Let us hope that the Church in Canada will keep sacred the memory of these harvesters of the first hour. The Catholics owe them a debt of gratitude. We sincerely hope that the history of their heroic efforts will not be lost and that the first to appreciate them will be the coming Ruthenian generation. Father Delaere, C.SS.R.—who has laboured among the Ruthenians in Western Canada for the last twenty years will one day give us, we sincerely hope, the history of the settlement and struggles of his adopted people.

Little by little the Ruthenian Church in Canada is emerging from its first chaotic state. The visit of Mgr. Septeski to Canada, the appointment of the Very Reverend N. Budka as Bishop of all the Ruthenians in Canada, marked a turning-point in their history. Authority is, in the Church of God, the only great vital centre from which proceed true order and permanent development. The war, it is true, complicated the Ruthenian issue. We all know what difficulties the Ruthenian Bishop had to face during this trying period, under what dark clouds of ungrounded suspicion he lived. But the most painful feature of this long and cruel ordeal was the absence of sympathy and the lack of co-operation in those from whom, as a Catholic Bishop, he had a right to expect them.

The Period of Assimilation

The period of settlement has passed, and already a young "CANADIAN" generation has sprung up sturdy, thrifty, progressive from the transplanted Ruthenian stock. The numerous children of that prolific race are gradually passing from the home into the schools and from the schools into the community life of the country. This Slavic race is striking deep roots in Canadian soil, particularly in our Western Provinces. The loss of faith has been heavy, we believe, especially in our large cities. Naturally, allowance must be made for the drift-wood which always follows the tide of immigration. In our rural centres, be it said to the praise of that simple-minded people, and to the confusion of the enemies of their faith, the great majority have kept their allegiance to the Church of their baptism. But, where the "bogus mass," the false priests and "Moscovite money" have failed, the neutralizing process of a so-called "Canadianization" may succeed. The flank envelopment has often a greater success than the frontal attack. This leads us to dwell on another phase of the Ruthenian problem.

In the history of the human race there is nothing more complicated than ethnic assimilation. It is a slow, delicate and, in many cases, very dangerous process. In the laboratory of the world many explosions are due to the ignorance of what we would call "human chemistry." "One cannot play with human chemicals any more than with real ones. We know by experience that at times they are fulginous and ready to break into open flames." But there are two elements which have to be treated with the greatest care: Religion and Race. They are the two foci of the ellipse in which moves history; the two shores between which oscillates the tossing tide of humanity. Lord Morley calls them "the two incendiary forces of history, ever shooting jets of flame from undying embers." This explains why the soil of history is so volcanic, so filled with burning lava which time itself has not cooled.

The racial element in ethnical assimilation is gradually modified by the imperative adjustment of the immigrant to his new conditions of life. For the observer and student of history there is nothing more instructive and, at times, more pathetic than that borderland which lies between what has been and what is to be in the life of the immigrant. This violent breaking away from the past and gradual assimilation with the present has its dangers. Unknown and occult factors are at work with the blood of several generations, pulsating in the veins of the new Canadian. Whilst beckoning hands stretch out to receive him on our shores and initiate him into our national life, other hands, the hands of the dead, stretch out through several generations to lay claim on him. Like everything in nature this change or rather this transformation should be imperceptible. Mutual toleration is the factor of a healthy assimilation. This has given to the United States a greater solvent power than has been shown by any other nation, ancient or modern. Coercive assimilation arouses national feelings, alien elements, and racial self-assertion. The worst enemy of Canada is the political power which, to please a blatant, ultra-loyal faction, pursues the policy of crushing into uniformity the heterogeneous elements invited to the country and allured to our shores with the bait of liberty. This patriotism may be well called the last refuge of scoundrels; it is nothing but Prussianism wrapped up in the very folds of the Union-Jack. Therefore, when in the great work of Canadianization this law of social psychology is not observed, we not only prevent assimilation, but we deprive the nation of the fertilizing contact and invigorating contrast of various ethnical elements and ferment future conflict.

The religious element belongs to a higher plane. Although independent in its nature of any particular racial feature, yet it co-exists with the love of country, giving to our patriotism something of its sanctity and durability. But the point at issue here is: Can the religious element prevent racial assimilation? In the eyes of many Canadians the Ruthenian's religion is looked upon as one of the greatest obstacles to his Canadianization. Under the cover of that specious plea, many agents are at work in our Ruthenian settlements. With the preconceived idea that their religion with its ritual, language and traditions, is the greatest obstacle to their nationalization and to its inherent benefits, these agents are multiplying their efforts to wean new Canadians from the faith of their fathers. The last report of the Methodist Missionary Society—1918, openly states the designs of this Church in the matter. "Many of these Ruthenian people are ignorant and degraded; and under the sinister leadership of their priests are resolved to resist all Canadianizing influences. . . . For the Christian Church to act at once is the need of the present hour, if the foreign peoples are to be made Christian citizens of the great West.". This statement is symptomatic of the curious Christianity that now prevails among the various non-Catholic denominations. With them Christianity is nothing more than social welfare inspired by a vague philanthropy. Differences of creed are being cast to the winds, and Social Service is the basic idea of their forward movement, around which they are trying to rally their dwindling forces. It is then but consequent to have the burden of their message and the policy of their apostolate bear on Citizenship. The inevitable and perfidious neutrality of state officialdom unconsciously seconds their efforts in this direction. But the most efficient co-operators in this nefarious work are the fallen-away Ruthenians. They have a smattering of education which makes them the more dangerous among their own.

This organized opinion and co-ordinated action of the "churches" against the CHURCH should give to all Catholics food for thought. To be indifferent would be criminal. We can say with Augustine Birrell: "It is obviously not a wise policy to be totally indifferent to what other people are thinking about—simply because our own thoughts are running in another direction."

* * * * * *

This diagnosis of the Ruthenian problem should suggest practical lines for individual and group action. It would be preposterous on our part were we to assume an attitude of destructive criticism without having a remedy to propose. But what we have in mind is to suggest means whereby the Church as a whole, and the laity in particular, will come to the help of a few heroic, struggling missionaries and to the rescue of their Ruthenian flock.

The Ruthenian people in Canada are now going through their assimilation period. In another generation or so they will be, at least they should be, all full-fledged Canadian citizens. This "land of opportunity" that has adopted them has a right to see them all become good citizens, as ready to shoulder their share of the common burden as they were to receive the benefits of our liberties.

In our large industrial centres their transformation is rapid. The stranger is swallowed up in the vortical suction of the city and is soon carried away in the maelstrom of its strenuous life. He rapidly loses his identity; only the strong individual will survive, bearing the features of his race. In our rural settlements where the foreigner has established colonies, the assimilation is slow and gradual. The change affects the community and, through it, the individual. But in all cases this transformation is a necessity, and necessity should be a deciding factor.

If this process of assimilation, we contend, is not surrounded with Catholic influence, if it is not carried on by Catholic agents—and is left only to those who see in the faith of the Ruthenian, a "relic of the Middle-Ages," an obstacle to Canadian citizenship—the danger to the faith of our Ruthenian people is greater than in the days of open attack. This method of neutral proselytism is more insidious, and in the long run, more telling. We know perfectly well that if the Canadian Ruthenian is "to give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar" he must first "give to God what belongs to God."

