RECENT RELIGIOUS TENDENCIES IN ENGLAND.
By M. Ellsworth Olsen
(From Our Own Correspondent.) A cursory survey of English religious life during the last three or four years reveals three distinct tendencies which may be taken as determinative. First, there is developing, on the part of the laboring classes, a marked indifference in matters of religion, and a feeling almost of hostility toward the clergy. Secondly, all classes of society are assuming a more favorable attitude toward Roman Catholicism. (I am not now referring to the Ritualistic movement, which is a thing apart, having really nothing to do with the tendency noticeable throughout Great Britain to-day to look with a sympathy, almost amounting to admiration, upon an ecclesiastic organization red with the blood of millions of martyrs.) Thirdly, English religious thought in recent years has shown a very strong tendency toward Rationalism, using the term now in a large sense, to include various cults within and without the pale of the orthodox churches, all of which, however, are alike in producing a sort of devitalized Christianity, a Christianity bereft of its distinguishing characteristics, of its vital power, a Christianity, in short, without Christ. The third of these tendencies has shown a marvelous growth in the last few years, and occupies to-day a strongly-fortified position right in the heart of popular Christian thought. To deal with it at all satisfactorily will require a separate article. I therefore turn to a consideration of the first two tendencies named. on the part of the so-called masses, may be traced to various causes. The conditions of their daily life are not conducive to the cultivation of that outward conformity to religious customs and observances which generally passes for Christianity. The poor are not so likely to do things for effect as their better-situated neighbors. Consequently they seldom go to church, except for religious help on the one hand, or for pure entertainment on the other. As, unfortunately, the average pastor usually has his hands too full of other matters to think of feeding his flock, the really hungry soul soon finds church-going rather unprofitable, and, as literature, politics, and social questions are all treated much more satisfactorily in the newspaper than they could be treated in the pulpit, except by the ablest and most eloquent ministers, it follows that the vast majority of the clergy face a great many empty seats. Some, knowing the general love of entertainment, are resorting to very questionable methods of filling their churches, thinking that, once the people are acquainted with the inside of the church, they will want to come regularly, even tho the special attractions cease; but invariably the audience drops off with the sensation, and the minister finds himself alone with his disappointed hopes. Of the hostility felt by workingmen toward the clergy, many evidences appear. The attitude of the “labor” press is unfriendly to the church. The socialist element, which bids fair soon to be the predominant party in all labor organizations in Great Britain, is frankly outspoken in its criticisms of church and clergy, whom it regards as leagued with capital. A curious instance of the strained feeling between the clergy and the laboring class occurred recently. Rev. R. J. Campbell, the successor of Dr. Parker at the well-known city temple, wrote an article for the National Review on “Sunday Observance,” a subject which, in England, is periodically discussed, usually without attracting much attention. On this occasion, however, Mr. Campbell ventured some remarks on the laboring man, describing him as often lazy and unthrifty, and sometimes immoral and foul-mouthed. He added that these statements were “not intended to apply to workingmen as a whole, but to large classes among them, which classes, it is to be feared, constitute a majority.” The daily press eagerly seized upon this portion of the magazine article, and gave it the widest possible publicity, causing a fierce outburst of popular indignation against the writer, and also his congregation, which was described as made up of “aristocrats, plutocrats, and stock exchange swindlers.” So deep was the feeling of resentment on the part of laboring men that Mr. Campbell saw fit to meet some of them in a large hall in the west of London, with a view of explaining himself; but no reconciliation was effected. Representatives of labor gave addresses, flatly denying the charges made, and Mr. Campbell, on his side, offered no material modification of his strongly-expressed opinions. The breach is wider than ever. The workingman thinks ministers in general blind to the sins and shortcomings of the moneyed classes, who form the chief support of the church, and rather hypocritical toward the less prosperous. It must be confessed that he has some reason for so thinking. Viscount Mountmones, in a recent paper on “The Failure of the Church,” records his belief that has grossly abused her trust, and shown herself incapable of realizing Christ’s ideal. He says that Sunday afternoon, in almost any of the great cathedrals, one finds a little cluster of “well-to-do, well-lunched, comfortable, middle-aged, middle-class Christians, mostly women—” for whose benefit an elaborate service, accompanied by the most exquisite music, is being conducted. “An air of self-satisfied repose and indolent languor pervades the whole scene. The voice of the minister, as he recites the familiar prayers and admonitions, during the intervals when the white-robed choristers