would. We are not ashamed of them, either. But our traditions have never been of such a character as to, in any way, hinder us in the task which God has given us. Others may get our traditions and our convictions confused. We never do. Our traditions are the footprints of our convictions in the sands of time. They may even have some influence upon our lives. But that we cannot prevent any more than we can destroy the laws of heredity. However, her traditions have never hindered the Lutheran Church to any appreciable extent. Indeed she has shown herself most remarkable in her power of adjustment in all ages and in all climes. Of course it must be definitely proven, but, when it is thus definitely proven that our policies or our customs or our traditions are in any way hindering the advance of any important movement for the betterment of the world we are ready to set them aside as we would lay aside a beautiful garment for some more serviceable attire. But with our convictions it is different. We are not the master over them. We do not command them they command us. They are not a cloak on the outside of us, but a dynamo on the inside of us, and nothing but the power of God can change them. There would perhaps be no trouble along this line but for the fact that these convictions of ours conflict sometimes with the convictions of others. Sometimes they conflict with the personal ambitions and plans of others. Sometimes they are a hindrance to the selfishness and pride and greed of others. Sometimes they lay too serious a life burden upon men and require too great sacrifices of them. Then there arises trouble and persecution and suffering and temptation. Just such conditions many of us are called upon to face today. Indeed only those of us who are comparatively isolated are exempt from the persecutions of those whose ambitions, whether sincere or insincere, we thus hinder. From those of other denominations, from many of the institutions of higher learning, and from the world the attacks are being made with the same viciousness that characterized the inquisition of the dark ages. I am not indulging in mock heroics. I am speaking of conditions as they really are. Convictions are just as antagonistic to the forces of selfishness today as they ever were. They call forth bitterness as they did ages ago. True, they may not use the same instruments of physical torture which were used in the attempt to crush the Reformation. But other forces are being used even more effectively than were they. They are the sham arguments of scorn and contempt, of laughter and wit, of disgrace and poverty. Many a young man is turned from the faith of his fathers and even from sacredness of his own real convictions by the scornful challenge that he is an "old fogy," "behind the times," "unscientific," "narrow minded," etc. The day is not by any means past when preachers were threatened with dismissal if they did not yield their personal convictions to the demands of the crowd. Our young people are having their faith and convictions tested by the impatient sentimental spirit of the day which has no use for calm argument and the Word of God as its ground and source. And they are made to suffer, to suffer or to yield. Or perhaps more of them are disaffected by the deceitful argument of "just as good" or "there is no difference between us," and are led away. Let us not be deceived, friends, we are losing hundreds by this laughter and these lies, and thousands are being put to the testing For these reasons we desire to lay this general theme upon your hearts and to appeal to you to stand firm upon your convictions. No man has any right to ask you to yield the least of your convictions unless he has first proven to you by fair reasoning and from the Word of God that you are absolutely wrong and established for you by the same fair reasoning and from the same Word of God that he is unquesfionably right. Stand therefore unfalteringly even though you must suffer, and suffer you will, I have no doubt. I wish I might lead you into the Governor's reception room of our beautiful State Capitol at Harrisburg and show you two pictures of historical incidents that have had much to do with your liberties and happiness. The one is the picture of a beautiful young woman standing before her judges, the Roman cardinals who have just condemned her to be burned at the stake. Her noble answer is. "Rather death than false to faith." The other is of young William Penn before an ecclesiastical court that is trying by threats of violence to make him deny his convictions. His answer is, "I would have all men to know that I have nothing but contempt for that religion which is not worth suffering for and able to sustain." Or I might bring to you a dozen pictures from the life of our own revered Luther and the other heroes of our Church as an appeal to you to stand firm for those things which according to our clear understanding of God's Word are the foundation principles of life temporal and eternal Stand like an anvil,-when the stroke Of stalwart men falls fierce and fast, And conscious innocence its rest. Second Session The second session of the convention opened at 7:45 p. m. An anthem, entitled "Oh, Light Eternal," was sung by the vested choir, after which the vesper services were conducted by Rev. George H. Schnur, the scripture lesson being read by the chaplain, Rev. Teufel. The address of the evening, on the theme, "Our Church's Convictions Concerning Her Task," was delivered by Rev. Harry E. Clare, of Wilkinsburg, Pa., in which he said in part: All these plants are seemingly intent upon one great thing, are apparently confederated in one vast enterprise, are to the most palpable appearances united for the realization of one grand purpose and end. Endeavoring to keep the unity of the garden in the bond of peace, in spite of all their diversity, with one heart and soul and mind, they seek life. Having heard the voice of "Him whon having not seen they love" in their own blind, mute and mysterious way, they have replied to the mandate, fruitful and multiply," with pious and obedient responsory in the grand antiphonal worship that never ceases between heaven and earth. "Amen! Amen! Let there be life." 