|
小马丁．路德．金 (MARTIN LUTHER KING, Jr.) 从伯明翰市监狱发出的信 Letter from Birmingham City Jail
任何一个地方的不公正是对一切地方的公正的威胁。
小马丁．路德．金(1929－1968)生于佐治亚州亚特兰大，祖父和父亲均爲浸礼会牧师。他15岁入穆尔豪斯学院专修爲天资聪慧的学生开设的课程，以后在宾夕法尼亚州切斯特的克劳泽神学院获神学士学位，又在波斯顿大学获哲学博士学位。金在亚拉巴马州蒙哥马利市的德克斯特大街浸礼会教堂任牧师时，一场对公共汽车的联合抵制运动开始了。他领导这场斗争历时一年，这使他成了全国知名人物。随后他组织南方基督教领袖联合会，成爲迅速扩展的民权运动的领导人。 1963年，金把一场非暴力和消极抵抗运动带到种族隔离和种族歧视严重的伯明翰市。在一次次抗议性的示威游行中数百人被捕。金宁可进监狱也不服从法院关于停止示威的命令。在单独监禁的日子里，金对七位重要的教会人士写的信作了答复。他们在信中要求他取消示威运动，转而依靠谈判和法院解决问题。金用复活节周末的时间起草他的答复。金因爲领导了民权运动于1964年被授予诺贝尔和平奖。1968年当他指导田纳西州孟菲斯的罢工斗争时遇刺身亡。
我在这伯明翰市监狱的铁窗内阅读你们最近的声明，该声明把我们当前的活动称爲“不明智而又不合时宜的。”…… 既然你们已受“外界的人纷纷介入”一说的影响，我认爲我应当阐明自己在伯明翰的原因。……我与我的几名助手在伯明翰，是应邀前来的。我来伯明翰是因爲我在这里有些基本的组织关系。此外，我来伯明翰是因爲这里存在着不公正。正如八世纪的先知们离开他们的小小村落，把“上帝是这麽说的”一话传到远离他们故乡的地方，正如使徒保罗离开他在塔尔苏斯的小村，把耶稣基督的福音带到希腊─罗马世界的几乎每一村庄和城市，我也被迫把自由的福音带到我自己故乡以外的地方。……任何一个地方的不公正是对一切地方的公正的威胁。…… 你们对目前正在伯明翰举行的游行示威感到痛心。但是我很遗憾，你们的声明竟没有对引起示威的客观形势表述同样的关切。我相信你们每个人都不愿紧跟在浅薄的社会分析家脚后，只看后果而不去设法解决根本原因。我会毫不犹豫地说，眼下在伯明翰发生所谓的示威游行是不幸的事。但是我想更强调一点：该市白人政权逼得黑人居民走投无路，没有别的选择。 任何非暴力斗争都包括四个步骤：(1)收集情况以判断是否存在不公正；(2)谈判；(3)自我净化；(4)直接行动。在伯明翰我们已经历了所有这些步骤。无可置疑的事实是，种族不公平笼罩着该市黑人社区。伯明翰可能是美国种族隔离最彻底的城市。该市警察暴行的丑恶记录全国各地尽人皆知。该市法庭对待黑人的不公亦是臭名昭著的现实。比起我国其它城市，伯明翰有更多尚未解决的黑人家宅和教堂爆炸案。这些都是确凿的，残酷的，令人难以置信的事实。…… 通过痛苦的经验我们懂得了，自由不会由压迫者自愿送上门；自由必须由被压迫者去争取。坦率地说，我可从未参加过根据某些人的时间表是“时机恰当”的直接抗争运动，这些人从未饱尝种族隔离之苦。多年来我一直听到这个话：“等待！”每个黑人的耳朵都听腻了。这“等待”一词几乎总是意味着“永不行动”。