widespread desire to end the present overlapping, especially in the small town, to prevent unseemly denominational rivalry, to secure a closer co-operation of religious forces, to unite all religions against no religion. The Protestant idea thus far has emphasized freedom and individuality. Unfortunately it has not emphasized solidarity and team work. Some of the leaders of the movement declared at the outset that the movement was an attempt to scrap all denominational organizations and create a new and united church. This may be most desirable, and it may be an ultimate attainment; but it is not possible today; and frankly I question whether it is desirable for the present. This is certain; that unity if it comes at all must come from the people and not from some outside source; it must be a growth and not a manufacture. The churches must practice co-operation before they can be ready for church union.

Some of the publicity methods were unfortunate and aroused much quiet resentment. Pages of spaces were bought in the daily press at the usual rates. Whole-page advertisements were used in high-priced magazines. Billboards all over the land were decorated with armed knights going out to plant the cross in new lands. The appeals in these advertisements were sometimes unfortunate in their tone. They were often mercenary in their statement and appealed to the lower and not to the higher motives. Employers and financiers were exhorted to support the churches on the plea that religion made contented working men; and that the missionary opened the door for the trader. These results may follow as by-products of Christianity; but such appeals are misleading and may be mischievous. Religion is not here to make men quiet in the face of injustice and wrong; and it is an utter perversion of Christianity to use it in that way. Such appeals are vain in that they do not sound the depths and unveil the heights of life. Christianity, which is the religion of the cross, of justice and brotherhood, must appeal to the sacrificial, the heroic, the unselfish in men; men cannot be moved to the higher planes of life except by the highest ideals and the finest motives.

Closely related to this was another source of weakness: the Interchurch tried to bring on the kingdom by elaborate organization and spectacular appeals. The Kingdom of God cometh not with observation. Men cannot say, Lo, it is here, or Lo, it is there. But behold it is everywhere. The strongest forces are the stillest. The stillest forces are the strongest. The sociologist reminds us that the forces which work in human society are psychic and spiritual forces. They must be such as can inform the mind, arouse men's desires, and stir their wills; they must be such forces as can purify the insight, cleanse the affections, and warm the heart; they must be such influences as can persuade men to live loving, sacrificial lives.

The movement expected social results without honoring social causes. I cannot discuss the failure of our educational system in the past; but there is a colossal failure, and all of our educational agencies are implicated. Our education has been too individualistic, too theoretical. It has not created

social mindedness in the people; it has not developed an impulse to serve and to help; people have not been trained to put truth into practice.

Beyond this were other influences that must be noted. It is admitted by all that the Kingdom of God is the central theme of Christianity. It was the master-thought of Jesus' life and the inspiring idea of his teaching. It would seem that by this time the churches would have some clear ideas concerning this central Christian ideal. But unfortunately this is not the case today; in fact it is not too much to say that the churches are wholly confused at this point. The past few years have been a time of unrest and agitation. The world has just passed through the horrors of a world-war and the nations are in confusion and despair. Within the church from the start there has been a little group who emphasize the apocalyptic and eschatological words of the scriptures. Such interpreters have always been active in a time of war and confusion. The events of the past few years have given these people a great opportunity for propagating their notions. They say frankly that they do not expect the salvation of the world but the return of Christ. Many of them are opposed to social study and service on the ground that these things are vain as the world cannot be made any better than it is. One of these leaders in answer to a question of mine admitted that the surest way to hasten on the coming of the Lord was "to give the world a push down hill." The Interchurch had much to say about saving society and building a more Christian civilization, and this was as smoke in the eyes and as vinegar to the teeth of the extremest of this apocalyptic school. One of the spokesmen of this group gave the widest possible publicity to such statements as these in objecting to the movement.

"It is socialistic, educational and ethical.

"It preaches a social rather than a personal Gospel.

"It seeks to save society rather than the individual.

"It holds out the hope that the world is growing better; while the Son of God declares it will grow worse and worse and become as it was in the days of Noah.

"It teaches that the Golden Rule intelligently applied, instead of the personal and second coming of Christ, will give the world peace."

This sounds like a caricature, but these are literal quotations. The people of this idea believe that the world is growing worse; and they practice their faith.

The followers of this group did not co-operate in the Interchurch World Movement. Some of their leaders opposed it at every turn. This opposition, like a division in war time, broke the morale of the movement and greatly weakened it.

