A POLICY AND PROGRAM
The roots of the religious and moral life of the Nation are chiefly in the
country church. As in southeastern Ohio, so in any area where the church
fails, degeneracy begins. The low and sordid moral atmosphere found in so
many rural villages and communities, not only among the Eighteen Counties,
but throughout the State (and far beyond the boundaries of Ohio) is
altogether unnecessary. It constitutes a challenge to the church which can
no longer go unheeded. Obviously, whatever reforms in methods and policies
may be required to enable it efficiently to perform its task must be made.
(1) _A Better Program_
One of the chief underlying causes of the present condition of the
churches is an imperfect conception of their function. We recognize the
fact that the effective proclaiming of the Gospel is the essential if not
the greatest and most important task of the churches, but the impression
is still very widespread in the Ohio churches that to preach it from
pulpit and platform is almost their only task. That this is not enough to
bring the churches to their full effectiveness has been conclusively
proved by the experience of foreign missionaries during the past hundred
years. In proportion to the number of their missionaries, the missionary
societies which have believed that proclaiming the Christian message is
the only function of the church, have not made as many converts nor built
up as strong churches as those which engage also in the work of healing
the sick and teaching. The most successful missionary organizations teach
not only Christian life and theology, but all that makes for what is best
in our Christian civilization.
The welfare of a man's soul may be increased by promoting the welfare of
the rest of him, and the aim of the church should be to bring every man to
the highest possible development of all his powers. In seeking to do so it
will not only be more effective in creating a higher manhood and
womanhood, but will also make its message better understood and secure a
greater number of church members and adherents.
For our city churches also this is as true as for the foreign missionary
field, although perhaps less obviously so. The equipment of so large a
number of modern city churches for various forms of social service is a
strong indication that those who control their policies recognize the
necessity of a more diversified field of work.
The success and growth of the Y. M. C. A. is another indication of the
truth for which we are contending. This institution which is a branch or
arm of the Christian church has declared its aim to be the development of
"soul, mind, and body." As a result of this policy it is now engaged in
many kinds of work which should also be done more widely and generally and
so on a greater scale throughout the church. It receives large
contributions of money from members of the churches, and it rightly
undertakes and successfully carries out large enterprises where other
church organizations fail to see their duties and opportunities and lag
behind or remain idle.
Still another reason for believing in a larger function and mission of the
church is found in the fact that every strikingly successful country
church is found to be deeply concerned with the needs of the community,
and is carrying out a broad and comprehensive program of service. This is
true not only in the State of Ohio, but throughout the Nation.
Finally and conclusively, it may be added that the broader program was
instituted and carried out by the Founder of the Christian religion, and
was by Him enjoined upon His followers.
What the new program for the local country church should be is no longer
a matter of conjecture. Country ministers in very many widely separated
parishes of the United States have worked it out independently in trying
to meet the needs of their communities, and have everywhere reached
substantially the same conclusion. The program is essentially the same in
all places where the most successful country church work is done. It has
found an embodiment in the mass of country church literature which has
been published during the past eight years, and it has been studied,
tried, and proved to meet the need of large numbers of country pastors in
Ohio and in many of the other States. How it has been carried out in some
Ohio parishes is described in Chapter VIII, pages 75-87.
(2) _A Better Ministry_
To carry out the better program for the local country church requires an
educated ministry. Ohio has suffered greatly from ministerial quackery.
Very imperfectly equipped ministers, such as are found in nearly every
county of the State, and unsound ignorant men, such as are so common in
the Eighteen Counties, cannot meet the requirements of the new program.
Doubtless the educational requirements of the discipline of many of the
denominations are set too low, but even so, if the rules of the discipline
were strictly obeyed, a large proportion of the present ministers would be
eliminated. The new program requires trained men.
To get better men, better opportunity and better pay must be supplied.
Fields of service must be created large enough, yet sufficiently compact
and free from competing rivals, to make good work possible. The farmers
must be convinced that better support of the ministry is essential, in
their own interest. At the same time the best young men of the churches
must be assured that the new program offers a field so promising as to
make it worth their while to enter the ministry. The churches are wise
enough and strong enough to do all this if they will address themselves to
the situation and take it seriously.
