THE COMMUNITY'S RELIGIOUS LIFE
From the earliest times and among all peoples the common religious life
has formed one of the strongest bonds of the rural community. Several of
the original thirteen colonies which formed the United States were
settled by those seeking freedom to worship as they chose, and as their
descendants migrated westward many of the new settlements were largely
composed of the membership of some one church or those of a similar
faith. Dr. Warren H. Wilson has called attention to the fact that the
Mormons, the Pennsylvania Germans, and the Scotch Presbyterians are the
most successful farmers and remain on the land because they have given a
religious sanction to country life and have made the church the center
of the life of the community, as it was in the medieval village
community of Europe. Whatever attitude one may take toward their
religious beliefs, all impartial observers are agreed that the Mormons
have established the strongest agricultural communities and that they
have discovered and applied to a high degree some of the most
fundamental principles of social organization. Concerning them Dr.
Wilson says:
"These exceptional farmers are organized in the interest of
agriculture. The Mormons represent this organization in the
highest degree. Perhaps no other so large or so powerful a
body of united farmers is found in the whole country. They
have approached the economic questions of farming with
determination to till the soil. They distrust city life and
condemn it. They teach their children and they discipline
themselves to love the country, to appreciate its
advantages and to recognize that their own welfare is bound
up in their success as farmers, and in the continuance of
their farming communities. This agricultural organization
centers in their country churches. They have turned the
force of religion into a community making power, and from
the highest to the lowest of their church officers the
Mormon people are devoted to agriculture as a mode of
living."[51]
But although large numbers of communities throughout the United States
were settled by people of one religious faith, and thus had the
strongest bond of community, yet large areas were settled by scattered
homesteaders belonging to different sects, and as time went on,
newcomers came into the older communities and established churches of
various denominations, so that throughout most of the country the
churches have come to have more of a divisive than a unifying influence
on community life.
In our discussion of the religious life of the rural community we shall
confine our attention to the protestant churches, because most of our
rural people are protestants. It is true that in some sections, such as
Louisiana and southern Maryland, and in many sections recently settled
by Europeans, the people are mostly Roman Catholics; but in general the
catholic church is strongest in the cities and towns and does not have
strong rural parishes throughout the country. Throughout most of the
United States the Methodist, Episcopal and Baptist denominations have by
far the largest number of churches and membership, and their traditions
and methods have largely shaped the religious life of our rural
communities.
During the century in which the United States west of the Alleghanies
has been settled conditions have changed with such rapidity that the
religious life is still largely dominated by its development during the
days of early settlement and the present generation is faced with the
problem of readjustment of its religious institutions to meet the
present situation. In the days of the pioneer the circuit rider made his
rounds over a large district, preaching at school houses and private
homes and in the few country churches at intervals of one to three
months. As the country became more thickly populated, country churches
sprang up and several of them were joined together in the employment of
a resident pastor with preaching at the larger churches every week and
at the outlying stations once in two or three weeks. Doctrinal beliefs
were strong and theological differences were frequently bitter. The
preaching was practically the only service of the church, except for an
annual "protracted meeting" or revival. The main emphasis was upon the
personal salvation of the sinner. Sunday schools had not become a
recognized feature of the church and but little thought was given to
religious education and training by the church. The minister christened
the babies, married the young people and buried the dead, but otherwise,
with numerous preaching services, he was unable to do much pastoral
work. A large proportion of the rural churches were located in the open
country and like the district school were largely neighborhood churches,
for bad roads and horse-drawn vehicles made it difficult for people to
go over two or three miles. In many cases several churches were
established in a single village or in nearby neighborhoods by different
denominations and were largely supported by home-missionary aid
contributed by the older churches in the East and the wealthier city
parishes. Prior to the Civil War when most of our population was engaged
in farming and before the exodus of the last half century to the towns
and cities, most of the rural churches were fairly well attended, but
with the recent decline in rural population, many of them, and
particularly those in the open country, have faced the same situation as
the district school in that there are now too few people to make
possible the economic support of a pastor and church building.
