The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1879-04-16
FoR rHr CENTRAL PHrssrrrRlAs.
HOW MUCH SHOULD BE GIVEN TO GOD

HOW MUCH SHOULD BE GIVEN TO GOD
The famous "Lettres un Provincial Of
Pascal, while exposing the proAigate logic Of
the Jesuits on moral duties, has the follow,
ing passage. Lstter 6ih.)
God says in the gospel that We must give
aims of our abundance. Yet several Jesuit,
caauists have found means to relieve the
richest persons from the obligation of aims
giving -. by interpreting the word 'abuu-
Dance This is what the learned Vasquez
has done. "What worldly people keep to
themselves to exslt their (sociaD condition
and that of their relatives, is not called their
abundance" To this snug gloss, Pascal
answers: According to Vasquez, man
will be sure to give no aims, provided be
have ambition enough never to have any Of
his abundance left over; but suppose the
gospel says, that we must be sure not to have
the ambition : What then ?"
Rem tstigit acG. Has not the great part
of the fashionable Protestant churches quiet
ly settled down upon the ethics of the pro-
aigate Jesuit "Of course; must con-
tribute to Gods cause what can spare
but in obedience to society," my worldly
aspirations will SO keep pace with my wealth,
that shall not have much to spare" But
does the gospel allow you to have the world
ly aspirations That is the vital question.
In my last, alluded to the accepted stand
ard Of duty, as usually acted on by rich
Christians, and even admitted by the reli-
giOus guides: Provided l sm spending my
own money, and paying my just debts; pro-
vided | give to the Church what is convenient
and reputable 10y the wOrld's stsndsrD and
provided the luxurious object on which /
spend my income is per Sc lawful, I am all
right as Christian
This expressly cOutrsdicted. Ho is not
sll right, as a steward of God. The only
rule by which be can rightly disburse his in
come is the law of love: he is bound to ask
himself not only: SIS this luxury, on which
1 propose to spend this disposable portion Of
Gods money entrusted to me, per Sc inno'
cent, and to some degree useful 2" But
also SIS it the expenditure by which 1 can,
at this time, most glOrity my Master ?" And
if he expends the money for any lower object
than the one most pleasing to God and be
ne6ceut to man on the whole within his reach,
be is an ulfaithful steward; he has robbed
God.
1 repeat; this is practical doctrine Of
great Importance. 1t is of radical impor-
tance, because Gods treasury can never be
adequately filed, until it is acted on. Ex-
perience proves, that on any other doctrine,
luxury and pomp among Christions always
grow as fast as their means; so that on the
looser, the popular, doctrine, Gods goodness
in enriching his people fails, and must ever
fail, to Eli up his treasury. 1t is of radical
Importance, because, until we take this Bible
ground, we can fad no tenable and consist
eut position on which We can say to the
proud waves of worldliness and vsin.show
:. Thus far shalt thou come and no farther.
/ have watched the question for thirty years
and have tracked it through church history
l have never yet heard of one, who discard
ing this Bible ground, was able to find ON
any less absurd and impOtent than that o
the old Methodist lady, whose view l an
about to state. At the season of new bon
nets, she was greatly scandalized to see
young sister seat herself before her in church
with new bonnet surrounded by q floating
ostrich plume. On Monday, she bethOugh
herself of the text, which says that the true
200. fearing man doth not suffer sin in hi
brother" and her conscience spurred her t
: 20 and demonstrate with her young sister o.
her sinful pOmp. The answer was poser.
"Wby, sister; know my plume looks rathe
gay; but you know that your own bonnet
> plain as it looks, is trimmed with genuin
Flanders thread lace, that cost ever 80 muc
3 more than my poor feather" J" But the elder
feminine logic was not at fault. Her answe
5 was: "Well, you know Paul says we mus
D not be conformed to this world (; AMI We haV
5 to set our standard sOmss0hsrs, and I 81
r mine at feathers" Now, good Mr.. Editor
|. let your columns be the lists; and hereb
b lay down my gauntlet in them, With tn
? challenge: Let any fashionable Christian
!. or his pastor, present any other standard, I
: a limit to Christians worldly confOrmitie
Q than the Bible STANDARD of the law of love
o and pledge myself to show that it is as q
o bitrsry and untenable as this old ladys.
t will be feathers" d"
d The true doctrine is vital, because it is Il
is only way to arrest the eviIs of EaTUry
: Christian families. Have men forgotten Il
/ wisdom of ages, which teaches that luxul