James 2

James 2:1

TO James 2:1THE arguments of Martin Luther against the Apocryphal books were so unanswerable as to tear that addition from the sacred volume. His attack upon the Epistle of James fared very differently, however, for the simple reason that the latter volume was inspired, and not even a Luther could shake a sentence thereof.The more one studies this Epistle, the more is he amazed at the criticisms which Luther passed upon it. The idea that it should ever have been regarded as teaching contrary to the Apostle Paul, strikes its good students as a strange conclusion.The objection that it does not honor Jesus Christ is stranger still in view of the sentences upon which one comes in its study; while the argument that it appeals to the letter of the Law rather than to the spirit of the Gospel overlooks the great truth James is here presenting, namely, that Christianity has no other way of expressing itself than through human conduct.In our first talk upon James, we saw that he was the brother of the Lord. That fact alone would account for his not having mentioned Jesus often. Had he referred to Him as constantly as the other Apostles, he would seem to have been boasting his blood-kinship.What more would you ask from a younger brother than James has conceded to Jesus, when, in the opening sentence of his Epistle he calls Him “the Lord Jesus Christ”? And of what further emphasis of this relationship have we need than to have him begin this second chapter with the phrase, “My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of Glory, with respect of persons”? That this viewpoint was not another from that of the Apostle Paul we shall plainly see before we have finished this chapter; and that he was an evangelist rather than a legalist, will also appear as we sound the meaning of his sentences, and come to understand the errors he meant to combat, and the conduct for which he called.For the sake of aiding the memory in retaining what may be said, and for the sake of relating Scripture to Scripture that we may make progress in our study, I have deemed it wise to discuss this chapter under these suggestive thoughts: The Democracy of the Church, The Conduct of the Redeemed, The Demonstration of Faith.THE OF THE CHURCH Jesus Christ has been called the most consistent democrat of all the centuries. If the word is to be understood as opposing all imperialism, all aristocracy, all oligarchy, all despotism, certainly He is worthy the name. His Gospel was a Gospel for the people; it was not the leaven of society, but the leveler of life; and His Church is the only institution that was ever animated by the spirit of a practical communism.James saw this truth. Doubtless he had heard the same from his own Brother’s lips, and in this Epistle he exalts the democracy of the Church. His words make emphatic some things concerning that democracy.It despises class distinctions.“My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of Glory, with respect of persons, “For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; “And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: “Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts”? He knew that an appeal of this sort made to Jewish Christians would remind them of their own Law, for was it not written into Leviticus 19:15 :“Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty; but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour”? The synagogue of the Jew was often the scene of court. A man having a claim against another would take it there for trial, and the temptation for the judges would be to receive a favorable impression of the man who came into the synagogue with, gold rings on, and in fine clothing; while they would look with a certain amount of contempt upon the poor man in vile clothing. Before the case was heard it seemed to be practically judged by the reception accorded the litigants. Running to the man in fine clothing they would say: “Sit thou here in a good place”; and turning with a scowl to the poor fellow: “Stand thou there”; and then, as if fearing they had gone too far, evincing a spirit of partiality, and exercising inhumanity by asking a man to stand, they would modify it a bit by saying: “Or sit here under my footstool”.That such things did occur in the Jewish synagogues is evident when God, by the mouth of Moses, charges the judges, saying: “Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him. “Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God’s” (Deuteronomy 1:16-17). It is a mistake to suppose that the Law of the Old Testament is abrogated by the Gospel of the New. Jesus Christ came not to destroy the Law, but to fulfil it; and Christianity consists not in displacing the eternal principles of human justice, but rather in giving to them more tender regard and a more spiritual translation. If, therefore, God had found it necessary to warn Jewish judges lest they make distinction between the rich Hebrew and the poor Hebrew, how much more must He warn Hebrew Christians lest, in the Church, they make distinctions between wealthy Jewish converts, and the poor, but regenerate Gentiles.No century ever saw such extremes of riches and poverty as the first century. There one was born to a seat on the throne of empire, and others were sold to slavery before their eyes were open to the light. When the great Apostle Paul penned his Epistle to the Galatians, he reminded them of a truth which was difficult for this caste-cursed people to understand.“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. “And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise”. People sometimes speak of the early Apostles as reformers; they were revolutionists rather. The man who would dare to pen what James writes to a people who were facing imperialism, oligarchy, even despotism, sent forth sentences of revolution.And yet, what revolution was ever more sadly needed? The very life of the Church depended upon its being accomplished. Arthur T. Pierson says truly: “The most formidable foe to human progress has been caste, the arbitrary elevation of an elect few above the many, and the erection of barriers, more or less inflexible, to prevent the average man from advancing beyond the common mass or rising above the common level. He is a philanthropist who, in any department of life, helps to break down caste barriers or encourages aspiration after excellence.”That is what James is about in this Epistle.

That is what Jesus, his elder Brother, had taught by practice and precept. He, who was Himself a Jew, had sung the praises of the despised Samaritans; and He who was Himself a Rabbi, had deigned to sit at the table of a publican; and when they called Him in question for His conduct, He answered by holding their paper partitions of society to scorn. The Church, the institution founded by Jesus Christ, was so honorable that the most exalted must humble himself to enter it; and yet so democratic that the penitent publican found its doors swinging wide in holy invitation.The great truth of its democracy was never better expressed than when the Abbess of Port Royal, Angelique, said, “I belong to the order of all the saints; and all the saints belong to my Order.”Louis Albert Banks has remarked, “A church that is sufficiently aristocratic to quarantine against one little waif, whatever its poverty or ignorance or race or color, establishes a quarantine against the presence and glory of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ.”It honors the true heirs.“Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the Kingdom which He hath promised to them that love Him”? (James 2:5). How seldom is the term “heir” truly applied. I noticed in a newspaper this startling head-line, “A Policeman Murders an Heiress,” and the article related how a Chicago policeman, becoming enamored of a young woman with $500,000, on finding his affection was not reciprocated, shot her to death.Such is the use of the words “heir” and “heiress” when the newspapers print them, or the populace employs them.“She cannot talk, she cannot sing, She looks a fright; but folks aver Ten millions have been set apart To talk and sing and look for her.” But God’s thoughts are not as our thoughts; He knows who the true heirs are; His language is not like that of the daily press, or the local platform. In the Person of Jesus He said, “Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth” (Matthew 5:5); and to those who had to question concerning what they should put on, He said, “Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the Kingdom”. The children of the Kingdom—they are the heirs. The rich in material wealth are sometimes the paupers, in Heaven’s judgment. To the Laodicean Church, so increased with goods that it could say, “I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing”, He declared, “and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked” (Revelation 3:17). “A man’s life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth” (Luke 12:15).He who can boast only a few years’ lease upon a material possession here is poor indeed compared with him who has a claim upon the eternal riches. I have known a man, a member of the organized body—the church—worth a half million, to sit in his pew when an offering was being taken, and contribute, in response to a most urgent appeal for a most needy work, a sum smaller than his cigars for a week had cost; and I have seen another, depending upon a day-wage, in answer to the same call, contribute a sum five times as large.

