Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

(C) Keystone View Co.

THE MAYFLOWER IN PLYMOUTH HARBOR, 1620. FROM THE PAINTING BY W. F. HALSALL

primarily an American one, and generously displayed the American flag in the decorations with which the town and harbor were embellished, thus indicating the pride which Englishmen may well take in the Nation whose foundations were in part laid by the Plymouth colonists of three centuries ago.

A message from the British Premier, Lloyd George, to the Plymouth celebrants read: "The Pilgrim Fathers achieved far-reaching results which have exceeded all their hopes and expectations, conscious though they were of the greatness of their venture. We welcome these celebrations as an opportunity for fostering the good relations which happily exist between ourselves and the great American people." Lord Reading paid a graceful tribute to American womanhood as represented by Lady Astor, who took a prominent part in the celebration. He said: "It was a remarkable coincidence that the Pilgrims went from Plymouth to land at a new Plymouth, and another coincidence that three centuries later another Mayflower came from Virginia to England, and by the constituency of Plymouth was elected the first lady to enter the British House of Commons."

ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND NURSES NEEDED AT ONCE

[ocr errors]

UT of the chaos and suffering of the World War has grown a demand for better health. The new demand arising from this changed point of view, aiming at the prevention rather than the cure of illness, has done much in thinning the ranks of available women for community nursing. Also the world-wide plea for the American nurse has caused an unprecedented shortage of women carry forward the high standards of the profession. Depleted by foreign need and the increasing domestic demand for the trained nurse to manage public health work in big industrial concerns, the pro

to

fession is facing the gravest crisis in its
history. It is not so much that there are
fewer nurses than formerly, but that there
is a greater demand.

To recruit the fast-dwindling ranks a
campaign has been launched to enroll one
hundred thousand women in the nurses'
training schools of the country. In the
appeal that has gone forth from, the
Department of Public Welfare, New
York City, Bird S. Coler, director of the
campaign, has made an interesting an-
nouncement. It is of moment to all
women who desire to enter the nursing
profession. It concerns the establishment
of a school for attendant nurses, the first of
its kind to be established in the United
States. By reason of this departure
in the standards for training of the
nurse, women who have hitherto been
barred because of educational require-
ments are now welcomed.

In the literature sent broadcast by the Department this summer, accompanied by five thousand posters, the importance of this new course is explained in full. Its value to the housewife, the urgency of its plea, and a statement of the requirements are set forth.

"It is hoped that this course will give an opportunity to young women who have been unable to have high school work. It should afford an opportunity for helping young women broaden their sphere of usefulness, or who for some reason have been unable to take the longer course for the nurses' training. During the training, which lasts nine months, the attendants are given full maintenance, are supplied with books and uniforms, and in addition are paid $33 a month. This ought to appeal to self-supporting women. On graduation places are found immediately for these trained attendants. They are registered and may, if they wish, go out and do community nursing."

These attendants will release many of the trained nurses, it is thought, and in

this way materially aid in solving th present problem of nurse shortage. T attendants are intended to supplemen but not to supplant the work of re trained nurses. That will be obviou when it is stated that these attendants will be graduated in one-third the time that it takes to educate a trained nurse. At present four city hospitals in the metropolis have instituted the course A woman between the ages of eighteen and thirty-five with a common school education is eligible for entrance.

In South American countries, where the nursing profession is in its infancy, the importance of such a short course is manifest. Prior to the war the nursing in these republics was relegated to

[graphic]

66

slovenly, haphazard women, more noted for loquacity and assurance than for skill." But with the advent of peace South American doctors have started a campaign for more scientific nursing and the establishment of nursing schools. The Superintendent of the Evangelical Hos pital at Rio de Janeiro has applied to Miss Agnes S. Ward, General Superintendent of Nurses in New York City, for a group of women to found a school for nursing in his country. It will be modeled on the school for attendants, of which Commis sioner Coler is the founder,

The war services of the American nurse have been universally appreciated. She is in such demand in Europe at this moment that only unprecedented, volunteering will begin to meet the need. The slogan that hitherto has applied only to service men is now that of the women: Join the army of nurses and see the world.

