Church debts; their origin, evils, and cure

Front matter

nn.r.':n"^S^^'^CH LIBRARIES

33433 07998438 5

?f

Letter I

Mr. Editor, — I:^ conversing with a friend, a few days ago, the subject of "church debts" was introduced. In the course of the conversation, I expressed the sentiinent, that "a standing debt upon a church was a standing curse upon it,"— that it was not only a curse resting upon that church and congregation, but that it had a most bhghting influence upon those who had no connection with tlie Church of Christ. He replied that he did not think so; but that, on the contrary, it was in many cases a blessing. One of the benefits arising from church debts was then mentioned, viz: that it acted as a bond of union. We did not stop to discuss the sentiment, but separated; each one in the undisturbed enjoyment of his own opinion.

As this gentleman is one of the most liberal hearted Christians in this city, and is behind no others in deeds of benevolence, so iar as God may enable him to act, 1 have been led to incjuire, wheiher the remark was not made to elicit my views on the subject, rather than to express his own decided judgment in the case. The more I have thought on the subject, however, the more firm 1 am in the belief of the sentiment, that a standing debt upon a church of the Lord Jesus ( hrist, is a STANDING CURSE. The thing is displeasing to God — injurious to the souls of Christians — ruin(»us to the souls of men — one of the greatest hindrances to the spread of the gospel and the salvation of men — and the grand reason why the Hock of ('hrist is kept in perfect infancy, and iiindered from arriving at the fulness of the stature of men in Christ Jesus. 'J'his perpetual infancy c>f the Church in strength, zeal, and power, is not only iter disgrace^ but licr si.v. 1

I am willing to grant that the views which I hold on this subject are one-sided. Nor can I appreciate the strength of the arguments that may be adduced in support of ihe blessings of church debts. The arguments may be powerful in the eyes of those who present them; but, to me, they are like Samson under the shears of Delilah. So long as I have the Bible to sustain me, I am content to be ''onesided" in my views, and am perfectly willing to bear any reproach, or encounter any opposition that may be waked up against an honest effort to cast out this demon from the church of the living God. And with your aid, I purpose to agitate this subject, until it shall be as disgraceful in the eyes of the church, as it now is in the eyes of the icorld ; and until this foul blot shall be wiped out forever from the Church of Christ.

If "church debts" are church blessings, may I not ask for some of your gifted scribes to write them down so plain that all may read, and let the public be enlightened on the subject. But that church debts are church curseSy I trust will appear to alf, before we conclude. Take them in what shape you please, either in Alopathic or Homoeopathic doses, the curse is there still, and no power on earth can alter it. It is like the carnal mind ; it is enmity against God. It never can harmonize with the will of God. It must be destroyed. These church debts are some of those "little foxes that spoil the vines," and although it may be difficult to catch them, still, we hope, in due time, to save "our vines, which have tender grapes," from their future annoyance.

In my next letter I will endeavor to point out the ignoble parentage of church debts. In the meantime, it would be well for those who have a fellow feeling on this subject with the writer, to "read, study, and inwardly digest" that portion of God's word,' which is found in the prophecy of Malachi, 3: 8—12.

Yours, sincerely, in the war against Church Debts,

William Ramsey.

June 2, 1845.

JVbt of Scriptural Origin.

LETTER 11.

Mr. Edltory — I rejoice that you have given my first letter a place in your valuable paper, and that you have thus introduced this innportant subject of Church Debts to the notice of your readers. I am, therefore, encouraged to proceed. If church debts are church blessings, then let us pray that they may be continued; but, if they are church curses, the sooner we can get clear of them the better. My object is good, my motives are good ; and I trust ihat all my remarks will be in the spirit of kindness. — But I desire that they should cut so deep, as to cut out this plague-spot from the Church of Christ forever.

