Newspaper Page Text
10 (422) T H E P
A QUESTION OF LOYALTY.
It is not the province of the religious press
to promote partisan politics, but there is a department
of service which is vitally affected
by politics, namely, public morals, with which
religious papers must deal. There is another
interest with which both religion and politics in
their separate capacities must deal, namely,
the preservation and perpetuation of religious
liberty, and the separation of Church and State.
Whoever would dynamite these bed-rock principles
is an enemy of the American people,
and whoever aids and encourages such ene
/ i_ _ i . A i*i
lines irom wnatever motive is iiKewise an enemy.
The Protestant press is becoming aroused
and alarmed by the persistent fawning upon
Romanism in which our President is indulging.
At this particular time there is no mistaking
his motives, and the question is being seriously
asked?to what extent shall a high official
go in acts that are subversive of constitutional
principles of government, and of the rights of
the great majority of American citizens?
In view of two recent executive orders, ministerial
associations in different parts of the
land are taking formal action. The following
is a paper adopted by the Presbyterian Ministerial
Association of Pittsburgh:
"Whereas, President Taft has suspended
the order issued by Commissioner Valentine,
forbidding the use of a religious garb in our
Indian public schools; we hereby do earnestly
protest against tne l resident s action as seeming
to be utterly at variance with the provision
of the Constitution of the United States in its
treatment of the relation of Church and State.
Commissioner Valentine's order looked to the
eon ~etion of a long-standing abuse against
which frequent and earnest protest had been
made as subversive of our constitutional principle
separating Church and State, and subversive
of the just rights of a large portion of
the citizens of the land. We moreover protest
that the President took the above action in
spite of a request from Dr. Charles L. Thompson,
representing twenty-four Protestant denominations,
asking a hearing from the President.
"Whereas, Under the present national administration
the public school teachers in the
Philippine Islands are. denied the religious
liberties granted unto them by our National
Constitution by an order contained in Circular
No. 32, S. 1908, of the Bureau of Education of
the Philippine Islands, forbidding such teachers
to give 'religious instruction of any kind
at any time, even outside of the public
school room.'
t I TTT . A 1 i il n J
we respectively request tne uovernmeni
to rescind the order contained in Circular 32,
S. 1908.
"We also request the Federal Council of
Churches to take up these matters, and in so
far as possible have a general dignified and
effective protest sent to President Taft from
all the religious bodies it represents."
Apparently to make assurance doubly sure
the President recently dispatched his private
secretary to Rome, bearing a personal letter to
the Pope. This letter is said to have contained
an expression of thanks to "His holiness"
for appointing three additional American Cardinals.
A special cable was sent to an American
paper announcing the performance at the
Vofioon onrl orvoni firiw 4 V% 4 'o
v (iiivrui uu u oj'ci:i 1nif^ mat tnc X I roiuciJt n
secretary "abstained from seeing the king and
had no communication of any kind with the
Quirinal," which doubtless pleased the Pope?
"the prisoner of the Vatican," immensely.
The "special cable" contains the following:
"The Pope has written a long autograph letter
in French to Mr. Taft and has given it to
Ma^or Archibald W. Butt to he delivered personally
to the President. The correspondent
of The Daily News is indirectlv informed that
the letter wartnly thanks Mr. Taft for sending
his personal aid to the Vatican and assures him
that th'e visit was highly appreciated.
The letter further refers to the development
RESBYTER1AN OP THE 30
of Catholicism in America and recalls the
friendly and uninterrupted relations between
the Vatican and the United States, which he is
convinced will continue through this and future
administrations. It alludes to Mr. Taft'B
work in connection with the settlement of the
Philippine church property question and concludes
with a cordial expression of good
wishes.
Although Major Butt's visit has been attributed
to ill health, it is well known that hb *
came to Rome to see the Pope and to deliver
a letter from President Taft to him. Major
Butt was flirilisllPfl with nfPilontiolo Co*
dinals Merry del Val and Rampolla and a number
of other influential prelates. Thus an audience
was arranged without the slightest
trouble. Major Butt abstained from seeing the
king and had no communication of any kind
with the Quirinal."
THE FOREIGN MISSION DEBT.
Little has been heard of late about efforts to
compass the foreign missions' debt. If vigorous
efforts were making in that direction, it
is likely there would have been some report
of it. Shall the church be idle and let her good
name suffer and let our missions themselves
continue bearing for it the heavy burden
which is upon their shoulders?
The debt can be lifted! All that is needful
to do this is simply to do it, and to do it now.
Those who have had some part in trying to
solve the problem have invariably succeeded.
They have found the hearts of the people warm
and readily moved. They have found them
intelligent about the matter. They have found
them loyally desiring to see the church freed of
an obligation, which is not to her credit.
Where the effort has been fairly made, and
earnestly, there has been substantial response.