(3) _Better Support_
In a large part of Ohio the farmers are able and ready to multiply the
amount of money they now contribute for the support of the churches. When
it is made clear to them that better pay will bring a better minister,
increased support will cheerfully be given. But the farmers will not give
more money either for the support of an inferior minister, or to carry out
the old program. They will demand their money's worth, and this the
present methods do not, in general, supply. The increased prosperity and
consequent ability of the farmers to support the church more liberally is
indicated by the fact that the total value of farm property in Ohio
increased nearly 60 per cent during the ten-year period from 1900 to 1910.
But it must be remembered that increased support will not be given by the
farmers unless the need for it, and what it will bring, is brought
forcefully to their attention. This the individual minister cannot do, for
to attempt it lays him open to the charge of feathering his own nest. It
should be done by a State Federation of Churches or by such organizations
as The Ohio Rural Life Association, acting through its own institutes and
the farmers' institutes, through the circulation of its literature, and
through the formation of organizations for this purpose in the churches of
the different counties. No matter how good work a minister may do,
ordinarily he will not be adequately supported unless some special agency
does this work.
(4) _Better Acquaintance_
The present system of circuits entails upon the country minister an
enormous waste of time. If a man tries to do the pastoral work which is
strictly necessary, he must spend a very large proportion of his working
hours in driving to the widely separated points of his various parishes,
crossing and recrossing as he goes the lines of travel of other ministers
engaged in the same territory upon the same work. That the country
minister should be called upon to waste so large a part of his life in
this way is shameful because it is bad and inefficient organization, and
carries with it an utterly needless loss.
To understand the significance of pastoral calling in a rural community it
must be remembered that isolation is as characteristic of the country as
congestion is of the cities. A large proportion of rural families look
upon a minister who calls frequently as a personal asset of great value.
He supplies opportunities not otherwise available for the discussion of
matters of general interest or of deep personal concern. He calls
attention to the things otherwise forgotten, and brings, or should bring
with him, the inestimable advantage of intimate contact with a wise and
well-trained mind. Moreover, a man full of good will to all going from
house to house, sympathetically trying to help and understand, will
inevitably modify the uncharitable and unjust public opinion which either
exists or is believed to exist in most rural communities.
Equally effective are the incidental contacts of a minister engaged in
community service, such as work with boys, or the promotion of welfare
enterprises. Thus engaged he will inevitably get in touch with his
parishioners, and supply the needs of individuals and of the community, at
least as fully as the minister who devotes most of his working hours to
pastoral calls. In such work less time is spent in the long drives or
walks between houses which are necessary in systematic calling, while the
minister gets to know the men better and bothers them less.
Without pastoral calling and community welfare work, the country
minister's service is sure to be ineffective. But as a matter of fact the
country ministers of Ohio for the most part do very little of either. The
country people as a rule, receive very few pastoral calls, according to
the almost universal testimony of the country ministers themselves as well
as that of other persons who live in the country. In Delaware County, for
example, a prosperous county in the center of the State, there is an area
of 82 square miles, with more than 2,100 people, in which only one
minister makes any pastoral calls, and he makes very few. Half the
townships of this county have no resident ministers.
Mr. Gill found one township in the north-central section of the State in
which the farmers' families probably had not been called on once in five
years. One woman had not received a call from a minister in twelve years.
When finally called upon she became a regular and happy church attendant,
though she had not been to church since her childhood. Another family was
found in the same region whose house no minister had entered for nineteen
years. In an Ohio River township, the members of a family testified that a
minister had not called on them for twenty-five years, and still others
asserted that no minister had ever entered their homes. From the reports
of eighteen pastors in one denominational district it appeared that on an
average each one made only six calls a year upon non-church members,
although these were more than 60 per cent of the people. "Our minister
does not know the people of this community" is common testimony everywhere
in the country parishes.
The country minister's influence is still further reduced because his term
of service is short--usually but a year or two, rarely three years.
Moreover, his efforts are commonly divided among several communities and
thus are spread too thin to produce results. Add to that the fact that in
each community the people whom he serves are intermingled with the
parishioners of ministers of other denominations. Under these
circumstances how can he become efficient in community service, and how
can he get to know the people of his charge? Ordinarily he does not even
attempt it. Under present conditions the country minister who does,
generally accomplishes little and wears himself into discouragement.
