Our New Departure (Brooks)/Chapter 17
In organization, the Universalist Church is happily one as never before—and as those of little faith, amidst our numerous and seemingly fruitless experiments, were accustomed to insist that we never could be.[1] We are at length unified in our General Convention, in a sense of common interests, in devotion to a common cause. Perhaps in nothing was our Centenary Year of greater advantage to us than in helping to nurture and consummate this feeling of Unity, and in thus consolidating us into One National Church. It did this in various ways, and in none, probably, more effectually than through the effort it incited to create the Murray Fund. We needed the money thus realized, and it will prove of immense use to us; but far beyond its value as so many thousand dollars, was the gain it brought us as, East, Midst, West, we together put ourselves to the task of building this Central Memorial Fund. It mattered little in this particular that some of the States did not come up to their quotas, and that, for this reason, the sum proposed was not fully realized. The moral effect was realized hardly less; and the talk about the Fund, the effort to raise it, and the fact that so much was done towards raising it, did more to pervade us with the sense of oneness we so much needed, and to knit us into a practical and heartily co-operative unity, than folios of resolutions, or months of mere preaching or argument, could have done: and as the Convention, to the full extent of its ability, has set itself to work in the employment of the means thus furnished—thinking nothing of locality, thinking only how best to serve our one cause, this sense of unity has been still further promoted, as it will be yet more and more as the work goes on. In this respect, though doubtless there will be those, constitutionally sour, or crooked, or impracticable, who will snarlingly or factiously talk about 'ambition,' and 'centralization,' and 'the methods of the fathers,' the unity of our Church, extraordinaries excepted, will henceforth take care of itself. There is no occasion to speak here of its advantages, or to dwell on the importance of doing all we rightly can to foster and preserve it.
In another sense, however, this subject of Unity is one that is demanding our special attention, and concerning which we should at once resolve on a New Departure. As a people, we are in most respects pervaded by a kind and fraternal spirit—no people more; but in some other respects, this spirit is seriously lacking. We have too much clannishness, too much suspicion and jealousy, at our sectional centres; too much sensitiveness and covetous anxiety touching purely personal and local influence and ends. Boston looks askance at New York, and Augusta nervously watches Boston, and Cincinnati is ready to take up any adverse criticism against 'Cornhill' or 'the Leader office,' and Chicago and 'the West' do not feel altogether right towards 'the East,' and 'the East' is not wholly without corresponding feelings towards 'the West.' Supposed business interests are mainly at the bottom of this state of things, though to these is added a half-unconscious local or sectional bias, that would be ashamed openly to confess itself, even to itself, but that nevertheless exists, and practically asserts itself as an undesirable element in our affairs. What is the consequence? The rivalries and competitions thus engendered come to a head in feuds and bickerings and mutual fault-findings and accusations, that are not at all creditable to us, and that are productive of anything rather than the unity, and cordial good understanding, and hearty co-operation, which alike the dignity and the welfare of our Church require. This was illustrated, not long ago, by the remark at one of our centres, "As for me, my interests are all here, at :" a remark happily rebuked in the reply, "I am glad to say I do not limit the work of the Lord in the earth to ." Other examples, some of them more mortifying, might be mentioned. But I forbear.
Must this state of things continue? No lover of our Church can consider it without pain. The following extract from a letter, called forth by a specially mortifying illustration of this state of things, from a friend who has had long and favorable opportunity to become acquainted with and to study it in its various phases and operations, does but give voice to what is in many hearts concerning it: "This jealousy among brethren is the saddest thing I have ever known in our Church. If it were only a personal exhibition, it would deserve contempt; but its harmfulness to our cause fills me with sorrow. So out of sympathy am I with the entire spirit and tendency, that, if I were not sure that we stand for the eternal verities, and that, to make our Church worthy its high mission, we must stand inside and fight for it, I should be tempted to step quietly out from all this littleness that seems to have entered into us. Is it true that we who ought to be the noblest, most generous, most tolerant, large-hearted and Christ-like people in the world, are the most self-seeking and little-souled? . . . Can we do nothing about it?"
