its work in the Southern States. Recent statements and inquiries
having been made which show a misapprehension, on the part of
some, of the methods of its work in that part of the country, the
Executive Committee deem it proper to state: That the American Home
Missionary Society still adheres to its long-established usage
in declining to aid in the support of a missionary to serve any
church, whether in the South or North, which refuses to receive
to its membership any applicant, solely on account of color.
That it still expects, as it has from the beginning, that any
church, wherever situated, that receives its aid in supporting a
minister, will unite with the association, convention, or other
ecclesiastical body of the denomination within whose bounds he is
appointed to labor; and by participating in councils, conferences
and other customary gatherings for mutual help and edification,
will show its Christian fellowship with other Congregational
churches. And that, in case of proposals to form or aid churches
in cities or towns where the American Missionary Association has
organized missionary operations, this society will not enter on
such work without first corresponding or conferring with its sister
association.
A MISTAKEN POLICY.
BY REV. W. HAYNE LEAVELL.
This is my deliberate conviction, based upon such knowledge of the
Southern People as comes from the fact of having been born and
bred among them, and from my observation among the more cultivated
families that go there from this region.
You will permit me to say, therefore, that in my judgment the
proposed policy of our societies is a mistaken one. Most of the
reasons that influence our brethren who guide the policies of these
missionary organizations I have considered, and largely sympathize
with their spirit; and if the plan were practicable, I would see no
Christian reason why it should not be carried out. But if we desire
to secure a foothold for Congregationalism among the respectable
white people of the South, and enlarge our borders in that
direction, we must adopt the only policy that will gain this end,
and have churches composed predominantly, if not exclusively, of
white people, as well as churches composed mainly of black people
for the blacks.
We may argue against caste in the churches of Jesus Christ, and
resolve that we will not be a party to its perpetuation anywhere
under the sun. Very well, then we must not hope for a successful
propagation of our denominational principles among the ruling
classes of the South, for they will not enter into church relations
with the colored people. After the churches are separately
organized, and while they are separately maintained, they will
affiliate in associations and conventions, but the limit will be
drawn at the line of the church. However unrighteous, this is a
stubborn fact—and anybody who has good knowledge of the Southern
character will know that it is to remain as stubborn for all time
to come.
Mixed churches among us, where colored people are comparatively
few, and in the South, where colored people are so numerous, are
very different things. For among us the predominant element in the
churches will remain predominant, and it is an easy matter for 500
white Christians to associate with five of another race and color.
But for 250 white Christians to associate in churches on equal
terms with 250 “colored” Christians is another, and by no means a
comfortable thing. Before the war, negroes and their masters were
in the same churches and enjoyed the association, but the negroes
sat in the galleries, and in other ways were not put upon an
equality.
WHO SHALL WORK SOUTH?—THE QUESTION STATED.
BY REV. L. W. BACON, D.D.
A gravely important and difficult question as to the future
policy of the Society (A. H. M. S.) was submitted in behalf of
the executive. It was one technically within the competency of
the executive to decide, but too important to be so decided,
without larger counsel: Shall the Society’s system of operations
with missions and superintendencies be extended over the Southern
States? In favor of this measure are urged (1) the desire to make
the field of the Society’s work co-extensive with the nation; (2)
the duty we owe to white people, as well as black, at the South;
(3) the alleged demand for the Society’s aid to communities of
Congregationalists who have moved to the South. Against it are (1)
the measureless inadequacy of the Society’s present or probable
resources for the urgent instant demands of its present field;
(2) the wastefulness of organizing and supporting a second system
of superintendencies over the field already occupied by the
superintendencies of the American Missionary Association, and the
chances of friction or collision between the two systems; (3) the
impossibility of drawing any line of demarkation between the two
systems of missions on the same ground, except a color line: the
emphasizing of the color line, in the most obtrusive and offensive
manner, not only by two orders of missionaries, one to whites
and one to blacks, but by two orders of mission churches, one
for black people in which whites shall be tolerated, and one for
white people where blacks shall be tolerated with not so much as
a common superintendency to co-ordinate them; and thus the danger
of indelibly fixing the color line, fortifying it by new vested
interests, and defeating any kindly tendency toward the effacing of
it from the Christian Church. Such considerations as these led the
congregation (we can hardly say the Society), after deliberation
and debate, and especially after the very able speech of Mr.
