity, the 
 farmers put all the increase back into the 
 ground, and do it year after year while the 
 world is starving. That would be something 
 worse than foolish. It would be criminal. 
 Yet that is what multitudes of men are doing. 
 Instead of applying the power m money to the e 7 id 
 for which it was entrusted to them, they use it 
 abnost wholly to accumulate more power. A 
 miller might as well spend his life building 
 his dam high and higher, and never turn the 
 water to his wheel. Bishop Butler said to 
 his secretary, “I should be ashauied of my¬ 
 self, if I could leave ten thousand pounds be¬ 
 hind me.” Many professed Christians die 
 disgracefully and “wickedly rich.” The 
 
25 
 
 shame and sin, however, lie not in the fact 
 that the power was gathered, but that it was 
 unwielded 
 
 THE MONEY-MAKING TALENT. 
 
 It is the duty of some men to make a great 
 deal of money. God has given to them the 
 money-making talent; and it is as wrong to 
 bury that talent as to bury a talent for preach¬ 
 ing. It is every man’s duty to wield the wid¬ 
 est possible power for righteousness : and the 
 power in money must be gained before it can 
 be used. But let a man beware ! This power 
 in money is something awful. It is more 
 dangerous than dynamite. The victims of 
 “saint-seducing gold” are numberless. If a 
 Christian grows rich, it should be with fear 
 and trembling, lest the “deceitfulness of 
 riches ” undo him ; for Christ spoke of the 
 salvation of a rich man as something miracu¬ 
 lous (Luke i8 : 24-27). 
 
 AN AIM TO BE KEPT IN MIND. 
 
 Let no man deceive himself by saying : “I 
 will give when I have amassed wealth. I de¬ 
 sire money that I may do good with it; but 
 I will not give now, that I may give the more 
 largely in the future.” That is the pit in 
 which m.any have perished. If a man is grow¬ 
 ing large in wealth, nothing but constant and 
 generous giving can save him from growing 
 small in soul. In determining the amount of 
 his gifts and the question whether he should 
 impair his capital, or to what extent, a man 
 should never lose sight of a distinct and in¬ 
 telligent aim to do the greatest possible good 
 
-- 26 - 
 
 in a life-time. Each must decide for himself 
 what is the wisest, the highest, use of money ; 
 and we need often to remind ourselves of the 
 constant tendency of human nature to selfish¬ 
 ness and self-deceptiom 
 
 THE PRINCIPLE NOT ACCEPTED. 
 
 The principle which has been stated and 
 briefly applied, and which is as abundantly 
 sustained by reason as it is clearly taught in 
 the Scriptures, is not accepted by the Chris¬ 
 tian church. There are many noble gifts 
 and noble givers ; but they ' only help us to 
 demonstrate that great multitudes in the 
 church have not yet learned the first princi¬ 
 ples of Christian giving. The home mission¬ 
 ary contributions of the evangelical church- 
 membership in 1890 did not average more 
 than fifty cents per caput. But many thou¬ 
 sands give a dollar each, which means that 
 as many thousands more give nothing. There 
 are some thousands who give ten dollars ; and 
 for every thousand of this class there are nine¬ 
 teen thousand who do not give anything. Dr. 
 Cuyler says he once had a seamstress in his 
 church who used to give a hundred dollars a 
 year to missions. Not a few out of larger 
 means, give as much ; and, for every one of 
 them, there are one hundred and ninety-nine 
 who give nothing. Some give five thousand 
 dollars; and for each of them there are ten 
 thousand church-members who do not give 
 one cent to redeem this land for which He, 
 with whom they profess to be in sympathy, 
 gave his life. There are hundreds of churches 
 that do not give anything to home or foreign 
 
27 
 
 missions; and of those that do many mem¬ 
 bers give nothing. A church in Hartford 
 gave eleven hundred dollars to home mis¬ 
 sions. One lady said to another : “ Did n’t 
 we do well this morning ?” “ No ; not as a 
 
 church,” was the reply; for one lady gave 
 six hundred dollars and one gentleman gave 
 three hundred. ” If church collections were 
 analyzed, it would appear that, as a rule, by 
 far the greater part is given by a very few per¬ 
 sons, and they not the most able. The great 
 majority of church-members give only a trifle 
 or nothing at all for the work of missions. 
 
 CONTRIBUTIONS. 
 