Hospitals where the course for attendant nurses is now in operation include Central Neurological Hospital, Black 'well's Island; New York Children's Hos pital, Randall's Island; Sea View Hos pital, Staten Island; and Greenpoint Hospital, Brooklyn.

[merged small][ocr errors]

Eight years ago there was such an issue. The Republican party in that year was split in two. The campaign was fought on the issue of. progressivism and the progressives proved to be in an overwhelming majority. Likewise, there was a somewhat similar contest within the Democratic party, and the progress ive element proved to be strong enough to control the nomination. The result of the campaign of 1912 was therefore clear demonstration that the America people are predominantly progressive.

As a consequence of that campaig progressiveness has become one of th

ost valuable of political assets. It has ased to be heroic for a candidate to nounce himself as progressive; on the ntrary, it has become a customary ethod of appealing for votes. There is more obvious way by which a candiate for office in most of the States or in e country at large can gain political dvantage or overcome a political disdvantage than by seeking to impress pon the voters the conviction that he is rogressive.

It was said of old, "Woe to you when all men speak well of you." This is not only rue when addressed to the individual; is equally true when it is said of a ause. Popularity ought of itself to be warning. Now is the time when proressives of all parties should be on their uard.

[ocr errors]

There are signs of danger to the cause f social progress that are not always bvious to those who are devoted to it. t was one of the proofs of the quality of eadership of Theodore Roosevelt, now ractically everywhere acknowledged, hat he saw the danger to social progress

the menace of imperial Germany. While lesser men debated over questions of industrial and social justice at home, e saw that all such domestic questions were submerged in the danger that beset the foundations of social and industrial justice from abroad. If the Nation were to maintain progress, he saw that it first must preserve itself and its own freedom. The cause of progressiveness then was nvolved in the larger cause of American ights and human liberty.

It took some courage for a public man o be a progressive in 1912. It equally ook courage for a public man to subrdinate the progressive issues to other ssues in 1916. Now in 1920 it is natural hat many voters, realizing that the war 8 practically if not technically at an end, should revert to their former habit of considering the great issue in America to be that of progressivism or reactionism.

There are, however, at least two great questions before the country which are more fundamental than any question of progressive legislation.

One of these fundamental questions is hat of the preservation of the right of America to determine its own destiny. Is the proposal that America should enter a League of Nations equivalent to a proposal that America should forego that ight? If so, will the yielding of that ight deprive Americans of the power to select for themselves their own proramme of social legislation, or will that power be handed over to an international ody? That is more fundamental than ny specific plan of social progress can

e.

The other one of these two fundamen

tal questions is that of the efficiency and character of the government. Shall Americans choose the road that leads to personal government or the road that leads to government by party? That is the question that concerns the character of government. Shall the American people intrust their government to those who believe in further experiments, or to those who believe that the time has come to make the government that we have work well? That is the question that concerns the efficiency of government. Unless the government we have is such as to respond to public need and public demand, and unless that government can translate the public demand from a programme into practical measures, practically administered, the programme itself, no matter how progressive and no matter how emphatically demanded, will be of no avail.

It is easy for candidates now to proclaim their progressiveness. It is a great temptation for candidates to divert the public mind from fundamental questions by appeals, in the name of progressiveness, to the interests of classes and groups. The fact is that between the two parties in this Presidential campaign there is no issue as between reactionism and progressivism. The issues are more fundamental.

WHY DO THEY DO IT?

W

THY do plagiarists plagiarize? The question is brought to mind just now because of what appears on the face of it to be a flagrant case of literary purloining in a recent minor signed and contributed article in this journal. We refrain at this time from specifying, for the reason that we feel that it is proper to await such explanation as the apparent offender may see fit to make in response to our inquiry; but ultimately, in justice to the magazine from which the short article in question seems to have been "lifted almost verbatim, to say nothing of our own readers and in the interest of journalistic integrity, a statement of the facts may be

necessary.