Tell me, will you, which was the heir—-the sordid, self-bound child of selfishness and luxury, or the tender-hearted, liberal-handed, self-sacrificing son of God?Years ago at Newport, I looked upon the place of W. K.

Vanderbilt’s summer residence; and later saw the Geo. Vanderbilt palace at Asheville, N. C. The public has its attention called to these, and are told that they are the homes of the “heirs” of the great Vanderbilt house. The surroundings are beautiful; the appointments are splendid; the interiors luxuriant; but who would think of comparing this inheritance to that of the poor in this world, who are yet rich in faith, and heirs of the Kingdom which He promised to them that love Him?It exalts character and Christ.“But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats”? Here he refers again to this court trial in the synagogues, “Do not they blaspheme that worthy Name by the which ye are called”? The Apostle is exalting character as against station, and defending the Name of Christ as against blasphemy. He knew the intimate relation between these two— Christ and character. He knew that Christ was in character, and the highest character was “in Chris”. He knew that riches often resulted in rendering men selfish, arrogant, and despotic; that with them they pampered themselves on the one hand, and oppressed their neighbor on the other.The rich of James’ time had been slow to accept Jesus. You remember the significant question which the Pharisees put to the officers who came to them, concerning Jesus: “Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on Him?

But this people who knoweth not the Law are cursed” (John 7:48-49). Thus they blasphemed the Name of Jesus.Wealth has now ceased to do it after that manner. Christianity is not only eminently respectable, but it is so honorable that the wealthy sometimes wear its name, much after the manner of jewels, as an additional adornment. You will find that a large section of that society which is utterly worldly, is recorded on church books, and calls itself Christian. They attend church occasionally; Easter and Christmas they are almost certain to be present, but their lives are in no wise ordered after the precepts of Jesus.I am compelled to agree with a sentence in “The True Estimate of Life,” which reads after this manner: “The most terrible blasphemy of the age is not the blasphemy of the slums, but the blasphemy of the temple, and the church, and the place of worship, where men pray these prayers and then go out to deny every principle of Divine government in their lives.”If there was ever an opportunity to exalt Christ by righteous character, that opportunity exists today, and let us remember that only genuine character can accomplish it; and that character is not such as the culture of the school and the suavity of society can produce, but such as comes alone from the indwelling of the Spirit of God.THE CONDUCT OF THE James passes from his censure of the rich to the discussion of the general subject of how Christians should behave.“If ye fulfil the royal Law according to the Scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: “But if ye have respect to persons, ye Commit sin, and are convinced of the Law as transgressors. “For whosoever shall keep the whole Law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. “For He that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the Law. “So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the Law of Liberty. “For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment”. Three things concerning the conduct of the redeemed are made clear by the pen of the Apostle.It must be free from conscious transgression.“If ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the Law as transgressors”. It is a sin of which a man is conscious; it is a sin such as destroys one’s peace of mind; and it makes little difference if he be upright at other points, he knows himself to be under condemnation at this point.Courage is impossible to a man under conviction for sin; communion with God is impossible to a man who is consciously committing any sin. Let us not misunderstand the Apostle when he says:‘Whosoever shall keep the whole Law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all”. He does not mean that the man who has a small fault is just as degraded in character and under just as deep condemnation from the Divine standpoint, as the man who is full of faults. James is not reaffirming the position of Draco, that “Small crimes deserve death; and that there is no worse punishment for great crimes;” nor yet is he returning to the statement of the Stoics that “the theft of a penny is as bad as parricide, because in either case the path of virtue is left; and one is drowned as surely in seven feet of water as in seventy fathoms.”He means to say: “Whosoever shall keep the whole Law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all”. Here is a man who is very respectably moral, a good churchman, regular in his contributions, active in his participation, but who despises the poor; James says that man commits sin and is convicted, and having offended in one point, he is guilty before God. Now I have heard people object to this statement, and say that “If I offend in one point, I am not to be judged guilty of all.” But let us see what James means.

I was at the trial of a negro who had snatched a purse, and who should have been convicted, and was not. Suppose he had put this plea in as a reason for being exempt from trial: “Yes, sir, I did take this purse, but you must remember that that is only one little transgression of the law; just think of all the laws I have kept.

The laws of this city number thousands and I have kept them all except this one; ought I not then to be accorded my liberty, seeing that I have kept thousands of laws and offended in only one point?” The judge would have laughed him to scorn.If any one imagines that he can offend at one point and not be guilty of all, he needs to sit at this Apostle’s feet and learn that if he stumble at one point he offends in all, for the Law is a unit. A man might as well say that he had not smitten a house because he had only smitten one in the house, but that house is one. When you smite the son, you smite the father, you smite the mother, you smite the daughter; God’s Law is one, and when you offend at one point you are guilty of all. Communion with the Father is broken by this conscious transgression, and such is not to be the conduct of the redeemed.Again, This conduct must be exempt from attempted compromise.“For He that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the Law”. Oh, how searching this statement! I have known men to be guilty before God of dreadful violation of law, but who have thought a compromise might be effected; I have known a man who was taking advantage of his fellows, but being liberal in his gifts, he thought to condone the cheat. There are great corporations in this country who ruthlessly wreck all smaller competitors and compel exorbitant prices for the commodities which they control, and then turn about and give a million or two to a religious institution and suppose that they have made it all right with God. I have known a man living in daily violation of the Seventh Commandment, who really seemed to think that if he could go on preaching the Gospel it would in some way condone his awful offense. The Apostle spurns such a thought: “Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the Law”.In other words, if we are doing some things that are wrong, the points in which we are right shall in no wise condone that offense. I have known people whose hearts were set upon worldly measures, to imagine that by increasing activity in church, conscience was to be silenced and criticism conquered.

Truly, as another has remarked, “God’s government is an imperial government, an autocratic government; He never permits us to make compromises with Him for a single moment. He speaks the words of authority; He makes rules for us without ever consulting us; and having done so, our only course is implicit, unquestioning, and immediate obedience.”The Apostle explodes the old opinion of the rabbis that if one keep the Law at one point, he would be made free.

