ADJUSTING THE LOCAL CHURCH TO THE COMMUNITY
In his book on Social Control Professor Ross has pointed out that
certain institutions are essentially conservative in their nature.
They are solid, permanent organizations but are not inclined to assume
leadership in social progress. He includes in this list the church.
The fact that the church is a conservative institution is not
necessarily a criticism of it. Other agencies develop new phases of
social expression, sometimes in actual opposition to conservative
agencies. The good innovations live and after they have demonstrated
their utility the conservative institutions such as the church and the
state take them over and insure their permanence.
The rapid advance of the social spirit in modern life has outstripped
existing agencies in their preparation to meet the new approach to
the solution of problems of living. Many forms of existing
institutions were created under entirely different conditions and to
meet different needs. To-day these old forms do not adapt themselves
to new demands, and in many cases prevent effective action on the part
of religious organizations that are ready in spirit to broaden their
programs to include the new demands upon the conservative
organization.
The minister, trained for the modern service of the church to the
community, cannot solve alone all the problems of maladjustment he
finds in his local community. He finds that the contacts and interests
of his local church organization are far broader than the interests of
the local group he is called to serve; and that in many cases his
local efforts are nullified by these larger contacts. It is the
purpose of this and succeeding chapters to outline some of the
conditions existing within the church itself that must be adjusted
before it can act most effectively in meeting the challenge discussed
in preceding chapters.
The first and probably most important problem is that of enlarging the
vision of church officials, ministers, and people as to the need for
broadening the program of the church and as to the need of a
statesman-like reorganization of adjustment of the church to the
community.
It is believed that quite generally the membership of the larger
religious organizations in this country are now in sympathy with the
principle that the church should have a social-service program. There
is still wide diversity of opinion as to the form that service should
take. In too many cases there is no opinion at all; and while
admitting the principle, active opposition develops to any attempt to
put the principle into practice in a specific project. This condition
is to be found most marked in those sections of the country that are
not in the direct line of thought movements, or where living
conditions are such as to make rural life monotonous. The monotony of
the plains is as deadening as is the lack of contact of the mountain
valley; and both fields offer fruitful ground for the spread of
unsocial types of religious expression.
The solution of this phase of adjustment of the church to community
needs lies in a patient educational program carried on by the
minister of the gospel. He must be a man of broad vision and must have
the fullest appreciation of the slowness with which the rural public
mind works. He must be everlastingly tactful and not attempt more than
the simplest advances at the beginning and not more than one at a
time. He should have at hand an abundance of educational material in
the way of literature, lantern slides, and periodicals which can be
used in showing what actually happens when the church embarks on a
broader program of rural service. A national educational program of
this type will in a few years create a demand that must be met and
that rural churches will pay well for as the value of such work will
be recognized.
The more serious phase of this problem is the lack of adequate
preparation for this service on the part of the ministry. In one of
the leading denominations (Methodist Episcopal) over twenty-nine per
cent of the charges are cared for by supplies, men who by reason of
educational preparation, age, or for some other cause are not now and,
in a large proportion of cases, never will be eligible to membership
in the Conferences. Of the remainder, only a small proportion are
graduates of schools of higher learning, such as colleges and
theological seminaries. At a time when a large number of those living
in rural communities are either agricultural college graduates or have
attended short courses in agriculture, it becomes apparent that an
uneducated ministry is becoming a menace to the future of the rural
church.