[ocr errors]

So far as can be recalled, this is the first instance, certainly for many years, in which a direct literary direct literary theft has actually attained the stage of publication in The Outlook. But, as with most other periodicals, there have been narrow escapes. In one instance an article on an important topic signed by a well-known and prolific writer and dealer in articles, now dead, an article "bought and paid for," was on the point of being printed when by chance it was found to be practically identical with an article written by a magazine writer of unquestioned integrity

[ocr errors]

and reputation that had appeared in one of the best-known of American monthlies before the fraudulent article reached this office. The only excuse ever offered was a vague assertion that both writers had copied from the same sources a totally inadequate explanation of literal plagiarism even if true, which it was not. In another case a dealer in interviews offered an article by a distinguished United States Senator, to be signed by the name of the Senator and with his authority. With what seemed at the time almost superfluous caution, we wrote to the Senator for verification, and learned from him that the "article was simply a long extract from a speech made by him on the floor of the Senate, published in the "Congressional Record,” and therefore free to any one to reprint without any special consent or any dealer's offices. In a third case a guileless lady journalist offered an article by President Taft. This was not exactly plagiarism, but an attempt to induce us to pass off as a new and original article a hodgepodge of extracts from various speeches which the lady had ingeniously compiled and to which good-natured Mr. Taft had kindly affixed his name. Once at least The Outlook suffered, not from plagiarism but from plagiarists; the poem "If I Should Die To-Night," by Belle Tabor Smith, which appeared in our columns in 1873, found its way into the popular anthologies, was claimed by half a dozen non-authors and was reprinted under several claimants' names in scores of newspapers.

So much for reminiscence! Mr. Sedgwick, of the "Atlantic Monthly," has told others more singular. To return to the question "Why do they do it?" Outright, vulgar, stupid cupidity is the commonest motive-stupid because the fraud is almost sure to be discovered. Sometimes the answer is vanity-we know of an instance where a wealthy business man used to carry around in his pocketbook and show to his friends as his a clever humorous poem written by one of the best-known versifiers in America but published anonymously. Rarely the offender is really so ignorant as to believe that "facts are facts," and may. be taken, literary dress and all, without acknowledgment. On the other hand, there have been many unjust accusations of plagiarism because writers have used the same plot idea or gone to some common source for legitimate suggestions. Some years ago such a baseless charge was made against Robert Louis Stevenson as regards his "Imp of the Bottle," and we took some pains then to point out the difference between using historic material or ancient legend and stealing both words and thoughts.

The plagiarist's offense is essentially

mean; it is usually sordid, and its underhandedness always makes it contemptible.

A QUESTION AND A COMMENT

THE PROVINCIAL AND DISTORTED VIEW OF NEW YORK STATE IN 1787

It is the wish and the duty of the State of New York to bear her share of America's burden.

But the State of New York will never consent that other States shall determine for her what that share is.

THE PROVINCIAL AND DISTORTED VIEW OF THE EDITOR OF THE OUTLOOK IN 1920

It is the wish and the duty of America to bear her share of civilization's burden.

But America will never consent that other nations shall determine for her what that share is.

The State of New York later corrected its provincial and distorted view. Has the editor of The Outlook any comment? D. W. L.

Ο

UR correspondent refers to the fact that the State of New York at first refused to ratify the United States Constitution, and later, largely through the influence of John Jay, did ratify. Our comment is that the Paris Covenant of the League of Nations and the United States Constitution are not, as our correspondent seems to think they are, analogous.

An association of nations analogous either to the federation of States in our country or to the union of states which constitutes Great Britain may be desirable and practicable in the future. But any plan for a federation of nations analogous to the federation of States in this country we regard as impracticable, in the present condition of the world, and perilous not only to the material but also to the moral interests of America, and for one and the same

reason.