Blakeslee, to decline committing itself to this great and not
easily revocable step, and to leave it for a year’s consideration,
and though a later and less considerate vote was obtained in a form
which seemed to throw doubt upon this decision, nevertheless the
reluctance toward the new policy was of such a weight and character
that a prudent executive may be trusted to keep it in view and move
with caution, in a matter that does not press for instant action.
_The Advance._
A QUESTIONABLE PROCEDURE.
BY REV. HORACE BUMSTEAD, D.D.
The American Missionary Association and the Am. Home Missionary
Society have both announced their purpose to enter upon enlarged
church work in the South. Is it not questionable whether it is best
for the Home Missionary Society to enter the Southern field at all?
Does that Society propose to do the same broad work for all races
and classes which the A. M. A. aims to do, and in good measure has
done? If so, why duplicate missionary machinery for this region? Or
is it proposing to do a work less broad, and if so, are its friends
ready to support it in so doing?
_The Congregationalist._
THE OHIO IDEA.
RESOLUTION OF CONGREGATIONAL CONFERENCE AT AKRON.
WHEREAS, During the past twenty years the work of the
Congregational churches for the needy millions of the South has
been performed in a manner that is fast winning the respect and
sympathy of all classes; first, by its being based upon Christian
needs without too evident attention being paid to denominational
advantages; second, by its uncompromising fidelity to Christian
principles in respect to the spirit of caste;
_Resolved_, That we, the members of the Congregational Association
of Ohio, do earnestly deprecate the adoption of any permanent
policy by which Congregational churches shall be established in the
South, practically, though not professedly, on the basis of what
is called the “color line;” and that in our judgment two distinct
Congregational Societies, the one working mainly for the white and
the other for the black race, in the same field, will inevitably
tend to perpetuate race prejudice, set at variance Congregational
brethren themselves, and so defeat the end of true religion.
WHAT IS A COLOR-LINE CHURCH?
BY PROF. C. G. FAIRCHILD.
The State Conference of Ohio recently protested against the
establishment by Northern missionary funds of churches based
“practically, though not professedly, upon the ‘color line.’” What
is a color-line church? A church at the North composed largely or
exclusively of colored members, following naturally a race line
of cleavage, as do the Irish or German, is not in this sense a
color-line church. Most white churches at the North have only white
members; but probably there is not one of them but would receive
a colored member without hesitating in the slightest about his
color. These are not color-line churches. There are many important
white churches at the South that have had for many years colored
members; but the colored members must wait for the communion until
the whites are served, and must occupy special seats. Such churches
are color-line churches. Churches at the South composed of blacks,
with a few white teachers and their friends, who would welcome
with tears of gratitude any Southern white families who would show
their love and sympathy by identifying themselves with them are not
color-line churches. A church at the South, composed of whites, in
the midst of a large colored population, or in close contiguity
with a church of kindred organization and sources of support, and
where the advent of the first colored member would be deprecated,
not welcomed, is a church based practically, though it may not be
professedly, upon the color-line. * * * * *
It is always wise to consider facts. The first fact is that this
color distinction is the most potent factor, politically, socially
and religiously, in Southern society. This should dominate every
plan for Christian effort at the South as much as the existence of
the rebel army dominated plans for the “On to Richmond” during the
war.
In the ultimate solution of Southern problems, natural race lines
of cleavage may largely prevail; but it lies within the realms of
reasonable expectancy, and not fancy, to believe that the time
will come when color will not be thought of in the admission of a
person to any hotel, railway car, school, or church. We have no
right yet to let go of this Christian and patriotic hope; but for
the present at the South color places upon a man a more damning and
ineffaceable stain than does murder or political treason, and the
present establishment of white churches as above described would
seem to be an obeisance to this most potent and evil influence.
