In religious periodical literature two high notes of social significance
have recently been struck. The _Constructive Quarterly_ has appeared
from the press of the George H. Doran Company in America and Hodder &
Stoughton in England. It is planned to be a free forum where all the
churches of Christendom may frankly and fully state their “operative
beliefs” and their distinctive work, “including and not avoiding
differences,” but making “no attack with polemical animus on others.”
The purpose of this undertaking is to afford opportunity for the
churches, without compromise, “to re-introduce themselves to one another
through the things they themselves positively hold to be vital to
Christianity,” “so that all may know what the differences are and what
they stand for, and that all may respect them, in order to cherish and
preserve whatever is true and helpful and to discover and grow out of
whatever is harmful and false.”
As it has no editorial pronouncements and no scheme for the unity of
Christendom to promote, the _Quarterly_ will depend upon the catholicity
and representative influence of its editorial board, selected from all
countries and communions, to promote a fellowship of work and spirit.
The middle term of the _Quarterly’s_ subtitle—a journal of the Faith,
Work and Thought of Christendom—is likely to prove the basis for the
correlation of the other two. For long before the faith and the thought
of Christendom may be correlated, the churches will surely co-operate in
their common work.
The _Hibbert Journal_, which for ten years has been the ablest technical
quarterly review of theology and philosophy, announces a department of
social service. This policy was foreshadowed by the editor as early as
October, 1906, in a notably direct and able protest against the church
standing aloof from “the world.” He stoutly maintained that
“the alienation from church life of so much that is good in modern
culture, and so much that is earnest in every class, is the natural
sequel to the traditional attitude of the church to the world.”
How false and unintelligible, as well as untenable, this attitude is
appears in these categorical imperatives:
“If by ‘the world’ we mean such things as parliamentary or municipal
government, the great industries of the nation, the professions of
medicine, law, and arms, the fine arts, the courts of justice, the
hospitals, the enterprises of education, the pursuit of physical
science and its application to the arts of life, the domestic economy
of millions of homes, the daily work of all the toilers—if, in short,
we include that huge complex of secular activities which keeps the
world up from hour to hour, and society as a going concern—then the
churches which stand apart and describe all this as morally bankrupt
are simply advertising themselves as the occupiers of a position as
mischievous as it is false.
“If, on the other hand, we exclude these things from our definition,
what, in reason, do we mean by ‘the world?’ Or shall we so frame the
definition as to ensure beforehand that all the bad elements belong to
the world, and all the good to the church? Or, again, shall we take
refuge in the customary remark that whatever is best in these secular
activities is the product of Christian influence and teaching in the
past? This course, attractive though it seems, is the most fatal of
all. For if the world has already absorbed so much of the best the
churches have to offer, how can these persist in declaring that the
former is morally bankrupt?
“Extremists have not yet perceived how disastrously this dualistic
theory thus recoils upon the cause they would defend. The church in
her theory has stood aloof from the world. And now the world takes
deadly revenge by maintaining the position assigned her and standing
aloof from the church.”
No better prospectus for the social work of either of these great
quarterlies could be framed than the intention to demonstrate and bear
home to the intelligence, conscience and heart of the churches these
very affirmations. For, while enough of church leaders and followers
thus face forward to warrant Professor Rauschenbusch in declaring that
it has at last become orthodox to demand the social application of
Christianity, yet there is a sharp reaction within every denomination,
which threatens to retard this hopeful movement of the churches to serve
their communities and thereby save themselves.
But the ultimate issue between those who are thus fearlessly facing the
present and those who persist in backing up into the future cannot be
doubtful. Social Christianity is not only demonstrably orthodox, but has
won its recognition and its own place in any theological, philosophical,
historical or experiential conception of Christianity that claims to be
comprehensive, not to say intelligent. Without a much larger emphasis
upon the social aims and efforts of Christianity in the thought, belief
and work of the church, the need that is finding expression in every
parish and community cannot be met—that which the _Constructive
Quarterly_ well states to be “the need of the impact of the whole of
Christianity on the race.”
THE FIRST ORPHAN ASYLUM IN THE UNITED STATES[8]
THAT OF THE URSULINE NUNS AT NEW ORLEANS
Footnote 8:
This account of the founding of our first orphanage in the quaint
language of the time was obtained for THE SURVEY from a friend of the
institution by Albert H. Yoder.
At the outset of the colonization of Louisiana by the French, ten
Ursuline nuns of France, with noble generosity and self-sacrifice,
volunteered to go to New Orleans, there to instruct the children of the
colonists. They left Rouen in January, 1727.
After great difficulties and countless perils, they reached the mouth of
the Mississippi whose waters they ascended in pirogues. They finally
landed in the Crescent City on the morning of August 7, 1727, after a
sea voyage of nearly six months. They had set sail from the port of
Havre on February 23, 1727 after a month spent in Paris.
Arriving in New Orleans, they were met by Bienville, governor of the
province of Louisiana. As there were no proper accommodations yet
provided, the governor vacated his own residence and placed it at their
disposal for a convent and school. Immediately was begun the erection of
a new building which was completed in 1734.
The Ursuline nuns upon its completion took possession and occupied it
till 1824 when they removed to their present home below the city. This
structure, which is now the Archbishopric, or official place for the
transaction of the business of the Archdiocese of New Orleans, is the
oldest building in Louisiana and also in the vast extent of what was
known as the Louisiana Purchase.
The Ursulines began their self-sacrificing work immediately upon their
arrival on August 8, 1727 and opened a free school to which were added a
select boarding school and then a little later a hospital. Moreover, in
order to inculcate principles of civilization and, especially, of
religion in the hearts of the wives and daughters of the Negroes and
Indians, the nuns devoted one hour each day to their instruction.