It is therefore our bounden duty to help our Ruthenian brethren to swing into the main stream of our national existence; and there is no reason why our religious duties and patriotic endeavors should work at cross purposes. In fact, if in the present crisis, the two are not merged into one, there will be a distinct loss to the Catholic Church in Canada. Have we not waited long enough for the immigrants to come to us? We contented ourselves with giving them as often as possible a priest of their language; and have left to others, to neutral and, most often, openly anti-Catholic agencies the duty of initiating them to Canadian life. The American Bishops have understood this necessity, and with what marvellous foresight and wonderful organization have they thrown into the work of reconstruction the whole weight of the Catholic Church! Their joint letter—the most timely and most luminous pronouncement on the labour problem,—their general meeting in Washington, the constitutions of the Catholic National Board with its various departments, all go to prove that they grasped the signs of the times and have readjusted the sails of the Ship of Peter in America to the new winds that are sweeping over the world. We should never forget indeed that the Church of God is not of this world but is in this world. To strip ourselves of crippling "formalism" and to bring the Church nearer the realities of the times, is, in Byron's words, making "realities real." Is it not indeed time to broaden our apostolate and give more scope to the laity? If the non-Catholic denominations are able to find young men and women who consent to live among our foreigners as teachers, social workers, field secretaries, lay missionaries and catechists, surely we should be able to find the same among our own to protect the faithful against apostasy. We must remember that the Ruthenians who have come to this country belong, generally speaking, to that class for whom even existence was a problem in their native land. They are the very ones who have been protected in their faith by language, tradition, customs and all that goes to make up the mental atmosphere of the uneducated mass. When that atmosphere disappears these poor people are exposed to all pernicious influences. We are therefore responsible to the Church to build around them the protective wall of Catholic life. The initiation to their Canadian life should not be at the price of their Catholic life.

This is the situation. What can be done? Naturally, to quote Lord Morley: "A settlement of foolscap sheet, independent of facts, of local circumstances and feeling, and passion, and finance, and other appurtenances of human nature" . . . will lead nowhere. To do effective work along the lines suggested in this chapter we must take facts and circumstances as they are, and work into them the idea, and then work the idea into the people. The LANGUAGE, the SCHOOL, the COMMUNITY LIFE are the THREE GREAT FACTORS that the enemies of the Ruthenian's faith unscrupulously exploit in their nefarious work. We must meet the enemy on this common ground and beat him with his own weapons.

Language.—The right of a man to his language is an incontestable right; the free use of it is a primary human liberty. The Church has always respected this right as one of the most elementary laws of nature. In the evangelization of nations She has always accommodated Herself to the ways and language of the people. In this, She is faithful to the illuminating lesson the Master gave to Her on Her birthday, Pentecost Sunday, when the Apostles were heard each speaking his own language. "They began to speak with divers tongues according as the Holy Ghost gave them to speak . . . Every man heard them speak in his own tongue." Since that day the true Apostle of Christ has respected the language of the people he evangelized.

The theory of compelling a nation to learn a certain language as if it were the only vehicle of the "Great Message of Christ" or of waiting until the people know the missionary's own language . . . is not Catholic. The Church of Christ is not a nationalistic Church. No one has to deny his race nor to give up his language to become or to remain Her faithful child.

But, facts are facts and one must face them and take from them one's bearings. They stand as the tossing buoy on the drifting waters of our ordinary life. To ignore them often spells disaster. Now, the fact of paramount importance is that the English language is fast gaining ground among the Ruthenians. The recent school laws (we do not discuss here their wisdom)[2], the anti-foreign feeling that has held the country in its grip during the war, the violent campaign of a certain element, the general drift of the various annual conventions, the studied plan of action of Provincial Governments, the eagerness of the Ruthenian rising generation to know English[3], and above all the unbounded zeal of non-Catholic denominations who make the learning of English the trump card of their game, these are facts, and have to be reckoned with. The sooner our Ruthenians are made to grasp these conditions, the better will they be equipped for the struggle of Canadian life and for the preservation of their Catholic faith. Is it not time, therefore, for some English-speaking priests to go out among the Ruthenians and share the work with those valiant missionaries who, the great majority at least, are strangers to our country, and who have learned the language, embraced the rite and for the last twenty years have been doing our work for us? Their presence is a stimulating lesson and an abiding reproach. A dozen or so of young English-speaking priests would be a great boon to the Ruthenian mission, particularly in the West with its present mentality.

The School is the great melting pot. One has to read "The New Canadian," by Dr. Anderson, to understand the full meaning of this statement in its relation to the Ruthenian problem. The schools among the Ruthenians in the Western Provinces are practically all public schools. The number of Catholic teachers is exceedingly small and yet, were they available, the Ruthenian trustees would be at liberty and glad to give them the preference. Only those who know the influence the teacher wields in a Ruthenian settlement will fully appreciate the presence of a Catholic teacher. Were a good Catholic teacher to give to this cause a year or two of her teaching life she would be doing a great missionary work. If the Baptists, Presbyterians and Methodists can get girls and young men to go, surely we could also, were we to organize and try it. This is the reason why the foundation, in Yorkton, of the English speaking Brothers of Toronto, is one of the wisest moves in the right direction. The idea is to prepare teachers for the Ruthenian settlements by giving them the benefit of a higher education under Catholic influences. The Governments of the various Western Provinces made several attempts to equip the Ruthenian schools with Ruthenian teachers. With a few exceptions, these embryo teachers proved to be a failure and from a Catholic view-point a real calamity. We remember personally how in a certain normal school the special Ruthenian class was nothing but a hot-bed of infidelity and anarchy. The students were collaborating with the worst subversive elements in the country. Therefore, our practical suggestion would be to encourage the recent foundation of the Christian Brothers by contributing liberally to its support and to the extension of the work of which it will become a natural centre. Could there not be a bureau in the East for the recruiting of teachers? A campaign of education to this effect, in the Catholic press, would be in season.

Community work is without doubt a deciding factor in our civic life. Considered from a Christian angle it is nothing else but the practice of charity. When animated by mere philanthropy it may play havoc with souls, particularly among our foreign element. The Church in the United States has realized its importance and has outlined a social service programme for Catholic agencies. They have field-secretaries and instructors—often Knights of Columbus—throughout the country, carrying on this welfare work. I would refer the reader to the monthly Bulletin of the National Catholic Welfare Council for an idea of the extensive work of their Catholic social activities. It is simply wonderful. As times change our activities also have to be modified. New questions call for new treatment. The initiation of the Ruthenian people to Canadian life should be our work. Being Catholics they are our wards in this new country and it is our sacred duty to see that they receive true ideals of Canadian citizenship without losing the higher ideal of their Catholic life. At times Canadian liberty has proved to be to some extent too strong a tonic. It is through a sound, intelligent, local government exercised in the school district and our municipal life that the new Canadians can learn best to play their part in the greater life of Provincial and Federal politics. If any one desires more details on this subject we refer him to the National Catholic Welfare Council's Reconstruction pamphlets No. 5 and 7.

Who has not followed with pride the launching of the great educational programme of the Knights of Columbus, particularly their nation-wide scheme of supplementary schools for the explanation of the "American Constitution" to foreigners? It is an open challenge to radicalism. To educate a citizen in the chart that governs his country, in the right use of his franchise, is an act of real patriotism and real Catholicism. Picture to yourself the results of the Ruthenian vote on an issue in which the Church is involved. Eventually time will bring such issues.

We would say to our laity what the editor of the 'Columbiad' wrote in the October number: "The vista of the glory of service that opens before the mind musing on the power for good within our grip is sublime. To each the image rises. An army, a host of faces keen with knowledge, calm with contentment, eager with honest ambition looks up. Men, women, boys, girls—humanity gazes at the beholder. The eye does not glimpse the last face, far out beyond the faint horizon of the panorama. . . . The vista is unending."

Yes, the apostolate among the Ruthenians is, we claim, a necessity of the hour; its possibilities are beyond realization. Procrastination in this matter is nothing short of treason and will prove a disaster to the Ruthenians, and to the Church. Turning to the Knights of Columbus in Canada and pointing to the feverish and unceasing activities of other agents among this our people I say: Go and do likewise.

* * * * * *

Our conclusion is obvious. The Ruthenian Question stands to-day as a religious problem to solve and a national duty to fulfill. Church and Country present a united and pressing claim for our co-operation. This appeal to the two strongest feelings of the human heart should awaken patriotic sympathies and quicken Catholic conscience into action. The issue is serious and far reaching in its consequences. Only organized opinion with united and determined action can successfully meet it.



[1] This chapter was the matter of a series of articles in the "North West Review," of Winnipeg. The Editor prefaced them with the following remarks, to give emphasis to the importance of this Problem:

"We wish to draw the attention of our readers to a series of authoritative articles now appearing in the Northwest Review on 'The Ruthenian Problem.'

