The advocate., 1895-10-02

God on earth, which the churches make
so much clamor about and are so careful
not to attempt TO reduce to practice.
AS to say, citizenship is "the greatest Of
all fields of Christian endeavor," or would
be, If there was any disposition on the part
of Christians to enter it. There is no such
disposition, except on the part ofa few, and
never will be-. The church cannot even en-
courage it. She made the experiment Of
ruling the world once, and the world viii
never give her the reins again. History
shudders as she recounts the bloody tale.
Never more will the church-ruled state be
possibility with any enlightened people.
Because the church cannot undertake the
the work itself, it win prove hlndrance to
the focalizing Of Christian thought and In
fluence upon it. The sentiment Of the dis
ciples, who "saw another casting out devils
in Thy name, and forbade him because he
followed not with u.s." is still dominant In
the church and always will be. It is USE
less to hope that this greatest Of all fields
Of Christian endeavor' will attract any
considerable attention from what we know
as "Christian workers" or from distinct
lively Christian influences. The attempt to
apply what you term "the Christian phil
osophy" to the performance Of the duty Of
citizens is more likely to be regarded with
suspicion than approval by the church.
You have, therefore, opposed your idea Of
developing q better, more self-reliant and
really self-governing cltizenship-hrst, all
party organizations, which depend for ex-
istence and success upon an entirely DIFF
ferent view Of the citizen; and secondly,
the church, which is naturally jealous Of
any work, professedly for human better
ment, which is not under her control.
These two opposing forces should be
enough to appall any man; but your case is
even worse. No considerable portion Of
the people themselves desire such citizen
ship as you would create, such self-gov-
ernment as you would develop, or any close
approximation TO it. / think, IL it could
have been set on foot in the years soon after
the close of the war, when the impulse Of
humanitarian zeal was still In its height, it
might have gained control of public senti-
ment and have changed the character of
our social and political development. Now,
it Is different nt-humanitarianism is dead In
the American heart, In the American
church, in American politics. 1t may re-
vive again, but not in our time. The few
who agree with you are not people who are
willing to work and fight and struggle for
their belief. Their support will be Ian
guild and an Indifferent one They will let
you work yourself to death rather than
risk anything in your aid. know them
well; they are good people, but not good
fighters, good supporters or good followers.
Why do write this9 Simply because
hate to see you waste your strength in
work, which, to my mind, is just as hope
less-to use pithy comparison Of your
own-ss "trying to batter down Gibraltar
with green peas" Why give yourself to
matter which, however well done, must be
of no avail9
feel it right to let you know how the
matter presents itself to one who, though
sincere friend and an admirer, is yet poll
tician who believes not in following the peo-
ple's whims, but in controlling and shaping
their incljnations, in order that we may
have a government really for the benefit
Of all.