Shortly after their arrival a new field of labor was open to their zeal
in the shape of a poor orphan whom Father de Beaubois, had withdrawn
from a family of dissolute morals. Although their lodgings at the time
were insufficient, the nuns being still in Bienville’s house (their new
convent, the present old Archbishopric, was not ready for occupancy
until July 17, 1734), they adopted the child. This was the tiny
mustard-seed from which sprang the flourishing orphanage which exists to
the present day. It proved a real providence for the country, especially
in colonial times, as may be gleaned from history’s record of the
Natchez massacre, which took place on November 28, 1729.
After this frightful tragedy, so pathetically described by
Chateaubriand, the Indians, who had spared only the young wives and
daughters of their French victims, were forced to give up their hostages
or to be massacred in turn. The generous Ursulines then opened their
home to these unfortunate little ones and mothered them.
This act of disinterestedness and charity was truly heroic, considering
the great difficulties usually attendant on the founding of a colony and
was highly commended by Rev. Father le Petit, Jesuit, in a letter
addressed, July 12, 1730, to Rev. Father d’ Avaugour, procurator of the
American missions. Having given an account of the appalling massacre of
the French at Fort Rosalie by the Natchez Indians, Rev. Father le Petit
adds:
“The little girls, whom none of the inhabitants wished to adopt, have
greatly enlarged the interesting company of orphans whom the
_religieuses_ [Ursulines] are bringing up. The great number of these
children serves but to increase the charity and the delicate
attentions of the good nuns. They have been formed into a separate
class of which two teachers have charge.
“There is not one of this holy community that would not be delighted
at having crossed the ocean, were she to do no other good save that of
preserving these children in their innocence, and of giving a polite
and Christian education to young French girls who were in danger of
being little better raised than slaves. The hope is held out to these
holy _religieuses_ that, ere the end of the year, they will occupy the
new house which is destined for them, and for which they have long
been sighing. When they shall be settled there, to the instruction of
the boarders, the orphans, the day scholars, and the Negresses, they
will add also the care of the sick in the hospital, and of a house of
refuge for women of questionable character. Perhaps later on they will
even be able to aid in affording regularly, each year, the retreat to
a large number of ladies, according to the taste with which we have
inspired them.
“So many works of charity would, in France, suffice to occupy several
communities and different institutions. But what cannot a great zeal
effect? These various labors do not at all startle seven Ursulines;
and they rely upon being able, with the help of God’s grace, to
sustain them without detriment to the religious observance of their
rules. As for me, I fear that, if some assistance does not arrive,
they will sink under the weight of so much fatigue. Those who, before
knowing them, used to say they were coming too soon and in too great a
number, have entirely changed their views and their language;
witnesses of their edifying conduct and great services which they
render to the colony, they find that they have arrived soon enough,
and that there could not be too many of the same virtue and the same
merit.”
After giving details relative to the visit of the Illinois chiefs, who
had come to condole with the French and to offer help against the
Natchez, Father Le Petit adds:
“The first day that the Illinois saw the _religieuses_, Mamantouenza,
perceiving near them a group of little girls, remarked: ‘I see,
indeed, that you are not _religieuses_ without an object.’ He meant to
say that they were not solitaries, laboring only for their own
perfection. ‘You are,’ he added, ‘like the black robes, our fathers;
you labor for others. Ah! if we had above there two or three of your
number, our wives and daughters would have more sense.’ ‘Choose those
whom you wish.’ ‘It is not for me to choose,’ said Mamantouenza. ‘It
is for you who know them. The choice ought to fall on those who are
most attached to God, and who love him most....’”
The records make mention of Therese Lardas, daughter of a Mobile
surgeon. After her father’s death, her mother brought her to the
Ursuline orphanage, where she intended leaving her just long enough to
make her first communion; but, when she came to take her home, so
earnestly did the child plead to remain, that the mother could not
resist her entreaties. At the age of sixteen, she entered the novitiate.
She led the life of an exemplary lay sister, and died at the age of
twenty-nine on November 22, 1786.
In testimony of the good education given to all classes by the
Ursulines, the Rt. Rev. Luis Penalvery Cardemas said in a dispatch
forwarded to the Spanish court, November 1, 1795:
“Since my arrival in this town, on July 17, I have been studying with
the keenest attention the character of its inhabitants, in order to
regulate my ecclesiastical government in accordance with the
information which I may obtain on this important subject.... Excellent
results are obtained from the Convent of the Ursulines, in which a
good many young girls are educated. This is the nursery of those
future matrons who will inculcate in their children the principles
which they here imbibe. The education which they receive in this
institution is the cause of their being less vicious than the other
sex....”
Up to 1824, that is, for well nigh a century, the Ursulines maintained
their orphanage in what is now the old Archbishopric. At this period,
New Orleans having spread considerably and become too densely populated
to afford the advantages and charms of the country so necessary to a
large boarding school, the institution was removed three miles lower
down, to the magnificent place which the Ursulines hold to the present
day. Owing to the encroachments of the great Father of Waters, they are
to transfer again, within a year, to another site.
After 1824, several asylums having been founded for orphans of both
sexes, the Ursulines received but thirty or forty poor children. In
keeping with their sphere of life and future career, these children are
taught English, French, geography, arithmetic, elementary history, and
some housekeeping, sewing and laundry work. The nuns endeavor, above
all, by religions instruction and careful training, to inculcate in the
hearts and minds of their youthful charges principles of duty, so as to
form for the future women of confidence, courage, self-sacrifice and
devotion.