"The writer is one of our foremost educationalists and knows his subject thoroughly. Furthermore his manuscript has passed through the hands of Bishop Budka and other members of the Hierarchy of the West who have given it their warm approval.

"It is, we think, very essential that the Catholics of this country should thoroughly understand the problem before them, so that when called upon to perform their duty in the matter they may be able to act promptly, wholeheartedly and with conviction.

"Our thanks are due to the author, 'Miles Christi' for having put before us such a clear presentation of the problem which sooner or later we shall be called upon to solve.

"The matter is one that to a very large extent concerns the laity and we think it should be thoroughly discussed in every council of Knights of Columbus throughout Canada. In districts where this society is not organized, any other existing Catholic societies might very appropriately co-ordinate in this good work.

"The question is also one of national as well as Catholic moment and so entitled to its due share of any 'forward movements' now anticipated."

[2] Judge Buffington, of Pennsylvania, gave a lecture lately on "Americanization." From it we cull the following paragraph on the foreign language question:—

"The solution is not in the abolition of foreign languages in this country. I have heard loyal patriots who found English twisting their tongues, and Bolshevism has come from the lips of those of New England culture like Foster. This country has not only been remiss in failing to teach the foreigner but in teaching the native. I believe in the English tongue and in the amalgamation resulting from common speech, but we do not accomplish our aims by destroying other languages."

[3] In a recent report of the Department of Education of the Province of Saskatchewan, of 177 schools in Ruthenian settlements only 28 have engaged teachers holding provisional certificates or permits; all the others are fully normal-trained and perfectly qualified. In many school districts salaries range between $1,000 and $1,500. The Ruthenians are among those who pay the best salaries to teachers.



CHAPTER IV.

WHY? WHAT? WHO?

The Necessity of a Field-Secretary for the Organization of our Missionary Activities

No one can read the Encyclical letter which His Holiness has recently addressed to the Catholic Church on the Propagation of the Faith throughout the world, without being deeply moved by the yearnings of the apostolic heart of our Common Father, and vividly impressed by the lessons that come from his inspired and timely message to each and every one of us.

Without doubt our own dear country is witnessing that movement which, inspired by the Holy Ghost, is being felt throughout the Catholic world in favour of home and foreign missions. The growing interest of our people in the Catholic Church Extension Society; the enthusiasm with which the great and noble work of Father Fraser, for Chinese Missions, was greeted everywhere; the recent foundation and marvellous development of the community of the "Missionary Sisters of the Immaculate Conception" in Montreal, for service among the lepers of China; the wonderful response which the call of Africa met with among the college and convent youths of the Province of Quebec; the increasing number of vocations to the missionary orders, both for men and women,—to mention only a few outstanding and significant facts,—are evident signs of the "stirring of the waters" in the Church in Canada.

To help to promote and develop fully this providential movement in the Church of God, we beg to submit a few suggestions which may be of some use in the great cause of Home and Foreign Missions.

I—Why?

The continued progress and abiding success of a movement depend on its organization. For, to realize its proposed aim and accepted plan of action, organization alone can enlist and keep secure the sympathies of patrons and members, co-ordinate the various forces, and call into play, when necessary, new and fresh energies. The greater the number to be reached by the society or societies which embody this movement, the more efficient should be the organizing power.

Experience and reason prove that an organization destined to affect the masses and hold its grip on them, will not live and thrive only on an occasional appeal or a printed message. These are indeed of great value, particularly the insistently repeated message in print. We are great believers in the force of a persistent, regular and frequent circularization. But, in our humble estimation, there is something more essential in the matter under consideration, and that is the human contact and continued influence of a "field-organizer." An extensive organization without this factor will not be efficient, will not last. As Floyd Keeler wrote in "America" (July 10, 1920): "It is the personal equation between the organizer and the various units of the Society that counts. . . . The masses are accustomed to think in concrete terms. . . . Long distance appeals and those made to total strangers do not produce permanent results." This influence of the field-organizer is so great that we may safely state that the life of a society fluctuates with the various impulses it receives from him. He is the very heart which gives health and vigor to its organism.

Here lies the secret of the mission-organizations in the Protestant Churches, to which, of late, we have referred so frequently in our Catholic papers, under the heading of: "Fas est ab hoste doceri." . . . Every denomination has its field-organizers entirely consecrated to mission activities among its people. Financial results tell to what extent they are effective in their work.

We have also among our own missionary societies, examples that illustrate the point we wish to emphasize. Since when has the Society of the Propagation of the Faith, in the dioceses of New York and Boston, leaped into prominence, and headed by generous contributions the list of the whole world? How did that change come about? Where is the secret of this success? The establishment of permanent diocesan organizers is the answer. What they have done, why could we not do? "Quod isti—cur non et nos?"

Never, we claim, will the missionary potentialities that lie dormant in Canadian Catholicism, be actuated to bear its message of spiritual light, heat and power to the Church at large, until we establish in the field at various points, secretaries or organizers, whose life-work will be to call into play, to systematize the mission forces of the Church in Canada. If on the contrary, as in the past, we content ourselves with an occasional appeal for missions, a collection now and then, a spasmodic effort here and there, a subscription to a Catholic paper or missionary magazine, the work for Home and Foreign missions will remain exterior to the corporate life of the Church, will not be woven into its very fibre to permeate its activities. As shadows on the wall, they will suggest rather than reveal the possibilities of our missionary effort. The great and pressing call of the White Shepherd of the Vatican will go unheard. If there is a response that comes from Canada, it will not be from the Church at large.

II.—What?

The "raison d'etre," the definite function of a field-secretary is organization. This work implies the double duty to spread, by an intelligent and well thought-out propaganda, the knowledge of the Home and Foreign Missions and of the responsibility it entails, and to found and maintain efficient the various societies established to promote and help their great work.

1. Vision. The effective presentation of the case of Catholic Missions, both to the clergy and to the laity, is the field-secretary's first and important duty. Nothing indeed can be hoped for, nothing can be accomplished until the Catholic people fully grasp and intensely feel what their help and co-operation—however little it may be—mean to the Church, to the salvation of souls, to the honour of our Blessed Lord, to the glory of God. Fac ut videant! The clear, broad and deep vision of these great possibilities in the mission fields will alone overcome selfishness and apathy, awaken interest, stimulate energy.

The field-secretary is the official expert in mission-matters. He will be able to accumulate strong evidence, sum up striking statistics and draw burning comparisons for the effective presentation of his case. An enthusiastic advocate, he will plead with thrilling appeals, the great cause placed in his hands.

During his absence from the field of action, the vision he pointed to, will be kept bright by the recurrence, at stated intervals, of the printed message. Missionary literature receives its life, vigour and impulse from the field-organizer and continues his work in his absence.

2. Action. To realize that vision and incarnate it in work for the Home and Foreign Missions, the Field-secretary will take the diocese as a unit of his organization. In each diocese, with the permission, authority, and co-operation of the Ordinary, he will establish the Societies recommended by our Holy Father in his Apostolic Letter, and others that have been created to meet the specific needs of the country or to favour certain particular missionary work. Therefore:—

(a) Among the Clergy will be founded "The Missionary Union of the Clergy", which our Holy Father desires to see established in every diocese. For loving sons and faithful priests of the Church of God the desire of the Sovereign Pontiff is a command. This, we think, could be easily done by the field-organizer when he visits each parish for the purpose of organizing missionary parochial units, as we shall see later.

The beautiful programme of action which is so easily combined with the ordinary work of the priest in the parish, the facility of his moral and material co-operation in this great work of missions, the spiritual favours and wonderful privileges which the "Union" grants to its members, together with the explicit desire of the Holy See, these are so many motives and incentives, which should induce all the members of the clergy to enter the ranks of the "Missionary Union" and assure to the Church their co-operation in the great mission work, both at Home and in the Field-Afar.

(b) Among the laity of each parish will be founded:

The "Propagation of the Faith"—for Foreign Missions;

The "Church Extension"—for Home Missions.

