Showing That in 317 or 27 Per Cent of the Strictly Rural Townships No Church Has a Resident MinisterLarger Image
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 isa 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.
To substitute coöperation 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 coöperation 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 concertedaction. 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 Coöperation 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.
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 Coöperation 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 hasbeen 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 certainofficials 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 coöperation, although the local churches and the local people were for it. It mightin charity be contended that in nine of these it was not Christian coöperation itself that was opposed, but rather the form of coöperation embodied in a federated church. But in the tenth community it was clearly Christian coöperation 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 coöperation, for only incidentally did the authors hear of the cases reported.
To give strength to the movement for interchurch coöperation, 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 coöperation. 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 coöperation between churches at the present time. Numbers of actual instances could begiven 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 coöperation. Such a movement would finally reveal the fact that the prevailing sentiment in the denominations is really in favor of coöperation 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 coöperation 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 onthis 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.
There are many rural communities in Ohio where the churches exert a vital influence in community life, and where farm life succeeds in holding families of moral, intellectual, and physical vigor. In some instances the communities and their churches have not been seriously affected by the modern conditions and tendencies which elsewhere are acting unfavorably upon the country church and country life. In other instances, intelligent leadership on the part of the ministers has overcome these conditions. Many of these ministers highly appreciate the help they have received from the modern country church movement, while not a few have testified that without it they would have failed.
In a very large part of rural Ohio the need of interchurch coöperation is keenly realized. In the divided communities the people, for the most part, want to get together, but they do not know how. But in many communities practical methods have been found and tested, and by these methods Christian coöperation has been brought to pass and the rural church conditions have been greatly improved. For that reason descriptions of actual successful cases of interchurch coöperation are here supplied. These examples are intended to include federated churches, church federations, and denominational union churches, as well as certain striking cases of the work of the church in community service. The uniting of Christian forces will not by itself alone insure rural church progress. The new country church program must be added. In its absence, a real advance appears to be impossible.
Greene Township, Trumbull County, is situated in northeastern Ohio, in the Western Reserve. In 1900 it had a population of about 800 persons, in 1910 about 100 less. Some of its residents are descended from the early settlers from New England, others have recently moved in from western sections of Ohio, while possibly 10 per cent are of foreign birth. That its people have been somewhat progressive is indicated by the fact that it was among the first three townships in the State to establish a centralized school.
Greene is not a rich township. It has no railroad. About 40 of its houses are now vacant. Fields which formerly were producing good crops of wheat, corn, and oats are now growing up to brush. The young men between 25 and 30 years of age who were going into farming before the war can be counted on the fingers of one hand. It is probable, however, that a new era in agriculture has begun. Quite recently drainage, and in some cases the application of lime, have reclaimed much waste land. Still other land will be treated in the same way and with equally good results. Doubtless, as elsewhere, progressive country church work will greatly assist a general movement in the township to secure abundant prosperity.
In the geographical center of the township are two churches, Methodist Episcopal and Disciples of Christ. These two are about equal in strength, while in the northwestern part is a Baptist church with but three or four families in its membership. The latter, however, supports a Sunday school of 30 or 40 attendants.
Formerly, three resident ministers lived in the community, but for twelve years there had been none. The Baptist Church holds only occasional preaching services, the Disciples have depended for their preaching upon student supplies from a neighboring theological school, while the ministers of the Methodist Episcopal Church have lived outside the township at North Bloomfield, five miles away, where there are MethodistEpiscopal, Disciples, and Congregational churches. The Methodist Episcopal Church at Greene, therefore, was part of a circuit of two churches.
As is usually the case among farming people of Ohio where there are no resident ministers the people of Greene Township received very few pastoral calls. Several families in the southeastern section of the township have had little or no association with any ministers or churches. Mr. Gill recently visited the township on a pleasant Sunday, and learned that less than 30 of its 700 people that day went to church.
As an indication that the churches of Greene Township have been losing their hold on the people, it may be noted that an increasing number of families do not ask clergymen to officiate at funerals. The undertaker sometimes conducts a short service at the grave, or his wife reads a prayer and passage of scripture. In view of immemorial custom, the absence of a clergyman on such occasions is significant.