Furthermore, it must be recognized that the standards of rural people
have changed as regards the church in the same way that they have
concerning the school. When all of the people have had a common school
education, many of them have had high school training, a few have been
to college, and many of them now and then visit the larger churches of
towns and cities, they are no longer satisfied with the occasional
preaching of an uneducated man, however religious and earnest he may be.
The Sunday school has become an established part of the work of the
church and as people have appreciated the value of education in secular
affairs, they have come to place more hope in the religious training of
their children than in merely saving them by sudden conversion. The
church is becoming more and more an institution for the training and
expression of religious life rather than only a place for preaching.
Moreover, the church now has to meet the competition of other
institutions and interests which did not exist in the earlier days. The
grange, the lodge, organizations of all sorts, moving pictures,
athletics and automobiles, furnish means of association and command the
interest and support of the people, where formerly there was only the
church for the righteous and the tavern or the saloon for the convivial.
All of these and other factors have conspired to weaken the relative
influence of the church in our rural communities and the situation has
become so serious in many sections that it has challenged the attention
of denominational leaders. During the past fifteen years there have
been a series of careful studies of the condition of the rural churches
in various parts of the country. These studies have given indisputable
evidence of the conditions responsible for the decline of the rural
church and of the measures which must be taken if the religious life of
the rural community is to be adequately fostered; and they have clearly
shown that the problems of the rural church must be solved from the
standpoint of meeting the religious needs of the rural community rather
than that of the interests of the individual church. In the older parts
of the country, and--alas--far too frequently in the newer sections, the
most serious obstacle to the religious life of the community is an
unnecessary number of churches, which divide its limited resources both
of funds and leadership. Overchurching is more largely responsible for
the decadence of the rural church than any one factor. Small
congregations are unable to support a full time pastor, and where
several of them are competing in a small community, it is deprived of
the services of a resident minister. Preaching once in two weeks and
practically no pastoral visitation are not conducive to the life of a
church. The small church maintains its Sunday school with difficulty for
there are too few of any one age for a satisfactory division of classes.
Equally serious is the fact that the ablest men will not enter the
ministry to devote themselves to what they regard as an unnecessary and
unchristian competition.
Tompkins County, where I live, is a fair average of rural New York. A
recent survey shows that but eight of its twenty-eight rural communities
have full time resident pastors, though there are ministers residing in
twenty-five parishes who also serve other parishes nearby. Throughout
the county there was one church for every 332 people, but the average
village church had but 92 active members, and the average country
church had but 32. The church membership has remained practically
stationary for thirty years, while the attendance has decreased from 21
percent of the rural population in 1890 to 14 percent in 1920. One
community of 900 population had five churches, no one of which had a
resident pastor or over 45 members, while two of them had but 11 members
each and were closed. Six strictly rural communities in the southern
part of the county have 16 churches, though none of these places can
properly support more than one church with a resident pastor. After a
careful study of the whole county, I am of the opinion that if at least
one-third of the rural churches were abandoned or combined, the work of
the church would be greatly strengthened. This county is cited because
it is fairly typical; many worse have been reported in other surveys.
Another handicap of the rural church is the frequent shift of ministers.
In Tompkins County only 4 of the 57 churches have had the same pastor
for ten years, 17 changed pastors three times in ten years and 17 of the
pastors had been in their parishes one year or less. When a minister
stays but a year or two, his parishioners tend to be only acquaintances
and rarely does he really know them. A minister cannot become well
enough acquainted with a new parish to do effective pastoral work in
less than a year, and many ministers who have seemingly good programs of
work fail to realize them because they attempt to force progress and to
secure results more rapidly than is possible. One of the chief duties of
the rural pastor is to train leadership. A church is no stronger than
its permanent resident leadership. No matter how brilliant the work of
the minister, if he has failed to develop local leadership, his work is
soon dissipated when he leaves. Now leadership cannot be produced in a
year or so and where it is most needed it requires several years to
discover and develop it. Unfortunately much of this frequent shifting of
rural pastors is directly due to ecclesiastical rule rather than to the
needs of the local churches, though much of it results from meager
salaries and sectarian rivalries which soon discourage a man who sees
larger opportunities for service elsewhere.