它不啻起镇静作用的反应停，使紧张情绪放松片刻，却导致沮丧失意感这一畸形儿的産生。我们必须同意昨天杰出的律师的观点：“公正被延误太久，也就是公正被否定。”对我们的宪法和上帝赐予的权利，我们已等待了340多年。亚洲和非洲国家正以喷射机的速度冲向政治独立的目标，而我们却仍以老牛破车的步速去争取在便餐柜台喝上一杯咖啡。…… 你们对我们意欲违反法律表示极大的忧虑。这当然是合理的关注。既然我们如此奋力地催促人们服从最高法院1954年关于在公立学校取缔种族隔离的决定，那麽发现我们有意识地违反法律便会感到奇怪、荒谬。有人或许要问：“你们怎麽能既提倡违反某些法律，又提倡遵守另一些法律呢?”可以用存在着两种法律的事实来回答：既有公正的法律，又有不公正的法律。我愿第一个爲遵守公正的法律大声疾呼。一个人既有法律上，亦有道义上的责任去遵守公正的法律。反过来说，一个人有道义上的责任拒绝遵守不公正的法律。我赞成圣奥古斯丁的话：“一个不公正的法律就根本不是法律。” 那麽公正与不公正的法律二者差别何在? 人们怎样判断一个法律公正还是不公正呢? 一个公正的法律是人制定的符合道德法则和上帝的法则的法规。一个不公正的法律则是与道德法则不一致的模式。用圣托马斯．阿奎那斯的话来说，一个不公正的法律是一种并非植根于永恒和自然法则的人类法律。任何提高人格的法律是公正的，任何贬低人格的法律则是不公正的。 一切种族隔离法都不公正，因爲种族隔离扭曲灵魂，损害人格。它给予实行隔离者以虚假的优越感，给予被隔离者以虚假的自卑感。借用杰出的犹太哲学家马丁．布贝尔的说法，隔离用“我─它”关系取代“我─你”关系，最后把人降低到物的地位。因而种族隔离不仅在政治上、经济上、社会学意义上是荒谬的，而且在道德上也是错误和有罪的。保罗．蒂利希曾说过：罪恶即是分离，难道种族隔离不是人类悲惨的分离的存在主义表现，不是人类极度的疏远和可怕的罪孽的表现吗? 因此我号召人们遵守最高法院1954年的决定，因爲它在道德上是正确的；我号召人们拒绝遵守隔离法，因爲这些法令在道德上是错误的。…… 请允许我作另一种解释。不公正的法律是一种强加于少数人的法规，这些人不参与该法规的制定或创立，因爲他们没有毫无阻碍地投票的权利。有谁能说颁布种族隔离法令的亚拉巴马州立法机关是民主産生的呢?
整个亚拉巴马州用尽各种合谋方式阻止黑人成爲正式选民。在一些县里黑人虽占人口大多数，但竟然没有一个黑人登记参加投票。难道这样一个州确立的任何一项法律能被看作是民主制定的吗?
我们决不能忘记，当年希特勒在德国干的每一勾当都是“合法的”，而匈牙利自由战士在匈牙利做的每一件事皆是“非法的”。在希特勒治下的德国，帮助、安慰一个犹太人是“非法的”。但我相信，倘若当时我生活在德国，我准会帮助、安慰我的犹太弟兄们，尽管这是非法的。倘若我今天生活在一个共産主义国家，某些基督教信仰所珍视的原则遭践踏，我相信我会公开提倡拒绝遵守这种反宗教的法律。…… 我们这一代人将不能不爲坏人的恶语劣行，同时也爲好人令人吃惊的沉默感到悔恨。我们必须认识到，决不能依靠必然性车轮的滚动来实现人类进步。人类进步通过自愿与上帝合作的人孜孜不倦的努力、坚持不懈的工作得以实现，而若是没有这种艰苦的工作，时间本身将成爲社会惰性力量的同谋。……