 During the year 1889-90 contributions in 
 the United States for foreign missions were 
 $3,977,701^ A total of $10,795,259 for 
 home and foreign missions sounds like a large 
 sum. But great and small are relative terms. 
 Compared with the need of the world and the 
 ability of the church it is pitiable indeed. 
 Look at that ability. The Christian religion, 
 by rendering men temperate, industrious, and 
 moral, makes them prosperous. There are 
 but few of the very poor in our churches. 
 The great question has come to be : “How 
 can we reach the masses.?” Church-mem¬ 
 bership is made up chiefly of the well-to-do 
 and the rich. On the other hand, a majority 
 of the membership is composed of women, 
 who control less money than men. It is, 
 therefore, fair to say that the church-member 
 is at least as well off as the average citizen. 
 In 1890, one in every 4.7 of the population 
 was a member of some evangelical church. 
 
30 
 
 THE IDEA OF STEWARDSHIP NOT 
 GRASPED. 
 
 Is it not evident that most of our church- 
 members have failed to learn the first princi¬ 
 ples of Christian giving? And many who 
 give most largely do not seem to have grasped 
 fully the idea of stewardship, and to hold 
 themselves under obligations to use every 
 dollar in the way that will most honor God. 
 A wealthy clergyman (!), who was a munifi¬ 
 cent giver, saw, in Paris, a pin that struck 
 his fancy, and gave |8oo for it. If, in the 
 wide world that was the highest use he could 
 find for the money, it was his duty to spend 
 it as he did. Many give largely, and spend 
 as lavishly on themselves ; nor is it strange, 
 in view of the instructions often given. A 
 worthy secretary of one of our most honored 
 benevolent societies said: ‘‘He shall see the 
 travail of his soul and be satisfied—When ! 
 Not till beneficence keeps pace with luxuryN 
 Will that satisfy Him who commended her 
 that cast into the treasury all her living, who 
 requires of his followers daily cross-bearing, 
 and admits no one to discipleship who has 
 not forsaken “all that he hath?’' Is the 
 Master satisfied when a rich man to gratify 
 “a nice and curious palate,” spends ten thou¬ 
 sand a year on his table, provided only be¬ 
 nevolence keeps pace with his luxury, and he 
 gives as much more to missions ? Or, is it 
 untrue that God requires every one to make 
 the wisest and the best use of all his money ? 
 
31 
 
 WHERE THE REFORMATION SHOULD 
 
 BEGIN. 
 
 Many churches are never taught that the 
 consecration of all our property to God is no 
 more optional than the practice of justice or 
 chastity or any other duty. Most Christians 
 leave their giving to mere impulse ; they give 
 something or nothing, much or little, as they 
 feel like it. They might as well attempt to 
 live a Christian life and be honest or not as 
 they felt like it. The churches are not ade¬ 
 quately instructed as to this duty. They 
 hear too often of the “ Lord’s share." The 
 reformation must begin with the pulpit. 
 
 ACCEPTANCE OF THE PRINCIPLE 
 URGED. 
 
 I. The spiritual life and power of the 
 churches demand the acceptance of the true 
 doctrine touching possessions. We talk about 
 “ our crosses." There is no such expression 
 in the Bible. The word does not occur there 
 in the plural. It has been belittled ; it has 
 come to mean trial, disagreeable duty, any¬ 
 thing which crosses our inclination ; but its 
 meaning in the Scriptures is never so meagre 
 as that. There it always means crucifixion ; 
 like the word gallows, in modern speech, it 
 means death. To take one’s cross means, in 
 the Bible, to start for the place of execution. 
 “ If any man will come after me, let him take 
 up his cross aiid follow me.” Follow him 
 where I To Golgotha. He, in whose experi¬ 
 ence there is no Calvary where he himself has 
 been crucified with Christ, knows little of 
 
 
32 
 
 Christian discipleship. Christ demands act¬ 
 ual self-abnegation ; but where the Christian 
 name is honored, and its profession confers 
 obvious advantages, self deception is common 
 and Christian experien-ce is liable to be shal¬ 
 low. As quaint old Rutherford said : “ Men 
 get Christ for the half of nothing ; such ma- 
 keth loose work.’' Too many church-mem¬ 
 bers know little or nothing of self-surrender ; 
 hence the lack of spiritual life and power. At 
 such times the church suffers for the want of 
 some decisive test, the application of which 
 will show men to themselves, and separate, 
 with a good degree of accuracy, those who 
 have been crucified with Christ from those 
 who know not what it is to ‘‘take up the 
 cross. ” 
 
 A TEST OF SINCERITY. 
 
