a meaning was put upon the act which made it impossible to every man
who could not accept that meaning. Conformity then was sin, unless
conviction went with the outward act. In many points of conduct this
is a distinction of importance. There are many things which we may do
so far as the thing itself is concerned, but which we may not do when
the public mind is agitated upon that point and will draw certain
inferences from our conduct. There are many things which to us have
no moral significance at all, any more than sitting at one side or
other of our table; but if a moral significance is attached to such
things by other people, and if they invite us to do them or to leave
them undone as a test of our attitude towards God or Christianity or
of our moral bent, then we must beware of misleading other people and
defiling our own conscience. Bowing in the house of Rimmon meant
nothing new to Naaman; it was not worship; it was no more than
turning round a street corner when the king had hold of his arm. To
him the idol was now, as to Paul, "nothing in the world." But if the
king had said, "You must bow to show the people that you worship
Syria's god," then plainly the bowing would have been unjustifiable.
And similarly, if a matter which to us is of no moral significance
becomes a test of our disposition or attitude towards truth, we must
be guided in our conduct not solely by our own view of the
indifference of the matter, but also by the significance attached to
it by other people. There are other points of conduct regarding which
we have no need to consult any prophet; points in which we are asked
to conform to a custom we know to be bad, or to follow and
countenance other men in what we know to be unwholesome for us. To
conform in such cases is to train ourselves in hypocrisy; it is to
say Lord, Lord, while we allow the world actually to rule our life.