What Will America Do?
Dr. Paul S. Leinbach rings clear in an editorial in the Reformed Church Messenger which we think
is of vital interest to us at this present moment. May we ponder it well:
The treaty of peace is in a state of coma. The United States
Senate has run away from its job. Like a bunch of guilty school boys, the
members of the two parties are pointing their fingers at each other and seeking
to place the blame on the other side. Opponents like the New York Sun say the treaty is dead beyond all hope of resurrection;
others say it can be revived, but lies maimed, bleeding, in a condition of suspended
animation. It will be difficult to shake the conviction that a blind and stubborn
partisanship has won the victory over broad-minded statesmanship, and that the prestige
of our county has suffered immeasurably through a lack of noble leadership. The
practically unanimous appeals of the Christina people of America have been
treated with an almost unbelievable contempt (next words obscured) not easy to
remain hopeful in the face of such evidences of parochialism, stubbornness, and
materialism.
Readers of the Messenger
doubtless notice the pathetic appeal of General Jan Smuts of South America, which,
strange to say, arrived in this country an hour after the senate had rejected
the treaty of peace. It was a plea that America should not disappoint the hopes
of mankind and abandon the world it its fate. But such a possibility as that
the heart of the world might easily be broken by the infidelity of America to
her high opportunities and responsibilities, has become the butt for jests and
sneers on the part of those who blatantly proclaim that genuine patriotism is
synonymous with a selfish and exclusive nationalism. We are sure that the news
of the defeat of the Treaty has bought great grief to many thousands of
oppressed and imperiled people all over the world.
However, as the Messenger
said last week, “The war is by no means lost.” We are not ready yet to believe
that the treaty will be finally rejected, nor will we accept the claim that it
will be accepted in a maimed and anemic condition, which would be disgrace to
our country. There has been a lack of considerateness and conciliation on both
sides, such as becomes Christian gentlemen and Americans.
Some sort of reservations may be advisable, but we believe that
what is called a reservation is a bit of arrant hypocrisy when it undoes the thing
which it dishonestly presumes to qualify. We have not believed that the American people are willing to enter
into an agreement in which they absolve themselves in advance from moral obligations
and self-sacrifices for the welfare of others. The very spirit which purposes
such an attitude is detestable, and it cannot ultimately triumph because it is
in opposition to the mind of Christ.
During the next few weeks the followers of the Master can
render a great service by their prayers and their influence in helping to
arouse a righteous public sentiment and to compel our recalcitrant leaders to
do their duty, for after all the President and the senators alike are not
lords, but servants of the people, and it is the duty of the hour to make those
who “believe in peace and pursue it” an “articulate, imperative, unyielding solidarity.”
Those who are in a position to know tell us that every
religious journal in America is in favor of the treaty of peace. We merely make
this statement for the serious consideration: Why are they?
No comments:
Post a Comment