METHODIST

QUARTERLY REVIEW.

OCTOBER, 1883.

ART. I.-THE SOLIDARITY OF METHODISM YEARS ago, some Frenchmen, not familiar with the teachings of the Bible, supposed they had discovered a new truth in regard to the human race. Availing themselves of the facility which their language affords for coining terms to express scientific and philosophical ideas, they invented the word solidaritè, as the vehicle of their new thought. Slightly Anglicizing it, we have the word solidarity. For this word, says Trench, "we are indebted to the French Communists," who use it to "signify a community in gain or loss, in honor or dishonor, a being (so to speak) all in the same bottom." Trench adds, this term is "so convenient that it will be in vain to struggle against its reception among us." Webster defines it, "an entire union or consolidation of interests and responsibilities; fellowship."

By this term is meant that individuals are not isolated personalities, independent of each other, like trees standing separately in a field, but like branches on a common stock, or buds on a common bough. The same life-sap flows through them all; so that, if the life of the tree is attacked anywhere, -in its root, its trunk, its limbs-all the buds feel it. Yet. each bud has a life of its own, and develops its own stalk, leaves,. blossom, fruit. Each bud and leaf is necessary to the life and growth of the tree, its breathing-places, inhaling the oxygen, and bringing this invigorating influence into the life of the tree. So. FOURTH SERIES, VOL. XXXV.—40

mutual and all-pervasive are these relations between the boughs, buds, leaves and trunk, that if either fails to perform its functions, the tree will suffer. So it is with individual men in the great tree of mankind. None liveth to himself alone, or dieth to himself alone. If one suffers, all suffer. If the life of mankind becomes diseased, individual men are also affected, and whatever improves the life of the race improves the individual members of the race. Such is the common life-connection of humanity. It is a solid, a unit. As individuals, we are parts of a whole, with which we are bound in relations of mutual dependence and service. We have a common race life. This is what the term solidarity means.

This term contains no new principle; but one as old as Christianity, which long ago declared that God "made of one blood all nations of men." The golden rule is predicated upon this great underlying race truth. So also the second great Commandment. The clearest Christian expression of this truth is in the language of St. Paul-"We are members one of another." "The body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body." This truth is very prominent in Paul's epistles.

This principle is one of the broadest and most fundamental of all known truths.

I. IT SUSTAINS A VITAL RELATION TO THE HUMAN RACE. 1. The common race life is dependent upon it.

It stands opposed to artificial divisions of the human family into castes, to aristocratic exclusiveness, to slavery, war, and every thing that estranges nations and communities. It condemns all wrongs against our fellows, for an evil done to one is a wound inflicted upon the race. The virus enters into its common life. This principle is the basis of mutual assistance. It was a profound remark of Sir Walter Scott, that if the element of sympathy should die ont of the human heart, the race could not protract its existence through another generation. Philanthropy, moral and social reforms, educational movements for the masses, and all charities, have their origin in this principle. It lies at the foundation of all moral relations and duties in the social sphere. Impure acts, words, and examples taint the moral life of the race, sending their pernicious influence through large circles and for many generations.

This principle is fundamental in civil government. The Preamble of the Massachusetts Constitution declares:

The body politic is formed by a voluntary association of individuals; it is a social compact, by which the whole people covenant with each citizen, and each citizen with the whole people, that all shall be governed by certain laws for the common good.

It is a prime truth laid down in the commentaries on civil law, that government exists for the good of society. Natural rights are surrendered when any government is forined, in order to promote the greater good of the whole. This principle makes us all cosmopolitans, linking us in a common race life.

2. If the principle under consideration is so important, as regards the common life of the race, it ought also to be recognized in the civil polities of the nations.

All true progress in government is an approximation toward the perfect recognition of the principle that we are "members one of another." In the earlier and untutored periods of national life, it was only slightly recognized. It is the ideal of the periods of better development and fuller manhood.

In the civil polities of the nations there have been two extremes-Absolutism and Democracy-both of which ignore this great truth. Some governments are of a mixed character, having features in common with one of these extremes, and perhaps some resemblance to both. This is especially true of provisional governments.