_The Independent._
THE TENDENCY IS TO RELAX.
EDITORIAL IN INDEPENDENT.
The natural bent of Southern whites is to separation from colored
members, and white congregations willing to open their doors to
all alike will not spring up in great numbers. The tendency, the
temptation is to relax a little on the principle, under trying
circumstances, for the sake of immediate results. We have pointed
out how signally some of the Friends’ schools in the South have
failed to keep their first principles intact. The same lowering
influence has been at work among the Northern Methodists. It is
worth a generation of endeavor, and perhaps it will require it, to
establish an influential constituency on the solid basis of true
Christian Brotherhood.
THE SOUTHEAST.
SEC. BARROWS’ REPORT AT SARATOGA.
How soon shall the Society have a superintendent in this region?
_It is for you to decide._ The executive officers are convinced
that the time has already come for this forward movement.
During the past winter we have had a general missionary at work
in Florida, with encouraging results. At our next anniversary
there will doubtless be present a representative from the Florida
Association of Congregational Churches. The Society also has
missionaries in Maryland, West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee and
Georgia—and appeals are constantly received urging us to enlarge
this work.
It is not the purpose of this society to foster the spirit of
caste. It was to remove all suspicions on this score that a
friendly conference was lately had with our brethren of the
American Missionary Association, and with the results of that
conference you are all familiar. It is our idea to form churches at
the South, like Dr. Rankin’s in Washington, and Dr. Goodell’s in
St. Louis, churches open to the colored people and to which they
will be made welcome if they see fit to join. The only difficulty
will be to find enough colored people willing to join to save the
principle—the uniform experience hitherto having been that they
prefer to be in churches of their own.
But we have too long ignored the fact that there are several
millions of poor whites at the South who need our help, and must
have it if they are to be fitted for citizenship on earth or in
heaven. They have claims upon our Christian sympathy equal to those
of the colored people, for they too are the victims of slavery, and
are despised by the old slaveholding aristocracy—and even by the
negroes. A Southern man said in our hearing a few days ago, “There
are as many white people at the South who need your help as there
are colored people, and they must be reached by similar means,
viz.: the Christian school and the Christian church.”
Let us now ask the question—Have we been doing our duty by these
people? We know we have not. God forgive us for having neglected
them so long, and may we now show by our actions that our
repentance is genuine! Do you wish the Home Missionary Society to
organize an agency to do this work?
REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON DR. BARROWS’ PAPER.
But why ask the Home Missionary Society to plant these churches and
commission these missionaries? Simply because the endeavor is one
which no present organized agency can successfully accomplish.
The work of the American Missionary Association is noble, and its
field is wide. But broad as are its principles it cannot, as a
practical matter of fact, cultivate the whole of that needy part
of our Lord’s vineyard. That which has been the pride and the
_strength_ of the American Missionary Association, the thing it
has printed on its publications and blazoned on its banners, that
it was organized for the help of the despised races of America, to
some extent honorably incapacitates it for some of the work which,
nevertheless, needs to be done. Not in this generation, nor in
the next, can men and women, between whom not history and habit
only, but nature and providence, run lines so deep as between the
races of the South, be made to any considerable extent to blend in
comfortable and harmonious church relationship.
The ignoring of this fact will cost limitless labor and limitless
disappointment. Why not take up the case as we find it, and
in those places where the hand of invitation now so obviously
beckons, respond to the call? What need of trespass, what occasion
for misunderstanding, if the Home Missionary Society and the
Association thus at some points work side by side?
_The Home Missionary._
DR. WALKER’S ADDRESS.
There is no man in this house who has, to the limit of his ability,
done more cordial and earnest work for the American Missionary
Association than I have. There is no man who maintains a more
cordial relationship with the secretaries and officers of that
society than I do. Personally, each one of them is my friend.