The permanent success of these societies, once established by the field-organizer, will wholly depend on the selection and appointment of trustworthy promoters, who will distribute the missionary literature, and collect from their respective circles of 10 or 20 members the monthly fee, stipulated for each society. This monthly collection comes as a reminder and is more effective, both morally and financially, than an annual collection taken up in the Church, as is now the prevailing custom in several dioceses. The monthly call of the promoter is a fresh awakening of the missionary spirit in the home, and stands as the continued call of the Master of the harvest. It keeps the interest alive and awakens anew the sympathy for the missions.

(c) Among the Children of our Separate Schools and Sunday-Schools, can be established, with great profit, The "Holy Childhood Society." It is wonderful what interest the kind and sympathetic hearts of children will take in missionary work. The results obtained by the distribution of mite boxes are marvellous. To quote an example given to us by the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States, we would say that through their Sunday-School classes, they raise annually the sum of $200,000.00.

But above all, the great asset to be considered in this educational work, is the broad Catholic spirit we create and maintain in the soul of the child. This is far more important than his actual financial contribution, and at the same time it prepares him to be, in later years, a generous contributor. Without any doubt, the Protestants can teach us here a lesson of organization.

(d) In Colleges, Boarding-Schools, Convents and Universities why should we not have branches of the "Catholic Students Mission Crusade?" This organization is doing wonderful work in the United States, and will prove soon to be a potent factor in the Missionary activities of the Church across the boundary. 250 delegates from various institutions of higher learning, throughout the country, gathered in Washington, last August (1920), for the second annual Convention. Among the delegates, we are proud to note, were a few Canadians.

(e) The "follow up" work is what counts in the long run, in a movement of this kind. If we do not wish to see all this beautiful zeal for missions burn away in a passing blaze, we must have a Central Bureau, which will keep in touch with the promoters, and act as the centre of Missionary activities, in the diocese. There all lines will converge, gathering information, bringing results; from there, as from the power-station, will go out to the workers in the field, enthusiasm and energy. "Unity," says F. Kinsman, "cannot be created by agitated fragments of a circumference; it must issue from a central force and be sustained by a centripetal instinct." The Central Bureau, or Clearing House could be confided to a trustworthy person, who would willingly give his spare hours to this great Catholic work, until it would grow to the point of necessitating a permanent and salaried secretary.

It is useless, we believe, to state that a crusade of prayers would be the sustaining force of this movement. We all know that the salvation of souls is above all a supernatural process. We may sow, another may water the seed,—but it is for God to give the growth,—Deus autem incrementum dat.

The development and fostering of "missionary vocations" would be the natural sequel to this movement at large, in the Church of Canada. How many young men and women could not the field-secretary find here and there, and direct to the mission fields where the harvest is plentiful and the harvesters few.

III.—Who?

The function of a field-secretary or organizer is a delicate one, we fully understand. But we are firmly convinced that priests can be found, who, with tact, intelligence and enthusiasm for the great Cause of Missions, and backed with the authority and sympathy of the Ordinary, are bound to make this work a success. There is a wave of the missionary spirit passing over the Church of God. The clergy and the people are eager to help missions at Home and Abroad. But they desire a concrete, workable plan to pin their activities to; they are waiting for something definite to act upon, and a responsible representative of the cause to work with.

Until the development of the organization would call for a diocesan organizer, one priest could act for a Province or Region of the Country. The ordinary objection which our proposal here would meet with, would be the lack of personnel. There is, we know, a shortage of priests everywhere. But would not the Church, as a whole, in Canada and throughout the world, receive more benefit from the life of a priest entirely dedicated to this work of Missions, than if it were given to a specific parish or diocese. Even were a parish or small country mission to be deprived for the time being of a resident pastor, should not that sacrifice be made, generously and cheerfully, for the sake of a greater cause. It is assuredly a short-sighted policy to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of souls for the care of a few, to prefer the welfare of a parish to that of the Church at large. This reasoning and its disastrous consequences are surely not Catholic.

We emphasise the necessity for the organizer to consecrate his life solely to this proposed work. At this price alone will he make it a success. Without doubt, it is the work of a man, the work of a life.

God grant that we may see the day when all the latent Missionary forces of the Church of Canada will be awakened and united in one great gigantic effort of apostolate! These forces form an invisible army of reserves on which the Church is to draw, to fill, as it were, the depleted ranks of Her Missionary units throughout the world. The lack of organization is the weakness of our strength. Let the leaders come forward, and we ourselves shall be astonished at the latent powers of Faith in the Church of Canada.



CHAPTER V.

PLOUGHING THE SANDS

The Church-Union Movement: its Causes and Various Manifestations. The Protestant and Catholic View-Point.

Church-union is to-day the outstanding feature of the Protestant world. The possibilities and promises, the necessity and advantages of this movement are widely discussed in the press and magazine, in the pulpit and on the platform, in Church conferences and synods. Denominational barriers are being swept away; creed lines lowered; inevitably great changes are impending. This universal unrest is assuredly symptomatic of a chaotic Christendom outside of the true Church. The peace and self-confidence of the Catholic Church pursuing the even tenor of Her life is indeed in striking contrast.

No serious-minded Christian can be disinterested in this supreme effort of the various Christian denominations for unity. We are not allowed to doubt the good intentions that animate and direct the promoters of this inter-church movement. For, as Lord Morley said, "in the heat of the battle it often happens that men manifest towards the heretic feeling which should be exclusively reserved for the heresy." Yet we believe that the explanation of our attitude, so much misunderstood and misinterpreted, cannot but help to hasten the day of the true and everlasting union, when in accord with the great desire of the Master, there will be but "One Fold and One Pastor." Gladstone said: "Any man who advances one step the cause of Christian unity in his life may well lie down to die content that he had a life well lived."

We said advisedly "our" attitude, for it is a vastly interesting point to note with Hilaire Belloc: "The Catholic understands his opponent, whereas that opponent does not understand him. A similar contrast existed once before in the History of Western mankind, to wit, in the latter days of the Roman Empire. The Catholic understood the Pagan; the Pagan did not understand the Catholic."

Church-union was always more or less an ideal in the various non-Catholic denominations. Periodically efforts were made to realize this ideal; but they always failed in the presence of the bitter antagonism that existed between the leading factions. The Church-union movement manifested itself, timidly at first, in the interchange of pulpits, the united services and inter-communion of several denominations. This exchange in the ministerial field now prevails among the Nonconformists and has also affected to a large extent the Anglican communion. But the multiplied divisions and multiplying sub-divisions among the conflicting creeds, a wasteful overlapping and disastrous competition in the mission field, the enlightening experience of the great war, have forced an issue upon the Churches.

In Scotland the "Old Kirk" is trying to bridge the chasm that has separated it from the "Free Church" in the past years. In England, under the leadership of Mr. Shakespeare, the Nonconformists are fusing their differences and presenting a united front to the Established Church. Only last year, (1919) in Kingswall Hall, did not the Bishop of London make most remarkable overtures to the Wesleyans and propose to them a scheme of union! By the introduction of Evangelical methods and particularly by the association with Nonconformists on doctrinal grounds, or in services in which doctrines are involved, the Anglican Church has been engaged—to speak with Newman—"in diluting its high orthodoxy."

Last August, 1920, Geneva was the meeting place of "The World Christian Congress." The Congress adopted a resolution to form a "League of Churches" whose object is to put an end to proselytizing between Christian churches and promote mutual understanding between them for Christian missions among non-Christian peoples; secondly, to promote an association and collaboration of Churches to establish Christian principles; thirdly, to help the Churches to become acquainted with one another; fourthly, to bring together smaller Christian communities, and unite all Churches on questions of faith and order.

But it was reserved for America, the land of daring schemes and audacious plans, to formulate the most chimerical project of all.

The Episcopalian Church has promoted "The World Congress on Faith and Order." Bishop Weller, of Fond-du-Lac, Wisc., is directing this gigantic movement. A committee of bishops has already called on the various heads of Christian Churches, and we all know of their visit to the Vatican and of the refusal of the Holy See to participate in the Pan-Christian Congress.

Sponsored by the Presbyterian Church of America, "The United Churches of Christ" were formed some months ago, with a complete organic union of the Protestant Churches of America in view. This is . . . "an advance of the present existing organization of the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America, as it opens the way for consolidation of administration agencies and the carrying forward of the general work of the Churches through the council of the United Church."

