« FöregåendeFortsätt »
are unable to quote any text of Scripture against such activities as are here described, we refrain from submitting any rule to which there must be general consent in our Synod. This is not the same, however, as expressing an opinion favorable to such participation of our people in religious mixed choruses which produce sacred music, or an opinion favorable to the organizing of Lutheran choruses under nonLutheran directors. As for his own sentiments, the writer will say that it grates on him to see a mixed assembly of Lutherans, Catholics, Jews, and Christian Scientists singing songs with any references to the Lord. He will say to himself: "This is not an hour of worship, these are not worshipers, religious belief is not involved, it is merely the art of solemn harmonies wedded to exalted sentiment that I have come to feast upon❞— and still the essential disharmony of uttering religious thoughts for a non-religious purpose is going to destroy even the artistic delight which he would otherwise take in the performance. As for seeing a nonLutheran, unchristian, at least churchless individual conducting a mass chorus of Lutherans on some festival occasion -this tends to destroy much of the delight which we could otherwise derive from such singing. We mean again such delight as is ordinarily produced by a work of art. There is something inherently inartistic in a performance which, on the one hand, bids our souls "rejoice in the Lord" and, on the other, bids us admire the ability of a conductor whose rejoicing is applause, wages, or anything else than the Lord. We have been up against this, and we know how it impressed us. But that is not the same as saying that such practises are unchristian and divisive of the Church. If some of our people will say that they "see no wrong in this," our answer is, "Neither do we." And where God's Word does not prohibit, we should be slow to speak. There are enough sins as it is. Let us not invent new ones. G.
Must We Live in Fear of the Pope?
The Pope seeks to inspire fear and dread or admiration and awe. And with many he is eminently successful. In his own Church there are millions, from the highest to the lowest, who live in mortal fear of him. And outside of his own Church there are many who are afraid of his agents.
There are, for instance, Protestant business men who contribute regularly, at times quite large sums, to Catholic institutions and the Catholic Church because they fear the power and influence of the Church of Rome. There are Protestant writers who do not dare to give utterance to their true sentiments concerning the papacy for fear of the Pope and his minions. There are large secret societies which have been organized through fear of the Pope. The hooded members of the Ku Klux Klan are hooded for fear of the Romanists. They fear the persecution to which they would expose themselves if they became known as members of this organization. During the late election, men who were accused of being members of the K. K. K. issued public statements, aye, some attached their oaths thereto, declaring that they were no members of this order. Fear of the Pope drove them to do this, though they lost votes by their action.
Those who follow this course tell us that there is just cause for such general alarm and fear. They point to the
Pope's power. The Roman Catholic Church is numerically far larger than all Protestant churches put together; it is unified, being externally united under one visible head, and it has a firm grip upon its financial resources. Then they point to the seeming helplessness of Protestant denominations. Think of poor Protestantism torn with factions! Not one of the denominations about us has been able to rid itself of those who within their own camps and fortresses are sapping the strength of the churches. Indeed, it almost seems that some of these denominations harbor secret agents of Rome. One of the lay members of the big Baptist denomination lately gave one million dollars toward a Catholic church. And if we look upon the comparatively little flock of those who have, confess, and teach the Word of God in its truth and purity, what are they compared with their opponents? What a lamb is to a full-grown tiger. Certainly, if ever it was true, then it is surely true to-day: "With might of ours can naught be done, soon were our loss effected."
But remember, the situation becomes entirely different if one other factor is mentioned: "But for us fights the Valiant One, whom God Himself elected." It was this consideration which gave that little monk Luther such amazing power and such lionlike courage against his mighty opponents. If this is kept in mind, then there is no cause at all for fear and alarm.
The papacy, after all, is comparatively a very weak power. The papacy is weak because it stands for untruthit has not the truth. It has for all times tied up with the sinking, leadlike weights of untruth and deceit. That in itself constitutes no small hole in its vessel. Romanists are
constantly compelled to pump water. We notice when we read their publications that they are forever on the defensive. Nobody on this earth is so afraid of truthful publicity as the Romanists. They have so much to hide, so many questions that they dare not discuss; so much to defend by rude force or by subterfuge that their entire fabric is constantly atremble. As long as they can keep others intimidated, they have some success; but let their opponents but gain courage to throw light upon their shams and to attack them, as Luther dared, and many a Roman castle will sink into ruins because it was built upon sand.