Any such federation of nations would make us share in the responsibility for the determination of questions respecting which we are necessarily ignorant. How many of the readers of The Outlook are prepared to express any well-instructed opinion upon the question of the rights and wrongs of Poland or of the controversy between Italy and Jugoslavia? We have no moral right to assume responsibilities which we are not prepared intelligently to fulfill.

Any such federation of nations would make the Poles and the Russians share in the responsibility for the conduct of our affairs. That they have the intelligence and the experience necessary to enable them to manage their own affairs may well be doubted; that they have the intelligence and the experience necessary to enable them to take any part what

ever in advising us as to the conduct of our affairs no one can believe. To assume a responsibility for which we are not prepared and to invite them to take a share in our responsibilities for which they are not prepared is neither wise nor safe.

The difference between a federation of peoples who had fought together in defense of their common liberties and interests, who lived in contiguous States, who spoke the same language and possessed what was essentially the same religion, and the federation of peoples without a common religion, a common language, a common tradition, or a common understand ing of the meaning of law or liberty, is, we think, sufficiently plain without further explanation.

THERE ARE VISITORS

T

HERE are visitors-and visitors. Some of them come to our shores, tarry a while, and go away with no other thought in mind than the memory of short bed-sheets and omnipresent spittoons. Others there are who come to us weighted down by philosophies of life which ignore nothing except the fact that we are all human beings, and depart unable to report as to whether or not we dress in the grasses of the South Sea Islands or the skins of polar bears.

Needless to say, Mr. E. V. Lucas belongs in neither of these classes. He came to America with no ineradicable predispositions. But he has left us with some very definite opinions on the difference between American civilization and that from which it sprang.

Genial, keen-witted, tolerant, and understanding, he has seen America through friendly eyes and against the broad background of a fundamental knowledge of human nature. He has discriminated

between surface differences and those which lie deep in the heart of our land. And he has combined his presentation of these superficial and fundamental differences in a picture of American life which all of us can observe with pleasure and many of us with profit.

We count ourselves fortunate to be

able to present to our readers Mr. Lucas's "From an American Note-Book," the first installment of which appears in this issue. The second will be published next week.

[blocks in formation]

have climbed in search of fabulous mo sters of the deep, her stocky masts whic had borne the menace of half a thousand gales, her yard-arms which had lifted against the sky lines of all the seven seas her battered bulwarks, and her darkened decks were eloquent with a story which even the veriest landsman needed no interpreter to understand.

The dock at which she lay was almost deserted. Her crew, save for a white haired Negro puffing at a pipe in her galley, had disappeared on shore. Her cargo of oil had been discharged; the riggers had not yet begun the task of refitting her for another voyage.

Down the pier came a little stoopshouldered man, the right cuff of his serge suit polished with the friction which comes from desk work and the adding of many weary columns. Yet there was an eagerness in his eyes which told the onlooker that his mission to the ship was not clerical.

66

He crossed the narrow gangplank and went aboard with the air of an adventurer. Do you mind if I look about a bit?" he asked, and the Negro's leisurely assent was all the welcome he needed. Up and down the deck he went, his eyes taking in every detail of the heavy davits, the cutting spades and case buckets, the try works near the foremast, and the huge anchor chains on the windlass. He went forward to the catheads, and then aft again to the galley where the Negro still sat puffing his pipe. On a whaler the galley is located on the starboard side of the poop and the cabin companionway on the port. Between the two the visitor caught sight of the old-fashioned wheel mounted on the tiller itself, with the tiller ropes stretched openly across the deck. The helmsman who controls such a wheel must walk back and forth as the tiller, upon which the wheel is mounted, swings.

[ocr errors][merged small]

When the visitor caught sight of the steering gear, he broke silence for the first time. "My father," he said, address- [ ing no one in particular, "once had his tiller ropes break in a gale of wind. The tiller went wild and smashed the side of the galley."