This letter was for my private eye; but I have felt justified in using this portion of it, because it means so much touching the matter under treatment, and because it indicates why I have deemed the subject important enough to call for a separate chapter. The letter, as I have since personally said to the writer, was somewhat too much an overflow of feeling, unduly disheartened by the mortifying exhibition which suggested it. The idea of 'stepping out' of our Church, quietly or otherwise, because anything in it fails to go just as we would have it, is one not to be for a moment entertained by any brave or loyal soul. It is a Providential Church, not only 'standing for the eternal verities,' but called of God to a great work; and, except upon contingencies altogether improbable, it is the duty of every Universalist to stand by it, seeking to correct whatever in it may need correction, and giving every possible contribution of brain and heart to make it the efficient instrument in the world's redemption God would have it. And as to our being more 'self-seeking' or 'little-souled' than our neighbors of other Churches, there is no reason for any such thought. Looking as sharply behind their scenes as we do behind our own, we should find that they—the best of them —have their jealousies, heart-burnings and bickerings quite as much as we,—some of them far more; and one has only to read their papers to be furnished with evidence of bad temper as flagrant, and of narrowness and littleness as marked, as any that ours have ever shown. This is nothing to our credit, it is true, and in no way lessens our fault, or our danger, on account of these things so far as they exist among us. But it admonishes us not to do ourselves injustice by thinking that we are worse than we are, and suggests that the wrong in question comes from what is common to all in the weakness of our human nature, and not from any littleness or perversity peculiar to us.
But though the letter is open to criticism and deduction on these two points, its main burden is none the less weighty. The personal aims and feeling of which it speaks are not a whit less serious or harmful than it avers. They are evil, and work only mischief, everywhere. Especially to our discredit, so far as they are suffered to have place among us, because so inconsistent with the spirit of our faith, they are inimical to every interest of our Church, as well as utterly at war with those relations which should be cultivated among brethren professing to love the same Lord, and to be devoted to the same great ends.
Jealousy and clannish feuds and selfish competitions, open or secret, are—does it need to be said?—necessarily elements of weakness always, as they are always signs of personal narrowness and littleness; and till they cease among us, and we come practically to that Unity which the cardinal principles of our faith demand, whatever else may be in our favor, we can never be the Church we should be ambitious to become, breathing all of us the inspiration of a common life, and marching to the music of one grand common purpose. A great common aim lifts all who really share it out of themselves and above any mercenariness of spirit, rendering them, in the enthusiasm that possesses them, incapable of feuds, or jealousies, or a mean regard to self, because blending them in the rhythm that makes all movement and feeling one. This is what we need, and is what we shall surely have, so far as the spirit of Christ as we interpret him takes possession of our hearts. And having it, how small and paltry will seem any thought of private, or personal, or local interests, such as now too much asserts itself, compared with the one great interest that rightfully claims to be supreme in our regards!
I deal with this subject in no fanciful or sentimental view of it. I overlook nothing that legitimately belongs to what is called the practical and business side of it. Some thoughtfulness of self, duly subordinated to what is paramount, we shall all agree, is not only allowable, but is a part of our duty; and Boston and Chicago and Augusta and Cincinnati and New York do well thus to think of themselves, and how they may each build up a business that shall benefit our cause and at the same time yield a fair return to their own pockets. But nobody has a patent on Universalism; nor is the Universalist Church, or any portion of it, a field to be reaped, or a flock of sheep to be sheared, for anybody's particular benefit. A great deal would be gained if this could be understood. The assumption of something quite different from this is the fallacy which underlies most of our feuds and bickerings, and so gives chief occasion for the lack of unity here under notice. It seems strangely to have been taken for granted that individuals or establishments have a right virtually to divide our Church-field into farms, of which special ownership, and within which special 'rights' to do business and to make money, may be claimed, and that, if the lines of one of these several farms or divisions are crossed, lo! just reason is given to the special occupant for whining, remonstrance and jealous complaint. But on what basis of fact or common sense does any such assumption rest? Or, who or what are Augusta and Boston and Cincinnati and Chicago and New York, or either of them, that they should thus claim ownership of me, or of the church of which I am pastor, or of any other minister, or believer, or church in our communion? "The field is the world;" and 'an open field and fair play' is the only motto for those who undertake to do business in the name of Universalism, as it is for those engaged in any other honorable calling. Obligations of courtesy and gentlemanly dealing, of course, there are; but all good books, whatever their imprint, have an equal right to find buyers, and the best book is entitled to command the market. For like reasons, all religious journals have an equal right to invite and win subscribers wherever they can; and the best deserves to have the largest subscription list, whatever the locality in which it is published.
The thing to be served is not anybody's private interest, but Universalism, held by us as the truth of God; and the chief ends to be accomplished are not the profits of any establishment, but the extension and upbuilding of the Universalist Church. To these everything else is secondary; and these have a right to insist on the unobstructed service of the best instruments in their behalf, come they whence, or be they in whose hands, they may. If anybody can serve these, and in so doing serve themselves, well; but no person or establishment is warranted in setting up a special claim to any particular portion of our field, demanding that others, whatever the merit of their wares, shall keep away from it, or in regarding anybody else as a trespasser, to be assailed with protests, or to be pelted with hard names, if, in an honorable way, he seeks to find patrons or customers in it. Could this but be once seen to be the true ground in respect to this subject, to be occupied in a common spirit of fraternal courtesy, the main cause of our jealousies and fretting discords would be gone. Everything for Universalism, and nothing for persons or places except as secondary to it, would be the cry of all our hearts; and with free scope for brotherly competition in the effort to produce what is worthiest, all legitimate personal or local interests would find themselves harmonized and best promoted in the mutual regard for our truth and our Church which would make us one.