But of those who have had the advantages of a college or theological
seminary training, the type of training has not fitted them for
effective rural service. The training of ministers has gone through
the same process as other types of training. It was once thought that
since the sole business of the minister was the personal appeal to
accept Christ, with the emphasis on the personal atonement features of
Christianity rather than on the principles of Christian living, the
same type of training would fit one to deliver the message whether he
was in the slums of the city, on the shores of Africa, or in the
mountains of Colorado. Moreover, for some reason, it appears to have
been accepted that the rural ministry was the simplest of all and
that any one could be a rural minister. It would be amusing if it were
not so tragic to accept the testimony of some of those who have not
yet seen that the rural ministry is a type demanding such a
cosmopolitan understanding of human nature and of conditions of human
existence that it demands the best intellects and the highest type of
missionary spirit to carry on successfully. We have heard of college
presidents recommending young men for important rural positions
because the young man was "not ambitious for any important work in the
church." It has been known that officials in the church would bid for
theological seminary graduates with the assurance that while they
would have to accept an "undesirable" rural charge for a year or so,
they would soon be "promoted." The writer knows of at least one young
Negro minister, a holder of a Master's degree from a large educational
institution, whose major work for his higher degree was in the dead
languages. The attitude of our educational institutions, and the
attitude in public thought has been that progress for the individual
has been in the direction of getting away from the country instead of
remaining with rural folk and giving one's life to the advancement of
the group as a whole; and the courses of study have had primarily in
mind the personal appeal rather than that of dealing with man in his
particular environment.
It is now recognized that modern life demands a specialized ministry.
The one who can handle successfully a rural industrial or a downtown
urban situation may not be at all fitted to deal with the problems of
the village or the open country. On the other hand, the one who can
serve farmers successfully might not be at all fitted to fill a
metropolitan pulpit. Beginnings only have been made in attempting to
adjust educational work to meet this modern demand. In the meantime
the problem remains of the ministers trained under former conditions,
if trained at all. Many of them have not yet caught the vision of the
larger program of the church; and of those who have caught this vision
the handling of the tools of the new program is such a delicate task
that many failures are sure to be recorded. It will take years to
bring the church to the place where it can meet successfully the
modern demands upon it.
The second great problem is that of maladjustment in thought.
Protestantism is still suffering from the effects of extreme
individualism in religious belief. Strong leaders, obsessed with some
one variation in interpretation of the Scriptures, have pulled off
from the main body of the church and have started independent
organizations committed to the development of the particular
interpretation they have made. When once these organizations have been
formed and have secured a financial backing, they have continued to
spread, until to-day rural America presents the spectacle of religious
forces agreeing on the broad general program of the relation of the
church to community needs but paralyzed because of dissensions over
less essential principles of theological dogma. The reasons for
separate organizations have often been forgotten and loyalty to a
particular organization as such has taken its place.
The solution of this problem is not that of attempting to eliminate
differences in dogmatic belief by argument, but of emphasizing the
points of agreement of the various religious groups. Error and
nonessential dividing lines will disappear if neglected. But if they
are agitated, they will thrive under persecution and conditions will
be worse than ever.
The third problem is that of maladjustment of buildings to community
needs. This problem presents itself in two aspects: first, that of
location of church buildings, and, second, that of location of
pastors' residences. In the original settlement of this country,
people located their new homes in neighborhoods partly for social and
economic purposes and partly for protection. Where these new groups
were founded the church building soon found a place. As the
communities grew, and aided in the course of time by ambitious
national agencies, the sectarian interests mentioned above established
new churches to care for those of each particular belief until many
communities soon became overchurched. The rapid decrease in
open-country, and even village, population which began during the 70's
of the past century and which has continued to the present made the
problem still worse, until to-day probably the least efficient
institution in all rural life is the rural church.
Moreover, the first settlements did not always mark the spot of
permanent development of population and interest centers. As time has
passed, many of the places which it was once thought would be
permanent centers have lost their preeminence and others have taken
their place, until now many very small communities have too many
churches, and others are lacking in adequate facilities for religious
service.
The time has now come when it is believed that rural population and
agricultural tendencies are sufficiently well known to enable those
interested in rural life development to determine what are the most
suitable centers for community development. The Interchurch World
Movement, had it been carried to a successful conclusion, would have
gone far toward determining those centers for the entire United
States. As it is, the Movement made possible such determination for
about one fifth of the United States and the task of completing the
survey may be accomplished in the course of time.