But I do feel, Christian friends, that we have here a question
that we must meet; and the best way to meet it is in the spirit
of frankness and openness, giving it the deliberation which
it requires. The American Missionary Association, as has been
suggested in the paper which has been presented to you, is, in my
view, handicapped for doing a part of the work which is necessary
to be done. * * *
Now the question is: Is it not expedient for us to enter upon that
work? I am met by the objection: “Why, you are doing the same work
that the American Missionary Association is doing. Why have two
societies, side by side, doing essentially the same work?” They are
not doing the same work, in the fact that the subjects for which
they labor are providentially made distinct. It is impossible in
this generation, and in the generation to come, for the American
Missionary Association to plant Congregational churches to any
considerable extent through the South. Now, the plain and practical
question is: Is it wise for us to neglect the present opportunity
and, for the sake of what may be proved after all to be but
sentiment, let the present moment pass, a moment so freighted
with consequences to the future? Is it wise for us to insist upon
the strength of ecclesiastical ties as sufficient to hold men
together, whom we cannot counsel to come together by strength of
natural ties? We cannot advise marriage among the races; why insist
upon a kind of work that forces them together in ecclesiastical
relationships to which they are equally unfamiliar and averse?
_The Home Missionary._
NO CLASHING MUST BE ALLOWED.
EDITORIAL IN ADVANCE.
What the American Missionary Association has done, and is doing,
is only the prophecy of what it is to do in the near future, if it
is promptly sustained in its noble work. And while we are on this
subject, we wish most emphatically to say:
There is not to be, there _must_ not be, any clashing in the work
between this society and the American Home Missionary Society.
The American Missionary Association was organized for a specific
work, broadly and definitely understood to be for the uplifting
of the colored races on this continent. To that work they are
pledged, for that money is given to them, and they are very wisely
administering the trust committed to their hands. To criticise
that society because it does not organize what are known as white
churches is the height of folly, and for it to attempt to force
mixed churches on the South would be equally absurd. The American
Home Missionary Society should not go down South with the idea of
starting white churches. It should be allowed, and must be allowed,
to go there and organize churches just as it does in Iowa, Dakota,
Missouri and Kansas, saying nothing at all about the race question
or in any way excluding colored people from its membership; giving
them that freedom which is theirs, to come in, and the freedom also
to stay out, and to have their own churches, and their own social
circles, just as they please. Any one who undertakes to force
such things out of their natural and proper course will only work
confusion and loss.
NO TROUBLE NEED BE BORROWED.
EDITORIAL IN CONGREGATIONALIST
As for the matter of the entrance of the Home Missionary Society
upon work in the South, that may be trusted to take care of itself.
The two societies mutually have agreed upon a policy of comity
and consultation. Unless there be a real and imperative demand for
its services at the South, the Home Missionary Society probably
will find all that it can do in its present field. If such a demand
arise, the Society will do its best to meet it, not in rivalry of,
but in co-operation with, the Missionary Association. There may be
localities where the former can work in the same line to better
advantage than the latter. Nobody need borrow trouble on their
account, for both are pledged, and honestly, we are sure, to keep
out of each other’s way when necessary, and together to erase “the
color line” as fast as possible.
CRITICISMS NOTED.
EDITORIAL IN ADVANCE.
We fear that many of those who are criticising the policy of the
society (A. H. M. S.), in pushing its work in the South, know
little or nothing either of the New West or of the South. We call
the attention of Dr. Bacon, and the minority which he represents,
to a few facts. In the first place, the American Missionary
Association cannot reach the white people of the South. In proof of
this we appeal to agents of that society, who are in the field—Dr.
Roy and the missionaries down South. One of the missionaries has
just been in this office and gave his testimony most freely, while
we were reading the proof of Dr. Bacon’s article. He said: “I have
been three years in Alabama. I am pastor of a colored church there.