The total amount of money contributed annually to the support of the ministry in Greene Township has been not more than $600. Of this the Methodist Episcopal Church paid its minister $300. The North Bloomfield Church in an adjacent township paid him $500, so that the total salary of the Methodist minister who gave part of his time to Greene Township was $800. Obviously this is not enough to support a family and enable the minister to keep a motor car or a horse. A large part of his time and energy, therefore, was spent in walking from parish to parish and from house to house through an area of 50 square miles.
In January of 1917 a joint committee was appointed by the churches of Greene Township to consider the questions of securing a resident pastor, increasing the size of the Sunday school and congregation, and rendering all other forms of service needed in the community. It was decided by this committee that a federated church should be formed in which each constituent ecclesiastical body would preserve its own identity. Each church would independently meet its obligations to its own denomination in all matters outside of the community, while all the members of the churches would unite in local activities, including the supportof a resident minister. A country life institute was held to stimulate the desire for community improvement, and the plan of church betterment was set forth and adopted.
To secure support for a minister, a thorough canvass was made by a committee of six representing the three churches. As a result of its work no less than $1,500 was subscribed. “Our results,†wrote the chairman of this committee, “have surpassed our brightest hopes. It is a genuine pleasure to work for something that is going to help the whole community and not just a part. I believe the interests of the Kingdom will be advanced most where effort is united in rural communities. In our canvass for funds we were surprised to find that the non-church people were not willing that the churches should close their doors. In addition we found they had a deeper interest in the church than we could possibly expect. One old man, probably sixty-five, said that this was the first time he had ever been asked to give to the support of a church. He added that he often felt he would like to give. Many a man said he would double the amount of his gift if it was necessary.â€
A well-educated minister who has rendered nine successive years of effective service in one community has been secured as pastor, and there is now a most encouraging prospect of improvement in religious, moral, social, and economic life. The increased giving in Greene Township has also influenced the members of the Methodist Episcopal Church in North Bloomfield. They have pledged $800, instead of the former $500, for the support of their minister, and expect to raise $1,000. Bloomfield Township also hereafter will have the undivided service of a minister.
As a result of this movement in Greene Township, therefore, four of the churches of these two townships will hereafter pay from $2,300 to $2,500 for the support of the ministry instead of $1,100 as hitherto, while two communities will each have the full time service of a resident pastor. The significance of this increase in the money support of the church will be apparent to those who have studied modern rural church problems. The failure of the rural churches to give a living wage, much less a workingsalary, to their ministers has been one of the most discouraging facts in the rural church situation.
If the three churches of North Bloomfield should federate as those of Greene Township have done, doubtless their people could raise $1,500 for the support of the ministry. Again, if all the churches of both North Bloomfield and Greene should federate it would be possible to employ a single pastor of even higher grade with an assistant. An automobile could be used effectively to cover both townships. In some cases, as in Benzonia, Michigan, one minister with one or more assistants has been able to get better results at less expense. The plan is worth trying.
In the year 1913 in the village of Aurora, Portage County, there were two churches, the Congregational and Disciples of Christ. They were small in attendance and membership, and it was hard to get adequate support for the ministers. The usual results of underpaying the ministry were not wanting. As a preliminary step in the improvement of this situation an organization of the men of the churches was formed to promote the general community welfare. As in so many other cases, to bring the churches together in coöperative service to the community was seen to be the only way to secure a vigorous church life for Aurora. That led to the decision to form a federated church under the leadership of one pastor. Under the plan adopted, each church was to keep its denominational relations, contribute to its denominational benevolences, and fulfill all denominational obligations. But in Aurora, as in Greene Township, the people were to work together as in one church.
Owing to circumstances which were purely accidental, for the first year or two the church was not very prosperous and the federation was only partially successful. But after awhile the church began to take on life. While at the beginning it was mutually understood that the arrangement was to be tried for but two years, at the end of that time thedesirability of going back to the old way was not even discussed. So far as Mr. Gill could learn in a visit to the community, the one and only one person who still preferred the old way was a woman who had opposed the movement from the start and had always held aloof from it. The opinion of the people is now practically unanimous that both the community and the churches were greatly benefited by the change. The first pastor of this church was of the Disciples, the second a Presbyterian.
Garrettsville is a prosperous community on the Erie Railroad between Youngstown and Cleveland. Its thousand inhabitants are engaged partly in farming, partly in manufacturing, and partly in supplying the various daily needs of the people. Its good houses, electric lights, paved streets, and trim sidewalks indicate progressiveness and community spirit. Being progressive, the people not merely recognized the undesirability of interchurch competition, but they were able to work out a plan whereby they have largely avoided it.