'Be Life is their common end. Propagation is their confederate purpose. And their unity in diversity is realized, and the "e pluribus unum" of their kingdom's coin is justified, because every trunk, and every stem, in prayerful aspiration reaches skyward, and leaves and flowers turn supplicating faces heavenward, in the mute but beautiful language of the rainbow's symbols that spells a common, united prayer, "Let us live and grow and come to our maturity. And then from seed and bulb and root which we have produced let us mysteriously reproduce, that there may be life, and life more abundant." But while all these plants, in glad obedience to the Creator's mandate, are performing a common task, reproducing life, each one is reproducing, not a common or composite type of life, but life in its own image, after its own likeness. And God also looked upon this lawn, and saw each plant obeying His command, "Herb yielding seed after his kind, and tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind; and God saw that it was good." How forcefully does Mr, Huxley, the agnostic, de accomplish a certain definite divine end, then we insist that she can justify her divine origin, and fulfill her divine purpose, and realize the divine end, only by preserving her divinely imposed character, only by conserving the image in which she was created, only by reproducing after her own kind. And conversely, when she obscures her image and modifies her character by cross-breeding, she not only loses her distinct and peculiar individuality, the very thing that differentiates and identifies her as a species, but she also defeats the whole program of God, so far as she has any part in that program, for she then becomes a hybrid. Of course, if she has already fulfilled the divine program so far as she has part in it, if there is no longer any divine justification, in purpose or end, for her existence, let her become a hybrid; and then after affectionate and appropriate obsequies, let her take that place of honor to which her past history entitles her in the museum of extinct animals with dinosaur and dinotherium. You see my argument thus far would have just as much validity and would be equally appropriate, if I were addressing Epworth Leaguers instead of Luther Leaguers. For I believe that God's garden is in the main as God meant that it should be. I do not look upon it as a wild patch that has outrun the gardener, and has got beyond his control. Of course, there are weeds in it, ephemeral sects which are like the grass which today is and tomorrow is cast into the oven. But the species remain; and they are here because God put them here and means that they shall remain. And I say, Let Presbyterians be Presbyterians, and not hybrids; and let Methodists be Methodists and not Mongrels; and let Lutherans be Lutherans. And if I did not believe, with all my heart and soul and mind, that God Himself approves of this position which I take on both theological and biological grounds, I should be afraid to say this. But on the visual landscape of my imagination I see a garden that wasages and ages ago, with species more than man can number, and with variety indescribable, and lo! and behold, as I look, I see that the seal of Heaven is stamped in golden letters upon it, for God also looked upon that garden as it was then, luxuriant in variety, with species innumerable, of dissimilarity indescribable, a garden of contrasts in shape and color, "and God saw that it was good." Our personal vanity rather inclines us to assume that it is not necessary to describe the Lutheran species, for this is the third time within five years that we have addressed the State Luther League Convention, and on the previous occasions we attempted such a description. We do wish, however, that we had time to point out, without the slightest disparagement of the other species in God's garden, how the Lutheran species differs from the other species. All we can do is to insist that the Lutheran Church has a character of her own, a character so distinctive, so peculiar, so self-identifying, a character that differentiates her so sharply from every other species, that by purely inductive methods of reasoning, to say nothing of other lines of argumentation, we are forced to adenit that she is a distinct species. And our whole contention is simply this: if she is a distinct species, then her chief task, her peculiar and specific task, is to preserve her distinctive character, to conserve her image, to reproduce after her own likeness, producing fruit after her own kind. And we are the more insistent upon this because we are persuaded, from theological and biological considerations, and also from practical observations drawn from ecclesiastical history, that only thus can she continue to perform her general task in common with the other branches or species of the Church. And now what is our Church's conviction concerning her task? We believe that we have already defined her conviction in our description of her task. We believe that our Church recognizes the fact of her divine origin and rejoices in it; that she realizes