"Yes, sir, it would that," the Negro answered. Was your father a whaler?"

66

"My father was," said the visitor. "And his father before him. My brother went to sea as a boy, but somehow my mother never let me have anything to do with the water. I wasn't even allowed to c sail a small boat. My father died at sea. you know," he added, as though he had explained everything very fully.

His hands reached for the spokes of the wheel, and he stood facing forward and glancing up at the rigging as though master of a ship under full canvas about to meet a sudden squall. The lure of far

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

thought of a career which even to the hardiest of those iron-bodied men who responded to the call of the sea meant suffering, loneliness, danger, and sometimes insanity and death. It meant the possibility of being set adrift on the trackless deep without water and at the mercy of the unmastered wind. It meant months and years of back-breaking labor in the stench of rotting blubber and the smoke of fat-fed fires. A strange dream of joy for a street-bred clerk! Yet somehow, while this slim figure swayed at the wheel, meeting the blows of a phantom gale and watching dockward for menacing seas that were only vagrant swirls

of dust, there came to one onlooker a new satisfaction with life. In that moment was revealed the secret and powerful force which has driven pioneers around the world, which has shattered mountains and conquered the air, which has toppled empires and bound continents with bands of steel-the force which has graven "Invictus" upon legions of nameless graves and left to the living the eternal romance of adventure and of high resolve.

We shall not fear for America while the smell of tarred rope and the sight of dizzy masts still bring the light into the eyes of the sons of old New Bedford.

a li at e

the

work

col

his en

gan

[ocr errors]

ne

We

nebes

mas

Pre

A VICE-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE EXPLAINS AND

WE PARTLY APOLOGIZE

E have received the following interesting letter from Franklin D. Roosevelt, recently the able ad efficient Assistant Secretary of the avy and now the Democratic candidate or the Vice-Presidency.

MR. ROOSEVELT'S LETTER

I was greatly surprised to note your ditorial in The Outlook for September headed "A Vice-Presidential Disappointment," and I will frankly confess hat I was a good deal disappointed, paricularly after the pleasant things you ave said about my work in the Navy, to iscover that you are willing to take a aress despatch from Butte, Montana, as

the

bsolute and complete evidence that I dad said something so completely at varilerance with what a man such as you have een kind enough to describe me could ossibly have spoken. I am sorry that

орес

ack

hurriedly reached the conclusion that our estimate of myself was untrue withut considering the possibility that the lespatch might have been untrue instead. tsAs a matter of fact, please let me assure Silent you that I was wholly erroneously resported and that a complete and full denial of this erroneous report was made ofy me on the Pacific Coast as soon as he misquotation appeared in print.

OD

ed the

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

I should have hoped that it would be bvious to you that, after experience in Washington during a period of nearly heright years, I could not say anything so njustifiable as the statement put into may mouth by some ingenious but inaccusate reporter. I would be loth to think hat I was deliberately misquoted, and I m assuming that it was merely one of hose fatal cases of condensation where a ewspaper man, in trying to reduce a peech to the smallest number of words, tirely misses the spirit as well as the nguage of the speech.

[blocks in formation]

those of at least a dozen West Indian, Central, and South American Republics are, in international affairs, and particularly in regard to European affairs, very similar. This has been abundantly proved in the past. In fact, the great majority of South American countries absolutely agreed with us in their attitude towards the recent war. No one who has followed, as I have, with such sympathetic interest the progress of the Pan-American Union, can fail to be convinced of the growing understanding between ourselves and our southern neighbors and the consequently increasing feeling that, instead of being rivals, our interests are, so far as world politics is concerned, practically identical. So impressed have I been with this increasing feeling of a community of interest between ourselves and the Southern Republics, that I felt it justifiable to express it as my belief, in that speech, that on any grave international question coming before the Assembly of the League of Nations affecting the destiny of any Republic on the North or South American Continent we would all vote practically as a unit because of this harmony of interest, which, I am frank to add, in my judgment, is really greater than the sometimes conflicting interests of Great Britain and her colonies. We need have no fear of the bugaboo of "six votes to one which has been so loudly proclaimed by those who do not believe in the League.

