How cruelly are the minds of the simple and the timid perplexed by the persons who thus act, as well as by those popular writings which countenance in professedly religious persons these worldly and self-indulgent habits of life.  The hearts and the consciences of the “weak brethren” re-echo the warnings given them by the average opinions of the wise and good in all ages of the world, namely, that, with respect to worldly amusements, they must “come out and be separate.”  How else can they be sons and daughters of Him, to whom they vowed, as the necessary condition of entering into that high relationship, that they would “renounce the pomps and vanities of this wicked world?” If the question of pomps should be perplexing to some by the different requirements of different stations in life, there is surely less difficulty of the same kind in relation to its vanities.  But while the “weak in faith” are hesitating and trembling at the thought of all the opposition and sacrifices a self-denying course of conduct must, under any circumstances, involve, they are still further discouraged by finding that some whom they are accustomed to respect and admire have in appearance gone over to the enemy’s camp.

It is only, indeed, in their hours of relaxation that they select as their favourite companions those who are professedly engaged in a different service from their own—­those whom they know to be devoted heart and soul to the love and service of that “world which lieth in wickedness."[95] Are not, however, their hours of relaxation also their hours of danger—­those in which they are more likely to be surprised and overcome by temptation than in hours of study or of business?  All this is surely very perplexing to the young and inexperienced, however personally safe and prudent it may be for those from whom a better example might have been justly expected.  It is deeply to be regretted that there is not more unity of action and opinion among those who “love the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity,” more especially in cases where such unity of action is only interfered with by dislike to the important and eminent Christian duty of self-denial.

I am inclined to apply terms of stronger and more general condemnation than any I have hitherto used to those amusements which are more especially termed “public.”

You should carefully examine, with prayer to be guided aright, whether a voluntary attendance at the theatre or the race-course is not in a degree exposed to the solemn denunciation uttered by the Saviour against those who cause others to offend.[96] Can that relaxation be a part of the education to fit us for our eternal home which is regardless of danger to the spiritual interests of others, and acts upon the spirit of the haughty remonstrance of Cain—­“Am I my brother’s keeper?"[97] For all the details of this argument, I refer you to Wilberforce’s “Practical View of Christianity.”  Many other writers besides have treated this subject