that back of her life and in it there is a divine purpose; that she is self-gratifyingly conscious of the great fact that justies her very existence, namely, that she exists for the realization of a certain definite divine end. We believe that our Church feels a certain justifiable elation, a certain holy pride, in the consciousness that she has a character peculiarly her own, a distinct and separate individuality possessed by none other; and that she not only recognizes the fact that in her character, and corresponding with her individuality, she possesses certain inherent tendencies, aptitudes, potentialities and possibilities, but that she is solemnly impressed with the obligation such possession imposes, and realizes this much at least concerning her task, and I am sure that there can be no difference of opinion about so palpable an observation, that whatever her task is, it must correspond with what she herself is. But personally we go further and take the position that in our more explicit and definite description of her task we have really defined what her own conviction is concerning her task. 12 We do not mean that this has always been her conviction, for a denomination conviction of a task is a development: it is the product of an expanding Nor do we mean denomination self-consciousness. that this is her conviction in all her parts today; for the task may exist without the conviction, and often does. History abounds in instances in which the agent has even fulfilled unconsciously the divine will and wrought the divine purpose. But we do mean that this is her dominant conviction concerning her task, in spite of many glaring inconsistencies and some destructive contradictions. And this conviction has taken hold of her, and persists in her life today, as a sacred thing of conscience and volition, in direct opposition to the spirit of this "the fashion of this age, which Paul describes as world." Really I should be afraid to stop at this point, lest what I have said, not being understood in the sense and spirit in which I mean it, should leave certain But I shall be wrong and pernicious impressions. very brief in my closing observations. First of all, I want to repeat that what I have said could, with the mere substitution of denomination names, be said with equal cogency and propriety before a convention of any other legitimately born denomination, such as the dear old German Reformed Church, so closely related to us by consanguinity and a parallel history. The underlying thesis of my whole argument is this: Let each denomination be true to its divine origin and to the divine purpose and end Let each be which alone can justify its existence. itself and preserve itself inviolate and unviolated for the sake of the truth, for the sake of rounding out the truth. For I believe that Truth is so big that And if no church can hold it all or express it all. this be heresy, you might as well proceed to burn me at the stake at once, for I will not recant one word. I feel that I am becoming a better Lutheran every day, a truer, stauncher, more intense Lutheran; and as I become rooted and grounded more truly and more intelligently in my own denominational faith I look out over the variegated acreage of God's garden, and I love my other brethren more, so much more than I used to love them in the days of my denominational infancy. And I cannot believe that our Church's conviction can be in any slightest concerning her task is or degree or measure destructive of that unity of the Church for which our Christ so earnestly prayed. The unity of the Church does not consist at all in the likeness of its parts; the very opposite is the case. In that wonderful defense of the unity of the Church in I Cor. 12, Paul expressly affirms that the There unity of the Church is a unity in diversity. are many members, and each member is different, separate and distinct from all the other members, yet there is but one body. And, lastly, our Church's conviction concerning her task does not lead to or justify in any degree that unseemly sense of superiority or that thing of ugly mien we call bigotry, or that supercilious aloofness, which, alas! we must confess with heads bowed in humiliation, has sometimes marred the lovely face of that plant in the garden of God we call the Lutheran Church. But it seems that every plant must have its parasites. The roses in my backyard were ruined this spring by lice. The Lutheran who thinks of himself more highly than he ought to think, who is supercilious in his attitude toward God's other children, who is bigoted in his activities, with all his confessional formulas and phylacteries, is like unto those of old who boasted that they were Israelites, but were not; he is a glaring contradiction of the faith once delivered to the fathers. For Lutheranism is not merely a confession, however correct that may be; Lutheranism is chiefly a disposition and character in perfect harmony with And if the sweet evangelical doctrines it confesses. we are misunderstood, if others look at us suspiciously and reprovingly, if the public does not esteem us as highly as we think it should, let us put on sackcloth and ashes, for some one of our own household has betrayed us. Some rose has been growing thorns at And God never meant the expense of the flower. that the rose's thorns should hurt the feelings of the other flowers, or by their exaggeration draw attention away from the thing of real beauty to their own ugly prickly selves. Our Church's conviction concerning her task will of necessity make her very guarded in all her associations. She will not only stoutly resist false union istic efforts, but she will