He reminds them, on the contrary, that one sin, indulged in habitually, reveals a spirit of revolt and will bring us to judgment. Did you ever stop to think of what it would mean if men should adopt this philosophy of the rabbis, and keep assiduously some of the Commandments while they broke others? There is not a single one of the Ten Commandments which, if broken wfith impunity, would not wreck society. Break the first, and you fill the world with idolatry; break the second, and you introduce fetish worship; break the third, and profanity will pollute every mind; break the fourth, and the strongest pillar of national life is destroyed, and desecration reigns; break the fifth, and the home is dissolved; break the sixth, and life is no longer safe; break the seventh, and social disorder reigns; break the eighth, and property rights are at an end; break the ninth, and there is no truth; break the tenth, and moral chaos follows.What one of these things would you like abolished? Ah, James is our teacher. The conduct of the redeemed admits of no compromise with sin. Once more,It must find expression in the Law of Liberty.“So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the Law of Liberty. “For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment”. It seems to me that in this expression James is emphasizing afresh what the great Psalmist has expressed when he says, “I will walk at liberty: for I seek Thy Precepts” (Psalms 119:45). In other words, while he taught these people that they must be obedient to the Law of God, he turned about to show that that is not legalism, that they are not to keep the Commandments to escape condemnation; that they are not to treat the poor with inhumanity lest they fall under Divine judgment. They are to keep the Commandments because they love the Lord; and to treat the poor with humanity because the poor are their brothers; and while they do the things that the laws demand, they do the things that are the promptings of their own hearts. Such obedience is liberty. I rejoice in the laws of this state; I esteem the laws of this city; they are no fetters to me. I prefer laws, and if there were no penalty attached to the law, it would still be sweet to obey it.

Such is indeed “the Law of Liberty”.Years since, in conversation with Dr. B______ he told me that on an ocean steamer he conducted devotional services every evening, at the request of the captain.

A man in attendance called upon him and thanked him for the service and then asked him some questions. The answers of Dr. B______ did not please the man, and he said, “Now I have been very much pleased with your devotional exercises, but when you talk to me about your views of personal conduct you are entirely too strict; you are an old fogy; you put me into bondage, and I want to be free.” To which Dr. B______ responded, “Don’t you want to be in bondage? The great Apostle Paul called himself ‘the bondservant of Christ’, and so far as I am concerned I want to be a bondservant of Christ; not to do what my flesh desires, but to do what His blessed tongue commands.We see the point! The Apostle Paul who had been breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the Church, when once he was converted, turned his face Heavenward and said, what? “Jesus”?

No: “Lord”! That moment he took the place of a bondservant! “Lord”! and that moment he asked for direction, “Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do”?

The answer to that question determined the Apostle’s conduct. Was he a slave? Yes! And was he at liberty also? Yes! Love enslaves its subjects, but it leads them by the paths where the sweetest perfumes fill the air, the most beautiful flowers break into beauty, and the sweet voiced birds break into singing. “So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the Law of Liberty”.THE OF FAITH James has not yet finished this chapter. From The Democracy of the Church, and The Conduct of the Redeemed, he passes to a discussion of The Demonstrations of Faith.His first remarks mean this—An empty profession is hypocrisy. “What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him”? All good things are counterfeited. There are advantages to be derived from assuming to be in possession of them. In business it means something to be a Christian; hence some men who have no love for Christ in their lives, profess Christianity. There is never a week but letters of business come to my office asking if I can commend applicants for positions. What is the significance of it? This, that Christianity is honorable and to be trusted; and whenever men find there is profit in things, they profess them, whether they possess them or not.

James knew that to be so, and he charges men who profess and do not possess, with hypocrisy, and reminds them that their profession is vain. He asks, not “Can faith save them?”; but he questions, “Can THAT faith save them?” What faith? The faith that is profession, not possession. To ask this question is to answer it. You do not need to tell the unregenerate man that his profession is inoperative; he knows it!The great Apostle Paul wrote to the Galatians: “For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love”. “Faith which worketh by love”—that is the only sort of faith that can accomplish anything.Some men profess faith whose profession is in vain; other men possess faith and the possession is above the price of rubies. But ere we pass this point let us be reminded that in a mere profession of faith one fares worse than simply to come short of Divine favor.

His lying hypocrisy brings him into disfavor with the infinite Father.“If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, “And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? “Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. “Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy Works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works”. But James proceeds to another point of almost equal importance.Intellectual belief brings redemption to no one.“Thou believest that there is one God”. You boast yourself to be a Unitarian; you remind us that the fundamental thing in all religion is the fact that there is one God. It is a great basal truth, and you believe it. Do not boast it! I heard a minister of the Gospel, some time since, say, “If it be scientifically demonstrated that Jesus Christ was born as a natural man, never begotten by the Holy Ghost, what of it? Jehovah remains and I believe in His existence.” James knew some such ministers, and he answered: “You do! Great belief! ‘thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble’” There are not many men who doubt that there is a God; “the heavens declare” His glory. There are no devils who question it; the last one of them has felt the power of His hand. But God has never promised redemption to such as merely consent to His existence. We are not to believe that “He is” only; we are also to believe that “He is a Rewarder of them that diligently seek Him” (Hebrews 11:6).That is the way Abraham believed. His faith was of the sort that begot works; on the basis of it he quit his home in Chaldea and turned his back upon family and friends for God’s sake, and “He counted it to him for righteousness” (Genesis 15:6).

Dr. Deems asked, “Why was it so counted?” and answers, “Because he was righteous.

Faith in God is righteousness and makes a man righteous.” Theodore Parker, John Stuart Mill, Thomas Paine, have all paid certain tributes to God, or to His Son Jesus Christ; but the saints of the Old and New Testament have done better than the tribute of language; they have lived their faith. That is what James demands.We may conclude our study today with seeing this great truth to which he has steadily moved in this chapter, namely,Good works, alone, manifest a living faith. Martin Luther said, “Faith is a lively, busy, active thing so that it is impossible for it not to be ceaselessly working good.” And Luther was right! What evidence have we that a body is alive? None, whatever, unless it moves. When the physician can find no pulse-beat, and the family can discover no quiver of the flesh, and the visitor coming in can detect no motion, we count a man dead.

Action is an evidence of life. The sap in the tree we cannot see, but I shall shortly know what trees in the park are alive and what are dead, for if the living sap be there, it will express itself in foliage and fruit.That is what James means.

If there is life in your church and mine, it will manifest itself in the flowers and fruit of righteousness, and that righteousness will not be in the abstract, but in the concrete. It will mean liberal offerings to the Lord; it will mean young men and women rising up to go to home and foreign fields as missionaries of His cross; it will mean the better manning of every one of our institutions calling for Christian service; it will mean a personal consecration to the great soul-winning work to which Christ devoted His life. What shall it mean? It is ours to answer that question! What shall it mean now, and in this church?Let me ring the changes upon the great thought of this Epistle; for as Abraham’s profession was justified by his works, in that he offered up Isaac his son upon the altar, and Rahab’s regeneracy was proven by her conduct, in that she received the messengers and sent them out another way; so the days to come will demonstrate, absolutely, the degree of faith resident in this Church of God.

