40

American periodicals and had also at one time been editor-in-chief of "The Academy" and "Pall Mall Budget." He was a friend of Hardy, Meredith, and Kipling, and other noted writers, and of Sargent, Leighton, and others prominent in art circles. Naturally, he had many interesting reminiscences of these friends. His sense of the picturesque and humorous enabled him to use them to his readers' enjoyment in his articles and books. His latest book of memoirs had the singular title of "Naphtali"-from the Scriptural phrase "Naphtali, a hind let loose." Among his other books are "The Diary of a Looker-On" and "Things Seen in America."

The Master Mind of

Prohibition

W

AYNE B. WHEELER, who died last week in his fiftyeighth year, had probably as great an influence on legislation and on he current of American life as any other private citizen of this generation.

He devoted his life to furthering the program of the Anti-Saloon League, but he avoided the narrowness and the bigotry that are too likely to attach to the man who devotes himself to a single cause, particularly to a cause of reform. He educated himself in the law in order that he might be able to handle the legal business of the League; but in the handling of that business he showed an ability in legal analysis which, if he had devoted his energies to general practice, probably would have placed him in the front rank of American lawyers.

Born in Brookfield, Ohio, educated at Oberlin and at Western Reserve University, he began at college his lifelong fight against the liquor traffic. He had much to do with temperance legislation in many States and with prosecuting saloon cases. His chief work was done as counsel and Legislative Superintendent of the Anti-Saloon League of America.

He organized and directed one of the most efficient political machines that this country has known, but his mind was never closed to the counsel and the claims of others.

He died comparatively young, but he lived to see the cause to which he had given his life triumphant, the program to which he had devoted himself carried out.

He shares the credit for this achievement with no other man. He had, in the real sense, no predecessor. He probably will have, in the real sense, no successor-and this not merely because of the difficulty of finding another man of

his type, but also because of the fact that the work which he did, being done, will not require to be done again.

He has been criticised because he used the Anti-Saloon League less effectively in prohibition enforcement than he had used it in prohibition procurement, but

Wayne B. Wheeler 1869-1927

this probably does not show a failure of Wheeler so much as it shows that the work of the Anti-Saloon League may have been completed with the adoption of prohibition.

Christianity on Trial

N

OT the Church, not the ecclesiastics, not the creeds, not the rituals, but Christianity itself, the religion of Jesus, is to-day in all parts of the world on trial. Will the faith that Jesus had, will the life, inspired by that faith, that he led, will the force that he let loose in the world, actually and practically work?

At Lausanne, in Switzerland, there has been held a great Conference representing churches of nearly a hundred varieties and nations numbering twoscore and a half. Some idea of what they have been discussing may be derived from the reading in this issue of our editorial correspondent's report entitled "A Bridge Between Authority and Freedom?". From that report and other reports it would seem that among these numerous church organizations scattered through many lands there is perhaps a more general agreement concerning what they believe about this religion and about the way those who profess it should be organized than had been commonly supposed. If it were the Church that were on trial in the tribunal

The Outlook for

of the world's opinion, this Conference might be a notable contribution to the defense of the Church as it is or as it may become. But it is not the Church as such that is chiefly on trial to-day. Indifference to the Church rather than hostility to it, or even criticism of it, seems to have become or to be becoming a characteristic of this age. If that is so, it is because the churches have seemed to be thinking and talking much about creeds and rituals and forms of organization. It is not that they have disagreed and sometimes come into harsh conflict over questions of creeds and rituals and forms of organization that has been the cause of alienating untold thousands from the churches so much as that they have seemed to put such matters as creed and ritual and forms of organization in place of religion itself. If anything could more surely alienate the multitude from the churches than disagreement among the churches on these matters, it would be their agreement about them. Indeed, a great mass of people are not aware of the disagreements that seem so important to ecclesiastics and theologians. The deepest questions of religion do not touch these matters primarily at all. On another page of this issue a mother puts the sort of question that the Church cannot answer in terms of creed or ritual or organization. To countless numbers it seems as if the Church were offering them a stone when they ask for bread. It does not matter to them that the churches should all agree upon the kind of stone to be offered.

A mother asks, "What shall I teach my children?"

It does not help that mother to have the Church answer, "The Episcopal, Presbyterial, and Congregational systems have an appropriate place in the life of the reunited Church."

A young student asks, "What can I reply to a science that seems to tell me that I am but a machine reacting to stimuli as automatically as a locomotive to the hand of the engineman?"

It does not help that student to have the Church tell him, "We agree in the belief that in the Holy Communion our Lord is present."

A business man asks, "What chance is there in the keen and sometimes unscrupulous competition of business for me to apply the principles laid down in the Golden Rule and the Sermon on the Mount?"

It does not help such a business man for the Church to tell him, "The Church in its varied forms accepts both the Apostles' and the Nicene Creeds."

