The gold leaf., 1901-07-18


complement in the accompanying
assertion Of the pulpit's imbecility y;
the whole monstrous accusation
swallows itself, tail, body and head,
including brain.
AS if bent on double self-anhilla-
ton, the paragraph rests in a sur
rounding atmosphere in which it
must inevitably die. This l shall
clearly show. My assertion is that
the paragraph misrepresents its
writer to such an extent as to make
him profess to believe thing which
he cannot believe if he believe other
things which he says in the same
article just before and just after this
paragraph.
The charge is that the preachers
are responsible for the nations loss
| of the force and character of the
South. But the body of the article
was written for the express purpose
of claiming and showing that this
loss is now in process of rapid re-
covery under the operation of 1.-TWO
new forces at work. The one is the
disfranchisement of negroes and the
other is industrial prosperity. ''But
now," says the auther, ''thers are
two new forces at work. The mass
of negroes have been disfranchised in
many Of the States, and soon will be
in more, and the full tide of industrial
prosperity is now having effect. -
The writer then goes on to show that
the industrial prosperity is pro-
NOTED by 1.-the gold rtandard," "by
expansion" by 'shipping subsidies;"
| and discusses Senator McLaurin and
President Mckinley These 1.-TWO
new forces thus fostered, and the
fostering agencies becoming more
generally accepted at the South, the
''loss to the nation" will be proper
tionally changed to gain.
Now it is no part of my object to
discuss these secular political views.
In forcing the argument, it is not
necessary for me to accept them or
reject them. The only nail care to
lay the hammer upon and drive to
the head is that these two new
forces with their fostering agencies
are described as restoring to the
| South her 'sold-time force and char
acter" as a factor in the nation. The
lack of these very things, therefore,
must be what the author holds to have
been the fatal lack. This is his real
opinion, as his whole article shows.
"Theology" is not even under discus
sion. Not one specification is laid
under the charge of the subversion
of intellectual independence by out
worn creeds. Not one doctrine Of
religion is discussed, or could have
been discussed, with any degree of
The whole trend of the article is
secular. The whole reference to
s'preachers'' in irrelevant. The whole
dogmatic accusation is not only not
sustained by even an attempt at
specification or proof but is destroyed
by the writer's own explicit views
enunciatcd and elaborated in the same
article. If 1.-The politicians and the
preachers have ruined the South,
and 1.-TWO new forces" are now saving
it, surely one Of them would need to
be theological. But the writer does
not attempt to show that either of
the ''new forces so adequate to save
us has one thing to do with .screeds. >
Theology today is just as it has been.
1t cannot be that ''preachers" and
"out-worn opinions and creeds" and
"most stagnant waters Of theology
have been a prime factor in debili-
tating and running the South if .stwo
new forces" both secular, can re-
4 4 L. -.
ed by the writer who pays no atten-
ton to things of religion beyond de-
nouncing them. Is this reason? Is
this "breadth and tolerance?'
/. | now come to part of this
wanton invective which | would pre-
fer not to touch. The reading of it is
sorrow, the mere quotation Of it is
burning shame. Here tits: doctor:
of divinity who herd good women by
the most stagnant waters of theology
Now this writer is not ignorant OF
words. He selects his synonym tc
carry its shade of meaning. Hi.
metaphor is forcefully. coarsely, re
pulsively expressive. 1t cannot fai
to draw it's picture upon the mind
dead, ''stagnant waters" upon the
brink, the creatures of the ''herd.
cattle, sluggish, stupid, dumb, driven
and over these, whip in hand tc
suppress independence, those ''whc
herd" These putrid waters are the
.'theology," the views OF God and o.
Gods word, taught in the pulpits oi
the South. These ignorant and tyran-
nical herdsmen are the criminal
"preachers" of the South. But my
pen positively refuses to write down
who the cattle are. For this | refer
the reader to the metaphor.
This answers "good women" These
submit to the suppression OF 'intel
lectual independence" and are pas
sively chargeable for the woes Of the
South as are the ''preachers" who
herd" them. Drovers and cattle
are linked together in common stupid.
ity and responsibility.
Intellectual independence is a noble
attribute. The women of the South
possess it in all its glory. Theil
thought has never been suppressed
Tie have been the companions and
counsellors of their husbands in high
est positions, both in Church and in
State. Their minds, .'since the war,
have enriched the nations literature
and largely educated the nations
children. But it is not their intel
lectuality which endows them with
s.old-time Southern force and char
acter since the war;" Woman's source
of power in this land is that very
thing which the editor of the World s
Work seems 80 lightly to estsem. Her
holy religion is the deepest thing in
her heart, the fairest and most potent
in her life. The man proud OF his
intellectually may be, after all, only
the .'wisest, brightest, meanest o.
mankind" leaving the world to turn
from "the spectacle of SO much glory
and so much shame" Bat the lullaby
of the modest "hand-maid of thu