And He spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully: and he thought within himself, saying, What shall I do, because I have no room where to bestow my fruits? And he said, This will I do: I will pull down my barns, and build greater; and there will I bestow all my fruits and my goods. And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry. But God said unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided? So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God.
HERE is splendid material for a most interesting study of human character. The central figure is the type of by far the larger part of humanity. Let us take a good look at this man. In order to understand him thoroly, it will be necessary to view him in different lights and from different points of observation. First, look at him in the light of this world, and estimate his character as we usually gage the wisdom or folly of men. Let us apply to him the same rules and measure him by the same standard that the world uses in measuring men. In doing this, I am sure we shall find much that is commendable.
Was an Industrious Man
That he was an industrious man is obvious from the fact that his ground "brought forth plentifully." As the result of careful cultivation and honest toil, he had got and kept his farm in first-class condition.
Not only this, but he plowed the ground in season, and planted at the right time, so as to insure good crops. All this is very commendable; for industry is a virtue, and idleness is a sin.
He Must Have Been a Careful Man
He was rich. This fact alone would generally mark him as a careful man. No amount of industry, no degree of success in getting money, will make one rich, unless he learns the lesson of carefulness. All about his farm were evidences of this virtue. There was a place for everything, and everything was in its place. His implements were well housed, his stock well sheltered, and everywhere things seemed to wear an air of carefulness. This is all commendable.
He Was Also a Thoughtful Man
I have heard people say, "I spoke before I thought," or "I acted before I thought." It was not so with this rich man. He thought before he acted. He considered a move well, he thought of it in all its phases, before he made it. That question, "What shall I do?" is very significant, and is the key to an important part of his character. It reveals system. This, too, is very commendable in him; for a haphazard mode of action makes chaos of many lives that otherwise would be orderly and beautiful.
He Was a Rich Man
Then, too, we must note the fact that he was a rich man. While this in itself is not a virtue, this man who, as a result of his industry, frugality, and intelligent use of his powers, had become rich honestly, is to be admired.
He Was a Highly Respected Man
His success in life would secure that. He had other things than his wealth to commend him to his fellow men. He was doubtless old; yet, as a result of good habits, he was hale and hearty. He had no use for intoxicating liquors, no profanity escaped his lips, and he was careful about his diet. This is all to be admired in any man.
He Was an Influential Man
His wealth would secure this also. He was an authority on all subjects pertaining to successful farming. If his fellow farmers were in doubt about a question of successful farming, his advice was eagerly sought and followed. He was probably a politician — perhaps a member of the council. If you were to call on him, he would doubtless take you in his carriage and show you his farms, tell you how he intended to improve this one, and how he expected soon to tear down that house and erect a new and modern one in its place. He would tell you how, when a boy, he came to the neighborhood without money, how he worked and saved, and little by little gathered together, until now he possesses all this, is a member of the council, and has the confidence and respect of all who know him. Yes, he was a respected and influential man.
Now, Look at Him All Around
Viewed as the world views men, measured as the world measures men, what is your opinion of him? You say, He is a most remarkably wise man. But God calls him a fool. How can this be? How can a man be a wise man and at the same time a fool? — Just this way: There are two ways of measuring a man — two methods of computing his wisdom or folly. There is man's way and there is God's way. It all depends on which method, which standard, you have used. Now let us shift our point of observation.
In the Light of Eternity
Hitherto we have looked at him merely as a citizen of this world, whose highest ideal of life was to prosper in this world's goods and enjoy himself; but let us look at him in the light of eternity. Now, if the grave ends all, if this life is all there is to it, then we are right in our estimate of him. "If the dead rise not, let us eat and drink; for tomorrow we die." 1 Cor. 15:32. But as death does not end all, as "there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust," we are wrong in our estimate. Let us now view him from God's point of vision, for this must be the final view-point of us all.
