The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1891-05-05

consequences of this leaders fall. but
it furnishes a fit and striking textfeF
a homily upon a difficult, but pressing,
point of casuistry. .'i
How ought the Christian to bear
himself towards men and things which
have been seen to be bad2
That the problem is one of enormous
difficulty may be seen by a few prac-
tical examples.
For instance, in social life. AChris-
tan woman proposes to give an enter
tainfnent in her house. She finds on
her list the name of a VIGOROUSLY bad
man, a moral leper, who ought to be
scourged out of the sight of all good
men and pure women. But, the man
has a wife a mother, sisters, who are
good, who love him, who have not
ceased to hope for his redemption.
They and he are bound together, that
they must be taken together or left to-
gether. Shall a card be sent him?
For instance again. A Christian
man is a sharehOlder-a small share
hO'der-in a great corporation. His
modest income is from the dividends
which it pays. His influence in the
management is practically nil. The
managers, such of them as he knows,
are men of high repute; but it is equally
we'll known that the methods of the
corporation are bad. 1t grinds the
faces of the poor. 1t pays those whom
it employs starvation wages. Or, the
same corporation is>a political sinner.
1t brides legislators, cOrrupts council
men, hampers with courts. Shall the
good man hold his stock?
Or, again, here is a queen of the
stage. She is a mistress of her art
but she is also a mans mistress. AS
an actress she is supreme; but as a
woman she is bad. The fact is open,
acknowledged, undisguised, notorious.
Shall Christian people go to see her on
the stage? Granting that play-going
is intrinsically as innocent as church
going, is it right to go to see her-or
bim2
Or, still again. The Christian is
called upon to act with a certain politi-
cal party. His interests are closely in
volved in it's success. But he does not
doubt that the metods which the lead
ers of the party use to secure success
are bad, dishonest, ~dishOnOrable. Shall
he vote with it, contribute to it's cam
paign fund, or share in the benefits of
it's triumph?
The practical difficulty in all these
arises out of the complexity of human
relationships. In a simple, primitive
community it would be easy to act.
But in the highly developed organism
which human society has come to be,
the life of each atom is so entangled
with that of every other atom, that in
dependent action seems impossible.
Two working theories of right living
are extant, each of which is widely ac-
cepted. 1 believe both of them to be
bad.
The first is the principle of Spiritual
Direction, which receives the support
of the enormous moral force which the
Roman Church yields, and which re-
ceives the Endorsement of a few doc
trin0ireS among ourselves. It's theory
is, that the conduct of a human life is
a responsibility too great for the ordi-
nary man to assume. Guides are pro-
vided. The Priest is trained in casuis-
try, drilled in the settlement of hypo-
thetical moral problems, until he is
equipped to become an expert in moral
conduct. Over and above the ecclesi~
astical evils referable to this theory, is
the fact that ordinarily there is no time
for consultation with a n expert. One
must act. It is only after he has acted,
and the case is settled, that he is able
to learn from the expert how he ought
to have acted.
The second working theory is: That
it is possible to distinguish between the
professional and personal characters
of bad men and women, accepting
them in one character and holding
apart from them in the other. This
is very specious and very widely ac-
cepted. It cannot be denied that in
some cases. this distinction between
personal and professional relations is
legitimate. There are times and places
when n cannot do better than follow
ShylOck's method: CT will buy with
you, sell with you, walk with you, talk
with you, and SO following; but l viii
not eat with you, drink with you, nor
pray with you" Yet. after all, it is a
Jews rule, not a Christians. The
New Testament lays down a different
principle of action,
The relations Of men are not me-
chanical, but vital. There are no bulk
heads in the structure of the individual
or between individuals. If one COM
partment of a life be stained, it's con-
tents flow over into and discolor all the
others. One cannot hold relations