242
THE FORTNIGHT.
will of itself fall to pieces when its work is done; a triumphant faction is but intoxicated by success. The first is but a federation; the last is an oligarchy.
The most excellent Reviewer of our monthly contemporary, the Kansas Review, rises in his awful majesty and sits down upon us hard, for daring to write one small paragraph on the revival now in progress. He accuses us of ignorance, both of facts, and of "the vital principles of Christianity." He wishes us to put a value on the souls saved, and set this over against the increased coal and gas bills. In a true spirit of Christian charity he calls us several pretty names.
Now as to the fact of the existence of want and suffering in this city, if our revivalist will but take a walk with his eyes open, through the east side, if he will spend a few hours some day about the railroad yards, he will find ample proof of our assertions. It stands to reason that in a town of this size there must be want and suffering. The extent and value of municipal relief may be judged, when we know that it is left entirely in the hands of a police force called by one of the council "a disgrace to the city."
We think there is quite a difference between the faith taught by Christ and the dogmas of systematic theology. We think it is the latter of which the Reviewer says we do not "understand the vital principles." But if an understanding of those principles will make us enthusiastic to save souls in revival meetings, while upon our streets children suffer in body and become corrupt in soul, we would rather remain in ignorance. We wish to understand nothing that will deaden our sense of humanity. There is not much use in trying to save a man's soul when his body is starved or half clad.
It is easy to see that the whole head and front of our offending is in the incidental
criticism of revivals, called forth by some things seen on the streets. We will not deny that revivals do some good, but we say that their influence on the community as a whole is bad. Nothing can be permanently gained by appealing to passion instead of to reason. The very word "revival" is a contradiction in terms. If religious feeling and the "vital principles of Christianity' are good things—and we most assuredly believe they are—why is it necessary to "revive'" them; should they not be alive at all times?
"That revivals are dangerous passages for the church to pass through would seem to be well established, as by the laws of the human mind all great excitements and all extraordinary labors are followed by corresponding depressions and exhaustions. I seriously doubt whether Christian growth is greatly forwarded by these exceptional agencies. * * * If the labor expended upon revivals were spread evenly over greater space, and applied with neverflagging persistency to the shaping and the nurture of the plastic and docile minds of the young, I am sure that the Christian kingdom would increase in numbers and advance in power by a progress at once natural, healthy and irresistible."
Thus wrote an earnest Christian gentleman, whose pen, now fallen from his hand, was ever ready to advocate truth or defend the right. Disliking and disbelieving in the methods of revivalists, and thinking, from evidence before our eyes, that the Christian people of Lawrence had a higher duty before them, we wrote what we did. We knew that it would reach but a limited number, but we did what we could. If that paragraph and these lines can be construed into an attack on the faith taught by Christ, we are sorry. If they are an assault upon the dogmas of theologians, upon churches and preachers that would substitute passion for reason, and fear for love, we care not at all.