Misconception of True End of Life
So viewed, his folly is seen, first, in his total misconception of the true end of life. His whole ambition was to get all he could, and keep all he could, and to have the good will and respect of his fellow men. Alas that so many have this same beggarly conception of life! The old catechism which you perhaps used to study had it right when it said the true end of life is to know God and enjoy Him forever. Jesus said, "This is life eternal, that they might know Thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom9Thou hast sent." John 17:3. But this man was content to know and enjoy only the things that are seen, temporal, and perishing. Truly this is folly.
Misconception of Nature and Needs of the Soul
Again, his folly is seen in his misconception of the nature and needs of the soul. He speaks to his soul as if it were a separate and conscious entity. And nothing is more pathetic than the way he deals or proposes to deal with his soul. He can do nothing toward arranging for spiritual interests now. He may sometime, but not now. O, how many in the world he represents? Perhaps he represents the reader. You can not attend to the matter of your salvation now. O, yes, you expect to do so sometime — after you have purchased more land, after your bank account has grown to such and such proportions, after you have thoroly settled in life, then you will attend to it.
So this man said, After I have pulled down those barns and built greater ones, etc., then I will attend to eternal things. And what will he do then? — "I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods," etc. O, what good is there for a soul in well-filled barns and numerous herds and waving fields without the blessing and approval and promises of God! These things can not give peace and rest of soul, and they can not give protection in the great day of God's wrath which is so near.
Folly of His Plans Respecting Time
Again, his folly is seen in the proposals he makes to himself in respect to time. He can do nothing for his soul just now. Those old barns must be torn down and new ones built. Those crops must be harvested, etc. To-morrow he will do something.
Alas that men will act so wildly! To thousands, to you, dear reader, to-morrow may never come; yet upon this flimsy, shadowy thing you risk the eternal welfare of your soul. The devil says, To-morrow; God says, To-day.
To get a complete view of this man's folly, we must look at the final scene. It is evening time, and he is resting, but his mind is filled with the unsolved problem of the day — "What shall I do" about those barns, about those crops that are ready to garner? Shall I sell the oats and the wheat direct from the thrashing-floor, or build greater barns, and store and hold it for higher prices? What shall I do? I must settle that question before I sleep. He summons the broker, and consults him regarding the probability of a rise in prices. He calls the master mechanic, and asks him about the probable cost of the proposed improvements. What shall I do? At last the thing takes definite shape in his mind — he reaches a conclusion. This will I do: I will pull down my barns, and build greater ones, and hold for the higher market. And he retires to sleep, and to await the coming of the morning, when he will execute his plans.
The Morning Never Comes
Alas that that morning should never come! for as he lies there, a strange feeling possesses him. What mean those strange sensations — this laboring of the heart — this difficulty of breathing — this aching of the muscles — this cold, clammy perspiration upon his brow? He asks: Am I ill? No; I must not be; I am too busy to be ill. Am I dying? No, no; I can not, I must not die. Those barns must be built, those crops must be gathered and judiciously sold. My business never needed me as it does now. No, I will not die.
But the God of heaven, in whose hand his breath is, says, "Thou fool!" and the next moment there is a lifeless body. A soul created to bear the image of God — to know God and Jesus Christ, and to enjoy eternity with Them and the redeemed — is famished and bankrupt. He lived without Christ and without God, and he died without Them, and consequently without hope. Now, listen, and let these words "sink down deep in your heart:" "So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God."
Your riches may consist of much silver and gold and broad acres of land; but if you are not rich toward God — rich in faith, rich in hope and love and peace, rich in the precious promises for a future home in the kingdom which the Saviour is soon, very soon, coming to set up — you are as bankrupt and hopeless and as surely lost as the soul of whom we have studied.
May God help you to make your peace with Him now, that when Jesus comes in the clouds of heaven, you will not be ashamed at His appearing.
The Old Songs
By E. E. Sanborn
By E. E. Sanborn
As I sing these dear old songs,
"Let me to Thy bosom fly,"
"There is a fountain filled with blood,"
"While the days are going by,"
"There were ninety and nine that safely lay,"
And "The half has never been told,"
"I love to tell the story,"
"As we walk the streets of gold,"
"Will there be any stars in my crown?"
