ANOTHER CHURCH FEDERATION.
Tuesday evening, Nov. 13, 1900, at Syracuse, N. Y., there was taken probably the first positive step in what is announced as a “great religious movement.” And, in view of the times, and the consideration of a number of other developments, it is altogether likely that this will prove to be a part of a great religious movement. However, this is not to say that it is a great religious movement for good. There have been, in the world's history, a number of great religious movements that were about the worst things that could ever happen to the world. There was one in the fourth century, which culminated in the making of the papacy, and all that the papacy has been and is in the world. And, though this one, enthusiastically begun at Syracuse the other day, may indeed be the first step in what may prove to be a great religious movement, it is of the same sort as that one in the fourth century. And as certainly as it grows and prospers, it will culminate, in its place and degree, exactly as did that one in the fourth century, and will develop the image of the papacy. For it is nothing else than the definite organization of a federation of the churches in the United States. A report of the meeting says that the “church was crowded to the doors long before the opening of the services;” that “there were many noted divines present;” and that vice-president elect, Governor Theodore Roosevelt, of New York, presided and delivered an address, in which he said:— I believe intensely in the work you are striving to further, and feel that the people who believe in the underlying principles make an unspeakable mistake when they quarrel about the boundary lines between them, when they have a common enemy to face, who demands our united attention and our united action. We can not afford to quarrel, we must be united. It is deeds which count, not words. We can not all see the truth in the same light, but we should all strive for higher ideals, and for that Christian unity which will bring us in closer touch with one another. I belong myself to the Dutch Reformed Church. Now, down at Oyster Bay, we have no church of that small denomination, and I should be opposed to establishing one of that faith there, as it would be an injury to the other churches already established. Down there, as elsewhere, we have lots to do to make things better, and I am glad to see the churches working toward this betterment. I had a hand in inaugurating a movement there which I think will be permanent. On the Fourth of July we get the Baptist, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, and Catholic clergymen on the same platform. There is patriotic unity, and I want to see the same kind of spirit spread through all our people. I do not think I am less a member of the Reformed Church because I attend elsewhere. When I go to Washington next spring, I shall attend the Reformed church, if there is one there. I was one of the first to subscribe to the erection of a Catholic church at Oyster Bay; and when the first project came there, the Rev. Father Belford, . . . I was awfully glad to help him. In this work of church federation, I want you to be content with the little steps. Do not be discouraged if you can not take the long strides. We are not going to see unity in a day. You will meet all kinds of opposition and prejudice. There must be a spirit of broad charity. One hundred years ago rank intolerance prevailed in the colonies, but we have advanced, and this meeting to-night is an evidence of it. All men who believe in the common virtues which underlie the foundation of our national life should come together. The church should be the center of the social and moral well-being of the community. I am more and more impressed with the truth of this. The first regular speech of the evening was made by the Rev. David Wills, of Oswego, who said:— Church federation is warranted. It is practical. It is not rainbow-chasing. This movement is practical, and would to God the ministry realized and knew how the people were longing to get together. Give the people a chance to work together. Church federation is imperative. It must be had as a condition of church life. It is not more money nor more men that we need, but a more honest business administration of the affairs of the church. Church federation is a step in the right direction. The next day, at a meeting of ministers and other prominent men, the Church Federation of the State of New York was formally organized. A constitution was adopted. The material parts of that constitution are as follows:— 1. Name.—This organization shall be called the Federation of Churches and Christian Workers of the State of New York. 2. Object.