Present perils of Methodism

Front matter

Class

Book

GopigM

Preface

A Church like any other organization may have its periods of peril. The Church has peculiar perils in the present time, and it is the part of wisdom and affection to recognize them promptly and rush to its defense. One who has loved the Church and labored for it through long years must do so until the peril is past.

This book is to point out the dangers and to rally some to meet them before it is too late.

If possible, the first reading should be at a single sitting, for the situation requires instant attention. Later readings may be more leisurely.

The principles herein contained extend into the future and should have a permanent interest.

Thomas B. Neely.

Philadelphia, Pa., March 24, 1920.

Contents

Chapter

I. Methodism and the Methodist Episcopal Church 9

II. Present Conditions in the Methodist Episcopal Church 15

Chapter I Methodism And The Methodist Episcopal Church

What is generally termed Methodism today is a generic word covering doctrines, church polity, and practical forms of Christian work, and a spirit easily recognized, even if it is not distinctly defined or easily described.

Starting in the earlier part of the eighteenth century, in England, under the Wesleys and their co-adjutors, it quickly took its place as a special or peculiar force among the Christian agencies of the time and rapidly spread throughout Great Britain and a little lator into other parts of the world.

At first it was a teaching, a method, and a spiritual power for the religious enlightenment, the conversion, and the character building of the people, but it gradually, and yet speedily, took a concrete and organic form.

Wesley or his followers did not invent the name Methodist or Methodism, for they were suggested and applied in an unfriendly manner by those who had derided and were antagonistic to Wesley's evangelical movement. Neither did they desire these indicative titles, but because they got into popular use they adhered, and soon were honored by the people because of what Wesley's followers were and because of the wonderful work they performed in the evangelization of the populace and the development of the religious life of the masses, and also to some extent, of the classes.

So, in course of time, Methodism was acknowledged to be one of the greatest religious forces of the world.

As the people accepting Wesley, with his teachings and practical methods, came together and were organized in London and other places, a new ecclesiasticism came into being and spread far and wide. This was an incarnation of Methodism.

In Great Britain the organism was known by one name, and, as it appeared in various other countries it acquired varying local titles.

That which was transplanted to and developed in the Atlantic section of North America, at its reorganization after the independence of the United States of America was recognized, became The Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States of America, or in America, the qualifying titles meaning the same. The country was America and the people were Americans even at that day, and so the new church in the new nation became The Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States of America.

That was in 1784, and this original church has continued to the present time, still the leading church of its family, notwithstanding the fact that various bodies, under distinctive names have branched off from the original trunk, and separately have greatly flourished.

The Methodist Episcopal Church, as we say for short, and just as we say the United States, one of the younger ecclesiasticisms, rapidly spread over the country, and soon outstripped the older churches in numbers, proving its right to be, and by its work demonstrating that it was a legitimate church of Christ, and that it had a right as an equal among its sister churches.

Methodism, under the form of the Methodist Episcopal Church, has been a great force in the United States of America as well as in other parts of the world.

It is a church among the churches, and, as it has its own ecclesiastical organization, and its own distinctive name, it is a denomination among the Christian denominations, and as a church among the churches, so as a denomination among the denominations it has its recognized rank.

A denomination amid other denominations has its own distinct value, and may be a very positive blessing because it is not just like the other denominations, but has its differences even to the extent of peculiarities.

A denomination stands for something specific and distinct and has its reason for its being in its very differences from the other bodies. Every denomination that had a right to come into existence had that right because of conditions and circumstances which called for opposition or rectification, and because it stood for and emphasized some important doctrine, some important feature of ecclesiastical government, or some practical method. Thus Protestantism came into being because of its protest against Rome's eeelesiasticism and in support of the Bible and its right interpretation. In a similar way Methodism was made necessary by irreligious and unspiritual conditions that existed, and the need for the correction of ecclesiastical errors, as well as by the need for new or different forms of operation. So Wesley's idea was to restore the essential ideas of the New Testament Church in doctrines and in matters of organization. So other branches of the Christian church have been formed for other but sufficient reasons and denominations have multiplied.

Far from being an evil the several denominations may be a very positive advantage. They meet the scientific idea of division of labor as the different bodies specialize more or less in their activities, and by their varying methods appeal to minds of different tastes. They stimulate each other to greater or better efforts, and act as checks upon each other, and so are mutually corrective, and there are people for all of them.