James 2:2-4

CHRIST’S OPINION OF PEW RENTS James 2:2-4. THE subject to which we address ourselves this morning is by no means a new one. While the custom of pew-rentals was unknown to the early Church, it has been in vogue so long that the man who pleads for the free-pew system seems, to some at least, to be setting himself in opposition to ecclesiastical order.And yet, let it be remembered that from the day when the first pew was put on sale, to this present moment, there have been protestants, and I question whether the number of these protestants was ever so large and influential as now, and my prayer is that this protest may speedily succeed in rendering a custom, which I believe has little in common with the spirit of Christ, obsolete. It is to aid in hastening that end that I bring to you the theme and text of this hour.In pleading for a free pew, I want to make some statements from which I doubt if any will dissent.THE FREE PEW IS It represents the higher sentiment of humanity. As most of you know, I am not accustomed to preaching the Gospel of humanism. To me humanity is a sinner and not a Saviour; and yet I find in this sinner some sentiments that bespeak his unfallen state, some finer feelings which have clung to him, coming down from the day when humanity was sinless; and among these sentiments and feelings is this one of fellowship as between man and man, without respect to difference in riches, social standing, breeding or birth.I refer to that sentiment which Charles Kingsley expressed in writing under the “non de plume” of Parson Lot:“I was looking in at the windows of a splendid curiosity shop in Oxford Street, at a case of humming birds. I was gloating over the beauty of those feathered jewels, and then wondering what was the meaning, what was the use of it all, why those exquisite little creatures should have been hidden for ages, in all their splendors of ruby and emerald and gold, in the South American forests, breeding and fluttering and dying, that some dozen out of all those millions might be brought over here to astonish the eyes of men. And as I asked myself, Why were all these boundless varieties, these treasures of unseen beauty, created? my brain grew dizzy between pleasure and thought; and, as always happens when one is most innocently delighted, ‘I turned to share the joy,’ as Wordsworth says, and next to me stood a huge, brawny coal-heaver, in his shovel hat and white stockings and high-lows, gazing at the humming birds as earnestly as myself. As I turned he turned, and I saw a bright manly face, with a broad, soot-grimed forehead, from under which a pair of keen, flashing eyes gleamed into mine.

In that moment we felt ourselves friends. If we had been Frenchmen, we should, I suppose, have rushed into each others arms and ‘fraternized’ upon the spot. As we were a pair of dumb, awkward Englishmen, we only gazed a half minute, staring into each other’s eyes, with a little delightful feeling of understanding each other, and then burst out at once with ‘Isn’t that beautiful?’ ‘Well, that is!’ And then both turned back again to stare at our humming birds.“I never felt more thoroughly than at that minute (though, thank God, I had often felt it before) that all men were brothers; that fraternity and equality were not mere political doctrines, but blessed God-ordained facts; that the party walls of rank and fashion and money were but a paper prison of our own making, which we might break through any moment by a single hearty and kindly feeling; that the one spirit of God was given without respect of persons; that the beautiful things were beautiful alike to the coal-heaver and the parson; and that before the wondrous works of God the rich and the poor might meet together, and feel that whatever the coat or the creed may be, ‘A man’s a man for a’ that,’ and one Lord the Maker of them all.”And if there is any place in the world where the man of means and the man without, the man of learning and the unlearned man, should meet together and touch elbows, and feel what Kingsley felt, namely, that all men are brothers, it ought to be in God’s house.The sane man must admit that the free pew assists this fellowship.It also recognizes the brotherhood “in Christ”. The truest fraternity is not to be looked for in the world. It is not to be expected that mammon will volunteer to claim kin with poverty, or civilization with heathenism. But the truest fraternity should be found in the Church of God, for, as Paul writes to the Galatians:“For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female; for ye are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:26-28). That was the mind of the Master. As John Watson says: “Jesus realized that the tie which binds men together in life is not forged in the intellect, but in the heart. * * Love is the first and the last and the strongest bond in experience. It conquers distance, outlives all changes, bears the strain of the most diverse opinions. * * Unity is possible wherever the current of love runs from Christ’s heart through human hearts and back to Christ again.” But who can imagine that Christ’s prayer for His disciples, that they all may be one, as He and His Father were one, will ever be answered by a system of church administration which makes it possible for him who has purchased one of the best seats in the house of God to pluck out of it the man who has preceded him to the sanctuary, or to exclude from it the man, who, coming after, wishes to share in it.I know it is easy to say that the man who pays for a pew has a better right in it than the one who contributes nothing, but I also know that there are two answers to this claim, either one of which would be adequate. The first is this—Will any man admit that his pew rental is a business bargain of so much money for so much comfort? If so, then where does Christ’s gift come in, and where is the man’s sacrifice to the cause?Again, it is not Christianity to stand on one’s rights. I teach my boys that brothers ought not always to demand their rights, but may show the sweeter spirit of self-sacrifice in the interest of others.

Shall the blood-related behave better than the blood-bought? If so, all our pretentions touching the sacrificial spirit in Christianity are vain, and all our boasted brotherhood but show-bills, published for the purpose of deceiving the people into supposing us what we are not.I do not hesitate to say that wherever you find a thorough-going Christian, a man who will remind you of his Master, you will find one who is willing to share his pew, and if need be, even surrender it for Christ’s sake; and I find such a spirit on the part of most of God’s people. I believe the majority of those who go to make up the membership of the average church know something of that fraternity in Christ of which my brother, and former co-laborer Louis M. Waterman, once sang:“O wondrous brotherhood! Sweet bondage of the heart— Thy golden chains no power Hath might to tear apart! O miracle of love! What marvel thou hast done; Ten thousand lives In Christ shall be as one: “O happy fellowship! Thine ecstasy the earth May never match in all Her palaces of mirth: In thee, O love of Christ, Such strange, sweet joy belongs As one might know who feels The thrill of angel songs: “O unity supreme! Of Father, Spirit, Son— In kindred mystery With Jesus we are one. Grant us, O Triune God, A fellowship like Thine— A peace—pure, fathomless; A joy—serene, Divine!” The free pew also anticipates the fellowship of Heaven. The men who expect to live together hereafter ought at least touch each other in the now. You remember Paul wrote to the Ephesians, “That in the dispensation of the fulness of times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in Heaven, and which are on earth; even in Him”. And I certainly believe that the closer the fellowship here, the sweeter the fellowship there.One November, years ago, James Farrington went from Iowa Falls, Iowa to New Brunswick, N. J. to make a visit to his brother Patrick. They had not seen each other since 1853, and the meeting was one of such joy to both of them that the New York newspapers made mention of it, and said the neighbors in New Brunswick had never looked upon a more affecting scene than that of the meeting of these two men.Why such demonstrations of love?