In absolute government power centers in the head-king or emperor-not conferred according to constitutional provisions, but assumed, or inherited. No power rises from the people to the head, but starting from the head, it descends to the people. Such has been the government of all Mohammedan and pagan lands, and, until recent centuries, of almost all Europe also. It was the only thing practicable in the earlier periods of the race. The Mosaic economy provided some limitations of this absolutism, in advance of any thing that appeared in the pre-Christian ages. In limited monarchies, the sovereign power is curtailed by constitutional restrictions; and every constitutional limitation is an expression, more or less, of the principle that we are "members one of another." The British Magna Charta, a notable guaranty of popular rights against absolutism, is a conspicuous illustration; and the principles

embodied six centuries and a half ago in that memorable document, the basis of English liberties, have been widely expanded and applied in the successive centuries. The movement has been a progressive abridgement of absolute prerogative among people of almost every clime and land.

The other extreme is pure democracy. To some extent this form of government recognizes the principle that we are "members one of another," but only in an inchoate and unorganized way, for it is a government wholly by the people. All business being transacted in an assembly of the whole people, the power rests wholly in their hands, and is distributed among individuals. Having no cohesion and no center of power, democracies soon fall in pieces. How different from the figure employed in the New Testament, in setting forth the principle we are discussing the human body, with its various members, the vital organs, etc. These portions are not disconnected and separate, like the individual people in a pure democracy, but organized and controlled by a central head. The blood is diffused from the heart through all the extremities, and then returns to the heart. Each member has its appropriate functions, but there are checks and counter-checks all through the body. No such things can be claimed for a pure democracy; it is only a collection of individualities, discordant and disintegrating. Such is the unquestioned verdict of history.

But what form of civil government most fully recognizes the principle under consideration, so strikingly illustrated by the figure of the human body? Ans. A republican government like that of the United States.

In the republican government of the United States the power resides principally in the people. The popular phrase of President Lincoln, so often quoted with encomium, “A government of the people, for the people, and by the people," is not quite correct. The Republic of the United States is a government of the people, for the people, by representatives of the people.

Originating with the people, the power rises through distinct lines of ascent, to the Congress and the President, and then, through enactments and appointees to office, returns again to the people. To specify: we have first Governors, State Legislatures, Representatives in Congress, and a President and

Vice-President elected by the people. Then, we have United States Senators elected by the Legislatures. Thus the power, starting with the people, concentrates in Congress and the Presiident, the federal head of the government of the United States. From this point the power returns again to the people, the members of the Cabinet, the Judges of the Supreme Court and of the District Courts, the United States Marshals, the Collectors of Ports, the officers of the Revenue, the Postmasters, and the Army and Navy officers-all appointed by the President and Congress, or by heads of departments, whom they have appointed. Thus, the power originating with the people, rises and concentrates in a single head or will, and then returns to the people. Along all the way of ascent and descent there are checks and counter-checks, in the form of legal or constitutional limitations. Some links may be wanting, but they are being gradually supplied by national and State legislation year by year. No other government so fully meets the conditions of St. Paul's illustration.

II. THIS PRINCIPLE IS ALSO FUNDAMENTAL TO THE CHURCH. 1. It is the life principle of the Church. It is opposed to caste and selfish exclusiveness in the Church. If true to the spirit of her founder, no invidious distinctions will be recognized. It is also opposed to the spirit of excessive denominationalism and exclusive sectarianism. The narrow assumption sometimes indulged by conceited bigots, that their denomination is the Church of Christ, is a gross offense. To exclude from the Lord's table Christian men and women because they have not been baptized according to a specific denominational form, is also an offense to the body of Christ.

This principle is also opposed to schisms. Different denominations do not necessarily imply schisms. The New Testament doctrine of schism is heart-division among Christians, and that may exist in the same denomination, and in a local church or society, without any open rupture.

This principle is the basis of Christian fellowship; it sweetens the communion of saints; it begets kindly attention to those united with us in Christ; it hallows and makes precious our Church relations; and it makes the Church a comfort and a blessing. It is the basis of mutual forbearance, mutual esteem, mutual joys and sorrows. It prompts to kindly interest in