A statesman asks, "How can the gov

It does not help that wage-earner for the Church to tell him, "We are a unit in advocating the perpetual obligation of baptism and the Lord's Supper."

Two weeks ago Irving T. Bush in The Outlook told of being in Constantinople when it was occupied by the Allied forces, and of being told that there had been opened there by Christians five thousand saloons and European harlots walked the streets to satisfy the troops of the Christian Powers. What has the Church to say to that? No amount of agreement on matters of creed or ritual or church organization will help to solve that problem.

What has the Church to say to China? For many years Christian missionaries have been in that vast country. It is true that they have disagreed about matters of faith, of creed, and organization; but would they have really impressed China more with the religion of Jesus if they had agreed?

Meantime there are other claimants for the place of Christianity. To many the chief claimant seems to be science, with its intrepid and relentless and utterly honest search for truth. To many the chief claimant seems to be psychology, that delves into the inner recesses of the mind of man and offers explanations for all his motives and his conduct. To many the chief claimant seems actually to be sport, with its frank and open code of conduct in struggle. To those who have transferred their allegiance from Christianity as they have heard it preached to one or another of such claims what does argument about Nicæa or the seven sacraments mean? Wherever the Church has prevailed it has not been because it has agreed upon doctrine or any such thing, but because its representatives have embodied in their lives and have helped to embody in the lives

about them the spirit of him who "came not to be ministered unto, but to minister and to give his life a ransom for many;" who, when John the Baptist sent to inquire whether he was "he that should come," told the messengers to go and tell John what they had seen and

Keystone

Lord Robert Cecil, defender of disarmament

heard; who made the test of success what one does to even the least of those whom he counted brothers.

The Church is strong to-day throughout the world because, in spite of its division, in spite of its emphasis on the theoretical and the external, it has been rich in those whom its Master has called great. ERNEST HAMLIN ABBOTT.

Cecil's Rebellion

A

FTER five years of compromising his own ideals for the sake of his party, Viscount Cecil of Chelwood has rebelled.

"I consider," he has told the Prime Minister, Stanley Baldwin, "that I shall be able to do better work outside the Cabinet than in."

Though he has disagreed violently with his Government, for five years he has played their game. In three important international conferences he has carried between Downing Street and Geneva instructions with which he was entirely out of sympathy. At the Opium entirely out of sympathy. At the Opium Conference he successfully carried out Downing Street's orders to block the abolition of Indian opium production. Although chief delegate to the Preparatory Commission on Disarmament, he was forced by the Cabinet to oppose most of the peace proposals he had worked for. Finally, at Geneva, where the British brought forward the gigantic

41

cruiser program which was the antithesis of his ideas on disarmament, Cecil, to the amazement of American delegates who had talked with him, still followed instructions.

"An agreement might have been reached on terms which would have sacrificed no British interests," Cecil now says; but, instead, the British delegates, after consultation with the Cabinet at London, stood pat. Three days after the break-up of the Naval Conference Cecil tendered his resignation.

In view of his own history and that of his illustrious father, uncle, and brother, his course is not surprising. The Cecils are chiefly distinguished for their power of acid analysis of other people's enthusiasm. Each of them, after succeeding brilliantly at politics, has taken refuge in something more soothing to an analytical mind-the Marquis of Salisbury, Lord Cecil's father, in chemical science; the Earl of Balfour, Lord Cecil's uncle, in metaphysics; Lord Hugh, Lord Robert's brother, in the Church,

Lord Robert Cecil did not find his anchorage until seven years ago. Admitted to the bar, he entered politics actively in 1906 as a member of Parliament for East Marylebone. He was not considered practical. He championed woman's suffrage, but opposed the eighthour day, old-age pensions, and the taxation of unearned incomes. In the war he was in turn Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs and Minister of Blockade. Finding himself more and more out of sympathy with Lloyd George, he rebelled, as he has done now, and crossed over to the Opposition line. It was about that time that he found his anchorage in the ideals that cluster about the League of Nations.

Together with Colonel House and General Jan Smuts, Cecil assisted Woodrow Wilson in drafting the Covenant of the League. At first the foundling child of Europe, the League grew stronger, and Europe began to be proud of it. The Conservative Government of Great Britain, waking up to the importance of having an able representative at Geneva, made overtures to Lord Robert and won his consent to become Lord Privy Seal, with the unders' anding that he would devote all his time to the League. His activities won him the Woodrow Wilson Peace Prize. After the interval of the Labor Government, Viscount Cecil, just returning from the United States, where he had a tremendous following, was sent to the Opium Conference. There he compromised his ideals, as he did later in the sessions of the Disarmament Commission and

42

finally at the Geneva Naval Conference. There are times when a man may honestly be a spokesman for others. But he can be so honestly and effectively only when he is so openly.