Some have held that there should be only one church, but so there is only one Church of Christ, and the several denominations are only branches or subdivisions of that one church. Some, however, have suggested that there should be only one ecclesiastical government. That is what is called organic unity, but the church has had that and the church was never so despotic and corrupt as when it had a unified ecclesiasticism. The denominations do not need to try that experiment again, for history tells what it was and utters an emphatic warning. Still one may say that Jesus prayed "That they may be one," but the reference was not to the denominations, as we know them, but to the disciples, and the oneness was not an ecclesiastical unity, but "the unity of the Spirit" and "the unity of the faith," as the Apostle Paul says to the Ephesians.

What is needed is the Christly spirit, mutual recognition, fraternal relations and a degree of general co-operation that will not interfere with their distinct organization, their self-government and their individual action. To destroy the denominations would be a disaster, and almost equally so would be an attempt to confuse them together so that the things that make them separate denominations would become less distinct and tend to become unseen. Even to blend them in practice as though there was no difference between them would be very faulty and unphilosophical.

All this is illustrated, and has been demonstrated in the history of the Methodist Episcopal Church. To the denominations generally it has been an example and an inspiration, and Methodist influence has modified the practical workings of other churches, and even modified the doctrinal teachings of other denominations, and many of these bodies would cheerfully concede their indebtedness.

The Methodist Episcopal Church, which has grown to be a great body in numbers and resources, has had a great history and has done a great work for the church and the world along the lines of ehurchly activity and moral reform.

Its members may justly be proud of its achievements, and in these acts and their results the members can find the strongest reasons for loving, strengthening, and perpetuating it as a distinct body, without a break in the continuity and character of this historic church.

Anything that would deprive Methodism of the essential elements that gave it its real success, or that would weaken these elements so that the Church would not have its old time power, or that would infuse counter ideas and forces that would impair or destroy the internal nature and spiritual nature of Methodism, would produce an incalculable disaster to Christendom and the world.

Chapter II Present Conditions In The Methodist Episcopal Church

The direct and indirect influences of the great war that closed in Ninteen Hundred and Eighteen have greatly affected the world generally, and may be said to have specially affected the United States of America. People have shown marked intellectual, political and ecclesiastical changes, but the fundamental change in America may be said to be intellectual and emotional.

There has been a psychological change in the mentality of the American people which may be attributed largely to the strain of the war upon those who have been in the war and also upon those who have been sympathetically related to the war, and upon others by association. The change shows itself in a loss of calmness and self-possession, and an increase of nervousness and excitability with a weakening of the reasoning processes. Frequently it amounts to hysteria, or, as a distinguished doctor has declared, to mania, and, altogether, it makes a bad time to have to settle any great question either in the State or the Church. Naturally we would expect the church to have its share of the prevailing conditions in the community, the country and the world.

PRESENT PERILS OF METHODISM.

We turn our attention to the church and ask what is the situation in this branch of the church of Christ.

A general survey of the Methodist Episcopal Church will show that it has vast extent as it spreads far and wide over the United States of America and into many distant lands. It shows vigor of various kinds, and it has immense bulk, as the statistical reports reveal that it numbers over four millions of communicants in the entire Church, and about four millions in the United States of America.

How accurate these statistics are is not absolutely certain, but they are at least as reliable as the returns from the other denominations. For practical purposes, however, it may be safe to strike out of our calculations at least a million as dead, missing, mythical or not-get-at-able, and probably the workable statistics of other religious bodies are open to a similar practical revision.

Whatever may be said, it remains that the Methodist Episcopal Church is a great organization and has done a great work. On its undisputed record the world will concede that, and whatever some may think as to the uncertainties of the future, the past is secure.

That at the present time it is an immense ecclesiasticism with many mighty forces must also be admitted. Specifically, in proof of the effectiveness of the church at this moment may be cited its great financial appeals and their manifest success.

Its church building operations are numerous and impressive. Its educational institutions are many and are found all over this country and in foreign lands and the highest authorities have pronounced most favorably as to their actual and comparative value. Its benevolent institutions such as hospitals, orphanages and homes for the aged and infirm represent much money and most excellent results. These and many other things stand strongly to the credit of the Methodist Episcopal Church, but if these things were all, and the body handled all the money in all the banks in the United States these things would not be sufficient to prove that the church was all it should be as a church, and that it was without any weakness, or that it was surrounded by no danger that should cause anxiety.

