{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_26114/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_26114","id":"gutenberg_26114","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/26114","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Religion/Spirituality","Category: Sociology","Rural churches"],"text":"Produced by Tom Roch, Karen Dalrymple, and the Online\nDistributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This\nfile was produced from images produced by Core Historical\nLiterature in Agriculture (CHLA), Cornell University.)\n\n\n\n\n\n\nChurch Cooperation in Community Life\n\n  By\n  PAUL L. VOGT\n\n\n  THE ABINGDON PRESS\n  NEW YORK   CINCINNATI\n\n\n  Copyright, 1921, by\n  PAUL L. VOGT\n\n  Printed in the\n  United States of America\n\n\n  TO\n\n  MY FATHER AND MOTHER\n\n  WHOSE PUBLIC-SPIRITED AND LIFELONG LOYALTY TO\n  RELIGIOUS WORK IN A COUNTRY COMMUNITY\n  HAS BEEN A CONSTANT INSPIRATION\n  TO CHRISTIAN SERVICE\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n  CHAPTER                                                      PAGE\n\n        PREFACE                                                   7\n\n     I. SOME PRELIMINARY DEFINITIONS                              9\n\n    II. THE BASIS FOR COMMUNITY SERVICE                          26\n\n   III. THE ECONOMIC CHALLENGE TO THE CHURCH                     44\n\n    IV. THE SOCIAL CHALLENGE TO THE CHURCH                       69\n\n     V. BUILDING FOR COMMUNITY SERVICE                           84\n\n    VI. THE CHURCH AND RURAL PUBLIC THOUGHT                      94\n\n   VII. ADJUSTING THE LOCAL CHURCH TO THE COMMUNITY             104\n\n  VIII. INTERDENOMINATIONAL READJUSTMENT                        124\n\n    IX. THE CHURCH AND OTHER RURAL AGENCIES                     142\n\n     X. MISSIONARY PROGRAMS AND RURAL COMMUNITY SERVICE         152\n\n    XI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION                                  169\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE\n\n\nMany books have been written during the past few years on the rural\nchurch. Some of these have given excellent concrete illustrations of\nmethods that are proving successful in solving local problems. Others\nhave discussed the general rural church situation. The rural life\nmovement, however, has been so rapid that it is believed that a brief\nrestatement of the place of the church in the rural life movement is\ndesirable at the present time.\n\nIt has been the task and privilege of the writer for the past four\nyears to be almost constantly in the field traveling from the Atlantic\nto the Pacific and from Canadian border to the limits of Florida and\ngetting so far as possible first-hand impressions of rural church and\ncommunity conditions. It is the purpose of the present essay to\ndiscuss some of the general problems in rural life presenting\nthemselves to the religious forces of America, and to note some\nconclusions as to the next steps to be taken if these forces are to\nrender the service in rural advance that it is believed is theirs to\nrender. Suggestions as to local programs will be made only as evidence\nthat when the church undertakes in an adequate manner the solution of\nproblems whose solution is demanded of it, it receives both the moral\nand the financial support of the people served. The chapters on phases\nof the local program are intended only to help in preparing the way\nfor the larger service contemplated.\n\nAs with individuals, so it is with institutions. It is difficult to\ndiscuss the place of different organizations in the rural life\nmovement without arousing the antagonism of leaders in the respective\norganizations. It is hoped that the point of view held will be\naccepted as one of sympathy for the efforts of all organizations\nconcerned and that the purpose of the discussion is to point the way\ntoward a larger cooperation resulting from a better understanding of\nthe work that may be expected of each.\n\n     PAUL L. VOGT.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nSOME PRELIMINARY DEFINITIONS\n\n\nWhen one begins to discuss a subject it helps very much if his readers\nknow what he has in mind in the terms used. In the title selected for\nthis text there are at least three words that need definition.\nProbably no reader will agree fully with any of the definitions given,\nbut an attempt to define should at least help the reader to understand\nbetter in what sense the terms are used by the writer.\n\nThe term \"community\" has come into such common use that it might be\nassumed that definition is unnecessary. And yet when learned bodies\nget together to discuss community problems a large part of the time is\nusually taken up in attempting to define what the different speakers\nare talking about.\n\nWhen the writer lived in the open country several years ago he went to\nMifflin Center school and attended Wesley Chapel church. The\nschoolhouse and the church were located at the same crossroads, and\nthese two institutions drew for their constituency from an area of\nabout four square miles for the school and a somewhat larger area for\nthe church. Brownstown school, to the south, Hendrickson's to the\neast, and Whetstone to the west made up other school communities.\nPleasant Grove church, Salem, and Brownstown, with a different\nterritory covered by each, made up church areas that did not coincide\nwith the school areas bounding Mifflin Center school territory. In\nlike manner, when trading was to be done, Upper Sandusky and Kirby,\nfive and six miles away, were the centers to which everybody went,\ngenerally on Saturday afternoon, when friends from other sections of\nthe county might be found on the streets. The boundaries of the trade\ncenter were thus much larger than those of either the school or the\nchurch. In politics, the center of interest of the particular township\nwith which the writer was concerned was the old schoolhouse turned\ninto a township house at Mifflin Center, the location of the church\nand school. The local political interests of the other communities\nmentioned were at the appointed places in the respective townships.\nThe seat of justice was for some time in the parlor of the writer's\nfather's residence, or in the front yard, to which court was\noccasionally adjourned when weather conditions permitted. In a larger\nway county courts were held at the county seat, as were other of the\nlarger political activities.\n\nOne could go on indefinitely illustrating the boundaries of interests\nof various kinds. Some of them centered in the State House; others in\nthe national Capitol; and many a wordy political battle was fought in\nthe little country section over the question as to whether the\nprotective tariff or the Democratic party was responsible for the hard\ntimes the farmers and others were suffering. There were even world\ninterests involved, as during the Spanish-American War or the\nVenezuelan difficulty during Cleveland's administration.\n\nThis concrete illustration both raises the question, Which of these is\nthe \"community?\" and also points the way to the answer. None of the\ngroupings mentioned can be considered \"_the_ community.\" Yet each is\n\"_a_ community.\" A \"community\" is a psychical and not a physical\nthing. It can only approximately be bounded by physical lines. In the\nlast analysis the true \"community\" is nothing more nor less than that\ngroup of two or more individuals who are bound together by a single\ninterest. Thus two people living within sight of one another may be\nmembers of the same religious community and at the same time be\nabsolutely separated from one another in their political affiliations.\nAlso one person can at the same time belong to many \"communities.\"\n\nBut this definition, if adhered to strictly, would lead to confusion\nof thought perhaps more serious than a less accurate use of the term.\nCareful investigation of the relation of the different psychic\ncommunities to one another reveals the fact that geographically the\nareas of individual community interest overlap one another; and that\nin the better organized regions the centers of interests coincide and\nit is only the boundaries of the several interests that are not\ncoterminous. The Mifflin Center illustration given above is good in\nthat it had the religious, educational and political interests\ncentered at one physical spot. The social and recreational life of a\nlarge part of this local area also was centered here. In the other\nlocal groups mentioned there was a division of interest much more\nmarked. A more practical definition, then, of a \"community\" would be\n\"That aggregation of population which is bound together by a\npredominating proportion of its local interests.\"\n\nIf this definition is accepted, then an inspection of almost any local\naggregation, in the open country at least, will lead to the conclusion\nthat there are few groups of people who have any large number of local\ninterests in common. Perhaps the most powerful force to be considered\nin determining what is an open country community is that of the social\nlife. People in a given section habitually seek those with whom they\nare best acquainted when they get together for social affairs of\ninterest outside the family circle; and it is only occasionally that\nthe mass will go out of these habitual associations in seeking social\nrelaxation. This social life may be sought at one time in the school,\nat another in the church, again at a picnic, or in the home of some\none in the \"neighborhood.\" But the dominating factor is\nacquaintanceship rather than religion or education or business.\n\nVillages are more easily defined as to the number of interests holding\nthe group together.\n\nOne principal objective in the modern local community organization\nmovement seems to be to bring together at some central point the focal\npoints of as many local interests as possible, thus strengthening the\ncommunity bonds and increasing the community consciousness. As this\nend is achieved the necessity for the strict definition given above\ndisappears and the \"community\" becomes _that aggregation of people the\nmajority of whose local interests have a common center_. This is the\nsense in which the term will be used in this discussion.\n\nThe term \"rural\" likewise conveys a different thought to different\npeople. Indeed, so likely has the term been to mislead that in a\nrecent national survey of religious conditions, the term was abandoned\nand \"town and country\" substituted. The simpler plan is to arrive at a\ndefinition of the word \"rural\" which will include what the latter\nterm connotes. To confuse \"rural\" with \"agricultural\" is to ignore\nboth the past and the present in movements of population and in\norganization of interests. To an increasing degree the interests of\nthe open country are centering in the village, or even larger centers.\nSo that in discussing the problems of the agricultural population it\nis often necessary to make the center of discussion the organization\nof the village with an agricultural environment. The better plan is to\ndefinitely discuss the problems of the open country under the term\n\"agricultural\" and retain the other term for all interests of groups\nof population in smaller communities, whether in the open country or\nin the villages. In general, the division of the United States Census\nwill be observed and the term \"rural\" regularly applied to all groups\nof under two thousand five hundred population.\n\nAt a recent meeting of country ministers an attempt was made to define\nwhat is the problem of the rural church. The definition as framed is\nherewith presented: \"The rural task of the church is the nurture and\ndevelopment of all phases of human welfare in those communities where\nthe general life and thinking of the people are related to matters\nwhich pertain to material natural resources.\"\n\nThis definition is inadequate from the administrative point of view in\nthat it would exclude the small manufacturing community, the\neducational center, the summer and winter resort communities, and\nsimilar specialized groups where population is small. The problems of\nthese small communities not directly related to material natural\nresources have many characteristics in common with those included in\nthe above definition. Size of community has much to do with the type\nof problem presented; and the one who understands the problems of the\nagricultural village is probably better able to deal with the problems\nof the villages of the type mentioned than is the one trained for\nservice in a metropolitan center.\n\nThe term \"church\" is here used in the sense of including all religious\nforces in rural life. The Sunday School Association, the Christian\nAssociations, Church Federations, and other groups allied to the\nchurch are included in the general term.\n\n\nTHE MANIFOLD FUNCTIONS OF THE CHURCH\n\nThe church is the only agency in existence that is concerned with man\nin all his relationships. It is concerned with keeping alive in human\nconsciousness the existence of a Divine Being and of man's\nrelationship to that Being. It is the only agency that proceeds on the\ntheory of the immortality of the human soul and that has a program of\npreparing the soul for a life after death. In common with other\nagencies the church is concerned with the individual life of man on\nthis earth and endeavors to lead human beings to that course of life\nwhich will result in the maximum of personal spiritual welfare. And in\ncommon with other agencies it is concerned with man in his relations\nto others and to his material environment because these relationships\nhave a vital effect on his spiritual life.\n\nA full analysis of the functions of the church would include a\ndiscussion of those features of church work which have to do with\nman's relation to God and to an immortal existence. But in a\ndiscussion of the church in relation to the community it is not\nnecessary to consider man's relation to God nor to a future life\nexcept in so far as beliefs in such relationships influence his\npersonal welfare on this earth or his relationships to his fellow man.\nThus this discussion falls in the field of sociology rather than in\nthe field of theology or psychology. A casual observation of the\nforces at work in human relationships, especially in the smaller\ncommunities, leads quickly to the conclusion that beliefs both with\nreference to God and to a future life have a vital effect on social\nconduct. But it is the effect instead of the truth of beliefs that is\nthe subject matter to be considered.\n\nHaving thus defined the field of our discussion both as to subject\nmatter and as to the phase of the interests of the church to be\nconsidered, it is next in order to note the size of the task.\n\nAccording to the census of 1920, 50,866,899 people in the United\nStates lived in rural territory, that is, in communities of less than\n2,500 population. This was 48.1 per cent of the total. For the first\ntime in the history of the country the records showed a larger\nproportion of the total population living in urban centers than in\nvillages or in the open country. The population in incorporated\nvillages of less than 2,500 population was 9,864,196, or 9.3 per cent\nof the total, while that in unincorporated or open country communities\nwas 41,002,703 or 38.8 per cent, as compared with 8.8 per cent and\n44.8 per cent respectively in 1910.\n\nThe total rural population increase was but 1,518,986, or 3.1 per\ncent. Incorporated village increase was 1,745,371, or 21.5 per cent,\nwhile the unincorporated community population actually decreased\n227,355, or .6 per cent.\n\nThese figures indicate two conclusions of importance to our\ndiscussion. The first is that the villages of less than 2,500\ninhabitants are sharing with the large centers in the general increase\nin population. Their increase proportionately is not so marked as is\nthat of the extremely large centers, but it is sufficiently marked to\nindicate that they offer opportunities that attract more than does the\nopen country. This village growth must be reckoned with in determining\npolicies of location of church buildings and the type of local church\nprogram for community service.\n\nThe second conclusion is that the open country is still at a\ndisadvantage so far as its possibilities of supporting a large\npopulation are concerned. Actual depopulation of the open country, the\nenlargement of the size of farms, the abandonment of acreage once\nunder cultivation, which preliminary figures issued by the Census\nBureau indicate, show that not yet is the demand for agricultural\nproducts such as to make a much larger open country population\npossible. This fact also points the direction for readjustment of\nrural community life.\n\nThe data from the religious census of the United States, taken in\n1916, while not classified as rural and urban, give hopeful figures as\nto the progress of religious institutions in this country. While the\ntotal population of the United States increased during the decade\n1910-20, 14.9 per cent, the church membership from 1906-1916 increased\n19.6 per cent. The total church membership increase, 6,858,796, was\n50.2 per cent of 13,710,842, the increase in total population. These\nfigures of church membership increase, covering a period before the\nEuropean war began to affect this country seriously, indicate that the\ngeneral rising ethical standards of American life have had their\nreflection in the larger personal as well as financial support of the\nreligious forces.\n\nWhile data are not available as to the proportion of rural and urban\npopulation belonging to church, the census gives figures as to the\nchurch membership in communities of over 25,000 population. According\nto census estimates, 32.7 per cent of the population lived in cities\nof over that population in 1916. The religious census shows that 36.5\nper cent of the church membership lived in communities of that size.\nContrary to popular impression, the larger centers actually have a\nlarger proportionate church membership than do the smaller\ncommunities. The facts show that the problem of advance of the\nChristian Church is more of a small-community problem than it is of\nthe larger centers.\n\nWhile the proportion of the total population belonging to church\nincreased from 38.1 per cent in 1906 as compared with the 1910\npopulation to 39.6 per cent in 1916 as compared with the 1920\npopulation, the magnitude of the unfinished task is still almost\nstaggering. If the proportion for rural America were the same as for\nthe country as a whole, there would be 20,143,292 people not belonging\nto church. Church membership, of course, is not the only criterion of\nthe influence of the church; nor would all denominations admit that\nall the people should belong to church, since some would not accept\nchildren not yet having reached the age of accountability. But in any\ncase Christian America is not Christian even in church membership.\nThis does not take into account matters of social and economic\nrelationships which the spirit of Christianity has not yet penetrated\nand by which church members as well as nonmembers are bound.\n\nMore than 50,000,000 rural folk rising to a consciousness of their\ninherent solidarity and community of interest, and more than\n20,000,000 of these not affiliated with any religious organization,\npresent a challenge for trained leadership unequaled in the history of\nthe world. Urban interests have grown powerful. Urban life has rapidly\nadvanced for at least the more favored groups until it has far\noutstripped conditions in rural communities that go to make up the\nbest in modern civilization and culture. Germs have been found in the\n\"Old Oaken Bucket\" in the country, while the scourge of typhoid has\nbeen banished from the city, and the \"Church in the Dell\" has crumbled\nin decay, while the metropolitan pulpit has taken the best leadership\nfor its own. The country has been unable to compete with the urban\ncenters for educational, religious, or social leadership because\nwealth has accumulated in the cities. Rural population has declined\nbecause the prizes in wealth accumulation were in the cities and\nbecause it was easier to secure those things there that people have\nlearned to value as most worth while, in good housing, medical\nattendance, education, and recreation. While city poets have sung the\npraises of country life, many people who have lived in the country and\nendured the long hours and little pay from husbandry have, like the\nArab, folded their tents and slipped away; and when once they have\ntasted the advantages of urban life, have not returned.\n\nNo civilization can be wholesome or permanent so long as any one great\ngroup is permanently handicapped in its struggle for economic or\nsocial welfare. So long as any group is evidently at a disadvantage\nthe shift of population from the less-favored to the better-favored\ngroups will continue; that is, unless castes are formed which compel\npeople to remain permanently in one group or the other. And this does\nnot happen in modern democratic society. And so long as there is a\ncontinuous shift of population in one direction or another we have\nevidence that conditions are such as to induce the shift.\n\nIt is the existence of conditions such as these that makes the\nchallenge for a trained loyal service on the part of those selected to\nattend to matters concerned with rural public welfare.\n\nIt is the purpose of the following pages to outline briefly some of\nthe conditions to which the church must give attention if it is to\nmeet the demand now made upon it by modern rural life. It is not\nintended to be a treatise on practical theology in the sense\nordinarily accepted in courses on that subject. Very little attention\nwill be given to matters of organization or administration of the\nlocal church. It is believed that if only ministers of the gospel can\nonce attain an adequate grasp of the purposes of religious service,\nthe matter of method of accomplishing results may be left largely to\nthe pastors themselves. On the other hand, emphasis upon method, which\nseems to be demanded by many ministers instead of knowledge of ends to\nbe attained, is more than likely to lead to overorganization, or\norganization not adapted to objectives. One of the essentials in all\nleadership is that of having definite objectives toward which to work,\nand it is the purpose of this text to call the attention to objectives\nand to organization, both local and general, adapted to the attainment\nof objectives rather than the methods of attaining them.