(5) _Rearrangement of Circuits_
The old circuit system under which many of the denominations developed
their work and which is now the system employed in nearly all the larger
denominations in the State, was of undoubted value in the beginning of
their work in pioneer days. But like many other efficient methods of
early times it has ceased to be the best method for present needs, in the
form in which we now find it at work. This is true except in a few
instances where it appears in such a modified form as to be adaptable to
present conditions.
Under the circuit system it has often been accepted as a policy by church
officials that every church must have a minister and every minister a
church. The advantages accruing both to the churches and ministers from a
reasonably cautious and not too consistent application of such a rule are
obvious. But failure to use such caution and too great insistence on its
universal application too often have resulted in the employment of
unequipped and uneducated ministers and sometimes even of men whose
character was questionable, which in turn, has helped to bring about a low
standard of pay for the minister. The pay of the skilled has fallen to
that of the unskilled, and the total result has been to cheapen the
ministry. The standard among farmers for the support of both church and
minister, therefore, has fallen low. We must have a greatly modified
system or a better system before the ministry can be better paid.
Under the circuit system as now applied in Ohio the churches too often
provide for but little else than preaching. Even the Sunday school, one of
the most hopeful and valuable kinds of church work, is hampered by it, for
this work needs the leadership of a trained ministry, which the present
circuit system tends to prevent. The minister with a circuit can rarely
attend the services of his Sunday schools, and the task of promoting the
Sunday school work during the week in the several communities of his
charge is usually too arduous for him.
In times past it has been held commendable for a denomination to establish
one of its churches in every community, regardless of the number of
churches already there. By making use of the present circuit system, it
has been possible to establish and after a fashion to maintain a church
almost anywhere. Hence the present unfortunate multiplication of churches.
When rural communities are overchurched, as under the working of this
plan in Ohio most of them are, competition between them necessarily
results not in the survival of the fit, but in the continued existence of
an excessive number of bloodless, moribund churches, whose energies are
almost entirely exhausted in the mere effort to keep alive.
When the circuit system is adopted by more than one competing denomination
in a field as it is in Ohio it helps to perpetuate interchurch
competition. When one adopts it all others must, or retire from the field.
It cannot be held that the resulting competition helps to make more
Christians, or that it tends to develop character or community life. On
the contrary, it reduces both the power of the church as a whole and the
influence of the individual churches for personal righteousness and
community welfare. Then, as the churches under the competitive system grow
weaker, they must be yoked in larger circuits. So far has the practice
gone that in one circuit in Ohio there are actually ten churches.
A variation of this system is found in certain Holy Roller churches where
an undefined number of churches together depend for their leadership on a
group of itinerant revivalists. Frequent or occasional seasons of revival
services often constitute the sole activity of these churches, yet because
of the weakness of the latter they are succeeding or have succeeded in
crowding out many churches of the older denominations. There is a clear
instance of this in the western half of Pike County, where nearly all the
churches are abandoned excepting those of the Holy Rollers--a striking
example of reverse selection or the survival of the unfit.
The movement for the conservation and improvement of rural life has no
greater enemy than the misused circuit system. Not only does it weaken the
churches, but it necessarily discourages the development of the community
and of community life. With his efforts divided among three or more
different communities, his parishioners mingled with members of competing
churches, the country minister cannot hope for the cooperation necessary
to effective leadership. His success in any work for the community,
because it would add prestige to his church, as a rule is not desired by
the members of other denominations. The entire circuit situation as it
works to-day in the region here under investigation whatever may be its
value elsewhere tends to make the modern program of successful churches
entirely impracticable.
Escape from the deadening environment of the country church circuit is the
ardent desire of most country ministers who have had any reasonable degree
of equipment for their vocation, and self-improvement as a preacher seems
to be the only way out. The circuit minister of such equipment naturally
regards his present work as temporary. He looks forward to leaving the
country through promotion to a town church. The city, where he hopes to
be, and not the country, where he is, becomes for him the only field for
success in the ministry.
It is evident, therefore, that country parishes to be successful must be
more compact. As a substitute for the circuit, churches in a small
community where there are too many should be united in the support of one
resident minister. If they cannot support him, then other adjacent
churches should join with them in a federated circuit under a single
pastor. Such is the right use of the circuit in the country.
