The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1889-03-06


full Of sectional strife, so full of every
days report of man 8 inhumanity to man
Who stops to listen to the soft and solita-
ry voice, Blessed are the poor in spirit,
while the populace vociferates, Blessed
are the self-reliant, Blessed are the world
defant2
Who believes that they are the "blessed
who mourn, while the multitude pro-
claims blessed are the gay, the prosper
Gus, and happy; blessed are they who see
Joy beyond Joy rising in long perspective?
What becomes of the gentle and tender
assurance, BLESSED are the meek, amidst
the loud p@ans OF popular applause for
those who are swift to redress their
wrongs and terrible to rJtaliate when
keenly sensitive honor, stung to the quick,
demands satisfaction?
Who will place the prosecuted in the
role of the blessed amidst the protest of
the clamoring crowd, proclaiming, Bless
ed are they who escape obloquy and mall
treatment, who enjoy the smiles and the
praises of the world as they bear off the
splendid prizes of ambition and renown
In the hero worship of the world which
side does poetry, history, and oratory
take2 When Homer gave to literature
his portraiture of the most renowned hero
of antiquity, the prominent traits of whose
character Horace summed up in one
nervous line,
In1piger, irdcundus, inerorabilis acer,
names that any four of Millions devils
might have answered to-the great bard
did not offend the moral sense of his
countrymen by the picture. Neither was
Greek nor Roman admiration of this
character diminished when he is repre-
sented as dragging the dead body of his
rival, bound to his chariot wheels, three
times around the walls of Troy, and this
too in sight of his aged father.
What protest of virtuous indignation
visited Mark Antony when he burst into
laughter at seeing the hands and head of
his enemy, Cicero, which he had ordered
to be cut off; and if it should be said
that those were the barbarities of anti
guilty, impossible to modern civilization,
what are we think of the epithets, great
ness and glory bestowed by the historians
of Ohristendom on the long unhroken line
of those who have achieved renown by
trampling on the rights and liberties OF
their fellow-men, and who by their tran
scendent villainies have won the crown
of the despot and usurper? Need we
wonder then that with literature, history,
and popular sentiment all arrayed
against the peaceful ethics of the cross,
it should be common in every day life,
and among men OF Cur own time, to
confound the poor in spirit with the poor
spirited and the pusillanimous; to mistake
the meek for the mean and cowardly,
and to rank those who are forbearing
and forgiving under insult and injustice
among the feeble and faint-hearted for
whom men of honor can have only feel
ing of pity akin to contempt?
But the subject under discussion is
met with still graver Embarrassment
one which perplexes the more thought.
tul and OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES which con-
fuses even those who are anxious to
learn what is true In order to do what is
right. The embarrassment to which |
refer arises from the difficulty of draw.
ing the line between the use and abuse
of what is in itself innocent and under
certain conditions commendable and yet
liable to become injurious through excess
or perversion.
To define the metes and bounds of al
loWable aDger-to determine the circum-
stances under which it is justifable and
conducive to the public good to ascer-
tain the moment when it overleaps law
ful restraint and becomes hurtful to
the individual and general welfare-to
present concisely and accurately the
teachings Of Scripture with regard to the
forgiveness Of injuries; to ENFORCE con-
vlncingly the motives by which it is en-
joined and to illustrate the manner In
which it is to be performed-what nice
discrimination, what sobriety of iudg-
ment, and above all, what spiritual die.
cernment and direction is needed for such
task
Those who have asked me to discuss
the subject to-day will recognize all the,
and estimate Alright the difficulty of the
undertaking Got which l am more con.
scious than any to whom speak, will
appreciate the care and trouble l have
taken to collect the opinions of iudicious
commentators to substantiate the views
venture to express, that they may thus
obtain the consensus of the wise and
good whose testimony is entitled to re-
spect.
Any system Of ethics which would
underrate the influence of the emotional
nature in the affairs Of life, and which
would subject everything to the control
of the intellectual faculties, has no sup.
port either in reason or revelation. Love,
j L