In the Methodist Episcopal Church in very recent years there has been very great financial giving. For the Conference claimants there was a "drive" for some twenty or more millions, but, before that was quite completed, there was a "drive" for the educational institutions which brought in thirty-five millions of dollars.

Right on that came a drive for the "Centenary," which was the centenary of the organization of the Missionary Society of the church in 1819, and this resulted in a subscription of one hundred and twelve to one hundred and fifteen millions of dollars, an unequalled financial achievement among the denominations.

The success of the centenary Missionary movement was most marked as a financial effort, but 2 possibly the church should be cautious in pronouncing as to the degree of success for the denomination as a whole and for the years to come. It is too early to say, and, probably, we shall not be able to tell, for some years, just how much of a success it has been, and really will be in the long run for the whole church in all of its departments.

Even at the present the total amount that will actually be received cannot be told, but of course the millions that come in can do very much for the various home and foreign mission fields, and the effort may be an uplift, and may establish a new and higher standard of giving, at least with many.

But per contra, as the old bookkeepers and the logicians used to say, on the contrary, on the other side, some things may have to be placed, and then deducted to ascertain the net gain.

From the strain there may be a possible reaction. Such an intense effort and such an intense condition as was produced is likely to cause a reaction, and, especially, as the tension goes on for five years, and perhaps longer.

All stimulants have their reaction, and this may be no exception. With the repeated and continued financial pressure during a series of years there is an increased possibility of a reaction which may require a very considerable reduction in the net gain.

Then other things are to be calculated. There must be calculated the effect of taking large numbers of ministers from their legitimate work of the pastorate, and sending them out as promoters in a money-getting campaign among strangers and in distant fields, and the consequences of the breaking up of their ministerial habits of study and work. We do not state what number was thus taken from the pastorate, but it must have been quite large.

In addition there must be calculated the loss through the disturbance of the charges from which these pastors were taken, for the disarrangement and the break in the local church and its activities must have cost very much to the denomination at large.

Further there must be calculated the injury to these ministers taken from the routine and regular work of the charges and sent out to be semiofficial rovers or given an entirely different task. The break in their habits, and the taste of officialism, may in many cases be destructive of love for, and contentment in, pastoral work, and the men may never be good pastors again.

If there is much of that, no amount of money can compensate for the loss, for what the church most needs in the line of workers is an increase of good pastors, and, with probably hundreds of ministers out of the pastorate there must have been an immense loss to the churches in their essential work, and in this we do not count the millions of dollars spent in salaries, and in other ways to get the great subscription.

The centenary has given a remarkable subscription. That proves something but it does not prove everything that some may claim.

It is a partial revelation of the resources of the church, and it shows what may be done by the use of certain methods of system and pressure, with the expenditure of millions to get other millions of dollars and the employment of professional promoters or those who have been trained elsewhere in conducting money-drives.

It was fortunate that the war ceased before the drive was made, for otherwise it might not have succeeded, but the skill in management and the practically unlimited funds for propaganda did bring in the subscriptions.

Nevertheless, with all that may, and should, be conceded, the success is not conclusive.

The large subscription does not even prove that the people of the church are rich, or that the individual churches generally are in a good and easy financial condition. As a matter of fact the average church still struggles along financially, the average pastor has but a meagre support, and he finds it difficult to get small sums of money for minor activities.

But there is something more important than money, and, while material success has its value, it may not be the best success. In a church it is not.

Let us scrutinize the church more closely and see if it is what it ought to be and can be.

What is its condition? In the first place, is it keeping up with its former proportionate net gain in membership? What do we find numerically?

It is a large body, but is it growing? Is it a big body that is slowing down and losing its power of growth? If a large body stops growing what is the expectation? The cessation of growth is the beginning of decay, and the completion of decay is death.

It must be admitted that recently there have been losses in membership and the church has not maintained its former pace in numerical progress. This may not mean a permanent condition, but it assuredly calls for attention and careful examination.

Men of science say that at certain short intervals every one should undergo a medical examination as a precaution in order to be sure of health or to detect the first approach of disease. So the church should be subject to a thorough diagnosis, not necessarily to cause undue alarm, but to ensure its preservation.