Why such overflow of joyful feeling? There is but one answer: they were brothers! Forty-seven years before they had dwelt together and learned to love, and if we are to meet in the hereafter, who questions that our meeting will be more sweet, if on earth we have felt the fellowship of the saints, that fellowship in Christ which means the obliteration of every barrier, the equality of children of a common Father? Just so long as churches are without the free pew, which puts the high and the low, the rich and the poor, upon the same basis of a common welcome in the house of God, they are without the conditions that conserve the fraternity, and anticipate the fellowship of Heaven.Again,THE FREE PEW IS It issues a common invitation to the rich and the poor, and makes good Solomon’s Proverb: “The rich and the poor meet together: the Lord is the Maker of them all” (Proverbs 22:2).Evidently that was the point of these verses from the second chapter of James. In James’ opinion, poverty was no reason for relegating a man to a place in a corner, behind a post, or under a footstool, any more than riches was a reason for pointing out to its possessor the best pew in the house. James reminded the ushers of his day, “Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the Kingdom”.You have heard the fable of the kind-hearted king, who, while hunting in a forest, found a blind orphaned boy, living there like a beast. His pitiable estate touched the king’s heart and he took him to his home and taught him all that could be learned by one who was blind. When he reached his twenty-first year, the king, who was also a great physician, restored his sight; and leading him into his palace, presented him to the nobles and proclaimed him his own son and commanded all to give him their honor and love. What lord then dare treat with indifference this adopted child?

What brother in the house had any right to look down upon him, when the king had lifted him above the first and to a level with the second? And I confess that I cannot understand how any member of the family of God, no matter how poor he has been, can be neglected, when God adopts him; when God introduces him, he is forever after the child of the King, and worthy not only to share the best in the synagogue, if it be his pleasure, but to sit with the Lamb Himself upon His throne.We do not believe in communism of wealth, in communism in social matters; we do not ask the rich to make their social friends among the poor. We don’t know that any profit would come out of that; there would be little pleasure to either party. But unless I read our Bible wrongly and utterly misunderstand our Christ, the Church of God presents the one place, and the Christianity of Jesus Christ the one faith where men should meet and forget every difference of station, every difference of cloth; yea, even despising the blood in their own veins, remember that they are alike bought by the Blood of Jesus Christ, and in that Blood are made brethren.Again,THE FREE PEW IS In sittings it is no respecter of persons. The purpose of the free pew system is not to say unto the man that weareth gay clothing,“Sit thou here m a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool”. We say with the late Dr. Deems that if ushers are to make any difference in escorting people to seats, that difference ought to be in favor of the poor, not because they are poor, but because they are more sensitive and more in need of the cordial welcome.Christ was exceeding careful to warn Pharisees at this point. One day He was invited to a Pharisee’s house to dinner:“And He put forth a parable to those which were bidden, when He marked how they chose out the chief rooms; saying unto them, “When thou art bidden of any man to a wedding, sit not down in the highest room; lest a more honourable man than thou be bidden of him; “And he that bade thee and him come and say to thee, Give this man place; and thou begin with shame to take the lowest room. “But when thou art bidden, go and sit down in the lowest room; that when he that bade thee cometh, he may say unto thee, Friend, go up higher: then shalt thou have worship in the presence of them that sit at meat with thee. “For whosoever exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted” (Luke 14:7-11). And God in His own dealings with men has perfectly illustrated this parable. When He wanted to select men to positions of honor, He chose Moses, the despised Hebrew babe, and exalted him; Joseph, the hated brother, and lifted him to eminence, and others likewise.Dr. Henry Van Dyke says: “He has made Apostles and saints out of men and women that the world would have thrown away as rubbish. Witness Peter, the weak and wayward; Mary Magdalene, the defiled; Zacchaeus, the worldly; Thomas, the despondent; Paul, the persecutor and blasphemer.”Who could imagine the early Church making a distinction against these Apostles of the faith because they were poor, and in favor of Nicodemus, Joseph, Lazarus and his sisters, because they were well-to-do, until one could determine the relative financial standing of the members of the Church in Jerusalem by studying the map of the ground floor of the building, and noting the names written against the best seats.Again, the free pew keeps the church-door open to Christ Jesus. When Christ had finished His Epistles to the Seven Churches of Asia, He ended by saying: “Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear My voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with Me” (Revelation 3:20). What a plea for a free pew!Do you remember in that wonderful dream of Dr.

Gordon’s, entitled, “How Christ came to Church,” the good man said: “Though there had been misgivings and questions about our system of pew rentals, the matter had not come home to me as a real and serious question until Christ came to church on that morning. Judging by His dress and bearing it was evident that were He to become a regular attendant, He could not afford the best pew in the house, and this was distressing to think of since I knew from Scripture that He has long since been accorded the highest place in Heaven, angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto Him.”And is not Jesus Christ a regular attendant at church? If not, God pity the church from which He is absent, and cause us to remember that even touching that church He says, “Behold, I stand at the door, and knock”. Every humble man, every lowly woman, who looks at the Church of God with wistful eyes and is afraid to enter it, because its pews are rented and they have not the price, is none other than Jesus Christ standing without, knocking and waiting—waiting to be invited in to share the seat of some saint, or rather to occupy a place in His own Father’s House.I trust every one present here has read “In His Steps” by Sheldon, and if so, you have not forgotten the scene in that First Church when Henry Maxwell, the pastor, had finished his sermon from the text: “For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow His steps” (1 Peter 2:21); and the quartette had risen to sing, “All for Jesus, all my being’s ransomed power,” when the congregation was startled by a man’s voice, and the next moment this pale-faced man is making his way from his place under the gallery to the open space in front of the pulpit, where he asked the privilege of speaking and told the story of no work, of having lost his wife a few months before, of having sent his little girl to stay with a printer’s family until he could support her, and as he went on telling how he had grappled with poverty, and had seen his wife practically die of starvation, he said, “I heard some people singing at a church prayer-meeting the other night,“All for Jesus, all for Jesus, All my being’s ransomed powers; All my thoughts, and all my doings; All my days and all my hours,” and I kept wondering as I sat on the steps outside just what they meant by it. It seems to me there is an awful lot of trouble in the world that somehow would not exist if all the people who sing such songs went out and lived them out. I suppose I don’t understand, but what would Jesus do? What do you mean by following in His steps? It seems to me sometimes as if the people in the city churches had good clothes and nice houses to live in and money to spend for luxuries and could go away on summer vacations and all that, while people outside of the churches, thousands of them I mean, walk the streets for jobs or die in tenement houses, and never have a piano or a picture in the house, and grow up in misery and drunkenness and sin.” At that point he grew paler still, and lurching forward he fell heavily upon the floor. The services were at an end, but the question remained in Henry Maxwell’s mind, “What would Jesus do?” and he turned himself about to follow his Master’s steps as never before.