Another vulnerable point in the Roman Catholic Church is its opposition to the Bible. Romanists are afraid of the Bible. It is true, they have been forced to publish Bibles of their own, but they have always been careful to add their own comment, their own introductions, and their own perversions. Whoever is afraid of the Bible and has the Bible against him occupies a very weak position. Hence, after all, the power of the Pope is in reality so insignificant that we can say with Luther: "One little word can fell him."
And think for one moment what the papacy has not been able to do! The Pope would like to have learning restricted to his own language, the Latin language; but he was not able to do it. We have to-day, in spite of the Pope's power, much finer and more exquisite literature in English and in German than in Latin. The Pope, from the beginning, condemned Bible societies and wished to put a stop to their activities, but — to-day the Bible is by far the best seller. You see, the Pope is not as mighty as he seems to be. The
Pope would, if he could, stop our publications, stop the publication of Luther's Small Catechism, stop the mailing of our periodicals, in which his shams are continually exposed. But he is forced to allow all this to go on.
Why, in Rome itself, overtopping the Vatican, Protestants are building their church-buildings. The Pope has protested, he is supposed to be very mighty in Italy, and in Rome they would not lose him because he brings money to that city, and yet he has not been able to stop the Protestants from building churches in Rome and in Italy. Somehow there is a mighty power against the power of the Pope. It is not the money power or the press or the politicians, it is God Himself.
Besides all this, it dare not be forgotten that God can at any time raise up a man mightier than Luther. At one time the Pope thought he had all Christendom in his pocket; however, God took a little farmer boy and made of him such a giant that the Pope could not conquer him, but came forth from the battle with that lad so thoroughly worsted that he had to be glad to be able to pick up the scraps, gather the remains, and take his refuge to secret diplomacy and bloody warfare in order to hold what he had and to try to regain what he had lost. And now, after four hundred years, he has regained little or nothing.
When people advised Martin Luther to spare himself because Christendom needed him, and because the poor, tyrannized Christians could not afford to lose their champion, Martin Luther told his friends that God is able to raise up ten Martin Luthers mightier than the one who was then living. That is still true to-day. The arm of the Lord is not shortened. If the Pope is against God and God is against the Pope, which is the true condition of affairs, then we have nothing to fear. That is to say, those have nothing to fear who are able to say, as Luther was able to say: "Take they our life, goods, fame, child, and wife: let these all be gone, they yet have nothing won; the kingdom ours remaineth."
The arm of the Lord is not shortened. That Man for whom the stone upon the grave of Lazarus and the death which worked in his body were no more than so many spider's webs is still alive and just as powerful as He was on the day on which He vanquished death itself. Yes, and He can produce ten, twenty, or one hundred Martin Luthers at any moment and give them such success that all Catholic cathedrals would resound with the wail of the vanquished foes of Christ. We feel sorry for those Protestants who still look to the arm of flesh. But those who trust in the Lord of Sabaoth have nothing to fear from the Pope. Let him do his worst, the promises of God are ours, the Savior from sin is ours, the victory over death, sin, and the grave is ours, heaven is ours. Why, God has determined upon the destruction of Antichrist; and if God is God, then this destruction is assured. 2 Thess. 2, 8.
Frederick Pfotenhauer, D. D.,
President Pfotenhauer was born at Altencelle, near Celle, Hannover, Germany, April 22, 1859. He first at tended the Latin school at Celle and later entered our Concordia at Fort Wayne. He graduated from Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, Mo., as candidate of theology in 1880 and was ordained at Odessa, Minn., during the same year. For seven years he bore the hardships of missionary life on the northwestern frontier of civilization. Many a German La theran settlement in Minnesota and North Dakota was visited by him. Frequently his missionary tours took him far beyond the facilities of travel by rail. He was thus part and parcel of the expansion of the American nation into the great North west and one of the band of faithful missionaries, who with the least possible encouragement in the way of salary and of the comforts of life, with the persistence of a great faith in the Lord of the Vineyard, laid the foundations of our Synod deep and strong in a well-instructed laity.
Rev. Pfotenhauer was installed at Lewiston, Minn., in 1887 and at Hamburg, Minn., in 1894.
