In former days the story of Cain and Abel used to arouse a vague sense of injustice in the writer; it seemed hard that Abel's gift should be accepted and Cain's rejected, for seemingly they each gave of their best, but the light of Christian Science has enabled her to see more clearly the divine justice which "had respect unto Abel and to his offering: but unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect." We know that "a wrong motive involves defeat"(Science and Health, p. 446)and that the widow's mite given ungrudgingly was more commendable than the richer gift of those who gave carelessly of their bounty. Thus it is the attitude of the giver and not the value of the gift which calls forth commendation or rebuke. The words "unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect," imply that Cain himself rather than his offering was lacking in the necessary qualities which make a gift acceptable, and from the sequel of the story it is not difficult to perceive wherein he came short. That he should have become "very wroth," and that "his countenance fell" on the rejection of his gift, betrays a proud and self-righteous state far from that humble spirit which will "listen patiently to the rebuke and credit what is said"(Science and Health, p. 8)and the subsequent act of revenge on his innocent brother proves that all was not well in his thought with regard to his fellow-worshiper.
From, the beginning there must have 'been in Cain's thought a sense of rivalry, a feeling of jealousy and a desire to excel, which made him regard his brother in the light of a competitor for divine favor, yet he is distinctly told. "If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?" Instead of acting upon this sweet assurance that good is always rewarded with good, and overcoming his jealous thoughts of his brother, Cain persists in his false view and follows up his misconception of Abel by attempting to destroy what he imagines to be his rival. He thus replies in the negative to his own question, "Am I my brother's keeper?" for, far from keeping him, he has done his utmost to remove him, so betraying the fact that he must have presented his gift in that spirit of jealousy which is the very opposite of love. Is it strange that he did not reap divine blessings? Our Master shows us very clearly the importance of being right with our brother before we can be right with God. In unmistakable language he declares the vanity of worship or of a religious life, so called, if our attitude toward our brother is not one of peace and love. "Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee; leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift."
Is not the question clear? Of what avail to lay material gifts upon the altar of Spirit if one lay not the spiritual as well? Without the spiritual the gift is a hollow mockery. Of what avail to call oneself a Christian and a follower of the "Prince of Peace" if we reserve secret chambers of horrors, full of hate and jealousy, and malice and rivalry, harsh criticism, and contempt for those around us? Of what benefit to build churches, and to sing hymns of love and good-will toward men, when there is lurking in one's consciousness a sense of estrangement and separation from one's fellow-beings? These questions may be raised equally well with regard to our attitude towards communities, churches, professions, and the like. Just as it is our duty to be reconciled to any in dividual and truly be his "keeper," that is, keep our thought of him pure and spiritual, so it is our duty to keep any body of our fellows perfect in conception, separating the error from the person or persons. We say, perhaps, "Oh, but so and so is so difficult to get on with;" or, "I don't like that profession, the members of it manifest such pride or such dishonesty." Having so judged, do we not often comfortably turn our backs both mentally and materially upon those whom we have criticised,—banish them to the condemned cell, there to await the penalty to be pronounced by Judge Self-righteousness? How many of us, upon recognizing the error, look inward and strive to correct the false concept of our brother in our own mentality? How many realize that we are breaking the command, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself," every time we neglect to purify our thought concerning the errors we detect in the persons and communities around us? "Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison."
