Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1856-11-12
Riches and Piety.

4 was one day. said the late William Jay o
Bath visiting with him (John Euster) nt tht
house of gentleman, who though deacon O
the church, was too much carried away with the
pride of life. The mansion was decorated with
every kind of ornament, and the table furnished
with every luxury. AS We were entering the
sumptuuus dining-room, Foster pinched my ell
bow and said, is this the strait gate!"
Foster possessed somewhat surly temper, and
we would by means endorse all lis remarks
Still he was keen observer rs well rs pro-
found thinker, and the question recorded above
NAV we'll be pondered by all to whom Provl'
dence has given wealth. That the rapid In
crease OF wealth in our country Is obllteratne
the lines of distinction between the church and
the world. cannot be denied. Should the pro-
cess of assimilation continue. it will soon be I'M
possible, from any outward showing 10 distin'
guish between the families which lay claim
to piety and those who are confessedly wlthou,
God Such things ought not so to be. Ii God
sees fit to give redeemed sinner temporal rich
essin addition to an eternal inheritance, that is
no reason why the recipient should feel less in
terest in Gods cause, and do less to promote his
glory. On the contrary, it lays him under in
creased obligations to gratitude and activity IN
the work of beneyolence.
Which of these two effects are usually pro-
duced9 Do we find men increasing in good
works in proportion as their property increases
Is it expected that rich man will feel as deep
an interest in the cause of spiritual religion as
the man of moderate means2
Will the possession of property atone for the
want of spirituality2 Will large subscription
be an offset against the non-attendance at the
prayer meeting2 Is there one standard OF du-
ty for rich man and another for the poor man
Certainly not.
We do not contend that the samo duties are
in all cases. incumbent upon the rich and the
poor. We do not contend that the rich man
ought TO live in the same style as the poor man.
1t is lawful for the rich man to expend more for
the comfort of his family, more than it is lawful
for the poor man to expend. 1t may be lawful
for the rich man to ride in his carriage when it
may be the duty of the poor man to go on foot.
God makes men 10 differ in their temporal cir
cunlstances, just as he makes them TO differ in
mental endowrnents. In both causes these diff
ferences modify duties but they do not modify
the grand principle of duty. It is the duty of
both to love God with all their heart. 1t is the
duty of both to do all to the glory of Ged. 1t is
required OF both that they be not conformed to
the world. III IS the DUTY Oh potu W "oIA III
Gods vineyard.
God does not give Christian wealth merely
that be may get more. He gives it to him that
he may render debt of gratitude, and that he
may have the means of working more efficient
ly in the vineyard Is the divine purpose ac-
complished in the case of the majority OF veal
thy professions of religion2
The poor and men of moderate possessions
should not neglect their duty because some who
are rich neglects theirs. Every man must give
his own recount unto God. To be snvious of
the rich, and censorious, is to be guilty of sin
greater, perhaps, than the one censured2 Envy
is oftep hidden under the cloak of zeal.
The rich and the poor meet together in the
church. and they should love as brethren. They
will ere long meet together at the judgement
coat