 In a commercial age, and especially in a 
 luxurious civilization, the form of worldliness 
 to which the church is most likely to be 
 tempted is the love of money. As the means 
 of almost every possible self-gratification it 
 becom.es the representative of self; hence the 
 true principle of Christian giving, the actual 
 surrender of all substance to God, is exactly 
 the best test for the application of which the 
 church is suffering to-day. If this test were 
 applied now to every church-member as Christ 
 applied it to the young ruler (and the need is 
 the same, for the human heart is the same, 
 and heaven and the conditions of entrance 
 are the same), would not the record in many 
 a case be, “and he went away sorrowful, for 
 he had great possessions ” ? 
 
33 
 
 What right has any one, who has light on 
 this subject, to believe he has given himself 
 to God, if he has not given his possessions ? 
 If he has kept back the less, what reason is 
 there to think he has given the greater ? As 
 Jeremy Taylor says: “He never loved God 
 who will quit anything of his religion to save 
 his money/' 
 
 Is not much that the Master said concern¬ 
 ing possessions a dead letter in the church 
 to-day ? ‘ ‘ Lay not up for yourselves treasures 
 
 upon earth." Is not that exactly what many 
 in the church are doing, and many more 
 striving with eager energy to do? “The de¬ 
 ceitfulness of riches." How many are afraid 
 of being deceived by them ? How many re¬ 
 fuse to run the risk? “How hardly shall 
 they that have riches enter into the kingdom 
 of heaven." How many are unwilling to be¬ 
 come rich or richer? Multitudes now com¬ 
 plain that they have so little who on the great 
 day of accounts wall mourn that they had so 
 much. The Word declares covetousness to 
 be idolatry ; but how many church-members 
 were ever disciplined for this idolatry ? There 
 is, however, a sign of the millennium down in 
 Maine, where, a few years ago, a church dis¬ 
 ciplined five members because they would 
 give nothing. The spiritual life and power 
 of the church can vitalize and save the world 
 only when there is a spirit of consecration 
 sufficiently deep and inclusive to accept the 
 true principle of Christian giving. 
 
34 
 
 OUR nation’s need. 
 
 2. Again, our safety from the perils which 
 threaten ruin to our nation demands the ac¬ 
 ceptance of this principle. 
 
 It is not urged as a panacea ; specific reme¬ 
 dies, which there is no space to discuss, must 
 be applied ; reform must be pressed ; we need 
 patriotic and wise legislation, and to this end 
 fewer politicians and more statesmen; but 
 statesmanship cannot save the country. 
 Christ’s refusal to be made a king, and his re¬ 
 jection of Satan’s offer of the world’s scepter, 
 ought to teach those who seek to save the 
 world that moral means are necessary to 
 moral ends. Christ saw that the world could 
 not be saved by legislation, that only by his 
 being “lifted up” could all men be drawn 
 unto him. He saw that he could not save 
 the world without sacrificing for it ; no more 
 can we. 
 
 THE SAVING POWER OF THE CHURCH 
 IS ITS SACRIFICING POWER. 
 
 The gospel is the radical cure of the world’s 
 great evils, and its promulgation, like its spirit, 
 requires sacrifice. Money is the sinews of 
 spiritual warfare as well as carnal, and a suffi¬ 
 cient amount of it would enable us to meet 
 these perils with the gospel. 
 
 The acceptance of the true principle of 
 Christian giving is urged upon us by the 
 fact that money is power, which is needed 
 everywhere for elevating and saving men. It 
 is further urged upon us by the fact that only 
 such a view of possessions will save us from 
 
35 
 
 the great and imminent perils of wealth. God 
 might have sent his angels to sing his gospel 
 through the world, or he might have written 
 it on the sky, and made the clouds his mes¬ 
 sengers ; but we need the responsibility of 
 publishing that gospel. He might make the 
 safe of every benevolent society a gold mine 
 as unfailing as the widow’s cruse of oil; but 
 we need to give that gold. 
 
 A REVERSAL NEEDED. 
 
