Page images
PDF
EPUB

cruelty brought distress upon their fellow-men, therefore, the Bible is not the friend of the poor: this is a specimen of their logic, and a proof of their conscientiousness, and because we consent not, for such reasons, to cast away from us the "good old book," they call us bigots.

We do not assert that the Mosaic economy was perfect. "It was the shadow of good things to come;" the dawning morn ushering in the effulgent day;a dispensation preparatory and typical; not the best that the world had to see, but the best for which the world was then prepared. To prove this, which is no task, is sufficient justification of the divine arrangement. But the law of Moses in reference to the poor is not only infinitely superior to any that obtained among ancient peoples, but will bear favourable comparison with the poor laws of the most enlightened and civilized nations of the nineteenth century; and the adoption of its spirit, if not of its letter, would go far towards the solution of one of the most difficult problems of political economy, and heal those Marah fountains which not unfrequently embitter the different orders of society against each other, and which more than once in our own day, have threatened commerce with paralysis, and the nation with ruin.

The friendless and the poor had the protection of the Mosaic law, as in all ages they have had the sympathy of the divine Lawgiver. Mutual dependence and relationship, so necessary to social existence, happiness, and progress, involved the possibility of the evils which flow from selfishness and tyranny when they have power. But God cannot be blamed for those evils, unless it is shown that the social constitution of man is not the best possible, and the most conducive to the general good. He has made it the imperative duty of every one, according to his ability, to seek the happiness and well-being of those around. On almost every page of the law, there are abundant proofs that the poor are his special care, and that with the tenderest interest he has sought to protect them from want, and injury, and oppression. nor oppress him; for ye were strangers in the only explicit direction, but powerful aspiration. under the yoke of the oppressor. By a strong hand that yoke had been broken, and their tyrants had been overwhelmed with a sudden destruction. Pharoah and his proud host sunk in the mighty waters. By the misery of their servitude, by the glory of their deliverance, by the preciousness of liberty, by the despot's doom and the honour of God, they were called upon to respect the rights of strangers, and to treat them with kindness.

"Thou shalt not vex a stranger land of Egypt." Here is not They once themselves groaned

The master's duty was most clearly indicated. and he was solemnly forbidden to deprive the hireling of his wages, or to cause him the slightest inconvenience by neglecting to pay him at the proper time. And the law was as stringent in the case of an alien, as in that of a Jew. "Thou shalt not oppress an hired servant that is poor and needy, whether he be of thy brethren or of the stran

gers that are in thy land, within thy gates." At his day thou shalt give him his hire, neither shall the sun go down upon it; for he is poor and setteth his heart upon it: lest he cry against thee unto the Lord, and it be sin unto thee." Deut. 24. 14, 15. Were this law carried out in spirit at the present day, how many unpleasant bickerings, disputes, and contentions between employers and employed how many irritating and misery-making strikes would be prevented, and how justly and honourably would the labourer be treated by the capitalist. Poverty has its rights as well as riches; and in the Bible these rights are not only recognised but defended. If trampled upon, it is a sin not merely against the individual and society, but against God.

Judges were required to deal out even-handed justice to those brought before them for trial. The rights of the poor were to be respected as much as those of the rich. "Thou shalt not pervert the judgment of the stranger, nor of the fatherless. Thou shalt not wrest the judgment of the poor in his cause. Keep thee from a false matter; and the innocent and righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked." All the solemn sanctions of a future retribution are presented to the judge as reasons why he should deal rightly by the poor. God set his face against all favoritism. With Himself, there is no respect of persons; and he would not tolerate any in the judge. Too often in the history of the world have the bribes of the rich stayed the hand of justice; but the judges of the people were solemnly forbidden to receive any money from any one in the performance of their duty. "Thou shalt take no gift; for the gift blindeth the eyes of the wise, and perverteth the words of the righteous." "Thou shalt not respect persons, neither take a gift; that which is altogether just shalt thou follow, that thou mayest live."

In what moral code can you find laws more conservative of the rights of the poor? In what way could they be more carefully defended from injustice and oppression. Can the civil magistrate in this age of enlightenment and civilization find higher and safer laws for his guidance in the dispensing of justice to the poor, than those which were promulgated among the Jews more than three thousand years ago? And where will the judge who refuses to hear the case of suffering and injured poverty, meet with severer and more withering rebuke than what is found in the Old Testament? From Ebal sounded forth from the lips of the Levites under the command of God, a denunciation which may well make the tyrant quake; "Cursed be he that perverteth the judgment of the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow." And to this sentence of the Supreme Lawgiver all the people had to say, "Amen". No such concern was manifested for the interests of the poor among any of the legislators of antiquity. The judges could be guilty of venality and corruption without a word of remonstrance or reproof being addressed to them. In many cases they could fatten upon the spoils of crushed and injured innocence and retain their places in society. In

