Numbers 2

Numbers 2:1-34

AND Numbers, Chapters 1-19.THE Book of Leviticus is hard to outline and to interpret. It is lengthy, and introduces so much of detail of law and ceremony that its analysis is accomplished with difficulty. And yet Leviticus took but thirty days to declare and put its every precept into actual practice. In that respect the Book of Numbers quite contrasts its predecessor. It covers a period of not less than thirty-eight years, and the plan of the volume is simple. Four keywords compass the nineteen chapters proposed for this morning’s study. They are words necessitated by the wilderness experience. Leviticus sets up a sanctuary and a form of service; but in Numbers, “we read of men of war, of armies, of standards, of camps, and trumpets sounding aloud”.

Through all of this, these key-words keep their way, and the mere mention of them will aid us in an orderly study of the first half of the volume; while we will not be able to dispense with them when we come to the analysis and study of the latter half. I refer to the terms mustering, marching, murmuring, and mercy.The first nine chapters of Numbers have to do almost entirely with the mustering. Chapters one and two are given to arranging the regiment, as we saw in our former study:“And the Lord spake unto Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, in the tabernacle of the congregation, on the first day of the second month, in the second year after they were come out of the land of Egypt, saying,“Take ye the sum of all the congregation of the Children of Israel, after their families, by the house of their fathers, with the number of their names, every male by their polls;“From twenty years old and upward, all that are able to go forth to war in Israel: thou and Aaron shall number them by their armies.“And with you there shall be a man of every tribe; every one head of the house of his fathers. * *“As the Lord commanded Moses, so he numbered them in the wilderness of Sinai. * *“Every male from twenty years old and upward, all that were able to go forth to war. * *“And the Lord spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying, Every man of the Children of Israel shall pitch by his own standard” (Numbers 1:1-4; Numbers 1:19-20; Numbers 2:1-2).After all the centuries and even the millenniums that have come in between the day of Numbers and our day, wherein have men improved upon God’s plan of mustering armies and arranging regiments? True, we permit our boys to enter the service younger than twenty, but we make a mistake, as many a war-wrecked youth has illustrated. True, we make up our regiments of men who are strangers to each other, and in whose veins no kindred blood is flowing. But such an aggregation will never represent the strength, nor exhibit the courage that the tribal regiment evinces in fight.

The almost successful rebellion of our Southern States demonstrated this. Our “standard” speaks of the nation, and appeals to the patriotic in men.

Their “standard” represented the family and addressed itself to domestic pride and passion. It is well to remember, however, that the primary purpose of these Old Testament symbols is the impression of spiritual truths. And the lesson in this arranging of regiments is the one of being able to declare our spiritual genealogy, and our religious standard.Every Israelite, when he was polled, was put in position to declare his paternity and point unmistakably to his standard; and no Christians should be satisfied until they can say with John, “Now are we the sons of God”, because we have discovered that “the Spirit Himself beareth witness with our spirit that we are the sons of God”. And no standard should ever be accepted as sufficient other than that which has been set up for us in the Word. Long ago God said, “Behold I will lift up Mine hand to the Gentiles, and set up My standard to the people”, and in Christ Jesus He has accomplished that; and every one of us ought to be able to say with C. H.

M., “Our theology is the Bible; our church organization is the one Body, formed by the presence of the Holy Ghost, and united to the living and exalted Head in the Heavens.” To contend for anything less than this is entirely below the mark of a true spiritual warrior.Chapters three and four contain the appointment of the Priests. When Moses numbered the people, “the Levites after the tribe of their fathers were not numbered” (Numbers 1:47).

God had for them a particular place in the army, and a peculiar part to take in this onward march. Their place was roundabout the tabernacle, at the center of the host, and their office was the charge of all the vessels thereof, and over all the things that belonged to it. They were to bear the tabernacle, to minister in the tabernacle, to encamp roundabout it; “to take it down” when they were ready to set forth; and when the army halted in a new place, they were “to set it up” (chap. 2). In one sense they were not soldiers; in another they were the very captains and leaders of Jehovah’s army. Their men from twenty to fifty were not armed and made ready for the shedding of blood, but they were set in charge of that symbol of Jehovah’s presence without which Israel’s overthrow would have been instantaneous, and Israel’s defeat effectual. The world’s most holy men have always been, will always remain, its best warriors.

The Sunday School teachers of the land fight the battles that make for peace more effectually than the nation’s constabulary; while the ministers of the Gospel, together with all their confederates—conscientious laymen—put more things to rights and keep the peace better than the police force of all towns and cities. Every believer is “a priest unto God”.

