The Manchester journal. [volume] (Manchester, Vt.) 1861-current, 1917-10-04

which are perneated more or Tess Dy
these principles win not forever toler-
ate injustice and wrong, but will at
last fight TO destroy them,
The sword Of Jesus is the sword Of
one whose entire view Of life rests on
the supremacy Of love. II is the sym
Dol Of a conflict, whether in the indi-
vidual or in society, whose sole end is
the establishment Of the Kingdom Of
God, the symbol Of a conflict whose in
spiration is not from beneath but from
above.
Therefore the sword of Jesus Is as
different as possible from the sword of
man or state that goes forth to get
revenge for some real or fancied
wrong; as different as possible from
the sword of state that goes out TO
rob its neighbor Of goods or lands,
though it do this ostentatiously in the
name Of the Lord; it is as different as
possible from the sword of a state
that says, II am to be safe myself,
| must show my neighbors that ! am
stronger and more terrible in battle
than they; and it is as different as
possible from the sword of a state
whose leaders believe that the divine
method of progress for the race is just
the method Of the jungle--the method
Of brute force.
These swords are swords Of hate
and selfshness and atheism; and they
must be broken, if not by reason, then
by force.
II, therefore, we think of the sword
of Jesus, as the symbol of the ire
pressible conflict between the prin-
ciples of his gospel and the selfshness,
the lust and the cruelty of which the
heart of man is capable, we can not
deny that this sword was drawn in
August 1914 in the conflict of the
nations.
But this is not at all the same as
saying that the guilt of causing the
war belongs wholly to one nation or
group of nations, nor is it the same as
saying that the spirit of the war on
one side has been wholly bad and on
the other side wholly right.
Enlightened reason will not make
either of these assertions. The best
men and women in all the Christian
belligerent nations are essentially
one in character; the worst men and
women in these same nations are also
essentially alike, and the masses Of
people on one side are not higher in
character than the masses on the
other side. So much should be gladly |
granted But the spirit of the govern
ments on one side is different from
the spirit of the governments on the
other side, and the freedom of the in
dividual on on side is different from
the freedom of the individual on the
other side. Yes, and the traditions of
one side for the past century are
through and through warlike tradi-
tons, while the traditions of the other
side during that period have been in
creasingly frightened by the sincere
cultivation of peace.
Because Of these subtle and power
full differences in the spirit Of the gov
ernments, in the freedom of the indi-
vidua, and in national traditions
war has come about of which we are
compelled to say no less than this,
that the sword of one side is the sword
of the natural man and the sword Of
the other side is the sword of the
spiritual man; that the sword of one
side, if successful, will cripple the
work Of the gospel, while the sword of
the other side, if successful, will pro-
mote the triumph Of the gospel; that,
in short, speaking broadly, the sword
OF one side is the sword of Mars and
the sword Of the other side is the
sword of Jesus.
This assertion is supported by the
aecumulating facts of the past three
years.
1t was not the sword of Jesus that
was unsheathed against Serbia when
Serbia sought TO have her quarrel
po4.lad Lx. nrh;tratto,
1t was not the sword Of Jesus that !
was unSheathed against Belgium and
that slaughtered her unoffending
people.
II was not the sword Of Jesus that /,
wasted the fields and cities of northern ,
France with savage ferocity.
Ii was not the sword Of Jesus that
the countless throngs Of
Armenian women and children with
sufferings until death re- !.
cascd them.
II was not the sword Of Jesus that :
rom the dark caverns Of the ocean
'mote the ships that bore wounded
soldiers 10 their homes or carried