The territory thus placed under one minister may be so large as to make it
desirable to employ a paid assistant to the pastor. Freed from the
necessity of long drives to other communities, the pastor can make many
calls nearer home. Community enterprises, under this system made possible,
will bring the pastor into personal touch with the people. He will become
their friend and they will wish him a long term of service among them. And
only when a minister has been two or three years in a community can he
begin to render his most effective service. The enlarged and unified
parish, such as that of Benzonia, Michigan, or Hanover, New Jersey, should
be carefully distinguished from the misused circuit, which now plays so
significant a part in the church life of Ohio. Parishes like these afford
all the benefits of the circuit with none of its defects.
[Illustration: MAP 11 SHOWING THAT IN 317 OR 27 PER CENT OF THE STRICTLY
RURAL TOWNSHIPS NO CHURCH HAS A RESIDENT MINISTER]
(6) _More Resident Ministers_
While the preaching of a good pastor is an indispensable factor in the
individual development of his parishioners and in the progress of
community life, that of the non-resident is by comparison of little value.
It is shooting in the air without seeing the target, like the fire of
artillery without the aid of air scouts. There is no greater force for
righteousness in a country community than a church with a resident
minister, well educated, well equipped, wisely selected, whose term of
service is not too short. The church is the only institution which can
hope to employ a man of this type to give his whole time, as a minister
can, to the service of his community.
The right kind of resident minister will have a strong and intelligent
desire to secure opportunities for the best development of his children
and to create a favorable environment for them. He will therefore take a
keen interest in the schools, in the establishing of libraries, in play
and social life, in keeping out evil influences and promoting general
decency. He may fairly expect to see the fruits of his labor, and will be
all the more likely on that account to become interested in the economic
betterment of the community. Such a man will stimulate it and help it to
make use of all available means to further the general welfare. A church
with such a pastor is community insurance against degeneracy and decay.
One of the most striking examples of the service of a resident minister
during a long pastorate is found in the life of the well-known John
Frederick Oberlin, a free biography of whom has recently been made
available to all country ministers. Large numbers of modern examples may
also readily be found. One is given on pages 77-80 of this report.
There are few more deplorable wastes than that of the church in the use of
its rural ministry. This waste alone is enough to account for much of the
decline in country life, because under the present system only a small
fraction of the normal influence of the ministry can be exerted. And it
is a needless waste, for it is fully within the power of the churches
through their officials to correct it. The minister must be given a field
of such a character that it is possible for him to do his work, and he
must be given that adequate support which proper church administration can
most assuredly secure for him. Only when these readjustments have been
made will it be fair and right to appeal to the young men of education and
ability to enter the rural ministry, and stay in it.
The thing can be done. We have in mind a rural township with less than
2,000 inhabitants, lying in a hill country, which has six resident
ministers in its five villages, while the term of service of the minister
of each of the parishes is nearly always long. To establish at least one
resident minister in every township is not too high an aim. The people can
and should be brought to understand that the value of a successful
minister rises in increasing proportion with his knowledge of the
community and the length of his service.
(7) _Interchurch Cooperation_
To substitute cooperation for competition is an essential condition of
rural church progress, at least in Ohio. Whenever the new program is
adopted by a community it will discover that interchurch competition is
hostile to community prosperity. Many rural communities already know that
interchurch cooperation is desirable. But the great question is how to
secure it. Nearly every community is aware that it has too many churches,
but the task of reducing the number or securing interchurch comity is a
problem beset with difficulties. These difficulties, however, are by no
means insuperable. Many communities have already found ways to overcome
them.
In every community which really requires more than one church or pastor,
there should be a federation of churches; that is, a joint committee of
pastors and delegates officially appointed by the several churches to
learn and meet the needs, religious, or social, which require concerted
action. While such federations, which are carefully to be distinguished
from federated churches, are common in our cities, comparatively few are
found in the country. One of these is in Shiloh, Ohio, a description of
which may be found on page 75. There appear to be no very great
difficulties in the way of bringing such federations about.
In communities whose compactness permits, and whose population and
resources require, that there should be only one congregation and pastor,
but where two or more churches already exist, the churches clearly should
either be united organically in a single denominational church, or a
federated church should be formed. Descriptions of federated churches may
be found on pages 59-69.
In a township or community where population and resources are inadequate
to support more than one pastor, but where the population is so
distributed that more than one place of worship and organized church are
required, a federated circuit may well be formed and a common pastor be
employed. In such case the several churches should be officially
represented by a joint committee which would act for the circuit not only
in employing the common pastor, but also in learning and meeting all the
religious and social needs which require concerted church action.