Numerous studies of the actual condition of the rural church in many
parts of the country all show the futility of denominational competition
in maintaining two or three churches where only one is needed or can be
supported. Furthermore, the present generation of young married people
who desire the best religious influences for their children are no
longer much interested in the theological or ecclesiastical differences
of the various denominations, and they refuse to support them or do so
under protest and with an apathy which makes effective church work
impossible. As a result, there has been a strong movement in recent
years toward the consolidation of rural churches and for the
establishment of what are called "community churches." Although much
effort has been given toward getting denominational boards and leaders
to form state federations for promoting inter-denominational comity, and
although notable progress in this direction has been made in a few
states, particularly in Maine and Vermont, yet the chief impetus to the
community church movement has come from the people themselves, who have
insisted upon a combination of the local churches often in spite of
ecclesiastical indifference or opposition. The lack of coal in 1918
induced many churches to hold their services together and in many cases
gave an impetus to the idea of their permanent federation.
The term community church has come to be applied to various forms of
churches, but whatever its form, its fundamental purpose is the service
of the community rather than the advancement of a particular
denomination and it admits all Christian people to its fellowship, in
contrast to the exclusiveness of the purely denominational church which
insists upon the importance of particular theological beliefs or systems
of church government.
As the term is now used a "community church" may be a church definitely
affiliated with some denomination, it may be a "federated" church, or a
"union" church. The union church is unaffiliated with any religious
denomination. If it be the only church in a community, it is then a
community church, but if one or two others decline to unite, it is a
_community church_ only in aspiration. It is this type of independent
union church, to which the term community church is most commonly
applied by the laity, and such community churches have increased rapidly
in the past five years as a protest of the people against denominational
competition and inefficiency. These independent community churches have
now become so numerous in one or two states that they are holding state
conventions. The question at once arises whether if they become
affiliated in even the most nominal manner they will not soon constitute
what will practically be another denomination and will fail to effect
the growth of Christian unity which they desire. On the other hand,
denominational leaders who are in entire sympathy with the abolishment
of competition and the establishment of but one church in a rural
community where only one is needed, point out that the union church
loses the advantages of affiliation with a body of churches which have
regional and national boards and agencies for giving them assistance and
support in their work. The history not only of church but of all sorts
of secular organizations, indicates that sooner or later local
organizations with common aims and purposes tend to get together in
conventions and to establish federations through which they may unite
their resources in maintaining agencies to promote the common cause.
Most organizations, whether religious or secular, need the stimulus of
association with kindred organizations devoted to the same purposes and
the help of expert supervision which can be secured only from state or
national bodies.
The "federated church" obviates this difficulty to a certain extent.
Each of the federating churches maintains its own corporate identity and
its affiliation with its own denomination, to which it sends its
contributions for benevolences and denominational work. The federating
churches form a joint organization for the employment of a minister and
use the same building, or use two buildings in common--sometimes one for
church and one for Sunday school services or social purposes,--and the
church is a community church for all practical purposes. In the long run
this usually results in a federated church finally affiliating with the
denomination which is preferred by the large majority of its membership
and which is least objectionable to the minority.
Denominational leaders, on the other hand, hold that neither "union" or
"federated" churches will be permanently satisfactory, but that the
community church, though organized on the "federated" principle, should
be definitely affiliated with some one denomination, and that a single
denominational church which effectively serves the whole community may
be truly a "community church."
Whatever the outcome of this movement may be it has forced the
recognition of the fact that the religious welfare of the rural
community should be the first consideration and that denominational
relations must be conceived as a means rather than an end, as has
commonly been the case heretofore. When country people have learned the
advantages of consolidated schools and of cooperation in marketing, and
have developed the ability to work together in these and other phases of
community life, they are no longer content to waste their energies in
maintaining feeble churches, whose differences no longer command their
loyalties, and they very naturally desire to bury their religious
differences and to cooperate in the maintenance of a single church which
will give that inspiration and dynamic to all the life of the community
which can be furnished only through the religious motive. So in religion
as in other phases of life, the community idea is replacing the older
individualism.