And you know what revolutions it wrought. And I want to tell you that whenever I raise the question touching whether every pew should be opened to every man that would enter the house of God, I know what Jesus would do; and I also know what we should do or else shut the Saviour from His own sanctuary. Read afresh the 25th chapter of Matthew, and know that in the Judgment we shall stand or fall according to our treatment of the lowly of earth, for, “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these”, Christ’s brethren, “ye have done it unto [Him]”.Finally,THE FREE PEW IS It elicits the best support. So far as my knowledge goes, I am not familiar with a single church which has accomplished the greatest work, a work like that of this church, or the Tremont Temple, Boston, or the Grace Temple, Philadelphia, which has been supported by pew rentals. And if you will study the history of the churches which hold a second rank such as the three or four larger ones of every great city, you will find that no one of them is supported in any considerable degree by pew rentals. I do not know the exact figures, but I doubt if one-third of the current expense account is met in that way. It is said sometimes that you cannot support a church liberally without this arrangement, but we wonder how those who make this argument are able to overlook so much of church history.Years since, the Ram’s Horn had an article upon this subject, in which Mr. Chas.

H. Mills, pastor of the Pilgrim Congregational Church, Cleveland, Ohio, told their experience of nine years with a free church.

In that time its membership had grown from 300 to 848; its gifts had been most generous to work at home and abroad; it had supported a reading room, gymnasium, boys’ recreation rooms, daily kindergarten, sewing-school, young men’s club, a course of educational lectures and concerts.The First Baptist Church of Minneapolis never reached $20,000.00 per annum under the rented pew system, but under free pew it has exceeded $200,000.00 per annum for years.When that grand man, George Mueller, was called from Teignmouth to Bristol, after days of earnest consideration of the call, he replied, “I will accept the call on the condition that the pew-rent should be abolished.” The eminent success of that work became known around the wide world, and praised in Heaven.The free pew gives the greater satisfaction. It does not militate against the family sitting, for he would be a blundering usher who paid no regard to having a family sit together and sit in one place as far as compatible, and it does provide against offending the poor, putting up a barrier against the laboring classes, relegating to the gallery some of God’s men, who once expended thousands upon His cause, but who, through adversity, have too little left to pay the price of a pew.No condition ought to exist in the Church of God that would ever make it possible for a man who, in the days of financial success, sacrificed grandly for his church, to ever go without a seat in the house of God that he can call his own, because it is his Heavenly Father’s; and no man, who has given much less than him, can come in and mortgage it. Think of the condition in this city! There are hundreds of men in these Protestant churches who, up until 1893, were pouring their wealth daily into these churches, hundreds and thousands of dollars they laid upon the altar of love. Their money went in the crash succeeding that summer. Not a few of them are old now.

Send them under the gallery or into it? God forbid!

Every church in Minneapolis should do the Master’s will and declare free pews and instruct the ushers to pilot such noblemen to the best places in the house, so long as they shall live, and, while not mortgaging anything to them, make evident their welcome.The free pew is successful in soul winning. We do not claim that to declare free pews would insure this result. A dead church may declare for what it will, and nothing comes of the declaration; but we do say that where the church is moved by the spirit of Jesus Christ, who so loved the world that He gave His life for it, and in that spirit is willing to make sacrifices of sittings that souls may be reached, God gives them success.There is no church so attractive to the unsaved as the church wherein they find themselves loved, wherein the people put themselves out that they may know them, that they may instruct them, that they may show them the Christ. The cordial handshake has been the beginning of many a man’s salvation. The sharing of the pew with the stranger presents the very best opportunity to speak to him of his soul; and pleased as I would be to sit with the wife and the children on the Sabbath,I would willingly sacrifice that privilege forever if, by doing so, I could sit with unsaved men and women and by a word show them the salvation of God.Think what it means to them when they are saved. Think what it means to their friends, if you shall show them the way!

Think what it means in Heaven when the salvation of a soul is announced there! Think what it means to God when the recording angel writes down a new name in the Lamb’s Book of Life!You remember when the steamer Atlantic struck Mars Head she went down and the dreadful message of destruction was sent throughout the land, and by and by the Associated Press published a telegram which had been sent to some friends in Detroit by a man who was known to have been on board that ill-fated steamer.

It contained but a single word, and yet it thrilled thousands and thousands of the land, for that word was “Saved.” Oh the joy in his own house! Oh the rejoicing among friends and acquaintances! “Saved!”And I think there are some here today who have been driven against the rocks of disaster and tossed on the waves of sin, and yet, if only we could bring them to see that Christ is present, that He has been accorded a place in this sanctuary, and that His hand is now outstretched to snatch all such men from the wreck, there might be made an announcement in Heaven that would start every heart, and engage every soul in song, for “there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth”.

James 2:9

THE CHURCH DOES IT CATER TO THE RICH? James 2:9THIS charge has often and seriously been lodged against the church—’It caters to the rich!” Practically all the men who belong to organized labor, and not a few of the poor, hold that opinion somewhat tenaciously. That they have some ground for their convictions, observing men will not dispute. It is a long time since James penned this Epistle. In that day the Church was made up almost entirely of the plain and poor people. But the Jewish synagogue service, of which he was speaking, presented another scene. There culture and wealth were largely in control, and to both, the synagogue service did cater. James, while a Christian, is also a Jew, and is writing to his brethren in the flesh regarding the synagogue services, and he openly charges them with fawning upon the rich, and flouting the poor. I want to arrange this chapter around three suggestions:—REGARD FOR THE RICH The church is not to needlessly despise the rich. There is such a thing possible as being a respecter of persons by exalting the poor beyond their deserts, and abusing the rich beyond occasion. Unquestionably we have come upon such a time as that in America at this moment. There is hardly a millionaire alive who is not berated in certain circles. The fact that he is in possession of so much money is accepted as “prima facie” evidence that he is guilty of having robbed the public and wronged his fellows. The opinion is often without justification.

