The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1902-06-23

He took for his text the words: For
brethren, ye have been called unto lib
erty; only use not liberty for an occa-
sion to the flesh, but by love serve one
another" from Gal, via, and "As free
and not using your liberty for a cloak
of maliciousness, but as the servants of
God" Peter, 2:16. DR.. Mcleod said:
In these sentences, the two great apos-
tlcs-Paul and Peter-teach substantially
the same doctrine. There was a time
when Peter held a widely different opin-
ion. He and his "beloved brother, Faul,"
collided at Antioch. and the contention
between them was quite sharp. At that
time. as on other occasions the incautio,s
and impetuOus Peter was at fault, and
Paul "withstood him to the face, because
he was to be blamed" Peter was willing
to sacrifice a great principle, for the
sake of conforming to a Jewish prejudice.
Paul. on the other hand. stood up for
Christian liberty and for Christian toler-
alton; and he opposed with much spirit,
and with unanswcrable logic, the narrow
and unchristian doctrine which Peter had
advocated and commended. The contro-
versy, though animated. was altogether
brotherly. 1t left no sting in the hearts
OF the apostles.
SAW HIS ERROR.
Peter saw his error. and he acknowl-
edged IT.; for, in aftcr years, he. with that
outspoken candor and magnanimity which
characterized him, not only endorsed
Paul's teaching. but he almost adopted
his language. Paul says: Brethren, ye
have been called unto liberty; only use
not liberty for an occasion to the flesh.
but by love serve one another: and Peter
only echoes Paul's doctrine when he says:
'As free, and not using your liberty as
a cloak for maiciousness, but as the
servants of Cod
In this, and in other controversies and
strifes which occurred between the dis
cples and apostles of our Lord, we have
abundant proof that they were men of
like passions with us. This sainthood
did not always lift them above the in
tirmities to which human nature is la
BILE. If such saints as Paul and Peter, or
Paul and Barnabas had their misun-
derstanding and their Quarrels, need we
wonder if good and honorable men are
found nowadays who differ widely on
points of Christian doctrine, and who. at
times, allow personal and party feelings
to enter into their sharp contentionS? If
st. Peter fell into serious error on the
subject of religious liberty. is it any Won
der of men who are far from being saints.
have fallen into grevous error on the
subject of civil liberty.
The principle laid down by both Paul
and Peter is one that no Christian can
afford to ignore. 1t is foundation doc
trine. Brothcrly love and good citizenship
are built upon it. The doctrine may be
stated thus: Instead of using our Chris
tian liberty as a law for selfishness or
as means of Expressing our neighbors,
or as "cloak of malciousness." We,
"as the servants Of Cod ought to be
loyal to His truth, and "by love, serve
one another"
If this doctrine We're more cordially en-
braced and more widely practiced, it
would be an unspeakable blessing to So
ciety in general, and to the church in
particular.
HAVE FALSE VIEWS.
In our own highly favored land, So
cety is today suffering grievous injury
because multitudes among us have emf
brace false views of liberty. Those
prejudiced Jewish zealots whom Paul re-
buked and with whom he reasoned. have
their successors They are blind to rea-
son. They are deaf to entreaty. They
have no right conception of the mean-
ing of Christian liberty. They take but
little if any interest in other folks. Their
thoughts are concentrated on them
selves Society has not many rights
which they feel bound TO respect. When
the laws of the land interfere with their
ideas of liberty. then they are opposed to
such laws. They want a loose rein. They
are quite willing that other violators OF
law and order should be curbed and pun
ishcd, but they are indignant when the
law steps in and puts curb upon them
selves. Their idea of liberty is that they
should be "a law unto themselves"
But we need not wonder at such con-
duct on the part of the thoughtless for
thoughtful men have held widely different
ideas in respect of liberty. In the mind
of George Washington and the colonists.
liberty meant something very different
from that which it conveyed to the mind
of the king and parliament of England.
A patriot and traitor have different
ideas of liberty. 1t will never do to
put George Washington and Benedict
Arnold in the same category.
We must be careful not to confound
Christian liberty with license. They have
nothing in common There is no fellow
ship between righteousness and un-
righteousness. There can be no concord
between Christ and Belial. Christian
liberty does not give a man IL wrong
commission to do as he pleases. Society
has rights with which no individual
should interfere.
One of the choicest blessings of ma
tion is good government; and good gov
elnment means civil liberty: and civil
liberty, rightly interpreted, means rei-
gious liberty; and for all the civil and
religious liberty that we enjoy we are
indebted to our truly holy Christianity.
Moreover, in all future ages, Christianity
and civil liberty will be found marching
side by side The only temple of freedom
worthy of the name. is that temple which
has Christianity for its 'seven pillars"
Divine wisdom alone has built that tenn
pie, and it is as solid as the throne OF
God. Prov. ix:1.)
THOSE WHO WOULD APPROVE.
10 be permitted to act as one pleases,
irrespective of the rights of others, Is an
idea of liberty that would be approved by
thieves and burglars, and by all those
who would use this liberty as a "cloalS
of maliciousness" but such conduct will
never be tolerated in Christian society.
No individual has any right to use lib
erty which he claims 10 the injury of his
neighbors; nor has IL number of indi-
viduals any right to band themselves to-
gether and in the name of liberty, sac
rifice liberty on the altar of their selfish
ness, and do ii to their own injury as well
as to the injury of the community. That
would be to use ones liberty for an
occasion to the iiesh,' and las cloak of
maliciousness, Hence, in every well or
dered state, where an individual, or a
combination of individuals. take undue
liberty and violates the law, restraint
should be used, and, if necessary, punish
ment should be inflicted.
That Christian liberty Is In harmony
with righteous law, Is II fact that needs
L..