Page images
PDF
EPUB

Have not the church armies more or less forgotten the common enemy and turned to cutting and slashing among themselves, or at an imagined enemy, with a mere warfare of words, sentiments and notions.

It may be wrong, but there is a prevalent idea that different branches of this army have learned to be quite as uncharitable to each other as to the real enemy; and if I were called on to point out any sin of the church it would be that of bigotry. In this reversion to the wolf and the lion, and the evil instincts of humanity, God is often almost forgotten and a worship of the particular church or creed set up in His stead. Alas, the number of small gods that are worshiped to-day! and while their worshipers laugh at the old worshipers of the golden calf they unite in paying homage to the material, if not the form of the calf. And whether from bigotry, church and creed worship, or other causes, or all of them, it is sadly evident that the church has lost much of its former hold upon the public. The bigot may deny and the "church" may defy, but to the observant the fact is nevertheless the same.

There may be various causes for this, and he is the churches' best friend, no matter to what branch of its army he belongs, who first sounds the alarm and suggests the remedy. It is a matter not alone of interest to the church itself but to society as well. To all come the questions: Are people as religious as they used to be, and if not, why not? Is there a church revolution on hand? We need not allude to past church revolutions, nor to the dangers of intimating that any particular section is not “a church-going community." Yet the United States is a fair criterion of church civilization, and is a church-going country. The church rolls show an immense army, though many of them are non-church goers, or admitted backsliders. Many who appear on the lists are placed there for distinctive classifications, and yet by the latest statistics there is less than one seat, in all churches, for the membership, and less than one seat to two people of the population. How well these seats are filled on the Sabbath is a matter of individual estimate. One thing is sure, however, there are no longer demands for brush arbors and standing room only, and as a matter of fact, except on unusual occasions,

there is not only plenty of room, but rarely are the seats more than half filled.

There is no use of denying the fact that the comparison in this country is rather favorable to the church, while formerly such was not the case. In view, therefore, of these and other apparent facts, may we not reason together and inquire the causes and effects? Are they not vital questions to the church and public? It might be expected that the "sinner" should be occasionally absent, but why the churchmen? Whither are the people drifting; to atheism, or simply from the church? Are they quitting all gods or going off after false gods? Has the minister done, or failed to do, anything to drive the flock away? Have the churches been asked for bread and have given a stone? Along this line there is truly food for thought, and which ignorance and abuse will not change, nor overlooking the facts settle. They are effects for which there must be a cause, and for which there should be remedies devised.

There are doubtless many causes why people do not attend church so generally as they formerly did, and yet there are many more people now to attend them than formerly. It was said of the early churchmen of this country that the reason they were so united in religious worship was because it was then a case of “hang together or of being hanged separately." Whatever other reasons may be assigned for it this one cannot now exist, for surely all may attend church without the fear of being hanged or scalped. It may, however, be that this privilege for which our forefathers so zealously fought has become commonplace and less appreciation is manifested than formerly. Still there must be other reasons for it, as people will go where they are interested, and there are far more to interest them now than then. There are now clubs, bicycles, baseball and thousands of things that then were not in existence. Yet we cannot think that even these diversions are the sole, if, indeed, they be the main, causes for the growing non-church attendance. There seems to be something back of it all that has changed, to a great extent, the old idea of worship and church reverence, and given the idea that a minister is only wanted "at a funeral or a marriage." It used to be that there were sanctities with all, whether from fear of the burning lake, and many

of those hideous things of the early church history, or deeper reverence to the cause; and it seems almost impossible that we should have ever been told that "there is no religion west of the Missouri and no God west of the Rocky Mountains," and that the church "was now only a retreat for imbeciles, women and children." That it has had its day, is now dominated by weak minds and mental dwarfs; that it has lost its sympathy and charity for the masses and has been converted into "mutual admiration societies and closed corporations for the rich." That God has left the church in disgust; that men to enter the church must leave their minds behind; that to get a favor or a job you must not go to the church people; or, having either, you must be a hypocrite to escape the venom of their bigotry, and all such. It seems impossible at the present day that such charges should be made, and yet, whether the churches ever hear them or not, they surely are made, and are apparently well indorsed.