We should be profoundly impressed with the position we occupy in the great army which is fighting for a better civilization, and with the responsibility that rests upon us in the bringing in of a reign of righteousness.Chapters five to nine, we have said, relate themselves to the establishment of army regulations. They impose purity of life upon every member who remains in the camp; they require restitution of any property falsely appropriated; they insist upon the strictest integrity of the home-life, and they declare the vows, offerings, and ceremonies suited to impress the necessity of the keeping of all these commands. In this there are two suggestions for the present time, namely, the place that discipline has in a well-organized army and the prominence it ought to be given in the true Church of God. That modern custom of making a hero of every man who smells the smoke of battle, and the complimentary one of excoriating every moral teacher who insists that even men of war are amenable to the civilities of life and ought to be compelled to regard them, has filled the ranks of too many standing armies with immoral men and swung public opinion too far into line with that servile press which indulges the habit of condoning, yea, even of commending, an army code that makes for criminal culture.Sometime ago I went, in company with a veteran of ‘61 to ‘66, to hold a little service at the grave of two of his comrades. On our way we met another veteran of that bloody war, and as we looked into his bloated face, and listened to his drunken words, this clean, sober, Christian ex-soldier uttered some things about the necessity of better discipline in the army that were worthy of repetition, and ought to be heard by those officials who have it in their power to aid the young men of our present army to keep the commandments of God; but who too often lead them by example and precept to an utter repudiation of the same.But the Church of God is Jehovah’s army, and if we expect civilities from the unregenerate, we have a right to demand righteousness of the professedly redeemed. Much as discipline did for the purity and power of Israel, if rightly employed, it would accomplish even more for the purity and power of the present organized body of believers.

Baron Stowe, a long time Boston’s model pastor, in his “Memoirs” says, touching the importance of strict discipline, “A church cannot prosper that connives at sin in its members; and that charity which shrinks from plain, faithful dealing with offenders, is false charity, and deeply injurious. A straightforward course in discipline, in accordance with the rules laid down by the Saviour, is the only one that will insure His approbation.” Any serious student of the Scriptures must be often and profoundly impressed with the parallelisms, and even perfect agreements, of the Old Testament teachings with those of the New.

Touching discipline, the Lord said unto Joshua,“Israel hath sinned, and they have also transgressed My covenant, which I commanded them: for they have even taken of the accursed thing, and have also stolen, and dissembled also, and they have put it even among their own stuff.“Therefore the Children of Israel could not stand before their enemies, but turned their backs before their enemies, because they were accursed: neither will I be with you any more, except ye destroy the accursed thing from among you” (Joshua 7:11-12).When Paul found in the Corinthian Church a similar condition of transgression, he wrote,“But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. * * Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person” (1 Corinthians 5:11 f).MARCHThe tenth chapter and thirty-third verse sets our organized army into motion. “And they departed from the mount of the Lord, three days’ journey”. Touching this march there are three things suggested by the Scripture, each of which is of the utmost importance.First of all it was begun at God’s signal.“And it came to pass on the twentieth day of the second month, in the second year, that the cloud was taken up from off the tabernacle of the testimony.“And the Children of Israel took their journeys out of the wilderness of Sinai; and the cloud rested in the wilderness of Paran.“And they first took their journey according to the commandment of the Lord, by the hand of Moses” (Numbers 10:11-13).Going back to the beginning of this tenth chapter you will find that the priests were to assemble the armies with the silver trumpets. A single blast called together the princes—heads of the thousands of Israel. When they blew an alarm, the camps that lay on the East went forward. A second alarm summoned the camps from the South, and an additional blast brought the congregation together. The same God at whose signal Israel was to march, speaks in trumpet tones by His Spirit, and through the Word, to the present Church militant.

When whole congregations go sadly wrong, much of the trouble will be found with the men whose business it is to. use the silver trumpet, and thereby voice the mind of God. Too many preachers have been snubbed into silence or cowed to uncertain sounds.

The silver trumpets through which they ought to call the people to battle have been plugged up with gold pieces, and in all too many instances they are afraid to blow an alarm, calling to the camps that lie on the East, lest when they sound the second, those that lie on the South should refuse to respond.Joseph Parker suggests that when ministers become the trumpeters of society again, there will be a mighty awakening in the whole nation. In Italy they have a saying to this effect, “There has never been a revolution in Europe without a Monk at the bottom of it.” And when the ministers of the Gospel of Jesus Christ faithfully fill up their offices, there will never be a division of God’s army, marching Canaan-ward, without a preacher at the head of it; and he will not be a man who has accommodated himself to the cry of the times in which we live— “Prophesy not unto us right things, speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits”, but rather one who will sound the alarm of Divine command, and whose word will be to the people, God’s signal. Every element of success enters into that assurance which comes from a conviction that one is marching according to the Divine command. The reason why public opinion, almost insuperable obstacles, and even royal counsellors, could not turn Joan of Arc from her purpose, existed in the fact that she kept hearing a voice saying, “Daughter of God, go on, go on!” And if we will listen, there is a voice behind us saying, “This is the way, walk ye in it”.In this march God’s leadership was sought.“And it came to pass, when the ark set forward, that Moses said, Rise up, Lord, and let thine enemies be scattered; and let them that hate thee flee before thee.“And when it rested he said, Return, O Lord, unto the many thousands of Israel” (Numbers 10:33).There is a simplicity and a sincerity in that prayer which is truly refreshing. There are plenty of men who consult their circumstances; who take into account all the factors that can affect the march of life, and who try to keep as their constant guide a well-balanced intellect; but Moses preferred God. He esteemed His presence above all favorable conditions, and above the highest human judgment.