I will now turn your attention to the 'parentage of church debts, and we shall see how much there is in the system to commend it to the patronage of the churches. After a most careful search, I am constrained to say, that the plan of erecting churches professedly for the worship of God, and not paying for them, is

1. JVot of Scriptural Origin.

The first account which we have in the Scriptures of any building being erected for the worship of God, is a description of the tabernacle. The history of this transaction is found in Exodus, chaps, xxxv. — xl. It is briefly this : When Moses was on the Mount, he received from the Lord a command to build the tabernacle, which was to be carried with Israel in their journey through the wilderness. On his descending, he "gave to Israel the command of the Lord," which was in these words : "This is the thing which the Lord cominanded, saying, take ye from among you an offering unto the Lord; whosoever is of willing heart, let him bring it, an otlerinfr of the Lord ; gold, and silver, and brass." In compliance with this command, we learn that the people came, every one whose heart stirred him up, and every one whom his spirit made willing, and they brought the Lord's oflering to the work of the tabernacle of the congregation. In this work all the men, women and rulers united. Men were selected to build the tabernacle, and to prepare the various articles of furniture, out of the voluntary contributions of the people. Moses was soon informed that there was more than enough brought for all that was to be made. He then gave the command to the people, saying, "Let neither man nor woman make any more work for the oflering of the sanctuary. For the stuflT they had was sufficient for all the work, to make it and too much.''^

Here, then, we have the account of the first building erected for the public worship of God, of which there is any record. And what is the fact in reference to it 1 Simply this, that it was built by the free-will ofl^erings of the Lord's people. So far from there being a large debt remaining upon it after its erection, there was more than enough collected to pay for every thing. When the work was finished, it was dedicated to the service of the Lord. "Then a cloud covered the tent of the congregation, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle." This house was emphatically the Lord's. No man had a personal claim against it. It was not built hy joint-stoch; nor was it built by money raised on mortgage; but by the voluntary contributions of a poor people, who had nothing but what they asked of the Egyptians before leaving Egypt; and yet the mere gold and silver used in the tabernacle amounted to about $550,000. And the presents of silver and gold, which were offered by the twelve princes of Israel, after its erection, amounted to about 812,300 more. The conduct of the Israelites in this case, gives no sanction to the modern and approved mode of erecting churches.

If we follow the Jews in their history, we shall find that the temple of Solomon, the glory of the world, was also built by voluntary contributions. David, before his death, had prepared for its erection about

Primitive Churches. 9

£940,000,000!! When this building was finished, there was not a farthing of debt remaining upon it. It was built for the Lord, and dedicated to his service, and no man could say that he held any legal claim against the house of the Lord. It was the Lord's, and his alone.

After the return of the Jews from Babylon, they rebuilt the temple. It was done in troublesome times. They were few in number, and poor; and yet they found favor with God in their work. It was ultimately built without their being under any obligation to the Sanballafs, the Tobiahs or the Geshems, of their day. It was built by the free-will offerings of the people oiGod. So far, then, as the example of the Old Testament saints is concerned, we find that, in no instance, was the house of the Lord left in debt. It is true that, through discouragement in part, they had stopped, for a time, in building the temple after their return ; but still it was paid for as far as it was built, and when it was completed, it was all paid. It was then the Lord's house, arid no Jew, much less a heathen, could say that he held any claim against the temple of the living God.

When we come down to New Testament times, we find that Christians conducted the worship of God in a very simple manner. An upper roomor a private house was used for their place of meeting. And in times of persecution, the caves and the densof the earth, (ir some unfrequented place, was their sanctuary. The first nolice that 1 find of houses being set apart especially for public worship, is at the close (»f the second century. Tertullian, in his treatise de Idolatria. c. 7, says that "they came from the idols into the church — from the shop of the adversary into the house of God, in domum Dei." One thing is very certain, they did not erect churches at an expense of from $5,000 to $.50,000 to hinder them in the work of the Lord, nnd to vex and perplex those who should come after them. If need be, ihoy sold their o \ n houses and lands, and laid the money down at the apostles* feci fur the pur- 1»

pose of aiding their brethren. This was more needful than to erect large and costly edifices which might be taken from them at the will of their persecutors. Eusebiijs tells us that under the reign of Dioclesian the Bible was burnt, (this is an old practice of the enemies of God,) and their churches were demolished. There were about forty churches in Rome which were destroyed during his reign.

But, when Constantino came to the throne, he gave Christians liberty to repair and rebuijd their churches. He not only prohibited pagan worship, but gave command that the Christian churches should be bu'ih higher and more capacious {han before; and also that the governors of the different provinces should assist them, and furnish thetn with whatever was necessary in the erection of churches. So then, down to the fourth century, we have no account that the modern custom of building churches w^ithout paying for them, was ever thought of This work is left for the improvements of the 18th and 19th centuries.

