ENGLAND AND THE UNITED STATES.

Waiapu Church Gazette, Volume 26, Issue 5, 1 May 1936, Page 7

ENGLAND AND THE UNITED STATES.

(By The Archbishop of York.) (This address was broadcast by the Archbishop of York from Washington, D.C.) It is a wonderful privilege that I should, be allowed at the very outset of my visit to speak m this way to multitudes of the citizens of the United. States, and I must preface what I say by an expression of gratitude for this opportunity. I am happy to number among my personal friends many Americans,) •and I have paid one very short pre-

vious visit to the States. In this way I have been led to a conviction which I desire to express at the outset. For I began by making the mistake, frequent among my fellowcountrymen, of supposing that American and British folk are really parts of one nation who happen to have become politically separated. Those who from either side of the Atlantic start with that assumption are bound to be disappointed as the difference disclose themselves — differences of sentiment, of policy, and of aspiration. Each is looking for what he does not find. For, of course, the plain fact is that history has led to the development of widely divergent types on the two sides of the Atlantic; and the way of wisdom is to assume, not identity, but difference. Then, if we meet each others as heirs of different, and, indeed, divergent traditions, we shall be surprised and delighted at the perpetually fresh discovery of common elements m our tradition received from the past, and common hopes m our outlook as we prepare for the future. The fact that we can understand each other without having recourse to any foreign language gives us an opportunity for mutual appreciation greater than any other two nations possess. And therein at once lies part of the special service which we are called upon to render to mankind. For the way of welfare and peace is the way of mutual appreciation. Peace and goodwill can never come merely through those things wherein men are all alike. These are m any case the source of agreement; and goodwill that rests on these alone will not survive the irritation due to variety and difference. If peace and goodwill are to be secure, it must be because the differences between us have themselves become the bonds that hold us together. The Forces At Work. It is worth while to consider what are the forces that specially bring men into contact with one another across all national boundaries, and how far these are a source of friction or of harmony. The chief is commerce; and this works both ways. Commerce is one of those activities of mankind that has about it a sort of natural paradox; Its method is

one that tends to obscure its true nature, for its true nature is mutual benefit. The exchange of goods should be to the benefit of both parties. In its simplest form it is, on each side of the exchange, a disposal of unwanted surplus m return for something needed; and, however complicated its organisation becomes, that remains its essential principle. Moreover, as far as commerce is healthy, it is beneficial to all concerned m it. But m the process of exchange each party is likely to be thinking more of his own needs than of the others. Consequently, there arises some rivalry between them; each is trying to buy cheap and to sell dear. And when the commercial system is highly complicated, and there is little personal intercourse between those who direct the two sides of an exchange — or, rather, the variety of interests concerned m the exchange — all sense of partnership m a process of mutual benefit is likely to disappear, and a sense of unrelieved, rivalry to take its place. The method of commerce has then obscured its true nature; men have become so absorbed m the way m which they conduct it that they forget what it really is. The answer to the question whether commerce promotes rivalry or goodwill is the same as the answer to the question whether men are thinking most about its method or most about its nature; for its method is likely to be a source of friction, while its nature is a source of goodwill. Competition or Co- operation? We sometimes hear reformers say that business ought to be, not competition for private profit, but cooperation for public service. That is not the wisest way of putting the matter; and Christians, more than other people, will be anxious to avoid it. For Christians will remember that the reality of anything whatever must be what that thing is m the mind of Christ. It must be as He conceives it, because He is the agent of Creation. No Christian who pauses to reflect can ever regard our Lord as one who points to visionary ideals. His is the mind which perfectly and truly apprehends Reality. That is why He can say that to follow His teaching is to build upon a rock. So it is here. Modern business often looks like a huge system

