In the next place it should be remembered that each parable has some special point of application, and is not to be applied in so bungling a manner to the whole subject. A parable or comparison is like a lamp which can enlighten but one side of an object at a time.

To what part of the kingdom of heaven then does the parable of the wheat and darnel apply? In other words, in what respect is the kingdom of heaven like a field in which wheat and darnel grow together and are to remain undisturbed till harvest? It is plain there can be no comparison between such a field and the king-the Lord Jesus. It is, or at least ought to be, equally plain to the least acquainted with the scriptures, that such a comparison cannot be instituted with regard to the subjects of the King, or what may be termed the church. Because, the church of Christ is supposed always to consist of those who are regenerated and have become children of God by faith-who are washed, justified, and sanctified; and amongst whom no iniquity or iniquitous ersons will be tolerated at all. For there is a system of laws and discipline furnished to the church by which any wicked persons who come in unawares can be promptly excluded, and the scripture abounds with exhortations to "purge out the old leaven" to "put away the wicked person," to "turn away from such," &c. Now in the parable, we have both wheat and darnel the wheat designating the church, the subjects the "children of the kingdom" as they are styled by the Saviour in his exposition of the parable, and the darnel representing the "children of the wicked one," both growing together and equally conspicuous, and we are expressly prohibited from rooting out the darnel. "Let them grow together" is the command. In this view consequently no discipline can ever be enforced against any offender however notorious-and to suppose then that the parable relates to the church is manifestly absurd and contrary to the whole tenor of the scriptures.

When, however, the parable is applied to the territory of the kingdom, as the Saviour himself applies it, (for he says "the field is the world,")"all'difficulty vanishes. We know that as it respects its territory, the kingdom of heaven is just like a field containing both wheat and darnel—that the righteous and the wicked exist together in the world, and must of necessity remain together until the harvest of the earth be ripe-until the "end of the world." "I wrote to you," says Paul, 1 Cor. v., "not to company with fornicators; yet not altogether with fornicators of this world, or covetous, or extortioners," &c. "for then ye must needs go out of the world. But now I have written unto you not to keep company if any called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or a railer, or an extortioner," &c. "with such a one no not to eat." It is at the end of the world that the Saviour will give command to the angels, the celestial reapers, who will gather out of the [territory

of] the kingdom all that offend, and cast them into the burning lake. In the mean time, however the church be kept purged from offenders by the means divinely appointed, and it argues great ignorance of the genius of the Christian religion, and of the scriptures, for any one to attempt to justify corrupt communion by any means, and more especially by the parable of the "wheat and the darnel," which is so differently explained and applied by our Lord himself: see Matth. xiii. R. R.

QUERY.

QUERY 4.-Did the Lord never use things that had no real existence in his parables— or, in other words, had all the things mentioned in the parables a real existence.

M. W.-1838.

Illustrations, similitudes, comparisons, and parables must be drawn from facts, or things real, otherwise they are worse than useless-they are deceptious. To explain, illustrate, or set forth a hypothesis by a hypothesis, would not be more unsatisfactory and powerless, than to explain a fact, a doctrine, an institution, an event by an imaginative

creation.

There are the points in a parable or comparison which are to be illustrated or set forth, and these are to be compared with the fact, or the reality, or the thing introduced for illustration. All the rest is but the ornament or drapery of the allegory or similitude. Our Lord's parables are all taken from nature, real life, or acknowledged fact,\ without a single exception, so far as I can understand them. For example-the parable of the Sower. Have we not the sower, the seed, the different sorts of ground, the different products, &c. in nature and fact. The parable of the Tares-Have we not a field, wheat, darnel, harvest, reapers, &c. and is there not a resemblance between the wheat and darnel at first, and a danger of rooting up the wheat in pulling out the darnel! The parable of the Sweep-net-Have we not such an instrument, fishermen, good and bad fish, and vessels, and dragging the net to the shore? In the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus-Have we not rich Sadducees and poor Christians, high living, sudden death, angels, Abraham's bosom, hades, and future torment? The parable of the Prodigal Son-Have we not fathers, good and prodigal sons, repentance, amendment, forgiveness, &c.

Those who presume to except one out of all the parables of Christ, because it thwarts their views as an exception to a universal rule, had need to have infallible evidence that they are not grievously mistaken, and wresting his words to get rid of their force against their wild and unlicensed imaginations. A. C.

TO CORRESPONDENTS.

R. L.'s last communication has been accidentally mislaid and cannot be found.Whatever he may now be pleased to furnish upon the whole premises will be laid before our readers.

A. C. Every number of the Harbinger containing any thing concerning Mr. Lynd's communication, has been regularly mailed at Bethany to him by me. W. F. M. ARNY.

THE

MILLENNIAL HARBINGER,

NEW SERIES.

VOLUME II.- -NUMBER VI.

BETHANY, VA. JUNE, 1838.

MORALITY OF CHRISTIANS-No. VI.