And the man who rises up in the morning, offering his prayer to God to be guided for that day, and who, when he lies down at night, prays again, “Return, O Lord, unto me, and watch over my slumber”, is the man who has no occasion to fear because even the fiercest foe will fall before him.Lewis Albert Banks says that about the year 1600 a man by the name of Heddinger was chaplain to the Duke of Wartenberg. The Duke was a wayward, wicked man.

Heddinger was one of these genuine, faithful souls like John the Baptist who would stand for the right and God. He rebuked the Duke for his great sins. This terribly enraged his Honor, and he sent for the brave chaplain thinking to punish him. Heddinger came from his closet of prayer with his face beaming. The Duke, seeing the shine in every feature, realized that he was enjoying the actual presence of the Lord, and after putting to him the question, “Why did you not come alone?” sent him away unharmed. Ah, beloved, whether we be on the march or at rest; whether we be fighting the battles of life or enjoying its victories; whether we be proclaiming the truth or are on trial for having taught it, we have no business being alone, for we seek the Divine presence.

The Lord will lead us in the march and lift over us His banner when we lie down to rest.Nor can one follow this march without being impressed with the fact that God was guiding His people Canaan-ward. By consulting a good map you will see that the line from Sinai to Kadesh-Barnea was as direct as the lay of the land made possible.

God never takes men by circuitous routes. These come in consequence of leaving the straight and narrow way for the more attractive but uncertain one of by-path meadow. Had they remained faithful to Divine leadership, forty days would have brought the whole company into Canaan. But when, through the discouragement of false reporters, they turned southward, putting their backs to God, they plunged into the wilderness fox a wandering of forty years, and even worse, to perish there without ever seeing the Land of Promise. What a lesson here for us! There is a sense in which every man determines his own destiny.

It is within our power to trust to Divine leadership and enjoy it, and it is equally within our power to mistrust it, and lose it. One commenting upon this says, “Israel declared that God had brought them into the wilderness to die there; and He took them at their word.

Joshua and Caleb declared that He was able to bring them into the land, and He took them at their word”. “According to your faith be it unto you”.The eleventh chapter sounds for us a sad note. There the people fall to petty complaints and criticisms. “And when the people complained”. There are those who can complain without occasion. Criticism is the cheapest of intellectual commodities. And yet the critic always has a reason for his complaint, and however he may seek to hide the real cause, God is an expert in uncovering it. Here He lays it to the “mixed multitude” that was among them—“they fell a lusting”.

That “mixed multitude” (or “great mixture” is the word in the original) consisted of Egyptians and others who had come out of Egypt with Israel, and whose Egyptian tastes were not being satisfied by enforced marches, holy services and manna from on High. It is a good thing to get Israel out of Egypt, to get the Church of God out of the world; but it is an essential thing also to get Egypt out of Israel, the unregenerate out of the Church of God, for if you do not they will “fall a lusting”, and the first complaint they will make is touching the food divinely provided for them.

The Gospel of Jesus Christ—God’s provided manna—never did satisfy an unregenerate man, and it never will. What he wants is “the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlick”. Yes, even “the garlick” of the world; and when you set before him manna, he insists that his “soul is dried away”.I went to talk with a mother about her little daughter’s uniting with the church. She told me that she was opposed to it; and when I asked her why, she boldly replied that she united with the church herself when she was young, and thereby denied herself all “the pleasures of the world”. She had never ceased to regret it, and she proposed to save her girl from a similar experience. “A lusting for the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlick!” If such is one’s feeling, just as well go back to the world! It does not make an Egyptian an Israelite to go over into that camp, and it does not make an unregenerate man a Christian because you write his name on the church book.This spirit of criticism spread to the officials and leaders. “And Miriam and Aaron spake against Moses because of the Ethiopian woman whom he had married”.

Their complaint was slightly different from that of the mixed multitude, but directed against the same man.From the complaint of these leading officials the trouble spread, and when the ten spies rendered their report of the land which God had promised, the whole congregation broke into revolt. That was the opportunity that Korah and Dathan and Abiram and On took advantage of.“And they rose up before Moses, with certain of the Children of Israel, two hundred and fifty princes of the assembly, famous in the congregation, men of renown.“And they gathered themselves together against Moses and against Aaron, and said unto them, Ye take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the Lord is among them; wherefore then lift ye up yourselves above the congregation of the Lord”? (Numbers 16:2-3).Here is the new complaint of the critics!