—or chaos — of competition for private profit; but it never really is that, it always is co-operation for public service. It is for public service, because if no one wants the product there will be no purchasers, no purchase price, no wages and no profits. Except m so far as it serves the public, business cannot go on at all. Similarly, business is conducted by the co-operation of multitudes of people; some supplying labour of various types, some managerial skill, some capital; and if any one of these is withdrawn the process stops. Except so far as it is co-operative, business cannot go on at all. But it could go on without any profit. It is already, always, and inevitably co-operation for public service, and it is not m its own nature competition for private profit. It always is the thing that reformers sometimes say they want it to become. It is not its own nature that is' wrong, but the way we treat it. We have become so obsessed with its method, as to forget its real nature. And, of course, if you treat as competition for private profit what really is co-operation for public service, something is likely to go wrong with it. We have here an illustration of a universal principle. God is the source of all good things, economic goods as much as any others; and He means us to enjoy them to the utmost. The commerce which enables men to enjoy them more fully is m accordance with His Will; and if we treat it as what it is, a great system of co-operation for the general benefit, it will generate godwill. But if we are self-centred — which is the essence of all sin— and attend, chiefly to our own share or interest m it, converting it into competition' for private profit, it is bound to go wrong m its own working and to promote rivalries and enmities. But this comes, not from the nature of commerce, but from our sinful way of conducting it. It is perhaps worth while, for avoidance of misunderstanding 1 , toj point out that co-operation does not m practice exclude competition altogether; and, m urging that industry and commerce should be conducted m a co-operative spirit, I am not demanding the elimination of competition. Consider any teamgame. The players join m the game for the pleasure which all share; the

aim is co-operative. The way m which they promote that co-operative aim is for one team to compete against the other. If the two principles can be intertwined like that m a mere game, it is not to be supposed that a combination of them is impossible m real life. But it makes all the difference which of the two is uppermost, and which, m the last resort, checks and controls the other. If the co-operative spirit is m control, you have good sportsmen who would rather be beaten m a good game than win m a weak walk-over; if the competitive spirit is uppermost, you have players who play to win, and who will do any dirty trick that the referee will permit. It is quite easy to apply this parable to the affairs of life. Commerce, then, is one of the factors that bring nations together. Whether m doing so It promotes goodwill or ill-will depends on whether we conduct it rightly or sinfully. In fact, of course, our conduct of this, as of all other human affairs, is a mixture of Tightness and sin. But there is no doubt where lies the way of remedy or salvation. Science and Art. Another great international activity is science. Here, national characteristics count for least. The progress of science is a vast co-opera-tive enterprise resting on those qualities of the human mind which vary least as between the different nations and races. j An experiment accurately carried out and observed m a laboratory of Moscow or Berlin is valid for Paris, London or New York, unless variety of climatic conditions affects it. So far as it goes, science generates fellowship. But it is not very potent m this, because it does not draw upon, and therefore does not harmonize, those differences of sentiment and outlook which lead "to strife. Art m its various branches is a greater power than science. For art does spring from nationally characteristic attitudes of mind, and is aßle so to present these as to illustrate their value. Shakespeare and/ Browning could only have appeared m England, Goethe only m Germany, Dostoievsky only m Russia; and all of us are the richer for their works. As we read these, we see each country m its characteristic excellence. We learn from the writers

of other nations what we could neverhave learned from those of our own; all are the better for this rich variety, and we rejoice that other nations are so different from ourselves. In that, mutual appreciation the foundationsof real goodwill may be laid, because the differences that tend toset us at variance are become the bond of our fellowship. One Standard of Moral Judgment. Yet even this does not touch theheart of the matter. For at bottom our differences arise from that sin of self-centredness which is characteristic of all men from birth, complicated by divergence m our standard, of admiration and of judgment. There is no hope of solving many of the most difficult of our problems until at least we all agree to submit to one standard of judgment. We may^ fail to conform our lives to the standard which we accept. But that: is a small matter, and the conflicts arising from such a failure are, m principle at least, capable of adjustment. But if one admires conduct which another censures, no adjustment is possible. The world's, most urgent need, now that it is welded by the scientific conquest of distance into a single community, is a single and universally accepted, standard of moral judgment, by which all nations agree that their actions shall be approved or condemned. But what possibility is there that out of* the welter of diverse traditions and cultures, which men havemade for themselves, any such agreement can be built up? There is no hope whatever that this chief need of our world can be met unless there is indeed a Father of all mankind, Whose will includes the welfare of all His children, and Who has made His character known to men — unless, m short, there is a Divine Revelation. The Gospel of. Jesus Christ is offered as precisely that Revelation; and those who have made sincere trial of it have found that it vindicates its claim. Here is the source of hope for the world m our generation as m every generation that has gone before us. It is true concerning this world, as concerning the next, that there is none other name under heaven, wherein we must be saved but that of Jesus Christ, m Whom is seen the very nature of God, and His will for man. (To be continued)!