AMONG the unwritten traditions of the Arabian Christians it is told that while Paul tarried in the village of Ichabo he found the remains of an ancient synagogue, then reduced to about ten families, to whom he preached Jesus and the Resurrection. At first he was attentively and candidly heard by most of them, and by many of the villagers who occasionally frequented their solemnities. Seven of the Jewish families were converted to Christ, with the households of the two chief proselytes of the gate, which greatly incensed the ruler of the synagogue and one of the deacons. Unable to refute the preaching of the Apostle by the Law or the Prophets, the director of the synagogue sought to defame his character and thus to turn away the ears of the people from his ministrations. This, however, he dared not to attempt openly; but in his private walks he took every occasion to impute licentious and irreligious tenets to the Apostle, and even to impeach his veracity and integrity as a man. He was quite successful in a few instances in preventing his friends from hearing the ambassador of Christ. Esdras, one of his sons-in-law, had been amongst the first who were immersed into Christ before his father had returned from Jerusalem; but neither of the other two would listen to the gospel after they had heard the defamations of Bezaleel their father-in-law. The consequence was, as tradition runs, that all the descendants of Esdras, even to the fourth generation, were Christians; while, during the same period, all the posterity of Hermas and Lucius, his two other sons-in-law, lived and died unbelievers. Now if the demerit of human actions is to be estimated by the injuries done to others consequential upon them, and if their punishment be in the ratio of the evils following, what must be the

1

4

doom of such false religionists as the president of Ichabo? But the mischief ended not here: for through his imputations and misrepresentations Paul was beaten with rods and driven from the village.

A similar story is found amongst the oral traditions of Lucerne, one of the Catholic cantons of Switzerland. In the days of Luther and Calvin almost half of the cantons turned Protestant. The magistrates of Lucerne were about declaring in favor of the reformers, when a cun. ning and plausible Priest, under the guise of a Protestant exile from one of the German states, obtained an interview with the principal magis trates friendly to the Calvinistic views, and under the pretence of defending Protestantism, so caricatured it in its most vulnerable points as to prejudice the magistrates against it and to secure their adhesion to the Pope, with the banishment of all Protestant preachers from its territory. Lucerne, with its one hundred and fifty thousand inhabitants, has continued Roman Catholic for the last three centuries, while many of the neighboring states are wholly Protestant and enjoy vastly superior privileges both civil and religious.

If, then, in the strong connectives and nice dependencies of society under the general government of the world, the fate of nations and of successive generations is often in the hands of a single individual and hanging upon one or two acts of his life, of what grave import and awful bearing are those actions that affect human character and human destiny, and with what reflection and circumspection ought Christians to speak of themselves, of one another, and of all men in their varied intercourse with the world!

Character is the product of a life, and is therefore the most expensive of all human acquisitions. It is not any definite number or class of actions, but it is the scope and meaning of all the actions of one's whole existence. A fortune is only sometimes made or lost by it, but invariably our influence on all our associates depends exclusively upon it; and the best and richest favors received from mortals are its procurements. It is, then, viewed from every point in the compass of social life, the richest of all human acquisitions-and the most precious deposite which can be placed in the hands of society. A high sense and estimate of its value are essential to the obtainment of a good character; but even then it must be purchased at a higher expense than that of gold or rubies. Every thing but conscience may be lawfully sacrificed for it; and when gained it is not to be parted with at even the cost of life itself. This being but a mere glance of the eye at its intrinsic value and transcendant importance as sketched in the Bible, as handed down by all oral and written tradition, as taught in all the schools of philoso. phy, and as inculcated in all the maxims of the sages-follows it not, as

4

before said, that of all the deposites placed in the hands of the public, this deserves to be most faithfully and religiously guarded?

We say, placed in the hands of the public, for the whole public have it in keeping. The reputation of Newton, Bacon, Locke, Wesley, or any less renowned name, is not in the keeping of kings, princes, priests, or a few nobles. It is in the keeping of all ranks and degrees of men: consequently the duties and obligations of preserving the character of the living and the dead are equally diffused throughout all society. All have a vote on this question, though all votes may not be of equal weight in the sum of all the suffrages of society; yet every individual is responsible to God, his neighbor, and posterity, how he votes on this subject.

Hence the charge, "Speak not evil one of another, brethren;" and al things whatsoever you would that men should say of you, say you of them-so far, of course, as truth will warrant. But, above all things, take not up an evil report hastily against any man; for he that would dwell for ever in the tabernacle of the Most High, must not "take up an evil report against his neighbor," if King David rightly judged in answering the question, Who should enter the abodes of the blessed.

Every individual Christian must then regard himself as the keeper of his brother's reputation, and he must feel that he is under the most solemn obligations to do it faithfully; that he is not at liberty to equivo cate, suppress, or exaggerate, but to speak the truth, if he speak at all, upon this most delicate subject. It has been said by them of old time, "If you can say no good, say no evil of any man." This, as a worldly and a general maxim, is a safe one, unless it be understood to extend to those cases where we are called to testify or to warn others. In such cases it is as much our duty to censure as to commend, and to tell the whole truth, whether it may be favorable or unfavorable. This, indeed, benevolence would dictate; for the good of society requires it. To warn others of a deep ditch is as much our duty as it is to relieve those who have fallen into it.

To withhold praise when it is due, or to refuse to acknowledge moral worth when it is called for by any exigency of society, is as unjust as to retain in our hands without their consent the property of others when i is demanded. Envy and jealousy, besides all the other mischiefs which they work, are peculiarly culpable in this, that they forbid their subjects to pay their just debts to those whom they regard as standing in their way. The envious man is grieved at the superexcellence of those whom he would rival; and therefore he cannot acknowledge the existence of that worth which throws himself into the shade; while the man of candor and of genuine excellence, of the two would rather exag