But the most ambitious scheme is that of the "Inter Church World Movement." It has been called into existence (1918) for the purpose of developing a plan whereby the Evangelical Churches of North America may co-operate in carrying out their educational, missionary and benevolent programme at home and abroad. To discover and group the facts concerning the world's needs; to build a programme of inspiration and education based on these facts; to develop spiritual power adequate for the task; to secure enough lives and money to meet the needs: such is the tremendous task the "Inter Church World Movement" has set itself. At a meeting in Atlantic City it was voted to raise the stupendous sum of $1,300,000,000 to meet the requirements of this Pan-Protestant project. Two thousand men and women are now (Feb. 1920,) busy at the head-office, in New York, preparing the world-wide survey and financial campaign.[1]

The Protestant Churches in Canada are also falling in line in this universal movement for unity. "The United National Campaign" which marked 1919 with thirteen national conventions, represented the co-operative feature of various churches in a general "Forward Movement." The war, we all know, has impeded the projected union between the Methodist, Presbyterian and Congregationalist denominations. There is hardly any doubt that this union will be effected in the near future. But as usual, while the East was deliberating, the forward and aggressive West was acting. Church-Union is an accomplished fact in many centres, particularly in the Province of Saskatchewan. Last October the "Union Church of Western Canada" held a convention in Regina and reported progress. Conditions in the West, especially in the rural districts, naturally favour this movement. The strong denominational feeling is becoming more and more a thing of the past. The identity of churches is being absorbed in "social service" work, and sectarian peculiarities considered "obsolete impertinences."

These are the various manifestations of the "Church-Union Movement." Although loose thinking and indefiniteness of purpose characterize most of these various moves, a close analysis reveals two different underlying principles which support and explain them. As an Anglican clergyman stated: "There are two courses open, uniting on points of agreement and allowing the differences to settle themselves, or facing differences with a view of settling them." The first course promotes a "co-operative union" in social and Christian work. This union does not interfere with matters of belief, but aims solely at the co-operation and co-ordination of all services which the Churches can render in the missionary, educational and social fields. It means a League or Federation of Churches, with a view to "greater efficiency."

The other course goes deeper into the problem under discussion, for it has as object an "organic union." This union means the fusing of all denominational creeds and forms of worship, or, at least, the acceptance by all of a certain doctrinal minimum as a basis of the entente cordiale. The Anglicans in the Conference of Lambeth, 1888, formulated the famous "Quadrilateral" whereby the Scriptures as Rule of Faith, the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds, the two sacraments of Baptism and of Eucharist, and the Episcopacy or apostolic succession, are "as the irreducible minimum on which they would open negotiations for reunion." [2]

II.

The Protestant Inter-Church Movement is a fact; we know its causes, its various manifestations, its ultimate aim. To what extent this universal movement reflects the general, deep and conscientious convictions of the masses, it would be hard to say. The prevalent indifference and profound ignorance as regards the specific tenets of each denomination would lead us to believe that this movement does not spring from the very soul-depths of the masses. Yet the fact is there, and assuredly of importance in the religious realm. What is the meaning of this fact? What is its message? For, every universal fact of that kind reveals and interprets an ideal.

Naturally the view point of the Protestant will be different from that of the Catholic. The explanation of the attitude of both, as we stated, cannot but help to hasten the coming of true union in Christendom. The non-Catholic mind sees in this Inter-Church Movement the ultimate triumph of Protestantism, the vindication of the leading principles of the Reformation. The Anglican Archbishop DuVernet wrote in the "Montreal Star," May 10th, 1919: "Reviewing the movement towards Christian Union in Canada, a very natural evolutionary order is at once detected, which gives us the assurance that a spiritual cosmic urge is at work behind this united action of the Anglican, Presbyterian, Methodist and Congregationalist Churches of Canada, the great evolutionary movement towards the comprehensive Church of the Future."

We all know of the sensation created in Anglican circles by the extreme views of the Bishop of Carlisle. In a recent article on the "Nineteenth Century and After"—entitled "Monopoly of Religion," he protests against the claims of right and the privilege of monopoly in Religion, either in doctrine or in form of government. He says that the Free Churches have been right in resisting unto death the doctrines of religious monopoly.

Robert H. Gardner, in the "The Churchman," (Episcopal), acknowledges that "The unanimous recognition of the plans (Interchurch World Movement) is only a beginning; the hope of all that it will lead to a more perfect union, and the evident anxiety to leave the Catholic (?) churches free to maintain their principle without compromise or surrender, have converted him to the belief that God the Holy Ghost is guiding this movement, and, therefore, that it is truly Catholic (?)."

If such are the views of the Anglican Church, which, among other denominations, has always been considered as most conservative, what may we not expect from the other Churches? And indeed, the reading of addresses made at their different Conferences and General Assemblies, the resolutions passed, and the very atmosphere of these meetings tend to uphold the Church-Union Movement as the realization of unity in Christendom. "The Christian Century" (organ of the Disciples of Christ) says: "It marks out the best path yet that has been described for the attainment of unity. It outlines the goal and bravely takes the first step towards its realization." The New York "Christian Advocate" (Methodist) thinks: "It will mark a definite step toward that fusing of Protestant forces whose absence hitherto, is responsible in large part for the failure of Christianity to make powerful headway among men." As the Presbyterians were the originators of the movement, "The Continent" takes a justifiable pride, in quoting from a contemporary, that: "They are perfectly ready to contemplate a Christian unity that involves the passing away of this particular organism called the Presbyterian Church, finely wrought though it be," and exhorts: "Presbyterians, this sort of reputation is a lot to live up to. But we must not fall from it."

The principles of evolution—principles which we find underlying modern thought—are freely called upon to explain this movement and justify its consequences. Our millennial-minded doctors and preachers are celebrating already the apotheosis of the Universal Church of the future.

And what does the Catholic Church think of Church-Union? What is its point of view on this "Movement" which has now such hold on the Protestant denominations? As the Catholic Church is in itself the largest Christian body, it is but natural to presume that all Christians will be interested in knowing Her views on this vital subject. For is She not that Church which Gladstone himself calls, "the most famous of Christian communions, and the one within which the largest numbers of Christian souls find their spiritual food!" (Gladstone to Acton, Nov., 1869.)

The Catholic Church sees in this movement of Church-Union the complete disintegration of Protestantism and the open condemnation of its fundamental principles. Those who are not of the "Fold" will perhaps resent, but not be astonished at this sweeping statement. We would only ask them to follow our argument and then judge for themselves.

Union—and therefore unity—will not and cannot be the result of the present Inter-Church Movement. This statement involves a question of fact and of right. In facto.—Let us examine first the question of fact. Union, as now promoted, is either "co-operative" or "organic." Co-operative union ignores differences of creed or form of worship; organic union suppresses them or merges them into a neutral mixture.

Co-operative Union,—as a basis of religious unity affecting the religion of the individual, can be at once dismissed. For, what religious action,—i.e., action prompted and guided by a principle, a religious doctrine,—is possible without that principle, that doctrine? Moral action,—and Religion is at the same time the foundation and the highest expression of the moral order,—pre-supposes immutable and recognized principles. "The mental attitude defined on paper as 'undenominational,' Miss M. Fletcher says rightly, has no existence in the human mind. Below all sustained enthusiasms lie strong convictions."—Therefore to ignore the directing principles of their various denominations in a common religious action, and yet to pretend to keep their denominational identity, involves, on the part of the Churches, an absolute impossibility. Because doctrine is the very foundation, the "raison d'etre" of intelligent Christian action. Diversity of opinion is bound to bring, in religious matters, diversity of action; for, to be consequent one must act according to his belief. Baptism, for instance, is necessary or not necessary for salvation. On this doctrinal point will necessarily hinge a diversity of action in the mission field alloted to this or to that denomination. The position is quite different when common action is confined to merely social work. But "social service," stripped of all its Christian principles and reduced to pure philanthropy, is not Christianity; it is mere naturalism or neo-paganism.