the Bible, on the contrary, some of the most scorching, awful words, found within its covers, are those spoken by God against such as injure the fatherless and widow. Their cause Jehovah made his own, and whoever injured them were the objects of his severe displeasure. "Ye shall not afflict any widow or fatherless child. If thou afflict them in anywise, and they cry at all unto me, I will surely hear their cry; and my wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be orphans, and your children fatherless." Exod. 22. 22. So terrible are the denunciations, that sceptics themselves sometimes object to them, as inconsistent with the divine benevolence. But there is no inconsistency whatever. Justice is in perpetual harmony with goodness. There is nothing noble in that softness which would sacrifice the interests of a community to the happiness of an individual. Deep sympathy with the oppressed, and stern opposition of the oppressor; tenderness toward suffering, and severity toward brazen-faced injustice are two sides of a symmetrical character. Either would be an imperfection without the other. Does Jehovah speak for the consolation of the sorrowing and the trustful? He comes with all the gentleness and compassion of a parent. "Like as a father pitieth his children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear him." Does he speak as the judge of the unrighteous and the protector of the needy; he clothes himself in terrible majesty. "The Lord your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty and a terrible, who regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward. He doth execute the judgment of the fatherless and the widow; and loveth the stranger in giving him food and raiment. Love ye therefore the stranger for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt. Deut. 10. 17. 19.

These are but specimens of a large number of passages scattered throughout the Old Testament scriptures, recognising with the utmost explicitness, the rights of the poor, and redolent of the tenderest and most practical concern for their well-being. Let those who assail the Bible, only have the honesty to quote some of those passages, and the labouring classes will perceive that that old book defended their rights, as well as specified them, centuries before they were thought of by sceptical writers.

Working men! do not trust to the representations made of the Bible by those who vilify it. Study its precepts and its spirit for yourselves, and you will be convinced that it is not the friend of the despot, but of the poor; that its statutes have only to be universally observed, and its spirit imbibed, in order that want and misery may be chased away from the earth, and that a day of righteousness and peace may dawn upon our world, such as it has never seen. If you have complaints to make of your employers and of those above you in the social scale, and they are professors of religion, think what would be their conduct if they really at all times and everywhere were actuated by the precepts and principles of the Bible. For yourselves, make that book "the man of your counsel," and you will act justly, honourably, and generously towards

others; in assurance of forgiveness for past sin, through the sacrifice of Christ, you will enjoy a peace which neither wealth nor philosophy can give; and when the shadows of death gather around you, it will be "a lamp to your path, a guide through the gloom."

THE KNOWNOTHINGS AND THE DONOTHINGS OF ENGLAND.

I have frequently been asked, in my private intercourse with society, what I think of a new sect of philosophers which has sprung up among us-I mean the Secularists; and perhaps you will not, my fellow-countrymen, deem it out of place for me to put down the character and intentions of this erratic body. They have done me no harm and no good,-I entertain for them no personal wrath or ! distinguished respect, and I will, therefore, deal with these gentlemen in a quiet tone of voice, without any expressions of surprise, excitement, or passion. They appear to me to be the last and the most recent exhibition of a lost humanity, sailing without a rudder, and steering without a compass.

It is now, as far as I can judge, some two years ago since a personal friend asked me to accompany him, one Sunday night, to hear a Secularist oration, in a great Secularist-hall, the name of which I do not recollect, but certainly somewhere within or without the walls of London. I went. I paid twopence to get in. I took my seat amid a great crowd. I saw, I listened, and I was amused. The whole business was of a commercial character, as much so as if we had gone to a Drury-lane opera or a gin-place saloon. The performing star of the evening was a gentleman of the name of Cooper,-playbills informed us of the nature of the performance,-admission was to pit, gallery, and boxes according to tariff of charges, persons went round the assembly hawking books and pamphlets, and a professional orchestra diversified the entertainment with stringed instruments and vocal score. Then came the lecture. In coarse, rude, ludicrous, and outrageous language the orator dwelt, for an hour and a half, upon the sublime doctrine of a resurrection from the grave, speaking with all the dogmatism of a Heliogabalus, and with all the impertinence of a buffoon. Everybody who believed in a resurrection was, according to the orator, a blockhead or a knave, and the audience was ever and anon plunged into loud gustos of laughter at ridiculous pictures of a spiritual state, at the expense of the sincere and the pious all over the world. When the orator resumed his seat I rose from mine. I asked permission to speak. Then followed one of those picturesque and unique scenes, which no Hogarth could paint or Shakspeare dramatise. Sunday night, said they, was not the night for discussion. I persisted, and got out a few sentences. The orator got out a few sentences also, telling the noisy assembly, in pretty plain terms, that I was an ass. One man received orders to blow an organ, another man began to make it play-the orchestra set up a tune-the door keepers put down the lights-there was the roaring of voices, the shrieking of females, the protestations of unknown friends, the stench of gas and cigars,in fact, a Charybdis, if ever there was a Charybdis on this earth, created simply, by an attempt to secure free debate and liberty of speech. Amidst the darkness and confusion a party recognised me, put his hand upon my shoulder, and whispered these consolatory words in my ear: -"Sir" said he, "I perceive you are the victim of a great delusion, the delusion that the people who come here want any opinion but their own." Others came round, and equally sympathetic, they formed a body guard for my protection, and I was safely escorted from the roaring and raging waves that threatened to engulf me. On my way home I mused and meditated, and said to myself, "Is a Secularist-hall a better place than a church or chapel ?"

