ssibilities even
in such men, proceeded to call forth those possibilities by trusting
the men and making an appeal to their manhood. Dangerous, foolish,
immoral were the comments which were made upon the enterprise; but it
worked, and he has in the process fitted those men to return to a decent
common life with their fellows.

Herbert Gray has said: "I remember the time when I supposed that Jesus
loved all men simply because He believed it to be His duty, and whether
or no He found in them anything to be loved. The idea was, of course,
grotesquely foolish. God himself could not love what is essentially
unlovable. No! Jesus loved men and women because He could always find in
them something worthy to be loved--some possibility, at the worst, which
was a fit object even for divine love. He could detect in each instance
that which justified the declaration that man was made in the image of
God."

There is very little use in arguing questions of the elimination of
war, the reorganization of industrial relations, new methods of dealing
with criminals, school technique, or the foundations of political
government with those who are unable to detect in men elements of worth
which can be counted upon. The basis on which such people take their
stand is so far removed from that of those who see this world of human
relationships as a field for the operation of the creative spirit that
only misunderstanding is apt to result from such discussions.

When one has not that understanding of human relationships, then
domination, coercion, suppression, restraint are the logical methods
which must be employed in all those fields when men and women do not
evince a desire to co-operate in the common life. The protection of the
interests of the right-minded must take precedence over the indulgence
in sentimentality. When we are strong enough we'll talk disarmament.
Knock the brute down first and argue with him afterward. Without
discipline you can't have education. No government can allow its
citizens to talk against it. These are sentiments which we hear again
and again. They proceed quite reasonably from a different but false
conception of human nature.

It is useless to try to meet such reasoning and prove it false, as long
as we leave unchallenged the basis from which it proceeds. There is
where the work has to be done. There is where there is a call for a new
evangel today, to reveal to men that same simple message that Jesus
proclaim