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nTHE BASIS FOR COMMUNITY SERVICE\n\n\nThe past few years have witnessed a marked widening of the concept of\nthe functioning of the church. But there is still considerable\nquestion concerning the basis for the program of church work that now\nbids fair to become conventional. Not long ago the writer attended a\nconvention of a state social welfare association. Over three hundred\nand fifty persons were in attendance representing the leading agencies\nfor the advance of social welfare in the entire commonwealth, both\nurban and rural. Careful inquiry revealed the fact that but one\nminister had registered, and he was on the program. On the other hand,\nit is the rare occurrence for those professionally interested in\nsocial service to be present at a convention of representatives of\nreligious orders. In practice there is still a clean-cut dividing line\nbetween those interested in social progress and those engaged in\nso-called religious work. The social workers are not irreligious; many\nof them believe their service to be of the highest type of religious\nexpression. The representatives of the church are welcomed by social\nworkers into their councils, but it is feared that often these\nrepresentatives are not taken seriously because for so long they have\nhad a program that affected social welfare in but an indirect way. The\ntime has come when representatives of the church should accept their\nrightful position as leaders in all movements that tend to make human\nexistence more Christ-like and to make the kingdom of heaven on earth\nmore of a reality.\n\nThe reason for the attitude of both ministers and people toward the\nchurch has been the emphasis placed upon individual regeneration as\nthe sole and all-important method of advancing the Kingdom. The\n\"conversion\" of the individual would lead him into right conduct. When\nall individuals were converted then the kingdom of heaven would indeed\nbe at hand.\n\nBut the advance of social science has made clear the fact that the\nindividual is very largely the expression of the group in which he\nlives. Custom, convention, fashion, public opinion, and other group\ninfluences go far to determine what individual thought and action will\nbe in any given group. The Tennessee mountaineer has a different\nstandard of what constitutes true religion from that of the New\nEngland Unitarian. The code of race relationships in Mississippi is\nnot the same as that in Wisconsin. The standards of the boy's \"gang\"\ndetermine largely the dress, the ideals, and habits not only of youth\nbut of the coming man. Even in the life of the individual different\nstandards exist suitable to the several groups in which he carries on\nhis habitual activities. The capitalist who corrupts Legislatures with\nimpunity in business or who prevents child-labor legislation may be a\nmodel Christian gentleman in his home and church life.\n\nIt is admitted that in the last analysis the group mind can have its\nexistence only in the individual minds that compose it. But it is also\ntrue that when we consider the minds of individuals working in groups\nwith the consciousness of what the reactions of others are, the\nresults are different from what they are when the individual acts\nalone. Moreover, individuals as a class react in much the same way to\nstimuli that affect all of the members of the group at a given time.\nIf the price of milk is raised so that there is suspicion of\nprofiteering, common resentment appears. If the leadership of a\npolitical party is threatened, the politician, even though he loses\nleadership, rarely bolts his group. Instead he finds some excuse for\nstanding by the party organization. It is not necessary to alter the\nminds of all individuals by \"conversion\" in the conventional manner\neither to change public opinion, alter physical conditions, or change\nthe form of social organization. When these changes are effected in\nthe minds of the controlling elements of the group, then the entire\npublic mind and social organization are altered and the social process\ngoes on stimulated in newer and, it is hoped, better directions.\n\nOne or two illustrations should make this point clearer. Several years\nago it was the custom to use common drinking cups on railways. When\nfirst legislation was passed to prevent such use, considerable public\nopinion opposed it as foolish. Now, it is difficult to get any one to\ntouch a common drinking cup even in the home. Before the elimination\nof the saloon powerful and sometimes very respectable forces were\nlined up in favor of its continuance. But as soon as the fight against\nthe saloon had been carried to the point of its legal elimination many\nof those who once supported the barroom because of the profit to them\nbecame its opponents. Formerly the saloon was a center for the\ncorruption of many if not most of the youth in the community. Now,\nmost communities are bringing up a far higher grade of young people\nmorally than they once were because it is no longer necessary to fight\nagainst this center of immoral infection.\n\nThe lesson these illustrations should teach is this: that the\nconventional method used by the churches during the past half century\nof depending almost entirely upon individual regeneration through\npersonal appeal as a means of salvation of the race has handicapped\nthe church and limited its effectiveness. When it is once understood\nthat the mind and the character of the individual can be influenced in\nas many ways as there are social contacts, and when the means of\napproach through all these contacts is understood, then the\neffectiveness of the church will be immeasurably increased. Social\nlife must be saved not only through individual regeneration but also\nthrough the establishment of a right attitude on the part of the\nindividual and as many individuals as possible. On the other hand,\nindividual attitudes can be established in large part by bringing\nabout, through means now fairly well understood, good economic\nconditions and social organization.\n\nThe sad part about the traditional limited method of approach to\nimprovement of group life has been that in probably the majority of\ncases impulses were aroused by personal appeal to do good and then\nthrough ignorance of objectives in group advance those impulses were\nallowed to die. The \"backslider\" is an excellent illustration of the\nresults of periodic renewal of impulse to right living. In most other\ncases the impulses thus aroused have found their expression in a\nhypersensitiveness in regard to certain phases of personal conduct.\nEmphasis upon personal moral conduct to the exclusion of effective\ninterest in social progress characterized much of the product of the\npersonal evangelistic campaigns carried on periodically during the\npast two or three generations, while the real work of making the world\nbetter has been directed by men and women not particularly subject to\nthese periodical waves of religious impulses but imbued with a steady\nabiding faith in the worth of social action. They have had the good\nimpulses, but these impulses have been steadied and rendered\npermanently valuable because faith based on knowledge of objectives\nwas available.\n\nIf the serious errors of the past are to be avoided it will be\nnecessary for those intrusted with responsibilities of church\nleadership to vastly increase their knowledge of problems of group\nlife and of methods of control of group life. The following pages are\ndesigned to aid the prospective religious leader, either professional\nor lay, as far as possible in understanding some of the problems that\nmust be dealt with in making human life what Christianity hopes for.\nResults already have been achieved sufficient to place beyond question\nthe principle that the church must approach life from every possible\nangle. The effort to produce right attitudes in the individual must be\ncontinued, but the methods used must be varied and multiplied.\n\nFurthermore, before the sound point of view with reference to the\nmethod of approach to the problems of the church can be obtained it\nwill be necessary to have a clear understanding as to the place of the\nchild in the moral order. Those who derive their theology by reading\nand interpreting isolated passages of the Scriptures sometimes arrive\nat unexpected, and, from the point of view of rational living,\neccentric and positively harmful conclusions. Some devoted readers\nfind in the writings of Paul something about \"Whereas in Adam all die,\nin Christ all are made alive\"; and in Christ's words the utterance to\nNicodemus, \"Except a man be born again he shall not enter the kingdom\nof heaven.\" They have drawn from these doctrines that all men are born\nwith sin inherent in their natures and that there is no good in the\nsoul until \"conversion\" has taken place. So long as these doctrines\nfind a place in the preaching and practice of churches the method of\nworld salvation will be radically different from that for which the\nwriter is contending.\n\nIn brief, if the words of Christ are taken at their face value when he\nsaid \"Suffer little children to come unto me, for of such is the\nkingdom of heaven,\" we have an entirely different basis of approach to\nour problem than if we assume that all are lost except those upon whom\nthe mystical influence of \"conversion\" in the traditional sense has\noperated. If the assumption that children are born good is accepted,\nthen we are brought to the question, \"How may these innocents be kept\nso?\" The answer is, By training them to control their natural\nimpulses, good in themselves but likely to lead into wrong if not\nproperly directed; and by cultivating the natural tendencies to good\nthat find expression in every normal child. They must also be brought\nto an understanding of what Christ means to them as their Saviour and\nGuide. Then this must be supplemented as rapidly as possible by the\norganization of group life, in such a way that evil influences will be\neliminated.\n\nThe saloon was not many years ago the center of corruption of\nthousands--yes, millions--of the growing youth of this country. The\nelimination of the saloon has made possible the development of\nmillions of young people free from the particular type of sinfulness\nfor which the saloon was responsible. In like manner, the elimination\nof commercialized vice has rendered our cities incomparably safer for\nour young men and women than they once were. The substitution of\nwholesome amusement for young folks in good environment for the\nunregulated commercialized amusements once the sole source of\nrecreation has exerted a moral influence too far-reaching to be\nestimated. The introduction of cooperation in industry has eliminated\nthe sin accompanying the fights between capital and labor in those\nindustries where it has been introduced. These illustrations show how\nit is possible, by continuing the improvement of social and economic\nconditions to create such an environment as will destroy the sources\nof individual corruption and degeneration and will make the growth of\nthe child a continuous succession of stages of spiritual improvement\nand growth. \"Conversion\" can thus conceivably become a conscious\npersonal acceptance of Christ and of the principles of Christianity as\nthe normal basis for right living without a noticeable break in the\ncourse or direction of life rather than the intense emotional\ncataclysm that so often characterized the change in hardened sinners.\n\nWhen children good by nature are brought up in an environment physical\nand spiritual that has been brought into harmony with the laws of God,\nthen the problems of evil will be reduced to those arising out of\nnatural causes over which man has not achieved control; and children\nwill be looked upon as the natural and rightful members of the church\ninstead of being kept out of the church until they reach the age of\naccountability. The burden of getting out of the church should be put\non the child instead of the usual responsibility of deciding to come\ninto it.\n\nIt is customary for leaders of the church to assume credit for\npractically all the good things going on in the direction of human\nimprovement by assuming that, though the church does not have a large\nmembership, comparatively speaking, its influence has inspired the\ngood work being done in social progress. It is well to face frankly\nthe fact that, whatever may have been the situation in the past, at\nthe present it is questionable whether the church has been the source\nof even the larger portion of this inspiration. The public schools,\nincluding the higher institutions of learning, have been socializing\nthe future leaders in social progress so that their inspiration has\nbeen drawn from a concrete knowledge of social problems and from the\nbelief that humanity can, by proper effort, control conditions of\nliving. Then pragmatic results have furthered this belief until\ninspiration has come from the achievement of results themselves rather\nthan from any recognition of Christian influence in social life. The\nChristian religion is doubtless responsible for those things most\nworth while in modern life, but other sources of inspiration have\ndeveloped for which Christianity does not get the credit.\n\nThe conclusion of the whole matter is that in the past two or three\ngenerations two marked divisions have grown up, the one a section or\nwing inside the church which has placed sole emphasis upon individual\nregeneration as the method of social progress; the other largely\noutside the church, with emphasis upon social reform as the method of\nadvance. What is needed is a widening of the field so that the methods\nof social improvement proved to be of value by social workers will be\nadopted as valid methods of bringing about the kingdom of God. On the\nother hand, social workers must give more attention to the\nregeneration of the individual. When each of these groups recognizes\nthe value of the program of the other, then it will be difficult to\ndistinguish longer between churchmen and social workers. The two\ngroups will, in fact, join hands, and by unifying and coordinating\nefforts will work more effectively in attaining a common aim. The\nbasis, then, for the program for the church which will touch all\nphases of human interest in a vital way is that every human interest\nhas its effect on the welfare of the soul. And a program that fails to\ntake into account every approach to the individual can at least be but\npartial.\n\nAgain, it will be necessary to revise popular impression as to just\nwhat is spiritual. The farmer who after having a most unusual\n\"spiritual experience\" at a revival service angrily opposed a local\nmovement for consolidation of schools because such a move would\nincrease taxes had an idea of religion that was strictly personal--and\nanti-social. The church leader who feared that the encouragement of\nsocial-center activities by the church would ultimately result in a\ncondition in which the social activities of the church would\novershadow the \"spiritual,\" had in mind a distinction that must be met\nand understood if the church is to broaden its program without losing\nits identity as a religious institution. The minister who, while\npraising a community-club movement which had brought to the community\nmany improvements and a better moral condition, stated that it was\ninjuring the \"church,\" either saw a real conflict between \"spiritual\"\nand \"social\" welfare or had a misconception as to what is spiritual.\n\nThe problem seems to arise out of a tendency which has crept into\ntheological thought to limit \"spiritual\" things to mystical personal\nexperiences. With this definition of spiritual things there seems to\nhave come a tendency to look upon any type of activity that was of a\npractical nature, such as providing for the recreational needs of the\ncommunity, organizing a campaign for better reading facilities for\ncountry people, or for better farming, as not spiritual, and\nconsequently be sedulously avoided by the church. Perhaps there is no\nthought in American rural life to-day that causes more trouble to the\naggressive rural minister of the modern type than this. His young men\nand women want to broaden the scope of the church, but the trustees,\nand those whose word counts toward the selection of pastors and their\nremoval, often oppose anything being done by the church which is not\ncustomary and accordingly, as they think, not spiritual.\n\nChrist said \"I am come that ye might have life, and have it more\nabundantly.\" If this statement is accepted at its face value, then we\nhave the foundation for judging every activity in which the church may\npartake. Does the activity tend to increase the material and spiritual\nwelfare of the community, so that the influences that tend to the\nextermination of the group are less? If so, then it conforms to the\npurposes of the coming of the Christ. On the other hand, if the\nactivity does positively lessen the resistance of the community,\nreducing it ultimately to a lower scale of living characterized by\nthose things that are recognized as harmful, then it is not a\nlegitimate part of church work. It also follows that if such harmful\nconditions exist in the community without a protest on the part of the\nchurch or without some definite effort to eliminate them, then the\nchurch is not living up to the high calling expected of it by the\nMaster. The term \"spiritual\" is, accordingly, much more inclusive than\nhas been popularly supposed, and one of the great contributions of\nsocial science during the past few decades has been to bring to the\npublic mind the knowledge that man and his spirituality cannot be\ndealt with individually but must be included in all those\nrelationships that affect the soul of the individual.\n\nWhile the succeeding pages have to do with the social aspects of the\nspiritual life of man, it must never be forgotten that the\nregeneration or the quickening of the individual is at least half of\nthe task in community progress. The life of the honest, upright man,\nwhose soul has been set on fire by contact with the flame of divine\nlove, whose heart has been brought into harmony with the divine will\nof God, becomes in itself a point for the radiation of impulses for\nright living. And when these impulses are directed into useful\nchannels through a broadened understanding of sound objectives in\nsocial progress, then real advance is possible.\n\nThere are many other phases of thought that act as a hindrance to the\nadvance of the spiritual kingdom in rural America, but these\nillustrations will be sufficient to show what must be cleared away\nbefore the broad program of the modern rural church can be\nwhole-heartedly accepted. In fairness to the writer it should be kept\nin mind, as stated in the definitions given at the opening, that this\ntext has nothing to do with those vital elements of religious\norganization and service which are intended to keep alive man's belief\nin a divinity and in immortality except in so far as these beliefs\naffect community relationships. The discussion of these subjects\nfalls, rather, into the realm of theology. It is hoped that at least\nthe principles underlying the movement toward broadening the program\nof the rural church have been clearly, if briefly, stated, and that\nthe movement toward a larger concept of the religious forces as a\nfactor in rural progress will continue to spread at an accelerating\nspeed.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nTHE ECONOMIC CHALLENGE TO THE CHURCH\n\n\nAs one travels through the rural districts of America and observes\ndifferences in the standards of living he is convinced that human\nwelfare depends very largely on economic conditions. The broad,\nwell-tilled fields of Iowa, surrounding large, well-built houses, big\nred barns and other outbuildings, form a marked contrast with the\npatches of corn in irregular fields cleared from the brush and scrub\ntrees on hillsides in Tennessee or Kentucky, and the hovels and\nrundown farm buildings which go under the name of homes for the hill\npeople. Healthy, well-dressed, happy children attending good schools\nof the most modern type in the corn belt undoubtedly have the\nadvantage of the boys and girls in the hills who often do not learn to\nread and write before they are ten years old, if at all, and when they\ndo go to school must be taught by poorly trained teachers for short\nterms, ending before the holidays, and in one-room schools often\nattended by nearly a hundred children. Religious service and\nleadership in the one section under the direction of college and\ntheological seminary men can hardly be put in the same class with the\nhighly emotional expression of religious impulses of the mountain\nsection led by once-a-month absentee pastors with no education, or,\nworse still, by wandering so-called evangelists of doubtful morality.\nOne could go through the whole list of contrasts between the\neconomically well-favored sections of the country and the less favored\nagricultural sections and in no way would the advantage be on the side\nof the latter.\n\nEfficient social and religious institutions cannot be built on poor\neconomic foundations. So long as a section of the country cannot\nafford to pay more than five hundred dollars per year for teachers or\npreachers, it cannot hope to have the leadership possible to another\nsection where ministers to rural people can easily secure eighteen\nhundred to three thousand dollars per year. Good buildings cannot be\nerected, nor can any of the material comforts which go to make up the\nfoundation of civilized life be enjoyed.\n\nFor the sake of the church, as well as the people, the church must\nattend to the economic foundations of rural life. It is unfortunate\nfor many parts of the United States that the ministry has become so\nseparated from real life by the mystical trend in religion that it has\nrendered practically no service in laying the foundations for the\ncontinuance of the communities themselves.\n\nThe shift of population from rural to urban centers which the census\nrecords show has continued, if anything, at an accelerated speed,\nindicates the seriousness of the problem. A part of the shift is\ndoubtless due to improvements made in methods of production. So far as\nthis is the cause there is no reason to be disturbed over the\ntendency, as it is useless to try to keep young men and women in an\noccupation that does not offer opportunity for earning a living. Part\nof the shift may be due to the living conditions in the country. This\nis but an indication of the task of the church on the social side and\ncan be changed as economic welfare permits. But the fact that rural\npopulation has been leaving the farms and that agricultural lands\nhave been abandoned by thousands of acres, indicates that urban\nopportunities have far outbid the rural in financial returns, variety\nof openings, and in working conditions. The farmer's income must be\nincreased as compared with other groups before there can be a\nwell-balanced relatively stable American life. Until this is achieved\nthose who are trying to build up rural institutions as strong as those\nin urban centers will be engaged in a hopeless task.