[ocr errors]

This, you will see, was a very different sort of speech from that which I was quoted as making, and you will also see the possibility of its being misquoted in an attempt to hurriedly condense it into something like the garbled form in which it appeared. However, I know you would never have willingly published a criticism based on an untruth, and I feel sure that you will do me the justice of giving my denial of the press report some mention in your magazine.

As to your criticism that I have "joined Governor Cox in loose charges that the

Republicans intended to buy the election by the use of huge campaign funds," please let me add that I have at no time made any charges, loose or otherwise, beyond stating, and I think you will agree with me that this has been proved, that the Republican National Committee, or responsible persons acting under them, have districted the country and assigned quotas which if carried out on the same basis of population as in the specific example cited by me would total a vast fund, somewhere between fifteen and thirty millions of dollars. At no time have I charged that this money had actually been raised, but merely that an attempt apparently was being made to raise it. In view of the testimony now before the Senate Committee, I will leave it to your own sense of fairness and justice as to whether or not I was justified in a statement of that kind.

Very sincerely yours, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT. Hyde Park, Dutchess County, New York, September 4, 1920.

We sincerely apologize to Mr. Roosevelt for having accepted what purported to be a verbatim account of his speech in the daily newspaper despatches. Ordinarily we endeavor to corroborate such statements in the daily press by going to the original sources. In this case the newspaper reports were so categorical that we were misled into making a comment without our usual verification. This applies to our criticism of Mr. Roosevelt's alleged attitude on the League of Nations. We agree with him that the interests of the United States and Latin America are identical as regards European affairs.

We still, think, however, that Mr. Roosevelt is open to criticism for his apparent willingness to accept Governor Cox's wholesale charges of Republican corruption. Governor Cox-unless he too has been misreported in the daily presssaid recently in a public speech that the Republicans were going to use some of

their corruption fund to buy bayonets with which to suppress the rights of the workingman. Now that Mr. Roosevelt has

A

THE

CORRESPONDENT gave in last week's Outlook an interesting account of a recent meeting of the Anglican bishops in England, in which they restated their desire for organic church unity and suggested as the four foundations for the reunited Christian Church acceptance of the Bible, the Nicene Creed, the Sacraments of Baptism and the Holy Communion, and an episcopal organization of the ministry. Our correspondent added: "They are not stressing any doctrine of apostolic succession, neither are they casting any doubt on the validity of non-episcopal ordination."

A Protestant of the Protestants, I gratefully recognize the catholic spirit of this proposal. But I doubt the wis dom of attempting an organic union of the Christian Church, and I am quite sure that if church unity is ever to be accomplished it must be by another method. We sing "The Church's one foundation is Jesus Christ, Our Lord;" we cannot substitute for this one foundation four foundations. Historically the creeds are not the foundation of the Church, they are the expressions of its belief-the oldest of them was organized two or three centuries after the birth of the Church; the Bible is not the foundation of the Church, it is the early history of the Church; the sacraments are useful symbols, but they are not the foundation of the Church any more than the American flag is the foundation of the American Republic; and the organization of the Church is not its foundation, though some form of organization is essential for its most efficient activity.

The foundation of the Christian Church

is faith in a Person. It is faith that Jesus of Nazareth is altogether adorable; it is the supreme desire to be such a person as he was, to live such a life as he lived, to possess the spirit which he possessed, to be governed by the motives which governed him, to take up the work which he initiated and carry it on, and to find strength and wisdom to live his life and do his work where he found his strength and wisdom.

In brief, the foundation of the Christian Church is spiritual, not ceremonial nor intellectual.

