NEW ACQUAINTANCES AND AN AGREEABLE DISCUSSION.

The evening of the first day that marked the stranger's advent into Westminster saw the entire personnel of Harmony Place on the veranda; the new moon smiled benignly upon them, the evening was cool and the "ripe harvest of the new-mown hay" gave to the air a "sweet and wholesome odor." One subject after another was taken up, discussed and disposed of, or at least laid aside to give way to some other, and in each and all of them our hero (for such we may as well commence to recognize him) took a part, and exhibited a fund of information and an aptitude of presentation which gave him the preference without a contest whenever he chose to speak. This became more and more frequent as the night wore on, for there was no disguising the fact that he was, like the others, already one of the household. If any one of the party wondered what it was that he had come for, how he expected to get it, or how long he was to stay, the conjecture never found expression; for they all experienced so much of general satisfaction in hearing him, and took such genuine pleasure in his word-painting of western scenes and events, that they were all willing to have him stay indefinitely. He was literally chosen as one of their number without opposition, and the mere matters of detail regarding his purposes might be left to the future or be entirely undiscovered; he was now decidedly the architect of his own fortune so far as retaining the good will of that little group was concerned.

The conversation proceeded from point to point until the topics of the quiet gathering assumed more the aspect of an intellectual melange than anything else; the Sepoy rebellion made way for the Dakota blizzard, the signal failure of the first laying of the Atlantic cable was shelved to make place for Webster's artistic destruction of Dr. Parkman, and Cromwell's career of conquests and crimes was followed by a brief discussion of the science and practice of silver mining. (Variety and scope enough, surely!) It must be noticeable that the two subjects which agitate us nationally and sometimes locally more than any others—politics and religion—had so far escaped; they had not, however, been unthought of, and presently the latter was begun by the minister saying:

"Representing to some extent as I do, the church, I am compelled to admit that in the matters of organization, discipline and places of worship, America is thoroughly Christianized. Look at the profusion of church buildings wherever you go. To me such rivalry is gratifying in the extreme, representing as it does the highest type of good citizenship."

"I partially concur with you," said the lawyer, "and yet I belong to no church at all—do not, in fact, endorse Christianity as a department of civilized life."

"Why, how is this?" said Fitzallen, "I thought nearly everybody in this country must be orthodox to some extent at least."

"Not so with me, I assure you," the other replied, "and the strangest part of it is that my 'peculiar views,' as you may call them, are not the result of neglect or indifference, but are rather caused by investigation and the peculiar explanations, or rather lack of explanations, of those who make the dissemination of religious views their calling."

"In other words you are an unbeliever."

"Exactly."

"Not totally, I trust."

"Oh, not necessarily. The creeds which base, or profess to base, their tenets upon the Bible do not, as it appears to me, live up to their professions, and the clergy—meaning no offense whatever—are more addicted to money-getting than to soul-getting. That there may be salvation and a Supreme Judge who provides it is to me simply like the traditional Scotch verdict—not proved."

The stranger from the west was listening to all this with the air of one deeply interested. It was as if an opportunity which he desired, but had not expressed himself concerning, had come, and he was not at all reluctant about replying when questioned as to his own views. It came when the churchman, after announcing his determination to "labor" with the infidel, turned to the new-comer and said:

"I do not know whether you would be for or against me in such a work, but coming from what we of the East are prone to regard as the land where restraints are not severe, I fear you might be disposed to assist him rather than me."

"Well, gentlemen," said Durant, "this topic interests me, and while I and my opinions are unknown to you all, still I will, if agreeable, endeavor to throw some light upon the subject at present, and will seek to do more in that direction hereafter if favored with an opportunity. I am a believer in religion, laying claim to a testimony from above, and still I often find myself opposed by ministers; they are generally the very persons who are foremost in opposing me on every side, strange to say."

"I cannot imagine why this should be the case," said Fitzallen, "if you are as you state, a true believer in Christ and have a testimony of Him."

"It may seem strange to you, at which I do not wonder. But I am afraid I am delaying the work you have planned for Mr. Brown's welfare. If you will permit me to ask a few questions during your conversation with him, I may be able to take a general part in it before it closes, provided, however, that should we differ upon any religious views, it will be in a friendly and pleasant manner."