It was the dream of Horace Greeley's life, to see all our papers and publishing interests consolidated into an establishment that should unite our whole people in loyalty to it, issuing a journal worthy of our Church, and sending out books, tracts and periodicals broadcast over the land. He had his impracticable side; but it is conceded that his judgment as to papers was worth something. Can we doubt, that could his dream be realized, it would do for us more than any other single agency could? But the time is not ripe for this. Even if those now controlling our several publishing interests should be moved to come into the proposition, the personal, local, clannish element is yet so strong with some among us, that new proposals for papers would doubtless very soon be issued from these same sections, enforced by glowing appeals to local prejudice and local pride, and by frightful pictures of the dangers of 'centralization,' and, probably, by eloquent pleas for 'individual enterprise'; and there would unquestionably be enough to respond as subscribers to put 'other Richmonds' into the field at once. So long as localism and a jealousy of 'centralization' at all survive among us, there will be those who will appeal to and seek to feed upon them. Such is human nature. And so long, it will be in vain—so far as any such result is immediately concerned—to set forth, no matter how clearly, the advantages of the consolidation which Mr. Greeley proposed, or to show how much better it is that the profits of our various publications should go into the treasury of our Church, for Church-extension and Church-work, than that they should go into the pockets of individuals, for their personal enrichment, whatever bonus they may be willing to pay for the sake of so enriching themselves. But truth and good sense will finally prevail. In this assurance, it is for those who believe in Mr. Greeley's general plan, to keep it in agitation, educating our people to see what would be gained by it, and so preparing for the time when our whole Church shall say, Enough of divided and personal publication interests. Let them coalesce, the possession of the Church, to help, by whatsoever they shall yield, to promote Church-ends. The amounts that some of our publishers are willing to pay for the sake of keeping the field only indicate the profits they make, and that might, on Mr. Greeley's plan, be realized for our Church-work.
In the mean time, let us resolve on the New Departure herein seen to be so demanded by every consideration touching our Church's welfare. The remedy for the state of things of which this chapter treats is in our hands. What a shame it is to us, and what evil is likely to come of it, are apparent. Let ministers and people, with one consent, unite to say, We will have no more of it, enforcing their command by means readily at hand, and which those mainly at fault will be sure to feel. If the people should resolve, and every sin against their resolve should be followed by a deluge of protests, ending with, Cease, or stop my paper! we may be sure their will would be speedily heeded. The word not only of the Apostle, but of the Master to us is, "Walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, with all lowliness and meekness, with long-suffering, forbearing one another in love." Be it ours, all of us, to obey this word, laying aside these sins which so easily beset us, forgetting self in devotion to our cause, and rising above all personal and local aims in the one purpose to love and serve our Church "in the unity of the spirit, in the bond of peace."
- ↑ I cannot forbear here to express regret, which must be shared by all who have most carefully studied the subject, at the disposition which has already showed itself in several localities to 'tinker' and modify the Plan of Organization adopted at Gloucester, before it has had an opportunity to prove itself. A 'uniform organization' was for years the desideratum demanded from all parts of our Zion, and by common consent it was agreed that the Gloucester Plan, the fruit of so much thought and labor, and adopted with such gratifying unanimity, had been fortunate in meeting this demand. It did not, perhaps, please any one in every minute particular. Certainly, nobody anticipated that it was perfect in all its details. But it was felt that its general principles were sound, and that, framed in the sincere effort, as far as possible, to meet and harmonize conflicting opinions, it was deserving a fair and thorough trial. It is to be lamented that this view seems not to have found universal acceptance. Some of the attempts to change the Plan, it is gratifying to know, have signally failed. But in other instances, local notions and individual theories have been permitted to mar the harmony of the system—fortunately, as yet, only in minor points, but enough to destroy the 'uniformity' so much desired, as soon as it seemed to be attained. It is safe to say that yet other uneasy theorists will propose their changes, anxious to mend what they would only help to spoil. Is it too much to suggest that all such further attempts for the present be quashed? Give the Plan time. Let experience demonstrate its imperfections. Then remedy them. Cannot the lesson be learned among us, that long-considered and laboriously-adjusted methods are not likely to be much improved by the hasty suggestions of a moment, or an hour, of debate; that no human instrument can be framed, in all points, to please every local preference, or individual fancy; and, above all, that, if we are to be a homogeneous Church, the wise way is for us to be content to accept what the general voice of our body approves? We can never be anything but a clumsy piece of patch-work, if we cannot learn this lesson.