"In the year of jubilee,"
"Shall we meet beyond the river?"
"Over there," "O Galilee,"—
My heart is full of rapture,
And I rise to "higher ground,"
While I sing those grand old verses,
"I'm homeward, heavenward bound."
We're admonished by the Scriptures,
"Praise the Lord," "Praise ye the Lord;"
Let us heed the admonition,
Praise Him all with one accord.
The honest and faithful, the tried and the true,
Who study the Bible, the Old and the New,
Who make "overcomeeth" the word of their choice,
And prove it in actions, in heart, and in voice;
Who know that the promise is given to those
Who all the devices of Satan oppose,
And hope by each sentence of love that they preach,
The heart of some poor, wayward sinner to reach;
Who love the Lord best, and who gladly obey,
Humbly they watch, and they wait, and they pray.
They know the Lord loves them, they know they love Him;
Their lamps do they fill, their lamps to they trim.
They study His precepts by night and by day,
The same as did Jesus, to please Him alway.
These all shall be purified, made white, and tried.
And finally they'll stand their Saviour beside,
In robes of Christ's righteousness, spotless and white,
To taste of life's tree, and with Him have a right.
Socialism—Some Aspects of Its Program
By George W. Rine
In a previous paper on “Socialism” contributed to “The Outlook” department of this journal, we saw that the spread of Socialism is one of the phenomenal facts of recent years. Twenty years ago the Socialist propaganda seemed like a mere dream. To-day vast numbers of thoughtful persons of all classes of society regard Socialism as the goal toward which society is inevitably moving. The progress of conviction in this direction has doubtless been quickened by the enormous growth of combinations, both of capital and of labor.
Very few of those, however, who cherish the conviction that Socialism is destined to become the ultimate form of human society, have ever clearly worked out in their own minds the program of Socialism. In truth, the ideas of many Socialists themselves are nebulous and indefinite. As to the program of actual procedure there are almost endless differences of opinion among them. Many intelligent Socialists decidedly oppose the adoption of violent or revolutionary schemes. They would bring about successive reforms just as rapidly as public opinion would warrant. Again, other leaders of the movement — for example, Jack London and Eugene V. Debs — would, as early as practicable, change the existing order radically and violently.
It looks as if the Socialist PROPAGANDA at least has come to stay. It is therefore imperatively urgent that we all should acquire a fair understanding of the goal to which the movement would conduct us. Socialism is not a system merely of amendment or reform. On the contrary, it declares every system of that sort to be wofully inadequate, and seeks to effect an entire renovation of the body social, to compass an economic and political revolution of momentous magnitude. It holds that the present condition of our industrial and social life is radically wrong, essentially unjust; and therefore demands that its whole character be revolutionized.
Socialism aims fundamentally to displace private capital by collective capital; that is, the substitution of collective ownership of all the means of production and distribution for the private ownership of such means. “The nationalization or municipalization of capital — that is the shortest phrase in which the scheme of Socialism can be expressed,” says Dr. Washington Gladden. The railways, the steamships, the factories, the furnaces, the machinery, the goods in warehouses and in transit, the mines, etc., would all be owned by the State. There would be no more private business or enterprise except, perhaps, on a very petty scale. Socialism does not seek to abolish capital, but capitalists. It would seek to accumulate vast stores of capital, but it would make it the common property of the whole people. All industry would thus be under government control. The civil service would include all of the population that would be engaged in the production and distribution of wealth.
As to the expediency of abolishing money as well as private capital, Socialists are not agreed. M. Schaeffle, a noted French Socialist writer, asserts that “it is a matter of history that money was never used in any closed economic circle; it would therefore have to disappear in any close economic community, such as that of Socialism.” The able German propagandist Hertzka, in his stirring little work “Freiland,” contends that money would be retained. Professor Graham thinks that it would be banished, and labor checks substituted for it. How, without a medium of exchange, any foreign trade could be carried on, is not easy to understand.