It was supposed that at these three conferences Cecil was speaking his own mind. If he had not been supposed thus to speak, he would never have been sent;

W

HAT is it that has given New England such an influence on the rest of the country? Here are five States without mines, without great farms, without wealth-producing natural resources-unless an unsurpassed seacoast indented with safe and beautiful harbors is a resource and yet New England has contributed more men, energy, intellect, and capital to the upbuilding of the Nation than any other section of equal area.

To answer satisfactorily the question which this phenomenon raises would require a long historical, psychological, and ethnological treatise. But now and then some modest family record or some forgotten personal narrative affords a little light even to the casual inquirer.

The other day, for instance, while rummaging some out-of-the-way bookshelves, I found a memoir of a New Englander whom I knew when he was a grandfather and I was a schoolboy fifty years ago. Reading it revived some old memories of the most gifted and original teacher I ever knew, with whom I took, as a boy of ten, my first tottering steps in Latin, French, history, and mathematics steps which, through no fault of his, never got much beyond the tottering stage, I am afraid.

for his known views and the following which they had brought him supplied him with a strength which as mere spokesman he would not have had. If he had chosen to resign rather than say what he did not mean he might have made his convictions felt at home and abroad; but now his resignation is but an empty protest.

This "Memorial Sketch," as it is modestly called, not only awakened my own recollections of a remarkable teacher, but brought vividly before my mind some of those qualities which have given New England her leadership. I wonder if in the limited space at my command I can make any kind of a pen sketch of this New England grandfather-not only the grandsire of his own kin but like one to the children of the village.

He came of English stock, probably Yorkshire stock, and his earliest American ancestor, a Puritan immigrant, landed in Massachusetts and settled in Andover in 1643. Thence his progenitors migrated and pioneered through New Hampshire into Maine, where he was born in 1803, when Maine was still a province or district of Massachusetts. for that large and beautiful territory did

not become a State until 1820. It was in this year that the subject of this sketch was graduated from college, for his forebears, while pioneers, merchants, and traders, were always deeply interested in college. To have taken the college degree of A.B. at seventeen might seem to have indicated precocity. It did not. It simply indicated that college requirements were not as complicated then as they are to-day.

Nor were professional salaries a topic of as anxious discussion as they are in 1927. For, after having studied divinity at Andover, this future New England grandfather was, at twenty-five years of age, appointed Professor of Mathematics and Natural Philosophy in a newly established New England college, his salary being eight hundred dollars, "one hundred dollars of which," the trustees stipulated, "are, however, to be appropriated by him annually, with the advice of the other members of the faculty, towards making repairs and additions to the philosophical apparatus.”

The munificence of this salary encouraged the young professor to marry. His bride, the granddaughter of a prosperous London merchant, apparently did not think her lot an unhappy one even in a remote New England village, for in one of her letters to a former school friend this cheerful note is sounded: "What a world this is, after all, and how many treasures we find even in its recesses!"

But the call, not of the wild, but of the child, which foreshadowed his later career as a remarkable grandfather, was too strong for the young professor. He left his village college to become the head of a newly organized school for girls, which he made famous throughout New England by the introduction of principles and methods at that time quite new in Puritan society. Some idea of his original views of pedagogical government is obtained from an extract from one of his earliest announcements to his new pupils:

You will, perhaps, ask . . . what are the punishments which are resorted to in the School? The answer

The Outlook for is, there are no punishments. I do not say that I should not, in case all other means should fail, resort to the most ecided measures to secure obedience and subordination. ... But as to the consequences which may result to you if you should persist in what is wrong, it is not necessary that you should know them beforehand. They who wander from duty always plunge themselves into troubles they do not anticipate; and if you do what, at the time you are doing it, you know to be wrong, it will not be unjust that you should suffer the consequences, even if they were not beforehand understood and expected. This will be the case with you all through life, and it will be the case here.

This philosophy of reasonableness, equanimity, and justice he followed all through his life. When I first came in contact with him in his grandfatherly days, the children of his sons and of his village neighbors gathered about him in the old New England homestead to which he had returned, as naturally as particles of metal gather about a magnet. For he understood children, sym-" pathized with them, and knew how to discipline them without being a disciplinarian,

For a New England Puritan he had singularly broad views and an interest in international affairs not common even in the Boston of his day. As a young college professor his interest in the struggle of the modern Greeks for independence led him to take under his special protection two refugees from Greece who had come to this country seeking an education "one a young married man, and the other a little girl of ten years, Sappho by name."

