Newspaper Page Text
4 THE PRESBYTERIAN
EARTHLY PROSPERITY AND GOSPEL
PROGRESS.
We have been interested in the leading editorial in
a recent "Westminster." It sets us to thinking.
It first portrays the material prosperity of our coun
try this year, "big crops, factories on full time, prices
up." Then it argues that "great possessions are an indubitable
mark of the divine favor," and should eventuate
in spiritual development. It says:
"The churches join in the chorus of thanksgiving.
r\ - * ? -
v./iicc upon a time tne preachers had much to say of
the uses of adversity,' but we are beyond all that, especially
since the budget for the conversion of the
heathen has become so big.
"For ourselves, individually, do we feel increasingly
pious as we find that we can not pay our debts? And
ainv,c wc arc in ims inooci witn every one else, why
should the notion that the world is 'a desert drear' excite
special faith in its Creator as the source of all
good?"
It argues that in the days of Abraham, Jacob, Joseph
and David, "it was the wicked man who was short of
provisions, while the good rode on camels and had all
the luxuries of the season."
Is this position true?
I. Does the Bible teach that earthly prosperity indicates
God's favor or that earthly trials express God's
condemnation?
In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, he who
had wealth went to hell; but the beggar was carried
to a place at the heavenly feast "in Abraham's bosom."
In the book of Job, Eliphaz argued that the afflictions
of Job proved him to be an awful sinner. Job
replied, No! "my righteousness?my redemption?is
in it." In the last chapter of Job God condemns the
utterances of Eliphaz and declares that Job had spoken
"that which is right."
"That model manipulator of the visible supply of
corn, Joseph," did indeed enjoy the testimony that
"God was with Joseph"; but,?mark you,?this testimony
was given not in the years of Joseph's prosperity,
but during his slavery and imprisonment.
' And in the third chapter of Revelation we read of
the church at Laodicea, "Because thou sayest, I am
rirll Or?/1 A-I- - J- " * * f "T **
?..vi mv.taacu wini guuus, tnereiore l will spue
thee out of my mouth."
One of the wealthiest lands of this earth in ages
past was Babylon?but it rests under God's curse: another
of great wealth was Egypt?God has made it a
"vile kingdom"; and there was Tyre?by prophecy
God stripped it and made it a bare rock. Prosperity
is not an evidence of God's approval.
IT. On the other hand those men for whom God
had in store the highest marks of his heavenly approval
have been those j/ho spent a large part, or the
larger part, of their earthly lives in affliction.
On the Mount of Transfiguration God specially honored
two men, Moses and Elijah. Rut Moses on earth,
instead of enjoying the riches of Egypt, had to abandon
it all, to live forty years as a hireling shepherd
apparently poor in this world, and finally to die in the
wilderness without a square foot of land to call his
own. Rut this experience fitted him to receive t"he
mark of divine approval.
So with Elijah. For three years and a half he was
OF THE SOUTH. October 13, 1909.
a fugitive from Ahab, and his daily wealth was a little
meal in the barrel and a little oil in the cruse. Yet under
these circumstances (as James tells us) Elijah
learned to pray, and God took this poverty stricken
Elijah up to heaven in a chariot of fire. The poverty
was an instrument in preparing him for honor.
t? ?1 ?11 ~r 1 - < < -?
i.. mai j;.aiivi iuh v-ctii ui me nerues oi iaun m tne
eleventh of Hebrews, the majority of them were men
f adversity. "Some were tortured not accepting deliverance,
that they might obtain a better resurrection ;
others had trial of cruel mockings and iscourgings, of
bonds and imprisonments; they were stoned, they
were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the
sword," etc.
III. Yea more. Not onlv did thpup mpn attain
God's smile through this poverty and suffering, but
they found the suffering a means of sanctification.
The time when David wrote those grand Psalms, SI,
and 32, and 42, the time when his spiritual nature received
its greatest uplift, was the season when, as a
chastisement for his sins, he was deprived of his throne
and fleeing from Absalom, he was worse than poor;
he was wretched. Rut the suffering was the means of
making him "poor in spirit" and then, specially then,
his "was the kingdom?the triumph?of heaven."
The same experience has been found in recent years.
Some of the greatest revivals in the history of this
?onnfrv have lipnn in nnc ?/-?? 1? * ?c
j ? ~ ... .'vuvviio uui ui pi uo^ci i\.y uui ui
adversity. The most serious of commercial panics
was in 1857; the largest number of accessions to our
ehurches was in 1858. T. E. C.
PURE FOOD LAWS.
Why not apply them to the mental food that is
poured from the press? Why not pay as much attention
to what the printing mills grind out as to what the
factories produce?
Commercial results and money in the product determine
the contents of most of the magazines and
light literature of the day. Does this guarantee the
best, or does it only pander to the most corruot tastes?
The determination of the family supply of mental
food is not in the hands of the State, and no laws
can adequately deal with it. The young people's
natural guardians, their parents, the family's natural
head, the father and mother, must furnish protection
here.
The State may aid, however. Pernicious books
and those that have an evil trend no less than those
which are openly vicious and corrupting, should be
forbidden passage through the mails or sale over
public counters. The paternalism implied in this need
alarm no one. A little more paternalism, wisely administered,
would be a good thing sometimes.
The State assumes guardianship over youth who
are without.parental care, to protect them in property
interests. It sometimes enacts compulsory educational
laws. Wherein will it be inconsistent in making
provision for the protection of its future citizens from
the unwholesome literature, which for the sake of
gain, is circulated so freely amongst our young people?
If a pure food law is not sumptuary, neither would be
a law regulating the circulation of evil literature.