We have already noted the change of emphasis in the work of the church
from that of merely holding a preaching service for the personal
salvation of adults, to a greater reliance upon the power of religious
education through the Sunday school and other organizations of young
people. When Sunday schools were first started, a century or more ago,
they were bitterly opposed by many of the more conservative church
people. To-day they are a recognized part of all protestant churches,
but oddly enough their advancement has been due more largely to the work
of the laity than to that of the clergy, although there can be no
question that church membership is most largely recruited from the
Sunday schools. Thus in our survey of Tompkins County, New York, we
found that out of 175 persons admitted to the rural churches on
confession of faith, 61 of whom were adults and 114 children, 134 were
previous members of the Sunday school.
The rural Sunday school in the small church has the same difficulty as
does the district school, in that it has too few scholars of
approximately the same age to form classes of sufficient size to command
their interest and enthusiasm. Likewise it is forced to depend upon
untrained and frequently-changing teachers. Although there has been a
marked advance in the grading and organization of Sunday schools and of
the literature for their study, yet there is a growing conviction that a
period of twenty minutes a week is inadequate to secure effective
religious education. On the other hand, although the separation of
church and state in this country prevents the giving of religious
instruction in our public schools, educators have come to recognize its
importance in the education of the child. As a result there is now a
definite movement for the organization of week-day schools of religion.
When these schools are conducted by trained teachers and their work is
of an educational standard satisfactory to the public schools, the
pupils are given credit for their work toward promotion in the public
schools. The State of New York has enacted definite legislation
permitting the schools to dismiss those pupils whose parents so desire,
for a definite period each week when they may attend whatever school of
religious instruction their parents may designate, and for which the
public schools shall give credit when satisfactory as to educational
methods. Such week-day schools of religious instruction have been
carried on in some of our cities for several years, and at the present
time are being introduced into rural communities in various sections of
the country. Sometimes each church maintains its own school, but
inasmuch as this movement is usually promoted by the inter-denominational
Sunday school associations the tendency is to secure the cooperation of
all the protestant churches in establishing one school for the community.
This movement is still young, but if it makes the progress which now
seems probable, it should be a powerful agency toward the elimination of
weak churches. It makes possible the organization of graded classes of
sufficient size so that a real group spirit and interest are created and
the instruction can be given with the same pedagogical efficiency as in
the public schools. Obviously the success of the movement will depend
upon the degree to which it can command the support of the whole
community and it will thus tend to strengthen community life.
A new attitude toward the social life of its people is also having a
large influence upon the program of many rural churches. Formerly
religion was one thing and sociability was another, and the church felt
no responsibility for the recreation of its people. Gradually church
suppers and sociables became customary, but they were held either to
raise money or as a means for attracting outsiders into the fold. In the
days when money was scarce in the rural community it was often difficult
to raise the pastor's salary. Much of his salary was paid in kind, and
annual "donation parties" contributed a considerable share of his
living. But as markets developed and farmers came to sell most of their
products for cash, money became more plentiful and it became evident
that no church can be maintained upon a sound business basis which does
not make up an annual budget and raise it by the direct contributions of
its people. Putting the finances of the church on a business basis has
removed the need of church suppers for raising funds, but their social
value has become so apparent that they are now held merely for the
better acquaintance and enjoyment of the church people. In so far as the
social life of the church has been consciously planned as a "bait" for
outsiders to attract them into the church, it has, in the long run
usually been ineffectual. Too often the motive has been so thinly veiled
and the program of the social hour has been given such a religious
atmosphere that outsiders very naturally take a defensive attitude, and
although they may enjoy the occasion they are perfectly aware of its
ulterior objective.
Recently, however, the church has come to appreciate that play and
recreation are a normal and necessary part of the life of its people and
that it cannot abolish the saloon and condemn certain amusements without
incurring a responsibility to provide, or to see that there is provided,
satisfying facilities for recreation and sociability. In short, it is
coming to recognize that a social program should be undertaken because
it is a worthy service and a real need of the people and not as a mere
means to other ends. Furthermore, where the church generously sponsors a
social program which is enjoyed by all the people of the community,
without thought of its being aimed at any proselyting, many of them come
to take an increased interest in the strictly religious services and
work of the church.