\n\nEminent, conscientious Christian gentlemen, leaders in religious\nthought, and occasionally country ministers, have accused those who\nmaintain that the church should have a vital active interest in\nimproving economic welfare of trying to make hog-cholera experts out\nof preachers, thus taking them away from their real tasks. It is\nbelieved that knowledge of hog cholera and of the agencies that can\nhelp the farmer to prevent it will not injure the standing of any\nrural minister. It is maintained with reference to care for economic\nwelfare that it is the business of the church to encourage economic\nimprovement so far as possible (1) by giving advice and assisting in\ndemonstration work when no other organized agency is in a position to\nrender this service, and (2) by opening the way to other organized\nagencies to perform this service. This is the prime business of the\nagricultural colleges through their extension service. But it has been\nthe experience of agricultural colleges that they have the greatest\ndifficulty in establishing relationships in those agricultural\nsections where their service is needed the most. The minister of the\ngospel, being one of the two or three paid leaders in a local\ncommunity, enjoying a measure of the confidence of the people, and\nhaving a large part of his time available for pastoral duties, has the\nopportunity and the obligation to tactfully bring to the community the\nassistance of these other agencies now provided by the State. When he\nhas done this he can rest assured that he has accomplished something\nthat will become the foundation for a far higher, more satisfying\nrural life.\n\nAlthough ultimately the problem of production in agriculture will\nprobably be a most serious one, because of influences such as\nsoil-mining, deforestation, and depletion of soil through erosion,\nthe immediate problems are, rather, the adjustment of production to\ndemand so that the farmer will be on a more equitable income basis\nwith other elements in the population. When there is newspaper talk of\nagain burning corn for fuel, when wool is a drug on the market, and\nwhen farmers' organizations are urging the decrease in the acreage of\ncotton, it is idle to talk of agricultural welfare being synonymous\nwith ability to increase crop acreage or production per acre.\nAgricultural colleges and other State agencies have devoted the large\npart of their efforts to study of problems of production. The results\nof their services to date have been to so improve production as to\nhasten the population movement from the farms to the cities. This\ntendency to aid production to the point of exceeding equitable demand\nhas been of economic value to the great centers but it has not\nencouraged the continuance on the farm of a large population, nor has\nit enabled the farmer to compete with the townsman in maintaining a\nsatisfactory standard of living. It would seem that the producing\nability of the farmer has been his misfortune, and that his friends\nwho have taught him to produce more have been his worst enemies.\n\nWhen a manufacturing plant closes down because it cannot sell its\ngoods at a given price, or when a retailer refuses to handle goods\nbelow a price believed by many to be excessive, little is said. But\nwhen the farmer tries to adjust his production to demand by limiting\nproduction there is widespread criticism of his conduct. There should\nbe continuance of efforts to retain the fertility of the soil, to\nimprove methods of cultivation, and to prevent destruction of wide\nareas through erosion. The patrimony of the nation must be preserved\nthrough wise policies of reforestation and reclamation of waste lands.\nBut the great immediate task is that of adjusting production to demand\nso that the rural population may advance in material welfare along\nwith other groups. In a competitive organization of industry the\nfarmers success is gauged by his net income rather than by the number\nof bushels of corn or bales of cotton he produces.\n\nA sinister tendency in the higher-priced general agricultural sections\nis that of increase in the number of farms operated by farm tenants.\nCertain writers have attempted to prove that this tendency is taken\ntoo seriously. But the evidence of the United States Census from\ndecade to decade indicates that the danger is real; and that the\nsooner a policy of control is adopted the better.\n\nThe handicaps to agriculture through this increase are manifold. In a\nlarge proportion of cases, as shown by studies in typical areas, the\nlandowner does not live on a neighboring farm, nor is he a retired\nparent or other relative of the tenant farmer. He lives in the\nneighboring city. Consequently, the rental from the farm goes to help\nbuild up the material welfare of the urban center. The contributions\nof the absentee landlord to church work go to supplement the salary of\na city pastor on a scale far beyond the competing ability of the rural\nchurch where his land is located. His contributions to benevolences\nare paid for out of the income from his four-hundred-acre farm but are\ncredited to the city church of which he is a member instead of to the\nrural church in the community where his land is located. Because of\nthe transient nature of his residence the tenant, who remains on the\nfarm on the average less than two years, has but little permanent\ninterest in the life of the community and lacks the stability to\nbecome a valuable factor in building up strong rural institutions. The\nlandlord, as previously suggested, has been known to oppose measures\nfor consolidation of rural schools because such consolidation might\nincrease taxes, and has been known to threaten tenants with\ndispossession if they should vote for consolidation. The constant\nmoving of the tenant has handicapped the children in getting a good\ncommon-school education because of the breaks in their training\nresulting from this constant changing of residence.\n\nThe tenant house, with all its implications of class-distinction, has\ncome to the country side in increasing numbers. And slowly but\ngradually a landed aristocracy is growing up in rural America as\nmarked as the landed aristocracy based on the purchase of a few acres\nof Manhattan Island several generations ago. And with the tenant has\ncome the farm laborer, alien to the community, transient, and as much\na member of the proletariat as if he were working in a great factory\nin the city. The I. W. W. movement in the wheat fields and lumber\ncamps of the Northwest is but the beginning of the wage-earning\nconsciousness as it spreads out from urban centers.\n\nThe short term of tenant operation is lowering the standards of\nagriculture. Instead of farming on a long-time schedule, expecting\nreturns on a system of husbandry reaching through the years, the\ntenant is inclined to produce such crops as can be disposed of at the\nclose of the year, regardless of the effect of such a form of\nagriculture upon the fertility of the soil. Tenant contracts as yet\noffer little inducement for the tenant to remain permanently on a\ngiven farm or to keep up needed improvements.\n\nThe tenant for the time being may even make larger profits as a tenant\nthan as an owner. But the tendency everywhere for rents to rise, and\nthe consequent increase in the value of the land, will ultimately\nbring the tenant to the position of securing from his labor on the\nfarm an income not much in excess of what he would receive from\nworking as a day laborer. The result in the long run will be that the\nbest agricultural sections of the country will be occupied by a\npopulation lower in ability than in a landowning section and\nconstantly kept down by poverty. This prediction may be deemed\nfanciful by some, but the writer believes that it is worthy of the\nmost careful consideration and study.\n\nSince the organization of the great combinations in the oil and sugar\nindustries during the 70's and 80's of the past century the movement\ntoward close industrial organization has proceeded with little\ninterruption. Legislation has been passed designed to break up\nindustrial combinations and from time to time various industries have\nbeen disintegrated. But the layman has not been able to discover that\nsuch disintegrations by court order have had any marked influence on\nthe progress of the fundamental tendencies toward industrial\nconsolidation. The farmers have been the last to get into the\norganization field on any extensive scale. The Grange and the Farmers'\nAlliance, and later the Farmers' Union, have made attempts and,\nalthough many failures are recorded, their work paved the way for a\nfar larger movement toward farm organization now under way. The\ntendency toward close organization of industrial groups may also be\nseen in the labor movement, the American Federation of Labor and the\nIndustrial Workers of the World in this country, and the syndicalist\nmovement in Europe; and in the organization of employers' associations\nand the National Chamber of Commerce on the part of business men.\nWhatever may be thought of the unfortunate phases of this movement\ntoward closely organized group consciousness, however Bolshevistic it\nmay be said to be, it must be recognized that class consciousness has\ncome to stay. The old-type citizen who voted as a Republican or a\nDemocrat and as an individual regardless of his industrial\naffiliations is passing away, and to-day the business men as a class,\nthe wage-earners as a class, the farmers as a class, approach the\nleaders of both traditional parties with their ultimatums as to what\nthey will do if certain policies are not recorded in their respective\nplatforms. And the best-organized groups, those that can swing the\nmost votes or can produce the largest financial inducements, are the\nones that get most consideration. This may be Bolshevism, but if it\nis, it is a fact in American life, and we may as well adjust ourselves\nto handling the situation wisely instead of lamenting the passing of\nthe system of individual representation which was the basis on which\nAmerican government was founded.\n\nThe farmer cannot be accused of leadership in this change in the\nAmerican State. Business men and wage-earners began it, and the farmer\nhas been forced to follow their example. The old type individualism of\nthe landowning-operating farmer has long handicapped the farmer in his\nrelations with other industrial groups. And it is with many mistakes\nand setbacks that he is now endeavoring to follow the example so ably\nset by the multimillionaires of the other groups. Better organization,\nnot for exploitation but for protection and maintenance of a safe\nbalance of influence in economic affairs, is fully justified, and the\nminister of the gospel is serving the farmer best when he encourages\nright and efficient organization.\n\nThe American Farm Bureau Federation, begun a few years ago through the\nencouragement of county agricultural agents in order to give them a\npoint of contact with groups of farmers and to give local support of\nthe county agent's work, has now taken into its own hands the task of\nfarmer organization. And now, with resources far beyond what could\nhave been dreamed of a few years ago, this organization is embarking\non programs of farmers' business organization almost too staggering in\ntheir size to be comprehended. If rightly managed, and if farmers can\nprove loyal to their own organization, this movement is destined to\nsolve many of the problems of intergroup relationships confronting the\nfarmers during the past few decades.\n\nAs a part of the modern farmer organization movement, and holding\nwithin itself the largest promise of social values, is the\nencouragement of cooperation. Since the days in 1844, when a little\ngroup of wage-earners in England, out of work and gathered round a\nfire in a tavern, decided to go into business for themselves on a\nbasis of one-man one vote, and distribution of profits on business\ndone with the concern instead of stock held, the movement has\ncontinued to spread all over the world until to-day it holds a very\nimportant place in many lines of industry in leading countries.\n\nIn this country cooperation has been an agricultural rather than an\nurban development, primarily because economic conditions have made it\nmore necessary in agriculture than elsewhere. Farmers' elevators,\nlive-stock shipping associations, insurance companies, fruit-and\nproduce-marketing organizations have all gained a sound footing and\neach year shows an increase in their numbers. The movement has been\nconsistently fought by competitive profit-seeking interests but\nwithout avail further than to delay the movement. In the early days\ndiscrimination in furnishing cars, underbidding, misrepresentation,\nadverse legislation all had to be overcome, in addition to the fact\nthat ignorance of business principles often led to failure. Even now,\nwithin the past five years, agricultural colleges have been prevented\nfrom adding advisers on cooperative organization to their extension\nstaffs, retail merchants' associations have prevented cooperative\norganization legislation, and insidious attempts have been made to\nprevent popular education with reference to the movement.\n\nThe cooperative movement offers the greatest opportunity for the\ncountry minister for definite service in the farmers' economic\nprogress. The principle underlying the movement is \"Each for all, and\nall for each.\" Instead of the capitalist and laborer being in opposite\ncamps under the necessity for bargaining, and each doing as little as\npossible and getting as much as possible for their respective shares\nof the product of the industry, the cooperative movement brings them\ninto harmony for production of goods, in the belief that all are to\nshare fairly in what is produced. The storekeeper and the buyer no\nlonger haggle over the price because both will share in the returns of\nthe business done. The cooperative movement bids fair to solve many of\nthe problems of open and closed shop, collective bargaining, labor\norganization, and of relations between producer and consumer. Its\nsteady growth is bringing about industrial peace and since it\nrepresents the true spirit of Christianity the minister is justified\nin encouraging its development wherever he may be.\n\nWhat is the challenge to the church of the economic conditions and\ntendencies outlined above? First and foremost, the minister must in\nseason and out of season preach honesty in business relations. One of\nthe most important discoveries in the study of problems of the\nfarmer's business relations is that his success or failure depends\nlargely upon the moral principles of the farmer as a group. The farmer\nwho puts poor apples or potatoes in the middle of the barrel, who uses\nfalse weights and measures, who fails to produce the best of which he\nis capable, lowers the price of all farm products. The dealer who must\nthrow out a certain proportion of bad eggs in his miscellaneous\npurchases makes the buying price low enough to protect himself. The\nconsumer's demand is gauged very largely by the quality or reliability\nof the goods he purchases. So dishonesty in farm business hurts the\nfarmer more than it does anyone else. The minister can render a\nservice when he imbues his people with the highest ideals of business\nmorality.\n\nMoreover, he can help in eliminating the loss to the farmer through\nattempted sale of ungraded, miscellaneous products by encouraging\nstandardization and guarantee of quality. This requires organization;\nand while it should be the pastor's aim to encourage the formation of\nagencies independent of the church to attend to this and to establish\ncontacts between his community and State and independent organizations\nthat will assist in this work he should not hesitate so far as his\ntime will permit to organize such standardization work and\norganization for guaranteeing products until other agencies can take\nthe work over. His obligation as community leader extends to the\nencouragement of every phase of life that makes the country more\nlivable in the way demanded at the particular stage of development in\nwhich he finds the community.\n\nAs stated before, his primary task in encouraging production is now\nthat of establishing contacts with State agencies and encouraging the\nsupport of their work. In some sections of the country, as among the\ncolored people, for example, a country preacher might well be a\ntrained farmer capable of doing in a local community what a county\nagent tries to do on a larger scale. But the State has now progressed\nin most sections to the point where, if opportunity is offered, it can\nassist in this work and relieve the pastor for other duties.\n\nThe rural pastor should be a leader in community economic\norganization. It is accepted now that economic organizations along\ncooperative lines should be independent of either educational,\nreligious, or social groups. After such organizations are well\nestablished the pastor has met in this respect the challenge to the\nchurch and to the pastor as community leader.\n\nThe church as a whole should have some form of organization whereby it\ncan register its influence in favor of State legislation making safe\nthe development of the cooperative movement, the better organization\nof marketing, the proper control of land ownership, taxation, and\nother business relations affecting the farmer. Many of these problems\ncannot be solved by a minister working alone in a local community. He\ncan preach honesty, stability, loyalty to community organization with\nall the fervor and liberty of a prophet, but so long as the tenant\ncontract remains an inducement to transient tenant population; so\nlong as class distinctions continue to become more marked; so long as\ndiscontent over high rents, high prices of land, and other conditions\ncontinues, he will not get far toward the establishing of the kingdom\nof heaven in agricultural life. These problems must be attacked by the\nchurch as a whole as the obligation of the general church to the\nminister who is on the firing line of the great world-wide struggle\nfor the establishment of industrial peace.\n\nOne or two concrete illustrations will show the necessity of general\nchurch action on these matters if the rural church is to be saved from\nconditions now acute in the large centers. Wage-earners in the large\ncenters who have no assurance of permanence of jobs are not inclined\nto give liberally toward providing adequate building and equipment for\nreligious services. No wage-earner can be expected to give hundreds of\ndollars out of his income toward building a church when the next month\nmay find him compelled to move to some distant city. In like manner it\nis difficult in large centers to get wage-earners even to maintain a\nchurch adequately. Consequently the church is to-day spending\nmillions of dollars to provide church buildings for wage-earners in\nlarge cities. Yet it does not have any program for bringing about wage\nreturns, permanency of employment, or interest in business that would\nmake it possible or desirable for the wage-earner to finance his own\nchurch building. Neither does the church have a plan whereby the\nindustries of a city make any adequate contribution to the housing of\nreligious institutions for those connected with the industry. Although\nthe wealth of America is centered in the great cities, the provision\nfor religious service to city people is being made by people living in\nsmall towns and in the open country.\n\nAs in the city, so in the open country. It has become necessary for\nthe general church to provide even pastoral maintenance in certain\nsections where land is worth three hundred dollars per acre. The\ntransient tenant has no abiding interest in the community because he\nexpects to move at the end of the year. This condition is gradually\nbecoming worse; and unless the general church undertakes the solution\nof problems affecting the local church but over which the local\nchurch has no control, the future will bring either a decline in\nreligious influence in rural sections or a continuous burden on\nnational boards that should and would under proper conditions be cared\nfor by local communities.\n\nThat the church can help in improving economic conditions to the\nadvantage of all rural life has already been abundantly demonstrated.\nOn the Brookhaven District, Mississippi Conference, Methodist\nEpiscopal Church, the missionary board of that denomination made a\ncontribution of three hundred dollars toward the support for the\nsummer of a man and woman engaged in organizing community clubs.\nTwenty-one clubs were organized, and as a result of their efforts over\nfifty thousand pounds of fruit and truck were saved during the period\nof the war when food conservation was a necessity. As a result of this\ncontribution, at last reports there were three colored county\nagricultural agents employed in counties of that district, all\nsupported by the State, and no further contribution of missionary\nfunds to continue the work was necessary. For years Bishop Thirkield,\nof the New Orleans area of the Methodist Episcopal Church, had been\nencouraging keeping of gardens by the pastors and land ownership among\ncolored people. It is impossible to estimate accurately the results of\nhis broad program, but one district superintendent reported for his\nown official boards that while at the opening of the year 25 per cent\nof his official board members on the district were in debt, at the\nclose of the year not one of them was in debt. They had been taught\nhow to save money and to pay their debts, and the members of the\nchurches were encouraged to follow their example.\n\nOn a little charge in southeastern Ohio the pastor began to preach\ngood roads. Before the end of the first year a township organization\nhad been formed and a vote taken providing for the macadamizing of\nevery road in the township.\n\nFour years ago the missionary board of the Methodist Episcopal Church\nmade a contribution of four hundred dollars toward the support of a\npastor in a village in New York. He organized a community club, led in\nsecuring a community house, installed moving pictures, and provided\nfor the recreational life of the community. To-day no contribution is\nbeing made by the Board for this work. Yet the membership of the club\nhas increased from fifty-nine to two hundred and twenty-five. It has\nbeen responsible for the establishment of a national bank which had\none hundred and seventy thousand dollars deposits in the first six\nmonths; it paved over five hundred feet of street; it provided for the\nconsolidation of four rural schools with the village school. And plans\nwere under way for opening a ferry across the Hudson that had not been\nrun for thirty years and for the establishment of an important\nmanufacturing plant. Thus a little stimulation has resulted in\neconomic development that must result in better financial support of\nall community activities.\n\nIn conclusion it may be said that it is the business of the pastor to\nconcern himself with all economic problems that affect the welfare of\nhis people. The type of problem will vary with the community and its\nstage of development. As rapidly as possible the church should turn\nover to private or State agencies the task of economic development.