BACK to the fourth century!
Steadily, surely, perseveringly, and determinedly the professed church of Christ is to-day following the path taken by churchmen in the days of Constantine.
Church history is repeating itself. In the united purpose and concerted action of twentieth century ecclesiastics we may read again the tale of the church life of 1600 years ago. Once more reciprocity between Church and State spells "progress;" once more bishops and statesmen fraternize and join hands; once more rapprochement is found through compromise of principle and abandonment of sacred and long cherished belief; once more Church and State are drawing together, and while not fully wedded, the unholy intercourse has begotten political churchmen and "Christian" politicians.
Like causes produce like results. If the "false theocratical theory" of the church of an early century brought disaster to both Church and State THEN, we may know that the same theory will work disaster NOW.
However painful may be the study of present-day church conditions, however ugly may be the picture presented, the student of prophecy must faithfully call attention to facts as he finds them, because in and through them he finds a fulfilment of the inspired Word. Like Daniel, he must boldly, tho optimistically, read the handwriting on the wall.
Now in the matter of church conditions of the present time it goes without saying that the great Protestant bodies of our country have announced their purpose to engage actively in an aggressive campaign of governmental reform. The chairman of the last great Federal Council stated: "We believe that the great Christian bodies in our country should stand together; lead in the discussion of, and give an impulse to, all great movements that make for righteousness. We believe that questions like those of marriage and divorce, Sabbath desecration, foreign immigration, modern industry, the moral and religious training of the young, indeed all great questions in which the voices of the churches should be heard, demand their united and concerted action."
This position having been taken by the churches as a united whole, it is only natural that everywhere throughout the United States we find them making earnest efforts to carry out the program. In an address given in Portland, Oregon, August 1, 1909, the Rev. Luther R. Dyott said, "The church should be in politics, not as a political institution, but as a force for municipal righteousness and national patriotism."
The order of the day, therefore, is for churchmen to enter the arena of secular life. The pulpit thunders forth its denunciations against this, that, and the other social evil. It may be, perchance, that the minister organizes and heads a Law Enforcement Society. He may be found, and often is found, doing detective work, even going so far as to persuade some suspected one to violate the law, that he may have him arrested as a criminal.
It is matter of common observation that ministers are now chosen and sent to our national and State legislatures to frame bills, and to lobby, as only politicians may, in behalf of legislation called for by the church. And by means of the "big stick" which they use to most telling advantage, they frequently succeed.
It was in view of this course taken by the church, that a certain "Reader" of the Sacramento "Bee" wrote his paper: "Why on earth is it that churchmen can not see the unreasonableness and unseasonableness of their meddling with Caesar's business? Could they attend strictly to their own business, trusting their Creator to enable them to live and preach the Gospel in the demonstration of the Spirit, thousands who to-day take no stock in Christian business, or at least in church business, would be found within the pale of the church. The church is the loser every time she allows herself or her leaders to be drawn away from her legitimate calling."
The State deified in the person of the ruler, who is both king and priest, an utter perversion of God's plan
This writer is largely if not wholly right. The church numbers her communicants by millions. She knows her strength, and, having cast many a side glance, she has learned that the political world really courts her favor. True, she LOSES SPIRITUALLY "every time she allows herself or her leaders to be drawn away from her legitimate calling;" but she gains favor with the great mass of careless worldlings, who regard her only as a voting potentiality.
It can not be successfully denied that the church has come to occupy a unique place in American political history. Practically speaking, the balance of power in great national elections is in her hand. She stands, not as in favor of this party or that, but for those who will do her bidding. And in unmistakable language she lets it be known that he who dares to brave her will, must suffer both the loss of support and her open antagonism.
The net result of her interference with matters political is a great loss of prestige with men who have looked to her for spiritual guidance; a sad loss of confidence on the part of her membership in their own individual divine calling; a tremendous loss of that power which really makes for righteousness; and an influx of those whose religion is largely one of form, and whose membership is held mostly for selfish or utilitarian purposes.
By both religionists and worldlings these facts are freely acknowledged. Said an Oakland pastor not long since: "Membership in a church is coming to mean almost absolutely nothing in these days." "The great trouble with the church is that we have put heaven too far away. When the church ceases to be a political organization, controlled by a coterie of influential men; when it ceases to be a select club, run by a particular few; when it opens its doors freely to the sinner, and welcomes the outcast,— then it will come to exercise its destined function in civilization and the world."
The political work undertaken by the church absolutely demands political methods for its accomplishment. Speaking of much of the preaching in a certain great city, a well-known periodical remarks editorially: "It would seem, indeed, that most of the sermons we now hear are composed with the hope of publication hovering ever in the background. The idea is not to say something that will strike home to the hearts of the congregation, but rather by strong condemnation to catch the ears of the press and start a blaze of notoriety. . . . The yellow journals have practically converted us, even our ministers — or shall we say our ministers first and the public afterward? For their fervid outpourings on supposed plague-spots in our moral system are so entirely like the stump speeches of office-seeking politicians that they can no longer be mistaken for anything else."
