September Eleventh

"It is the duty of nations as well as of men to own their dependence upon the overruling power of God, and to confess their sins and transgressions in humble sorrow, yet with assured hope that genuine repentance will lead to mercy and pardon, and to recognize the sublime truth, announced in Holy Scripture, and proven by all history, that those nations only are blessed whose God is the Lord. And, insomuch (sic) as we know that by His divine law nations, like individuals, are subjected to punishments and chastisement in this world, may we not justly fear that the awful calamity of civil war which now desolates the land may be but a punishment inflicted upon us for our presumptuous sins, to the needful end of our national reformation as a whole people? We have been the recipients of the choicest bounties of Heaven; we have been preserved these many years in peace and prosperity; we have grown in numbers, wealth and power as no other nation has ever grown. But we have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious hand which has preserved us in peace and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us, and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own. Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us. It behooves us, then, to humble ourselves before the offended power, to confess our national sins and to pray for clemency and forgiveness."

Abraham Lincoln [March 30, 1863]

Throughout our history as a nation, under God, there have been many pioneers of progress, similar to those efforts of Abraham Lincoln (for example) during his own personal struggles, yet time and again we find it has been united efforts of religious institutions that have laid out the path which humanity should travel despite how big or small a struggle might seem to our own natural eye. Consequently, democracy has always had such a need of religion performing this very necessary work, even this day. Religion has best been able to do this most efficaciously only when in a thorough accord with principles of a civil government; religion must be a supplement to it; grounded, if you will, in the same fundamental principles. Based on past experiences, civil institutions were at the height of their powers having religion as such.

Whatever the form of government it is both impractical and impossible passing laws regulating man's every act whose consequences may affect others. The civil law must confine itself to mere prohibitions; it cannot prescribe rules of conduct imposing positive duties upon all individuals in their private intercourse with others. Any such attempts have only proved futile in the past. The law cannot judge motives and intentions; it can only pass upon overt acts. There are innumerable acts harmful to others which, on that account, the law can neither prevent nor punish; on the other hand, it is powerless to force people toward doing acts beneficial to others, yet the prevention of injurious acts alone cannot and will not bring about full fruition of the objects of co-operation. The enforcement of the law can only produce a form of armed peace. The main difficulty with which any theory of  government has to contend is the impossibility of controlling and restraining the primordial passions via cold reasoning. Innate in every man is the primal instinct of preservation; source of all passions causing social troubles. There is greed, which is an overpowering desire to acquire and hoard up things necessary for the maintenance of life. Its manifestation can be seen, as example, in the single cell when storing up fats, oils and starches within its sack, to be used when food cannot be obtained from outside. The instinct of preservation is most selfish, and when allowed full sway the greed which it breeds has no consideration for others and is the source of nearly all the injustice perpetrated by men against their fellows. Society claims that, because of co-operation, it is not necessary for every man to strain all his efforts to store up necessaries for further use, to provide against barren times; society  tries to assure this supply, but the voice of reason is drowned in the presence of this overwhelming elemental passion. The sight of poverty and misery makes no impression on it. Anger, a powerful protective passion, has been greatly softened, not by reasoning, but by disuse, because society has nearly accomplished its objects of assuring personal security. Ambition, when its object is not to satisfy greed, but for personal preferment, can also be very ruthless and destructive. Its limitation within the bounds of propriety cannot be well accomplished by reasoning. It can also be traced to the instinct of self-preservation. We have the reproductive instinct, passions which are the means of promoting reproduction. They too have been the source of a great deal of social disturbance. The male's and female's desire for personal adornment is a natural one, though sex  being just a feeling, a great deal of injustice has been perpetrated and oppression practiced in order to satisfy it.