你们把我们在伯明翰的活动称爲极端和行动。起初我对教会同仁竟把我的非暴力斗争视作极端主义者的行爲感到失望。我开始考虑这麽一个实际情况，即我恰恰站在黑人社会两股对立的力量中间，满足于现状的那股力量由两类黑人组成。一类黑人因长期遭受压迫已完全失去自尊自重之心，适应了种族隔离；第二类人是爲数不多的中产阶级黑人，因享有某种程度学术上和经济上的保障，又因有时从种族隔离中获利，他们已不自觉地变得对群衆的疾苦麻木不仁。另一股势力饱尝辛酸，充满仇恨，它再向前跨出一步便会鼓吹暴力行动。该势力体现于在全国层出不穷的各种黑人民族主义团体，其中最大最出名的是伊莱贾．穆罕默德的穆斯林运动。当代人对种族歧视继续存在的沮丧失望感使这一组织应运而生，发展壮大。它由对美国失去信念的人组成，他们彻底否定基督教，而且得出结论，认定白人爲不可救药的”魔鬼”
。 我尽力设法站在这两股力量中间，我说我们不必追随满足现状者的”无所作爲主义，”也不必仿效黑人民族主义者的
仇恨和绝望。有一种以博爱和非暴力抗议爲手段的更好途径。我感谢上帝，因爲通过黑人教会，非暴力方式进入了我们的斗争。假如这非暴力哲学至今未诞生，那麽我肯定此刻南方许多街道已血流成河。而且我更确信，假如我们的白人弟兄把我们斥爲”暴民煽动者”和”外来鼓动家”──指我们中那些通过非暴力直接行动的渠道工作的人──而且拒绝支持我们的非暴力斗争，那麽数以百计的黑人出于沮丧和绝望将从黑人民族主义思想中获取安慰和保护，这一发展趋势不可避免会导致恐怖的种族对抗恶梦。 被压迫人民不堪永远受压迫，争取自由的浪潮终将到来。这便是美国黑人的经历。内心有物提醒他们记住自己天赋的自由权；身外有物提醒他们记住自己能够取得这权利。…… 然而当我继续思考这一问题时，我却渐渐爲自己被看作极端主义者而略感欣慰。难道耶稣不正是一个在博爱方面的极端主义者吗?
──“爱你的敌人，祝福诅咒你的人，爲虐待你的人祈祷”。难道阿摩司不正是争取公正的极端主义者?
──“让公正如洪水，正义如激流滚滚而来。”难道保罗不是传播耶稣基督福音的极端主义者?──“我在自己的身体上带着主耶稣的痕迹。”难道马丁．路德不是极端主义者?──“我站在这里；我别无选择，所以拯救我吧，上帝”。难道约翰．班扬不是极端主义者?──“我将留在狱中直到我死去的那一天，免得把自己的良心变爲屠场。”难道亚伯拉罕．林肯不是极端主义者?──“这个国家不能在半奴隶、半自由状况中继续生存。”难道托马斯．杰斐逊不是极端主义者？──
“我们认爲这些真理不言自明：人人生而平等。” 所以问题不在于我们是否要做极端主义者，而在于我们要做什麽样的极端主义者。我们要做服务于仇恨的极端主义者还是服务于博爱的极端主义者?
我们要做爲保存不公正而奋斗的极端主义者，抑或是爲正义的事业奋斗的极端主义者?
……
我已周游了亚拉巴马州、密西西比州和南方其它各州。在炎热的夏日和秋高气爽的早晨，我看着一座座尖塔直插云霄、外观很美的教堂，注意到南方在营造大批宗教教育场所上不惜工本。我一次又一次情不自禁地暗自发问：“谁在这儿做礼拜?
谁是他们的上帝?