Moses is domineering; his administration is that of a “one-man power”. He has not given sufficient attention to “the princes of the assembly”, and to “the chief members” of the congregation.This is no ancient story. From that hour until this, the Church of God, whether in the form of Israel or that of the body of baptized believers, has experienced the same rebellion with the same reasons assigned. In Paul’s day the Church at Corinth had to be counselled by the great Apostle and the members thereof reminded that they were of one body. The feet are enjoined not to complain of the hands, and the ear not to criticise the eye, and the eye not to envy the hand, nor yet the head the feet, that there should be no schism in the body, since when one member suffers, all the members suffer with it, and when one member is honored all the members should rejoice with it. In our own day the chief men have sometimes set aside the servant of God.

Dr. Jonathan Edwards, once a man of the highest education and personal culture, honored by the members of his profession for his spirituality, and for the success that had attended his ministry, was set aside because he interfered with the Egyptian desires of the children of certain “chief men” of his congregation.

Years ago, in New York, America’s most famous pastor and preacher, after passing through a series of sicknesses and bereavements in his family, came to the thirtieth anniversary of his pastorate to find himself retired from office by a few of “the officials” of the church who were “influential”. His reinstatement by the body at large came too late to save him from the collapse that attended this severe experience. A New York correspondent, writing of this, said, “Such action makes every pastor in New York City feel sick at heart.”Attend to the way Moses met this! If the ministers of the present time learned his way, their course would be a more courageous one and their burdens better borne. “Then Moses and Aaron fell on their faces before all the assembly of the congregation of the Children of Israel” (Numbers 14:5). That is the way he met the first rebellion. When the rebellion of Korah came, it is written, “And when Moses heard it, he fell upon his face.

And he spake unto Korah and unto all his company, saying, Even to morrow the Lord will show who are His” (Numbers 16:4-5). We may suggest here, prayer to God, the best possible reply to complaints and criticisms.

If one has been guilty of that charged against him, such prayer will bring him to a knowledge of his guilt and give him an opportunity to correct it; and if he has not been guilty, such prayer will cause God to lift him up and establish his going, and put into his mouth a song.Constantine the Great was one day looking at some statues of famed persons, and noting that they were all in standing position, he said, “When mine is made I’d like it in kneeling posture, for it is by going down before God I have risen to any eminence.” Moses has taught us how to conquer all complaint, and all criticism, and come off victorious by falling on our faces and waiting until God shows who are His.MERCYThe conclusion of this study presents a precious thought; in the midst of judgment, mercy appears.At Moses’ intercession, God removes His hand. Every time there is a rebellion, and judgment is visited upon the people, Moses appears as intercessor, and “when the people fell to lusting for the leeks, and the onions of Egypt, Moses cried unto God, Wherefore hast Thou afflicted Thy servant? and wherefore have I not found favour in Thy sight, that Thou layest the burden of all this people upon me”? Their cries were the anguish of his soul! When Miriam and Aaron were in sedition against their brother, it was Moses who interceded, saying, “Heal her now, O God, I beseech Thee”. And when the whole congregation lifted up their voices of murmuring at the report of the spies, Moses was on his face again in such an intercessory prayer as you could scarce find on another page of sacred Scripture. He was ready to die himself, if they could not be delivered and when Korah and his company attempted his overthrow, he plead with God until the plague was stayed.

Therein is an example for every true Christian man.“Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath, for it is written, Vengeance is Mine; I will repay, saith the Lord;“Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink. * *“Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good”.This is what Christ said,“Love your enemies, bless them that curse you; do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despite fully use you and persecute you, that you may be the children of your Father which is in Heaven” (Matthew 5:44-45).The richest symbol of God’s mercy is seen in this nineteenth chapter—the red heifer! “She was preeminently the type of God’s provision against the defilement of the wilderness experience. She prefigured the death of Christ as the purification for sin” and contained the promise of God’s mercy toward all men, however dreadful their rebellion or deep their stains.

Who can read this nineteenth chapter and remember how this offering of the red heifer covers the most grievous sin of man without seeing how great is God’s mercy, and how Divine is His example. Henry Van Dyke says, “When we see God forgiving all men who have sinned against Him, sparing them in his mercy, * * let us take the gracious lesson of forgiveness to our hearts. Why should we hate like Satan when we may forgive like God? Why should we cherish malice, envy, and all uncharitableness in our breasts? I know that some people use us despitefully and show themselves our enemies, but why should we fill our hearts with their bitterness and inflame our wounds with their poison? This world is too sweet and fair to darken it with the clouds of anger.

This life is too short and precious to waste it in bearing that heaviest of all burdens, a grudge.”And you will see in this nineteenth chapter, also, a new emphasis laid upon the necessity of personal purity. The red heifer was provided for cleansing, and God imposed it upon the cleansed to keep themselves unspotted from the world.