When the Fathers of our Republic signed the Declaration of Independence, they thereby not only severed their political relations with the mother country but, in that immortal document, they proclaimed to all the world the rock-bottom principle of social intercourse, cooperation. The declaration that "governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed" not only laid down the fundamental principle of the democratic form of government, but also established a new ground for moral restraint. Under the theory of our government, here in America, "self-government" not only means the right of every citizen having a voice in the administration of public affairs, it also includes the placing of necessary restraints by every individual upon himself. Every man must govern himself in his every-day acts so they do not conflict with the aims for which his civil government has been established, the protection of life, the securing to every one his full measure of political liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Democracy can accomplish these noble aims only when every one of its citizens does thus govern himself. Governments are established to place necessary restraints upon their citizens by passing laws and executing them, but these will be but shams unless every citizen realizes the full measure of his responsibilities and performs his duties willingly and of his own accord.

Whether by instinct or from experience, from time immemorial men chose to live in communities, deeming it a better way. With social life entered several institutions which not only made the supplying of daily needs more complicated and even, contrary to its aim, more difficult, but tended to sharpen and develop those natural desires and passions which, because their exercise became unnecessary by reason of the benefits of cooperation, the assurance of protection and of the supply of daily wants, ought to have been curbed and limited. Peace and good order being prime necessities of communal life, and the undisturbed possession of what man needs is indispensable for preservation of peace: from this arose the institution of private property. The natural instinct to hoard away enough against the unproductive days developed into greed for possession of as much property as possible. The invention of barter and trade assisted in development of greed, because it showed to man it was possible to acquire enough to sustain himself without the necessity of laboring, which naturally is distasteful. It is pleasanter to play than to labor. This greed and its gratification produced riches and poverty and its companions, want and misery. The natural passion  for personal adornment, which man inherited from his pre-intelligent days and was given him by nature in order to promote reproduction, degenerated into all those desires for luxuries which have brought so much evil into this world and which intelligent men ought to consider too petty for the serious objects of their desires. Man finding that he could gratify his desires without working, ambition to control the production of others was born. It is unnecessary recounting the evil which this passion has brought in its wake.

All these so highly developed passions and desires are the great disturbers of the peace and militate against the attainment of social aims. They must be kept in proper bounds somehow. Under our theory of government a man is supposed to sit down and reason it out with himself that, as a member of an association which he entered of his own free will, it is his duty to observe all the laws which are deemed necessary for the attainment of associate aims and to conduct himself so that his acts will not come into conflict with the rights which this association undertook to assure to him as well as to all other members; his duties are the necessary incidents of his membership and they should not be considered as burdens by him. Whether the form of government be democracy, or any other form of a government, that is the exact truth regarding responsibilities of a citizen towards the society in which he lives. But what is cold blooded  reasoning against the primordial passions, sharpened by centuries of social living? Laws can reach man's acts, but they are powerless toward curbing his desires. Governments can pass rules of conduct to restrain a man from doing those things that are injurious to others, but they cannot go beyond preserving peace (armed peace). Laws can prevent open conflicts, but cannot place limitations upon the desires, for gratification of which men will resort to all kinds of trickery and subterfuges which the law is powerless to circumvent. Some institution is needed in every community whose purpose is to accomplish this.

In all ages and among all nations religion took upon itself this task. The religion of any people represents the realization of its social ideas. It represents a state in which all the known social evils shall have no existence, and the idea aim of society , the pursuit of happiness, shall be realized. As to details, it never rose above the social order. Religion has always reflected the social ideas. It deified its founders and its national heroes. The means religion employed for the curbing of human desires were similar to those employed by the government under which they existed.