Of course, this condition is not now universal. Even the editor just quoted adds that "our real men of the pulpit — and there are some — do not adopt such tactics. . . . It is a pity that there should be only such a few of them." But while NOT universal NOW, the position of the church and its ministry regarding political matters is such as to call for universality; and sooner or later the minister who is conservative enough to stand against the prevailing custom will be considered not progressive, and will find himself without a charge.
We have reached the advent of a "new Christianity," a "new evangelism." As stated by Ray Stannard Baker in the "American Magazine" (December, 1909), "There must be, from now forward, quite a new preaching and teaching — the preaching of repentance from social sin and the need of social salvation." "As in the old evangelism the INDIVIDUAL has to be born again, so the new evangelism demands a new birth for SOCIETY." And this new evangelism, which is now firing both the church and the world, is so broad that "every man and every organization, whether church leader, or Socialist, or labor agitator, or publicist, or business man, who has a vision of the new time and is working toward it, is a new evangelist."
But this doctrine, so prevalent, so popular, so heralded, is NOT a "new CHRISTIANITY." Jesus Christ never commissioned either His church or His ministry to go forth and labor for the regenerating of society. Society — the world at large — is not regarded by the Scriptures as an object of conversion. Society will "wax worse and worse." There never can and so never will come national repentance and a consequent national righteousness. The mission of the church is to preach "Jesus Christ and Him crucified." The world will hear; but only a few, and they as individuals, will accept the Gospel and be saved. "As the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be." The conversion of society is but a will-o'-the-wisp, designed to attract the church from its Heaven-given work.
It should not be thought, however, that when the church follows its legitimate calling it will be neglecting anything that IT CAN DO for men in a social way. Indirectly, the11Gospel of Christ has always been a civilizing, enlightening, uplifting force in the world. One sinner converted, one heathen transformed by the power of God through the church, is a tremendous influence for good in the reforming of society. And the more there are converted, the greater the influence. Yet while this is so, the church never should make the reforming of society its object, either primarily or secondarily. It has but one business,—the saving of men from sin through the preaching of Christ.
Nor will the church fail in philanthropic lines by clinging tenaciously to its calling. When it shall have succeeded, under the direction of the Holy Spirit, in winning men away from their selfishness and sin, it will have brought into existence an army of men and women who, like the Father above, will mercifully bestow from their storehouses of supply the temporal blessings of which others stand in need. The truly converted man will ever see in his neighbor's need a call for his sympathy and support, and he will do because DOING is a part of his very life business.
How easy it would have been, if Christ had so designed, for Him to make it plain that He wished His church to preach "civic righteousness," to educate "the national conscience," to "compel the enforcement of law," to "advance civilization," ad infinitum. But He never did it. On the contrary, His only word was, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to the whole creation." "Go ye therefore, and MAKE DISCIPLES of all the nations."
The church may point with pride and enthusiasm to the "great movements" started by its direct effort; but let it not forget the truth uttered by the editor of the Kansas "Post":
O, says one, but how about our great movements, our great giving, our great literature, etc., etc.? Turn to the Dark Ages, and ask how about our great cathedrals, our great pomp and glory as a physical worldly power. But that was the cloak of the church, costly enough, to be sure, but made so all the more to cover and hide her spiritual deformity and death.
And whether Romanist or Protestant, human nature is the same the world over, and from age to age. Yes, we are active, 'tis true. But is it not true that our great movements are rather a rallying of what forces and power we have, and, after all, a substitute for the real power of God's Holy Spirit and God's Word, rather than results of these?
Ah, who will see the fatal weakness of the present almost world-wide plan of the church to enter the new field of "social Christianity"? Who will see the need of holding fast to the old, simple plan of the Gospel, depending alone on the power of the Holy Spirit working through the divine Word preached by holy lips for the regenerating and saving of the individual soul? Who will see that all this stir and hurrah about saving society is, so far as the church is concerned, but a wretched "substitute for the real power," entailing great loss to the world and spiritual destruction to the church?
It has been stated in this article that this whole church movement toward politics, social reforms, law enforcement, etc., is a revival of fourth century life. Let the thought be repeated. Then it was Romanism, now it is Protestantism led on by Romanism. It was bad in the fourth century, but it is as much worse now as there has come greater light from which to turn. The history of that time should warn us that the movement will end in the degradation of the church, the weakening of the State, and an unholy union that finds pleasure, in trampling under foot the sacred rights of all.