That is the major part of true religion to this day, to keep one’sself unspotted from the world. This whole chapter is God’s attempt to so provide us with the blood of the slain, and surround us with the cleansing ceremonies, that we may be able to resist the floods of defilement that flow on every side. Realizing, as we must realize, the beauty and blessedness of a holy life, we can enter into a keen appreciation of that most beautiful beatitude, and sing with John Keble: “Blest are the pure in heart, For they shall see their God:The secret of the Lord is theirs; Their soul is Christ’s abode.“The Lord, who left the heavens, Our life and peace to bring,To dwell in lowliness with men, Their pattern and their King.“Still to the lowly soul He doth Himself impart,And for His dwelling and His throne Chooseth the pure in heart.“Lord, we Thy presence seek; May ours this blessing be;Oh, give the pure and lowly heart, A temple meet for Thee.”

Numbers 2:2

OUR IS OUR Num_2:2THE Scripture going before and immediately following our text, seems to be a mere jumble of hard names. But in this verse the word of the Lord brings order out of confusion. The calling of the muster-roll is completed with a sentence which assigns his place to every man. Now that the individuals are disposed of, it only remains to arrange the position of the lines, and the march may begin at a moment’s warning.There are not a few phases of life in which a roll-call seems to be a necessity. Confusion appears to rise of itself, is just tumbled into, but order is most often affected with difficulty, and only comes about when a master is in command. As children at the public school we did not consider the roll-call a useless performance.

The names may have been varied, and some of them almost unpronounceable, yet the teacher delighted in this task because it resulted in setting things to rights. Two objects are had in the school-roll, two were contemplated in the command of our text, and perchance the same motives most often give rise to the great muster-rolls of life.

The one is a strengthening of the sense of individuality, personal responsibility. The other contemplates some organization of individuals into classes, corps, lines, etc. In our text God addresses His speech to “every man”. Some people talk as if they half doubted Jehovah’s acquaintance with us as individuals; as though the human unit were swallowed up and lost sight of in the great human mass. Be not deceived. Shall Raphael forget his “Transfiguration”, and remember only the panorama to which his genius gave birth? Shall Michael Angelo forget his “Moses” and think only of a galaxy of marble statuary? Shall the fond parent forget the son, or the daughter, and be mindful only of the family?

Then why suppose that God is unmindful of your individualism and mine, since we are the conceptions of His Divine genius, the work of His holy hands and the offspring of His infinite love?It was for the deepening of this individual sense that Paul wrote: “Let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another, for every man shall bear his own burden”. It was written to heighten the consciousness of personal accountability. “As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to Me, and every tongue shall confess to God; so then every one of us shall give an account of himself to God”.And yet after we have emphasized individuality as we may and ought to do, we will not find it militating against the gathering of groups or the sense of interdependence. The very same writer who said, “Every man shall bear his own burden”, hastened to save his words from a too narrow interpretation by the added line: “Bear ye one another’s burdens and so fulfil the law of Christ”. The writer who said, “So then every one of us shall give an account of himself to God”, waited not for the ink to dry from these words before he was penning those others: “None of us liveth to himself and no man dieth to himself”. So I conclude that if one sentence of inspiration cannot clash with another, the man is not lost sight of in the human mass, and although he must join groups, and live in groups, and move with groups, still “every man” has the responsibility of deciding which is his circle, and of choosing the standard beneath which he will stand.I am aware that the standards of our text were only staffs or banners, and that those who gathered about them formed lines to march through the wilderness toward Canaan. But these standards meant more than wooden staffs and flaunting flags; they were the centers around which revolved social, intellectual and religious life.

This march may have been confined as to place, but in its experiences, it was universal—a life march. So I must interpret our text this morning, “Every man shall pitch by his own standard”.

In the ring of social life let us begin with this statement of fact: ARE AT ONCE ITS BANE AND .There is one kind of social communism that I believe in, and there is another kind, which if I ever advocate it, I must first have lost my senses. I am persuaded that the Scripture is to be taken literally when it says, “God hath made of our blood all nations of men”. The Chinaman, the Japanese, the Hottentot is as much your brother and mine, as is the needy American. Each of them have a claim upon our lives which we may not disregard; a right to our sympathy and assistance which we dare not ignore or despise. If one of them hunger and there is opportunity, we must feed him; if he is naked we must clothe; if he thirsts we must give him to drink; if he is sick or in prison we must visit him. But that is not the social communism that many are just now advocating.

The effort is to break down all lines, and merge all social circles into one great communion, in which distinction in birth shall be forgotten, in breeding taken no note of, in education disregarded, in aesthetic taste overlooked—an effort as unreasonable as impracticable. Human nature is too greatly above that of swine to ever allow that men be pigged together socially.

Lift up your social standards then! They ought to exist, and “every man shall pitch by his own”.But if we enjoy their blessing, and escape the bane, we dare not raise up or rally about those that are false.Wealth is the false standard of social position in all too many cities and circles today. A man’s place in the various groups that grade from lower to higher is too often as absolutely dependent upon the size of his pocketbook as though he had to buy a ticket of entrance at a price corresponding to the position desired. When will society learn that money is a wretched measure of the man? How many new illustrations need we have of the truth that gold is more often a matter of accident, a question of heirship, or a tale of greed, than an evidence of intellectual acumen or force of character? Edward Bellamy’s “Looking Backward” may be optimistic, and even visionary, but it will repay your study with its many sound social principles.

