ARE OTHER THAN BAPTIST AND METHODIST CHURCHES ADAPTED TO THE PRESENT NEGRO? Rev. Geo. F. Bragg, Jr.
At first the asking of this question is a most natural one, seeing that the great body of Negroes are attached to either one of the above churches, and it would seem at a first glance that these religious organizations are pre-eminently suited to the Negro race. But, we hope to show that not only are other churches adapted to the "present Negro," but one of these other churches meets the Negro's need better than either one of those above mentioned. Of course it is hardly necessary for me to state that our showing is conceived in the very best spirit, and with the fullness of Christian love towards our Baptist and Methodist brethren. Did I not believe that the church of which I am a member is best suited for the Negro, I would at once renounce attachment thereto and embrace most lovingly the one which I thought more efficiently equipped to minister to the complexed and diversified needs of my race. On account of a multitude of reasons, not necessary to state here, Negroes naturally drifted into that form of Christianity presented by the Baptist and Methodist churches. With the innate feeling and strong tendency to warmth, fervor, animation and excitement, it is not at all surprising that people so strongly emotional should gravitate in that direction. Whatever may be my own criticisms with respect to the defects in these two systems, which render them inferior to the church of which I am a member, and therefore less suitable to the needs of the race, I much prefer stating my side of the question and leaving my readers free to draw their own conclusions. That portion of the Universal Church, known in this country as the Episcopal Church, to my mind, is better suited and equipped for the amelioration of the condition of the Negro than any other. The Negro is specially fond of "regularity" in religious as well as political affairs. In this respect the Episcopal Church comes to him not as something new but as the living exponent of the old-time religion and the old church which has actually descended to him, through all the ages The Negro needs the faith once delivered to the saints, not in shreds or left to pick it out for himself, but the whole faith. This the Episcopal Church offers him. A complete faith, naturally, is to be found in a comprehensive church. The Episcopal Church is most comprehensive. She believes more in turning in than in turning out. Men are not brought into the fold to be "turned out" for every little thing, but they are brought in to be built up, established and rooted and grounded in Him. The church, then, is adapted to the present Negro because she gives him not opinions and theories, but the living faith of the ages and a living Christ as potential to-day as when He trod this earth clothed in flesh. And this church is most comprehensive, taking in all sorts and conditions of men, and by grace dispensed through sacraments, ordained by Christ Himself, seeks to bring to the fullness of stature as realized in Jesus Christ. The Episcopal Church is pre-eminently adapted to the present Negro, for the present Negro is most eager to learn, and, above all other religious bodies, she is a teaching church. More Scripture is read at one Episcopal service than is ofttimes read in a month in the services of other churches. She has a liturgy which is the sum total of all that is good and grand in the ages past, and the constant and almost imperceptible influence of her most excellent system of public worship, as indicated in the Book of Common Prayer, silently but effectively issues, in moulding and mellowing good Christian character. She teaches not only through the prayer book, but by the yearly round of feast, festival and fast, of which, like a great panorama the acts and incidents in the life of her Lord are constantly set forth before those who have ears to hear and eyes to see. More than that, she teaches through symbolism. Many persons, and a considerable number of Negroes are here included, are endowed with but little brain. But they have eyes, and what they take in with their eyes help to rivet and fasten in their memories what they seize upon with what The Episcopal Church is adapted to the Negro because her worship is hearty, beautiful, uplifting and inspiring, though simple and easy, furnishing the greatest opportunity for active participation therein by the ignorant as well as the learned. The worship of the Episcopal Church harmonizes most beautifully with the strong religious fervor of the Negro, and as a vehicle for offering up those intense longings and aspirations of his heart, is without an equal. The Episcopal Church is adapted to the Negro because she believes so persistently and thoroughly in "a change of heart." Of all religious bodies not one lays such emphasis on the absolute necessity of "a change of heart" as does the Episcopal Church. Stamped upon every page of her divine liturgy, and permeating the beautiful prayers of her offices, and inwrought in her hymnology, is this deep and firm recognition and teaching with respect to a change of heart. All her sacraments, disciplinary offices, instructions and the like, are with the design of helping her children, through the aid of the Divine Spirit, in proving the