Christianity was born under an imperialistic form of government at a time when Hebrews dreamt of regaining their earthly kingdom, represents "God" as the ruler of the heavenly kingdom, where souls of all his faithful subjects will be rewarded and where the kingdom which could not be hoped for on this earth will be established. As all good subjects of earthly kings hope to be rewarded for their faithfulness, promises of rewards are held out by Christianity to induce its believers to the laws which, although they spring only from social necessities, are given a heavenly origin. The idea of Christianity is a perfectly regulated monarchy, with an absolute monarch ruling over his subjects, consisting of various hierarchies and the common people. The desires which cannot be gratified on this earth shall be gratified in that kingdom; the repression of such as would lead to disturbance here will be rewarded in this idea life to come. Poverty, which was a prevalent evil in those days, is made a virtue to be crowned in heaven, and the acquisition of wealth a crime, in order to curb the desire for hoarding property. Charity, which is but idealized cooperation, is made the greatest virtue, in order to teach men the necessity of mutually helping each other. The simple ideas of the early Christians were elaborated into a complicated system of philosophy, in order to meet the requirements of advancing knowledge and accommodate them to the changing order. There can be no doubt as to the soundness, the wisdom and the efficacy of the majority of the ethical rules of Christianity, especially of those which have for their objects the repression of the passions and desires causing social disturbance, but the symbolism with which they are clothed we may be permitted to question. We can doubt the efficacy of the motive which Christianity instills into its believers, the hope of a reward for performing one's duties. As the realization of this hope must be postponed to a life concerning which we know nothing and whose existence we can sincerely question, it is but a weak restraint upon man's passions, and the greater the doubt due to our knowledge, the less its force.

The true aim of religion is the promotion of the cause of humanity. "Thy Kingdom come."

Christianity committed its greatest error when it diverged from teaching simple moral principles, invaded fields of speculative philosophy and cluttered up its teachings with dogmas. It pushed its doctrine of rewards and punishments to the utmost limits and brought down upon itself a storm of protests. We can all approve of Christianity's essential ethical maxims, but many, even among the faithful, differ on points which ought never to have entered into discussion. We agree that human conduct needs regulation and every man ought to do what is just toward others; a check must be placed upon all human passions and desires; the rest is immaterial. To be most efficacious, religion must be in harmony with social order and the prevalent ideas, because both law and religion have the same end in view, the promotion of human welfare. If men were capable of thoroughly understanding their social relations, it would not be necessary to clothe them in symbols. By divergent ways civil and religious institutions can never reach their common goal. One ought to supplement the other.

Man's intellectual faculties, so highly developed, we have made the distinctive mark of the species. Because man has an intellect this makes him responsible and, therefore, a moral thing. Though man's free will is not a distinctive faculty. Free will being developed from the limited ability of the primordial cells so to be able to move and control movements, and animals, to whom we do not concede this free will, have that power of controlling their own actions as well; doing things which may be injurious to them or others. It is the moral quality attaching to a man's action because he is able to understand his action and consequence thereof. Insane, a man, although evidently having the same faculty of free will, is not held responsible, because he know not what he do. Man is morally responsible to the extent of his knowledge.

Man does know himself to some certain extent. With this knowledge it ought to be utilized regulating his conduct as not to do anything detrimental toward his own nature nor contrary to nature's law. Any willful act contrary to these laws are the highest crime of which man is capable. Man's body, a perfectly regulated society of cells which, if not interfered with, will attain the true aim for which it exists, the perpetuation of life. Any discord introduced into this otherwise harmonious working becomes detrimental to the body and in opposition toward the divine manifestation through that man. The perversion of different bodily organs from their natural purposes, introduction into the system of substances known injurious in some way or even preventing the body from taking its necessary rest, ---- in a word, anything that is harmful is a violation of the eternal laws of nature. Any willful act shortening life is akin to murder. Similarly, every act which arbitrarily deprives another man of means of providing substances to his own body or which supplies him substances that prove injurious is partial murder. Causing and maintaining unsanitary conditions is another crime of this category. On the other hand, helpfulness is a natural virtue, the promotion of the work of the Infinite. We really are all brothers, not only because we have banded together in a society, we have descended from some remote common ancestor, but also due to having the component elements, the cells, of which our bodies consist are enlivened with the same universal life, same manifestations of the Infinite. The individual (you are for example) is but an incident, a grouping of these cells, the better  to carry out the chief end, the preservation of universal life. The question, "Am I my brother's keeper?" was condemned no sooner than uttered. It does not do simply saying everyone has his own free will and can therefore take care of himself; that will not remove the responsibility factor from the act of any other man. Every act must stand on its own merits, the test: will your act have harmful consequence to you or another? It becomes immaterial whether you bring injury to yourself or another, whether damaging your own life elements or another; in either case you are trying to destroy universal life.