"Oh, certainly," said the churchman, "I am sure it will be a pleasure to me to have you join in our conversation as you see fit, and I do not doubt that Mr. Brown and the other gentlemen will look upon it in the same way."

The entire party here expressed approval of the proposed discussion, and the lawyer said:

"I have not the slightest objections, and will be glad to have all the light possible thrown upon the different doctrinal points that I do not believe, and mainly because of which I am not at present a member of any Christian church."

"Then, Mr. Brown," said Fitzallen, "let us commence our voyage in search of eternal truth. What particular part of the Christian faith appears to you as being most difficult to understand?"

"I confess there are many. However, let us commence with one of the principles of your belief. I will refer to some of the literature of the Church of England. The first article of religion contained in the Church of England Prayer Book is: 'There is but one living and true God, everlasting; without body, parts or passions; of infinite power, wisdom and goodness; the maker and preserver of all things, both visible and invisible; and in the unity of this Godhead there are three persons of one substance, power and eternity,—the Father, Son and the Holy Ghost.' According to this, then, your belief is that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are one person, without body, parts or passions."

"You have certainly quoted correctly from the prayer book; I fail to see anything wrong with that. What fault have you to find with it?"

"None whatever if you really believe it, because there does not seem to me much variance in our conclusions if you believe in such a God as this; I can not conceive of a just God who has neither body, parts nor passions. So far as the Bible is concerned, I fail to see from what part of that book you obtain such a conclusion."

"Well, Mr. Brown, using your own language, 'so far as the Bible is concerned,' let us do as Isaiah commands, go 'to the law and to the testimony,' (Isaiah viii: 20) and I will soon convince you that the Bible plainly sets forth the fact that the Father and the Son are one. In fact, Jesus Himself declares that He and His Father are one. (John x: 30.) Is this not true?"

"Excuse me," said Durant, "but is it not more reasonable for us to believe He meant that He and His Father were united in all things as one person?—not that they were actually one and the same identity?"

"Certainly not," said the reverend, "our Savior meant just what He said when He declared that He and His Father were one."

"I must certainly differ from you," said the stranger, "for He also asked His Father to make His disciples one, even as He and the Father were one, as you will see by reference to John xvii: 20 and 21, and by your argument it must have been His wish for those disciples to lose their separate and distinct identities. I am afraid you are not making a very favorable impression on Mr. Brown's mind."

"Stranger," said Mr. Brown, "your view of the case, I must confess, appears to be very reasonable. Looking at it from any other standpoint would not be in accord with sound reason."

"Let me ask," said the preacher, "did not Jesus say, 'He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father?'" (John xiv: 9.)

"Yes," said the westerner, "for as Paul says, 'He was in the express image of His (Father's) person,' (Heb. i: 3), and this being the case Jesus might well give them to understand that when they had seen one they had seen the other. When Jesus went out to pray, He said, 'O, my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless, not as I will but as Thou wilt.' (Matt, xxvi: 39.) Now then, to whom was our Savior praying? Was He asking a favor of Himself?"

"Oh, no; He was then praying to the Holy Spirit."

"Oh, then by such admission you have separated one of the three from Jesus, for in the beginning you declared that the three were one; and now that we have one of the three separated from the others, let us see if we can separate the other two. In order to do this, I refer you to the account of the martyrdom of Stephen. While being stoned to death he looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and that Jesus was standing on the right hand of God. (Acts vii: 55.) Would it not be rather difficult for any person to stand on the right hand of himself? And in order to prove further that Jesus is a separate person from the Father, we will examine into the account of His baptism. On coming up out of the water, what was it that lighted upon Him in the form of a dove?" (Matt iii: 16.)

"We are told it was the Spirit of God."

"Exactly! And whose voice was it that spoke from the heavens, saying, 'This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased?' (Matt. iii: 17.) Now, mind you, there was Jesus, who had just been raised from the water, being one person, the Holy Ghost which descended from above and rested upon Him in the form of a dove, making two personages; and does not the idea strike you very forcibly that the voice from heaven belonged to a third person? And then, again, I will draw your attention to—"

The churchman was getting warmed up. Said he: "These are things which we are not expected to understand; and, my young friend, I would advise you to drop such foolish ideas, for—"