genuineness of their change of heart by a conspicuous, powerful and beautiful change of life. The Episcopal Church is adapted to the Negro because she offers a government that is congenial and pleasant to his sunshiny nature, and which, while it amply protects him in the enjoyment of all the blessed privileges of religious culture, saves him the disaster and confusion of a democracy, which, when realized, is but another name for anarchy and confusion. The government of the Episcopal Church is jointly shared by her clergymen and laymen, and the stability and security of its government is firmly attested by the past ages of experience and notable achievements. In conclusion the Episcopal Church is the church for the Negro, because she is both willing and able to supply his every need, and under SECOND PAPER. ARE OTHER THAN BAPTIST AND METHODIST CHURCHES ADAPTED TO THE PRESENT NEGRO? Rev. John W. Whittaker
It would seem from the immense following of these churches that this question would require a negative answer, but it is only in appearance and can be accounted for. In the days of slavery the Methodist and Baptist churches predominated in the South. The great mass of the slaves attended these churches with their masters and there they were converted and became members. They were thoroughly indoctrinated in the teachings of these churches. At the same time, there were other denominations existing among the slaves: Catholic, Episcopalian, and Presbyterian. In some portions of the United States, where these denominations were in the lead, they have a very large Negro following, whose attachment to these religious sects is so strong that they could be satisfied in no other. They belong to these denominations by birth and training. All that is sacred and dear to them is wrapped up in the history of these bodies. At the present time, it is a fact that the Negro is found in every religious denomination known among men. So it can not be said with truth that no other than Baptist and Methodist churches are adapted to the Negro. The needs of the Negro, from a religious point of view, demand all sects. How does it come about then that the Baptist and Methodist so largely predominate to-day? These denominations, just after the War of the Rebellion, required no educational qualification for the ministry; and missions were opened by them everywhere an opening was to be found, and every man, learned or ignorant, who felt himself called to preach, was licensed and sent forth to preach in his way and to build up churches. These men were for the most part ignorant and superstitious, with very vague ideas of religion. Their chief object was to draw the people and every other consideration was sacrificed to that end. They pandered to the ignorant and superstitious notions of the Negro, ridiculed Back of all this there was one ever present motive—the pastor's support, the running expenses of the church, and the keeping up of a house of worship. All this had to be collected from the congregation. Hence the preacher's position hung upon his getting and holding a congregation. In the Methodist Church, a clergyman's advancement depends chiefly upon his ability to increase his membership and to raise money. Therefore, every Baptist and Methodist pastor felt the very great necessity there was upon him of getting as great a crowd as possible and gathering all the finance he could from it. This many did, regardless of the method employed. Thus it was that these two denominations got hold of the masses and preoccupied the field. The other denominations went to work in an entirely different way. They did not seek in the first place the spread of their sects, but the elevation of the Negro. They realized that the Negro needed to be developed into strong, self-reliant, and independent characters; that the masses were not moved by duty and did not appreciate the obligation of duty. They are a prey to their feelings, which sway them to the right hand and to the left. They live on their feelings. So engrossed are they in their feelings that they neglect duties and ignore obligations. That is why the religion of so many is such sad rubbish. God gave man reason to rule over his actions. But it was plain that, in the great mass of the Negro, reason is yet a child, ruled over by its playmates—the feelings, passions, and appetites. This is not the kind of foundation upon which to build a true religious life. Therefore, these denominations went to work to educate the Negro. They put the emphasis on education. Schools instead of churches were established. Their theory was that men should not only be converted, but they also should be educated and made intelligent Christians. They did not discount brains, did not consider ignorance in itself a mark of virtue, nor that learning disqualified a disciple of God for the best service They were slow in establishing churches. Whatever churches they set up were pastored by men of learning and character. They were unwilling to stoop to the people, but sought to bring the people up to them. Everything was done according to the custom of the most intelligent and cultured. The preaching was of a high order, yet adapted to the needs of the people. The music was the very best. Thus a model church was set up, suited to the needs of its communicants. As