Some men are poor for the solitary reason that they are fit for nothing! Laziness, intemperance, and moral indifference combine to create their poverty, and some of these are the most eloquent in their railing accusations against the rich. Only a few days since I listened to such eloquence, and the breath that bore it to my ear would have taken fire and burned with a blue flame, had you struck a match near his mouth. With the utterances of such subjects of sloth and sin, we have no sympathy whatever, and the time ought to come when they would no longer be privileged to convert the street corner into a pulpit for their unwarranted harangues, or the pages of “The Forum” into false and sacrilegious charges as in July 1930 number. We know men whose accumulated money represents industry, intelligence, and frugality, and their hands are more clean and their hearts more right than is the hand and heart of the average street speaker or magazine writer who pillories them. As a minister of Jesus Christ, I positively refuse to let a rich man insult, neglect, or even decline Christian civilities, to the poorest that attend the services of my church. I feel equally called upon to say to the unsuccessful man who desires membership in the same institution, that he must treat with civility of speech and action his more prospered brother. I have just as little sympathy with the walking delegate among the poor, as I have with the high-handed oppressor among the rich.The rich people of the world ought to be the subject of just as much prayer and endeavor upon the part of the church as are the poor. They need it. Their temptations are in many respects even greater than those of the poor. Whitfield showed himself a student of human life when, on one occasion, he said to his great congregation, “Pray for the young man who has just fallen heir to a fortune.”Neither holiness nor happiness are insured by increased riches.

Sometimes they mean both additional temptation and worry. There is a story in “Ford’s Christian Reflector” to the effect that, walking one morning after a heavy snow, the writer overtook a colored brother whose cap was much the worse for wear, but he seemed so happy that the writer asked, “Are you always happy?” “Always happy, Boss!” was the answer. “Don’t you ever worry?” “No sah; I has a good place to sleep in; ‘nough to eat, and white folks for my friends, why should I?” “But you haven’t much money, have you?” “Don’t want money; Boss!

I notice all the rich men what I work for, never smile.”As a matter of fact the poor little realize the work and worry and the temptations and trials of the prospered.But the church is not to fawn and cater to the rich. This is an insidious temptation. The warning of James, spoken to the synagogue, is needful to almost every modern institution wearing the Name of Christ. The relation of money to the success of large enterprises is perfectly understood.Preachers and institutions and officials are ambitious for progress, and recognizing the power of the dollar, which in America has come to be described as “all mighty”, they are likely to fawn at the feet of the man who possesses the same, and in order to insure his sympathy and assistance, quite often they exalt him to office without reference to ability or character. John Flynn writing on “God’s Gold” says, “Of the 75 multimillionaires of New York in the 20th century half of them were communicants of the Episcopal church. Sixteen of these, appointed lay-deputies one year, were multimillionaires from New York, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania.George Mueller inveighed against this whole thing.

His biographer tells us that he was in opposition to the fact that the individuals in whose hands the management of such societies rested, were often manifestly unconverted persons, chosen because of their wealth and influence and rank, and means (or riches) were commonly first considerations in the selection of patrons and presidents, or even the chairman for public meetings. “Never once,” said he, “have I known a case of a poor but devoted, wise and experienced servant of Christ, being invited to fill the chair at such public meeting. Surely the Galilean preachers, who were Apostles, or our Lord Himself, would not have been called to this office, according to these principles.”It would seem, then, that we have improved some since Mueller’s day; or at most in this country, things are not so bad as in his land.But even here the words of Jesus are needed, for in many instances the church does cater to the rich.The church should accept the Divine estimation of poverty and riches.“Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the Kingdom which He hath promised to them that love Him”? It is just possible for the poor man to be rich, and it is equally possible for the rich man to be poor.Thomas Dixon, in his volume, “Living Problems,” says, “There are some men you cannot make rich— they have no place to put it. There are many poor millionaires. You might give them the wealth of Croesus—they would be poor still—and they would live a mean, narrow, cold, and selfish life. The Duke of Brunswick possessed his millions, but lived the life of a dog, in a miserable kennel he built, in which he dwelt, keeping watch day and night over his money and jewels. Says Jeffers: ‘He keeps his diamonds in a thick wall; his bed is placed against it, that no burglar may break in without killing, or at least waking him. He has but one window in his bedroom, and the sash is of stoutest iron.

A case of a dozen six-barrelled revolvers, loaded, lie on a table within reach of the bed’.“Could any one be simple enough to think such a man is rich? The nameless cur that prowls through street and highway in search of bread, is richer in all that makes life worth the having!”Cowper says:“They call thee rich; I call thee poor, Since if thou dares not use thy store But saves it only for thy heirs The treasure is not thine but theirs.” THE ROYAL LAW The Royal Law insures the practice of the Golden Rule. If there is anything upon which men dote these days it is the Golden Rule. In theory, they are proposing to do unto others as they would be done by; in practice, not a few of them are joining with Mr. Harum in saying, “Do unto others as they would do unto you; and do it first.”Once in a while some critic makes a plea for an ethical Gospel. Can you exceed the words of Jesus for ethics? “Love your enemies”. “Pray for them which despitefully use you”. Can you attain to the injunction of His Apostle, to “esteem other better than themselves”?

Truly, are these sentiments worthy the description “The Royal Law.”We are told that Ruskin was fond of relating this instance about Tennyson. An intimate friend of the poet set himself to find out all the technical rules of his versification, and in doing so, collected quite a number of laws and their examples. “Look here,” said the friend, “what wonderful laws you observe!” “IPs true,” said Tennyson, “I do observe them; but I never knew it.” The law had become a habit, an instinct, a love.

And when believing souls are filled with the love and power of Christ they keep His Commandments almost unconsciously. Says H. O. Mackay, “Law has been transfigured into life and love.” They can say, “I delight to do Thy will”. In truth, the Law of the Lord is written in their hearts.The Royal Law requires righteous sentiment as well as action. James demands more than that one should do to his neighbor as he would be done by.“Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself”. Royal indeed! There is a story of a chaplain in the army who, as he was walking over the field after the battle, saw a wounded soldier on the ground.

He said to the soldier, “Would you like me to read to you out of my Bible?” The poor fellow answered, “I am very thirsty; I would like a drink.” The chaplain emptied his canteen and gave it to him. “Could you lift my head a little higher?” Instantly the chaplain took off his overcoat and very tenderly put it under his head. “I am very cold,” moaned the man, “if I only had something over me.” Then the other coat came off and was spread over him. Then the dying soldier cried, “For God’s sake, man, if you have anything in that Book that will make a man do as you have to his fellows, read it to me!” The one thing that is certain regarding the world is this, that Christian men and women will only be able to win it to their Lord by giving to the world the genuine evidences of love. They belong to the “Royal Law”.The Royal Law dispenses with respect of persons. The one institution that must accord love to rich and poor alike is the Church of God. Social clubs may be as select and exclusive as they please; not so with that fraternity which professes to be spiritual, and which does its work in the Name of Him who knew no difference between the high and low, the rich and poor.“O brother man, fold to thy heart thy brother, Where pity dwells, the peace of God is there; To worship rightly is to love each other, Each smile a hymn, each kindly deed a prayer. “Follow with reverent steps the great example Of Him whose holy work was ‘doing good,’ So shall the wide earth seem our Father’s temple Each loving life a psalm of gratitude.” THE METHOD OF James seems to fear that what he had written might be misunderstood, and men might come to feel that if they behaved themselves properly toward the poor, Heaven itself would be the reward; and so he reminds them that it is not so easy, declaring that redemption is upon another basis altogether.“For whosoever shall keep the whole Law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. “For He that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the Law. “So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the Law of Liberty. “For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment”. By the Law of justice, condemnation is come upon all men. “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).There is a whole school of skeptics who inveigh against the Law of Moses, declaring that it makes the innocent to suffer for the guilt of their parents. It does nothing of the sort! From the beginning of revelation to its end, there is never a phase that can ever be contorted into such an interpretation. It makes the guilty children of guilty parents responsible for their own conduct. God visited “the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate [Him]” (Exodus 20:5). Mark the phrase, “of them that hate [Him]”.