The great majority of those for whom Christianity is yet a living reality understand the nefarious consequences of "co-operative-union." To protect themselves against this scheme of a perfidious neutrality, they advocate an "organic union." This even is to the fore in the Philadelphia plan of the "Inter-Church World Movement." "The plan of federal union will have this result, that after it shall have been in operation for a term of years, the importance of divisive names and creeds and methods will pass more and more into the dim background of the past and acquire, even in the particular denomination itself, a merely historical value, and the churches then will be ready for, and will demand, a more complete union; so that what was the 'United Churches of Christ in America' can become the 'United Church of Christ in America,' and a real ecclesiastical power, holding and administering ecclesiastical property and funds of such united church."

The promoters of "organic union" do not ignore the differences between creeds, but they are trying to reduce them. This union strikes at the very bed rock of Divine Revelation. For, the suppression of differences, or their limitation to a certain doctrinal minimum, implies a compromise, and a compromise, in matters of truth, is unacceptable. Truth is eternal and therefore does not change. If the Westminister and Augsburg Confessions were true yesterday, why should they not be also true to-day? If the 39 Articles were the rule of Faith for the Anglican Church in the past, why should they be to-day but "definitions of theological opinions of the time of the Reformation," as Anglican Bishop Farthing, of Montreal, recently stated.—"You change . . . therefore you are not true," we may say, with Bossuet, to those Churches.

In jure.—This universal readiness to compromise should not astonish us when we know that the very fundamental principle of the Reformation is "private judgment" in matters of Faith. The divine message of Revelation is to be interpreted as each one sees best. This principle makes, "de jure," every Protestant independent in his religious belief, and opens the door to the most conflicting interpretations of the Divine Message. "The High Church clergyman to-day," writes A. Birrell, "is no theologian, he is an opportunist." Dogma degenerates into religious emotionalism. Doctrine becomes nothing but a "scheme of theological impressions." To tolerate every doctrine is, for a Church, to teach none. Doctrinal chaos, such as we now see outside of the Catholic Church, is the inevitable result of compromise. Winston Churchill's famous novel, "Inside of the Cup," is nothing but the diagnosis of this disintegration which Protestant Churches are now witnessing.

The history of Protestantism is but the history of its changes of religious belief. For "between authority and impressionism in matters of Revelation, there is no alternative." As Christianity is not the product of the human mind, but a Revelation from God, authority,—a divinely constituted infallible and living authority—is a necessity, and the only possible bond of unity.

This disintegrating principle of "private judgment" in matters of Divine Revelation has been at work since the inception of Protestantism. By the very force of its dissolving power the primary elements of a supernatural religion have fast disappeared from the various creeds. One by one the different Churches have drifted away from their Christian moorings and taken to the high seas of Rationalism. Assailed by the storms of unbelief they are breaking on the rocks of religious indifference. Empty churches are the natural outcome of empty creeds. "The dominant tendencies are indeed increasingly identified with those currents of thought which are making way from the definiteness of the ancient Faith, toward Unitarian vagueness." If Bishop Kinsman, Anglican Bishop of Delaware, a recent convert to the Catholic Faith, gave this statement as one of the reasons for leaving the Anglican Creed, with how much more truth could it not be made of the kaleidoscopic tenets of other denominations?

This process of dissolution of doctrinal grounds is bound to continue. The fluid condition of the various churches testifies to the uncertainty of their actual position and forces them to seek the lowest doctrinal level. "Their standard is determined by the minimum, rather than by the maximum view tolerated, since their official position must be gauged, not by the most they allow, but by the least they insist on." (F. Kinsman.) The remnants of Christianity that were still to be found in their teachings are now looked upon as "obsolete dogmas" and, as such, obstacles to unity. The very fundamental mysteries of the Incarnation and the Redemption are fast growing dim in the minds and hearts of men.[3]

The Protestant Churches will never come back to their former position. In this Church-union movement they are burning their bridges behind them. The gospel of pure "humanitarianism," which is the absolute negation of a supernatural religion, will eventually be the last result of this present unity.

Destructive criticism, to be profitable, should be followed by constructive suggestions.

"That they may be all one!" This ideal of the Master, this supreme wish of His last hours, remains the ideal, the wish of His Church. But its realization cannot be at the expense of truth. Cardinal Gasparri outlined to the promoters of the "World Congress on Faith and Order" the view and position of the Catholic Church in this most important issue. "The Holy See has decided not to participate in the Pan-Christian Congress which it is proposed to hold shortly, as the Catholic Church considering her dogmatic character, cannot join on an equal footing with the other Churches. The feeling at the Vatican is that all other Christian denominations have seceded from the Church of Rome, which descends directly from Christ. Rome cannot go to them; it is for them to return to her bosom.[4] The Pope is ready to receive the representatives of the dissenting churches with open arms, since the Roman Church has always longed for the unification of all Religious Christians. Pope Leo XIII. was deeply interested in this question and wrote two famous encyclicals on the subject of the unification of the Christian Churches."

The divine Founder of Christendom did not leave to several Churches the conservation and propagation of His doctrine. He founded only one Church and gave "unity" itself, as the supreme test of its divinity. Therefore the Church, that has remained "one" through time and space, and has conquered those two great enemies of unity, bears the birth-mark of its divine origin. The Catholic Church alone makes that specific claim. History is there to substantiate it. Matthew Arnold himself could not help acknowledging this universal fact. "Catholicism is that form of Christianity which is the oldest, the largest, and most popular. It has been the great popular religion of Christendom. Who has seen the poor in other churches as they are seen in Catholic Churches? Catholicism envelopes human life, and Catholics in general feel themselves to have drawn not only their religion from their Church, but they feel themselves to have drawn from her, too, their art, poetry and culture. And if there is a thing specially alien to religion, it is division. If there is a thing specially native to religion it is peace and union. Hence the original attraction towards unity in Rome, and hence the great charm when that unity is once attained." The sharp contrast between the actual restlessness and uncertainty of the dissident Churches, and the calm assurance and self-possession of the Catholic Church, is not that an abiding proof of the security of the Catholic position?

Father Palmieri, O.S.A., Ph.D., D.D., who has made the problem of Christian Unity a life-study, made, in a recent article, these pertinent remarks: "The reunion of Christianity in the Catholic sense is not a Babel-like confusion of different sects which oppose creed to creed, which proclaim their absolute indifference in the doctrinal field, which take the individual reason as a judge of Christian revelation or Christian discipline. It would be an absurdity to suppose for a moment that Catholicism or Catholic Theology would propose this hybrid confusion of concepts and human caprices under the name of unity. For Catholicism and Catholic Theology, the reunion of Christianity is the return of dissident Churches and of the non-Catholic sects to Christian unity, to the one Church of Jesus Christ, which not only teaches this unity theoretically but also puts it into practice, in its doctrine, in its government, in its dogmatic and moral teaching, in its principles of authority. By logical sequence the Church of Jesus is one. This unity is not broken by political barriers, by ethnic divisions, by opposing national aspirations. To tend therefore toward Christian unity signifies to tend toward the only Church of Jesus Christ, and to effect this unity is the same as to adhere to it."

Father Palmieri concludes his study with these words: "An impartial study of many years' duration has fully convinced us that the union of the dissident churches can be brought about only under the leadership of the Catholic Church. Outside of Rome there is a principle of dissolution which breaks up and disintegrates the most solid organisms and which will cause the breaking up even of the Orthodox Churches. It is therefore in the supreme interest of Christianity that the Catholic Church addresses its appeals for union to the dissident Churches, and it will never cease to exercise this, its noble mission. Its efforts have been crowned with success several times, and I am convinced that that day will come in which by means of prayer and action the aspiration of Christ's Vicar for union will be realized."

Our non-Catholic reader may say that the position we take tends to strengthen that exclusiveness, that narrowness, that aloofness with which he has always charged the Church of Rome. But we would ask our dissenting brethren, can it be otherwise? Truth is indivisible and unchangeable. Were the unity of the Church Universal to exist only in the Church of the future we would have to conclude that there was a time when the Church of Christ did not exist on earth. This would be absurd and would destroy Christianity in its very foundation. The true Church of Christ has a right to claim the monopoly of Christianity. The Church which, through a so-called spirit of broad-mindedness, accepts the conflicting claims of the various dissident bodies, and is ready to merge its entity with other denominations, immediately, de facto, invalidates its claim to be "The Church of Christ." For, its position involves a contradiction and is in itself a self-condemnation.