\nBut the church should encourage in every way every movement that is\ndestined to bring about a higher stage of economic welfare; and the\npastor cannot relinquish his obligations in this respect until he has\nsucceeded in establishing other agencies that can effectively perform\nthis task. His duty, then, is to encourage this form of development by\neducating the people as to its value and by giving it his moral\nsupport.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\nTHE SOCIAL CHALLENGE TO THE CHURCH\n\n\nThe task of the minister is primarily to deal with man, either in his\nown personal life, his relations to his Maker, or to his fellow-man.\nUnlike the farmer, whose interest lies in the control of animal or\nplant growth, or the mechanic, who controls and molds the forces and\nconditions of inanimate nature, the minister has to do with that most\ndelicate and elusive subject of all--the human soul. His business is\nto tune the individual soul instrument so that it will harmonize with\nthe musical vibrations of the Infinite Will; and to bring about such a\nrelationship between the different instruments in his little group\nthat all together will produce a heavenly harmony.\n\nThe Christian religion, except when it has degenerated into formal\nPharisaism, has been an ethical religion; and the ethical conduct of\nthe individual has been a criterion of the depth of his religious\nexperience. Ethics have primarily to do with the relation of man to\nman, so that the conclusion is logical that the church is vitally\ninterested in the ethical problems of humanity and in anything that\ntends to lower or raise the moral standards of the individual or the\ncommunity.\n\nThere is no other agency more vitally interested in moral problems\nthan is the church. Business organizations may be interested, but\ntheir efforts have apparently not been to conserve moral standards,\neven in business. The school is interested, but its emphasis has been\nplaced more on mental development without regard to moral\nimplications, or on utilitarian objectives. The church has been\npreaching right living, and other objectives have been incidental.\nSince this is true the thesis is advanced as the basis for this\nchapter that it is the business of the church to provide building,\nequipment, and leadership for conserving the moral life of the\ncommunity. Since the moral welfare of any community finds its\nexpression largely in its social and recreational activities, such\nprovision involves providing for the social and recreational\ninterests. This is a function which is not to be encouraged and then\nturned over to other agencies, but is to be retained by the church\nitself as its legitimate service.\n\nIn view of the fact that the efforts of various agencies have not been\nin entire harmony with this point of view it deserves further\nconsideration. For many years it has been argued that the schoolhouse\nshould be so built that it could be made the community center for all\ntypes of activities. Without intending to limit the public schools in\nany laudable endeavor to enrich rural life it should be noted:\n\n1. That so far as villages and open country schools are concerned it\nis not believed that the agitation for the wider use of the school\nplant has yet resulted in any marked nation-wide response to such\nagitation further than to provide room for physical training of\nupper-class students.\n\n2. In general, the schoolhouse is so located that it is not suited for\ncommunity service. It is usually located on the outskirts of the\nvillage, where plenty of ground may be had for outdoor school games.\nWhen people gather for social life and leisure they do not go away\nfrom the lights of the village street but move toward them. The\nwell-lighted poolroom near the village store will attract more boys\nthan the building on the village edge that must be reached through the\ndark. Villagers have their downtown as well as do the great urban\ncenters.\n\n3. The school teachers and principal are busy five days in the week in\nthe classroom. The schools cannot assume charge of community center\nactivities without danger either of overworking the teachers or of\nhaving to hire special assistance for this service. Many villages\ncannot afford to hire special workers for this purpose alone.\n\n4. It has been argued that the school is the democratic institution\nsince it is tax-supported, and thus every one may go there as a right.\nTo this it may be replied that, as with the church, only those\ncontribute who have resources from which to contribute. The only\ndifference is that in the public school the majority decide that all\nthose who are able must contribute to the support of public\ninstitutions, thus it falls short of complete democracy, which must,\nin the last analysis, be a purely voluntary association. In the\nchurch the only force compelling contribution is personal desire and\npublic opinion. Thus it is as democratic, if not more so, than the\nschool.\n\n5. On the other hand, a large part of the time of the country minister\nis available for pastoral service. The establishment of community\nservice activities under the auspices of the church bids fair to\nrescue pastoral calling and service from a routine of personal\nvisitation by giving it a definite community service objective. Again,\nin the beginnings in the medium-sized and larger villages and probably\ncontinuously in the smaller places the pastor is the only salaried\nservant of the community with free time during the week for the\norganization and direction of community service.\n\n6. The church building and parish house can be located conveniently at\nthe center of the village, thus obviating the objection to the school\nbuilding for this purpose.\n\n7. True religion is a loyal supporter of everything that is safe in\nsocial and recreational life. It is subject to the control of the\ncommunity in the same way as the school; excessive puritanism need not\nbe feared under its auspices more than under the auspices of other\nagencies.\n\nThe usual argument against serious consideration of the church as the\ncenter of community life is that religious agencies are so divided up\nby dogmatism that it is impossible for any one religious organization\nto assume leadership in this respect without incurring the opposition\nof other agencies. While this is true in many cases, it should be\nremembered that dogmatism does not have the influence in more highly\ndeveloped communities that it once had. Moreover, considerable\nprogress has already been made toward intergroup agreements, including\nthe two great divisions of the Christian Church giving responsibility\nfor community leadership to one denomination or another. In cases\nwhere local adjustments have not been made it may be necessary to\ndepend on other agencies to conserve the social and recreational life.\nIn these cases the church loses its rightful heritage.\n\n8. The popular response to projects of building community churches and\nparish houses in small communities leads to the belief that the\ngeneral public accepts as the correct one the principle that the\nchurch should provide these facilities. The Methodist Episcopal\ndenomination alone, through the aid of its Church Extension Board,\naided in 1920 in building or remodeling over four hundred church and\nparish houses equipped to provide for all or a part of a community\nservice program; it is not known how many more made such advances\nwithout outside aid. The question of whether the church or some other\nagency than either the church or the school should provide community\nservice facilities may be answered in much the same way. In some\nStates local communities may levy a tax for the building and\nmaintenance of community buildings. Where this is possible there seems\nto be no serious objection to such a course. But a community building\nwithout adequate supervision is likely to become a center of moral\ndeterioration. On the other hand, such a public building can be\nlocated more strategically than can a schoolhouse. The objection to\nstock-company-owned community houses is much more serious. These are\nlikely to become mere pleasure resorts, often of a very questionable\nnature.\n\nThe judgment of the American people seems to be rapidly determining\nthat the safest plan is to look to the religious agencies for\nconserving the social and recreational life; and this judgment is in\nharmony with the thesis advanced at the opening of this chapter.\n\nIf the principle is accepted that it is the business of the church to\nconserve the social life of the community, then it is next in order to\nconsider some of the problems of social life that are a challenge to\nthe church at the present time.\n\nThe social organization of this country in its smaller communities as\nin the larger centers, such as it is, is the product of undirected\nuncoordinated efforts of special interest groups. A general\nclassification of the types of rural organizations may be made, first,\ninto political, including the incorporated village, towns, townships,\ncounties, and political parties; economic, including special\nassociations around specific interests such as farm bureaus, stock\nbreeders' associations, potato-growers' associations, etc., and the\nincreasing number of cooperative organizations, such as farmers'\nelevators, fruit-marketing organizations, live-stock, shipping\nassociations; social, including the Grange, the various types of\nfarmers' clubs for men and women that perform much the same function\nas the Grange, and the more or less permanent groupings for purely\nrecreational purposes, such as dancing parties, card parties, etc.;\nand the conventional religious organizations as represented by the\ndenominations and their many subsidiary groups for special purposes.\n\nAs was pointed out in the chapter on definitions, each of these\nvarious groups has a customary center for coming together. But owing\nto the fact that each interest has grown largely without reference to\nthe others, their centers of activity have been determined largely by\nconditions of local convenience. Now, these centers may have been well\nadapted to the times when they were established, but as time has\npassed shifts of population have come, road improvements have been\nmade, and new interests developed so that the traditional centers not\nonly tend to lessen community solidarity but also tend to prevent its\naccomplishment. One of the first tasks of the community leader is to\nmake a study of his proposed field of activity for the purpose of\ndetermining what are the present centers of group interests, what\nchanges have taken place in rural life conditions which make\nreorganization and readjustment of centers desirable, and then, in\nconsultation with representatives of the community, to organize a\ncommunity plan toward ward which the entire community may work. City\nplanning has long been an accepted principle for service in the more\nprogressive larger centers. The time has come when plans for the most\nefficient organization of village and open country communities should\nbe made. It is interesting to note that already in many sections of\nthe United States the movement toward community planning has made\nconsiderable progress. It is now generally recognized that with rare\nexceptions the village rather than an open country point is the normal\nbasis for such a plan. In accordance with this, movements are now\nunder way to displace the traditional township boundaries created as\npolitical limits for government and to replace them by boundaries\nconforming as closely as possible with those limits that careful\ninvestigation indicates are now and probably will continue to be the\nmost representative of what the future limits of rural communities\nwill be. In like manner educational work is being reorganized to\ninclude the community territory instead of the political areas\ninherited from the methods of survey adopted under the ordinance of\n1787. As this movement continues, doubtless farm bureaus, and even\nreligious agencies, will try to adapt themselves as far as possible to\nthe program of other agencies.\n\nThe breakdown of social life in the open country and the very\nquestionable forms it often takes in the villages has long been the\nnightmare of the minister of the gospel who stands for a high ethical\nplane of social life. The church, with its Ladies' Aid, its young\npeople's societies, its occasional men's clubs, fails to reach more\nthan a very limited number of those living in the open country or in\nthe village. The lack of a definite, well-organized social program\nresults in all kinds of association often anti-social and lowering of\nthe moral fiber of the entire group. It is unnecessary to go into the\nsordid details of moral conditions existing among both young and old\nin many village communities. The pastor with a program of absentee\nservice consisting of an occasional sermon and holding a Sunday school\nfinds his efforts continually nullified by more powerful social and\nrecreational impulses expressing themselves in ways recognized as\nmorally deteriorating. When a plan for ultimate centralization of\nwholesome and legitimate community interest has been made it is the\nminister's task to organize a plan for bringing to the community an\nabundance of wholesome recreational life. The traditional plan has\nbeen to preach against dancing and card playing. Such preaching has\nmore often alienated the young people from the church than it has\nattracted them to religious life. The modern plan is to overcome evil\nwith good; that is, to provide such a program of unquestioned\nrecreation that the evil will die of itself.\n\nThat this actually happens has been demonstrated over and over again.\nThe Rev. Matthew B. McNutt, on arriving at Du Page, Illinois, found a\nlarge building near the church turned into a dancing center. Without\nsaying a word against dancing he began to organize his young people\nfor singing. In a short time the dancing mania had ceased and did not\nreturn in the twelve years of his service on that charge. The Rev. L.\nP. Fagan found dancing all the rage when he went to a little town in\nColorado. He began to develop a wholesome program of recreational\nlife, and before long dancing had ceased and had not returned two\nyears after he had left the charge. At a little town in New York\nState, the young men of the town were accustomed to gather at the fire\nhouse and indulge in cards with more than occasional playing for\nmoney. A recreation hall opened in the village broke up the\ncard-playing and brought the young men into something more wholesome\nand which they preferred. A village in Southwestern Ohio had a gang of\n\"Roughnecks,\" as they were called, who were accustomed to loaf in the\npoolrooms and find their amusement in neighboring cities. A room in\nthe upstairs of the town hall was opened up and fitted for basketball.\nLeadership for clubs was provided by college students training for\ncommunity service. The result was that this group of young men, of\nexceptionally good native qualities but spoiling morally for want of\nadequate provision for recreational life, came to the community center\nand for the time being avoided the lower forms of social and\nrecreational activity.\n\nThese illustrations prove three things: first, the need of such\nequipment; second, the fact that young people prefer and choose the\nbetter when it is provided for them; and, third, that the church can\nsolve many of its most serious problems most readily by attacking the\nsource of corruption of the morals of young people through caring for\nrecreational interests. The minister who neglects this powerful force\nin attempting to build a Christian civilization is failing to take\nadvantage of one of the greatest instruments God has placed in his\nhands. Yet it is the sad fact that in too many instances ministers are\nfailing to take advantage of the forces at hand, and that even those\nwho have caught the vision of the possibilities of these other forces\nare not trained to use them safely.\n\nThe number of village communities that have organized social and\nrecreational life is still so small that when such movements are\ndiscovered they receive widespread comment in the public press. One\ncan drop into almost any village in America and make inquiries as to\nwhat is being done for conserving the recreational life by the church\nor any other community agency, and the answer will be that nothing is\ndone either in providing leadership or buildings and equipment. Much\ngood work has been done for specific groups by the Christian\nAssociations, and now the American Playground Association, the Red\nCross, and other organizations are applying themselves to the task of\nbringing about a better condition in smaller communities. But the work\naccomplished by all of them is still, as compared with the task in\nhand, scarcely more than a beginning. The church with a paid community\nleader in each community offers the solution for most rapid and\npermanent progress; and the outlook for rapid development under\nreligious auspices is most hopeful.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nBUILDING FOR COMMUNITY SERVICE\n\n\nThe thesis that the church should provide building and equipment for\nconservation of the social and recreational life of the church\nintroduces standards and objectives that do not find expression in the\ngreat majority of church buildings now erected, nor even in the\nmajority of plans sent out by religious agencies or architectural\nconcerns bidding for contracts for church planning and building.\n\nThe traditional village and open country church was a one-room\nstructure erected for the sole purpose of providing a place for\nworship. This amply met the needs of a pioneer time when social\nactivities were largely carried on in the homes. In a very large\nnumber of communities this is still the only type of church building\nto be found. As the idea of providing for Sunday school began to\nprevail gradually side rooms were added to provide for extra Sunday\nschool classes. In the course of time the needs of a wider program for\nthe church began to be recognized, and then basements were added with\nan occasional kitchen. Thus the entertainments for adults and of the\nyoung people old enough to enjoy banquets and like amusement were\nprovided for. But the needs of the young people under sixteen years of\nage and many other community needs were still uncared for.\n\nThe new program demands a building or buildings that will provide for\nthe threefold program of worship, religious education, and community\nservice. In view of the lack of standards for rural church building,\nthe present discussion is offered in the hope that it may contain some\npractical suggestions in terms of the program demanded of the modern\nopen country and village church.\n\nIt is believed that the type of building suitable for an open country\ncommunity will be somewhat different from that needed in a village\ncenter. The number of rooms will be less. Usually, two main rooms, one\nfor worship and the other for recreational purposes, with such side\nrooms for kitchen and special clubs and classes as the community can\nafford, will be sufficient. The recreation room should have stage,\nlantern slide, and moving picture equipment, and a very simple\nprovision for games. Problems of plumbing and heating must be worked\nout in accordance with local conditions.\n\nIn the larger centers, in addition to the facilities mentioned above,\nother rooms may be added as a careful study of village equipment and\nneeds, present and probable future, indicate. Rooms for library,\ncommittees, clubs, offices, shower baths, lockers, art center, and\nsimilar interests should be provided for if other agencies have not\ndone so.\n\nIn building for community service the community should not make the\nmistake of economizing because it imagines it cannot afford the best.\nNo community should build less than the best. If it does so, it\nhandicaps the community for a generation or more; and this is too\nserious a matter to be lightly permitted. At the present time\nreligious organizations have national agencies which are serving to an\never larger degree as a reserve resource for the purpose of aiding\nlocal groups to build adequately. Thus the general organization aids\neach year the limited number of local groups that find it necessary to\nrebuild and renders unnecessary the maintenance of a replacement fund\nby the local church for an indefinite period.\n\nIf it is impossible to build an entire building at one time it is\nbetter to build by units, so that in the course of time a structure of\nwhich the community may be proud will be completed. It should be\nremembered that a community's solidarity and spirit are gauged largely\nby the type of buildings it erects, and the church and community\nbuilding, representing as it does the deepest interests of man, should\nbe a living monument to community loyalty. Such a building becomes a\nlasting inspiration to both old and young, pointing the way to the\nhighest and best in human life.\n\nThe building should be strategically located. As has been suggested,\npeople like to come to the center of the village for their social and\nrecreational life. The owner of a poolroom or a picture show that\nwould place his building a half mile in the country would not have a\nlarge and enthusiastic patronage. The main street, near the center of\nthe village, is the place to be selected for the principal building of\nthe city, the community center.\n\nSometimes a well-meaning citizen will offer to a church a plot of land\nfar out on the edge of a village free of charge, provided the church\nwill accept it for the erection of the new structure. Sometimes the\nBoard of Trustees, thinking they will save a few hundred dollars,\ngratefully accept the gift, thus violating the principle expressed in\nthe preceding paragraph. When a business man plans to put up an\nexpensive building he does not seek the cheapest land but the best\nlocation regardless of the cost of the land. For illustration, a lot\non the edge of a village may cost but five hundred dollars, while a\nlot in the center of the village may cost five thousand dollars. If\nthe proposed building to be erected is to cost fifty thousand dollars,\neven the larger land cost is but ten per cent of the total; and the\nvalue of the building to the community after erection on the more\nvaluable lot far more than justifies the extra expenditure.\n\nSometimes architects are inclined to sacrifice utility to beauty. They\nare inclined to make the recreation room too short because a proper\nlength would not harmonize with other lines in the building. The good\narchitect accepts the beautification of a useful building as a\nchallenge and does not sacrifice utility because a useful structure\ndoes not embody some feature of Gothic or Old English parish church\narchitecture. This tendency should be carefully guarded against.