All staple commodities would be produced, then, under the direction of government officials. “The amount produced,” says Dr. Gladden, “would be determined by government statisticians and actuaries. The goods so produced would be transported by government conveyances to government warehouses, and would there be exchanged for labor checks, presented by those who had received them for services rendered in some department of State-managed industry.” Socialist authorities vary widely as to the basis of distribution. There is no agreement among them; and many of them refuse to commit themselves definitely on the question. One of the first things that would have to be determined under a Socialist régime would be the proportion in which the various classes of workers should share in the wealth produced. Schaeffle assumes that the distribution will be proportioned “to the amount and social utility of the productive labor of each.” Would it not, however, require more than human wisdom to calculate this in such a manner as to satisfy all classes of workers? Who could determine how many days’ work of a street-sweeper equal in “social utility” six days’ work of a music teacher or a civil engineer or a mineralogist? In a coöperative commonwealth these things would obviously have to be determined by a majority vote. The very nature of such a task seems quixotic. At any rate, it is easy to foresee that insuperable perplexities would arise in an effort to fix a schedule of wages.
The late W. Liebknecht, said to have been the founder of German Socialism
Mr. Bellamy and not a few other Socialists would simplify the task by adopting a communistic distribution — equal incomes to all, without regard to their social utility or inutility. Such an “equal” distribution would be far from an EQUITABLE distribution. A German statesman has said that “nothing can be more unequal than the equal treatment of unequals.” By their industry, intelligence, disinterestedness, and skill, some persons would make a vastly larger contribution to this common fund than would a multitude of shirkers and spongers. Equal compensation to each of all these classes would be a travesty on justice.
Professor Ely, of Johns Hopkins University, aptly says: “If we take men as they are now, or as they are likely to be for a long time, we have every reason to believe that an assignment of nearly equal income would not enlist in Socialistic production the most capable members of the community in such a manner that they would give their best energies to the Socialistic State; but unless we could secure from the most talented members of the community willing service, Socialism would inevitably prove a serious failure. . . . It is much to be feared that men can not be socialized to that extent that they will generally accept the principle of equal reward for their services, even could it be shown that it were desirable. And it is impossible to show this, for quite the contrary is true.”
Every student of human nature knows, too, that large masses of the community can never be socialized enough to make them willing to work at all, if they could by any means escape the necessity of work. “The unemployed,” says Dr. Gladden, “are many, but a large percentage of these are not merely unemployed — they are unemployable.” How many, likewise, make it the chief end of life to get something for nothing — by scheming and plotting, contrive to wheedle their living out of society without giving anything serviceable in return for it! There is no prospect that the parasites of industry in this world will ever become extinct. No new arrangement of economic conditions would help this class of persons to subdue their chronic indisposition to apply themselves to methodical and patient industry. The difficulty here is one of character, and only God can change that.
Under the Socialistic régime, we are told, all will be compelled to labor except the invalids and the aged. The question of age is easily determined. But it is so easy for the lazy and the shiftless to feign invalidism! Skilled physicians might readily determine the presence or non-presence of physical infirmities, so that there would be no trouble on that score. On the other hand, there are manifold and painful affections of the nervous system which are not outwardly perceptible. How could the truth be ascertained in these cases? Should the naked word of all alleged sufferers be accepted as true, hosts of do-nothings would soon be living at the expense of honest workers; but should the claims of all of this class be rejected as unworthy of credence, how many innocent sufferers would be compelled to work or starve!
Again, Socialists are hopelessly divided as to the solution of the question of compensation to the expropriated class. There are those who would cut the Gordian knot by simply confiscating existing property for the benefit of the socialized commonwealth. But the more generous insist that some compensation be given to the dispossessed. Many of the latter seriously propose the plan of putting such compensation on the basis of a terminable annuity, “by which an amount equal to the interest on the capital expropriated should be allowed for a certain number of years, after which the ex-capitalists and their descendants must take their places in the ranks and work for their living like other people.” But, as Dr. Gladden points out, such a compensation would, in some cases, enable the expropriated to spend profusely.