At the present time Methodism here and in other lands is not gaining but is losing numerically, and the facts should be widely known and looked at squarely, as the physician studies the symptoms of his patient.

Consider certain instances by way of illustration.

Turning to Methodism in Great Britain it will be noticed that there is a decline in the Wesleyan Methodist Church. This is not simply because of the great war, and it is not merely for the present period. Indeed, for a long series of years the membership has been steadily diminishing from year to year. It is said that for thirteen years in succession this church has lost from three to six or seven thousand a year, making a loss of at least fifty thousand in these years from a body of about five hundred thousand.

This is partly due to emigration to the British colonies or other dependencies and to the United States of America, but many attribute this apparent decay to a general and growing acceptance in recent years of German Biblical criticism of the destructive kind, and that is what many British Wesleyans think and say.

In the Methodist Episcopal Church from time to time there have been of late disappointing increases and depressing decreases. The disappointing increases have been because they were so small in view of the agencies at command, and depressing decreases because there were no increases but losses, where in the nature of things large increases were to be expected. Thus in some of the largest conferences, having hundreds of ministers with well equipped churches, year after year the annual balance showed a net loss.

Considering the denomination as a whole there have been repeated returns that were food for reflection. The Methodist Year Book for 1919, giving the returns for 1918, puts the total membership of the Methodist Episcopal Church in the world at 4,241,403, a net increase of only 30,031, but the increases were not in the United States of America but in the foreign missions, and the net loss in the United States was over 8,000, which was not an overwhelming indorsement of the new area method of the episcopacy, or of certain other modern innovations.

PRESENT PERILS OF METHODISM.

In the Methodist Year Book for 1920, giving the returns for the previous year, the losses in membership were immensely greater. In the whole church the total net loss was 55,881, and the number would have been much greater had it not been for gains in the foreign mission fields, though one foreign field, namely, Southern Asia, had a net loss of 1,617, a territory which had been having large gains.

All the "episcopal areas" in the United States had decreases excepting three, and of these three two were in the colored sections of Atlanta and New Orleans. The third was the great Chicago area, with its hundreds of preachers and churches, which saved itself by reporting an increase of 211.

Again the losses do not furnish a specially strong argument for the modern "area-episcopacy." It is also to be noted that the losses occur in the year of the great centenary financial "drive."

These losses are not to be accounted for by the war entirely or in any great part. The soldiers and sailors who went into the war were not stricken from the church membership or the Sunday School rolls. They were reverently and lovingly carried forward.

Neither do the deaths in the army account for the losses, for the loss in membership is far above the proportionate loss in the army. The influenza epidemic will account for some of the losses, but the real explanation is that the church did not have grip enough.

Incidentally it is to be noted that the Sunday-

School membership reported in the 1919 Year Book was 4,461,229, and in the Year Book for 1920 the total enrollment was 4,324,458, showing that the net loss for 1919 was 136,771. In the Year Book for 1918 the total enrollment was 4,606,700, and for the next year, as in the Year Book for 1919, 4,461,229, showing a net loss for the year 1918 of 145,471, making a loss in the two successive years of 1918 and 1919 of 282,- 242, or over a quarter of a million in the two years.

Considering the membership statistics by quadrenniums the reports show that in the quadrennium from 1912 to 1916 there was an increase of 490,958 in members, while from 1916 to 1920 the increase was 139,958, a drop of 351,000 compared with the returns of the quadrennium ending in 1916, yet the last quadrennium was the period of certain intense activities in the denomination.

Naturally a pastor is given credit for an increase of membership, but, because of these losses which have been indicated, it does not follow that the pastors have been derelict, for there may have been conditions and adverse forces for which they were not responsible, and which handicapped them in their work, diminished their success or defeated them.

The general conduct or condition of the denomination as a whole may have something to do with it, or local acts of the denomination, or special doings of the denomination may alienate some and prevent their winning.

If the church generally is at fault, then the fault may have been somewhere else than in the pastorate or in the particular local church. Inquiry should be instituted to ascertain what the fault is and where it is.

Methodism at the beginning was a revival movement and the Methodist Episcopal Church from the beginning was a revival church. By the revival, people were gathered in and the church membership was built up. Therefore, we must ask: Has Methodism its old revival success? Is the Methodist Episcopal Church the revival Church it used to be?