\n\nDetails as to the slope of ground best adapted to church building,\nheating, plumbing, and other features can best be learned by\nconsultation with a trained architect. Care should be taken to see\nthat the recreation room is sufficiently large to carry on the simpler\ngames, such as basketball, when the community so desires. The limits\nrecommended are fourteen feet high by forty feet wide by sixty feet\nlong. Many communities, however, are getting along with rooms\nconsiderably shorter and narrower than this. The ceiling should be\nsupported by steel beams instead of posts. In most sections of the\ncountry it is recommended that recreation rooms be erected on the same\nlevel as the church instead of in the basement, as has been the\npractice.\n\nIn many sections of the country there is a distinct objection to\nhaving the community service features and the house of worship under\nthe same roof. It is thought that the light-heartedness of play time\ntends to lessen the sacredness of the house of worship and to lessen\nrespect for religious service. While this attitude is largely a matter\nof custom, and while people who have caught the vision of God can\nworship him any place, it is believed that wherever possible\nconsideration should be given to this sentiment and the community\nservice features of the church should be housed in a separate building\nlocated adjacent to the church or attached to it by some smaller club\nroom. The two should not be located in widely separate parts of the\nvillage, as the connection between the two may be lost and the service\nof the church to the community in this way not recognized. Both house\nof worship and community or parish house should be located near the\ncenter of the village.\n\nIn villages where there is room for several houses of worship the\nquestion of community service is much more difficult. The Young\nMen's Christian Associations and the Young Women's Christian Associations\nhave made partial provision in some communities on an interdenominational\nbasis. But in the ordinary small town there is not room for a building\nfor each of these organizations. The rural Christian Associations have\nbeen proceeding on the policy of using such buildings as are now\navailable, but it is evident that in the vast majority of small\ncommunities, present buildings can at best be but a makeshift for\ncomplete community service. It is hoped that the time will come when\nthe several denominations will find some way of pooling their financial\nresources so that as religious organizations they can provide a common\nbuilding for community service. The writer knows of no village in America\nwhere this has yet been done. One village in New York State,\nMilton-on-the-Hudson, has a community club under the direction of a\nBoard of Trustees of ten members, two from each of the five denominations\nrepresented in the village, the Catholic church included. This club has\nbeen very successful in operating a community house and developing a\ncommunity program. It has been suggested that where property rights are\ninvolved one denomination might make its contribution by providing\nand maintaining the building, while the other denominations might\ncontribute the equivalent of interest on building investment, depreciation\nand maintenance of building to cost of operation of the plant. It is\nfeared, however, that in the course of time, the original cost of\nbuilding to one denomination would be forgotten and the community\nwould demand that all groups contribute to operating expenses\naccording to their membership or some other agreed upon distribution\nof maintenance expense. This should be the ultimate method of\nmaintenance.\n\nIn a number of communities one denomination has provided the building\nand the operating force, while other denominations have cooperated by\nacting on the Board of Control and contributing what they could to the\nmaintenance cost. Such denominational leadership almost invariably\nleads in the beginning to interdenominational jealousy and antagonism,\nbut in some cases the community has accepted the situation and all\nhave cooperated, it being understood that such provision for community\npurposes is not for the purpose of proselyting. Sunday school and\nchurch membership is encouraged in the denominations from which the\nyoung people come, and thus a contribution by one denomination has\nstrengthened the work of all the churches. Some form of cooperation\nagreed upon for a common development is preferable and independent\naction by one denomination should be undertaken only when the\ndifferent groups concerned are not in a position either by tradition\nor financial ability to cooperate in a common enterprise.\n\nThe movement now is very strong in the direction of provision of\nbuilding and equipment for community service by the church. May the\nchurch not fail in doing justice to its high obligation in the type of\nstructure it may erect!\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI\n\nTHE CHURCH AND RURAL PUBLIC THOUGHT\n\n\nMany city pastors, and some rural ones too, lament the fact that\npeople do not come to listen to them preach. This condition is in\nmarked contrast to the good old New England days, when the whole\nneighborhood would turn out and listen to sermons four hours long. It\nis a question whether such intellectual giants as Jonathan Edwards\nbuilt up such congregations or whether such congregations brought out\nthe best in Jonathan Edwards.\n\nPeople to-day go to church for a variety of reasons. But the dominant\nmotives that should prevail are those of worship and for instruction.\nAll Christians should attend religious services for worship regardless\nof the quality of the sermon or the personal attitude of the people\ntoward the minister. The message from the pulpit should be such that\nit too would attract for its own sake. It is the exceptional city\nminister that can fill the pews from week to week and from year to\nyear because of the type of message given. The daily papers and the\nmany other agencies for discussion of live topics have become so\nnumerous that the pulpit has lost much of its original importance as\nan agency for instruction. But in the village and the open country the\npulpit still has a large field for service in this respect and thus\nbecomes an especial challenge to the one who wants to develop as a\nleader of thought. The village minister has an opportunity unique in\nAmerican life in this respect. Some of the greatest leaders of thought\never produced were the product of the village churches of England and\nScotland. There is no reason why the village church of America should\nnot become the seedbed for the best contributions to religious,\nphilosophical, and literary thought of the present day.\n\nIt will be impossible to give more than a few illustrations of present\nneeds and opportunities for service in this respect in the smaller\ncommunities. One of the first tasks of the church is the introduction\nof correct thought in regard to religious beliefs. It is almost\nunbelievable the amount of actual superstition and positively harmful\nbeliefs that prevail under the guise of religion not only in rural but\nin urban communities. An example of this is the widespread belief in\nthe second coming of Christ at an early date. Educational institutions\nof national note are continuously laboring to extend this form of\nbelief. The question as to whether Christ will ever come again is one\nthat does not appear to have any immediate social significance other\nthan it may have some influence on conduct as to the method of\npreparation for his coming. Those who believe in such coming may\neither believe that all efforts at social improvement now are\nfruitless, because the ultimate inauguration of the Kingdom will\nresult from the sweeping away of everything that now exists and in the\ninauguration of a new social order out of the ruins of the old. Or\nthey may believe that the efforts of the churches and other agencies\nnow are preparing the way for such coming, and the inauguration of the\nKingdom will be but the next step in an orderly process of social\nprogress. There is reason to believe that many of those who are\nteaching the second coming are inclined to the former point of view;\nand wherever they gain a hearing their influence practically nullifies\nall efforts to enlist their followers in any program of social\nimprovement.\n\nThe effect of a belief in an immediate coming of Christ as indicated\nby present world conditions interpreted in the light of Old and New\nTestament prophecy is to paralyze all motive for social action. Such\naction, if this belief is correct, is useless. The devotee is driven\nto the position of finding his sole religious duty that of getting\nhimself and those in whom he is interested ready to enter the new\nkingdom through the observance of the personal elements in religious\nlife.\n\nAnother belief that in some sections has a limited influence is that\nof observance of Saturday instead of Sunday as the day set apart by\nbiblical authority as the Sabbath. Without commenting on the rightness\nor the wrong of the contention, it should be remembered that this\nbelief has resulted in some sections in practically the breakdown of\nobservance of the Sabbath by rural communities, without a\ncorresponding gain in Saturday observance. Community solidarity for\neither social or religious purposes is thus broken up. From the social\npoint of view this is distinctly unfortunate.\n\nAgain, in some sections religion has taken an extreme form of\nantagonism to anything of a practical type. The extremes to which the\nemotional expression of religion has gone have been such that these\ngroups have become popularly known as \"Holy Rollers.\" Wherever this\ntype of religious expression breaks out in a rural community it\nseverely handicaps all efforts at making the church function as an\nagency for rural progress. The energies of such devotees are so\nexhausted in their services that they lack the energy, even if they\nhad the inspiration, to link their efforts to any program of community\nbetterment. This group is usually found not only opposing progressive\nmeasures in the church but also opposing other progressive activities\nin the community, such as better schools, road improvement, etc.\n\nIn isolated sections of rural America all over the country may be\nfound groups of Latter Day Saints. These groups are not yet of\nsufficient strength to be of great importance outside of Utah and a\nfew other Western States. But the existence of an organized group\nanywhere, particularly if it is of a missionary character, is likely\nto spread and ultimately become a factor of considerable importance.\nAnyone visiting the Mormon Temple at Salt Lake and reading on the\nmonuments to Joseph and Hiram Smith the testimony in letters of stone\nto the effect that Joseph discovered the message of the Book of Mormon\non gold plates, and that Hiram was the witness thereof, will realize\nhow easy it is to spread almost any belief under the guise of religion\nif the children are taught such doctrines during their youth.\n\nIt will be unnecessary to go through the whole catalogue of beliefs\nfinding expression in the dogma of practically all religious\norganizations, and in times past dividing the followers of\nChristianity into denominational groups. The most serious problems of\nadjustment of religious institutions for community service grow out of\nthese differences in belief on points of dogma.\n\nThe solution of the problem of clearing the field of unwholesome and\ninjurious belief lies not in writing polemics against them but in\nfilling the minds of the people with unquestioned truth. As the rural\nmind is directed to the consideration of topics of vital importance\nthese things that have crept in and disturbed social order and\ndissipated precious energies in fruitless discussion will disappear\nthrough lack of attention. On the other hand, persecution will attract\nattention to and arouse the fanatical support of them and distract the\nattention of the group from matters of more vital importance.\n\nIn addition to preaching those sermons which keep alive in community\nconsciousness the sense of man's obligations to his Maker, the\nsignificance and solemnity of death and those other epochal events in\nthe course of human existence, and the hope given to man of a fuller\nlife through the coming of Christ, the minister has certain great\nmoral ideals that he should instill into the minds of his people.\n\nThe matter of honesty in dealing with both the farmer and his\nneighbors both near and distant has already been mentioned.\n\nThe right attitude toward wealth accumulation must also be preached\nnot only for the safety of the rural community but also for the\nentire nation. By the very nature of the business the vast majority of\npeople living in small communities and on the farms must remain\nindefinitely people of modest means. The possibilities of large wealth\naccumulation are limited because the farm must continue to be a small\nscale industry. It can be improved so as to afford adequate leisure.\nBut farm life does not promise large enjoyment to those of an\nepicurean turn of mind. The ideal of the farm must be that of\nproducing wealth so that the modest comforts of life may be insured.\nBut the minister must exalt the appreciation of those things that may\nbe obtained without lavish expenditure of money, such as local\nentertainment produced by the community itself, literature, music, and\nart; and the simple pleasures that come from democratic association\nwith intimate acquaintances.\n\nIt is believed that with all the material progress of this country, it\nhas had to sacrifice many things that are worth far more than the\ntypes of enjoyment obtained by slavish imitation of the extremely\nwealthy leisure class in the cities. The exhortation to preach the\nvalues of the simple pleasures possible in smaller communities is not\nfor the purpose of keeping people contented with a lot that cannot be\nimproved, but because it is believed that the smaller communities\nto-day contain within themselves and their ideals the seed of\nrejuvenation of all life, and that a greater contribution can be made\nby rural communities to civilization by adhering to their ideals than\nby being diverted from them by the money-seeking, materialistic ideals\nof the urban centers. The best in rural ideals must ultimately become\nthe ideals of the city if we are to avoid the degeneration that will\ninevitably follow a too materialistic urban civilization.\n\nThe pastor should be able to bring to his people from time to time the\ninterpretation of national and world events in terms of their relation\nto the advance of religious progress. This obligation will require\nconstant and wide reading about the social movements of the time. In\nthe more progressive communities many of the farmers and their\nfamilies will have access to literature that will enable them to form\ntheir own conclusions to a large degree. But not many of them, even\nthough they be college graduates, will have the time to read as\nwidely as they would like on any of the great changes taking place;\nand they will welcome an intelligent interpretation of these by the\none who has the larger opportunities for such service.\n\nFinally, the preacher must be a prophet. He must have caught the\nvision of tendencies in human life and be able to bring to his people\nthe evidences of the hand of God working out the course of the human\nrace in the infinite stream of human history. He must believe, with\nTennyson, in a \"far off divine event, toward which the whole creation\nmoves,\" or with Shakespeare when he said \"There's a divinity that\nshapes our ends, rough-hew them how we will.\" If he can bring his\npeople to see that, even though they may be living in some obscure\ncorner of the earth, they have a part in the great movements going on,\nand that they can render a service by doing what they are able in\nsupporting the programs for which the church stands, he will be\ncontributing his share to the wholesome attitude needed in our rural\ncommunities.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII\n\nADJUSTING THE LOCAL CHURCH TO THE COMMUNITY\n\n\nIn his book on Social Control Professor Ross has pointed out that\ncertain institutions are essentially conservative in their nature.\nThey are solid, permanent organizations but are not inclined to assume\nleadership in social progress. He includes in this list the church.\nThe fact that the church is a conservative institution is not\nnecessarily a criticism of it. Other agencies develop new phases of\nsocial expression, sometimes in actual opposition to conservative\nagencies. The good innovations live and after they have demonstrated\ntheir utility the conservative institutions such as the church and the\nstate take them over and insure their permanence.\n\nThe rapid advance of the social spirit in modern life has outstripped\nexisting agencies in their preparation to meet the new approach to\nthe solution of problems of living. Many forms of existing\ninstitutions were created under entirely different conditions and to\nmeet different needs. To-day these old forms do not adapt themselves\nto new demands, and in many cases prevent effective action on the part\nof religious organizations that are ready in spirit to broaden their\nprograms to include the new demands upon the conservative\norganization.\n\nThe minister, trained for the modern service of the church to the\ncommunity, cannot solve alone all the problems of maladjustment he\nfinds in his local community. He finds that the contacts and interests\nof his local church organization are far broader than the interests of\nthe local group he is called to serve; and that in many cases his\nlocal efforts are nullified by these larger contacts. It is the\npurpose of this and succeeding chapters to outline some of the\nconditions existing within the church itself that must be adjusted\nbefore it can act most effectively in meeting the challenge discussed\nin preceding chapters.\n\nThe first and probably most important problem is that of enlarging the\nvision of church officials, ministers, and people as to the need for\nbroadening the program of the church and as to the need of a\nstatesman-like reorganization of adjustment of the church to the\ncommunity.\n\nIt is believed that quite generally the membership of the larger\nreligious organizations in this country are now in sympathy with the\nprinciple that the church should have a social-service program. There\nis still wide diversity of opinion as to the form that service should\ntake. In too many cases there is no opinion at all; and while\nadmitting the principle, active opposition develops to any attempt to\nput the principle into practice in a specific project. This condition\nis to be found most marked in those sections of the country that are\nnot in the direct line of thought movements, or where living\nconditions are such as to make rural life monotonous. The monotony of\nthe plains is as deadening as is the lack of contact of the mountain\nvalley; and both fields offer fruitful ground for the spread of\nunsocial types of religious expression.\n\nThe solution of this phase of adjustment of the church to community\nneeds lies in a patient educational program carried on by the\nminister of the gospel. He must be a man of broad vision and must have\nthe fullest appreciation of the slowness with which the rural public\nmind works. He must be everlastingly tactful and not attempt more than\nthe simplest advances at the beginning and not more than one at a\ntime. He should have at hand an abundance of educational material in\nthe way of literature, lantern slides, and periodicals which can be\nused in showing what actually happens when the church embarks on a\nbroader program of rural service. A national educational program of\nthis type will in a few years create a demand that must be met and\nthat rural churches will pay well for as the value of such work will\nbe recognized.\n\nThe more serious phase of this problem is the lack of adequate\npreparation for this service on the part of the ministry. In one of\nthe leading denominations (Methodist Episcopal) over twenty-nine per\ncent of the charges are cared for by supplies, men who by reason of\neducational preparation, age, or for some other cause are not now and,\nin a large proportion of cases, never will be eligible to membership\nin the Conferences. Of the remainder, only a small proportion are\ngraduates of schools of higher learning, such as colleges and\ntheological seminaries. At a time when a large number of those living\nin rural communities are either agricultural college graduates or have\nattended short courses in agriculture, it becomes apparent that an\nuneducated ministry is becoming a menace to the future of the rural\nchurch.\n\nBut of those who have had the advantages of a college or theological\nseminary training, the type of training has not fitted them for\neffective rural service. The training of ministers has gone through\nthe same process as other types of training. It was once thought that\nsince the sole business of the minister was the personal appeal to\naccept Christ, with the emphasis on the personal atonement features of\nChristianity rather than on the principles of Christian living, the\nsame type of training would fit one to deliver the message whether he\nwas in the slums of the city, on the shores of Africa, or in the\nmountains of Colorado. Moreover, for some reason, it appears to have\nbeen accepted that the rural ministry was the simplest of all and\nthat any one could be a rural minister. It would be amusing if it were\nnot so tragic to accept the testimony of some of those who have not\nyet seen that the rural ministry is a type demanding such a\ncosmopolitan understanding of human nature and of conditions of human\nexistence that it demands the best intellects and the highest type of\nmissionary spirit to carry on successfully. We have heard of college\npresidents recommending young men for important rural positions\nbecause the young man was \"not ambitious for any important work in the\nchurch.\" It has been known that officials in the church would bid for\ntheological seminary graduates with the assurance that while they\nwould have to accept an \"undesirable\" rural charge for a year or so,\nthey would soon be \"promoted.\" The writer knows of at least one young\nNegro minister, a holder of a Master's degree from a large educational\ninstitution, whose major work for his higher degree was in the dead\nlanguages. The attitude of our educational institutions, and the\nattitude in public thought has been that progress for the individual\nhas been in the direction of getting away from the country instead of\nremaining with rural folk and giving one's life to the advancement of\nthe group as a whole; and the courses of study have had primarily in\nmind the personal appeal rather than that of dealing with man in his\nparticular environment.\n\nIt is now recognized that modern life demands a specialized ministry.