In the intervals of his teaching and writing (the memoir contains a biblioggraphy of 180 volumes from his pen, chiefly for young people, which were published between 1830 and 1873) this quiet but busy New Englander found time to visit Europe seven or eight times, on one occasion living several months in Paris. On his first visit to London, in 1843, he wrote home as fol-. lows, so the memoir says:

The Bishop of Norwich... gave me an order of admission to the House of Lords, where I attended last evening, and was very much interested in witnessing the proceedings. I saw the Duke of Wellington, Lord Lyndhurst, Lord Brougham, and other distinguished men. Afterwards, at nine o'clock, I attended a soirée, as they call it, at the Bishop of Norwich's, where I was entertained in very handsome style, and was introduced to many gentlemen, titled and untitled The evening before I dined

44

different ideas and some wearily wide spaces.

What has been necessary, just the same, has now taken place-namely, new proclamations of what is common in the various creeds, whether it leads or not to greater uniformity in form and ceremonials, so long as it emphasizes a new consciousness of religion as an impulse and standard of life.

IN

N the present Conference the participating churches are in no way bound by any opinions expressed by their delegates or by any conclusions reached by the Assembly.

The Church's Message to the World,

The Nature of the Church,

The Church's Common Confession of Faith,

The Church's Ministry,

The Sacraments,

The Unity of Christendom.

The reports made by these sections are subject to review by a committee consisting of four Americans, with whom I have also talked (Bishop Brent; the Methodist Bishop Cannon; Dr. William Adams Brown, of Union Seminary; and Dr. Ross Stevenson, President of Princeton Seminary); of five Britishers (three Anglican bishops, the Congregationalist Principal Garvie, and the Methodist Dr. William Lofthouse); Dr. Merle d'Aubigné, of Paris; Professor Adolf Deissmann, of the University of Berlin; Archbishop Söderblom, Chief of the Swedish Lutherans; and the Metropolitan Germanos, of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

In the discussions six main subjects ther rampant individualism," said he, have been before it:

"nor negative sectarianism can forever set aside the corrective witness of the Church Universal." Yet, he almost shouted, "The test of the true Church is not conformity to type, but effectiveness in fulfilling the will of her Lord, and therefore that organization need not be of a single type."

Dr. Adams Brown, conducting the discussion, proclaimed at its close:

"The Church's Message to the World" is, of course, the Gospel, the source of the energy necessary to transform society. The Church comprehends our generation's thirst for intellectual sincerity, social justice, spiritual aspirations. But let us not forget, as the Methodist Bishop McConnell, in his superb address on the subject, reminded

us:

It may be well for the ardent Protestant in particular to ask himself if the task of Christianity is now conceived in as wide terms as before the Reformation. Protestantism has not yet supplied effective substitutes for some agencies it cast aside. In those Middle Ages, which we now see were not dark ages by any means, the Church brought all human group relations under its sway. The Church intervened between warring nations and quarreling nobles, between feudal lords and serfs. between employers and employed, between wrangling individuals. That the Church was her

Protestantism was a justified revolt against an ecclesiasticism which tried to redeem men by fiat. . . . When Protestantism, however, laid stress exclusively on justification by faith, it opened the door to an extreme individualism which slighted the group contacts.

On "The Nature of the Church" Dr. Cadman's was a notable address. "Nei

sess. But, as the Anglican Bishop Go reminded his hearers, reunion in an large sense would mean, when it cam the bringing together of the Roma Catholic and Protestant Churches, bot of whom have always accepted bot. creeds. Yet, after their long centuries o alienation, a large patience on each sid may be necessary.

As to the Church's ministry, existin forms differ, both regarding the func tions assigned to the holders of the min isterial office and the mode in which the commission is conferred. Archbishop Söderblom, of Upsala, had a good wor of advice regarding this, taken from the practice of the Swedish Church. Wha the priests and ministers are to a church so are the judges to a court. In 1907 a the Hague Conference, on the erection of a new Permanent Court of Interna tional Justice, the Powers came to ar agreement on every point save one-the election of the judges. So it may be that Christian reunion will be established in every other respect before it is established in this respect.

On the sacraments the Orientals stood out strongly to-day for the mysticism surrounding their seven forms. Though important problems arose in connection with other rites to which the name of sacrament is put, it was thought wise not to spend the Conference's strength on these things, but on the perpetual obligation of the administration of the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper.

THE unity sought at Lausanne is not

uniformity; indeed, diversity sould be safeguarded. Yet the question arises whether, justified by historical circumstances, all the manifestations of the special aspects of Christian truth or practice, having rendered immense service to the Universal Church, can so easily in the future remain in the unity of the One Church. This problem, leading up to that of a central authority for Christendom, was not included in the Lausanne agenda.

Like its predecessors, so the present Conference shows that the problem of Christian reunion must needs be approached from different angles.

Fundamentally, as the title of the Lausanne Conference indicates, Christian reunion is a question of Faith and Order, but practically and for a very long time to come, the main accent on Christian reunion must be laid on the application of Christian principles in all the ramifications of individual and social life. We must have force in conduct. Lausanne, August 18, 1927.