Man knows the social relations in which he lives and their necessary consequences. It would be somewhat useless speculating whether man is naturally gregarious or developed this instinct: society is a fact. Society provides means of carrying out plans of the Infinite. Is not man able to maintain himself better and more securely because he lives a social life? Do not animals congregate for a similar purpose?

Social relations demand individual cooperation. The realization of this maxim by everyone is the aim of ethical teachings. It's observance creates the feeling of responsibility, which should be the guiding star of all. Cooperation equals true social justice. As in the human body every cell performs its allotted functions; so should every man perform his duties, because the ultimate success of society in which man lives demands it. The cells within a man's body are ruled by an inexorable law, they cannot do wrong because cells do not understand their positions within the body. Cells are acting blindly, automatically. With each individual man having his own intellect and volition, therefore, a free will; this makes him a free agent. Knowing of relations he sustains toward others and society as a whole means each individual man ought to regulate his conduct in such way being conductive toward an attainment of ends the social organism has in view. This rule is a positive one. Observing this rule is not merely restrictive. Not only in forbearing man doing anything injurious toward others, it too demands man do those things that would be beneficial to others and the entire social organism. In this, the purpose regarding rules of ethics differ from rules of laws and their purpose. Laws are mostly prohibitive insofar as regulating private human conduct. Outside of the few positive duties towards the state as a whole, the rules of laws consist merely of prohibitions. They are in the negative: "thou shall not." Their aim is preservation of peace and order, absolute necessities. For that reason they are not fully competent bringing about such a coordination and cooperation necessary for attainment of social aims. LAWS MUST BE SUPPLEMENTED BY POSITIVE ETHICAL RULES WHICH PRESCRIBE WHAT MAN SHALL DO. The position of laws limit themselves only to prohibitions and can be justified on grounds of lacking means to enforce positive private rules, if their were any in place.

Our ethical principles do not depend wholly upon knowledge and mental development either. In our conduct we are not wholly guided simply by what we know of our nature and/or social conditions, nor what reason would tell us was wise and necessary. Our sentiments, emotions, feelings, of which represent a distinctive faculty, play a vital part in control of our actions and regulating conduct. They are , in other words, supplement to the intellect. These sentiments, emotions, feelings are not intellectual faculties; in that they are separate and distinct in their operation, in many instances act contrary to the dictates of reason. The mind certainly is not able to control them at all times. If I were to conceive an aversion for some one: no amount of reasoning would eradicate it. Affection for a person can neither be prevented nor destroyed by any amount of reasoning; love will always find a way to circumvent it. In fact, efforts to do so are liable to produce the contrary result. The feeling of pity and compassion springs up uncalled for and persists in spite of any knowledge subsequently acquired which would show it to be otherwise groundless.

Such a sentiment is the rugged sense of honor. It is akin to the sense of responsibility, but indistinguishable from it, as responsibility is purely a habit of thought based on reason, the complete comprehension and realization of natural and social necessities. Honor is clearly a feeling, a sentiment, at times running contrary to reason or common sense. It is a very powerful restraining influence. Its basis is self-respect. Its consequence is consuming desire to be true to one's self, to one's ideals. Fully developed its influence for good is incalculable. Honor is able to repress all selfish desires, to overcome the most powerful temptations. For an example, we might hear of men refusing to accept bribes for no other reason but simply because they feel that it would outrage their sense of honor, that they cannot be bought, their ideas are placed above any material gains. They would consider themselves humiliated in their own eyes to do so. You might say this has to do with pride. But what is pride? Can we define or describe it in any other term but one of feeling or sentiment high valuation of one's self? It represents a high conception of one's destiny and fidelity to it. We know it, feel it; it is a specific expression of the life force subsisting in us and operating through us. It may be attributed to the primordial instinct of preserving one's life in its purity as it came from the hands of the Infinite.