\nThe one who can handle successfully a rural industrial or a downtown\nurban situation may not be at all fitted to deal with the problems of\nthe village or the open country. On the other hand, the one who can\nserve farmers successfully might not be at all fitted to fill a\nmetropolitan pulpit. Beginnings only have been made in attempting to\nadjust educational work to meet this modern demand. In the meantime\nthe problem remains of the ministers trained under former conditions,\nif trained at all. Many of them have not yet caught the vision of the\nlarger program of the church; and of those who have caught this vision\nthe handling of the tools of the new program is such a delicate task\nthat many failures are sure to be recorded. It will take years to\nbring the church to the place where it can meet successfully the\nmodern demands upon it.\n\nThe second great problem is that of maladjustment in thought.\nProtestantism is still suffering from the effects of extreme\nindividualism in religious belief. Strong leaders, obsessed with some\none variation in interpretation of the Scriptures, have pulled off\nfrom the main body of the church and have started independent\norganizations committed to the development of the particular\ninterpretation they have made. When once these organizations have been\nformed and have secured a financial backing, they have continued to\nspread, until to-day rural America presents the spectacle of religious\nforces agreeing on the broad general program of the relation of the\nchurch to community needs but paralyzed because of dissensions over\nless essential principles of theological dogma. The reasons for\nseparate organizations have often been forgotten and loyalty to a\nparticular organization as such has taken its place.\n\nThe solution of this problem is not that of attempting to eliminate\ndifferences in dogmatic belief by argument, but of emphasizing the\npoints of agreement of the various religious groups. Error and\nnonessential dividing lines will disappear if neglected. But if they\nare agitated, they will thrive under persecution and conditions will\nbe worse than ever.\n\nThe third problem is that of maladjustment of buildings to community\nneeds. This problem presents itself in two aspects: first, that of\nlocation of church buildings, and, second, that of location of\npastors' residences. In the original settlement of this country,\npeople located their new homes in neighborhoods partly for social and\neconomic purposes and partly for protection. Where these new groups\nwere founded the church building soon found a place. As the\ncommunities grew, and aided in the course of time by ambitious\nnational agencies, the sectarian interests mentioned above established\nnew churches to care for those of each particular belief until many\ncommunities soon became overchurched. The rapid decrease in\nopen-country, and even village, population which began during the 70's\nof the past century and which has continued to the present made the\nproblem still worse, until to-day probably the least efficient\ninstitution in all rural life is the rural church.\n\nMoreover, the first settlements did not always mark the spot of\npermanent development of population and interest centers. As time has\npassed, many of the places which it was once thought would be\npermanent centers have lost their preeminence and others have taken\ntheir place, until now many very small communities have too many\nchurches, and others are lacking in adequate facilities for religious\nservice.\n\nThe time has now come when it is believed that rural population and\nagricultural tendencies are sufficiently well known to enable those\ninterested in rural life development to determine what are the most\nsuitable centers for community development. The Interchurch World\nMovement, had it been carried to a successful conclusion, would have\ngone far toward determining those centers for the entire United\nStates. As it is, the Movement made possible such determination for\nabout one fifth of the United States and the task of completing the\nsurvey may be accomplished in the course of time.\n\nWhen this task is completed, then the challenge to the churches of\nAmerica will be to so readjust the location of their church buildings\nand to remodel them in such a way as to be adapted to the present and\nprobable future growth of communities so determined. This work is\nscarcely begun, but it is believed that it has gone far enough to\ninsure its ultimate achievement. When this is done, then the local\nchurch will be in a position to deal most effectively with the\ncommunity problems mentioned in preceding chapters.\n\nThe situation as to location of pastors' residences is even more\nserious than that of location of church buildings. During the pioneer\nperiod of church organization ministers were under the necessity of\ndividing their efforts among a considerable number of small groups.\nThese were organized into circuits and the pastor's residence was\nprovided at the point either where the original church was established\nor where it was most convenient for him to serve the preaching points\nunder his care. Each denomination developed its own work regardless of\nother groups and in many cases from the same common center, so that we\nnow have in rural and village organization pastors' residences\ncentralized in the minority of rural communities and the great\nmajority of such communities without resident pastoral care.\n\nIn the State of Ohio, for example, in one county of twenty-four\ncommunities but twelve have resident pastors and in these twelve\ncommunities thirty-nine pastors reside. In another of sixteen\ncommunities but eight have resident pastors. Yet in each county there\nare enough ministers to supply each community with a resident pastor,\nif readjustment were to be made. In the northeastern part of the State\non a single Methodist district are to be found two instances of\nMethodist and Presbyterian pastors living in the same village and\ngoing on alternate Sundays to another village, in one instance larger\nthan that wherein the ministers live. The facts as to the growth and\ndecline of churches with resident or non-resident ministers elsewhere\npresent (see Church Growth and Decline in Ohio) are a sufficient\nindication of the effects of maladjustment of pastoral residences to\nrural community needs. Since the modern demand of rural life upon the\nchurch is for community leadership as well as for holding Sunday\nworship, it is clear that no adequate program of church leadership in\nrural life can be worked out until this vital need of readjustment of\npastoral residences to community service is met.\n\nA third serious problem is that of lack of coordination of\ndenominational effort in community service. Where two or more\nreligious organizations find a place in the same small community, no\nplan has yet been successfully tried whereby these organizations as\nsuch have been brought into harmonious and continuous action for\ncommunity service. The presence of two or three ministers of social\nvision in the same small community is not always an asset, since small\ncommunities do not have a place for more than one leader and sectarian\ninterests forbid cooperation under the leadership of either of the\nchurch pastors. This situation has given rise to such organizations as\nthe Christian Associations, the Sunday School Associations, and a\nlarge number of nonreligious agencies now trying to provide for\ncommunity leadership independent of the church. It is intended here to\ncall attention to the problem. A suggestion as to methods of solution\nwill be taken up more at length in a succeeding chapter.\n\nA fourth serious problem resulting from the above is lack of adequate\nsupport for rural religious institutions. Owing to the general lack of\nfinancial resources of rural communities as compared with the urban\ncenters, they have not been able to compete financially with city\nchurches in bidding for men who have high standards of living and who\ndemand large financial returns for services rendered. This condition\nwill probably continue indefinitely because of the tendency of\nlarge-scale industrial production to centralize wealth control in\nurban centers; that is, unless the economic motive is taken from\nChristian service through the equalization of salaries. This is a\nsolution much to be desired, but it is feared that pastors will not\ntake kindly to such a movement; and members of city churches will\ncontinue to contribute to the support of their own particular pastor\ninstead of to general pastoral support. But the weakness in support\nhas been seriously increased because of dividing of such resources as\nrural communities have among so many different agencies. Many\ncommunities that could support a pastor at two thousand dollars or\nmore a year now have men serving denominations at one thousand dollars\nper year or less.\n\nThe same is true of church building. When five church buildings must\nbe erected and maintained for sectarian purposes in a town where there\nis room for but one school building there is little wonder that the\ncontrast between church buildings and other rural institutional\nbuildings is so marked. And it is little wonder that when people begin\nto think in community terms they are inclined to pass by the church as\nan institution offering hope of community service conservation and\nturn either to the school or to some other agency that they hope will\nserve the purpose.\n\nClosely akin to the problem of inadequate support for the country\nminister and the country church is that contention often made that the\njob of a country preacher does not offer as great a challenge as does\nthat of service in other branches of church work. It is believed that\nthis contention is erroneous because the rural work, while not\ndemanding the same qualities of service as other types, does demand\nqualities of its own that equal, if they do not exceed, those of the\ncity pulpit. The ability to serve people long and continuously in\nclose personal relation to them; to deal patiently with conservatism;\nto endure the hardships of living under conditions far below what are\nto be found in city environments; to get the support of the people for\nprogressive measures, and to keep alive mentally in an environment\nthat is not the most conducive to study because of lack of reading\nfacilities and because of the ease with which one may shirk the means\nof personal growth--all these make the task one for the specially\ncapable and devoted.\n\nBut if there is truth in the statement that the country ministry does\nnot offer the opportunity for the exercise of personal abilities\nrequired by the city pulpit, then, unless we frankly recognize that\nthe limit of possibility of building up the rural work is to alleviate\nan unavoidable discrepancy in personal challenge, it becomes necessary\nto so reorganize the local parish that it will be a challenge fit to\nattract the best minds in the church.\n\nThe first step already has been mentioned: that is, to adjust\nrelationships between denominations so that a minister will have sole\nresponsibility for community leadership.\n\nThe second is to enlarge the parishes under the control of one pastor\nthat he will have ample field for the exercise of his abilities. In\nsome sections of the country two or more communities may still have to\nbe assigned to one minister, with the expectation that he will develop\nlocal volunteer leadership in the respective communities, or have\nadequate assistance in the way of special workers among the children\nand in the homes and have directors of religious education for full or\npart time in each community. In most sections of the country the\ncommunities are now of such a size as to demand the full time of a\npaid minister and to pay a satisfactory salary for services rendered.\n\nThe third is to increase the functions of the pastorate so that people\nwill be willing to pay more for the service rendered. This results\ndirectly from the adoption of the larger program for the church herein\nrecommended.\n\nThe practice--still all too rare--of supplying the pastor with an\nautomobile for pastoral work, should be encouraged everywhere,\nparticularly when the charge has a pastor who has the vision of the\nbroader program of the church and is specially trained for his work.\nThere are complications in the connectional system of making\nappointments that tend to prevent liberality in this respect. When a\ncharge is brought up to adequate self-support the tendency is too\noften to make the charge a place to \"take care\" of a Conference member\nof that grade regardless of his fitness to follow up the type of\nprogram introduced by his predecessor. The taking of the automobile by\nthe departing pastor deprives the community of its use. Leaving it for\nthe use of an inefficient pastor is too great a burden on the\ncommunity. Experience will determine the best means of handling this\nproblem and should ultimately put ministers on the same basis as to\nhaving means of transportation furnished as County Agricultural\nAgents, County Superintendents of Schools, Christian Association\nSecretaries, etc.\n\nThe soldier in the ranks will probably never be looked upon as in the\nsame grade of responsible position as the captain of the company. So\nthe country minister has a right to look forward in due time to\n\"promotion\" in natural channels; that is, to the district\nsuperintendency. It is to be feared that too often at the present\ntime, the rural minister is discouraged from remaining in the rural\nwork because he sees that a very large proportion of the positions in\nthe church that are recognized as personal promotions are filled from\nthe city pulpits. His course of advance is now from the country pulpit\nto the city pulpit, thence to the district superintendency or detached\nservice, thence to the bishopric, a position very few ministers refuse\nif offered. The rural work would be strengthened if rural district\nsuperintendencies were filled by rural men who have demonstrated their\nability to build up a rural charge successfully, and then if these\nsame rural district superintendents were to have an opportunity to\nfill the highest possible positions in the church, thus bringing to\nthe highest administrative offices of the church the tried experience\nthat comes from building up a district in Methodism. When the\nnecessity of leaving the rural work in order to get \"promotion\" is\neliminated there will be a marked strengthening of loyalty to the\nrural work.\n\nThe illustrations given have been taken from Methodist Episcopal\nexperience. Other denominations have similar problems, but probably to\na less degree because of the more marked form of localized democracy\nin church polity.\n\nIf the churches of America permit this crisis of lack of adjustment of\nchurch to community needs to pass unchallenged, and if they delay in\nmaking the adjustments needed, the time will soon come when other\nagencies, supported by rural communities, will make provision for\nthese needs and the opportunity of the church will be gone\nindefinitely. Other agencies will be performing a real Christian\nservice, and the church, by reason of its failure to live up to the\ndemands upon it, will have an increasingly difficult task of\njustifying its existence so far as relationship to this world is\nconcerned.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII\n\nINTERDENOMINATIONAL READJUSTMENT\n\n\nRural progress under church leadership has been much like the first\ndrops of water on a placid lake at the beginning of a rain. Little\nrises of water appear and some waves circle out, but the ultimate\nlevel is not much raised. So with the church. Here and there a\nminister stirs up some local community, some definite progress is\nmade, attention is attracted from other communities and they may have\na few symptoms of a rise, but too often the minister moves, another\ncomes, and the general level of community life falls back to what it\nwas before.\n\nThe difficulty is that with the overlapping of interdenominational\njurisdictions it is impossible for any group to lead in progress\noutside of the local community. Methodists cannot lead in a county\nprogram because Baptists and Presbyterians will not follow them.\nNeither can the other groups lead because Methodists are not gifted\nin following the leadership of other denominations. It is perfectly\nnatural and justifiable that this should be so. Before the churches of\nAmerica, Protestant or Catholic, can render the entire service\ndemanded of them there must be a thoroughgoing system of\ninterdenominational cooperation worked out which will insure joint\nresponsibility of all denominations concerned in providing for\ncommunity leadership on a large scale. If this is impossible, then the\ninevitable alternative must be accepted of passing by the churches of\nAmerica in carrying out comprehensive plans of progress and of turning\nto other agencies for this service.\n\nDuring the past, largely owing to the apparently hopeless situation so\nfar as interdenominational cooperation is concerned, Christian\norganizations, such as Christian Associations and Sunday School\nAssociations, have sprung up to do for the denominations and for the\nministers what they could not do under present conditions. These\nagencies have done notable work. They have accomplished much in\npreparing the way for a nation-wide recognition of what the broad\nfunction of the church is; they have brought representatives of all\ndenominations together and have gradually increased the social spirit\nwhile at the same time lessening the emphasis upon those things which\nhave divided the Christian Church into so many isolated camps. They\nhave pioneered and experimented. They have had failures as well as\nsuccesses, but their failures have been a real contribution to the sum\ntotal of human experience and have taught us many things that should\nbe avoided. The service rendered by these agencies must ever be\nremembered as of the most vital and important character.\n\nBut it will be admitted by representatives of all organizations that a\nlarge part of what is now found in the programs of those other\nreligious organizations, \"arms\" of the church, is a legitimate part of\nthe work that should be supervised by the minister of a community\nprogram and included in his program, and that in those communities\nwhere such trained pastoral leadership exists the functions of these\nother agencies can be materially modified and their activities\ndirected into still further new and untried fields of endeavor. The\nchurch needs organizations supported from funds not coming through the\nregular channels founded on the budgets of individual churches. These\nsubsidiary organizations can go ahead with experimentation, and their\nfailures do not bring the discredit to the parent organization that\nthey would if done by the church directly. On the other hand, their\nsuccesses can be adopted into the regular program of the church and\nthus conserved. Complete control of experimentation or demonstration\nwork is likely to destroy or prevent initiative, which is the soul of\nprogress.\n\nIn adjusting problems between denominations in local communities a\nnumber of plans have been tried with greater or less success. One of\nthe oldest is that of the \"union\" church. This is a type of\norganization in which the people of the local community, tiring of the\nuneconomic system of interdenominational competition, and without hope\nof uniting on any one of the local organizations represented, decide\nto separate from all and form themselves into an independent local\norganization.\n\nNo large denomination to-day is favorable to the so-called \"union\"\nchurch; and all are opposed to the plan sometimes followed by rural\nindustrial concerns of erecting a church building open to anyone who\npretends to speak with authority about religious matters. The \"union\"\nchurch usually begins with enthusiasm, but because of lack of outside\ncontacts, because of lack of continuity of program, because of lack of\na broad missionary spirit, it is generally shortlived and gives way to\nsome church with denominational affiliations. The \"union\" church\nwithout denominational affiliations should not be confused with the\n\"community\" church with denominational connection. It is the latter\ntype that most religious organizations are now agreed is most\ndesirable as the solution of the inexcusable overchurching now\nexisting in many communities.\n\nIn these days of get-together movements denominational leaders should\nthink clearly with reference to \"federated\" churches. A few of these\nhave had a fairly long life. But their growth in the past fifteen\nyears has not been such as to inspire confidence that they offer a\nsatisfactory solution to the overchurched situation. The \"federated\"\nchurch idea is not in harmony with a connectional polity nor with the\nprinciple of world democracy with centralization of administrative\nresponsibility for carrying out democratically adopted plans implied\nin that polity. Local federation involves giving of full power of\nselection of pastors and of determination of policies to the local\ncongregation. Whatever may be said about the occasional failures of\nthe connectional system in finding suitable pastors, or in other ways,\nit is nevertheless true that this system has a vitality and efficiency\nthat are now being recognized by many of the leading religious\norganizations. The polity of the \"federated\" church is congregational;\nand extreme congregationalism and connectionalism do not mix readily\nso far as polity is concerned. The growth of the one form involves the\ndecline of the other. This is why the Methodist Episcopal Church, for\nexample, has developed so little sympathy for the \"federated\" church\nidea.\n\nFar different from this is allocation of responsibility for community\nleadership. This insures leadership to one denomination or the other.\nThen the local congregations can work out their problems of adjustment\nas local conditions indicate is best. Usually some form of affiliation\nin worship and in sharing local expenses with continued separation of\nsupport of missionary and other benevolent enterprises has proven the\nmost satisfactory method of local adjustment. By this method\nconnectional interests are preserved and fixing of responsibility in\neach community assured.\n\nWith the vastly increased missionary resources made available by the\nmissionary \"drives\" of the leading denominations there is positive\ndanger of the problem of interdenominational adjustment being made\nstill more serious. If the Home Mission Boards, through unwise use of\nmission funds for the purpose of assisting in competitive struggles,\nshould precipitate retaliation by other denominations, a misuse of\nmissionary funds would result that would not only dry up the sources\nof missionary support but bring Protestantism into lasting disgrace.\n\nIn working out a program of interdenominational adjustment the\nfollowing plan has been tried with success on at least three\nMethodist Episcopal Annual Conference districts:\n\n1. A survey of the district and the preparation of a map showing the\nlocation of all churches, residences of all pastors, circuit systems,\nand whether churches are located in villages or the open country.\n\n2. Separate lists are then made of cases of apparent competitive\nrelations with each denomination.