Why Churches Fail by W. E. Hancock

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Nov 7, 1912

Why Churches Fail

By W. E. Hancock

W. E. HANCOCK

In the September number of Munsey’s Magazine there appeared an article by Joseph H. Odell, author of “Moses Breeze, Doctor of Sick Churches,” which expresses in unmistakable terms the true spirit that actuates the modern movement toward church confederation, or, as this writer expresses it, toward a “religious trust.”

After referring to the religious census of the United States, which shows that in this country there are one hundred eighty-six separate denominations, besides more than a thousand individualistic and independent churches, and that there is invested $1,500,000,000 in church property with annual overhead charges of $200,000,000, he says:—

“In spite of these figures, religion is not a trust, and more’s the pity. Whatever opinion we may hold about commercial combinations, the greatest boon to this country would be an organized ecclesiastical movement in restraint of competition,—a wide-spread, systematic merging of rival church organizations. The immediate need of the Protestant churches in the United States is not a revival of religion, but a renaissance of common sense; less homiletics and more economics.”

This writer evidently views religion not as an individual conviction, not as a personal experience, but as a thing to be regulated on the same principle as a trust runs its business to destroy competition. Those who would not by free choice worship according to the program of the “religious trust” should be driven to the wall, just as an independent commercial enterprise is forced out of business in the commercial world.

This idea is more clearly expressed further on in this same article in the following words:—

“In the first place, the boards of home missions, sustentation, and church extension of various denominations ought not to contribute to any church in an overcrowded region. If a number of rigid sectarians in any given neighborhood have not enough charity to worship with their fellow Christians, they should at least be compelled to pay for the luxury of their differentiating dogmas.”

In other words, if any number of people do not believe and worship with the majority of the community, they ought to be subjected to fines and penalties. This smacks very strongly of Puritanism, when he who dared to worship differently from his “fellow Christians” was put in stocks, flogged at whipping-posts, or put to death as a heretic.

Again he writes, “The ideal is not impossible of attainment if farmers will use the same common sense that they ordinarily give to the establishment of the communal grain elevator, cheese factory, or day-school.” This citation shows the low estimate the writer of this article has of the religion of Jesus Christ. He seems to consider the worship of Jehovah on the same level as the building of the communal elevator, the cheese factory, or the public schoolhouse. Evidently, religion to him is a question of so little importance that should his “fellow Christians” decide public worship to be a non-essential, and therefore bad economy, he would acquiesce and expect “rigid sectarians” to do likewise. In fact, one can account for such a position being taken by a professed Christian only on the basis that he regards Christianity as a mere social and economic element in civilization, to be dealt with and regulated by public opinion and legal enactments in the same way as any public, economic, or social question.

Can it be possible that the writer of this article realizes that Christianity is a personal experience and a thing so sacred and vital that upon one’s individual relation to it depends his eternal destiny? Does he not understand that the religion of Jesus Christ is not a question of economics? that it is a spiritual power which has not as its principal motive the betterment of morality, the extension of civilization, or the amelioration of the conditions of society, but the eternal salvation of the soul? It seems that he does not.

Herein lies the answer to the question of to-day, “Why churches fail,” not only country churches, but all churches. This gifted writer is not alone in his desire to bring all public questions into the church to be dealt with. The larger part of professed Christians of all denominations have become so engrossed in social questions, in things which are only incidentals in the work assigned to the church of Christ, that the temporal welfare of humanity is receiving attention far out of proportion to the proclamation of the vital and purely spiritual truths of the gospel of the early church, of the Reformers, and of a generation or two ago, when men were led to ask, “What must we do to be saved?” Let ministers take hold of their work with the spirit in which Paul exhorted Timothy to “preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long-suffering and doctrine.” If this is done, the social and economic phases of a community will take care of themselves.

To the Christian church the commission is given, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” Mark 16: 15. Social, economic, and political questions have no place in pulpits nor in churches only in so far as they may relate to the work of preaching the gospel. The work of preaching the gospel committed to the church is sufficiently extensive to occupy its attention without stooping to meet popular demands for amusements, which draw into the church an element wholly ignorant and indifferent regarding the divine commission of the Saviour. What churches need today is not more institutional buildings with play-rooms, bowling-alleys, pool-tables, baseball teams, tennis-courts, tournaments, and fairs, but a revival of the faith in the power of the simple gospel, and a new vision of Christ as the crucified and risen Saviour who is soon to “appear . . . without sin unto salvation.”

A religious trust will be the greatest curse, not the greatest boon, that could be introduced into this country. It will result in spiritual stagnation. Persecution of conscientious persons who can not submit their faith to the mandates of such a trust, will be sure to follow. Rome once had a monopoly on religion, and the dark ages followed. The blackest pages of human history are found when religion was held as a commodity under the control of the papal trust. History is sure to repeat itself when the same course is followed in this time.

May true religion abound and increase, and may it influence every phase of human life and human endeavor; but let it do so under the power of personal conviction and free persuasion. Let the church live more fully the religion of Christ and let the ministers preach it more powerfully, but God forbid that the religious convictions and the Christian activities of our Christian communities shall ever be under the domination of “an organized ecclesiastical movement in constraint of competition.”

Falls Church, Va.