In April, 1916, there were four churches in the community, or on an average one to 250 persons. The highest salary paid to its minister by any of the churches was $800. Two of the other churches paid much smaller sums and shared the service of their ministers with the churches of other towns, while one of the pastors was the Educational Secretary of a Y. M. C. A. in a town thirty miles away. The spirit of denominational rivalry was in no respect different from that commonly found where there are too many churches. When the pastor of the Congregational Church attempted to organize a branch of the Boy Scouts of America for all the boys in the community, he found that the members of the other churches feared he was attempting to win the boys over to his church. For this reason he thought it best to give up the enterprise.
In 1914, an unsuccessful attempt was made to unite the Congregational Church and the Disciples, and another to unite the Baptist andCongregational churches. In 1916, however, under the influence of the country church movement in Ohio, a successful effort was made to unite all three of them. In the spring of that year these three churches were all without pastors. They decided to hold union services and a Union Sunday school during the summer.
Upon trial the advantages of this arrangement became manifest. Not only was the church attendance larger than the aggregate attendance in the separate churches had ever been, but the Sunday school, formerly with separate attendances of 65, 20, and 12, now had an attendance of 130. Besides the added enthusiasm of greater numbers, it had better teachers, better music, and a better Christian spirit.
In September, 1916, it was decided by separate vote of each church to form a permanent organization, which was incorporated with the name of “The United Church,†and included all who were members of any of the three churches. No member was asked to alter any of his beliefs, and any candidate for admission might choose his own mode of being received, provided it was one used in some Evangelical church. Contributions for missionary work were sent to denominational bodies indicated by the givers or determined by a joint committee. For all local work the members were to act as one body. A committee of the United Church chose as pastor a young man of rural experience, a graduate of an eastern university and seminary, whose denominational affiliation was regarded as of so little importance that it was not even announced.
The United Church of Garrettsville, after two years of experience, affords religious opportunities and renders service to the people far beyond anything the town could supply before the federation was made.
While the three original churches remain intact, the main part of the business of the church is done by the committee of the United Church. The officials of the denominations of the three churches interested heartily encourage the project. The united force of church workers from three denominations has made a very efficient church.
The United Church is the result of a desire of the people to be as closelyjoined in their new church as they were in their different denominational churches. Its motto is “In essentials, unity, in non-essentials, liberty, in diversities, charity, in all things, Christ first.†It accepts the Scriptures as its sufficient rule of faith and practice, interpreted in the light of fundamental agreements in evangelical teaching, and in the spirit of its motto. Forms of ritual for the sacrament, for the public services, and for admission into the church are left to the decision of the minister, and are not provided for in the regulations. It was desired to keep the forms of sectarianism too feeble to be able to keep the people apart. Persons may join the United Church without joining any of the three denominations represented by the original constituent bodies.
The Sunday school is well organized, and is testing its work by the highest standard of Christian education. Its relation to the church is very close. The young people have a Christian Endeavor Society. The women’s work is carried on by a most flourishing society under the name of “The Community Circle,†whose form of organization provides for taking care of both local and missionary needs. At the first meeting of each month, half of the time is given to local opportunities for service. The general social life of the church is largely cared for by this society.
The United Church has leased all the property of the old churches for a term of years and cares for the church buildings. It has decided to build a new community house for promoting the social life of the community and general community interests, but has postponed it until after the war. In the Articles of Incorporation one of the objects is regarded as the support of such enterprises as tend to the more perfect development of the children and young people spiritually, physically, morally, and socially.
Representatives of the old churches usually go to the meetings of their respective denominations, and are accompanied by such members of the United Church as may wish to attend as visitors. Reports of the meetings are made at meetings of the United Church. The pastor of the United Church is also pastor of each of the three denominational churchesand so far as possible attends the district meetings of the denominational bodies in a representative capacity and cares for the local denominational interests. Public services and meetings are held in the Congregational Church building because it is the largest and best equipped. A baptistry is now being installed, and various uses are being found for the other buildings.
It will be noted that the United Church of Garrettsville differs in some respects from the ordinary federated church.