fast as men were trained and prepared for the work of the gospel ministry, they were sent forth to take charge of newly-organized fields. This work went on with considerable opposition, but the influence that went out from these churches and schools was felt in the whole community. They were centers of light and wholesome Christian instruction. They were Mt. Sinais from which the laws of liberty, education, and progress were sent out to the people far and near. These churches were, in intelligence, far removed from the masses. There was very little effort put forth to reach them. That was not the object now. That work was to come on later. The members of, and the attendance upon, these churches were mainly those who had been sufficiently taught to appreciate them. The ignorant and prejudiced dubbed these churches high-tone. They said: "Only the educated and well-dressed can go there. The people in that church have no religion. They have only book religion. You must know how to read to go there. Why, you can't shout or say amen. I don't want anything to do with that church. It's too cold for me." Thus there grew up in the minds of the masses generally a prejudice against these denominations. And the fact that these churches were for a long time in the hands of white pastors was used to stir up opposition to them. The clergymen of the Methodists and Baptists made much of it to tear them down and to build up themselves. Then, again, the members of these educated churches did a great deal to widen the breach by such remarks as this: "We do not want any head handkerchief people in our churches." They often spoke in a way which gave the impression that they felt themselves better than the commonality As time goes on and education becomes more general, these hindrances and difficulties to the progress of the other denominations begin to pass away. The prejudice against them wanes. The Baptist and Methodist are forced to change their tactics; their people begin to clamor for a more intelligent ministry. The churches of the other denominations fell into the hands of young colored men who had been educated and trained to take these places. The passing of these churches into the hands of the native pastors was the beginning of a new era in our Southern church history. The North had set the standard and carried out its purpose to raise up educated men and women to take up the work. The labor of these churches heretofore was one of education and preparation. Now it becomes one of development and expansion. Up to this time, they cared for the few. Now they are to reach out for the masses. Previously these churches had been in great measure supported by Northern aid, but now they have to deal with all the problems connected with running a church, such as gathering and holding a congregation, securing pastor's support, and all the expense of keeping up and maintaining a house of worship. Hence the necessity is upon them to reach the masses if they expect to exist, not only to save souls, but also that their forces may be strengthened and made more efficient; and they stand to-day as good a chance in this race as do the Methodists or Baptists. Their past work in an educational line in behalf of the Negro in general has given them a lasting hold upon the hearts of the people, who feel that they owe these denominations a debt of gratitude which can never be paid. Most of the Methodist and Baptist leaders of to-day were trained in the schools of these denominations. So they enjoy the best wishes of the communities in which they exist, with very few exceptions. The way is open to them to grow if they will only seize it and use it for all it is worth. [Note by the Editor.—We assume that the membership of neither the Baptist nor the Methodist churches would claim for a moment that theirs is the only church suitable to the Negro race. But we think it would be unfair to leave the discussion of this topic without correcting an erroneous impression given by the Rev. J. W. Whitaker in the paper above. Perhaps not more than one other church has done more for the education of its Negro ministers and membership than has the Methodist Episcopal Church through its Freedmen's Aid Society and by other methods. This education commenced immediately after the war. We have reason to believe that the Baptist is a close second to the Methodist Church in this matter of educating the Negro. It is possible that some of the Negro Baptist and Methodist Churches that are entirely separated from the white churches of the same denomination may come under the category of especially ignorant ministry and membership; but even these exclusively Negro churches began the work of education soon after emancipation. We suspect that the two churches under criticism as given above preferred not to wait until the freedmen became cultured before attempting to save them.] THIRD PAPER. ARE OTHER THAN BAPTIST AND METHODIST CHURCHES ADAPTED TO THE PRESENT NEGRO? REV. OWEN M. WALLER. Rev. Owen Meredith Waller, rector of St. Luke's P. E. Church, Washington, D. C.; Associate of Arts of Oxford University, England; Graduate of the General Theological Seminary, New York, was born in Eastville, Va., in 1868. When but five years old his parents settled in Baltimore, where he was sent at an early age to the St. Mary's