His first synodical office was that of Secretary of the Minnesota and Dakota District. Later he was Visitor and then President of the District. In 1908 he was elected Vice President of the Missouri Synod, and since 1911 he is its President, having been reelected in 1914, 1917, 1920, and
1923. The small insert photograph shows him at the convention of 1923.
Dr. Pfotenhauer entered into holy wedlock with Miss Helene Brauer at Crete, Ill., October 10, 1882. The union has been blessed with eleven children, of whom three have departed this life. His sons Martin and Carl are in the ministry. Daughters are married to Rev. W. Friedrich, Rev. F. Hertwig, and Rev. V. Bartling.
The faculty of Concordia Seminary conferred upon Rev. Pfotenhauer the title of Doctor of Theology honoris causa October 25, 1920.
The Church-School and Ministerial Candidates.-It was pointed out by the Lutheran (General Council) years ago that the Missouri Synod owes its large enrolment of theological students to the Christian day-school. A little computation which we have recently made confirms this judgment. The Norwegian Lutheran Church numbers 400,000 souls and 94 theological students, or one student for every 4,255 souls. The Missouri Synod, with 1,050,000 souls, has 589 theological students, or one student for every 1,782 souls. On the ratio obtaining in the Norwegian Synod we would have 246 theological students instead of 589. The inner unity of the Missouri Synod may have something to do with our large enrolment, but the fact cannot be overlooked that the Missouri Synod has a system of dayschools and the Norwegian Synod has none. That by far the greatest number of our theological students are products of the parochial schools is a matter of common knowledge. Thus the sacrifices which our congregations bring for their day-schools redound not only to their own benefit, but to the benefit of thousands of souls who would not be reached by our Church if it were not for the great number of candidates who are graduated every year by our seminaries.
It is encouraging to note in this connection the interest which our young ministers take in the Christian education of the children in their charges. Under present-day conditions, with the standards now being applied by the school authorities in many States, it requires a greater expenditure of time and effort to conduct the school than in the earlier period of our history. We find young ministers who are veritable examples of self-sacrificing labor in this field. A few examples which just come to hand may be quoted.
From Secor, Ill., our missionary writes that he is working for an extra credit in Education from Augustana College. "A year ago our congregation had a school of 18 pupils and a lady teacher. Grades one to seven were taught. This year we have 42 children and have added the eighth grade. We are now instructing in two rooms. The lady teacher has one room, and in the other room my wife, who was a teacher for some years, is instructing in the afternoon; I teach in the morning. Now the congregation is speaking of calling a graduate of one of the teachers' seminaries. Next year we shall add the ninth grade, as our town is without a regular high school. For teaching this grade I need a certificate."
At Cuba, Mo., our missionary has lately begun a school, and he writes: "We have only eleven children in our school. I never knew what a pleasure it was to teach school until I had a good taste of it. Now I would rather teach school 'than eat.' From Big Spring, Nebr.: "I induced the members, seven in number, to start a parochial school in fall. Learning of the great blessings of such a school, they finally decided to start one." This missionary, in addition to teaching school, finds it possible to teach an adult class, requiring a drive of fifty miles every week.
In San Antonio, Tex., our missionary opened a school in September, 1923, with four pupils. At present he has eight.
No doubt many similar instances could be quoted. Let these suffice to show that the old spirit of devotion to the greatest of all educational tasks, the training of young children unto Christ, is not dead among us. An evil day has dawned for our Church when opportunities for starting a school even with a small enrolment are neglected. We have large enrolments in our seminaries only because in years gone by the young graduates of those days did not think it wasted efforts to start a school. Our Church owes those men a debt which it can never repay. From their bodies, to quote the words of Christ, flow rivers of living water. The seeds which their humble labors planted have now sprouted and bring fruit in the wide-spread missions of our Church.
It is all very simple. Train children to know Jesus Christ, whom to know "is life eternal," and you will train the spirit that will sacrifice itself for the Gospel ministry. A forceful statement by a Presbyterian here comes to mind. Rev. John Burton Thwing said in the Presbyterian of September 4, 1924:
"The care of the soul is the Church's task. The school grew out of the church- and in my opinion, would be far better off as an adjunct to the church. Trying as it does to compromise among Jew, Catholic, Protestant, and infidel, it casts out the Bible and all that is worth keeping and 'educates' the souls of our little ones on junk. It were better to have no 'education' in the present usage of the word, and to know one's Bible and believe it, than to have a thousand Doctor's degrees and not know Jesus Christ, whom to know 'is life eternal."" G.