2d. Church Debts are not of Heathen Origin. I have been permitted to enter many of the temples of the Hindoos; the Mosques and Musjeeds of the Mohammedans; the "towers of silence," and the temples of the Zoroasterites ; and the sacred caves of the Buddhist, as they are found in a heathen land. I have looked with astonishment at the magnificence of some of those structures, and have admired the zeal, the industry, and ihe self-denial of those who erected them, and often have wished that their zeal had been devoted to a better cause. But, while! have admired their zeal and their devotion to idolatry, I have at the same time, been reproved, in reflecting that the people of God are far behind them in zeal and effort for the promotion of the cause of Christ. In Bombay, for example, the Hindoo population in 1835 was about 200,000, and they had upwards of 400 temples, or one teniple to about every 500 of the inhabitants. But this is not all. JVot one of these temples is in debt, so far as my knowledge of

PARSEE CEMETERY.

JVbt of Heathen Origin. 1 1

them extends. They have all been erected, either by the former Hindoo government; by the legacies of the rich, or by private contributions. It is so with the Mohammedan population. Their Mosques are all paid for. Tiie Parsee population is about 20,000. They have several temples, all out of debt. The last *Hoicer of silence " as it is called, was built by Framjee Cowasjee, on Malabar hill, at an expense of about $25,000. He then gave it as a donation to his nation. Now, when I think of these things, and then cast my eye over this city, and look at her churches of all denominations, (about onefourtli enough for the population,) and think of the fact that, so far as 1 know, there is scarcely one of them out of debt, I grieve that the cause of Christ is so dishonored. As to the Presbyterian churches in this city where is there one, from the First Church, with its immense wealth, down to the humblest mission station in connection with us that is free from debt?* Is there one? U there be owe, Mr. Editor, please name the church, and let the fact be known that there is rehgion enough, in at least one church among us, to lead them to pay ofl' their debts. We send money to a heathen land with an ill grace, to convert the heathen from the error of their ways, when in zeal and benevolence in the matter of building churches and paying for them, they put us to the bhjsh. When I have urged upon the heathen the duties of repentance and of faith, they have often told me, "Sahib, go convert your own people before you come to us, for tliey are worse than we are." 1 have had to confess that many of tfie vSahibs are worse than Hindoos: but then I have told them, these are not Christians, though they bear the name. It was well tfiat they did not know the sad truth, that even those who gather around the table of the Lord, often do it in a liouse, whose rafters are s[)litiing under

♦To ttie honor of the nipm*KTd of the First Proshyferiari ('liurch of this f.'ity. I fiinst si;itt', lluit since th«* aliove remiirks wivt- piiMi^hcd in June, 184.5, (hi y h.ivp fiaiil oil' the drhi lliut was ufion their own church, and have nohly assisted other churches in paying oiX theirs. October 1, 1850.

the weight of the curse of a church debt, or I should have heard that reproach also cast upon the church of Christ. But, not to dwell longer on this part of the subject, let us look at the real parentage of church debts. You will find it, not in the Bible, not in the practice of the ancient Jews, not in that of the Primitive Church, nor even in the practice of the heathen, for they would be ashamed of such conduct: — but, in the pride and covetousness of the church in these latter days. As this statement may not be self-evident to all my readers, I will defer the proof of it till my next letter. If any one can show a nohler origin let him do it : and let all pray, and pray earnestly, that the God of heaven may speedily deliver all his churches from the curse, the unutterable curse of church debts. Yours, trulv, in the war against Church Debts.

W. R.

Letter III

In my last letter, I said that the origin of Church debts must be traced to the pride and covetousness of the church of Christ. It most assuredly is not found in the humility and liberality of the church. If the professed followers of the Saviour were now really poor, and did but possess the spirit of their Lord or of the Apostles, they would no more think of building churches, and then leave them pressed down by a heavy debt, than the apostles would have thought of making an Elder of Simon Majrus, or a Deacon of Alexander, the Coppersmith. The thought would be as far from their minds, as the proud and the covetoui are from the kingdom of heaven.

