XI.

DIVINE PROVIDENCE.

"Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father. . . . Fear ye not, therefore; ye are of more value than many sparrows." — MATT. x. 29, 31.

HE doctrine or question of Divine Providence

THE

is one which has exercised the minds of men at all times, and in all places. It seems impossible for any one of us to look around upon the mysteries which everywhere prevail, without often being sorely perplexed in attempting to find for them a reasonable and satisfactory solution. Says one writer on this subject, "Where and when, in what age, or part of the world, has not the thoughtful and feeling mind occupied itself again and again with meditations on Providence? Now delighting in the felt presence of a superior Power, whose smile is in the rejoicing heavens, and upon the glad earth; now standing in awe of the resistless agents that spread desolation and ruin around; now feeling a delicious trust towards the bounteous

Hand that supplies every want; now shrinking before the mysterious Will that sends calamities against which there is no resource, where and when has not the faith in Providence been perplexed occasionally, if not confounded, by observing the seemingly fortuitous course of human events, in which outward blessings and outward sufferings are made to befall the good and the bad to a great degree alike?"

Most of us doubtless remember instances when the question, how much could be attributed to the providence of God, and how much could not, exercised the minds of the people in a very marked degree. Whenever any calamity befalls an individual, a community, or a nation, there are always those who think they are able to point out the precise thing for which God sent the calamity as a punishment. Ten years ago, when the great fire occurred in Boston, there were men who felt able to decide for just what that calamity was sent. It was stated at the time, in one newspaper, "The conflagration was imputed by the clergy to the providence of God; but by the laity, to the folly of man as exemplified in narrow streets, high buildings, and tinder-boxes built for roofs." I think, however, that there were many of the clergy who did not attribute the fire to the providence of God, as

that providence is generally understood. The view of that event which some persons held was commented upon in another paper as follows: "Interpretations of Providence by the narrow creeds of small-brained bigotry and self-righteous fanaticism are simply contemptible. Indignation is wasted on such sputtering farthing-candles." And yet, if there is any foundation for the theory that God sends such calamities as punishment, why should not every person have had the right to use his reason to seek an interpretation of that particular occasion? And why should not men do the same thing at every visitation of calamity or misfortune which occurs in the world? If we object to this in any individual instance, is it not a question if our general theory of Providence accords with the application that we make in special cases?

The theory was very common among the Jews, that good or bad fortune was a sign of the pleasure or displeasure of God. In the Book of Job, it was very strongly stated by the men who came to reason with Job in his misfortunes. "Remember," they said to him, "who ever perished, being innocent? or where were the righteous cut off? . . They that plough iniquity, and sow wickedness, reap the same." Hence they insisted that it was on account of Job's wickedness that his sufferings

were visited upon him. Job, however, protests against such a theory; and the conclusion of the book is, that these things are something which we cannot understand.

Jesus found the same theory current in his own time. "Master, who did sin," asked his disciples, "this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?" His answer was, "Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents." And of Galileans whom Pilate had slain, and those on whom the tower of Siloam fell, he said, "Think ye that they were sinners above all others? . . . I tell you, Nay." It seems, therefore, that Jesus did not accept any such theory of special providence as had been common among his people.

It does not seem to require much reflection to convince us of the unreasonableness of such a theory of Divine Providence as encourages men to attempt to explain why every event happens, and for what purpose it was ordained by God. If a man is sailing on Sunday, and is drowned, there are those who will say that his death was a punishment for his violation of the sabbath. But there have been instances of people having been drowned when going to church in boats, that having been the only way in which they could go. Will that theory explain such an accident? Or

As

will it explain a railroad-collision, or the sinking of an ocean-steamship, where fifty or more persons, good and bad, perish? A few years ago a boat containing two missionaries left Calcutta, and pushed up the Ganges for a distant town, where there was a call for Christian zeal and labor. they approached the end of their journey, one of them was laid prostrate with a sudden illness. His companion, taking a smaller boat, hastened on to procure medical assistance. Just as he came in sight of the town to which they were both going, two trees, which had been loosened by the wind and the river, fell from the banks, crushing the boat, and burying that noble heart in the waters. Christians thought it a mysterious providence. The heathen thought it a judgment sent by their deity against the intruder. And they had as much reason for their opinion as we have for considering any accident a judgment of God. There have been thousands of such instances, where the good and noble have perished, or suffered some great calamity. Shall we be like the comforters of Job, and say to them, or their surviving friends, that they were punished for some secret sins? Such a decision would only prove our presumption and pride. The best man who lives has no immunity from the working of the laws of nature. He has no right to