So to-day many a rural church is holding community sings, its young
people are staging amateur dramatic entertainments, its boys have a
troop of boy scouts and the girls join the girl scouts or the camp-fire
girls, baseball and basketball teams are formed from the Sunday school
classes, the men have a club which meets once a month for the discussion
of current topics and a supper, the women come together for sewing
parties, and the whole people assemble for suppers and for the
celebration of national holidays and festival occasions. In a small
village in western New York the four Sunday schools have recently formed
an athletic association which has erected a one-story gymnasium in which
the boys can play basketball and all can find enjoyment.
One of the handicaps of the average country church is that its building
is not adapted to social purposes, although the newer buildings are
being constructed with better facilities. Sometimes this need is being
met by erecting a separate church house which is used for Sunday school
and social purposes. Where there is more than one church it is
frequently felt that one building may serve the needs of all and so in
many communities the churches have united in the promotion of community
buildings to serve as social centers for all the people. Thus in its
social as well as in its educational program the church finds that a
satisfactory social life cannot be secured through sectarian
competition, but that by united effort the churches may meet the
community needs.
Although in the past the chief duty of the country minister was to
preach on Sunday, yet those most beloved and most successful in building
up strong churches have won the hearts of their people more largely
through their pastoral work, through their personal acquaintance and
influence on the lives of families and individuals. Although a broader
educational and social program is needed in the rural church, there is
an equal opportunity for a larger service through a new sort of pastoral
work by the minister who can serve the community as a social worker.
There is an impression that there is no need for so-called social work,
for the expert assistance of the poor, the neglected, the delinquent,
and the mentally defective, in most rural communities; that this may be
necessary for the city slums, but that there are but few such people in
the open country. But the recent work started during the war by the Home
Service of the local chapters of the American Red Cross and the work of
various child welfare and health organizations have shown that country
people are not always aware of the needs of some of their not distant
neighbors, and that there is a deal of service which might be given the
more unfortunate members of the average rural community which they are
not now receiving. The average rural community cannot support a paid
social worker and needs but part of her time, while the county is
usually too large an area for her to cover. Why should not the rural
minister be qualified to do much of the family welfare work of his
community, calling in outside expert assistance when needed? What better
pastoral work could he do, and yet how many rural pastors are doing this
sort of work in any intelligent sort of fashion, and how many families
in need, outside of his own membership, would turn to the average rural
minister for help? Dr. C. J. Galpin has well said of the rural minister
that "he is the recognized community psychologist and sociologist." The
trouble is that although he is often so recognized, he is usually an
amateur rather than a professional. Obviously, as a doctor of souls, the
village pastor should be the local "social worker" of every rural
community, but if he is to so serve he must first be trained so that he
can bring to bear a knowledge of social science upon the problems of the
families with which he deals. An average rural community can hardly
afford more than one pastor with such qualifications, and it is evident
that he would need to give his whole time to one parish. Such a modern
representative of the old "cure" of the medieval parish could give real
spiritual service to many a rural family which the average rural church
never reaches, and he would be a real father to his people.
Finally, and most important, we must recognize that no other institution
can take the place of the Christian church as a source of those ideals
of life which give religious sanction to loyalty to the common good--to
the community--rather than to self or particular interests. The ideals
of its Founder who conceived the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood
of man as the norm of human relationships, and who thought man's
relation to man should be the expression of his loyalty to their common
Father, will ever furnish the strongest spiritual dynamic for the best
community life, for the whole community movement is but one means toward
the realization of His ideal of the Kingdom of God on earth. Indeed so
keen a mind as the late Professor Josiah Royce has interpreted the
spirit of the early church and the ultimate aim of Christianity as that
of "the beloved community."[52] Though it may require new equipment and
new methods to meet the changed conditions of modern life, the mission
of religion to interpret the highest values of life will ever make it
the motive force of community life, the heart of the community. As Dr.
E. DeS. Brunner has well said, "The aim of the country church movement
is not to substitute anything for the Gospel. It is to assist in
expressing the best religion of the ages in terms of the best spirit of
the age."[53]
FOOTNOTES:
[51] "The Evolution of the Country Community," p. 63. Boston, The
Pilgrim Press, 1912.
[52] Cf. "The Problem of Christianity."
[53] "The Country Church in the New World Order," p. 39.