By way of illustration, Dr. Gladden says: “Let us suppose that our friend Mr. Carnegie were thus relieved of his burdens; let us imagine that in return for his estate of three hundred millions, an annuity equivalent to three per cent upon that sum were guaranteed11to him and his heirs for thirty years. Labor checks supposed to be equal in value to this interest of nine million dollars would then be handed over to him annually. It is evident that he would be able to get all the groceries and dry-goods and millinery and drugs and medicines that he would need out of that annual income; and he might even build several libraries and a yacht or two, and own several automobiles, and employ a great many servants.” The doctor goes on to show that Mr. Carnegie, if he were so determined, could conjure up some way of GAINFULLY employing his surplus income. In all ages there have been governments that made the taking of interest a crime. The socialized State might do this. But the thrifty and avaricious have always been able to circumvent such laws. There are not a few ways by which the practise of illicit usury is made easy. It is seen that our expropriated millionaires would under even the most radical Socialist régime be equipped for luxury and even for hoarding. Hence not only a leisure class but even an oppressive capitalist class could be perpetuated.
Prof. Robert Flint, head of the department of sociology at the University of Glasgow, is the author of this suggestive antithesis: “Socialism is the exaggeration of the rights and claims of society, just as Individualism is the exaggeration of the rights and claims of individuals.” Both Socialism and Individualism comprise truths and errors. A true doctrine of society must obviously include the truths, while excluding the errors, of both. The writer believes that here, as in all things, there is a golden mean. The Scylla of out-and-out Individualism is to be shunned equally with the Charybdis of out-and-out Socialism. Individualism would exclude all legitimate coöperation. Socialism would retard if not estop the development of such admirable qualities as self-reliance, personal courage, aspiration, and individual initiative. The French Socialist leader, M. Leroux, frankly says, “Socialism is a political organization in which the individual is sacrificed to society.” If this admission is true, how long could society endure under such a scheme, since the individual is the unit of society? Mr. Bradlaugh, the widely-read English Socialist, boldly avows, “Socialism denies individual private property, and affirms that society, organized as the State, should own all wealth, direct all labor, and compel the equal distribution of all produce.” This would mean, of course, the extinction of private enterprise.
But is not private enterprise essential to the production of independent, clear-thinking, self-reliant men, who can stand alone, speak their own minds, and each make his own “contribution to the sum of human welfare”? It will never do to make a man a mere cog in a wheel, a part of a machine. If a man is to make the most of himself, he must have his own footing, not only in the moral and spiritual realm, but in the material and economic as well. Is it not true that a man derives much of his intellectual and ethical discipline in the proper handling and using of property? True it is that he is seriously injured in the misuse of it; but this is true of the misuse of any other kind of responsibility. One's complete manhood depends on “knowing how to use every kind of power.”
We would not deny that there are many industries that can most advantageously be carried on coöperatively; in which the body politic furnishes the capital and directs the work. It is probable that every business or industry that is actually a monopoly would best be owned and managed by all the people through their government. Yet I am convinced that collective industry and enterprise could not long endure where individual industry and enterprise are not found. Training in exercising individual responsibility and initiative are indispensable in preparing men and women to take leading places in coöperative enterprise. We can never make men happy, contented, and thrifty by act of Congress.
Food Adulteration and Prison Violence
—★★—
Dr. Harvey Wiley, who has stood at the head of the United States Bureau of Chemistry for so long, and who has made so commendable a fight against the adulteration of foods, resigned his position on March 15. Altho the doctor has been upheld in his decisions, because the force of the facts was such that it could not well have been otherwise, yet he says the big combines that insist on adulterating foods have so tied his hands through Government officials that he is practically powerless to do anything. It is a sad commentary on the conditions of this time when men will deliberately destroy the health of their fellow men in order that they may make big profits from their wares. It is true that the claim is made, by those who are adulterating the foods, that they put up only wholesome products; but the facts show to the contrary. It is the part of wisdom for people to use as little of the prepared foods as possible, unless they are fully assured that the manufacturers are honest. There are food factories that are operated by honest men, and their wares can be relied on. But such factories have no occasion to drive out of office such men as Dr. Wiley.