What made the Allied forces one army? Loyalty to a spirit of justice and liberty. Progressives and Conservatives, Socialists and Individualists, Republicans and Monarchists, fought under one leader and were inspired by one purpose. If, as a condition of co-operation in the war in one army and under one leader, they

[blocks in formation]

ye except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye are the branches. He that abideth in me and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit. Apart from me ye can do nothing.

BY LYMAN ABBOTT CHURCH'S ONE FOUNDATION had attempted by debate to settle the question, which was preferable as a form of government, the Constitution of the British Empire or of the United States, as a political creed the platform of the Republican, the Democratic, or the Labor party, as a symbol the American, the British, or the French flag, and as an expression of their patriotism "The StarSpangled Banner," "God Save the King," or the "Marseillaise," they would have been discussing these questions instead of fighting together under the common leader and against a common enemy. The difference between the army and the Church is not that one needs agreement in opinions, forms of expression, or methods of organization and the other methods of organization and the other does not, but that the army believes in an ideal which is undefined, while the Christian Church believes in an ideal of life which has been realized in its Master, and in him as its Master because he realizes that ideal.

Jesus Christ has expressed the secret of church unity in a parable that is not often cited in discussions concerning the Church.

The Hebrew psalmist had in the exile sung of a vine which Jehovah had planted. "Thou broughtest a vine out of Egypt," he sang; "thou didst drive out the nations, and didst plant it." Isaiah had "Let me sing,' a similar sung he sang, "for my well-beloved a song of my beloved touching his vineyard.'

song.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

In the days preceding the Last Supper, Jesus recalled to the multitudes in the Temple this ancient figure and compelled from the people their condemnation of the rulers of Israel. "The Lord of the vineyard," they had said, "will destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen who will render the fruits in their season." And Jesus had commended their verdict. "The kingdom of God," he said, "shall be taken from you and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof." Later, speaking to his disciples at the supper table to revive their hopes and inspire their courage, he recalled to their minds this familiar parable of the vineyard and gave to it a prophetic interpretation:

I am the true vine; my Father is the husbandman. Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away; and every branch that beareth fruit, he cleanseth it that it may bring forth more fruit. Already ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself except it abide in the vine, no more can

This is the fullest description which Jesus has left to the world of his ideal for that brotherhood to which he has committed the completion of his commis sion. It is founded not on agreement in opinion-that is, on a creed; not on agre ment in forms of worship-that is, on a ritual; not on agreement in the form of organization—that is, neither on an heredi tary priesthood nor or a democratic con gregation; not even on love for a sacred but long since buried Messiah; but on love and loyalty to a living Messiah, dwelling in the hearts and lives of his disciples in a more intimate companionship and with a far wider and mightier influence than when he trod the earth with the few score of faithful friends whom he gathered about him.

This prophetic parable of the Christian brotherhood is at once interpreted and confirmed by the history of the Christian Church. Whenever that Church has had faith in its Master and shown its faith! by the will to do his will, it has been a spring of life in the community. Whenever it has lost that faith; whenever it has substituted an admiration of beauty for a reverence of goodness, emotional enjoyment for self-denying service, regu lation of conduct for inspiration of the spirit, belief in a creed for faith in a Person, whatever its wealth, its political power, its prestige, whatever the beauty of its services, the regularity of its order, or the soundness of its theology, it has ceased to be a living Church; the jeweled robes of its rich ecclesiastics have become its grave-clothes and its cathedrals have become its tombs.

Much of my theology I have inherited from my father. In my boyhood he wrote in the "Corner Stone" the follow ing sentences:

...

Nine-tenths of nominal Christians, all over the world, are firmly believing and sincerely wishing that their own de nomination may extend and swallow up the rest, and become universal. There can be no moral effect more certain, than that in such a case, four or five generations would place worldly, selfish, ambitious men at the head of the religious interests of the world! We have had one terrible experiment of the effects of one great denomination to illustrate this reasoning. God grant that the dark day may never come again.

I quote this passage because it ex

t

« PredošláPokračovať »