In Northfield, Summit County, the Presbyterian and Methodist Episcopal churches united by verbal agreement in a federated church on December 1, 1914. Written articles were adopted several months later. The pastor of the federated church, Rev. J. M. Keck, has kindly given us the following brief account:
“The consent of the higher officials of each denomination was first secured. Then the members of the local churches agreed to the following plan:
“The Presbyterians remain in the Cleveland Presbytery and the Methodists in the Northeast Ohio Conference as before. The legal organization of each local church continues intact. Each set of trustees has charge of its property. The Presbyterian Church being the better located, is used for worship, and the Methodist for dinners, etc. When a building needs repairs, funds are raised from the entire congregation by voluntary contributions.
“The only additional organization is an Executive Committee, half Presbyterians and half Methodists, which has charge of current expenses and all matters relating to the congregation as a whole. An every-member canvass for the local budget is made in which no account is taken of church relations, no one but the treasurer knowing how much is contributed by each denomination. Benevolent contributions are equallydivided between the denominational boards or applied to the Presbyterian or Methodist funds as indicated on envelopes.
“Persons desiring to unite with the church elect whether they are to be Presbyterians or Methodists and are received accordingly. No one seems to care in which they are enrolled, since they work in the same congregation and contribute to the same funds. The order of public worship is a modification of each of those formerly in use but retains the essential features of both.
“So far there has not been the slightest friction between the denominations. No one seems to think of ever going back to the old way.
WHAT THE PRESBYTERIANS GAINED
“1. A church was saved for the denomination which in time would probably have been forced to disband.
“2. Several hundred dollars of home missionary money was saved annually which had been expended in Northfield to keep the church open and alive. Under the federation it is not needed.
“3. Offerings are made to the various boards and interests of Presbyterianism.
WHAT THE METHODIST CONFERENCE GAINED
“1. A church was saved that doubtless would have been closed in a few years for want of support.
“2. The salary of the pastor has been increased and also the stipends of the district superintendent, the bishops, conferences, and claimants.
“3. The contributions to all boards and benevolences have been increased.
WHAT THE COMMUNITY GAINED
“1. Federation saves paying two pastors and keeping two church buildings when one is sufficient. It makes the public more willing to aid.
“2. The congregation being more than doubled, there is more enthusiasm and willingness to work.
“3. It has silenced the criticism that the churches are competing instead of coöperating.
“4. The economic and fraternal features of federation appeal to the public and bring into line people who did not patronize either church before.â€
More churches have been federated in New England than in any other section of the United States. Familiarity with the success or failure of these churches is therefore necessary to a reasonably full discussion of interchurch coöperation. Accordingly information blanks were sent to a number of these federated churches. The inquiries were expressed as follows:
1. Date of Federation?
2. Denominations of constituent bodies?
3. Membership of each church at the time of federation?
4. Denomination of the first minister and of succeeding ministers?
5. Do the people like the present arrangement better than the old?
6. Do many people want to go back to the old way?
7. Have church benevolences declined or increased?
8. How has the pecuniary support of the ministry been affected?
9. How have other expenditures of the church been affected?
10. Has attendance declined or increased?
11. Has church membership declined or increased?
12. What effect, if any, has the formation of the federated church had upon the social life of the community?
13. Kindly express frankly your opinion of the federated church as a means of securing Christian unity and church efficiency.
Fifteen churches replied. In these fifteen federated churches were thirteen Congregational churches, nine Methodist Episcopal, sevenBaptist, and one Universalist. The Universalist was federated with a Congregational church, two federated churches were made up of Baptist and Methodist, five of Baptist and Congregational, seven of Methodist Episcopal and Congregational.
The first ministers of four of the federated churches were Baptists, of five, Methodist Episcopal, and of five, Congregational.
One of the churches had had an experience of sixteen years, one of eleven, two of eight, two of six, two of five, two of four, two of three, three of two, making the average experience of the fifteen federated churches more than five years.
Of the fifteen answers to question 5, thirteen said that the people liked the present arrangement better than the old, while the other two said there were not many people who wanted to go back to the old way.
In reply to question 7, eight declared that the benevolences had increased, three that they had remained the same, one said benevolences varied in different years, while in three the benevolences had declined. In one of these the decline was very slight and there was a prospect of an increase in the future.
In thirteen the support of the ministry has been favorably affected by the federation. From one the answer is ambiguous. In the case of Truro, Massachusetts, where one church had a membership of three and the other of eight, at the time of federation, the answer indicates a decrease in the amount given to the salary.