Another thing that awakened much criticism was the prominence given to financial leaders. The movement was to be commended for its effort to enlist all groups of men in its plans. But it made much of the support of a few outstanding financial men; it placed them in the forefront and

traded upon their names. There is a very deep sentiment in our land in opposition to this. There is the feeling that the great capitalists have exploited the people. There is the feeling also that the support of those men may have a tendency to cause the churches to soft pedal in their demand for righteousness and brotherhood. In one city, a great manufacturing and commercial center, a meeting of prominent churchmen and financial leaders was held. One of the outstanding financial leaders of the world was sent to that city to address this meeting. Now mark this: in no city in the country did there develop such a strong and outspoken opposition to the movement. And strangely enough the strongest opposition came from two groups-the captains of industry and the organized industrial workers. The Interchurch forgot its simplicity; it forgot that it knew no man after the flesh. When it gave men prominence because of their wealth, it awakened a subtle opposition. And I am ready to say that there was a deep spiritual reason for that opposition.

The Interchurch World Movement is a thing of the past. It is probable that it will be salvaged in part at least, by other agencies, notably by the Federal Council of Churches. But there are some values which must be noted and conserved.

The churches have a better understanding of the condition and needs of the world than ever before. The surveys, except in a few cases, are incomplete, and many of them may never be finished. But with it all, much valuable information is at hand and some of it is most effectively presented.

The Interchurch has strengthened the impulse toward church federation and co-operation. Organic church union is probably far in the future. But church federation is possible now and should be promoted and practiced to the full. There will be less denominational rivalry in the days to come and vastly more co-operation.

The Interchurch movement has vindicated the right and the duty of the church to speak on industrial issues. When it was proposed to investigate acute industrial situations and to give the facts to the people, opposition began. A sinister and bitter attack on the leaders in this work was promoted. Attempts were made to discredit these men. Several journals opened a bitter and unfair campaign against them. Efforts were made to discredit the denominational workers in the field of social service and to secure their discharge. A widespread campaign was conducted by some interests to arouse the opposition of financial leaders and to induce them to withhold their subscriptions. It was even proposed to discipline colleges that have chairs of sociology; where these dangerous men, the teachers of sociology, are permitted to remain, they must be watched and their teaching supervised! In short, an effort was made to discredit social study and service, to drive the church out of the field of industrial investigations, to make it dangerous for church leaders to meddle with social and industrial matters and to limit the churches to what may be called the spiritual concerns of the church. A

prominent financial leader said to a friend of mine: "You preachers take your life in your hand when you meddle with industrial affairs."

The Interchurch braved the lightnings and published the report of the steel strike. I shall not discuss the merits and defects of that report. But this I do say with all possible emphasis: this report marks an epoch in the life of the churches. For the churches to have shown timidity and played safe and withheld the report, would have convicted them of cowardice. It would have shown that the churches can be cowed and controlled by the money power. And to have refused to publish the report when once the facts were gathered, would have alienated the mass of working people and would have lost the confidence of all men. The publication of the report of the steel strike proves several things. The churches recognize their obligation to know the facts, to make the facts public, to show the human and moral values that are at stake in a social and industrial situation, to affirm that Christian principles apply to the whole range of life and to suggest ways whereby the social and industrial order can be made more Christian. The temptation came to the churches and they refused to be turned aside. In the final test they followed the clear path of right and dared to make public some most damaging facts against an almost omnipotent industrial autocracy. All this has saved the day for a moral, a social, an honest Christianity. And this has proved that the churches are not afraid to give a prophetic witness against our modern industrial sins.

THE MEXICAN REVOLUTION AND THE STANDARD

OF LIVING

MAX SYLVIUS HANDMAN
University of Texas

In the heyday of the Diaz régime, a cross-section of Mexican society presented the following social stratifications:

An upper class made up of men of great wealth and large incomes living in a princely style, a style developed through the contact of Spanish grandezza with modern industrial inventions in comfort and luxury.

A bureaucratic class living with its eyes trained on the upper class, despising manual labor and always anxious to improve its position by legitimate or illegitimate means so as to be able to live in greater security and greater luxury.

A group of idealists, chiefly young men, who in the course of events expected to find their way into the bureaucracy, but in the meantime chafing, with the noble spiritedness of youth and illusion, against the restraints imposed by the nature of the Diaz dictatorship.

An upper middle class made up chiefly of foreigners, "Mexican foreigners," foreign-born business men and manufacturers, with a sprinkling of native Mexicans. With a very few exceptions, this class does not interest us here. In this class we may also include the clergy.

A rural population divided into two uneven groups, the first being the large mass of agricultural laborers, chiefly Indian and mestizo; and the second, a small class of independent small farmers (rancheros), foremen and supervisors of the big estates, local political overseers, and high-and low-class personal servants.

From the economic standpoint, the large landed aristocracy (hacendados), the mine-owners, the upper bureaucracy, and the upper business class enjoyed incomes, or were able to command resources which enabled them to live in style becoming their exalted