Our feelings of love and pity for others. These sentiments can prompt us to self-denial and self-sacrifice. Their being gentle virtues whose beauty is grace of the soul. Surely they run contrary to reason. We are not talking animal attraction of sex s here, nor feelings inspired by hopes of reward (temporal or eternal); that would be selfish. At some time or other in life when we are prompted toward doing things for others to our own disadvantage, not counting cost, not expecting nor hoping for any reward. A sight of misery can open our wellsprings of pity thus inducing toward doing everything in our power to relieve it. Such real experiences, yet neither describable, definable, nor analyzable. Feelings in whose presence of reason stands mute. What wonderful heroism and self-sacrifice have sprung from them! Can we honestly say reason is capable of inducing a man to give to another means of saving his own life and perish himself? These sentiments may be called the expression of the aggregate instinct of the cells, founded on their mutual attraction for each other, which binds them into a complex individual for purpose of preservation; the extension of this instinct to cells outside of the individual for the preservation of universal life. The concrete expression of the unity of life, broadening the principle of coordination and cooperation.

Then we have our aspirations,  the desire for growth and development, an inward pressure for perfection, the conscious ambition to grow, a dissatisfaction with the present state and longing for something better. Aspirations can be one of the most dangerous sentiments, because of misconception of standards which may be really debasing. Its foundation is a combination of both primal instincts, propagation and self-preservation, and is, therefore a great power for both good and evil.

There is patience: not a dumb animal patience enduring bodily sufferings and petty material adversities of life with meekness and humility, but rather a militant patience which can wait for the accomplishment and realization of ideas in spite of discouragements and setbacks, while inducing a man to hold fast to those ideas. This type of patience discounts worldly gain and that of self-glorification , its a compass which holds a man's course true to his ideas. Without this sort of patience humanity would likely not have had any of the men who really counted; for there was not one of them who did not have to hew his way through a veritable jungle of discouragements. It answers Hamlet's despairing cry:

"For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,

The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,

. . . and the spurns

That patient merit of the unworthy takes."

"Truth is mighty and will prevail," but it is rather slow in doing so, it takes patience to bear up with this delay; it is patience that enlivens this saying: it is its soul. This patience is the one virtue which points unmistakably to the Infinite in us, as it disregards time and has its eyes on eternity. What if within the short span of our lives others do not see the truth as we see it? Patience says that the time will surely come when they will, even if we shall not be here to know about it. Patience teaches that seeing and knowing is success, and not what others think of it. Without patience there could be no growth, no development.

All these instincts, passions and desires are great factors in maintenance of proper social conditions. It is more important toward humanity regulating man's conduct so as to promote welfare in this state of today, than preparing him for a state concerning which he knows nothing. Man's destiny as man, as flesh, is here on earth, if he reaches it he need not worry about what is going to happen after his death. There being much diversity of honest opinion about man's destiny, or rather the means whereby his destiny can be worked out, an infinitely just God can be trusted not to punish those who sincerely follow their own lights, even if they differ from others as to immaterial details. If religion confined itself to cultivation of the sentiments which counter-act the passions, as in some time during our past it has deified, religion would do much greater, more acceptable service for all humanity than occupying itself with speculations concerning the mysteries of nature, for which work religion is not fitted nor can it solve. Regulation of conduct is much more essential in these times than preaching of dogmas, curbing of human desires most beneficial than practice of any particular ritual. George Washington had a true comprehension of the necessities when he advised his countrymen not to neglect religion and morality, but did not refer to any particular religion nor advocate any set of dogmas.

Many national affairs and problems faced today are of this world; of this everyday life we live and represent a present state, not with some future state; if religion truly wishes to be a guide; it must concern itself with these real problems, not with some ephemeral speculative condition. It comes really as the duty of all of us to preserve this life which is before us, not some mere idea existence about which we can only guess and speculate about. Social problems, with changing conditions, suggest suitable remedies, in devising such, religion should be the leader and lead. If religion does not lead, there will continue to arise men outside of religion who surely will try, then that might possibly leave religion becoming merely a useless adjunct to some, following instead of leading their life.

Man's duty to his fellow-man is still the same, has never changed, same to-day as five thousand years ago, same in America as India , Patagonia or elsewhere in the world. These duties and these duties alone religion should undertake preaching and propagating.