The answers to question 9 indicate that the running expenditures of the churches are often less and that the money is more easily raised to meet them.
To question 10, nine of the answers denoted an increased attendance, five no noticeable change. No church reported a decrease. In one case the answer was obscure.
The answers to question 11 report that eight have increased in membership, five have remained stationary, one reports normal additions, and one a slight decrease.
In answer to question 12, twelve churches reported a favorable effect upon the social life of the community, two recently formed reported that there was no marked effect yet, while one gave no answer. All but one of the correspondents cherish a strong opinion that the federated church is the best arrangement when a community is overchurched and the churches are small. One pastor of a federation had nothing to say.
The following are the replies to the request made at the end of the questionnaire, “Kindly express frankly your opinion of the federated church as a means of securing Christian unity and church efficiencyâ€:
1. “Nothing to say.â€
2. “I do not see any reasons why two or more churches of Congregational form of government should not federate, but it would be difficult to federate with Episcopal form of church government.â€
3. “The efficiency here has been greater since these churches federated than it was before. No church could support a pastor. The Baptist Church had been pastorless for three and a half years. The Congregational Church was supplied by students from Hartford Theological Seminary. Now they pay a fair salary and give free use of parsonage. Federation is the best solution of overchurched communities.â€
4. “The federated church should be adopted in rural communities and in many small cities. I see no other way to bring the church into its place as a social and religious power.â€
5. “It is my opinion that for a community that is like this one a federated church is a great means to secure Christian unity and efficiency. At our last meeting there were but two who were not enthusiastic for its continuance. Our field here would be much better if there were not another church in the community outside the federation. There is still the Unitarian Church outside the federation which necessarily makes a divided leadership in the small community. Our federated church has grown from two small churches to the position of dominance in the community. Our decrease in benevolences is largely explainable and excusable perhaps in that it occurred during the time when there were somany other things to take care of, relative to the federation. It will not happen again, but for a part of the time we were without a pastor and during the rest of the time exceedingly busy getting things adjusted.â€
6. “We are thoroughly satisfied. Each church in denominational relationship (the Methodist Episcopal and Congregational) is as independent and well organized as before federation. Each church is stronger than before federation. We look forward to the day when federation will be the rule in overchurched communities for the sake of the good of church and community rather than from pecuniary necessity.†This opinion was expressed after an experience of sixteen years of the federated church.
7. “Having been pastor of the federated church in Somerset for three years I am glad to be able to say that I unqualifiedly recommend federation as a solution of the overchurched problem in country and village. Wherever there are genuine Christian members, federation will work perfectly.â€
8. “It is a great help in small places.â€
9. “Our federation has been a great success. Perfect harmony seems to reign.â€
10. “A strong church can do better work alone, but two or more weak churches should unite in the support of one minister. A federated church gives opportunity for denominational loyalty and connections. This is important.â€
11. “This is a small town, only about 435 population, but it is a summer resort and during the months of July and August a great many city people attend church. I am pastor of this church and North Thetford, another federated church about five miles south. It is about the only way these churches could be run, for both are small places.â€
12. “This federated church is in a flourishing condition. During the present pastorate since May, 1914, 31 have been received into the church. The building has been remodeled at a cost of about $3,500, all paid but $300.00.â€
13. “It is the most efficient means of securing Christian unity and church efficiency ever discovered. It is the ideal way.â€
14. “I am convinced of the sincerity of Christian unity and of the possibility of church efficiency, but it has not really approached that reality any more than some denominational churches have in rural centers. But it is a wholesome and generally satisfactory plan of religious service in a community of changing personnel. In the community is quite a large Catholic element and also a very progressive and influential Universalist element. This remains in our midst practically unassimilated as yet, after a dozen years with no services in their church. The children are coming into the Sunday school pretty well and time will overcome some of these obstacles.â€
15. “It is the reasonable and only possible means in this and many other communities in Cape Cod, but it needs energy and aggressive effort to succeed.â€
In the face of the fact that a very large proportion of denominational rural churches are on the decline, the experience of these fifteen churches constitutes very strong evidence that the federated church is a practical means of securing Christian unity and increased church efficiency in small overchurched communities.
