so many various opinions, who is to know what is the truth?" "If religion leads to such bitterness, it is better to keep clear of it altogether." Such things are said by some, or thought and acted on, if not said. But is this the language of a man in earnest? Is this what one would say, who found briars and brambles in his path, and yet desired to reach the end? Is it not rather the excuse of one who wishes to find an excuse for going on his own way, and flatters himself he has found one in the disputes of Christians? No honest man, no true seeker, will do so. Rather, he will brush aside, as far as may be, all contentions about trifles, and look beyond all infirmities and faults of men, and seek with all his heart to know what God has said, and what He would have him to believe and do. Was there no truth in the contest between the Jews and Paul? Was there no right side in that question from which Gallio turned away? The same truth exists still, and the like conflict goes on between truth and error, and right and wrong. A heathen governor may be excused for caring for none of those things, but not one who bears the name of Christian. We are not left without guidance and help we have the Bible, and the Holy Spirit is promised, and we are invited to pray. DIOTREPHES. E meet with this name only once; but in that one mention of him we have such a description of this person's character as gives us a very unfavourable view of him. The words are these: "Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them;" and, from this being all that is said about his character, we may judge that a love of being first was his main quality that which gave the tone to his whole life, and governed all his conduct. It is so sometimes. Some master-passion is suffered to take possession of the mind, and every right feeling and disposition is made to yield to it. Such a case forms a warning, a beacon-light. : Who Diotrephes was, and where he lived, we do not know all we know of him is gathered from St. John's Third Epistle, a private letter written to one Gaius, "the well-beloved Gaius." Now, if we knew who Gaius was, we might gather at least where Diotrephes lived, and of what church he was a member: but even this we do not know. For Gaius, or Caius, was one of the commonest names; two, if not three, persons of that name occur in connexion with St. Paul. There is a likeness between one of them-the one mentioned in the Epistle to the Romans-and this Gaius to whom St. John wrote; for the former is called by Paul, "Gaius, mine host, and of the whole church," while the latter is mentioned by John as showing kindness to strangers. But there was a great distance of time between Paul's letter to the Romans and John's to Gaius—as much as thirty years probably —and, the name being so common, there may well have been two of the name who were given to hospitality. We must leave the matter in doubt. We cannot settle who this Gaius was, or where he lived; and so we can settle nothing about Diotrephes' place of abode. But it is of no great consequence ; his character and conduct are what concern us. He was a person of influence in the church to which he belonged: that is plain. But he wished for more influence; he would have no one over him, nothing would satisfy him but to be first. St. John the Apostle, so worthy of reverence from his office, his age, and his character, had written a letter to the church. We have not got the letter; but, as far as we can judge, it was partly a letter of exhortation and partly one of introduction. It was carried probably by certain Christian brethren, who went from the place where St. John then was. They were well known to him, if not expressly sent by him, and they were travelling on the work of the Gospel. Such journeys from place to place, between the different churches, for Christian communion and for stirring up the converts, were not uncommon. Now Gaius himself was noted for his kindness to such travellers: from him the brethren were sure of a welcome, and, though those who arrived might be perfect strangers, yet he made no strangers of them, but entertained them hospitably and helped them on in their journey. Thus he showed himself a fellow-helper to the truth. Not so Diotrephes. "I wrote unto the church," says St. John, referring to the letter lately sent, "but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not ;" and, further on, he says, "neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church.” If (as seems natural) we take these two sentences as applying to the same thing, then it was the Apostle John who had sent the men, and so, in not receiving them, Diotrephes did in effect refuse to receive John himself. He would not acknowledge his authority, or pay attention to his recommendation. All went for nothing with him. St. John's Apostolic office, his past personal intercourse with our blessed Lord, his saintly character, his venerable age-all weighed nothing with this man. He would have no interference, he desired no exhortations from strangers to be mixed with his own, he would be first. But even this was not all. Not content with refusing to receive those who came with the Apostle's introduction, he had been active in opposition to St. John himself, and had spoken against him continually. "Prating against us with malicious [or, evil] words," St. John writes. With no foundation whatever for the things he said, he had gone about speaking evil of the Apostle and the brethren, in his envy and malice prating against them, and doing all in his power to set others against them. Nay further, so determined was he to reign supreme, that all who ventured against his will to receive the brethren he treated as his enemies, and, if he could not hinder them from showing this kindness, used his influence to cast them out of the church, or excommunicate them. So outrageous had his conduct been, that the gentle and loving Apostle (his love now ripened by old age) shows himself here to have still somewhat left in him of a "Son of thunder," and says, "If I come, I will remember his deeds;" meaning, not that he would remember them in his own mind in a spirit of revenge, but that he would remind, or inform, the members of the church of them, and thus set the conduct of Diotrephes in its true light. What he writes of Demetrius, another member of the same church, is plainly meant by way of contrast to the behaviour of Diotrephes. Gaius himself, good and faithful as he was, was not raised above the danger of this man's influence; even he might in time be acted upon by what he heard so often, and from a man of such energy and import |