\n\n3. Conferences are then called with the representatives of each\ndenomination to consider the problems of competition between the\nMethodist Episcopal Church and the particular denomination with which\nthe conference is called.\n\n4. After tentative plans have been adopted representatives of both\ndenominations visit the local field together, confer with the churches\nconcerned, and arrive at some agreement as to adjustments to be made.\n\n5. This method is followed with each denomination, separately, with\nwhich Methodism has competitive relations.\n\nThis plan has been tried with success in the State of Vermont, where\nMethodists, Baptists, and Congregationalists had to cooperate or\nabandon the field; in the Portsmouth district, Ohio Conference, where\nthe principal problems were with the Presbyterians, United Brethren,\nand Baptists; in Montana, where a conference was held to consider\nadjustments affecting an entire State; and in the Wooster District,\nNorth-East Ohio Conference, where adjustment of relationships is\nproceeding satisfactorily.\n\nThe results of this program already noticeable are:\n\n1. The increase in salary of rural ministers made possible by uniting\nthe financial resources of all religious forces in the community.\n\n2. Saving of missionary money by eliminating duplication of missionary\ngrants by competing denominations.\n\n3. A marked increase in membership and church attendance.\n\n4. A more vital relationship of the church to community welfare\nthrough unified action of all religious forces under the trained\nleadership of one pastor.\n\n5. Resident pastorates to more communities through better distribution\nof pastoral residences of the denominations concerned in adjustments\nmade.\n\n6. A more vital appeal to life service in rural work can now be made\nto young people who have objected to service in rural charges where\nefforts at community service have been handicapped and even nullified\nby the presence of competing religious organizations and pastors.\n\nIt is believed that the results obtained far outweigh the possible\nlosses that may come through Methodists intrusting leadership in\nservice to Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Baptists, or the\nreverse. The good work made possible by fixing responsibility for\nleadership to a given denomination in one community is destined by the\nforce of example and imitation to compel similar progress in\ncommunities to which leadership responsibility has been assigned to\nother denominations.\n\nA word of caution to ministers in charge of local fields is desirable\nin regard to settlement of interdenominational difficulties. The\ninterests involved are so much larger than the local church that the\ninitiative must be taken by the district superintendent, always in\nthe fullest consultation with the resident bishop, or the proper\nState, synodical, or other representative of the other denominations\nconcerned. In a number of cases local initiative in this matter has\nresulted not only in defeating the end sought but has created\nembarrassing situations between the supervisory representatives of the\ndenominations. If a local situation needs adjustment, the matter\nshould be gone over fully with those responsible for church\nadministration, and it is believed that in most cases such adjustment\ncan be made satisfactorily. The experience of those in the Methodist\nEpiscopal Church who have tried to bring about adjustments by the\nmethod suggested has been that in most cases other groups are ready to\ncome to an agreement.\n\nIf other groups refuse to make adjustments, then the denomination\nmaking the advances has no other alternative than that of caring for\nits own obligations as adequately as possible and with every resource\nthat can be made available. But no blame can attach to this policy\nafter effort has been made to cooperate with other groups and these\nefforts have failed.\n\nAfter communities have been allocated for leadership to one or another\nof the denominations, then the problem of a united program by all\ndenominations remains to be solved. Unless this end is attained, then\nrural churches must continue to work largely alone, each in its own\ncommunity without relation to the program of neighboring churches or\ncommunities. Unless there is coordination between the churches, then\nwe shall continue to witness the spectacle of the three\ninterdenominational branches of the church, the Sunday School\nAssociation, and the Christian Associations, each moving in its own\nself-chosen direction, each raising an independent budget, and each\nestablishing county organizations without reference to the interests\nof the other; and none of the three doing anything to encourage the\norganization of county groups of the churches as such. The time has\narrived when the church as such should take the lead in bringing about\ninterdenominational cooperation for community service under its own\nauspices and in the most inclusive way.\n\nFor many reasons the county offers the best basis for this type of\norganization. It is the most permanent political unit, next to the\nState or the incorporated town or city. Social progress finds the\nclosest opportunity for cooperation with economic and political\nagencies in the county. The following proposal for a County Christian\nAssociation, supported out of the budgets of local cooperating\nchurches, has been worked out:\n\n\nSUGGESTED PROGRAM FOR COUNTY RURAL CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OR FEDERATION\nOF CHURCHES[1]\n\n  1a. Proposal for County Christian Association or Church Federation.\n\n    1b. Board of Directors.\n\n      1c. County Council chosen by each cooperating denomination on\n          basis of membership.\n\n      2c. Election or appointment of denominational representatives\n          to be left to each denomination.\n\n      3c. Selection of county secretary.\n\n    2b. Duties of county secretary.\n\n      1c. Survey--Follow up what interchurch county office has done.\n\n        1d. Location of all churches.\n\n        2d. Residence of pastors.\n\n        3d. Community boundaries.\n\n      2c. Organize county religious movements as:\n\n        1d. Evangelistic drive.\n\n        2d. Membership rally.\n\n        3d. Go-to-church campaigns.\n\n        4d. Religious worship in the home.\n\n        5d. Common programs with reference to moral and spiritual\n            problems.\n\n        6d. Other religious movements.\n\n      3c. Interchurch adjustments.\n\n        1d. Act as secretary of Committee on Adjustments--provide office\n            for interchurch activities.\n\n        2d. Depository for interchurch religious information.\n\n        3d. Follow-up plans made as result of interchurch survey,\n            including:\n\n          1e. Encouragement of building parsonage and getting resident\n              pastor in every community.\n\n          2e. Getting a community church building in every community\n              adequate to its needs.\n\n          3e. Getting a community building under joint religious auspices\n              where need exists for several houses of worship.\n\n          4e. Clearing house for membership conservation.\n\n          5e. Determination of parish boundaries.\n\n          6e. Establishment of new work in communities where there is none.\n\n      4c. Social and recreational.\n\n        1d. County field days.\n\n        2d. Cooperation in organizing boys' and girls' clubs in Sunday\n            school or otherwise.\n\n        4d. Direct social and recreational activities.\n\n        5d. Assisting in selection and training leaders for church and\n            community service.\n\n      5c. Religious education.\n\n        1d. Recruiting membership campaigns.\n\n        2d. Perform all functions now expected of volunteer county Sunday\n            school secretary.\n\n        3d. Assist in analysis of Sunday school methods and organization\n            in local churches in organizing for larger service.\n\n        4d. Week-day religious instruction plans.\n\n      6c. Social service activities to be encouraged:\n\n        1d. County free library.\n\n        2d. County hospital and nursing program.\n\n        3d. Adequate provision for dependents, defectives, delinquents.\n\n        4d. Securing desired State public service.\n\n        5d. Health and sanitation campaign.\n\n        6d. County Farm bureaus.\n\n      7c. Cooperation with other agencies. In general, give moral support\n          to agencies doing effective work in the fields mentioned in (6c).\n\n      8c. Act as bureau of advice with reference to appeals for charitable\n          purposes.\n\n      9c. Religious publicity.\n\n    3b. Budget.\n\n      1c. Estimated Salary of Secretary   $3,000\n          Travel                             400\n          Office rent                        300\n          Equipment                          200\n          Stenographer                       750\n          Publicity                          400\n                                          ------\n                                          $5,050\n\n      2c. How to raise.\n\n        1d. Estimate amount that should come from each cooperating church.\n            Ask each church to assume its share on a three-year guarantee.\n\n        2d. Make list of special givers who may become a private source.\n\n        3d. Communicate with respective missionary boards for aid in\n            carrying balance of budget until such time as it can be brought\n            to self-support.\n\nFOOTNOTE:\n\n[Footnote 1: Prepared in Collaboration with C. J. Hewett, Garrett\nBiblical Institute, Evanston, Ill.]\n\n\nThis form of organization has many advantages, among which are:\n\n1. It coordinates all the religious forces of Protestantism, for a\ncommon community service.\n\n2. It insures ultimate permanent support by being financed out of the\nbudgets of the cooperating churches instead of by a limited number of\nprivate givers of large funds.\n\n3. The county organization develops its work through the churches,\nstrengthening the program of the minister instead of developing\nindependent organizations locally with volunteer leadership related to\nan \"arm\" of the church instead of directly to the church.\n\n4. By organizing to do their own work in this way the churches obviate\nthe necessity of private Christian agencies organizing with outside\nsupport to carry on interdenominational work.\n\nIf the churches of America do not rapidly work out plans of\ninterdenominational cooperation in the development of their work,\nother agencies will enter the field and will receive popular financial\nsupport for doing those things in rural progress that are the\nlegitimate task of the church and for which the church should receive\nsupport. Church people will supply the large part of the funds for\ncarrying on these activities through nonreligious agencies; and\nbecause of the narrowness of program the church will have chosen for\nitself many of the brightest and best minds, and consecrated hearts\nnow found in our student groups in educational institutions will find\ntheir life's activities outside the church instead of within its ranks\nwhere they would prefer to be. This will be the misfortune of the\nchurch and she cannot clear herself of the wrong of depriving her\nyoung people of the opportunity of rendering a service to humanity\nwithin her own ranks and of forcing them to render that service\nthrough independent social agencies.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX\n\nTHE CHURCH AND OTHER RURAL AGENCIES\n\n\nSince the arousal of interest in rural welfare by the studies made by\nthe Country Life Commission in 1908, probably no movement has made\nmore rapid progress than that concerned with rural life. Studies of\nrural church conditions made by the Presbyterian Board of Home\nMissions and other agencies, of rural health by the National Public\nHealth Service and by a number of the large philanthropic foundations,\nof educational conditions by the United States Bureau of Education,\nand of other problems by various agencies concerned, have revealed the\nmore important conditions and have made possible the organization of\nprograms for their amelioration. The conditions still further revealed\nby the problems incident to preparation for the World War and the\nfacilities made possible by that preparation for mobilization of the\nforces for improvement still further advanced the rural-life movement\nuntil now no other interest is occupying more public attention than\nthis.\n\nThe list of agencies with programs of rural service on a national\nscale that have found representation in the National Council of Rural\nSocial Service affiliated with the American Country Life Association\nwill indicate the large number of groups now contributing to the\nadvance of rural welfare. This list is as follows: National Grange,\nAmerican Farm Bureau Federation, National Board of Farm Organizations,\nFarmers' Educational and Cooperative Union, American Home Economics\nSociety, American Red Cross, Boy Scouts of America, Girl Scouts of\nAmerica, Federal Council of Churches, National Catholic Welfare\nCouncil, Board of Home Missions of the Presbyterian Church in the\nUnited States of America, American Baptist Home Missionary Society,\nBoard of Home Missions of the Methodist Episcopal Church, Young Men's\nChristian Association, Young Women's Christian Association, United\nStates Department of Agriculture, States Relations Service; United\nStates Department of Agriculture, Office of Farm Management; United\nStates Public Health Service, United States Bureau of Education,\nUnited States Department of Labor, Children's Bureau; National\nOrganization for Public Health Nursing, National Child Labor\nCommittee, Child Health Organization of America, Russell Sage\nFoundation, National Tuberculosis Association, National Educational\nAssociation, Rural Department; American Library Association, National\nUniversity Extension Association, National Child Health Council,\nPlayground and Recreation Association of America, Community Service,\nInc.\n\nThe above is a list of thirty-one different agencies that have a\nnational definitely organized rural-service program. This list\ndoubtless is incomplete and will be increased in the course of time.\n\nThe problem before us is to determine just what place the church\nshould have in this formidable galaxy of agencies, and to consider\nwhat advantages and difficulties present themselves to the churches of\nAmerica in functioning unitedly and successfully in doing their part\nin the entire movement.\n\nIt must be recognized that it is impossible for the church to assume\nleadership in all the interests represented now by various specialized\nagencies. It has been contended that the task of the church has been\ncompleted with reference to a number of these interests when it has\nencouraged their organization in a local way and has continued to give\nthem its moral support so long as they render effectively the service\nfor which they were intended. Rural interests are so complex that\nspecialized groups are necessary to insure adequate attention to all\nthe interests concerned.\n\nIt must also be recognized that until the two great branches of the\nChristian Church--Catholicism and Protestantism--learn to cooperate in\ntheir service to the community, the religious forces of America cannot\npresent a united front in rendering the service that belongs\npeculiarly to them. It is assumed that the effort will be made by\nthose responsible for community service in both branches of the church\nto work out this problem so that the church can do its part in the\ngeneral movement.\n\nThe physical basis for organization of all forces for service on a\ncomprehensive plan is recognized to be the political units, county,\nState, and nation. The township is giving way gradually to the\ncommunity as the more local unit of organization. In cases where\ncommunity boundary lines do not coincide with county lines local\nadjustments will be made whereby the integrity of communities may be\nmaintained within the organization of one or the other of the counties\nconcerned.\n\nThe present movement is toward the appointment of county work\nsecretaries on a salaried basis to administer the work of the\nrespective interests concerned. Thus we have now developed wherever\nthe spirit of the people has made it possible salaried County Y. M. C.\nA. officers, Y. W. C. A. officers, International Sunday School\nofficers, Red Cross Chapters, Boy Scouts, Community Service, Inc., and\nso forth. There is no regularity or uniformity in the selection of the\ncounties by the different agencies with reference to each other, but\nit appears that when one of the groups succeeds in getting a county\noffice established, it is increasingly difficult for other agencies\nconcerned in rural social service to gain a foothold on a salaried\nbasis. The agency that succeeds in gaining a foothold originally tends\nto incorporate into its activities the full program of social service.\nTheoretically all admit their readiness to turn over to other agencies\nthe functions belonging to other groups as soon as they are ready to\nassume their proper duties, but practically the organization of an\ninterest group county office delays indefinitely the organization of\nrural service on a proper basis.\n\nThe normal course of development is for the agency that is prepared to\norganize and finance a comprehensive rural program for a county should\nrender this service; but it should at the same time use its influence\nto bring about at the earliest possible moment a county council of\nsocial agencies that will give unified control of the rural service\nprogram to all agencies that should have a voice in rural progress. If\nthis policy is adhered to, there will be the heartiest support of the\nwork of any agency that wishes to begin its work on a county basis in\nany section of the country.\n\nThe first impression that may come to one not familiar with the\nvastness of the organized movement for rural welfare may be that a\nlarge number of agencies have undertaken rural service for their own\nsakes rather than for the sake of the community. This is not the case.\nIt is recognized that rural organization for definite objectives\nshould take the place of previous uncoordinated, haphazard opportunism\nin rural progress, and the present sporadic and unrelated movements\ntoward organization are but the result of a very rapid development\nwhich has not yet found time to make the desired adjustment desired by\nall concerned. The National Council of Rural Social Agencies, the\nState Councils coming into existence, the County Councils and the\ncommunity councils that have appeared here and there are but the\nbeginnings of a well-ordered, economical and necessary coordination of\nrural social forces.\n\nHow is the church related to this movement? Repeated investigations\nhave shown that the churches of America have within their membership\nby far the larger proportion of those whose public spirit registers\nitself in voluntary financial support of public enterprises. The\n\"friendly citizen\" is largely a myth. Those who build churches at\nlarge personal sacrifice, and pay the bills in maintaining religious\nservices are those whose names appear at the top of most subscriptions\nto benevolent enterprises. It was the Christian ministry and the\nchurch membership that made possible the Red Cross drives during the\nwar, and the other financial campaigns for relief and other calls\nincident to the war. Thus history has continued to show the same\ncondition so far as financial resources for public welfare support are\nconcerned.\n\nSince this is the case, it appears that the most natural method of\ninitiating social service work on a voluntary basis is to expect the\nchurches to take the lead. As has been pointed out, the church and the\nschool are the two local institutions that have salaried officials to\ncare for their public service. Other agencies, with the possible\nexception of public health nursing service, will probably not in the\nnear future be able to secure financial support for full-time salaried\nlocal officials. The nearest they can approach to such salaried\nservice is the county official who must depend for local service upon\ntrained volunteer help. This condition puts upon the church an\nadditional responsibility because through the organization of a county\nreligious organization outlined in the preceding chapter it can not\nonly mobilize local support for such work on a permanent basis most\neffectively, but it can also provide the salaried local leadership for\ncarrying out a well-organized community service program. Moreover, in\nharmony with principles presented in an earlier chapter, the church as\na conservative institution is one of the permanent organizations that\nin the last analysis must be expected to take over and insure\npermanence to well-tried advances in community organization and\nservice. If this thesis is admitted, then it logically follows that\nall who are interested in rural progress should encourage the\norganization of the religious forces on a comprehensive basis to\ninsure the perpetuation of the work now being inaugurated by a large\nnumber of private agencies.\n\nWhen it is found that the interests of other organizations conflict\nwith the program of the church, the interests of the American public\nwill give the preference in support to the church, or to the\ntax-supported institution. In the long run much of the work now being\ndone by private organizations of various sorts will be inherited\neither by the church or by the state; and it is not only the\nopportunity but the obligation of the church to prepare itself as\nrapidly as possible for conserving these newer activities by financing\ncounty and State and national organizations for coordination of\nreligious forces for community service. If county offices for\ncoordination of religious forces were now in existence, the churches\ncould provide facilities through which much of the work now being\ndeveloped by other agencies could be carried on. And thus the church\ncould render a much-needed service to the entire rural-life movement.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X\n\nMISSIONARY PROGRAMS AND RURAL COMMUNITY SERVICE\n\n\nLong years of experience in foreign missionary service has vitally\naffected the methods of carrying the gospel of Christian living to\nthose who have not yet come under the influence of the Christ. Here\nthe demonstration method of what Christianity means in terms of\nincreased human welfare has done far more to spread the gospel than\nsimply preaching to people. The freeing of the millions now living\nunder the control of other forms of religious belief by introduction\nof schools, together with the message of health and better moral\nideals through the practice of Christian living, has done more to\nspread Christianity than all the efforts of attempting to build a\nChristian spirit into a civilization not suited to it nor prepared for\nit.