One of that author’s greater intentions was the correcting of men’s methods of estimating their fellows. If his theories are impracticable they have at least the virtue of regarding character as above cloth, and brain above boodle.

Whether his effort is to work a reform or not, it is a step in the right direction when a brilliant author employs his rhetoric to expose a giant fallacy. Surely wealth in itself is no crime, and its possession, instead of branding a man as unworthy of social distinction, often bespeaks his superior right to such honors. But falsity is introduced when circles disregard mutual affinities and overlook differences that must repel, and open widest arms to every man who brings a bit of gold.Along the track of this too widely prevalent practice is to be found the record of not a few failures in life. Young men and women, dazzled and deceived by standards of splendid and expensive show, have grown weary of the dull colors in their own lives and have forsaken the very posts for which their birth, breeding and abilities had measured them. No wonder the Apostle reserved the sentence, “The pride of life”, as the capstone or climax of his resume of all iniquity, “The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life”, is the order of his speech. How often this “pride of life” has led men to forsake the standards of real honesty and largest opportunity, to take refuge beneath those of greater pretentions, but of far less safety.

It is John Foster, I believe, who tells a tale in illustration of this truth. It seems that a young man living *at Springfield, Mass., was most favorably considered by a business firm who thought of employing him at a splendid salary, and opening for him a way to partnership in their stock.

But before they acquainted him with their intentions, they inquired after his private life. When they learned that he spent several nights of the week in a billiard room, and on Sunday afternoon drove a hired span into the country, they decided to give the place to another. The standard under which he had pitched was not so essentially immoral as false! His gambling was not so much a mania for the game as a necessity of keeping up his pretentions to wealth. His unnecessary expenditures rendered necessary some increase of revenues. Young man, pitch by your own standard, whatever one your neighbor may stand beside.

Consult your own interests, note well your own ability, and take account of eventual good. If you would like a loftier standard than that under which you stand, climb to higher ground, and carry your own with you, and you will have it.But some one says, “What of heredity, of family, of blood?” That has long determined lofty standards abroad, and is fast becoming an important factor in American social life.

There are not a few people who claim and are accorded a place beneath society’s most ample folds, because their fathers were noble men, and their mothers most spirited women. I am a firm believer in heredity, but who can forget that it works in diverse directions? Diseases and vice have discovered a facility of transmission which health and virtue have seldom outrun, and the circle that emphasizes heredity is bigoted and blind if it does not consider its whole swing. You may remember Hawthorne’s teaching in his “House of Seven Gables”. He is looking upon the likeness of Judge Pyncheon, and comparing it with that of the founder of the home when he says, “That likeness implied that the weaknesses and defects, the bad passions, the mean tendencies and the moral diseases which lead to crime are handed down from one generation to another by a far surer process of transmission than human law has been able to establish in respect to the riches and honor which it seeks to entail upon posterity.” A sad commentary, surely, on the law of boasted heredity, and yet how many circles furnish demonstrations of its truth. To my mind some of the most pathetic and curious scenes of real life are discovered in upper social circles.

Who has looked upon their gatherings, but has beheld men and women who were but a slight remove from fools, whose characters discovered consummate weaknesses, whose souls were dwindled and dwarfed, mingling as freely with the excellent in mind and spirit, as though a place purchased with father’s gold, or inherited from mother’s virtues were equally honorable with that attained by some force of personal character, or acquired by some individual excellence of mind and heart? How splendid a thing it would be if some best orator could have the ear of the youth of the land long enough to thunder into it the necessity of correct standards for social life.

When will the day come in which we shall pitch by those that aspire to personal effort, that speak of personal worth, that rightly represent essential character? Not till then will young men cease to court those whose only attractions are their giddiness and their father’s gold. Until then will young women continue to open their parlors, and unbolt their hearts to men who, relying upon the influence of a monied and virtuous ancestry, have before your very eyes, trampled a sister’s virtue under foot and in fiendish leer laughed at the wreck. I doubt if there be a fact of social life that gives such pain to the noblest among us, as the indisputable evidence that for family’s sake some such men are now permitted to stain the social circles of this city. Oh, would God that all knew and would practice the rules which Gresley put into words: “Reject the society of the vicious; shun the agreeable infidel and the accomplished profligate; lay it down as a fixed rule that no brilliancy of connection, no allurement of rank or fashion shall tempt you to associate with profligate or openly irreligious men! If you do fall into their vices, such it is, your heart will be estranged from virtue and the love of God.” You are to pitch by your own social standard.

How important then that you make your own the right one!But as already intimated, standards affect other phases of life quite as much as they do its social side.THEY ARE HELPERS AND TO .Here again it is necessary to distinguish between the true and the false, the higher and the lower, the nobler and the more debased. The young, if left without direction, are peculiarly apt to make fatal blunder at this point.