当巴尼特州长大谈干预，鼓吹拒绝执行国会的法令时，当华莱士州长公然号召挑战，煽动仇恨时，他们的声音上哪儿去了?……
当代教会常常只是发出微弱、无效、动摇不定的声音。它常常是维护现状的主要支持者。普通地区的权力机构不但不对教会的存在感到不安，而且因教会的缄默，因教会常对现状表示认可感到安慰。 但上帝对教会的审判从未像现在这样严厉。如果当今的教会无法恢复早期教会的牺牲精神，它将丧失权威的光环，失去千百万人对它的忠诚，被人们当作对20世纪毫无意义、无关宏旨的社会团体。……我感谢上帝，因爲有组织的宗教阶层中某些高尚的人已从束缚手脚、令人瘫痪的锁链中挣脱出来，积极加入我们爲自由而斗争的队伍。……他们怀着这样的信念踏上征程：正义即使被击败也比取得胜利的邪恶强大。如果说这个种族是块面团，这些人便是发酵剂。他们的证言已成爲精神食盐，在这动荡不安的时期用于保存福音的真话。他们已在失望的黑暗山洞中凿通了一条希望的隧道。……但即便教会不去援助正义，我对未来也不感到绝望。即使我们的动机目前被误解；我对我们在伯明翰斗争的结果也不感到担忧。我们将在伯明翰和全美国达到自由的目标，因爲美国的目标是自由。虽然我们可能被辱駡被嘲笑，我们的命运与美国的命运紧紧结合在一起。……总有一天，南方会认识到它真正的英雄是何人。他们将是詹姆斯．梅雷迪思们，以巨大的勇气和坚定的意志面对暴徒的嘲笑和敌视，面对令人痛苦的孤独，而这些正是先驱者生涯的特点。他们将是年老的、饱受压迫欺凌的黑人妇女，以亚拉巴马州蒙哥马利市一位72岁的老妇人爲典型。她怀着自尊感与决心不乘实行隔离的公共汽车的黑人同胞们一起站立，对询问她是否疲劳的人作了语法不规范但却颇有深度的回答：“我的脚很累，但我的心安宁。”他们将是年轻的大中学学生、年轻的福音传教牧师和大批年长者，勇敢而又和平地在便餐柜台边静坐抗议，爲了问心无愧宁愿坐牢。总有一天，南方会明白，当这些被剥夺继承权的上帝的孩子们在便餐柜台坐下时，他们实际上是爲实现美国梦的最佳理想，爲犹太─基督教传统最神圣的准则挺身而出，从而把整个国家带回到民主的伟大源泉，由建国的先辈们在拟定宪法和独立宣言时所深深开掘的源泉。…… 我希望这封信能使你们坚定信念。我也希望自己有可能很快与你们每一位会面，不是以一个牧师和基督教兄弟的身份，而是作爲一个主张取消种族隔离的人或一名民权领袖。让我们期盼种族偏见的乌云很快飞走，误解的浓雾从我们担惊受怕的居民区消散；让我们期盼在不远的明天博爱和兄弟情谊的灿烂星辰将以美丽的光华照亮我们伟大的国家。 附注：
While confined here in the Birmingham City Jail, I came across your recent statement calling our present activities "unwise and untimely." . . . I think I should give the reason for my being in Birmingham, since you have been influenced by the argument of "outsiders coming in." . . . I am here, along with several members of my staff, because we were invited here. I am here because I have basic organizational ties here. Beyond this, I am in Birmingham because injustice is here. Just as the 8th century prophets left their little villages and carried their "thus saith the Lord" far beyond the boundaries of their home town, and just as the Apostle Paul left his little village of Tarsus and carried the gospel of Jesus Christ to practically every hamlet and city of the Graeco-Roman world, I too am compelled to carry the gospel of freedom beyond my particular home town. . . .Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. . . . You deplore the demonstrations that are presently taking place in Birmingham. But I am sorry that your statement did not express a similar concern for the conditions that brought the demonstrations into being. I am sure that each of you would want to go beyond the superficial social analyst who looks merely at effects, and does not grapple with underlying causes. I would not hesitate to say that it is unfortunate that so-called demonstrations are taking place in Birmingham at this time, but I would say in more emphatic terms that it is even more unfortunate that the white power structure of this city left the Negro community with no other alternative. In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: 1 ) collection of the facts to determine whether injustices are alive; 2) negotiation; 3) self-purification; and 4) direct action. We have gone through all of these steps in Birmingham. There can be no gainsaying of the fact that racial injustice engulfs this community. Birmingham is probably the most thoroughly segregated city in the United States. Its ugly record of police brutality is known in every section of this country. Its unjust treatment of Negroes in the courts is a notorious reality. There have been more unsolved bombings of Negro homes and churches in Birmingham than any city in this nation. These are the hard, brutal, and unbelievable facts.... We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly I have never yet engaged in a direct action movement that was "well timed," according to the timetable of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word "Wait!" It rings in the ear of every Negro with a piercing familiarity. This "wait" has almost always meant "never." It has been a tranquilizing Thalidomide, relieving the emotional stress for a moment, only to give birth to an ill-formed infant of frustration. We must come to see with the distinguished jurist of yesterday that "justice too long delayed is justice denied." We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God-given rights. The nations of Asia and Africa are moving with jet-like speed toward the goal of political independence, and we still creep at horse and buggy pace toward the gaining of a cup of coffee at a lunch counter. . . . You express a great deal of anxiety over our willingness to break laws. This is certainly a legitimate concern. Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court's decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools, it is rather strange and paradoxical to find us consciously breaking laws. One may well ask, "How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?" The answer is found in the fact that there are two types of laws: There are just laws and there are unjust laws. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with Saint Augustine that "An unjust law is no law at all." Now what is the difference between the two? How does one determine when a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a mode that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of Saint Thomas Aquinas, an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality. It gives the segregator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority. To use the words of Martin Buber, the great Jewish philosopher, segregation substitutes an "I-it" relationship for the "I-thou" relationship, and ends up relegating persons to the status of things. So segregation is not only politically, economically, and sociologically unsound, but it is morally wrong and sinful. Paul Tillich has said that sin is separation. Isn't segregation an existential expression of man's tragic separation, an expression of his awful estrangement, his terrible sinfulness? So I can urge men to obey the 1954 decision of the Supreme Court because it is morally right, and I can urge them to disobey segregation ordinances because they are morally wrong. . . . Let me give another explanation. An unjust law is a code inflicted upon a minority which that minority had no part in enacting or creating because it did not have the unhampered right to vote. Who can say the Legislature of Alabama which set up the segregation laws was democratically elected? Throughout the state of Alabama all types of conniving methods are used to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters and there are some counties without a single Negro registered to vote despite the fact that the Negro constitutes a majority of the population. Can any law set up in such a state be considered democratically structured? . . . We can never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was "legal" and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was "illegal." It was "illegal" to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler's Germany. But I am sure that. if I had lived in Germany during that time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers even though it was illegal. If I lived in a Communist country today where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I believe I would openly advocate disobeying these anti-religious laws. . . . We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of good people. We must come to see that human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability. It comes through the tireless efforts and persistent work of men willing to be co-workers with God, and without this hard work time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation. . . . You spoke of our activity in Birmingham as extreme. At first I was rather disappointed that fellow clergymen would see my nonviolent efforts as those of the extremist. I started thinking about the fact that I stand in the middle of two opposing forces in the Negro community. One is a force of complacency made up of Negroes who, as a result of long years of oppression, have been so completely drained of self-respect and a sense of "somebodiness" that they have adjusted to segregation, and of a few Negroes in the middle class who, because of a degree of academic and economic security, and because at points they profit by segregation, have unconsciously become insensitive to the problems of the masses. The other force is one of bitterness and hatred and comes perilously close to advocating violence. It is expressed in the various black nationalist groups that are springing up over the nation, the largest and best known being Elijah Muhammad's Muslim movement. This movement is nourished by the contemporary frustration over the continued existence of racial discrimination. It is made up of people who have lost faith in America, who have absolutely repudiated Christianity, and who have concluded that the white man is an incurable "devil." I have tried to stand between these two forces saying that we need not follow the "donothingism" of the complacent or the hatred and despair of the black nationalist. There is the more excellent way of love and nonviolent protest. I'm grateful to God that, through the Negro church, the dimension of nonviolence entered our struggle. If this philsosphy had not emerged I am convinced that by now many streets of the South would be flowing with floods of blood. And I am further convinced that if our white brothers dismiss us as "rabble rousers" and "outside agitators"― those of us who are working through the channels of nonviolent direct action― and refuse to support our nonviolent efforts, millions of Negroes, out of frustration and despair, w― ill seek solace and security in black nationalist ideologies, a development that will lead inevitably to a frightening racial nightmare. Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The urge for freedom will eventually come. This is what has happened to the American Negro. Something within has reminded him of his birthright of freedom; something without has reminded that he can gain it. . . . But as I continued to think about the matter I gradually gained a bit of satisfaction from being considered an extremist. Was not Jesus an extremist in love? "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, pray for them that despitefully use you." Was not Amos an extremist for justice ― "Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream." Was not Paul an extremist for the gospel of Jesus Christ― "I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus." Was not Martin Luther an extremist― "Here I stand; I can do none other so help me God." Was not John Bunyan an extremist― "I will stay in jail to the end of my days before I make a butchery of my conscience." Was not Abraham Lincoln an extremist― "This nation cannot survive half slave and half free." Was not Thomas Jefferson an extremist― "We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal." So the question is not whether we will be extremist but what kind of extremist will we be. Will we be extremists for hate or will we be extremists for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice― or will we be extremists for the cause of justice? . . . I have traveled the length and breadth of Alabama, Mississippi, and all the other Southern states. On sweltering summer days and crisp autumn mornings I have looked at her beautiful churches with their spires pointing heavenward. I have beheld the impressive outlay of her massive religious education buildings. Over and over again I have found myself asking: "Who worships here? Who is their God? Where were their voices when the lips of Governor Barnett dripped with words of interposition and nullification? Where were they when Governor Wallace gave the clarion call for defiance and hatred? . . . The contemporary Church is so often a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. It is so often the arch-supporter of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the (church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the Church's silent and often vocal sanction of things as they are. But the judgment of God is upon the Church as never before. If the Church of today does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early Church, it will lose its authentic ring, forfeit the loyalty of millions and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the 20th century. . . . I am thankful to God that some noble souls from the rank's of organized religion have broken loose from the paralyzing chains of conformity and joined us as active partners in the struggle for freedom . . . they have gone with the faith that right defeated is stronger than evil triumphant. These men have been the leaven in the lump of the race. Their witness has been the spiritual salt that has preserved the true meaning of the Gospel in these troubled times. They have carved a tunnel of hope through the dark mountain of disappointment. . . . But even if the Church does not come to the aid of justice, I have no despair about the future. I have no fear about the outcome of our struggle in Birmingham, even if our motives are presently misunderstood. We will reach the goal of freedom in Birmingham and all over the nation, because the goal of America is freedom. Abused and scorned though we may be, our destiny is tied up with the destiny of America. . . . One day the South will recognize its real heroes. They will be the James Merediths, courageously and with a majestic sense of purpose, facing jeering and hostile mobs and the agonizing loneliness that characterizes the life of the pioneer. They will be old, oppressed, battered Negro women, symbolized in a 72-year-old woman of Montgomery, Alabama, who rose up with a sense of dignity and with her people decided not to ride the segregated buses, and responded to one who inquired about her tiredness with ungrammatical profundity: "My feets is tired, but my soul is rested." They will be young high school and college students, young ministers of the Gospel and a host of the elders, courageously and nonviolently sitting in at lunch counters and willingly going to jail for conscience's sake. One day the South will know that w4ien these disinherited children of God sat down at lunch counters they were in reality standing up for the best in the American dream and the most sacred values in ourJudeo-Christian heritage, and thus carrying our whole nation back to great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the founding fathers in the formulation of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. . . . I hope this letter finds you strong in the faith. I also hope that circumstances will soon make it possible for me to meet each of you, not as an integrationist or a civil rights leader, but as a fellow clergyman and a Christian brother. Let us all hope that the dark clouds of racial prejudice will soon pass away, that the deep fog of misunderstanding will be lifted from our fear-drenched communities, and that in some not too distant tomorrow the radiant stars of love and brotherhood will shine over our great nation with all of their scintillating beauty. |