 The tendency of human nature, intensified 
 by our commercial activity, is to make the life 
 a whirlpool—a great maelstrom which draws 
 everything into itself. What is needed to-day 
 is a grand reversal of the movement, a transfor¬ 
 mation of the life into a fountain. And in an 
 exceptional degree is this the need of Anglo- 
 Saxons. Their strong love of liberty, and their 
 acquisitiveness, afford a powerful temptation 
 to offer some substitute for self-abnegation. 
 We would call no man master; we must 
 take Christ as master. We would possess all 
 things ; we must surrender all things. 
 
 THE INFLUENCE OF SELF-DENIAL ON 
 CHARACTER. 
 
 One of the grave problems before us is how 
 to make great material prosperity conduce to 
 individual advancement. The severest pov¬ 
 erty is unfavorable to morality. Up to a 
 certain point increase of property serves to 
 elevate man morally and intellectually, while 
 it improves him physically. But, as nations 
 grow rich, they are prone to become self- 
 indulgent, effeminate, immoral. The physi- 
 
36 
 
 cal nature becomes less robust, the intellec¬ 
 tual nature less vigorous, the moral less pure. 
 The pampered civilization of old had to be 
 reinvigorated, from time to time, with fresh 
 infusions of barbaric blood — a remedy no 
 longer available. If we cannot find in Chris¬ 
 tianity a remedy or preventative, our Chris¬ 
 tian civilization and the w^orld itself is a 
 failure; and our rapidly increasing wealth, 
 like the “cankered heaps of strange-achieved 
 gold,’’ will curse us unto destruction. 
 
 But the recognition of God’s ownership in 
 all our substance is a perfect antidote for 
 the debilitating and corrupting influence of 
 wealth. It prevents self-indulgence, and the 
 apprehension of religious truth implied in 
 such recognition affords the strongest possi¬ 
 ble motives to sacrifice and active effort of 
 which men are capable. A hundred years 
 ago poverty compelled men to endure hard¬ 
 ness, and so served to make the nation great. 
 Now that w^e are exposed to the pampering 
 influence of riches, Christian principle must 
 inspire the spirit of self-denial for Christ’s 
 sake, and the world’s sake, and so make the 
 nation greater. 
 
 THE PRESENT CRISIS. 
 
 3. A mighty emergency is upon us. Our 
 country’s future, and much of the w'orld’s 
 future, depend on the w^ay in which Christian 
 men meet the crisis. 
 
 And our plea is not America for America’s 
 sake ; but America for the world’s sake. For, 
 if this generation is faithful to its trust, Amer¬ 
 ica is to become God’s right arm in his battle 
 
 
37 
 
 with the world’s ignorance and oppression 
 and sin. Immeasurable opportunities sur¬ 
 round and overshadow us. 
 
 What a consummate blunder to live selfishly 
 in such a generation ! What food for ever¬ 
 lasting reflection and regret in a life lived 
 narrowly amid such infinitely wide opportu¬ 
 nities ! 
 
 A LIFE DEVOTED TO MONEY-GETTING. 
 
 Says a New York daily paper : “A gentle¬ 
 man died at his residence in one of our fash- 
 able streets, leaving eleven millions of dollars. 
 He was a member of the Presbyterian church, 
 in excellent standing, a good husband and 
 father, and a thrifty citizen. On his death¬ 
 bed he suffered great agony of mind and 
 gave continual expression to his remorse for 
 what his conscience told him had been an 
 ill-spent life. ‘Oh,’ he exclaimed, ‘ if I could 
 only live my years over again ! Oh, if I could 
 only be spared for a few years, I would give 
 all the wealth I have amassed in a life-time. 
 It is a life devoted to money-getting that I 
 regret. It is this which weighs me down, 
 and makes me despair of the life hereafter.’ ” 
 Suppose so unfaithful a steward is permitted 
 to enter the “ many mansions.” When, with 
 clarified spiritual vision, he perceives the true 
 meaning of life, and sees that he has lost the 
 one opportunity of an endless existence to 
 set in motion influences, which, by leading 
 sinners to repentance, would cause heaven to 
 th-ill with a new joy, it seems to me he 
 would gladly give a hundred years of Paradise 
 for a single day on earth in possession of the 
 
38 
 
 money once entrusted to him—time enough 
 to turn that power into channels of Christian 
 work. 
 
 THE NEEDS OF THE WEST. 
 