There are not a few people who wait not till the bud of youth has fully blossomed ere they have fixed their intellectual fate.Our indolence is too often an overmatch for our ambition, and our ease-seeking natures readily fall in with the debasing suggestion that we are incapable of the largest learning and should school ourselves into contentment with mediocre attainments. Every man who decides upon such a standard has most narrowly circumscribed his literary and scientific horizon. It may have been the superior wisdom of Socrates that led him to affirm his ignorance repeatedly. But often it is only the superior blindness, or the splendid laziness of young men and women that convinces them that the larger learning and richer culture are beyond their ken.I have sometimes thought, however, that certain older people were in part to blame for this meager estimate that the young too often put upon their own mental and spiritual powers. We are ready enough to detect in our juniors the first evidence of egotism, the slightest indication of an over-ambition. We are ready enough to reprove the one and repress the other.

We are all too slow to feel the pulse of a larger hope, the throb of loftiest aspiration that may be, yes often is, thrilling through the young life. It is not an unusual thing to hear parents and other elders call the children “upstarts”, and remind them of their “oversmartness”.

Such compliments as would excite their faith in self, encourage them to the largest expectation, and stimulate them to best endeavor, are only too seldom heard. But a little while ago, I read a short comment upon Longfellow’s first poem. The writer said of it, “It was the realization of an early dream.”When a mere boy, Longfellow wrote from his boarding school, asking of the fond mother if she did not think that he might one day write books which would be read all over the land? What answer that mother gave her boy’s question, the author of this scrip did not say; perchance we shall never know. I imagine, however, that could the mother’s letter be found, its every line would sparkle with the wisest counsel, and appear almost swollen with the bigness of hope for her talented son. None should be surprised that Guizot’s children were ambitious and talented, when they learn how well he understood their young lives, how thoroughly he sympathized with their early aspirations, and how kindly he touched and tended their loftiest hopes and sentiments.

Not one of them but was worthy of such a father. The boy of his heart, his first-born son, had not death snatched him when just budding to manhood, promised to equal, if indeed he had not outstripped his illustrious sire.

It was to that boy, as a contestant for one of the University prizes, that Guizot wrote: “Our destiny consists of two parts: The one is hidden from us and God settles it according to His will; the other depends upon ourselves, and this is the only one which we ought to trouble ourselves about. * * You are right to be ambitious. Ambition is one of the best of youthful passions. It is a wish for distinction, unalloyed by any of the bad feelings which are often mixed with it in later life. One is sometimes too ambitious at forty, but never at twenty.” I call that the lifting of a lofty standard, and a most sensible way of stimulating the boy to choose it as his own, pitch by it and prove himself worthy of it.It was Sir Wm. Hamilton, was it not, who gave us that striking sentence? “In the world there is nothing great but man; in man there is nothing great but mind.” Then how dare we neglect this noblest part of self; how can we allow, much less assist, our loved ones to be guilty of the same? Young men and women, let me speak freely to you!

If we do not grow in mind, become cultured, keen in intellect, broad in judgment and wide in learning, the fault will most often be with our ignoble efforts, not with our more capable natures. Pitch by the standard of hope, stand under the flag of self-help, and by the grace of God, make the most of life on the intellectual side.There is another theory, somewhat popular today, which deserves to be exploded.

I refer to the notion that to educate boys is to render them effeminate and unfit them for the more manly duties of life. This notion accounts in part for the unequal state of things now existing in this and other cities of the land. Our public schools, high schools and academies are filled with girls and young ladies, whilst the boys and young men are found following business pursuits. Fathers who have adopted this plan of education for their children, attempt to justify their action by affirming that, aside from the importance of remuneration, the boys are getting the most practical learning. We do not charge that there is any want of sincerity in this plea, but are soundly convinced that it is faulty and hurtful in the extreme. It is that theory which has circumscribed many a more capable life to the narrow limits of a dingy shop, restricted personal influence to the small circle of fellow-laborers, tied and tethered its victim to the lowest rung of the intellectual ladder.

With a false premise no right conclusion is reached, and when your theory of life is wrong, its out-working is apt to tell the tale. Against the soundness of this theory Henry Ward Beecher once hurled such facts of history as left it tottering if not utterly demolished.