Methodism itself in the abstract is the same old spirit and where it has a fair chance ought to produce the same spiritual results. The question then seems to be if it is incarnated in an ecclesiastical organism, does it have a fair chance in the organism and amid its environments? Has the Church had the old time revival success? Has it had recently any kind of revival success of the old time or of any time? Are the revival services as largely attended as in former times? Do the sermons produce the same results as in former periods? Does the laity participate with the same spirit and efficiency? What are the reports that come from pastors and churches?

On the contrary the reports that have been coming for years do not show the old time conditions. In short, they have been most discouraging. They do not show the aforetime ingatherings or the deep religious impressions. Attempts at widespread revivals have been regarded as failures. Announced revival meetings have brought together few professedly unconverted persons, and the mass movements that have brought the main results have been largely limited to Sunday School children who by the way should be gladly received. In this we speak of the efforts in the local churches by the pastors and such ordinary aid as they could obtain, while the actual or seeming successes on the other hand have been combination efforts under some noted and well advertised evangelists. Even in the latter it may be asked whether the Church has been able to retain the asserted converts.

In view of propositions to have revival efforts within defined periods one may ask whether the church can have a revival to order and whether the church should attempt to designate the number of converts to be received within a specified number of weeks?

Can we have a revival to order? Certainly not as one might with confidence order a specific mechanical output and the delivery of a definite quantity of goods on a designated day. That can be calculated on the basis of mechanical certainties, but when one comes to deal with spiritual things he touches a multitude of contingencies growing out of the freedom of the human will, and the presence or absence and degree of mental and moral preparation. If these facts are not positively known, as generally may be, or must be the case, one cannot predict with certainty the spiritual outcome.

If the question be asked: Can a genuine

PRESENT PERILS OF METHODISM.

spiritual revival be made to order on a given day with a cold, indifferent, unconvinced and unbelieving church? The answer would be in the negative, because for a reliable revival there must be a degree of intellectual preparation which comes from instruction and individual thinking, and some degree of moral impression.

If the people are entirely ignorant as to spiritual things, there is little or nothing to which the appeal can be made. So, if they are without any degree of moral preparation there is little or nothing on which to build. Then, unless there is an acceptance of certain great fundamental religious truths, there is no certain groundwork for an exhortation to make the great moral decision, and, if there is no personal realization of personal sin, there can be no repentance and no basis for regeneration.

If men do not believe in sin and its consequences, if they do not believe in Christ as the Saviour from sin and its penalty; and if they do not believe in the Supreme Being, his existence and intelligent rulership, there is lacking the intellectual condition which makes possible a hopeful appeal for repentance, for faith in Christ as the Saviour, and for trust in God for pardon and purification. These are necessary preliminaries to a genuine and permanent revival, and it is to be feared that very many today are without this preparation, so that one could not safely predicate a revival among them in any very brief period of time.

Matthew says of Jesus: "And he did not many mighty works there, because of their unbelief." (Matthew xiii, 58.) And so is it today where unbelief is established. Yet a revival effort may be made, because some do believe in God and in an atoning Saviour, and who not only know there is such a thing as sin, but also know that they themselves are sinners. But even with them a certain condition is necessary, for, though they have faith in all these things, they may not be ready to repent and trust, and they must have a preparation that will touch the heart as well as the head.

Still all men have the moral sense and conscience, and these give the Christian hope and encouragement in his work.

That such unprepared people may be best reached and regenerated through the means of a coldly calculated "drive" may be questioned and even denied. That the drive may be effective in securing contributions of money may be possible, but that it is the best way to secure the spiritual regeneration of human souls is far from certain. Indeed in spiritual things the organized, universal and mechanical drive may be most disastrous. In a galvanized revival there may be movement, and there may be an ingathering of numbers without a genuine spiritual revival and without the right kind of permanent results.

Much is said today about evangelism, and there is a right and noble use of the word, but where it means a cold and perfunctory calculation and a movement of mechanical machinery it is not the ideal thing. Some talk about evangelism as though it were a new discovery, one of the modern improvements, but in the Methodist Episcopal Church evangelistic work is neither a new phrase or a new fact. Methodism has always been evangelical and evangelistic.

Neither is evangelistic work limited to a particular class of men. There are good and skilled evangelists who devote themselves to that form of work, but pastors also may be exceedingly successful in such activities. Indeed the faithful pastor is the good every-day and all-thetime evangelist on whom the Church must steadily depend.