(5.) There is another practical suggestion with reference to amusements, though I cannot urge it as one of principle; viz., this: _There is great risk in adopting_, _or introducing_, _an amusement_, _if it is likely to lead on to something further_, _and you cannot draw any clear line at which you mean to stop_. There are some things perfectly unobjectionable in themselves, but which become most objectionable when carried to the extent to which the world carries them. But yet the shades of difference are so delicate that it is almost impossible to draw any line that shall form a stopping point between the innocent beginning and the objectionable end. Take dancing as an illustration. In itself, it is a natural, cheerful, innocent amusement, and a great deal better, in my opinion, than many others which are substituted for it. But those others have this advantage, that, when they reach a certain point, they cease of themselves; whereas, dancing leads straight on to the ball-room, and you cannot tell your sons or daughters where to stop. It is offensive to your friends to say that your young people may dance in your own home, but not in theirs. Then, again, it is impossible to persuade a young person that the question of conformity to the world depends on whether the carpet is taken up or not. You cannot turn the carpet into a test, as I have known some attempt to do, and say that it is all right if the carpet is down, but wrong if it is taken up. Nor can you make the time of leaving off a test, and say that it is right till eleven, and wrong if it goes on till twelve; or right till twelve, and wrong if it goes on till one. The result is that those who begin with what they call family dances find in most cases that their young people end in being habitual ball-goers; and very frequently the parents themselves are so drawn along down the sliding scale that they give up most of their early principles, and become with their young people, in such matters, thoroughly conformed to the world. Thus, many a young person has been like those unfortunate travellers who perished when crossing the Col de Géant. They found the narrow ridge of rough rock was difficult and fatiguing, so they turned aside a few paces in order to find an easier path on the smooth surface of the sloping snow. Of course they had no idea of doing anything but keep safely along the upper part of the slope, close to the rocky ridge. But it was not in their power to choose their own path when once on the slope. In a fatal moment one slipped, and drew the others with him. There was no stopping point then, and they were dashed to atoms over the tremendous precipice below. I am not surprised, therefore, that most Christian parents have considered it wiser and safer for their children to keep strictly to the rocky ridge.