Yet, the Catholic Church cannot feel indifferent toward this general and supreme effort of the various fragments of Christendom towards unity. Confidently she waits for the hour when all will return to her as to the only centre and source of permanent unity. Yet, we would say with the Bishop of Northampton, "If we may not compromise the very object of this remarkable movement towards unity by accepting the pressing invitations of our separated brethren to make common cause with them, neither can we rest content to be mere spectators of their perplexities like those who watch from the shore the efforts of distressed seamen to make their port." Let us hope that Divine Providence, always gentle and strong in its dealings with human liberty, will hasten the day when there will be but "One Fold and One Pastor." In the meantime the efforts made to constitute unity of Christianity outside of its true centre will prove as futile as ploughing the sands of the desert.



[1] The withdrawal of the Northern Presbyterian and Northern Baptists and the failure of the financial drive have imperilled the existence of this ambitious project. Is it not a case of repeating with the Psalmist: "Unless the Lord build the house, they labour in vain that build it?"—Ps. 126.

[2] In the last Lambeth Conference—1920—the Church of England has again reduced this minimum by implicitly recognizing the Nonconformist ministry and abandoning its claim to reunion through the absorption of all sects in the Anglican communion. It has so shifted from its former position that it has openly expressed in the Bishops' manifesto the desire to place itself on some "no man's land" where all the dissident Churches may safely meet and unite.

[3] Canon E. W. Barnes, of Westminster Abbey, in a sermon to the members of the British Association, at their meeting at Cardiff, Aug. 29, 1920, declared that, to harmonize Christian Doctrine with modern science, particularly with the theory of evolution, he found it necessary to abandon the doctrine of the Fall of Man and arguments deduced from it by theologians, from St. Paul onward.

[4] Father Leslie Walker, S.J., in a recent work on "The Problem of Reunion," suggests we should enquire rather how we came to differ than what we differ about.



CHAPTER VI.

"THEM ALSO I MUST BRING"

(Jo. X, 16)

The Apostolate to Non-Catholics—Its Obligation. What have we done? What can we do?

The spiritual influence of a Christian is commensurate with his appreciation of responsibility. The breadth and depth of vision give to this moral feeling its field of action. The circle of our influence ceases with the limits of our spiritual outlook. The boundless and clear visions of all the Great Apostles in the Church of God give us the key to the generosity and artfulness of their zeal. Just as the narrowness of our views explains the restrictiveness of our charity and the limitations of its activities. This is particularly noticeable in our dealings with the spiritual needs of those outside the Fold. The claims of our non-Catholic brethren to our charity do not seem to affect us, because our spiritual outlook has not the proportions of that of the Master. With Him we do not stand on those heights from which we could see beyond our own green pastures, "Other sheep that are not of His Fold and which we must also bring." This explains how the claim—"Oportet" . . . "We must bring"—awakens in us no sense of responsibility and meets with no answer in the ordinary activities of our life. Every one seems more or less contented with the lines of denominational demarcation as he finds them around him in the community. Not to discuss religion, not to busy oneself with the other man's belief, to be very frequently rather reticent about our own, is a policy generally accepted in the West. This habit of evasiveness is not Christian and often leads to the sacrifice of Catholic principles. Far from us be the idea of advocating rash obtrusiveness, of untimely aggressive and inconsiderate zeal. But between this excess and that of a "laissez faire" policy there is a golden mean. What is then wrong, our method or our zeal?

A right understanding and a deep conviction of our duties in the matter under consideration are of the greatest value for the Church in Western Canada. May we preface our chapter by asking the reader to keep before his mind the illuminating distinction of St. Augustine between the Body and Soul of the Church. Many souls outside of the visible Body of the Church are nevertheless within the beneficial influence of her invisible pale. This is a commonplace of theology, we all know, but evidently, very often forgotten.

Are we in conscience bound to spread the true faith among our non-Catholic brethren? Most undoubtedly we are. The examples and precepts of the Master, the canons of the Church, the love of God and our neighbour, are among the pressing motives which should appeal to a true Catholic and make him zealous within the sphere of his influence.

"Thy Kingdom Come!" That prayer of the Lord, which has become our morning and evening prayer, is vain, if in the ordinary course of life we do not try to extend the boundaries of that spiritual kingdom in the very souls of those with whom we come in daily contact. Is not the light of our life to shine out so that it may serve as a beacon to those outside the Fold? But nothing is more striking than the words of the Good Shepherd: "And other sheep I have that are not of this Fold; them also I must bring and they shall hear My voice" (Jo. X., 16). Who could explain the profound yearnings of the Divine Master's heart and the deep feeling of obligation that are summed up in these words: "Them also I must bring." The Divine Shepherd finds Himself responsible for the sheep that are not of His own Fold and His only ambition is to bring them in.

This recommendation of Our Lord, His Church understood when in her Canon-law She makes it a duty for all bishops and priests to look upon the non-Catholics residing within the boundaries of their jurisdiction as recommended to them by the Lord and placed in their charge. (Canon 1350, No. 1.)

The Plenary Council of Quebec, the authoritative voice of the Church in Canada, is most emphatic in its recommendation of our separated brethren to the zeal of all Catholics. (No. 331)

The obligation of conscience to come to the help of our non-Catholic neighbour is moreover founded on the precepts of Christian charity. If Christ will condemn to Hell those who did not give Him to eat and to drink in the person of the needy, what will He not say to those who neglect the spiritual works of mercy. The activities of Christian zeal, to one who rightly understands the spirit of the gospel and the economy of the redemption, have the same binding force as alms-giving, and fulfill in the spiritual world the part charity has to play in the scheme of Christian economics.

The obligation of alms-giving is complementary to the right of property. For, as St. Thomas says, "It is one thing to have a right to possess money and another to have a right to use money as one pleases." (II. a, II. ae, Q. XXXII., art. 5, ad 2.) This duty when conscientiously performed re-establishes that economic and social equilibrium which strict justice alone is not able to create. For, the inequitable distribution of wealth greatly depends on the inequality of power of production. This inequality of natural gifts in man remains an unchangeable fact which faith alone in a Divine Providence can explain, an ever renascent problem which Christian charity only can solve.

This mystery of Christian solidarity reveals itself also in the spiritual world. We may say of each Catholic what St. Ambrose said of the priesthood: "Nemo Catholicus sibi,"—no one is a Catholic for himself alone. By a mysterious law of Divine Providence the conservation and propagation of the faith are, after Divine Grace, largely dependent on the influence of man on man. We are all verily "Our brothers' keepers." We are commissioned by Christ not only to keep the faith but also to hand it down to others, not only to keep its fire burning in our hearts but to spread it, and to fan it into a conflagration. The gift of faith implies the charitable obligation of weaving our belief into our every day life and, through that life and its influence, into the lives of others. The plenitude of some make up for the penury of others. If St. John, to urge the precept of alms-giving, said: "He that hath the substance of this world and shall see his brother in need, and shall shut up his bowels from him: how doth the charity of God abide in him?" (I. Jo. III, 17), with how much more truth cannot the condemnation of the Beloved Apostle be applied to one who, rich in Faith—"that substance of things unseen," makes no effort to help his brother who is deprived of it? Therefore charity, through its spiritual works of mercy, re-establishes the equilibrium in the spiritual realm and stands out as a vital factor in the economy of our religion. To understand rightly this principle and to reduce it to action, is to be a true and ardent apostle. Then, and then only, are we able to say in truth, with the martyr, St. Pacien, "Christian is my name, but Catholic is my surname."

How pressing is this obligation to be an apostle, to be truly Catholic, among our non-Catholic brethren? Why should we particularly turn the energies of our zeal to the conversion of non-Catholics? What special claim have they to our prayers?

