n devoting themselves to the restoration of
self-respect in the fallen, than in the attempt to nurture into vigour
his bruised or dormant instincts of right, than in the organized effort
to restore him to some place in society which should give him honest
bread in return for honest labour? Few men are criminals by choice.
Crime is more often the fruit of weakness than intention. Almost every
criminal would prefer an honourable life if he knew how to set about
it. Can we doubt that if Jesus presided in the councils of His Church
to-day, this would be one of the first directions in which He would
apply His energy? And who that surveys the modern Church with
undeflected judgment would not say that the Church would be a thousand
times dearer to the world, a thousand times more sacred, respected, and
authoritative, if instead of spending its time in spiritual
self-gratification, and its riches in the adornment of its worship, it
became the true Hospice of the Fallen and Unfortunate, thus
exemplifying in its action that love for men which was the essential
spirit of its Founder?
It will no doubt be replied that the Church already, by a thousand
institutions, of a philanthropic character, is attempting this very
work. But this is an evasion of the point, for such institutions only
begin their work of redemption when the existing social systems have
accomplished their work of destruction. Moreover, no institution,
however admirable, can be a substitute for the general action of the
Church. It is precisely this practice of substitution that accounts
for so much of the weakness of the Church. It is so much more easy and
pleasant to devolve upon others duties which to us are disagreeable, to
buy ourselves out of the conscription of personal duty, to persuade
ourselves that we have done all that can be asked of us when we have
given money for some worthy end, that it is not surprising that
multitudes of excellent and kindly people adopt such views and
practices. But, in doing so, they miss not only the joy of personal
well-doing, but also the sense of reality in the good that is done.
And the spectator and critic of the life of the Church, although he may
not be ignorant of the kind of work done by these institutions,
nevertheless is keenly conscious of the lack of reality in the work of
the Church, when he finds that its individual members are leading lives
in no way distinguishable by any active love for their fellows.
|