In order to learn whether or not it is true that only the more successful churches replied to the questionnaire, we have by other means secured information in regard to certain churches which did not reply. Some of them were found to be as successful as those which did. For example, the federated church of North Wilbraham, Massachusetts, the constituent bodies of which are Methodist Episcopal and Congregational churches, has greatly increased in membership, attendance, and in the influence it exerts for various kinds of progress in its community. It would be very difficult to find any country church, either denominational or federated, whose record for service is better.
In two cases in New England where the federated church has failed, it was reported that the pastors regarded the federated church as atemporary expedient and tried hard to change it into a denominational church. Such action would necessarily be regarded as a breach of faith on the part of one of the churches, and disaster might well be expected to follow. The authors know of no experience which indicates any inherent weakness in the federated church, nor so far as they are aware is there any evidence that a federated church has injured the denomination of any component church. On the contrary, a very large majority of the small churches which have united with others in such federation have gained rather than lost, with a resulting benefit to each denomination concerned.
In the village of Shiloh in Richland County are two churches, Lutheran and Methodist Episcopal, each supporting a resident pastor. Each seems to be strong enough to sustain alone its ordinary activities. For this and other reasons there has been no desire to unite the churches into one congregation. But they had both neglected to provide means of meeting many of the community’s needs, such asopportunitiesfor social life, recreation, and athletics, or to stimulate others to make provision for them. As usual under such conditions, gambling and other amusements of a questionable sort became more or less common. In order the better to look after the needs of the young people and to strengthen the moral life of the community, a committee representing both of the churches was appointed to provide and carry out a program for the community welfare.
One of the features of this program is a successful movement for the promotion of the social, athletic, and play life of this and neighboring communities. The life of the neighborhood has been made more attractive, especially for the young people, while some of the forms of petty vice have disappeared. Union services are frequently held by the two churches. In every way their work is becoming more effective.
This form of coöperative organization may be called a church federation, but it should be distinguished from the federated church, which is the union of two or more churches into a single congregation. In every rural community where it is neither feasible nor desirable to unite all the churches under the leadership of one pastor, a church federation should beformed to create conditions favorable to the development of Christian character, to hold community religious services and social gatherings, and to render all forms of social service which are needed in the community, but are not rendered by other institutions.
Where there are social organizations other than school and church it often happens that the churches can get better results by working with them. An example of this kind of coöperation may be found in White Cottage, Newton Township, Muskingum County. Here the pastor of the Methodist Episcopal Church made a thorough survey of the community in an area which included four churches. He then prepared a sermon on the much needed country life movement, and sent a personal letter to every family in the area covered by the survey, inviting its members to come and hear his sermon. Large numbers responded. Then a mass meeting was called to discuss the situation, and the results of the survey were set forth. A committee was appointed to draw up a constitution for a community betterment organization. At a second mass meeting it was adopted. Under it every member of the community became a member of the association. Every social organization in the community was given equal representation on the Executive Committee, which has standing committees on programs and publicity, on religion and social service, on education, on recreation and physical culture, and on finance.
A general cleaning up of the community followed. An unsightly square was transferred into an attractive playground, where every Saturday afternoon there was basket ball, volley ball, croquet, tennis, track athletics, or baseball. A library and public reading room was opened, a temperance program was adopted, farmers’ institutes were established, and lectures on agriculture and home economics were given, together with a Chautauqua course of lectures for winter and summer, and a series of home talent plays. There were three holiday picnics each summer, andfield day exercises with a parade, platform meetings, and a community dinner.
Other results of this movement are a fine new school building with a large auditorium, and greatly improved roads. Moreover, a favorable reaction has been felt in the churches. Whereas, formerly but 37½ per cent of the population were church attendants, now there are 58 per cent; where formerly 40 per cent of the people went to Sunday school, now there are 52 per cent. The whole community shows a higher moral tone.
While the churches at White Cottage were not united in any organic way, yet a spirit of Christian unity was brought about. The very best of feeling exists among the different churches, and their members work together gladly in community improvement. As the result of such an atmosphere the evils of overchurching are reduced to a minimum, and it becomes easier to bring about such reorganization as may be for the best religious and social welfare of the community.
Organizations of coöperating rural social forces, like that at White Cottage, for many years have been doing good work in other states, both East and West. In large numbers of communities, particularly where the churches cannot be federated, or where bitter feeling has resulted from interchurch competition, the best method of progress is often to bring about such a coördination of forces in the service of the community itself.