 The emergency created by the settlement 
 of the states and territories of the West—a 
 grand constellation of empires—is to be met 
 by placing in the hand of every Christian 
 agency there at work all ,the power that 
 money can wield. There is scarcely a church, 
 or society, or institution of any kind doing 
 God service there which is not embarrassed, 
 or sadly crippled for lack of funds. Mission¬ 
 aries should be multiplied, parsonages and 
 churches built, and colleges generously en¬ 
 dowed. The nation’s salt, with which the 
 whole land and preeminently the tainted civi¬ 
 lization of the frontier, must be sweetened, is 
 Christian education. The tendency, which is 
 so marked in many of our older and larger 
 colleges, to develop and furnish simply the 
 intellect, is full of peril. Divorce religion 
 and education, and we shall fall a prey either 
 to blundering goodness or well-schooled vil¬ 
 lainy. The young colleges of the West, like 
 Drury, Doane, Carleton, Colorada, Yankton, 
 Fargo, and others, founded by broad-minded 
 and far-seeing men, are characterized by a 
 strong religious influence, and send a surpris¬ 
 ing proportion of their graduates into the 
 ministry. In view of their almost boundless 
 possibilities for usefulness in their relations to 
 the future of the West and of the nation, and 
 in view of their urgent needs, it is a wonder 
 that those who, like Boaz, are mighty men of 
 
39 
 
 wealth, can deny themselves the deep and 
 Tasting pleasure of liberally endowing such 
 institutions. Said one who had just given 
 fifty thousand dollars to a Western college : 
 “I cannot tell you what I have enjoyed. It 
 is like being born into the kingdom again.” 
 
 OUR GREAT BENEVOLENT SOCIETIES. 
 
 This emergency demands the acceptance of 
 Christian stewardship, that our great benevo¬ 
 lent societies may be adequately furnished for 
 their work. They are kept constantly on their 
 knees before the public, and with pleas so 
 pitiful, so moving, the marvel to me is that, 
 when Christian men hold their peace and 
 their purse, the very stones do not cry out. 
 And, notwithstanding all their efforts to secure 
 means, they must, every one, scrimp at every 
 point, decline providential calls to enlarge 
 their work, and even retrench, in order to 
 close the fiscal year without a debt. 
 
 THE DOOR OF OPPORTUNITY IS OPEN 
 IN ALL THE EARTH : 
 
 Organizations have been completed, Ian-, 
 guages learned, the Scriptures translated, 
 and now the triumph of the kingdom awaits 
 only the exercise of the power committed to 
 the church, but which she refuses to put 
 forth. If she is to keep step with the majes¬ 
 tic march of the divine providence, the 
 church must consecrate the power which is 
 in money. 
 
 THE BLESSEDNESS OF GIVING. 
 
 4. Oh, that men would accept the testi¬ 
 mony of Christ touching the blessedness of 
 
40 
 
 giving ! He who sacrifices most, loves most; 
 and he who loves most, is most blessed*. 
 Love and sacrifice are related to each other 
 like seed and fruit; each produces the other. 
 The seed of sacrifice brings forth Ae fragrant 
 fruit of love, and love always has in its heart 
 the seeds of new sacrifice. He who gives but 
 a part is not made perfect in love. Love re¬ 
 joices to give all ; it does not measure its 
 sacrifice. It was Judas, not Mary, who cal¬ 
 culated the value of the alabaster box of 
 ointment. He who is infinitely blessed is the 
 Infinite Giver; and the man, made in his 
 likeness, was intended to find his highest 
 blessedness in the completest self-giving. He 
 who receives, but does not give, is like the 
 Dead Sea. All the fresh floods of Jordan 
 cannot sweeten its dead, salt depths. So all 
 the stre.ams of God’s bounty cannot sweeten 
 a heart that has no outlet; that is ever re¬ 
 ceiving, yet never full and overflowing. 
 
 If those whose horizon is as narrow as the 
 bushel under which they hide their light could 
 be induced to come out into a large place, 
 
 ’ and take a worthy view of the kingdom of 
 Christ and of their relations to it, if they 
 could be persuaded to make the principle of 
 Christian giving regnant in all their life, their 
 happiness would be as much increased as their 
 usefulness. 
 
 Copies of this pamphlet can be obtained from the 
 American Tract Society, lo East 2jd Street, New 
 York, at 2 cts. each, or $i 6o per hundred.