The unhallowed harvest

by Homer Greene

When the bishop of the diocese entered the library most of the vestrymen were already there. The rector, together with the two remaining members, came a few moments later. There were cordial exchanges of personal greetings, and some general conversation of a cheerful nature, for the bishop was what is called a food mixer. And this was his favorite parish. He had always enjoyed his visits and visitations here, and his friendships with the prominent men and women of Christ Church. The strained relations between many of these men and women and their rector had therefore given him deep concern. How to heal the breach was a problem that taxed his episcopal judgment and ingenuity to the utmost. He deplored the loss of spirituality that must necessarily result from the quarrel. But it was his especial duty, as a bishop, to preserve the corporate integrity of organized religion, and to this end he felt that he must now bend all his efforts. Yet he approached his task with deep misgiving.

Seated, finally, at the head of the library table, he expressed his sorrow at the conflict which had arisen, and his desire to restore peace and harmony in the parish. It was his earnest wish, he said, that the case might be settled by the exercise of his godly judgment in accordance with the admonition of the canon, without the necessity of proceeding to a formal trial and decree. To that end he had called the vestry to meet with him in consultation; and, in order that there might be a full understanding of the case, he now invited those who had formulated the charges against the rector to give him the specific causes of their complaint.

Thereupon Westgate, who had been chosen to represent the complainants, arose to present their case.

He sketched briefly the history of the parish, and referred to its record for harmony and good works up to the time of the present incumbency. He then dwelt specifically on the deviations of the rector from the accustomed activities of a parish priest. He spoke of his attempt to force upon his parishioners the practice of an unwelcome, if not offensive, social equality, of his affiliation with elements in the community that were indifferent or inimical to religion, of his advocacy of an economic creed entirely at variance with the doctrines and discipline of the Church, of his utter disregard of the wishes and feelings of the bulk of his parishioners, and of his obstinate refusal to be influenced or guided in parish activities by his vestry, or by the wise judgment of those who were responsible for the maintenance and prosperity of Christ Church.

The bishop heard him through, listening attentively, but made no comment. He then called upon the accused priest to reply.

In the rector’s response there was no bitterness, nor any show of resentment. He stated his position and his beliefs, his scheme of work in the parish, his hopes and aspirations for his people, and his hearty desire to unite all those affiliated in any way with Christ Church, without distinction of class, into one aggressive body pledged to the spiritual and material regeneration of men.

“I ask nothing for myself,” he said in conclusion. “If my Reverend Father in God shall see fit to separate me from the people whom I love, I shall accept the decree without a murmur. In that event my only grief and fear would be that these sheep that I have shepherded will become scattered and lost. It is for their sakes, and for their sakes alone, that I desire to stay.”

“Is it not possible,” asked the bishop, “that you have placed too great emphasis on the wants and demands of the poor, and have given undue attention to those who take but a passing interest in the Church?”

“I think not,” was the reply. “In my judgment it is the indifferent who should be sought out and urged; and in my belief it is the poor who need the greater attention as compared with the rich. They are children of the desolate. They are many more than are the children of her who is favored and blessed.”