Money the Acid Test. Really? One hears it so often, and it so commonly passes without contradiction, that one naturally hesitates to contradict a notion so generally accepted, the notion that for our Christian faith there is no test so reliable as that of giving. If a man is a Christian, he will give liberally. Stinginess is a clear indication of an absence of love, hope, and charity. It's the acid test.
But is it?
The Lord Himself has given us a test of discipleship. He says Matt. 16, 24: "If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me." Jesus bore the cross because He was faithful to the truth which was to be revealed to the world through Him. If He had been a Messiah according to the notion of the Jews, they would not have crucified Him. But the heavenly teaching which He brought concerning Himself and His work, man's redemption and the way of eternal life, brought upon Him the hatred of the selfrighteous Jews. Now, says our Lord, this is the test of true discipleship. Are we willing to bear the contradiction of the wise, who call us fools for believing the Inspiration, the Incarnation, the Atonement, the Resurrection? Are we willing to be called narrow-minded, intolerant bigots because we believe that simply by accepting the plain teaching of the Bible, and only so, may we find the way of salvation? The learned, the scholars, the scientists, have nothing but a pitying smile for
our loyalty to the Bible. There are some luminous exceptions, scholars and scientists of the first rank who are firm believers in the Bible. But the great majority of university men look upon our religious position as a relic of the sixteenth century, as unsuited to the present age as the quill-pen and the tallowcandle.
Are we willing to bear this reproach? Is the Christian student willing to stand up for his faith and be ridiculed by his classmates? How many who are convinced of the ungodliness of lodge practises are unwilling to step out because they fear to lose friends or to lose their daily bread? How will parents advise their sons and daughters when they are tempted to enter into a matrimonial union which will render a consistent Christian life impossible thereafter, but which offers many material advantages?
"If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me."
This is the acid test. We know it from Christ's own lips as recorded by inspiration. And we know it from observation and experience. Whatever we may say about the necessity of liberal giving, let us call it a test of discipleship, but let us not call it the acid test, which finally decides whether a man is a Christian. We may be greatly concerned about the spiritual life of a man who out of a miserly spirit withholds the bare necessities from the servants of the Word; who seemingly has no heart for the heathen at home and abroad, no missionary spirit. We may be deeply concerned about such men and women because spiritual life in such people is certainly at a very low ebb. As church-members they are a disgusting lot. They seem to be intent on saving their own souls only and seem to think an outward observance of religious duties a safe way to heaven. They must be baptized, of course; they must be confirmed, of course; they must go to Communion twice a year, of course; they would be horrified at the thought of being married by a justice of the peace-they are church people, they must be married in church by a minister; and they want to be buried from the church which they attended so long and regularly and to which they contributed during an entire year not as much as they spent on new automobile tires. Do we intend to defend this kind of church-member? We do not. But even such extreme cases must not be quoted in support of that well-known saying about the acid test. A weak or underdeveloped Christian may still be a Christian, a follower of Jesus, though through his own fault or the fault of others he may fail to experience that joy which comes to liberal givers.
It is true that we need to encourage one another toward liberal giving. It is even more necessary that we encourage each other to remain loyal to the teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ. Only then will our giving also be welcome to our Lord and blessed by Him. G.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good."This familiar Bible-passage, found in 1 Thess. 5, 21, is often quoted by men who refuse to insist on purity of doctrine, as a Scriptural warrant for their indifference and laxity. "Paul does not sanction fanaticism," they say; "he wants everybody to have an open mind." Quite true. But Paul does not want the Christian to be an unprincipled man, without firm convictions as to what is right and wrong, true and untrue. The Watchman-Examiner recently said very correctly:
"It is possible to carry our practise of having an open mind to sorry extremes. President Mullins [of the Louisville Baptist Seminary] in a convention address once said that while he liked to have the windows of his house open, he liked also to have screens in them. His suggestion is a good one. To some things our minds should be closed. A man ought not to have an open mind about his wife's character. If he has, what ought to be a home will be a hell. Hus
bands and wives ought to hold one another above suspicion. Prac tically all of us hold the love of our mothers above impeachment So a disciple ought to feel about his Lord. When Jesus Christ has spoken on any matter, that ought to settle it for us. How can we call Him Lord if we think we have a right to appeal from His decision or to review what He has said in the light of our own fallible reason? Men who have not accepted Him as Savior no owned Him as Lord may fairly claim the right to subject His judg ments and His commands to scrutiny. But for us, who have given ourselves to him, our confidence in Him is so absolute that when He speaks, we are silent. There is no challenge on our lips and no questioning of our hearts. The Master has spoken. He knows, and His judgment is right."