Ferdinand August Bebel, the German Socialist leader who came within twenty votes of being elected president of the Reichstag
On March 14 there occurred an insurrection in the Nebraska penitentiary, among the prisoners, in which the warden and some four or five guards were killed. Three of the convicts finally escaped in their prison clothes in the midst of a very severe blizzard. The militia as well as the police force were immediately called out, and the prison bloodhounds were taken to try to catch the fugitives; but the snow covered their tracks so quickly that it was impossible to pursue them. Three days later a woman frantically telephoned to the officers that the men had robbed a near-by store, the night before, of citizens' clothing, guns, and ammunition, and had just stopped at her house and compelled her to get them breakfast, and her husband to hitch his team to his sled and drive them on their way. The fleeing men were soon surrounded by the pursuing officers and posse, and altho the brothers of the man that was unwillingly driving them in his sled implored them not to shoot, the pursuers opened fire, and the driver was the first to be killed. Two of the convicts were soon killed, and the other one surrendered. The saddest thing in connection with it is that the unwilling driver who was killed was a young man that had been married but two months, and he had to be taken home a corpse to his young wife.
Judge Otto Rosalsky, on March 16, received a bomb through the mail. There was nothing about the package that looked suspicious, for the judge casually opened it the same as he would any other mail that might come to him. But as soon as he commenced to unwrap the package, he discovered what it was, and immediately sent for an officer who was an expert with bombs. The officer proceeded with the work of taking the bomb from its package the same as he had done with many others before, but this one exploded, and he was seriously hurt, and considerable damage was done to the building in which they were at the time. It was supposed that some one was trying to terrify the judge because of the decision he rendered in the case of Foulke E. Brandt, the former valet of Banker Schiff. Modern high explosives are very useful in their proper place, but they also furnish a means for the lawless element of society to hasten on the reign of terror that lies just ahead of us. For the conditions that are rapidly growing up around us can result in nothing short of a reign of the lawless element. Courts that can not be bribed with money will be intimidated with the bomb if possible.
The first lord of the British admiralty has submitted his estimate for the navy for the next year, and it amounts to $220,427,000, a decrease of $1,535,000 from last year. He recommends that they abandon their "double standard" for the navy. The "double standard" means that they have tried in the past to keep their navy up to the point where it could successfully meet any two of the first-class powers of the world. He thinks that they should drop down to a sixty per cent efficiency. In the past they have reckoned the United States among the great powers that they should be ready to meet in connection with any one of the other great world powers in naval battle. But he says now that it is foolish for them to plan against the United States in this way, and all they need to plan for is to keep sixty per cent ahead of Germany. Lord Churchill said that he did not like to mention Germany in such connection, but thought it was necessary. He also said that if Germany would agree to cut down her naval program, the British would meet her on the same ground. It is plainly to be seen, from the report of the admiralty, that Great Britain does not like to go on with this awful burden of war preparation. But in the condition of the nations to-day, she feels that it would be suicide to do otherwise. What is the unseen power that is driving the nations into this madness of war against their will?
Ex-President Diaz has recently been in consultation with a celebrated palmist in France, and this person assures him that he has still fifteen years of life before him, and that he will be returned to the rulership of Mexico next September. Diaz may live much longer than that for aught we know, and he may be called back to Mexico to help quell the revolution that has been running riot there for so long. But why should intelligent people resort to such methods to try to read the future? It is an index, however, of numerous human minds. Men are so anxious to know their future that they can be drawn into consultation with almost any kind of soothsayers that come along. If ordinary human reason can not teach one the evils and fallacy of such a course, they should let God's Word speak to them in its clear warnings against all such work. The mind should be held above the superstitions and trickeries of palmists and all the other schools of soothsayers, if we would be free from self-deception.
