Hyde Park Discussions
Weary with a grinding day's toil in study, I went out this Sunday evening about five-thirty to the famous Hyde Park, known for its unique institution—the soapbox-orator row. Here multiplied thousands gather and mill about, listening to the political and religious speakers, each on his portable outdoor stand, frequently with a flag or ensign. It is a remarkable spectacle, well worth observing and pondering.
Among the political speakers, were found all shades of political faith, including, of course, the socialist and even the communist, with his deep-red flag. I asked a policeman if there were ever altercations or disorders. He answered, "Very rarely. The people listen to the different speakers and form their own opinions, and are not much influenced by the radicals. It's a good system."
But the place I sought was the religious row. Here Protestants of all shades, Catholics, Jews, and skeptics hold forth, each with his pulpit and his surrounding crowd. No, they are not all cranks. Many of the religious leaders of the city speak in Hyde Park. A prominent Methodist was speaking today. Also an able Catholic apologist. Our own evangelists have often participated. There is song and prayer, as in a regular meeting. It is vastly different, however, from the hall or tent meeting where you expect no interruptions. Here you are subjected to questions and perhaps challenge, and woe betide the man who is ill prepared, or is unable to support his every statement with Scripture, history, and sound reasoning. The sympathies of the crowd leave him when the weakness of his argument or cause is disclosed. This serves as a spur to well-rounded preparation.
Earnest, good-spirited men speak forth their views and seek to win others to them. And are they effective? I was impressed with the Salvation Army section. There were a number participating, and they were as fine-appearing a group of men as I have ever seen. One clean-cut, intelligent young man was telling of what the Army had done for him. He had been worldly, careless, irreligious. But right out there in Hyde Park his heart had been reached, and now he was witnessing for his Lord. It was not so much what was said that had impressed him, he declared, as the kind, Christian spirit of the Army speaker under heckling. Evidently, the plan has results, or it would not be continued.
Yes, Britain is wise. Hyde Park is a safety valve as well as an eminently democratic institution. There the sacred rights of free speech are exemplified and defended. Totalitarian governments and ecclesiastical hierarchies fear and oppose discussion, and with good reason. But truth has nothing to fear. Give it a fair field and no favors, and it will win. It is error and weakness that shrink from the light. Let weakness come to light through discussion, and truth is served and buttressed.
In our early decades as a people this principle was fully recognized and operative. In recent years, however, there has been a tendency to repress discussion of points on which there is not obvious unity, with the consequence that there is little room or occasion for discussion— lest someone "rock the boat." But a position must be pretty weak that is intolerant of scrutiny, and is fearful of investigation. The "Association Forum" section of this journal is in harmony with the concepts of our founding fathers.
In this historical-research work that has brought me again to Europe, tracing the advent hope through the centuries, as it is gauged by the progressive interpretation of the outline prophecies, truth has been made to shine with a luster and to take on a force, a strength, and a breadth heretofore unrecognized and scarcely deemed possible. In the light of nineteen centuries of history, with the thousands of witnesses left on record for support, illumination, and enforcement of God's last prophetic message to mankind, we can look any man or group—Jewish, Catholic, Protestant, or skeptic—squarely in the eye, and with lifted head and exultant heart not only witness to the truth, but meet and vanquish the sophistries of error. Let us hold fast the cherished principles of the right and propriety of discussion for the determining and enhancement of truth.
L. E. F.
The Matter of Our Music
Closest harmony and coordination between the music instructor in our colleges and the singing evangelist in the field is obviously imperative to denominational unity of purpose and achievement in the sphere of our denominational music. The singing evangelist, working under the ceaseless pressure of a hostile—or at least an apathetic—world, is faced with the very practical reality of leading in sacred song a large mixed crowd, largely non-Adventist, coming from every conceivable sort of religious or irreligious background. He must somehow, through the song service, subdue, blend, and inspire these discordant spirits, and bring them into a unified, receptive attitude ready for the message of the evening. His is a distinctive and often difficult task.
Confronted with such conditions, the field musician tends to look with impatience upon what he is prone to consider the cloistered positions and protected ideals of the music master ensconced in his quiet studio, smoothly carrying on in college chapel, church, or concert hall. He has everything favorable for effective capitalization of his high musical ideals, including picked voices with Adventist background, discipline, and perspective, and a willingness to make use of musical talents for God. The singing evangelist would like to see the music teacher face the hurly-burly world which confronts him as he works in tent, tabernacle, or theater, often without the support of Adventist musicians, audience, and atmosphere. He would find the proposition to be vastly different.
Two distinct worlds of music are here involved that are not always—not often—clearly differentiated. The skilled music teacher, pained by popularizing trends and lack of the dignity and high musicianship that constitute his very life, looks with horror upon the things he observes among some of our singing evangelists—certain of the songs they use and methods employed in their endeavor to get a heterogeneous crowd to singing strange but meaningful gospel songs. He is sickened and saddened to hear the jungle rhythm of syncopated scores and near jazz, with equally crude jingle rhymes, that taint certain of the songs some are prone to use. Thus the evangelist comes to think of his brother musician of the schools as living in a dream world, divorced from the practical realities of life; while the trained teacher thinks of his evangelistic brother as an innovator with lowered standards and disquieting trends. And neither has usually been willing to concede the viewpoint of the other.
There is no excuse for cheap music on the one hand, and on the other no consistency in the chiefly esthetic type, with its too frequently liturgical, if not indeed Catholic, slant. What each group needs is sympathetically to recognize the other's situation and viewpoint, and to draw together in mutual understanding and appreciation. The music teacher has much to give the field singer ; and the singing evangelist has much to show the music master. A practical exchange of viewpoints and problems and a definite drawing together is in order. The matter of our music is fundamentally important. Music can largely make or unmake a religious movement. At least, it profoundly affects it.
L. E. F.
Interest Based on Information
Sound and comprehensive information concerning our unfinished world task lies at the foundation of all true and intelligent interest in missions. And such an intelligent interest, based upon such a foundation, underlies all wholesome effort in service and all abiding sacrifice for missions. Facts, more facts, and still more facts—cogently, comprehensively, continuously, winsomely presented—are imperative, therefore, to the successful support of our mission enterprise. This matter of motive in giving is fundamental. The artificial stimulus of mere urge and pressure to whip up flagging zeal, does not constitute real food for building mission energy any more than does the toper's morning cup of coffee provide genuine strength for the day's duties. It never really satisfies or strengthens. Nor can we, as workers, truly promote the world task committed into our hands without a clear understanding of, and familiarity with, its real issues and involvements. A constant study of its objectives, its problems, its achievements to date, its unfinished, aspects, and an acquaintance with the precise method by which it is carried forward, is therefore necessary to an increasingly hearty support.
We must have some understanding of our world budget to have interest in the way in which its component funds are gathered and disbursed. We must grasp the principle that the individual worker constitutes the mission board representative for his particular locality, and that success or failure, progression or recession, of the entire enterprise definitely depends upon him—and several thousand others scattered over the home-base fields. We cannot create an abiding interest that leads to giving from principle and love—rather than from pressure or spasmodic drives—unless we ourselves have a clear concept of what is comprehended in manning and maintaining such a world movement.
Without such a definite understanding of the financial and other phases of mission work, we cannot really have heart confidence in its financial support. We need to know pretty definitely just what is being done with the funds gathered, and with what results. Acquaintance with, and confidence in, the judicious expenditure of them in the mission field engenders a confidence and a willingness to give, yes, a desire to sacrifice and continue to sacrifice for the finishing of the supreme task of this movement.
L. E. F.