To the observant this means something. Indeed it means much, for only a short time back it was thought that only Thomas Paine and Col. Ingersoll would make such remarks. To-day the unorthodox speak to crowded houses, and what they write finds immense and ready sales. And, whether right or wrong, good or bad, they appear to have been more successful in "conversions" than do the churches. At least something, or a combination of things, has put the public to reading and thinking, and in just this proportion do they seem to be seeking other places and amusements to the neglect of the churches. Not only this, but many of the old Bible stories, at least in their literalities, are emphatically denied. The old-fashioned hell is now scoffed; the Jonah story is jested with; the school boy is openly told, as a choice between the teachings of his teachers at Sunday school and those of science and the high school, of the story of creation, to accept the latter; while the churches and all have about agreed that creeds are of human origin and limitations, and not those of the spirit or Deity.

Following these ideas have come dancing without thought of sin; card playing for amusement; theatre-going without compunctions of conscience; and so far has the pendulum swung in the opposite direction, that baseball games, bicycle races, Sunday shows and a

thousand of things that the churches, if not the public, considered as grave offenses in the past, have found in the public morals a considerable open tolerance. If these so-called offenses were confined to the "sinners" and the "unconverted" there might be less of wonder. But are they? Except by the lists on the church rolls, how could you tell many of them? And yet while the minister gathers with his diminished flock, and sings "A charge to keep I have," is it any wonder the passing crowd looks in and asks "Where is the charge?" Why this apparent revolution against the churches? It is useless to get mad, lose patience and say the one is right and the other is wrong. That proves nothing, and besides seems to be a question of opinion, and in which the churches appear to be growing into a waning minority. People will go where it suits them, and restraints against will may make hypocrites but will never make Christians. It is needless to say that the picture is overdrawn, or that it applies to any one country, church or section. The facts and proofs do not so warrant. Nor is it fully determined that people are worse, less moral or more wicked than formerly, in proportion to population. If that be affirmed it may also be denied, as it depends upon the view taken of it. On the lines of temperance and profanity it will doubtless be admitted that the world has advanced. It is plainly seen by observation and the diminished quantity of strong drink consumed. It is also evident that humanity has made wonderful strides in the way of intellectual advancement. The public is both reading and . thinking more. Children are brighter and the older are more thoughtful. The mental food of the present and future is stronger and of higher grade; for the public is at least more choice and discriminating since the cheapening of books and literature. One fact is they will no longer listen to a man whose assertion is the only evidence that he has been "called." To be heard, nowadays, the speaker must say something; to be read, he must have a message.

In the light of these advancements then, in other lines, in the name of all that is good and holy, may we not ask what is the matter with the churches? Why are the people estranged from them? Have they advanced too fast, or have the churches advanced too little? It can hardly be said that the people have become atheists,

for reverence for Deity is still as universal in the human heart as is the recognition of hope. God is, was and ever will be; and the heart of nature, as well as that of man, reaches out to Him and re-echoes the sympathetic chords of the creature to the Creator. Universal is the belief and hope in Deity, and to other causes must we look for the apparent revolt against the churches, for even the wars of the socalled atheists have been against men, creeds and dogmas and not against the Godhead.

Let us go back then to other inquiries. Is it because the people think they can live better and happier without the churches than with them? Outside of them than in them? Have they advanced and are now waiting for the coming church to catch up with their procession? Are they tired of the old and demand the new? Are they tired of creeds, forms and isms and desert the church to escape them? Do they hear and read something better without than within them? Are they turning from them on account of what they consider literalisms and pious contradictions, rather than apparently indorse what they there hear? Is it the idea of simply tearing down the old, or a revolution that hopes to meet the demands by newer and still better structures?

Be the answer what it may, it is one of deep concern to the church and public, which they must soon realize and recognize. It cannot be denied there are evidences of new demands of some kind upon every hand; nor can it be denied that, after all, no matter what the origin, the people make the churches and not the churches the people. All the present churches were the supply of demands, if not the direct products of revolutions, and the future church, as in the past, will be the simple supply in answer to public demands. In church work, as in everything else, "God moves in a mysterious way, His wonders to perform," and there is no more favorite instrumentality of His hand than humanity.

So what if there be an impending church revolution ahead of us? In it we really have nothing to fear. The real church has nothing to fear. to gain and nothing to lose. The whether written in the blade of grass upon the mountain peak or

Religion has nothing to fear. On the other hand, it has all Bible and all Divine teaching,

« PreviousContinue »