Do not suppose, however, that I am now speaking against the custom of erecting costly houses of worihip. I am only speaking against the practice of not paying for them. The propriety, however, of building

A Heathen Custom. 13

such churches, and the religion of the measure, we shall consider at another time. Nor would I have you suppose that I am an advocate for that iiiggardUness o^ feeling, which would make the house of God the most uncomfortable, and uninviting place in the town or community. There are such buildings, which are not only a disgrace to the Christian character of those who worship in them, but also a reproach to them as a civilized people. Some people seem to think that the practising of that religion, which requires them to endure hardness as good soldiers of Jesus Christ, consists, in part at least, in doing penance, by sitting on hard and uncomfortable seats; and not in "trembling at the word of God,^' but in shivering under it, while coldly spoken in a cold and cheerless house. But, broken windows — hostility to paint — the absence of decency and comfort in the house of God — the prostrate walls around the chambers of the dead — and the graves of their fathers trodden down by the lowing herd, or uprooted by the swine of the field — accord not with the views which I entertain of the religion of the gospel. A people who have not religion enough to take care even of the graves of their fathers, or to make themselves comfortable in their own house of worship, have not religion enough to sustain their minister, or to profit by the means of grace. And if such a people do not ultimately starve their minister out of his office among them, it will be owing to influences over which they have no control.

1 have said that the practice of building churches and not paying for them, has no precedent in the word of God, as exemplified either in the conduct of the Jewish, or of the Christian Church. Nor does it receive any countenance from the conduct of the heathen, who may, in this case, follow the light of nature, or the promptings of their feelings as men. I venture here tfie declaration, that you will vot find a tcwph'. of any description, among anij of the Heathen nations noio on the face of the earth, that is in debt, ('iiina, with her more than 300 millions, and India, with her 130 millions, have not one temple in debt. Did ancient Greece, or Rome, or Egypt ever have one in debt? No; the temples of the gods belonged to the gods. They were sacred, 1'hey weie built by the people for the gods, and were freely and unreservedly dedicated to their service. It is left for those, who glory in the light of revelation, and civilization, and refinement to do a deed, which never disgraced the annals of a heathen nation, sunk in the deepest of moral degradation. Ohi it looks like sanctified mockery, to see the hoary-headed and reverend ministers of Jesus Christ, the devout looking company of elders and deacons, and the multitude of consecrated followers of Christ, all unite together, and by one solenrin act of prayer and praise, lay the foundation; rear up and dedicate to God, a house for his worship, which they know belongs not to them to give, and which, in a few months or years afterwards, may be seized on, and made merchandise of in the market. Such a scene reminds me of what I have often witnessed in the festival of Gunputtee in Bombay. The Moor-tee-kur-ta, (the maker of images,) fashions the idol — the Brahmun consecrates it — the multitude dress it in costly robes, and after adoring it for ten days, and carrying it in solemn procession from temple to temple, they strip it of its costly attire, ar;d then most devoutly, cast it into the sea. This is heathenism. But does Christian conduct exemplify itself in devoting a house to God by solemn prayer, and then after a few years, sacrifice it under the hammer of the auctioneer? Is there any real religion in such a course of conduct ? Ananias and Sapphira tried the experiment, upon their own responsibility, of devoting property to God, and keeping back a part of the same. Is there less guilt now in a whole church doing an act almost parallel to it! Judge ye. As to the conduct of the heathen in the case above cited, every unprejudiced man must confess, that it is far more consistent and common-sense-like than that of Christians in their mode, ofientimes, of managing the worship of God. The Hindoos byild their temples andpay for

GUNESII.

THE NEW YORK PUBLIC LIBRARY

ASTOR, L£NO^ AND TILDEN FOUNDATIONS

A Christian Practice. 15

them, and they are never sacrificed for debt. In the festival of Gunputtee, (the god of wisdom,) the idols are made of clay for the occasion. The casting of them into the sea is designed to prevent them from being touched by unholy hands. It is worthy of notice here, that they never go in debt for these idols, nor for the things they need for the festival. Those who are to conduct the ceremonies collect the necessary money. If they succeed in getting a large sum of money, the ceremonies on the occasion will be the more imposing ; and if the amount collected be small, the expense of the idols and their ornaments will be small in proportion. There is good sense and practical wisdom in this part of their conduct. Fas est ab discere hoste.