Ashley, in Delaware County, is a town of about 600 inhabitants. Here a resident pastor’s desire to serve his community resulted in Christian unity. Twelve years ago there were four competing churches, poorly attended and struggling for existence. Camp meetings of a fanatical sect were often held in the neighborhood. In the churches of the town seasons of protracted meetings were characterized by excessive emotion at the time, but by few permanent good results. While respect for religion is necessary to a high degree of moral and social life in any countrycommunity, a large proportion of the people in Ashley no longer respected the church because of the character of its religious activities. Many of the most influential citizens even doubted whether the church was good for the community or not. High ideals were conspicuously lacking among the young people, and disorderly conduct was beginning to appear.
In the year 1907 the Methodist Episcopal Church acquired a pastor who by nature and training was well equipped for his work. Fortunately he was the only resident minister in the town, where he remained for nearly ten years. As the result of his leadership the whole community now has a high regard for religion and the church, while a practical Christian unity has been brought about and interchurch competition has disappeared. The moral and religious atmosphere of the place has become wholesome.
Community life has been made attractive through special instruction and entertainment, social gatherings, athletics, and all kinds of healthy amusement.
There still are two churches, but one of them meets not oftener than once a month, is attended by only two or three families, and has ceased to be a factor in the life of the community. The other church is well attended and is generally recognized as the community church. The members of the two churches which have dropped out have, for the most part, united with it, while the building of one of them has become the gymnasium of the community church.
Though the work of this successful pastor was begun before the modern country life and country church movement had been developed, his program and methods of work in no way differ from those which are common to the nation-wide movement. In fact large numbers of country pastors, widely scattered over the United States, entirely independent of one another or of the literature of any special movement, have made and carried out programs for church and community betterment which in their essentials are substantially alike. The pastors have all studied the needs of their communities and have tried to meet them. Similarity ofneeds in the different communities has naturally resulted in the adoption of similar programs.
The pastor who did at Ashley the work just described began by making a thorough study of his parish. He then led the young people into active work for their community, and later on stimulated the older men to do their part also, until finally it became recognized in Ashley that the duty of the Christian and the church is not to work mainly for the church, but mainly for the common welfare and the development of all the people.
This minister never emphasized any form of sectarianism. He thought of himself as pastor of the whole town and countryside rather than of his church alone, so that whatever he did was entirely free from the spirit of competition. The people did not fail to recognize his aims, and, in consequence, were satisfied with his leadership. Thus it became possible for him and his church to work to satisfy the needs of all the people. The Presbyterians and Friends, therefore, willingly joined his church and gave up their own. But if in speech or deed he had attempted to build up his own church at the expense of the others, there would undoubtedly be four churches in Ashley to-day.
The Ashley community church secured the creation of a community library, itself provided a community reading room, gave special attention to the day school and its teachers, held each year free university extension lectures on agriculture and home economics, lectures on sanitation and prevention of diseases, gave socials and festivals, promoted athletics, maintained a church gymnasium, and formed farmers’ clubs and helped them in their work. Though there were lodges in Ashley which held occasional gatherings, still the church was generally recognized as the institution which supplied the opportunities for social life for the whole community. The church became preëminently the most democratic and most popular institution in the town.
Simplicity of organization was the aim of the pastor. Sunday school classes, including a men’s Bible class, were organized, and were stimulated to do their best to meet the social and other needs of the community.So well did they do their work that other organizations were found to be unnecessary. One unusual feature of the pastor’s work was the combining of the Bible school session on Sunday morning with the service of the church, making one service of worship, at which communion is administered and members are received.
No collections are taken up in the church, but a budget is made at the beginning of the year and the money is raised through a church committee. Contributions for benevolences have been greatly increased during this pastorate, and large sums have been spent for building and improvements. Yet nevertheless the community did not furnish adequate support for its pastor, undoubtedly because as in the case of nearly all pastors, he refused to work for an increase in his own salary, while, as in nearly all small communities, no one else took the matter up. In this respect, therefore, the people acted unjustly towards their minister.
It should be noted that the minister was well trained and of high character; that he lived in the community he served; that he was given a long term of service; and that he cherished a right conception of the work of minister and church.
Such work as this is badly needed in multitudes of communities in Ohio. It is the only thing that can preserve or restore their wholesomeness and make them suitable places for the rearing of children. The church, as a whole, should spare no effort in providing large numbers of such men to do this kind of work, for the total result of so doing would be an increase of untold value in the strength of the very foundations of Christian civilization in America.