We have yet to hear of the first church in
which it has been faithfully tried, that has
utterly refused to bear a part. In one State,
whose Synod officially declared its sense of
obligation as to its pro rata of the debt, quite
general effort has been made in the past three
or i our montns, in a very quiet but persistent
way, and that Synod's proportional part of the
debt has been provided for. And in that case,
too, it was a Synod which was not responsible,
so far as previous unredeemed pledges were
concerned, for the debt. It had met its special
pledge in full.
What one Synod or one section of the
church can do, all the others can do. The
trouble just now is that they have not seriously
addressed themselves to the problem.
And meanwhile, the cause, so wonderfully
blessed of God in the very year in which its
administrative has become in a wav hn'n/ti.
J ? - ~ ~J 1
capped, is now suffering. We await, almost
with concern, the condition which the close
of the ecclesiastical year will disclose.
HOW SHOULD CHURCH REVENUE BE
RAISED.
An extract from an address delivered some
years ago, recently incorporated in the manual
of the First Church of Staunton, Va., is of
so much practical value that we have assumed
the liberty of passing it on. The general reader
and church worker will find it illuminating
and edifying, while finance committees and
treasurers will be confirmed in the persuasion
mat the waj' to raise church revenues is the
good old Biblical way which flourishes above the
wreck of all human devices. We read:
"A little more than a hundred years ago, the
church was constituted by law in Virginia.
The people were assessed by public officers,
and the money due from them "for the support
of religion," was collected by tax-gatherers,
like any other public dues. The money
thus raised was applied for the support of
"the church," and Dissenters, consisting then
UTH [ April 10, 1912
mainly of Presbyterians and Baptists, had to
contribute as well as others, and in addition, to
provide for the maintenance of their own institutions,
as best they could. Amongst the results
of the Revolution of 1776, the religious
establishment was abolished.
But soon afterward, the scheme of a "general
assessment" for the support of religion
was proposed in the State Legislature. It was
earnestly advocated by Patrick Henry and
other distinguished public men, who appre~
; * _c ?ii_:? ?j Jj?J
voitu me impuxiitiiuu ui rcngiuii uuu aesireu
to promote its influence amongst the people.
According to this scheme all tax-payers were
to contribute, willingly or unwillingly, to a
general fund, to be apportioned to the various
denominations, the only liberty granted to the
tax-payer being that of indicating the church
or society to receive his quota.
The Presbyterian clergy and people warmly
opposed the scheme, as an infringement upon
liberty and injurious to religion. Memorial
after memorial in opposition to it, was adopted
by Hanover Presbytery, then the only
Presbytery in the State, and the Rev. John B.
Smith, of Hampden-Sidney, was sent to Richmond
to remonstrate in person before the Legislature.
Finally, a general convention of
Pt?noKtff AWl n V?r. -A T~l~Xl 1 b
i kvoujiuiaiio naa nciu at utjuiei vmurcn, in
Augusta County, which adopted an earnest
protest against the measure. Soon afterward,
the bill securing complete religious liberty was
passed by the Legislature, and our people congratulated
themselves on the establishment of
just and sound principles.
The policy of our church was therefore long
ago established, that the institutions of religion
should be supported by the voluntary,
free will offerings of the worshippers. "Whatever
plan for raising money infringes in any
degree upon this fundamental principle,
should be carefully avoided. Money is indispensable.
There is no denying that, and there
is no incongruity in keeping the fact before
the people. In every civilized community
money is necessary for subsistence, and without
it the religion of Jesus Christ cannot be
maintained and propagated. In the hands of
one who loves God and his fellowmen, it is a
blessed thing. It may be sanctified and become
a holy thing. Let us not fall into the mistake
of condemning money as something unclean and
not to be mentioned in connection with religion.
It is not money itself, but the undue, sordid
love of pelf, which the Bible denounces. It
not only represents dwellings and food and
clothing, but also churches, Bibles, and to some
extent even the proclamation of the Gospel.
How shall preachers abide in their calling, or
go on their errand without the means of subsistancef
And how shall meetinsr-houses be
i :ii. ? j* ? * - ? -
uuiit, ana warmea, ana lighted at night, unless
funds are provided for the purpose?
Money is indispensable. How shall it be
obtained? Not by a system of governmental
taxation?our ancestors delivered us from that
burden a hundred years ago. Nor by an arbitrary
and impracticable assessment by church
officers, in consideration of a certain allotted
space in the house of worship. But rather by
each individual assessing himself. It is not
for me to say what my neighbor shall contribute.
I am bound to give, or pay, in the fear of
God and according to my ability. The Bible
lays down the rule?"Each one according to
Li- .Lili. ft
njh aomiy."
It is objected to this plan that some persons
who are able, will contribute nothing and
that the fear of losing their pews must be kept
before them in order to obtain their contributions.
T imagine there are very few people
of this kind. No one of the least self respect,
>