President Taft has been notified by Commissioner of Corporations Herbert K. Smith, that the Government should be careful to preserve the title to the remaining sources of water-power in the country, for the reason that the big monopolies of wealth are gathering them up so fast that they will soon be held in one strong combine. The possibilities of electricity make the water-power of the country especially valuable.
A young Russian chemist has succeeded in making a good substitute for rubber from certain properties of benzol. His discovery is said to be attracting considerable attention among those interested in the rubber industries.
Thirty-two men were killed by an exploding boiler of a passenger engine in the Southern Pacific railroad shops at San Antonio, Texas, on March 18.
"Touched with the Feeling"
By Clara Edna Rosencrans
By Clara Edna Rosencrans
HOW often we meet with people who, tho kind and gentle, and filled with sympathy for trials which they can understand, yet have never had experience of utter or partial helplessness, and that weakness and apathy which so often accompany this condition! They look at one with a sort of half pity, and say: "I don't know how you ever live that way. I never was crippled in my life, and I don't know how you feel."
Then, again, there are those who never have been sick; and they too pity us, but they can not enter into the feelings of those who are sick and suffering. Their buoyant life and high animal spirits jar upon every quivering nerve, and we can not but draw a sigh of relief when they take themselves off to some more congenial environment. We do not blame them; for if they never felt as we do, never have known what it was to have nerves that the slightest sound thrills to agony, how can they be supposed to understand?
Sometimes one feels utterly alone. Then comes the joy of the thought that Jesus knows, that He has felt and suffered all that we can be called upon to endure; for He is "touched with the feeling" of all our pain, not in some by-gone time, outlived and forgotten, but now, at the present moment. He suffers with His own as much as when on the shores of Galilee, in the temple at Jerusalem, or beside the little demoniac. His loving heart broke at sight of the fearful misery Satan had brought upon those who were blood-bought and blood-related to the Son of God. When the pain is greatest and the weariness hardest to bear, we can reach out our weak hands and clasp His, and feel His sympathy and love flow into us in a mighty tide. Ah, He is "touched with the feeling," and we love Him all the better so! He meets one of the deepest needs of our common humanity, that of a living sympathy and help.
Then, again, the sufferer is always sensitive. Little slights that would not even be noticed by those in ordinary health, are turned over and over in the tired brain, until they assume entirely unjustified proportions. You worry and fret yourself into a fever over the matter, until suddenly comes the blessed thought, "Jesus had all this to bear, and He knows, and loves me through it all." He had not only the little slights to bear, but the stern sorrow of seeing His most cherished friends turn against Him with aversion and denial.
We go a step farther in this wonderful life story wherewith our Lord has identified Himself, making it so much a part of His own that there can never be a separation. We stand beside the grave where we have laid our loved ones, and still we see Him, our Brother, flesh of our flesh, weeping with us, in a sympathy so human that it is divine. And as we realize His oneness with the human race, so more and more shall we become one with His divinity, lifted up to heights to which we might never have climbed unaided. Knowing that "we have not an High Priest which can not be touched with the feeling of our infirmities," gives us an earnest desire to attain to the thing which He would have us to be. His is no far-away, impersonal being, but a living, breathing, loving Friend that our finite minds can lay hold of.
In giving us Jesus, God gave us heaven; for where Jesus is, there is heaven. And when we come to feel that tender sympathy for those who are crippled and sick with sin, which He feels, heaven will come so near to us that we will breathe its air and speak its language of unselfish love. And not only will our words and actions proclaim our kinship with that better country, but an impalpable influence will be shed around us, so that those with whom we come in contact will "perceive that virtue has gone out" of us. When shall we attain to this ideal? When shall we come to be "touched with the feeling" of the great world of sin and sorrow and suffering about us, and hasten to bring to it the balm of a living Gospel?
What a brother we've found in the Saviour,-
One who never forsakes in our need;
One who feels, through His cross, every sorrow.
O, He's just such a Christ as we need!
He is one with the Father in glory,
Yet He stoops to our lowliest need.
Never wound was too deep for His healing.
O, He's just such a Christ as we need!