—The object of this federation is the promotion of effective co-operation among the churches of the State of New York, in order that their essential unity may be manifested; that the evangelization of every community may be more systematically accomplished; that a means may be found of expressing the united Christian sentiment of the State in regard to moral issues; that the various Christian churches and Christian workers and benevolent activities of the commonwealth may be more completely co-ordinated; and that other appropriate ends may be secured. When this constitution came before the meeting for consideration,— It was suggested by the Rev. A. B. Coit that the word “evangelical” should be added to the designation of what churches should be permitted to join the federation. The Rev. Dr. Hegeman, of New York, said that it would be unwise to put any word in the constitution which would offend any body of churchmen. At a meeting held in New York City Bishop Potter favored a federation. “If you put in the word ‘evangelical,’” Mr. Hegeman said, “you will put something in the way which will interfere with the work. To my way of thinking, it will be impolitic.” The Rev. Dr. Zimmerman said that he was not afraid of the resolution as read. The evangelical bodies were in the majority, and he did not think that the Jew or the Unitarian would absorb them. “We want to get all we can in this federation.” The Rev. A. B. Coit was afraid that a mistake would be made if the basis of federation permitted the admission of those who denied the Messiahship of Christ. He said the success of the movement depended upon the proper solution of the article. The Rev. E. N. Packard, D. D., said he thought that Dr. Coit was talking about a difficulty which did not exist. This movement is a simple manifestation of Christian unity. There is room in the constitution for the great bodies known as evangelical, and those known as Christian workers, such as Y. M. C. A. He said he would deplore it if the federation should be halted at the very beginning. The Rev. Dr. Clark defined the word “evangelical.” He said it had not been applied historically to the Roman Catholics, the Episcopalians, Unitarians, and Universalists. We can not afford to eliminate these bodies from this work. In the present constitution it would be unwise and hurtful to use the word. We can not do anything to imperil this organization. The Rev. Dr. Zimmerman said it would be fatal to inject the word “evangelical” into the constitution, which would offend those who would co-operate with us. He cited the co-operation of the Roman Catholic Church some years ago in Syracuse in closing the saloons on Sunday. He said that the work of the federation was to be practical and not sentimental. The Rev. Martyn Summerbell spoke on the objects of the federation, and said that when he was travelling on the cars, he did not ask who were his fellow travelers. If there is a definite exclusion of others, we raise a barrier. He did not think that the Roman Catholics would interfere or disturb the work, as the organization of the local bodies would take care of the work. It would be a mistake to exclude the men who will help you in the philanthropic and moral work to be undertaken. The Rev. Mr. Main said that he did not believe in federation with those who deny the divinity of Jesus Christ. The Rev. F. N. Betts said that as a Universalist, the federation would have no trouble. “We will not come into the federation until we are assured that you want us. But we are working for federation, and believe in it from top to bottom.” Others spoke on the proposition to make the second resolution incorporate the word “evangelical”777before the words “Christian churches and Christian workers.” The motion to insert the word “evangelical” was rejected by a vote of seventeen to three. The Rev. H. H. Stebbins, D. D., of Rochester, was elected president; and Theodore Roosevelt and William E. Dodge, of New York, vice-presidents. It should be remembered, in this connection, that only last Thursday, November 29, a great meeting of Catholics was held in New York City, to consider Catholic Federation. And thus, with Protestant Federation on the one hand and Catholic Federation on the other, interesting scenes will soon be opened to the people of the United States. It is well to note, just now, too, at the beginning, that the Catholics start in with a great advantage; for they are expected to work in the Protestant Federation: the Protestant Federation is definitely arranged so that the Catholics will not only not be excluded, but that they will really be included, and that nothing will be done that would suggest that Catholics are not an essential part of the federation. Undoubtedly Catholic priests will work with this Protestant Federation, at least enough to check any step that might be taken which would advance purely Protestant ends. Yet, at the same time, the Catholic Church has her own distinct Federation, working with might and main for distinctly and confessedly Catholic ends. Now, in the nature of things, that situation can not long continue. This Protestant Federation will not very long be content to work smoothly along including Catholics, and especially modifying every move it makes, that it shall not prevent Catholic co-operation; while, all the time, there is this distinct Catholic Federation working steadily and solely for Catholic ends. And thus it is certain that, before long, these two federations will not only be distinct, but in antagonism. And when that time comes, then will be fulfilled that which is written: “Old controversies which have apparently been hushed for a long time will spring up; new and old will commingle.” And when they do, then, with national prestige and political as well as ecclesiastical power and preferment, the prizes to be contended for, all the bitterness and intensity of the old controversies will be revived and manifested, and even intensified. Commotion, strife, violence, persecution, and all the evil accompaniments of rivals to establish religion will afflict and ruin the nation, even as that former thing of the kind afflicted and finally ruined the Roman Empire.