In securing pastors and in other matters where assistance is needed, the
local federated churches and federated circuits should be aided by the
State Federation of Churches if there is one, and if not by such bodies as
the Committee of Interchurch Cooperation of the Ohio Rural Life
Association. Both Federation and Association are necessary for other
purposes, and therefore no ground whatever exists for the objection
sometimes made that federated churches will require the formation of new
organizations to supervise them.
While it is true that an uneducated minister ordinarily cannot satisfy the
people of various denominations, and that usually he is sectarian in his
thinking and point of view, it is equally true that where a well-educated
man is pastor, the needs of the people of various denominations can easily
be met and church unity be made possible.
(8) _Community Churches_
The most successful rural church is the community church. Its members work
chiefly not for the church itself, but for the community. Its ambition is
to serve every person in its neighborhood, to create an environment
favorable to the highest possible development of every person in the
neighborhood, and to stimulate other organizations and persons to serve
the community in every possible way. It is conceivable that there might be
more than one such church in a neighborhood, but in this discussion it is
assumed that a community church is the only church in the community, for
by far the larger number of rural communities in Ohio should have but one
church. Since, on an average, there are five churches in a township and
only 1,448 persons, the formation of community churches is evidently both
advisable and important.
The community church may be a denominational church or a federated church.
It is the judgment of most of the denominational officials who are members
of the Committee of Interchurch Cooperation of the Ohio Rural Life
Association that wherever possible churches should be united in one
denominational church through the reciprocal exchange and elimination of
small churches by the denominational organizations. In such an exchange
church members of denomination A would unite with the church of
denomination B in community M, while members of denomination B would unite
with the church of denomination A in community N, and so on. A number of
such exchanges have been made, and so far as can be learned, they have
worked well. But the members of the small churches frequently refuse to
carry out this plan. They often care more for their local church than for
their denomination, and are not willing that their own church organization
should be destroyed. While such exchanges will doubtless continue to be
made from time to time, it is unlikely that rapid progress will be
achieved by this method alone.
On the other hand, the members of a local community are usually ready to
form a federated church when they understand it. This has been done in
Northfield, Aurora, Wayland, Olmstead Falls, Milford Centre and
Huntington, in Greene Township, Trumbull County, and in many other
communities. A description of some of them may be found on pages 60-69. If
the officials and superintendents of the church should become as favorable
to the formation of federated churches as they are to exchange between
denominations, and should actively further the movement, they could
without question bring about the unification of the churches in very large
numbers of communities which stand greatly in need of it.
Here then we have two possible methods of uniting the Christian people in
the rural communities. One of them--denominational exchange--is favored by
the officials but often opposed by the people in the churches. The
other--the federated church--is favored by the people in the churches and
opposed by many of the officials.
It is our contention that in the majority of cases the method preferred by
the people is more desirable than that preferred by the officials. For a
man to leave his own denomination and unite with another often involves
action against the conscience. In some of the denominations, for example,
the members have been trained to think it undesirable to subscribe to a
creed. But creed subscription is required by the churches of many of the
denominations as a condition of membership. In such cases the church
officials may properly hesitate to urge a part of the people to do what
they believe is not right.
Another reason which often makes it impossible for the church member of
one denomination to unite with the church of another is a temperamental
distaste for the idea of submission to some special system of discipline.
To all Protestants this is clear so far as the Catholic Church is
concerned. To many it is just as clear in relation to some of the
Protestant bodies.
The official objections to the formation of federated churches involve no
questions of moral principle, but merely those of expediency and the
smooth running of existing ecclesiastical machinery. It is held by
certain officials that the federated church tends to promote autonomy in
the local congregations, and that it will impair the authority of the
denomination. But this increase of autonomy has already taken place in the
city churches, which, as a matter of practice, whatever the denominational
theory may be, manage their own affairs. There is here no loss to the
denomination, nor is there likely to be when the country churches are
strengthened by federation.
In the long run the officials who now entertain objections to the
federated church will doubtless not permit them to stand in the way of
rural church progress. Particularly will this be true when a minister of
their own denomination is to be made pastor of the federated church. It
would seem wise, therefore, for the denominational authorities to agree
that when federated churches are formed the choice of pastors should be
made, so far as possible, on the basis of interdenominational reciprocity.