Besides, it is clear that the advocates of indifferentism thoroughly misunderstand St. Paul. Instead of confirming their view, his statement absolutely condemns it. Every candid person will have to admit that what the apostle inculcates is not an "I don't care" attitude toward error, but the very opposite. His meaning can be given thus: "Be not indifferent in matters of doctrine and ready to accept any teaching which you may come in contact with. Prove all things. Examine before you assent. Distinguish carefully between what is good and what is bad." In brief, these words of St. Paul help to prove that indifference toward heresy is not a part of the Christianity taught in the New Testament. A. Another Fruit of Unionism. We remember the day when the denominations exulted in the success of the Y. M. C. A. To-day the Watchman-Examiner (Baptist) prints this:
"Now there are numerous pastors who dread to have their young men join the Y. M. C. A.; for that means the end of their usefulness as soul-winners. Pastors with a thoroughly evangelical message are not invited to address the association, and it hardly can be said that conversions are sought in the association's work The Y. M. C. A. of our day is socialized and liberalized completely."
Our Church has often been ridiculed because of its stand against the unionism of the Y. M. C. A. and the Y. W. C. A. || but it has long since become apparent that those pastors whe recognized the dangers of the unionism of these societies had "their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.”
Heretofore the association drew the line at having Roman Catholics in executive and leading positions, but now we are told by Mr. P. Whitwell Wilson that the growth of the Y. M. C. A. in the Philippines is remarkable, and that there the Hon. Theodore R. Yangco, a Roman Catholic, subscribed $10,000 for the association at Manila and is now the leader in that society. He adds that many progressive Roman Catholics rallied to his leadership. Some think that it means the "liberalizing of Catholicism," but every one who knows any thing of the Roman hierarchy is convinced that it means that the interests of Romanism will be guarded in the Y. M. C. A. They will allow Protestants to supply the money for the social affairs, amusements, and gymnastics, and Romanists will take care of the religion. How long will it take until Rome wil have all?
The spiritual chemistry of unionism works about as follows: First introduce unionism and tolerance of error because of "Christian love," and then a little leaven will soon leaven the whole lump. How can a man who has played up tolerance defend intolerance? He would lose all his popularity. And when devotion and loyalty to truth have been driven off, all is ready for a strong infusion of Romanism.
Let us be thankful that God gives us so many demonstrations of the final, fatal effects of unionism. It helps us to be on our guard against its very first pleadings for tolerance. S.
Do We Want This Education? - The Supreme Council of the Scottish Rite Masonry is working with might and main
for the establishment of a Federal Department of Education, with a Secretary in the President's cabinet and Federal aid for public school purposes. And what is the education which they wish to foster in this country? One of the articles which they published indicates the trend of their efforts. The article is written by a heathen poet and educator of India. He suggests the following:
"If we live in an arrangement which is not our own, but which is made by somebody else, however wise he may be, it is no real world of freedom for us. For our creative mind craves expression for itself in building its own world. So in my institution I try to make provision for these three aspects of freedom freedom of mind, freedom of heart, and freedom of will.
"He who knows that Nature's own purpose is to make the boy a full man when he grows up, — full in all directions, mentally and mainly spiritually, he who realizes this, brings up the child in the atmosphere of freedom.
"I have given you the general principle of the education which I believe to be true, and it is this, that, as God Himself finds His own freedom in His own creation and then His nature is fulfilled, human beings have to create their own world, and then they can have their freedom."
He is opposed to discipline, opposed to repression, but wishes each boy to create a world of his own out of himself. All this is in exact contradiction to what the Bible tells us, namely, that "the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth." Gen. 8, 21; that "it is good for a man that he bear the yoke in his youth," Jer. 3, 27; and that "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom," Ps. 111, 10. True, indeed, the Christian religion does not consist of a monastic, ascetic repression or destruction of the nature within. But neither does it favor undisciplined expression of all that arises in the sinful heart. Human nature is not to be destroyed, for it is God's creature, but it must be sanctified, for it is corrupted by sin. Evil tendencies and sin are in the hearts of all children. God's Word testifies to it, and daily experience shows it. There can be therefore no better education for the youth than that which is guided by the principle laid down by Martin Luther in his Catechism, when he says "that the Old Adam in us should by daily contrition and repentance be drowned and die with all sins and evil lusts and, again, a new man daily come forth and arise, who shall live before God in righteousness and purity forever." The Masonic program, on the other hand, intends to give us a heathen training, which knows of no sanctification by God's Word, no moral restraint through the revelation of God, no crucifixion of the flesh, no vivification of the Spirit, but the full development of the corrupt nature within. The product of such an education can be nothing else than deceitful hypocrisy and self-righteous pharisaism.