Now, let us see how the great mass of Christians proceed in carrying forward the worship of God. They meet together and agree to erect a house of worship. A small portion of the whole amount is obtained, and the work is begun and completed. A mortgage is given upon the property for the balance ; and if they can meet the interest upon the mortgage, they are content to remain so, never intending to pay the principal themselves, but very piously leaving this debt to be paid by their children. A few years roll round, and circumstances, over which they have no control, prevent the church from meeting the demands against them. Discouragement ensues; the minister is dismissed for want of support, and the building (that is God's house? !) is sold to the highest bidder, and the flock of Christ is scattered ! Now, why all this? The answer is, they are like the man spoken of in the gospel of Luke, (xn, 20, 30,) whom the people mocked, saying, "this man began to build and was not able to finish V But why were they not able to finish? Because they have spent more in laying the foundations and in completing a part of it, than might have been suflficient to build, and pay for a house of a smaller size, and one which would have afforded ample room for them for years to come. But why did they not build such a one? Do you think there was any j)ride about it? Was there not a desire to erect such a building as would attract — whonn? God's children? No: but men of the world, so that they might fill the house and help to pay for it. The conversion of such men is a secondary thing. No matter, now, what may have been the motive in erecting such a house for God's worship, at an expense beyond the means obtained for paying for it ; was there not still money enough in the hands of the church to be used for the glory of God to pay for it? Certainly there was. VVhy, then, was it not obtained? It cannot be because the object was not in itself a good one. Nor can it be because there were so many oiher and superior claims upon the benevolence of the people of God, that this object was as nought, in comparison with them, and was overlooked. ^y no means. There was, and there is now, in the hands of the church of God, more than enough of money to erect and pay for suitable houses of worship in every part of our land where they are needed. Why, then, was the work not paid for? I can see no adequate cause for it, except the wonderful cohesivejiess of the money to the hands of those who possess it. Covetousness has seized upon the professed church of Christ, with such a powerful grasp, that nothing but the merciful interposition of God can save them from spiritual death. Oh ! that the fire of God's love were kindled into a flame in the hearts of all professing Christians; then w^ould their grasp on God's money be loosed, and the wealth of the church would flow forth in one continued stream of life and salvation, to bless and save the souls of men !

That the people of God have an abundance of His money in their hands, which should be disposed offer the glory of their master, no one can doubt. Do they not live, many of them, in their ceiled palaces, and nearly all of them in the enjoyment of the comforts of life, and I might add, of its luxuries loo? Is there a scheme of worldliness that promises temporal gain; — is there a

A Christian Practice. 17

scene of national joy and amuseinent not in itself sinful ; is there a new fashion or a new mode invented to make life more easy; is there a new enterprise to promote the political prosperity of the nation, or to increase the ^lory of our country both at home and abroad; is there any society founded for the promotion of the arts or for the cultivation of letters in this great nation that does not draw largely upon the treasury of the Lord through the hands of His people? Point me to one if you can. Why, then, docs the house of the Lord lie waste, and why are the watchmen on the walls of Zion faint and dying, for the lack of those means which God's people have directed, in a great degree, from their appropriate channel? I am not finding fault with tlie activity of Christians in any plan, whose tendency is to promote the temporal good of man. But why should they be active in pushing forward their researches in science, in tlic improvement of the arts, in the improvement and refinement of society in general, and yet leave the cause of God to languish ? Does this latter cause promise less temporal gain? Or does the money thrown into the treasury of the Lord, yield less interest, and less comfort to the body, and less joy and peace to the soul, than the same amount invested in the stocks of earth, that church members are induced to trust their thousands in the hands of man, while they will not commit their tefis to God for safe keeping? There is something here radically wrong. Jf the pride, covetousness, and selfishness of the church be not the cause of the evil, do tell me wfiat it is. If I am wrong, set me right. And if 1 am right, then help me on in this work of reform.

In my next letter, I shall speak of the direct benefits of church debts, as they have been enumerated to me by those who plead for the continuance of //je^/c^.s/z/nr/

Yours, as ever, in the warfare against church debts.

W. R.

Letter IV

In my last letter I promised to speak of some of the benefits of church debts, as they have been slated to me by the advocates of the system. So far as I have been able to collect and arrange them, they may all be included in these two, viz.:

1. Church debts act as a bund oj union,

2. They produce a spirit of activity ; they keep the church stirring and awake.

To secure, then, these blessings, I have been told that "it is not the design of those who erect churches to pay for them. Their successors, who are to be benefited by • these churches, should help to pay for their erection."

Such is the mode of reasoning in the case. Let us look at it for a moment. It is said, that it is not the intention of those, who are immediately engaged in the erection of a church, to pay for it themselves, but to leave a portion of the debt to be paid by those who may succeed tljem. Js this acting according to the principles of the gospel ? Is it honest? What right nave any set of men to engage in an enterprise which they do not mean to accomphsh; but, as soon as they can, throw the burden of sustaining it on the shoulders of others; and all this, too, for the glory of God? It may accord with the spirit and with the wisdom of this* world ; but it is the antipodes of the spirit of the gospel.