In view of the urgent needs of the rural communities, as a rule, those
methods should be adopted which are most acceptable to the local people
whose interests are involved. When the people of a community come to
desire united Christian action in promoting community welfare, their zeal
will usually be strong enough to overcome the difficulties in the way. But
this desirable consummation is greatly retarded where opposition is made
by the denomination or its officials. Until the church officials and
denominations are able to propose some other practicable plan for the
readjustment of church life to community welfare, a plan which can be
carried out, the demands of the situation certainly require them to help
rather than hinder the movement for the formation of federated churches.
In any event they will not be able to stop it.
In the investigation striking cases were found of denominational officials
opposing Christian unity in the mistaken belief that they were acting in
accord with the sentiment of their denominations.
It has been reported to us that a certain denominational official has
tried in ten different communities to prevent interchurch cooperation,
although the local churches and the local people were for it. It might in
charity be contended that in nine of these it was not Christian
cooperation itself that was opposed, but rather the form of cooperation
embodied in a federated church. But in the tenth community it was clearly
Christian cooperation and not the form of it to which this official was
hostile, for the people of the two local churches were merely meeting
together, in union services on Sunday evenings, and for an occasional
communion service. No federation or organic union was contemplated. But
the old minister was removed, and a new minister was sent to the field
with definite instructions to break up what unity there was. These
instructions he carried out so thoroughly that the Christian forces in the
community were greatly reduced in effectiveness.
In another community an official persistently tried to prevent the
formation of a federated church, although himself acknowledging that he
sincerely believed it was the very best thing that could be done for the
local people. From two other communities it was reported that this same
official was the only obstacle in the way of Christian unity. It is
entirely probable that in many other communities these denominational
officials have opposed Christian cooperation, for only incidentally did
the authors hear of the cases reported.
(9) _Nonsectarian Support_
To give strength to the movement for interchurch cooperation, a strong
interdenominational or undenominational backing is needed. On the part of
the higher leaders and officials there is no lack of genuine desire to
further interchurch cooperation. The same desire is shared by very large
numbers of the younger ministers who are properly trained for their
calling, and by many older ministers also. The movement, however, is often
halted because of a feeling that somewhere in the denomination there is a
strong sentiment against it.
Faintheartedness is the greatest obstacle to cooperation between churches
at the present time. Numbers of actual instances could be given if it
were proper to do so. What is needed, therefore, is an active movement
between or outside of the denominations, to strengthen those officials who
hesitate to promote interchurch cooperation. Such a movement would finally
reveal the fact that the prevailing sentiment in the denominations is
really in favor of cooperation and not against it, and many who now oppose
it or refuse to help would become most valuable agents in promoting it.
It must not be assumed that the day of denominations is past. Although, as
between most of the denominations, theological differences no longer
exist, and other differences between many of them are small,
denominational feeling is still dominant. The slight differences loom
large. Denominational officials for the most part feel that their chief
duty is to their denomination, from which they hold their official power;
and this duty is very absorbing. Hence it is often most difficult to gain
support from denominational authorities and churches for
interdenominational projects.
Moreover, the direction of interdenominational organization, at the
present time, is largely in the hands of men who are responsible for
denominational interests, or the interests of other organizations which
require their wholehearted and undivided support. While the cooperation
and combined judgment of such men is invaluable in the wise direction of
interdenominational projects, in Ohio they fail as a driving force. This
is now the chief cause of weakness in the interdenominational movement for
church and country life in the State.
Both the work for the country church and for the promoting of rural
business are rendered ineffective by lack of pecuniary support. In spite
of this, however, plans for progressive work both for rural business and
rural church are well developed, and have been tested; and moreover, the
feasibility of progress in both these lines of endeavor has been
thoroughly proved. Two things, then, are now required. These are funds and
federated or independent direction of their use.
We may well expect that adequate funds will be given for carrying on this
work in the years immediately following the war. After the sacrifices of
war those of peace by comparison will not seem large--while the sacrifices
of both peace and war are equally necessary for the realization of the
high ideals which as Americans we cherish.
This war as nothing else has done, has caused men in general to realize
that there are tasks for all other than the commercial enterprises of the
day, and that each of us must accept his share of the responsibility for
their performance. What is worth fighting for during the war is worth
working for after the war.