If the theory of a civil government should truly be one requiring of its citizens to perform their duties from a sense of personal responsibility, religion ought to take upon the task preaching personal responsibility. Our American government does in fact require our personal responsibility of its citizens. So, since powers of our government are actually derived from our consent as Americans, then therefore laws passed by virtue of these powers derive their force from our consent, we then should stand by our word not because we are expecting to be sometimes rewarded for it, but because we have given our word. With us all rest a big question of honor. Our obedience of laws is from the sense of honor. How can religion cultivate that sense of honor, and that is certainly what religion should be doing, if it is busy teaching the hope of a reward as a motive for doing good? Hope for reward is just as likely to produce a sneak or  hypocrite as it is in producing any honest person, maybe more so. As you can easily bribe a slave, but not a man who habitually considers himself a ruler (smile).  We can see the strange anomaly of self-confessed or convicted criminals trusted, while a supposedly honest man has to be bribed into being good. Courts take the words of those who have already violated their honor, while religion deems it necessary to offer bribes to those who are already obeying the laws. The criminal's word to be good is now worth more than that of any law-biding citizen, for the former has also given his word to obey the laws by consenting to passage. Our civil government offers no rewards to its citizens for their obeying laws, outside of the advantages occurring from cooperation; why should it be necessary for religion to do so? And because we have not gotten rid of this habit of expecting to be rewarded for well-doing is the reason why the exploitation of the public for private gain is so prevalent. What is there in it for me (smile)? If I will be good, will it profit me personally? Christianity encourages and fosters this habit of thought. A habit so fixed that we are inclined to be suspicious of anyone who claims otherwise. The indirect and remote advantages of cooperation simply do not appeal to us nor satisfy many of us; there must be some personal reward in addition. My good behavior may come to the attention of my king and he will reward me for it. Why is this? Because religion persists in dangling future rewards as the price of the obedience of laws. Democracy, then, has serious need of an educational institution whose ethical teachings are in harmony with its fundamental principles. It must teach self-government, the habit of self-restraint from a sense of personal responsibility. It is only such religion that can be an influence for good. It must be satisfied to solve many of the everyday problems of this life and let the future take care of itself.

An institution, teaching men their positive duties. Under our current theory of government today only so much of man's natural freedom is surrendered by him and circumscribed by laws as is absolutely necessary; consequently only such acts that are regulated as would tend to disturb the peace. Those laws are nearly all only prohibitions. It is not the policy of our laws to prescribe to men what they shall do. But only refraining from doing injury to others is not cooperation, which also means doing of things beneficial toward others. If men simply did nothing for others, social life, because of the restrictions it places on man, would be to a disadvantage. Our positive legislation being limited toward revenue and administrative laws; mutual helpfulness is then left to a person's own inclinations. But we do not live under governments merely to maintain expensive machinery for the administration of laws, which only insure peace and thereby limit our natural freedom and take from us the means with which nature provided us to preserve our lives; we want to derive some benefits also, of enjoying the fruits of cooperation.

The law, however, does not direct us as to what we should do. With democracy, creating such an institution taking upon itself the duty of interpreting to and impressing upon people the full meaning of cooperation, preaching the gospel of work,  service, and of mutual helpfulness. This such institution could and should be a pathfinder, leading in progress. Life is after growth, social life is a best means of preserving it; consequently, society must also grow. It must daily provide new means of protection; that is really what growth is, adaptation to varying external conditions. Society to be efficacious must also be able to grow, to develop, devise new means of protecting itself, adapt to changing conditions. There has to be pioneers. Democracy should have, therefore, such institution cultivating high ideas inspiring men toward becoming pioneers. High ideas offer expression of an attribute of universal life, to grow and to develop.

Such work involves ethics/education (only the educated are free). The school is made inadequate mainly because children and youth attending are not yet capable of comprehending the necessities and exalted purposes of a society. Work of restraining natural passions and desires within limits of necessity was once done in past times almost exclusively by parents in a home, particularly the mother, since those times many seem to act as if the work involving children is drudgery, and below them and their destiny as they understand. There are even some who mistakenly imagine chasing the dollar is more nobler than raising a child.