Well, countrymen, I meet a Secularist, and when I meet him, I shake hands

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

with him, and I say, "What believest thou?" "Believe!" says he in astonishment, "We do not believe." "What!" says I, "is there a future life?" "Mum" says he. "Is man immortal,' "Mum says he. "Was the world made?" says I. "Mum " says he. "Is there a Divine Creator ?" says I. "Mum says he. "Is there a future retribution for evil and a reward for good ?" "Mum " says he. "Good heavens !" says I, "then you believe nothing!" "Nothing at all," says he. "What! is there not a God?" "Dont know." "Is there not an eternal glory?" "Dont know." "Is there not a Divine justice?" "Dont know." "Where did you come from?" "Dont know." "Where are you going to?" "Dont know." "What are you?" "Dont know." "What may you be?" "Dont know." "Then what do you know?" says I. "Only what we see, hear, taste, touch, and smell," says he. "And is this philosophy ?" says I. "It is," says he. "Indeed" says I, and I may take the liberty to add that it is also the philosophy of dogs, cats, lions, and kangaroos, and their only philosophy, for they are the creatures of sense, not of intellect, and reason, and faith.

However, the Secularists, as I am aware, put aside all questions of faith, in order that they may turn their attention to practical pursuits. We are told that they think Christians have preached so much about faith as to forget there are duties to perform in this world, and they call themselves Secularists because it is to secular purposes they apply themselves. Very well; it therefore becomes my purpose to ask my friend, the Secularist, not what he believes, but what he does. If he is the genuine English Knownothing, I may be able to discover that he is truly that great Do-something who has been expected to visit the earth for many years. I am aware that the Secularist has no chapel, or pulpit; but he has his hall and his platform. True, he may not preach; but he lectures, and is as much a hired teacher as any priest whom he may condemn. "But come, now, Mr. Secular Secularist, what are you about-have you formed a teetotal society to save the land from intoxication ?" "Can't say," says he. "Well, perhaps you have created a society to give the slaves of America liberty?” "Can't say," says he. "Well," says I, "have you established a machinery to save the world from war ?" "Can't say, "Have you established schools ?" "Can't say." "Have you any scheme for the people to get land or freeholds ?" "Can't say." "Do you visit the homes of the poor ?" "Can't say." "Have you been among the Spitalfields' weavers to inculcate habits of independence and comfort ?" Can't say." "Have you taken steps to redeem the streets of London from the desolating floods of prostitution ?" "Can't say." Come, tell me have you established a penny bank ?” "Can't say." Or a "Then, of course you have sent out no mission to elevate savage nations ?" "Can't say." "Can you say you intend to sacrifice friends, home, reputation, country, and life, that the human race may be exalted throughout the earth ?" "I suppose you snuff, smoke, drink beer, and read Reynolds ?" "I suppose we do." "And I suppose you go to your hall, you hear the music, you listen to the lecture, you pay your money, and you go home and eat your supper?" "Yes," "And what else do you do?" "We do what we think should be done." Pray tell me what you think is that which should be done?" "Why the thing which should be done is the very thing that is wanted." "What is wanted, says I ?" "Secu

66

soup kitchen ?" Cant say.

"Can't say.

[ocr errors]

"

ralism is wanted," says he." "What is Secularism ?" says I. What do you

think it is," says he? "Is it getting up a dance and going to a play," says I; and here the conversation drops.

And I understand, fellow-countrymen, that large portions of the working classes of England are disposed to accept Secularism as the religion for humanity, and the Secularists as the prophets of a new dispensation. Why the humblest and the most despicable religious sect on earth may boast of a Sundayschool, a Dorcas society, or a mission of charity; and I do not know a single

« PreviousContinue »