Christians who rejoice in their Savior know of an education which represses and mortifies the worst that is in the child, while at the same time it nurtures faith and love and hope, those spiritual powers by which the world is overcome. That is the Christian education which we wish for our children. That is the education which produces the true world conquerors, who can sing Zion's songs of victory and triumph. S.
The Craze for Excitement.-When questioned, criminals, especially young criminals, often declare that they did what they did because they craved excitement, that they were on the lookout for thrills. Without question there is an increasing class of young people who are not satisfied unless they see or hear something exciting and thrilling. The movies and the press foster this frame of mind. The harrowing details of a railroad accident, a steamboat explosion, or of a desperate holdup is to their liking. A wealthy man is reported to have said, "I wish I could know how it feels to be very poor."
Another said he wished to know how it feels to be dying. This state of mind has so taken hold of the rising generation that mischief and crime are resorted to to satisfy the craving.
This frame of mind, moreover, distracts the soul and prevents us from looking within to see whether our daily thoughts, words, and deeds are in accordance with God's will. A person so constantly distracted by thrills finds no time for that daily contrition and repentance by which the Old Adam in us is daily to be drowned and die with all sins and evil lusts and by which a new man is daily to arise to live before God in righteousness and purity. Mere excitement, a thrilling experience, may cause us to believe that we have had a wonderful time and have gained much, whereas in reality we may simply have wasted time in which we ought to have been at work, faithfully performing the duties of each day. Common tasks, the ordinary round of little things, the daily routine, which seem just so much drudgery, are nevertheless required of us by our Lord and should have our undivided attention. Here again the habit of daily prayer, the habit of daily commending ourselves to the Lord and asking His blessing upon our tasks, be they small or great, will help in preserving us and our children from that epileptic, zigzag, fitful course of life which is wasted upon a quest for blood-curdling experiences. To such prayer should be added the daily reading and contemplation of God's holy Word. The taste for such daily occupation will cure this hectic S. craze for thrilling experiences.
Mr. Coolidge and the Holy Name Society. Our Synod has so far refrained from calling the attention of the Government to the fact that we are meeting in convention, and our Districts are not in the habit of advising the state governor of their meetings. On the whole, it cannot but detract from the solemnity of a church-gathering when an official of the Government, separated from us by anywhere from three to ten horizons in religious faith, congratulates us upon our purposes. The thing jars, especially when the congratulating politician, as the case may well be, is a rascal.
When Mr. Coolidge sent greetings to the United Lutheran Church conventions at Chicago, he showed good sense both in what he said and in what he left out. It was a dignified, courteous letter, and to all of it we can subscribe.
Mr. Coolidge was not quite as successful in addressing the Holy Name Society (Catholic) which met at Washington last September. It was his privilege to greet this large gathering of citizens and bid them welcome to the nation's capital. But to remind Roman Catholics of the American principle that "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States" is quoting the gospel of freedom to a congregation which needs some plain preachment of the law. Certainly, a denomination which claims for its chief official the right to dictate to every temporal government as a temporal prince, should not be reminded so much of religious liberty as of the duty of an American citizen to renounce his allegiance to every foreign ruler. Not being able to say this to his guests, it would have been better not to quote the Constitution at all.
As for the Holy Name pledge (to refrain from profanity, blasphemy, and unclean speech), no one will deny that from the standpoint of citizenship and public morality this purpose is worthy of all praise. If Mr. Coolidge commends these aims, we have no quarrel with him. He spoke from the standpoint of civic righteousness only. However, when the Pope praises Mr. Coolidge (December 18, address to the cardinals) for having spoken "with appropriate words of the respect due to the name of God and of the ugliness of blasphemy," his words no longer seem quite so appropriate. Looking beyond human judgments and seeing things as God wants us to see them, we