He says, “When you show me a man who has been cultured, you ought to show; me a man who is better built to meet the contingencies of life than any that are uncultured.” He reminds us of our experience in the late war with these different classes. We expected the rude swain, who had known only coarseness, to make the better soldier, and resist the hardships of the campaign more easily than the college-bred and the sons of wealth and refinement. But the facts as noted were, that for endurance of hardships, efficiency of service, adaptation to the camp-life and the survival of suffering and wounds, the brain power was the preservative, and mental resources far outweighed muscular strength. He also cites the history of the French Revolution, and reminds us that the nobility bore their exile and wanderings more nobly and were far more self-helpful than the common peasantry and the lower ranks. Neither does he let us forget the trials of Kossuth and his noble band after the Hungarian expulsion. He pertinently remarks of them, “No equal number of men ever justified culture more, by adapting themselves to their circumstances, and without complaint or repining, meeting the hardships of their changed methods of livelihood.”We cannot all know equal ambition; we will not all follow like studies; we should not all end at the same goal; but every one should be impressed that in intellectual life, his standard is his strength, and whilst pitching by his own, purpose to carry, it with advancing step.But our first suggestion will not be complete in statement until this one is added: ARE THE FRIENDS AND FOES OF .That Christianity has often been impeded by false standards is as certain as that its truth is capable of wrong and even hurtful interpretation.

But that its strong staff of truth and its crimson flag of atonement have furnished at once a rallying point and an inspiration to the faithful hosts, none can deny. Dr.

Cuyler, in a late article, shows at once the beauty and the necessity of raising our standards of religion, instead of lowering them, as too many have done and are doing. But the religious decision is the first needful step. When Joshua stood before Israel and delivered a discourse, which reached its climax in the sentence, “Choose you this day whom ye will serve,” he declared an absolute necessity. As between the standards of good and evil, God and the devil, every man must choose. No feet are swift enough to do service under both banners; no arms strong enough to bring these standards into a common compass, and no soul is great enough to pay tribute to each. It was said of Jesus that he taught “as one having authority and not as the scribes”.

There was no faltering in his speech, no uncertainty of sound or meaning. Yet in what words of His find you a more emphatic ring than in these? “No man can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other.

Ye cannot serve God and Mammon”. Take your standard and pitch by it; you must be godly or godless. There are but two states in all the universe.To decide for God and holiness is to settle upon the standard most important, and yet there remains to be made another choice of considerable consequence. I refer to church connection or denominational faith. We cannot be glad that our too meager knowledge of the truth, our poorer interpretations, our prejudices and petty preferences have divided our common Christian faith into many sects. But, on the other hand, it is well to remember that there is such a thing as a “denominational psychology.” So long as men continue to be born apart, bred differently, and enjoy independent thought, it is a good thing to have several standards so that every man may pitch by his own.

Not by the one that he has a prejudice for, but by the one which he believes to be nearest the New Testament model. The story is told that an English gentleman, meeting his neighbor’s coachman on Monday morning, found him indulging a very positive smile. “Well, John,” said he, “what has happened to make you look so pleasant today?” “Why, sir, what do you think?

We are a pretty lot at our house, that we are. I started out with five of us in the old carriage yesterday morning. First of all, I drove the young mistress to the church, and then old master to the Wesleyans; next I took young master to the Romans, my wife went to the Ranters, and when I had put up the horse, I took a turn myself with the Calvinists.” Somebody says, “That is just it; that is what troubles me! There are so many divisions among those who own one Lord and read a common Bible that I consider myself as well off to let them alone.”Many a husband, godless by preference, has employed this argument against a wife’s tender entreaties for the church. Many a son has met and opposed parental concern with this plea. This argument is self-defeating, the plea its own contradiction.

The man who rejects Christ Himself because His followers are gathered beneath many standards, adds to existing divisions a new one, and one most radically removed from the measure of truth. If he claims to accept Christ and yet refuses to identify himself with any body of His people, he either admits an inability to form an opinion, or else the want of courage to act that opinion out.

This case is not unlike that of the Romish Priest who came to a Protestant Bible society meeting and said: “Now, gentlemen, here you are telling us that we should take the Bible for our guide and join you. Which one of you pray? Episcopalian, Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian or Quaker? All of you claim to be the best and how shall I decide?” An Irishman present responded, “I can answer the gentleman: Believe on Christ, take His Word as your guide, join any one of us, and you will be a vast deal better than you are.” Yes, the man who believes on Christ and takes His Word as a guide will find a standard which, if pitched by, will make him a vast deal better than he was.But when once we have pitched by a standard we ought to stay by it. You are westward sufficiently far to understand me when I say: There are too many squatters in the churches—people who pitch by the Baptist standard today, who will be professing allegiance to the Methodist standard tomorrow, and who next-day will be seeking a place beneath the flag of Presbyterianism. I don’t know how any could have more admiration for the man who changes standards for the sake of truth than I do.

But I confess that I feel a mingled pity and contempt for those who tramp from church to church and never do any good anywhere. Can’t you decide on a standard and pitch by it, or will you so act as to secure a name among those “who are ever learning, yet never coming to a knowledge of the truth?” I hold up today, as infinitely above all, the standard of Christ’s righteousness; I point to the banner colored with His atoning Blood; I unfold the flag whereon is inscribed the word of His infinite love!

Oh, men and women, dying without the camp, will you not rally to this standard and make it your own? Will you not pitch beneath this flag and be forever safe from sin and death, to engage in the sweet service of our loving Lord?