\n\nThe missionary agencies in the home fields have learned from the\nexperience in the foreign fields, and now the programs of home\nmissionary boards are characterized by their large emphasis upon the\nsocial gospel. The revival of interest in religious life in this\ncountry coincident with the recognition of its vital significance in\nsound social organization has come so rapidly and popular support has\nbeen so liberal that grave danger exists lest the funds made available\nshould be used unintentionally in ways that tend to defeat the purpose\nof the gift. The church, in its benevolent program, should take\nadvantage of the lessons learned by private philanthropic agencies in\ndealing with problems of reclamation of the unfortunate or of\nstimulating to a larger life.\n\nMany of the efforts at social progress fail because of lack of clear\nstatement of objectives. So far as the rural work is concerned, the\nfollowing are presented as necessary objectives, if the rural church\nis to succeed in measuring up to its task. It is believed that funds\nof the church can be used safely and wisely in their attainment.\n\n1. Strengthen the weak places in rural church work in harmony with\nprinciples of interdenominational ethics and well-established\nprinciples of benevolent assistance.\n\n2. Increase effectiveness of rural ministry by training ministry now\nin service in modern methods of church work and by recruiting and\ntraining a new ministry in sympathy with rural life and devoted to its\nimprovement.\n\n3. Organize rural church work so that every rural family will have\ndefinitely assigned pastoral care.\n\n4. Adjust interdenominational relationships so that the ideal of but\none resident pastor and one church to each community may be realized.\n\n5. Provide means of interdenominational cooperation so that rural\nreligious forces may work together in dealing with common problems of\nrural social and religious progress.\n\n6. Organize rural work so that it may have due consideration in the\ngeneral policies of religious organizations.\n\n7. All the above are preliminary to the one great object, from the\nsocial point of view, namely, that of making it possible for the rural\nchurch and the rural minister to function most effectively in\nbringing more abundant life in the best sense to rural people.\n\nAfter religious forces are organized so that they can present a united\nfront in the attack on the great social problems of rural life, then\nthe individual churches and all churches together can undertake to\nmeet the challenge outlined in earlier chapters of this text and also\nwell presented in much of the recent literature on the subject. But\neffective organization must precede most effective and permanent\nservice.\n\nCertain principles have been the guiding influence in the program on\nwhich the rural department of at least one of the leading\ndenominations has been working. For those who come to positions of\nadministrative responsibility from time to time without having been\nunder the necessity of acquainting themselves with the principles that\nshould guide in the safe expenditure of funds for maintenance of\npastors, these are given here:\n\n1. Principles of interdenominational ethics should be observed in\nmaking grants of missionary funds to local pastors. It is to be feared\nthat too often funds have been used to sustain a local work in the\npresence of another denomination when efforts at interdenominational\nadjustment would have relieved the situation by removing the necessity,\nnamely, that of division of local resources by competing religious forces.\n\n2. Owing to the unusual problems presented on charges asking for\nmissionary aid only the ablest ministers should be assigned to such\npoints. They should be supported according to their needs through\nmissionary aid, and their acceptance of difficult work should enhance\nrather than lessen their standing in the church.\n\n3. Rigid avoidance of use of missionary funds for purposes of charity,\nor for making appointments easier. The charge, not the minister, is\nthe objective.\n\n4. Centralization of effort on a few places instead of dissipation of\nfunds in providing inefficient service in many places.\n\n5. Gradual but certain withdrawal of support from national or State\nboards in order to avoid pauperizing communities by relieving them of\ntheir local financial responsibilities.\n\nAs one of the most serious problems connected with rural missionary\nservice is that of interdenominational complications, an effort has\nbeen made to work out certain principles that may be observed by all\nreligious organizations carrying out a rural program. At the annual\nmeeting of the Home Missions Council in 1914 a statement of principles\nwas adopted. In 1919 the rural fields committee of the Home Missions\nCouncil undertook the revision of these principles in the light of\nlater experience and adopted the revision as a committee report.\nBecause this document represents the best judgment of those in the\nvarious denominations concerned with rural work it is presented\nherewith as a desirable basis on which grants of funds may be safely\nmade. The statement is presented in full:\n\n     Persuaded of the urgent need of some comprehensive and united\n     plan for the evangelization of our country and for closer\n     cooperation to make such plans effective, the Home Missions\n     Council proposes for the consideration of its constituent\n     societies the following principles of comity. It is to be\n     distinctly understood, however, that no ecclesiastical\n     authority of any kind is implied except as ecclesiastical\n     bodies shall adopt these policies as their own. They have only\n     the moral force of the consent of the parties desiring to see\n     them become effective.\n\n     FIRST. As to the occupancy of new fields. The frequently\n     suggested plan for the entering of new territory is to divide\n     it among the various denominations, holding each body\n     responsible for the proper working of its field.\n\n         a. In the judgment of this Council this course of procedure\n         would seem to be impracticable. But a sensitive regard not only\n         for the rights but for the sentiments of sister bodies of\n         Christian people is demanded by every consideration of\n         righteousness as well as fraternity.\n\n         b. In districts or in places already occupied by any\n         denomination new work should be undertaken by any other body\n         only after fraternal conference between the official\n         representatives of the missionary organizations embracing those\n         localities.\n\n         c. Occupancy of the field shall be determined by at least the\n         following characteristics:\n\n             1. The establishment of a regularly organized church.\n\n             The establishing of a Sunday school shall not be deemed\n             sufficient to meet the terms of this definition.\n\n             2. The appointment of a pastor who shall be expected to hold\n             services in the community at least once every two weeks.\n\n             3. The provision of church building and equipment within a\n             reasonable time adequate to the needs of the community at its\n             present stage of development.\n\n     The occupation of a field by any denomination after conference\n     and agreement shall give to that denomination the right to the\n     field and the responsibility for its Christian culture until\n     such changes in population shall make it desirable that it be\n     shared with one or more other denominations.\n\n     If the above conference shall fail to reach agreement, it shall\n     be the privilege of the aggrieved party to make appeal to its\n     respective board or society, which board or society shall\n     confer with the sister board or society concerned, and these\n     boards may then request the superintendents of the\n     denominations concerned for the field in question to make\n     personal investigation and to report their findings to their\n     respective boards. If they agree, the boards shall take action\n     in accordance therewith. If they disagree, the matter shall be\n     referred to the boards for such action as their wisdom may\n     determine, which action shall be communicated to the churches\n     concerned with whatever ecclesiastical or moral force their\n     decision may command.\n\n     SECOND. In communities already occupied by two or more\n     denominations, in case any church or mission station shall\n     consider itself aggrieved in its relations to sister churches,\n     the course of procedure outlined in Section I shall likewise be\n     followed.\n\n     There shall be friendly conference in the spirit of the Great\n     Head of the church and recourse be had, when necessary, to the\n     local or national missionary authorities, whose findings\n     properly communicated shall have behind them the moral force of\n     this Council.\n\n     Where any denomination occupies a district by groupings of\n     mission stations under one missionary the same principles shall\n     apply and the same method of adjusting differences shall be\n     followed.\n\n     THIRD. \"Overchurched Communities.\" Not infrequently the promise\n     of new towns fails of fulfillment, with the result that there\n     are more church organizations than in any economic view should\n     be maintained--at least out of missionary funds. In many\n     sections of the country also, because of the marked shift of\n     population from agricultural communities to urban centers,\n     overchurching has weakened all denominations to the point where\n     missionary effort is necessary to restore again a wholesome\n     religious life. Regardless of the cause of overchurching,\n     whether from the undue optimism of the newer sections of the\n     country or changed conditions in the older, or other\n     conditions, the problem of overchurching must be dealt with in\n     the true spirit of comity and cooperation for the sake of the\n     common good.\n\n         a. The principle should be established that one Protestant\n         church is adequate for each community of less than 1,500\n         inhabitants; and that efforts should be made to bring about\n         interdenominational readjustment to this end in all sections of\n         the country where economic and social conditions have become\n         sufficiently established to make improbable any marked or rapid\n         increase in population within a short time.\n\n         b. In communities of over 1,500 inhabitants there should not be\n         more than one Protestant church to every 1,000 population.\n\n         c. In communities of over 1,500 inhabitants and of less than\n         5,000, plans should be worked out whereby the different\n         denominations concerned shall cooperate in providing adequate\n         building and equipment for community service. Such building\n         should be strategically located and should be controlled by a\n         governing board made up of representatives, the number of whom\n         from each denomination shall be determined by the\n         _constituency_ of that denomination in its proportion to the\n         total Protestant or cooperating population. The rules for the\n         control of the activities of such cooperative community service\n         should respect the standards of the respective denominations.\n         The support of such community service should be apportioned to\n         the respective denominations concerned to be raised in their\n         respective budgets in proportion to their respective\n         representation on the governing board.\n\n         d. It shall be the duty of the denomination to which\n         responsibility shall have been allocated to provide the\n         best-trained leadership and the best service of which it is\n         capable out of consideration to the other denominations that\n         have intrusted the spiritual welfare of their membership to\n         this group.\n\n         e. In determining what denomination has prime responsibility in\n         a given community of under 1,500 inhabitants the following\n         shall be considered.\n\n             1. Present resident membership and constituency. The\n             organization having the largest bona fide membership and\n             constituency should be considered as having prime\n             responsibility, from this point of view.\n\n             2. The residence of the pastor. In general, the pastor's\n             residence should be given larger weight than membership unless\n             the denomination having prime responsibility according to (1)\n             stands ready to provide a pastor's residence in the community\n             where this denomination has prime responsibility from the\n             point of view of membership.\n\n             3. The location of the church building. The denomination that\n             has a building located in a village center should be given\n             precedence over the denomination that has its headquarters in\n             the open country near a village. The building of the village\n             church should be suitably located for adequate community\n             service; that is, near the center of the village.\n\n             4. As between the village and the open country church, the\n             village church should be given prime consideration in putting\n             on an aggressive community program.\n\n             5. No missionary or \"sustentation\" support should be given by\n             any cooperating denomination to a pastor in an overchurched\n             community nor to a \"circuit\" involving interdenominational\n             competition until after an adjustment is made either by\n             reorganization of the circuit or an agreement has been reached\n             by the missionary and administrative bodies of the respective\n             denominations concerned as to an allocation of such missionary\n             responsibility.\n\n             6. Church extension aid should not be given toward the\n             rebuilding of churches in these communities until after\n             allocation of responsibility has been effected.\n\n             7. If after due effort to secure satisfactory adjustment of\n             relationships according to the plans suggested in First above,\n             and by such further arbitration or other means as may be\n             adopted by the Home Missions Council or its constituent\n             bodies, then the denomination seeking such adjustment shall\n             be at liberty to develop its own work as it may see fit,\n             standing ready, however, to make agreement with competing\n             bodies whenever they wish to renew negotiations.\n\n             8. In the interests of the Kingdom, after missionary\n             responsibility has been allocated, efforts at unifying local\n             religious organizations may take the form of federation,\n             assimilation, affiliation, or such other mode as may be\n             determined on by the local churches concerned.\n\n             9. Plans should also be worked out whereby the religious forms\n             of the different groups may be respected; that is, that\n             membership in the remaining religious organization may be\n             obtained by fulfilling the obligations of the cooperating body\n             with which the persons belonging to the withdrawing\n             organization would naturally affiliate.\n\n             10. It is understood that nothing in this proposed set of\n             principles implies that withdrawal from given fields shall be\n             forced. It is only intended to provide a plan whereby all\n             forces both local and general shall be united as rapidly as\n             possible in the attainment of the desired end, namely, that of\n             unifying Christian service in given communities.\n\n             11. In determining the limits of communities to which this\n             plan shall apply the Federal Census Bureau designation of\n             communities of 2,500 and under as rural shall be adopted\n             except as noted in paragraph 5c.\n\n     FOURTH. Inasmuch as many of the constituent bodies of this\n     Council are already by official action committed to the\n     principles of comity which we advocate, it would seem\n     reasonable to hope that at least gradually these principles\n     would find realization along some such lines as here proposed.\n\n     It is manifest, of course, that no plan of procedure can be\n     expected to cover all cases or to be of universal\n     applicability. We are glad to record that in some States there\n     are Interchurch Federations to which local comity matters would\n     naturally be referred. For other cases this Council proposes\n     the erection of an Interdenominational Commission, to which any\n     matter of comity not otherwise provided for may be referred by\n     mutual agreement of the parties at interest. One representative\n     of each of the bodies having membership in the Home Missions\n     Council shall constitute this commission. When any case calling\n     for adjudication shall rise, which case shall previously have\n     had the consideration of any one or more of the constituent\n     bodies of the Home Missions Council, it shall be referred to a\n     Committee of Three chosen from this committee and acceptable to\n     both parties. The decision of this committee shall have no\n     ecclesiastical force, but its utterance shall be regarded as\n     voicing the united judgment of the Home Missions Council and so\n     far forth shall be binding on its constituent bodies.\n\nIt is recognized that these principles do not receive the most\nenthusiastic support of church leaders who are thinking in terms of\ndenominational progress instead of community welfare. But this lack of\nsupport is an evidence of their value instead of a criticism.\nDenominational interests must be sacrificed for the sake of the\nadvancement of the entire cause when the two come into conflict. There\nis reason to hope that not only Protestants but also Catholics and\nProtestants can come to cooperate on programs of community service,\nthus overcoming forever the vital objection to religious leadership\nnow made that because of fundamental differences in belief the two\ngreat branches of the church cannot render an organized community\nservice.\n\nThe relations of the benevolent boards of the several denominations to\nother church organizations are such that but little can be said\nconcerning methods of relating missionary work to the larger program\nof community service. In each case where projects for missionary aid\nare presented effort should be made to see that local conditions are\nmade such that the pastor can render the best service. It must be\nrecognized that the application for outside aid is in itself an\nadmission of local weakness. The people are poor, or indifferent to\nthe type of service to which they have been accustomed. There has been\nunforeseen disaster, as the destruction of church property by fire or\nin some other way. Sudden movements of population have temporarily\nweakened the support of the church and new resources have not yet been\ndeveloped. Circuit systems must be broken up so that people will be\nwilling to support full-time resident pastors with efficient programs\nfor service. Customs of expecting the pastor to make his living in\noutside work and attending to religious service as a side issue must\nbe overcome. The pastor's residence may be in such condition that\nfamilies cannot be sacrificed for the sake of missionary communities\nand residences must be supplied by liberal outside aid as the\npreliminary to effective service. Church buildings are inadequate, and\nthe trained minister must be given every assurance that aid will be\nrendered in bringing physical equipment up to par. In each case the\nproblems that present themselves must be met. The demands of any one\ncharge do not compare with the demands of any other. And methods must\nbe adapted to meet the specific needs of each charge. These are\nmatters that must be left to those responsible for administration of\nmissionary funds.\n\nWhen the religious forces of America learn their problems so that a\nlong-time organized program of religious advance can be worked out,\nwhen they learn to cooperate in carrying out this program, then the\nhaphazard, wasteful, competitive missionary program that has\ncharacterized rural religious work in the past will disappear and we\nshall see one of the most marked advances in religious welfare the\nworld has ever known.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XI\n\nSUMMARY AND CONCLUSION\n\n\nIn the preceding chapters the effort has been made to outline some of\nthe conditions and principles involved in organizing the rural church\nfor community service. The field has been limited by distinguishing\nbetween that type of service which has to do with man's relation to\nhis Maker and that which has to do with his relations to his fellow\nman. The latter service has been chosen as the field for the present\ndiscussion, and the effort has been made to keep within the field,\nregardless of the desirability of discussion of the other phases of\nthe work of the rural church. The field itself both as to size of\ncommunity and the scope of the entire field has received attention. An\nattempt has been made to present the philosophic basis justifying the\nchurch in giving large attention to community service. Some of the\nmore general aspects of rural life demanding attention on the part of\nthe church have been discussed and the reasons for assuming that\ncertain phases of rural social activity properly belong to the church\nrather than to other agencies have been presented to the reader.\n\nThe problems of adjustment between religious denominations as such and\nbetween the parent religious organizations and so-called \"arms\" of the\nchurch have been outlined and methods of adjustment suggested. The\nrelation of all religious forces to other rural life agencies has\nreceived some attention; and, finally, the missionary program of the\nchurch as the agency for strengthening the weak and of advancing the\ngeneral cause of conquest of all life with principles of Christian\nliving was discussed. It is hoped that the principles presented will\nat least be given careful consideration, and if they are not accepted\nin full, that they will at least provoke discussion that will\neventually lead to some form of organization that will more nearly\nmeet the demands of the time than the present unorganized, unrelated\nsectarian and other efforts that paralyze and discourage those\nresponsible for service in the local as well as in more general fields\nof Christian work. If this object can be accomplished, the effort to\npoint the direction organization should take will not have been in\nvain.","title":"Church Cooperation in Community Life","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":29452}