The supernatural element of Faith, often the fruit of a valid baptism, which still lingers in the souls of many non-Catholics; the fact that numbers of them, because they are in good faith, belong thereby to the "Soul of the Church;" the rising tide of indifference and unbelief which is now burying under its water the last remnants of Christianity to be found among the conflicting creeds: these are the predominant motives which, according to the principles of St. Thomas Aquinas, should attract the preference of our zeal. For the order of the charity, says the Holy Doctor,[1] depends on the relations of those we love, to God and to ourselves, and on the urgency of their spiritual needs. By this doctrine, among those outside of the Church, those professing Christianity have the first claim to our apostleship. Therefore missions to non-Catholics, caeteris paribus, take precedence over foreign missions.

We all recognize the reality of this obligation and understand, vaguely perhaps, the burden of its responsibility. We all indeed, at times, say with the Divine Master: "There are other sheep that are not of this Fold; them also I must bring."—But, what have we done to bring them?

Outside of a few casual cases of conversion prompted often by marriage, and of some spasmodic efforts during a mission, are we not bound to admit that our policy in our relation with non-Catholics has been one of aloofness and waiting. This attitude of aloofness may be traced to many causes. The certainty of his faith gives to the Catholic an assurance which he carries with him into his every day life. A sense of superiority is its natural result. It gives him that self-confidence in religious matters which our separated brethren are so prone to call "Roman Pride."

There exists in the Catholic soul that feeling we might name "The timidity of faith." This sensitiveness is but the instinct of preservation. We have been impressed from our youth that faith is the greatest heirloom of our Christian heritage. To protect it against any influence that would endanger it, is always considered a sacred duty. This is particularly remarked among the masses, whose chances of education finished with the grammar schools, and in countries or localities where Catholics are the minority.

The natural result of this attitude and feeling is an estrangement from those of another faith, a bashful reluctance to meet them and to co-operate with them in social or civic matters, an unconscious tendency to see motives that do not exist and, at times, to refrain from the most elementary acts of charity and courtesy. "It often happens that we manifest towards the heretic the feeling which should be exclusively reserved for heresy." (Lord Morley.) That this is precisely the frame of mind of the ordinary non-Catholic in his dealings with us, is by no way an excuse for our own unkindness. Retaliation is not Christ-like. Does not our aloofness confirm our separated brethren in their false ideas, wrong impressions and bitter prejudices. We must not forget that centuries of strife and untold antagonism of misunderstandings and ignorance, stand as a granite wall between their souls and ours. The teachings and influence of their home, of their school, and of their church lie in their minds, strata upon strata, as the silent and lasting mementoes of the great religious upheaval of the Reformation. Only the influence of a genuine, frank, Catholic life, seen and felt in daily intercourse will gradually wear the barrier away. It is a long and slow process, we know, but one worth trying. Like the ever returning tide it eats its way into the most solid rock of prejudice and bigotry.

That this aloofness carries with it for the unguarded soul and untrained mind a great protection, is made evident by the too many examples of lukewarm Catholics, who by their continued association with those outside of the Fold have lost the right appreciation of their faith and are open to compromise. Principles in their lives often yield to a policy of so called broadmindedness and alleged charity. But those we have in mind, are the leaders, among the clergy and the laity. They are grounded in their belief, know its principles and should be prepared to throw off that aloofness which shades the light of their faith and prevents it from being seen by those who are bound to them, in the everyday life, by national, social, commercial, and often by family ties.

This quasi universal attitude of aloofness has developed among us what we might call "The policy of waiting." The festive board of Christ's faith is ready, but the guests from another fold are wanting. Have we gone "by the highways and byways" and forced ourselves upon their attention by our pressing invitations . . . "compelle intrare?" No, we stand at the door of the Banquet Hall, receiving politely and with joy, it is true, those who ask to come in; and there, for the most part, ends our apostolate. This naturally leads us to say frankly what we think could be done. For we believe that our methods of apostolate call for revision, need readjustment. The way to become like St. Paul, "All things to all men, that we may save them all," (I. Cor. I., 22) changes with the times.

In the great drama of life the stage-settings are ever shifting and the dramatis personae, changing. The success of the actor is to fit in as the play goes on. This he does by adopting ways and methods most appropriate to his surroundings. The problems we face are always the same, but to be efficient our methods of handling them must evolve and adjust themselves to the temper of the age. What should be then the characteristic features of our apostleship among non-Catholics? The neglect of readjustment of our methods in dealing with our separated brethren is the avowed cause of the tremendous waste of energy and the explanation of meagre results. "An enormous amount of energy," said Father Benson,—and he had the experience,—"has been expended uselessly in the past, assaulting positions that are no longer held, and by lack of appreciation of present conditions." In this age of loose thinking and of rapid dissemination of ideas, aggressiveness, supported by active propaganda, characterizes every world-wide movement in government, industry, science and religion. Every doctrine, every theory comes into the open and makes a strong bid for our hearing, for our following. Why should not the true doctrine of Christ assume this new shining armour of sane aggressiveness, come more into the open, and throw down the gauntlet to unbelief and indifference everywhere rampant and openly defiant? For, if conviction is the father of devotion, if our belief in the mastery of ideas is genuine, we cannot help but be aggressive. Needless to say we are not asking for vulgar aggressiveness, we are not asking for cheap sneers and attacks on the ignorance and the illogical position of others. By aggressiveness, we mean coming out in defence of truth which it is our privilege and responsibility to possess. Never have times been more inviting for an aggressive Catholicism. The great war has been for Protestantism the acid test. The result is for the Anglican and Evangelical Churches a complete failure,[2] and, as the soldiers said "a wash-out." They have lost their grip on the masses who are rapidly slipping into a religious chaos. The universal disintegration of creeds, strangely combined with a secret thirst for truth and unity now sweeps the English-speaking world. Are not these portentous events that manifest, as "The stirring of the waters," the movement of the Holy Spirit.

Our policy of aggressiveness, if it be true and resolute, will find expression in an intelligent, active and persevering propaganda. Propaganda is the dissemination of ideas, with the view of giving them a strong foothold in the mind. The gradual development of the message it carries and the recurrence of its lessons at stated intervals are the principal factors of this great force. To be efficient and successful our propaganda among our non-Catholic brethren will assume two distinct forms: The open and the silent form.

The silent propaganda is the spreading of Catholic ideas through the contact of our every day life with those who are not of our own Faith. Willingly or unwillingly we are bound to leave an impression of our belief in the business and social circles into which our life is cast. Our silence and abstention alone often militate against the Church. Let then the purity and spirituality of our lives, the honesty of our commercial relations, the sanctity of our home, bear witness to the sacredness of our religion and to the seriousness of its teachings.

A true Catholic life is in itself a living antithesis of the prevalent neo-pagan ideals, and stands as the best proof of our Faith's sincerity and of the depth of its conviction. "If life is the test of thought rather than thought the test of life," wrote Van Dyke, "we should be able to get light on the real worth of a man's ideals by looking at the shape they would give to human existence if they were faithfully applied." For, as Cromwell said, "The mind is the man."

The participation in civic, social and national activities will afford the occasion of meeting our non-Catholic neighbours. This personal and repeated contact, particularly with the leaders of the community, on occasions when the best brains can concentrate together without clash of principle, is, in our humble estimation, of the greatest value. The participation of the Knights of Columbus in war activities and reconstruction work is a striking illustration of this point. Nothing has more helped the Church in the American Republic, in breaking down the barrier of anti-Catholic prejudice, than the stand its Catholic laity took during and after the Great War. Have we not in Western Canada been rather remiss in our participation in public activities? If we have not had our share in public life, it has often been, we must confess, our own fault.

The strength of the silent propaganda lies in its persistency and consistency. A silent continuous and intelligent activity, and not a mere passivity, on the part of Catholics, is what characterizes this tremendous force. Like the tide, it creeps from pebble to pebble, from rock to rock, submerging every thing under its conquering waters.

The logic of Catholic life lends its consistency to this silent force. Our life is indeed the best proof of our principles. No one on the contrary does more harm to the Church than a Catholic whose life is not in harmony with his belief. The non-Catholic points to his life, with a sneer, and says: "See, he is no better than others!" This reasoning, we know is false, but for the unthinking masses, very often conclusive.