When this task is completed, then the challenge to the churches of
America will be to so readjust the location of their church buildings
and to remodel them in such a way as to be adapted to the present and
probable future growth of communities so determined. This work is
scarcely begun, but it is believed that it has gone far enough to
insure its ultimate achievement. When this is done, then the local
church will be in a position to deal most effectively with the
community problems mentioned in preceding chapters.
The situation as to location of pastors' residences is even more
serious than that of location of church buildings. During the pioneer
period of church organization ministers were under the necessity of
dividing their efforts among a considerable number of small groups.
These were organized into circuits and the pastor's residence was
provided at the point either where the original church was established
or where it was most convenient for him to serve the preaching points
under his care. Each denomination developed its own work regardless of
other groups and in many cases from the same common center, so that we
now have in rural and village organization pastors' residences
centralized in the minority of rural communities and the great
majority of such communities without resident pastoral care.
In the State of Ohio, for example, in one county of twenty-four
communities but twelve have resident pastors and in these twelve
communities thirty-nine pastors reside. In another of sixteen
communities but eight have resident pastors. Yet in each county there
are enough ministers to supply each community with a resident pastor,
if readjustment were to be made. In the northeastern part of the State
on a single Methodist district are to be found two instances of
Methodist and Presbyterian pastors living in the same village and
going on alternate Sundays to another village, in one instance larger
than that wherein the ministers live. The facts as to the growth and
decline of churches with resident or non-resident ministers elsewhere
present (see Church Growth and Decline in Ohio) are a sufficient
indication of the effects of maladjustment of pastoral residences to
rural community needs. Since the modern demand of rural life upon the
church is for community leadership as well as for holding Sunday
worship, it is clear that no adequate program of church leadership in
rural life can be worked out until this vital need of readjustment of
pastoral residences to community service is met.
A third serious problem is that of lack of coordination of
denominational effort in community service. Where two or more
religious organizations find a place in the same small community, no
plan has yet been successfully tried whereby these organizations as
such have been brought into harmonious and continuous action for
community service. The presence of two or three ministers of social
vision in the same small community is not always an asset, since small
communities do not have a place for more than one leader and sectarian
interests forbid cooperation under the leadership of either of the
church pastors. This situation has given rise to such organizations as
the Christian Associations, the Sunday School Associations, and a
large number of nonreligious agencies now trying to provide for
community leadership independent of the church. It is intended here to
call attention to the problem. A suggestion as to methods of solution
will be taken up more at length in a succeeding chapter.
A fourth serious problem resulting from the above is lack of adequate
support for rural religious institutions. Owing to the general lack of
financial resources of rural communities as compared with the urban
centers, they have not been able to compete financially with city
churches in bidding for men who have high standards of living and who
demand large financial returns for services rendered. This condition
will probably continue indefinitely because of the tendency of
large-scale industrial production to centralize wealth control in
urban centers; that is, unless the economic motive is taken from
Christian service through the equalization of salaries. This is a
solution much to be desired, but it is feared that pastors will not
take kindly to such a movement; and members of city churches will
continue to contribute to the support of their own particular pastor
instead of to general pastoral support. But the weakness in support
has been seriously increased because of dividing of such resources as
rural communities have among so many different agencies. Many
communities that could support a pastor at two thousand dollars or
more a year now have men serving denominations at one thousand dollars
per year or less.
The same is true of church building. When five church buildings must
be erected and maintained for sectarian purposes in a town where there
is room for but one school building there is little wonder that the
contrast between church buildings and other rural institutional
buildings is so marked. And it is little wonder that when people begin
to think in community terms they are inclined to pass by the church as
an institution offering hope of community service conservation and
turn either to the school or to some other agency that they hope will
serve the purpose.