avoid even the appearance of evil from promiscuous alliances and doubtful familiarities. And yet in fidelity to her general task, the task she must perform in common with others, she will consistently guard herself against a false aloofness. She will remember the tragedy of Israel whose exclusiveness was by divine sanction and command, but which exclusiveness finally became an obsolete virtue after Israel had once been rooted and grounded in the monotheistic faith, and by its false persistence after it had served its purpose and was no longer needed, defeated its own purpose, disqualifying the chosen people for the task of world evangelization, forcing God to turn to the Gentiles. The Lutheran Church, if true to her whole conviction, will have some vital contact with the other branches of Christ's body, will cooperate where there can be no infringement on her own distinctive life. If Lutheranism is, as we so often hear, a leaven of righteousness, I respectfully ask, in genuine perplexity, How is the leaven to leaven the whole lump if it is not to have some contact with the lump? The trouble is some Lutherans do not seem to have enough faith in the leaven, in its power to expend without being expended, in its transforming and triumphant efficacy. They seem to think that the leaven is mere paste that will lose itself when mixed. After announcements and the singing of the Battle Hymn of the Reformation, this session closed with prayer and the benediction. At the close of this session a most delightful reception was tendered the visiting Leaguers in the lecture rooms of the church by Lutherans of Johnstown. Third Session The third session of the convention was called to order at 9 o'clock on Wednesday morning. The devotional services were conducted by the chaplain, Rev. Charles M. Teufel, after which the regular business of the League was taken up, C. W. Herman Hess, president, in charge. The minutes of the previous sessions of the convention were read and approved. introduced to the President Hess then convention Rev. G. F. Gehr, of the National Executive Committee; Dr. Charles L. Fry, of Philadelphia, and Dr. Sawvel, president of Thiel College; also Dr. I. Chantry Hoffman, of Philadelphia. At this point the report of the junior work committee was presented by Rev. P. George Sieger, accepted and referred to the resolutions committee. It was as follows: Owing to the fact that the Committee on Junior Work is a widely scattered body, and inasmuch as pe matters of vital importance were referred to us dur ing the year, the character of the work resolves itself Suffice into individual effort along personal lines. to say: This has been a year of much correspondence, and the inquiries indicated more interest in the Junior The information work than for years in the past. desired was largely concerning methods of organis Many of these intion and what to do ever after. quiries are along the lines of the topics in the L THER LEAGUE REVIEW and attention was called to the importance of constant reading of the REVIEW and its wider circulation among our people as the best solution of many of the difficulties which confront Attention is also called to a new development in the establishment of separate societies for boys or for girls only, in different parts of the State, which is development of the graded system in junior work of former years, and merits our interest and study, For years back the cry has been "What will interest the boys may not interest the girls, or vice versa." It is an issue which comes up whenever and wherever local conditions permit of emphasis upon one feature of activity to the exclusion of another. It is a problem which vitally affects the future of senior organizations as now constituted, and which may eventually call for a similar arrangement or division in the senior league. In the further development of this matter it should be clear to us all that wherever societies are formed for girls only or for boys only, the cooperative idea should not be lost sight of, but our aim should be to keep the congregational pattern constantly in mind where male and female membership are invited into a common bond of activity for the welfare of the Church. In many of our Churches new organizations are constantly effected under other names and are affiliated with general bodies outside of the district or State League. This should not be necessary where the League ideal is thoroughly understood. We can easily band our boys and girls together for mission study, singing classes, benevolent enterprises, or any other movement without losing their identity with the Central Luther League body. In fact the topical programs of the Junior Luther League suggest this very ideal. All mission study no less than all social diversion deprives the boys and girls of a well rounded Church preparation. We would therefore most earnestly call attention to strict compliance with the suggestive work set forth in the LUTHER LEAGUE REVIEW as the most satisfactory and at the same time the most beneficial method of Junior work that can be devised. We also call attention to the importance of utilizing our trained seniors in Junior work. The best results will be attained only when the Junior Society is a stepping stone or recruiting station for senior membership, a training up of the child in the way it is to go. And no one is better fitted for this training than the seniors themselves. In short, whenever the problem arises, "What shall do with Juniors?" the answer should be, "What do you expect them to be when they become Seniors," and act accordingly. This is to be the vital issue of successful Junior work at all times and in all