The Washington herald., 1911-01-28
THE TREND OF THINGS
l.. Federation a Utopian Dream:

Ii Federation q UtOpian Dream:
No word that was uttered. in the pub
lie session of the Federal Council of
Churches of Christ last Tuesday evening
was more deeply significant of the real
question as to the feasibility of the church
unity movement than that spoken by Rev.
DR.. Charles L. Thompson, of New York
City. Federation from the top down
without federation from the bottom up
declared he, lis nothing less than Utop-
ian dream
There is little question about the senti-
ment Of church unity. Everybody wants
it. Apparently every denomination seems
to be clamoring for it The crucial test is.
Can this ideal programme be actualized
in the life of the churches of country,
town. and Slater
This is what the home missionary secre-
, tary meant when he said that without
federation outside the rooms of the board
of strategy in New York and Philadel-
phia-without downright effort and a get
together spirit in every hamlet city, and
Statethere can be no actual federation.
And SO the dominant note that came
from the meeting of the executive COM
mittee Of the Federal Council seemed to
be. We must get every States, and every
county. and every great city definitely
and urgently back of the federation idea
Christianity's problem is the city problem
There can be no unity and no comfy in
meeting the enormous task imposed upon
the modern church unless every church
denomination is a cooperative unit in the
federation program.
A strong resolution was adopted by the
Federal Council and the Home Missions
Council in joint session this week in
Washington concerning certain land grant
bills now before Congress. Protestant and
Catholic church circles have been stirred
by these land grant bills just now before
Congress. some of which bills are said
by church leaders not to represent the de-
sires of churches. but to have been put up
to the government either to pay political
debts, or to court political strength for
reelection. Regarding one of them the
Federal Council and the Home Missions
Council took pronounced action. The
councils named represent. respectively. all
principal Protestant bodies. having COM
bined memberships Of 100000 and the
home mission societies of almost all of
them. Individual statements are also re-
ported from Catholic archbishops.
Early in this session of Congress. Dele
gate Andrews, Of New Mexico, introduced
a bill granting 100000 acres of nonmineral
lands in New Mexico to the Roman Cath
Ole Church to establish and maintain a
manual training school for the youth of
the new State The grant is said to re-
present a value of 100000. and few con-
ditions surround the grant The original
bill designated Archbishop Pitaval. of
Santa Fe, as the grantee, but a supple
mentary bill designated the Christian
Brothers of the st. Louis Province of
New Mexico. When seen concerning it
Archbishop Pitaval, Of Santa Fe, said his
church could make wise use of such
grant, but that until the bill was intro
duced he had known nothing of the
scheme
Few conditions are made in the grant
and it can be used. should the school be
established. to educate English. Indian.
or Mexican youth, or to educate none of
them. according to the wisdom of the
Christian Brothers These brothers are
educators in the Catholic Church. among
many others. American in origin. and
have excellent schools in number of
Catholic dioceses. So far as learned, no
objection to them, such, has been
made by Protestants. their ability and
standing being recognized by all educa-
tors
It Is stated that two other bills are be-
SUUSISSS UOt Uuuke mat OF Dele-
gate Andrews. save that they directly or
indirectly benefit Protestant plans. The
action just taken by the councils, backed
by many ministerial organizations in the
Southwest looks to concerted opposition
to the passage of all Of these bills, both
such a. favor Catholics and such as
favor Protestants- The councils unani- |
mously declare the principle that reli-
gious plans are best promoted through vol |
untary aid. and they oppose with equal !
earnestness and favors or free gifts to |
Catholics or Protestants. |
Catholic leaders. seen concerning these |
projects. take stand almost exactly like |
the councils. Some of them say they
favor strongly the principle Of Catholic |
education, as they have always done. but |
they resent the use of their church and |
its interests by politicians who seek by |
such meaps to further their ambitions |