Closely akin to the problem of inadequate support for the country
minister and the country church is that contention often made that the
job of a country preacher does not offer as great a challenge as does
that of service in other branches of church work. It is believed that
this contention is erroneous because the rural work, while not
demanding the same qualities of service as other types, does demand
qualities of its own that equal, if they do not exceed, those of the
city pulpit. The ability to serve people long and continuously in
close personal relation to them; to deal patiently with conservatism;
to endure the hardships of living under conditions far below what are
to be found in city environments; to get the support of the people for
progressive measures, and to keep alive mentally in an environment
that is not the most conducive to study because of lack of reading
facilities and because of the ease with which one may shirk the means
of personal growth--all these make the task one for the specially
capable and devoted.
But if there is truth in the statement that the country ministry does
not offer the opportunity for the exercise of personal abilities
required by the city pulpit, then, unless we frankly recognize that
the limit of possibility of building up the rural work is to alleviate
an unavoidable discrepancy in personal challenge, it becomes necessary
to so reorganize the local parish that it will be a challenge fit to
attract the best minds in the church.
The first step already has been mentioned: that is, to adjust
relationships between denominations so that a minister will have sole
responsibility for community leadership.
The second is to enlarge the parishes under the control of one pastor
that he will have ample field for the exercise of his abilities. In
some sections of the country two or more communities may still have to
be assigned to one minister, with the expectation that he will develop
local volunteer leadership in the respective communities, or have
adequate assistance in the way of special workers among the children
and in the homes and have directors of religious education for full or
part time in each community. In most sections of the country the
communities are now of such a size as to demand the full time of a
paid minister and to pay a satisfactory salary for services rendered.
The third is to increase the functions of the pastorate so that people
will be willing to pay more for the service rendered. This results
directly from the adoption of the larger program for the church herein
recommended.
The practice--still all too rare--of supplying the pastor with an
automobile for pastoral work, should be encouraged everywhere,
particularly when the charge has a pastor who has the vision of the
broader program of the church and is specially trained for his work.
There are complications in the connectional system of making
appointments that tend to prevent liberality in this respect. When a
charge is brought up to adequate self-support the tendency is too
often to make the charge a place to "take care" of a Conference member
of that grade regardless of his fitness to follow up the type of
program introduced by his predecessor. The taking of the automobile by
the departing pastor deprives the community of its use. Leaving it for
the use of an inefficient pastor is too great a burden on the
community. Experience will determine the best means of handling this
problem and should ultimately put ministers on the same basis as to
having means of transportation furnished as County Agricultural
Agents, County Superintendents of Schools, Christian Association
Secretaries, etc.
The soldier in the ranks will probably never be looked upon as in the
same grade of responsible position as the captain of the company. So
the country minister has a right to look forward in due time to
"promotion" in natural channels; that is, to the district
superintendency. It is to be feared that too often at the present
time, the rural minister is discouraged from remaining in the rural
work because he sees that a very large proportion of the positions in
the church that are recognized as personal promotions are filled from
the city pulpits. His course of advance is now from the country pulpit
to the city pulpit, thence to the district superintendency or detached
service, thence to the bishopric, a position very few ministers refuse
if offered. The rural work would be strengthened if rural district
superintendencies were filled by rural men who have demonstrated their
ability to build up a rural charge successfully, and then if these
same rural district superintendents were to have an opportunity to
fill the highest possible positions in the church, thus bringing to
the highest administrative offices of the church the tried experience
that comes from building up a district in Methodism. When the
necessity of leaving the rural work in order to get "promotion" is
eliminated there will be a marked strengthening of loyalty to the
rural work.
The illustrations given have been taken from Methodist Episcopal
experience. Other denominations have similar problems, but probably to
a less degree because of the more marked form of localized democracy
in church polity.
If the churches of America permit this crisis of lack of adjustment of
church to community needs to pass unchallenged, and if they delay in
making the adjustments needed, the time will soon come when other
agencies, supported by rural communities, will make provision for
these needs and the opportunity of the church will be gone
indefinitely. Other agencies will be performing a real Christian
service, and the church, by reason of its failure to live up to the
demands upon it, will have an increasingly difficult task of
justifying its existence so far as relationship to this world is
concerned.