placesno more, no less. we our We have now about 100 Junior Leagues in the State, with a membership of upwards of 5,000 boys and girls. For the first time, to the best of our knowledge, we are able to report junior organizations in every district in our State. Since this is the situation, a great effort should be made during the coming year to strengthen our lines and develop the Junior work as the hope of the League in the future. The report of the business committee was presented by Mr. William Mearig, chairman, containing a resolution that the conventions of the State League be held each alternate year, and that sectional rallies be held in the odd year. This resolution was discussed at some length by Rev. A. T. Michler, Rev. P. George Seiger, Mr. Mearig, Mr. K. J. F. Wilharm, Mr. Charles W. Fuhr, Rev. Gebert, Rev. Charles M. Teufel and others, when a motion was made that the resolution, which was presented by the executive committee, through the business committee, be referred to the District Leagues for discussion. This motion was duly seconded and carried. Dr. Sawvel, president of Thiel College, then extended greetings to the convention and invited the State League to hold its next convention at Thiel College, Greenville, Pa. Mr. Hodges moved that the thanks of the convention be extended to Dr. Sawvel for the invitation and that the same be referred to the excutive committee for consideration. This motion was duly seconded and carried. At this point a most forceful and inspiring address was delivered by Rev. Prof. J. A. Singmaster, president of the General Synod, Gettysburg, Pa., on the theme of the convention program, under the topic "The Luther League a Training School for Leadership in the Church," as follows: In presenting this subject I will divide it into four parts: First, the need of leadership; second, the sphere of leadership; third, the characteristics of leadership, and fourth, the training for leadership. The first three points are so necessary for the fuller consideration of the fourth that we shall pay more attention to the first three than to the fourth. In regard to the need of leadership, I think we all recognize that every great movement is incarnated in a person or persons. Some time ago I noticed an article in our Church papers in reference to the celebration of the four hundredth anniversary of our Lutheran Reformation, and an ardent writer contended that there should be no mention of Luther, that this was such a spiritual movement, such a revival and of such an intensely religious nature that You it would suffer by the mention of the man. might as well try to play "Hamlet" with Hamlet left out as talk of a reformation without Luther. You might as well talk of Christianity and leave Christ out. God himself raises up men for particular purposes in the history of His Church, and leadership is necessary. Why, it is the only supreme and great need outside of the need of God's Spirit. Sometimes people have come to me and wanted this or that done, You and I say to them, "You get a man for it." must have a man obsessed with an idea before you can make the idea go. You must have a man that is under the impetus of a sense of duty in order to carry out a great purpose. In the present war it has been found necessary on the one side constantly to change generals to reconstruct cabinets-because of the lack of trained leaders. One of the strong points that has been made against the Allies is lack of sufficient officers, and the results are apparent. They did not have the training, they did not have the equipment necessary for the conduct of a great campaign. We feel this in our church work. In missions or institutions we have found out that if we can only get the right man things will go. But for the man it will be a failure. This comes home to us very closely when we come to the selection of a pastor. When the pulpit is vacant the common feeling is for the right kind of a man-one who can lead, guide, go ahead, who can inspire the sympathy and cooperation of the congregation-and such leaders are few. In great international affairs they can be counted on the fingers of one hand. In looking back over history, only one here and there stands out like a mountain peak. It is not necessary that there should be many great leaders, and surely it is more necessary that there should be many good followers, and it is just as great a thing to be a good follower as a good leader, and a good follower makes a good leader, for a man who cannot follow cannot lead. A man who cannot be in sympathy with the people cannot lead them, cannot guide them. I am sure that we realize the need of it. I am positive that these pastors feel the need of strong laymen, men and women, in their churches to help out in the particular work of the congregation. When a large church becomes vacant we are sometimes appealed to as professors to name men. We feel that the large men are few for the large places. They are all so necessary where they are that it is difficult and unreasonable to displace them. When it comes to the nomination of a great man for the Presidency of the United States the conventions are at their wit's end to name the right man. Leaders are few. In regard to the sphere of leadership, the first and greatest and dominant sphere is the ministry, and I doubt whether there is another position among men that wields so large an influence for the good of hu manity as the ministry. I spent last Sunday with a German pastor of Lancaster. He told me that when McKinley was President some of his people wanted him to apply for the position of Minister to Germany. He had a great deal of influence with prominent men, |