"Excuse me. Did you say 'foolish ideas'? Why, my dear sir, we are told in the Bible that, 'This is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.' (John xvii: 3.) Therefore, it should be our first duty to find out the character and being of God. You say we are not expected to understand these things, while the Bible says these are what we must understand if we desire eternal life. It also says we can understand the things of man by the spirit of man, but to understand the things of God we must have the Spirit of God; and as you profess to be one of His servants, you are supposed to be in possession of the necessary Spirit to understand the true and living God, also Jesus Christ whom He sent. You say God has no body; did our Savior have one? If so, then His Father had one, for I have just proved by the words of Paul that Christ was in the express image of his person. (Heb. i: 3.) Jesus appeared in the midst of His disciples after His resurrection, with a body of flesh and bones, and called upon His disciples to satisfy themselves on this point by touching Him; for, says He, 'a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have.' (Luke xxiv: 39.) Then He called for something to eat and He did eat (verses 42, 43), and with this body of flesh and bone He ascended into heaven and stood, as Stephen says, on the right hand of God. (Acts vii: 55.) Now, if He has no body, what became of the one He took away with Him?"

"This is nonsense! You know that God is a spirit, and I think we would better not delve too deeply into matters which we are not permitted to comprehend."

"Pray, listen a while longer, for I have yet more to say in regard to what you call nonsense, although if it be such, I must insist that it is Bible nonsense. You say God is a spirit; does that prove He has no body? We are also told we must worship Him in spirit. Am I to understand from this that we must worship Him without a body? Have you a spirit? Yes. Have you also a body? Yes. Were you made in the image of God, body and spirit? So says the good old Bible. Man was created in the image of God. (Gen. i: 26, 27.) Then God has a body, and, consequently, must have parts. Moses talked with Him face to face, as one man talks with another (Ex. xxxiii: 11), arid he also saw His back parts. He promised (Num. xii: 8) to speak with Moses mouth to mouth. We are told in the fifth chapter of Deuteronomy that He has a hand and arm. The Psalm (cxxxix: 16) tells us He has eyes, and Isaiah (xxx: 27) says he has lips and a tongue. John describes His head, hair and eyes. (Rev. i: 14.) And, as for passions, we are told in the Bible that He has love, wrath, and is a jealous God. Are these not parts and passions? My dear sir, it would appear that all who believe in the scriptures must conclude that they are parts and passions, and that the Creator is a God after whose likeness we are made."

"Well, I had no idea when I commenced this conversation with Mr. Brown that I was to find such an antagonist in yourself. One would naturally come to the conclusion that you had made the Bible a study."

"Thank you, you do me honor. I confess I have as a Christian studied the record; in fact, at a very early age my parents required me to commit and remember a very important verse in that good old book. It is found in the fifth chapter of the gospel according to St. John, being the 39th verse, and reads as follows: Search the scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

"That is certainly proper, but I must again warn you against plunging into mysteries which we cannot understand."

"But Peter tells us that 'no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation' (II. Peter i: 20), and these are the things which we should seek for information upon; for lack of explanation by the ministers upon these points is, to a great extent, the cause of many persons being in Mr. Brown's frame of mind today."

"You are scarcely complimentary, and if your assertion be correct, perhaps it would be better for me to withdraw and leave Mr. Brown in your hands."

"I beg your pardon, my dear sir," said Durant, "I meant not to offend, I assure you, and intended only to be in earnest; I will endeavor to be more careful during the rest of the conversation."

The lawyer, who was decidedly impressed at this juncture, dispelled what might have been a painful silence by saying:

"Well, I declare, things have taken a very peculiar turn, I seem to be out of the fight altogether. But I want to say this, I have heard more that appears to be reasonable from you, Mr. Durant, regarding these matters than ever before in my life, and I must also admit that if my early teaching on religious matters had been as reasonable, I almost believe I might have been a Christian."

As it was getting late Mr. Marshall here "put in a word," saying:

"It is now getting quite late and perhaps all would like to retire; if so, I will conduct you to your rooms."

"No," said Mr. Brown; "we must not go to bed yet a while. I never was religiously interested before in my life, and I wish to listen to further discussion between these two."

The new-comer was more than willing; but being somewhat fatigued himself, and realizing that possibly there might be a sense of weariness in some of the others, he deemed it best not to continue for the time being, although asked to do so. He then made a suggestion, which was unanimously agreed to: that the subject be taken up on the following evening in the same place; and so, with mutual expressions of regard and a kind "good night" all around, the party dispersed for the night.