In Ontario, Springfield Township, Richland County, there were three churches,—Presbyterian, United Presbyterian, and Methodist Episcopal. Because many of the best families had left, the Presbyterian churches have held no regular services since the year 1900. For a time the Methodist Episcopal Church shared a resident minister with three or four otherchurches, but from 1912 Springfield Township was left without a resident minister for three years. Under these circumstances it was inevitable that social and moral decline should begin, for the modern community’s needs cannot be met by the old-fashioned circuit system. More and more the better families moved away or relapsed into the background, and the less moral elements became conspicuous. A dance hall became the haunt of disorderly people from neighboring towns. Drunkenness grew apace, while bad language on the streets was altogether too common. Pilfering the property of the railroad was more or less open. It was high time to act.
Accordingly, the people of all the denominations and the non-church people who lived in the township, realizing that it was going from bad to worse, joined in deciding that a resident minister was necessary. Money was raised, and the future support of a minister was promised if the Methodist Episcopal Conference would send them a good man.
The new minister began his work in the autumn of 1915. The total budget of the church had been about $500, of which less than $250 went to the minister’s salary. During his first year, $1,540 was raised, $900 of which went for the support of the minister. In the second year no less than $7,500 was raised, $1,000 for the minister’s salary, $540 for ordinary expenses, while the rest went to the permanent repairs on the church buildings.
As in Ashley, so in Springfield Township; the pastor regarded his church as a community church and thought of himself as a Christian rather than as a sectarian. The attendance more than doubled both at the church services and at the Sunday school, while the real membership increased from less than 100 to 315. When the Presbyterians saw the manifest good that could be brought by united Christian action, they became members of the Methodist Episcopal Church, while later on they made a Christmas present of their building to the Methodist community church. It is now used as the house of worship, while the Methodist Church has become a gymnasium and parish house.
Under the leadership of the new resident minister a genuine cleaning up of the gross indecency was made, some of the most harmful characters left, and the place became comparatively orderly. The village has been transformed from a rural slum to a very decent community,—a safe place to bring up children. This better state of things will undoubtedly continue as long as the present system of church work prevails.
The plan of this church’s work did not differ from that of many other modern country churches. It included Sunday school classes organized for social service, athletics, including basket ball, a full program of social activities, lectures to promote an intelligent interest in agriculture, and active interest on the part of the minister in coöperating with the day schools and providing opportunities for intellectual advancement.
The pastor declares that the work in Springfield Township was made possible only because he could live in the community, because he could give his whole time to this field, and because of the program of country church service with which, through the Conference of the Commission on Church and Country Life which was held in Columbus in 1915 and through modern country church literature, he had become familiar. He asserts that without the modern program and conception of the function of the country church, success would have been impossible.
In the work at Ashley and Ontario we have seen the adoption of a good program accompanied by improvement in the moral tone and religious atmosphere of the communities. There are many other communities where a similar program has been carried out, with the same results. These cases constitute a fairly conclusive demonstration that the varied community life which is stimulated and made possible by the modern country church program is the normal one, and that without these various activities general moral and religious health is impossible.
The leadership of a modern country church minister brought aboutjust such an improvement in the community life of Old Fort. This pastor came to realize the needs of his community by taking part in the Ohio Rural Life Survey. One direct result of his work is a centralized agricultural high school, which will become the means of keeping the best families on the land instead of letting them move to the larger towns in search of better schools for the children. Once gone they rarely return.
The young men of Old Fort, who formerly had little to do with the church, are now active in its work. Special attention has been given, in a neighboring parish served by the same minister, to the farm laborers and tenants. Whereas formerly these people rarely went to church, now as large a proportion of them take part in the activities of the church as of any other class. This is an achievement of real importance. It appears from Map 12, which is based on data from the United States Census, that, in no less than 54 of the 88 counties of Ohio, more than 25 per cent of the farms in the year 1910 were operated by tenants. On Map 13 it appears that in no less than 50 counties the number of farms operated by tenants is increasing. Here is one of the great obstacles in the way of church progress in the State, for it is well known that farm tenants usually take little interest in the community where they live, while only a small proportion of them are members of the church. Until reform in the system of land tenure can be brought to pass through legislation, it is most important that the church shall give special attention to the tenant families.
Map 12