We are prosperous. We were never more so. The Southern people are
coming more and more to labor with us, and to co-operate with us
in every way for the education of the negro. But there must be a
colored church for colored people, and a white church for white
people, and this will be done without saying anything about it.
Both races prefer it, and it is a natural method. Our society
cannot reach the white people, we ought not to attempt to do so.” *
* *
There is a call for the work of the American Home Missionary
Society in the South. To refuse to go there would be wicked. That
society has just as much right to build a church in Mississippi or
Georgia, and to give it aid, as it has to aid a church in Iowa or
Dakota. No other society has a right to bid it keep north of Mason
and Dixon’s line.
WHO SHALL WORK AT THE SOUTH?
BY REV. J. E. ROY, D.D.
_To the Editor of the Advance_:
In your response to Dr. Bacon on this question, you said: We appeal
to Dr. Roy. I did not understand you as committing me; but finding
that some brethren took you as setting me down to the theory that
the A. M. A. could not do the work among the white people there
because of its relation to the colored, I wish to disavow it, for I
never held that view, never expressed it. I think that the A. M. A.
_could_ do that work if the constituency shall so direct, though,
as our experience among the mountain people of Kentucky proved, it
would require patience, wisdom and fortitude, and would be a slow
process.
_The Advance._
RESOLUTION AT SARATOGA MEETING.
Voted, That a committee of five be appointed who shall consider our
denominational work in the South and confer with the secretaries of
the American Missionary Association, or any committees appointed
by that society, in reference to the same, and report at our next
meeting.
Committee to confer with the American Missionary Association—Rev.
Drs. J. E. Twichell, G. L. Walker, Lyman Abbott, C. L. Goodell, and
A. S. Barnes, Esq.
_The Home Missionary._
BUREAU OF WOMAN’S WORK.
MISS D. E. EMERSON, SECRETARY.
* * * * *
FROM OUR LADY MISSIONARY, WILMINGTON, N.C.
MISS A. E. FARRINGTON.
My work the past month has been very encouraging. Mrs. Steele has
been with us and special meetings were held among the women and
girls. At one of these about 90 were present, and many seemed
deeply interested. At the close quite a number rose for prayers and
remained for personal conversation. After the meeting that night,
which was also quite full, the same girls remained, and several
expressed the hope that they had given their hearts to Jesus. Some
of them had been very thoughtful for weeks, and seemed to need just
the help that these meetings gave to bring them to a decision. A
meeting of the boys was also held. The girls begged me to keep on
with meetings for them, which I have very gladly done every Monday
after school, from twenty to thirty-five coming in. Nine or ten
of them hope they have become Christians. Several of them wish to
unite with the church at once. They were examined and their friends
consulted, and three were propounded for admission, but will not be
received until they have had a little time to test their sincerity.
Influences have been brought to bear to draw them away from us.
They have been told that there is no religion where everything is
so quiet, and endeavors have been made to get them into revival
meetings which are wild with excitement. Last week some of our
teachers went into one of these meetings, where several girls were
rolling on the floor, crying and moaning. One lady thought she saw
one of her scholars among them, and going to her held out her hand
and told her to get up. She obeyed at once, and her teacher led her
to a seat, where she talked to her quietly a few moments, telling
her that God did not require any such thing as that of her or any
one else, that her good conduct in school and elsewhere lately
was stronger evidence that she had given her heart to Jesus than
anything she saw there. Afterwards she went to another part of the
church, where others of her scholars were, quieting them, some
going home as soon as they saw her. These lambs of the flock need
to be very tenderly guarded, and others seem only waiting to be led
along the right way.
* * * * *
A VALUED WORKER GONE.
Rev. Dr. Woodworth, of our Boston office, in a commemorative
address on the death of Mrs. D. L. Furber, of Newton Centre, Mass.,
gives an account of her devotion to the cause of missions, in
language fitted to arouse, in no common degree, the zeal of the
Christian women of the country. He says: