The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1908-12-27
PASTOR CRIT!CISES
CHRISTMAS CHARITY
Gifts, Prompted by Selfish or
Mercenary Motives, Fail TO
Accomplish Purpose.

AndiyZiUE the psychology and cOnSe-
uUCuCtS Of gift giving AT Christmas. the
Rev John Van SChaick, pastor OF the
Church ot our Father criticised the
present observances IN his sermon this
morning, delivered on the text Of Good
Win ward Men," Luke, ill.,
lie scored the iI-gOtten wealth OF the
rich, and he deplored the thoughtless-
ness OF the cit. -Igers who are Satls-
fled TO practice charity once a year
TO question EIrJ-ElVluE seems an
uusraci1u5 thing began the pastor. 1T
has assumed enormous proportions, and
il represents much love md sacrifice. Il
uuguestiouably brings with 1t b, deal Of
happiness and good caecE.
MeTcenary Phases of Giving.
But 900 many give that they may re-
ceive. Too many others give that they
may pay back Some give simply that
they may hold mp their end, and be
thought well of by others.
Another criticism rs that making and
receiving Christmas presents Involves
too much strain and hurry and worry
and oyeUyCrk. II breaks down the
health Of the clerks IN the stores. It
destroys the peace of min" Of the house
keeper. Il takes from Christmas 'u,
spirit OF peace and good viii
IN these criticisms there IS mach
that is pertinent. There IS & criticism
noweVe~. much more fundamental Tt
asserts that re give that we may please
. ourSciV g. have warm, generous feel
ing iU our hearts, hear The grateful
: thanks of the humble. ana enjoy our
selves more in consequence.
In his new book, BY the Christmas
I Fire samuel McChord Crothers brings
[ 20 life the Old ScrooEe' Of Charles
Dickens. Scr0oEe complained that times
have change l. once man could I'm a
/ hack with turkeys and scatter them
right and left, have the time q his
: life, and yHcn sit down and cLUCkie over
/ his generosity until he cried. People
took all that was offered and asked no
/ questions. Nowadays says ScUOOge,
! the way Of the hsucfaCtOr is hard Il
is so difficult that we have schools Of
/ philanthropy. The public has grown
critical Instead Of dan ing for joy. 70
looks suspiclouSIv at the gifts and asks
| where did they get them?
Christmas Spirit Ccmmandable.
Tn so far as these criticisms attack
| the spirit OF the Christmas charity
which 1 know, I cannot ague with
them. The weakness in our bere-o,ence
! is that il is thOuzltless. II does not
! go far enough or deep enough. 10 is not
continued long enough. II is concerned
Cncc a year with the problems OF q
] class from whom we are separated by
/ 4 wide social gulf and whom we cali
| the poor
Enormous gifts for charity cannot
! atone for the decentralization Of q race.
/ II there were more OF Christian justice
1 there would be less need OF so much
! Christian charity
/ It have not done enough when I have
TclieN ed the want of my neighbOr. I
! must lift my neighbor until he becomes
my equal L have not done my duty
/ wien l have fed the hungry. I must
make the hungry able TO feed them
/ selves. It IS not idealistic. It is not
/ impossible.
| by the power of friendship, sym
pathy, interest. kindness and help in a
thousand nameless ways transform the
unit, the sick, the shiftesS, the evil
/ into the rich. the beautiful. the good,
and the useful Of the world
! There are those who still call modern
I charity cold and hCartless- It is cold
| and heartIess only in the sense IT, which
| the surgeon is heartess who sheds no
( tears but goes at his work with pre-
/ cisiOn and accuracy