The very day that the child of a murderer gives his heart, in love, to God, that day he is accepted in Christ, and he will never need to answer for his father’s iniquities.Let Ezekiel instruct us:“The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness ‘of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him” (Ezekiel 18:20). Bunyan’s holy war brings this out! When Diabolus took possession of the town of Mansoul he did it because the inhabitants, all with one consent, said to this bramble, “Do thou reign over us!” And the reason that all men are under condemnation exists in the same fact; they have voluntarily surrendered to their enemy. There is none that doeth good, no, not one” (Romans 3:12). And judgment is passed upon all men, “for all have sinned” (Romans 3:23).The whole of the Law is involved in a single transgression.“For whosoever shall keep the whole Law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.” We know that to be a fact of all legal administrations. Most of the men who lie in your county jail tonight are only accused of breaking the law at one point. It matters not that the man who is guilty of thieving can honestly say, “I did not tell a lie;” can honestly say, “I honored my father and my mother;” can honestly say, “I was not profane;” can honestly say, “I did not bear false witness.”When he put forth his hand and took that which belonged to another, he broke the Law. We consent to that in civil matters; why should we not see it in religious matters. The Law is a unit and the man who has broken it at one point has broken the whole Law. The man who professes to worship one God and one only, and refuses to bow down to images, withholds his lips from profanity, keeps the Sabbath day, honors his parents, shrinks with horror even from the thought of murder, and is guiltless regarding adultery, exempt from lying and stealing, but has coveted that which his neighbor holds, and has, and by devious methods, as David did, possessed himself of his neighbor’s riches, secures his desire at the greatest cost, namely, at the very sacrifice of his soul’s interest.There are a great many who ought to regard Jeremiah’s injunction, “Let not the rich man glory in his riches” (Jeremiah 9:23).

As Ward Beecher said, “Those riches often come at too great a cost. How many men there are that pipe over their gains, no larger than a summer’s mosquito on the last days of its life—thin, sharp, blood-sucking, voracious, and worthless!

How many men are like steamers that have been blown about by the mighty winds until they are out of fuel and cannot get back to port again without burning the furniture and parts of themselves; and so, after all those articles on board which are combustible are consumed, part after part is torn away and burned in order to raise steam enough to get back, and they are stripped of everything from stem to stern, when they enter port! Many men thus come into the harbor of old age, empty. They have used themselves for fuel to make steam all through their life. And these are the men that walk, looking suspiciously down upon, and pitying poor men—men who are ‘too conscientious’ or who have ‘stood in their own light,’ as it is said; men that will not do wrong; men that abhor evil, because they are a law to themselves; men of honor; men of simplicity; men that love the thing that is right, and just, and good, and true, and pure—how are they pitied by the successful men of the world; but the world has ravaged them. Many men think they have led honor captive; but they have dishonored and disgraced their essential manhood. Many men think they have built a great Babylon; but God beholds how, after all, they are to browse as beasts upon the very ground.

It is a base thing for a man to be put into God’s workshop, which was set up on purpose to make men, and come out on the other side without a single attribute of manhood.“Ah! such wastes as there are! For a man to walk through the cities and town and see what becomes of manhood, is enough to turn his head into a fountain of tears.

It is enough to see the wastes of antiquity—the battered statutes, the toppled-down columns, the fractured walls—the ruins of the Parthenon. It is a sad experience, mingling both pain and gladness. But of all the destructions that have gone on in this world, and that are now going on every day in the great cities which are grinding and crushing out manhood, the destruction of men is the saddest. Men are as clusters in the wine-vat; and the feet of temptation tread them down as the vinter’s feet tread the clusters. And blood flows out as wine. And yet, this is a world that was made on purpose to make men better; to grind them into shape; to sharpen them; to tempt them.

And woe be to the man that is burned, or that is crushed, and that comes out worthless and goes into the rubbish-heap of the universe.”The Law of Liberty is by reason of unmerited mercy. David said, “I will walk at liberty; for I seek Thy Precepts” (Psalms 119:45).The very man who surrenders his own will and gladly yields himself up to God, instead of losing his liberties, discovers in the experience, “the Law of Liberty”.

By it he is happier here, because his will and his deeds are brought into harmony. The only man who can daily do what he wants, without hurt or hindrance, is the man who wants to do right, the man who prefers the will of God. And that man knows perfectly well also that his path will shine “more and more unto the perfect day”.Ward Beecher, addressing a lot of men who were given to greed, said, “There is going to come a time when the Christian’s joy will begin to rise beyond the horizon. My help will come to me when I need it most; yours comes to you when you need it least. By and by when heart and flesh fail, you will have no comfort at all, no help at all. But when my heart and flesh fail, my joy begins.

Come gray hairs, come dimness of vision, come dullness of hearing; to me these are signs that I am about to grow and sprout into new life. When you come to white locks, when your eyes fail, when your ears grow heavy, you have no future.”Now, if you follow James, you will find that to come into that Law of Liberty is to come by an unmerited mercy.

It is to receive “the gift of God”, which is “eternal life”. And it is to enjoy pardon, another having paid for you the price of the same on Calvary.It is a great Law, this Law of Liberty. It releases a man from his bad, black past, and breaks the hold of all his hell-deserving sins, and not only sets him free but starts him on the path to the Celestial City.It is something over a hundred years since John Newton lived, and the tablet on the north wall in the chapel at Woolnoth contains this inscription: “John Newton, clerk, Once an infidel and libertine A servant of slaves in Africa Was, by the rich mercy of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, Preserved, restored, pardoned and appointed to preach the Faith he had long labored to destroy.” Why not say to the Son of God:“Just as I am without one plea, But that Thy Blood was shed for me And that Thou bidst me come to Thee O Lamb of God, I come, I come?” and you will be made the subject of unmerited mercy.