are silent, is carefully modulated in a drowsy cadence, so as not to disturb the spirit of restful peace which fills the congregation.” “Finally, some venerable and erudite prelate, living a life of comfort and ease, and thoroughly attuned to the harmony of his surroundings, delivers in cultured tones a forty-minutes’ discourse on some abstruse point in tenth-rate metaphysics. He may or may not have the gift of oratory; he may or may not have the power of drawing vividly and brilliantly a narrative picture; he may or may not be capable of touching the emotions of the more sensitive of his audience; but it is certain that, whatever his talent or lack of talent may be, he will studiously refrain from breaking in on the comfortable mood of his congregation.” “He must on no pretext arouse them or give their mind food for disquieting reflection. He must carefully avoid touching on any of the more serious concerns of life, or referring to any of its unpleasant phases, such as might possibly send his hearers away in a less cosy frame of mind. So, to the melody of a beautiful organ, played by a master of his art, the little group is dismissed to its scandal and its tea.” No doubt this description would not apply to some churches; but, in the main, it indicates truthfully the general drift of church activity in this country. The poor are largely left out of account. Their struggles, hopes, longing desires, their sufferings, their fierce temptations—these are not taken account of in the modern sermon. It is a repetition of the old saying,—“Depart; be ye warmed and fed,” while nothing tangible is done to bring about a better state of things. That Spirit of Commercialism
in the church which is so vividly pointed out in the 18th chapter of Revelation, is, sad to say, only too evident. Self-denial is conspicuous by its absence. Church-going has come to be merely one of the proprieties of good society. The church is a species of club, whose members form a social clique. If money is to be raised, resort is sure to be had to the bazaar, with all manner of unchristian amusements and forms of petty overreaching, which virtually amount to swindling. One is glad to admit that some serious-minded people, both pastors and lay members, feel that these things are wrong, but they seldom have the courage to rebuke them, and so ultimately become reconciled to them. Meanwhile a very large class of well-fed, prosperous, worldly-minded Christians persist in saying that the world is growing better. God grant that their eyes may be opened to see things in all their stern reality before it is too late. Of the Poor and the Laboring Classes
generally it may be frankly admitted that what Mr. Campbell said about them is not untrue, tho, on the other hand, perhaps not more applicable to them than to society in general. As the poor are usually more frank and open, so their sins come more quickly to light than do those of their richer and more prosperous neighbors; but it must be remembered, also, that their general environment is a most unfavorable one, and their opportunities narrow and cramped in the extreme. In the light of God’s Word and the teaching of our Saviour while here upon the earth, the chief responsibility for the wrongs of society must rest with those who are in positions where they could do much to right matters, but whose selfish indifference to the sufferings of others leads them to do nothing. In classing the laboring class with the poor, I am governed by conditions prevailing here in the old country which are essentially different from those one finds in America. There the laborer gets a sufficient wage, as a rule, to enable him to live in peace and plenty. Here in London, on the other hand, it has been found by careful investigation that thirty per cent. of the entire population live below the poverty line—in other words, they are not earning enough to decently feed and clothe themselves and their families, even when work is fairly easy to get. Suffering and hardship is their common lot; they know nothing different. When they go to church, they do not find there the sympathy and spiritual help that it should be the joy of their better-situated neighbors to give them. Therefore they stay away. is one of the remarkable developments of the present day, and bids fair to become a most powerful factor in the political, social, and religious life of the twentieth century. It is shown by rich and poor, educated and ignorant; one meets it in newspaper and magazine, and in platform utterances, as well as in social converse. There is no doubt that Rome is growing in power and influence at a rapid rate, and that in the face of conditions supposedly contrary to her best interests. Stationary, in some cases almost seeming to lose ground in Catholic countries, she is far outstripping her strongest rivals in all so-called Protestant countries, and displaying a marked ability to make the most of the situation. Just why Roman Catholicism should be gaining ground so rapidly in Great Britain, I am not prepared to say. In an age of so-called liberal thought, one would think that the whole tendency would be in another direction. But prophecy points out that the Papacy is to regain much of its lost power in the latter days, and, together with apostate Protestantism, once more manifest the persecuting spirit. This prophecy is being fulfilled before our eyes. Rome will yet occupy a position in the world little dreamed of by those who think her day is past. And Rome, let it be remembered, does not change. London, England. M. ELLSWORTH OLSEN.