Academy. In 1881 he went to Oxford, England, where he entered St. John's Classical School, pursuing studies there until 1889, when he returned to New York city. He graduated from the General Episcopal Theological Seminary in 1892, and was ordained to the Deaconate by Bishop Potter, after which he accepted a call as assistant rector to St. Phillip's Church, New York. He declined the principalship of Hoffman Hall of Fisk University, Nashville, Tenn., to accept a call to St. Thomas' Church, Philadelphia. Having passed all examinations before reaching the required age to enter the priesthood, it was only after his election to St. Thomas' that he became eligible for advancement. Bishop Potter arranged for the ordination to take place in the Colonial Church of St. John, Washington, D. C. Here in the presence of the Chief Justice, Cabinet Officers, Senators and other men of national note, Mr. Waller was formally elevated to the priesthood. After a rectorship of three years' successful work in this historic parish, during which its centennial was celebrated, Mr. Waller was elected rector of St. Luke's Church, Washington, D. C., in succession to the Rev. Dr. Crumwell. In size he is above the medium and of athletic build. He is a perfect type of the physical manhood of his race, graceful in manner and address and is clear and eloquent in his style of oratory. Success has crowned his work from the beginning. Mr. Waller combines all the essentials necessary of a leader of men along religious lines. He understands humanity. His methods inspire the confidence of men, and they reverence his gospel. He appeals to the intelligence and reason, never to passion and prejudice. He has the faculty of saying much in little, and saying it with directness and force. Mr. Waller was married in 1893 to Miss Lillian M. Ray, of Brooklyn, N. Y. Three bright boys have blessed this union by their advent into the home. I have no hesitancy in saying that not only are there other churches adapted to the training of the Negro than the Methodist and Baptist churches, but, in my opinion, some are better suited to the present needs of the Negro, and chief, if not indeed the first, among these is that branch of the Apostolic Catholic Church known as the Protestant Episcopal Church. I advance the following arguments to sustain this statement: First, the Negro is under a spell of religiosity; a conception of religion that freely recognizes and imbibes its sentiment, but just as frankly rejects its stern practical duties and obligations. The Negro's religion is a poem—a sentiment—indeed, a velvet-lined yoke. He, therefore, stands sadly in need of an influence that will regulate his super-emotional nature, and not one that adds fuel to an existing conflagration that threatens to forever consume the only power in the human being that can ultimately work out his salvation, viz., the human will. His religiosity needs to be directed to the deep channels of true religion, Second: The present Negro needs opportunity and latitude for self-development in a church where he must measure himself with the highest standard of Anglo-evolution. As long as the Negro is content to compare himself, in Negro associations, with himself, he must be satisfied to know only that things equal to the same thing are equal to one another. But, both in the lay membership and in the ministry of the Protestant Episcopal Church, the Negro coming into contact with the best results of modern forces, not only rises up to higher standards, but is saved from the insidious evils of conceitedness by ever seeing the vistas beyond him. Withal, the doors are open to the Negro, here more truly so than in any church of like prestige and heritage. Two Negroes are on the bench of the Protestant Episcopal Church. Nearly a hundred have been elevated to the diaconate and priesthood, meeting all requirements and thereby teaching the same level as other men. Such a showing cannot be made by any church of like history. Third: We have been told of late to teach the Negro history, and I add that no lesson will be so potent as identification with a historic church that has come down the centuries to us, in unbroken integrity, from the hands of Christ through the spiritual loins of the Apostles. I advance the following argument to show that the Protestant Episcopal Church will meet this need of the Negro: At Acts 11:42, we read as It may be readily seen from these words, drawn as they are directly from the scholarly Greek of St. Luke, that the Apostolic Church was distinctly marked by four observances or characteristics: (a) Their steadfastness in the Apostles' doctrine. (b) Their steadfastness in the Apostles' fellowship, dealings, doings, ministry or form of government. (c) Their steadfastness in the breaking of the bread, or the Holy Communion; Holy Baptism being included in the Apostolic doctrine. (d) Their steadfastness in the Apostles' manner of praying or in the set forms of prayer, at first, for twenty-five years in the Temple and the synagogues of the Jews. These being the four marks of the church at that time, is there now in existence any church having these selfsame marks? Without any doubt, Christ was the founder of that visible body of Christians, the church in Acts II. Does that church exist to-day? It must, because Christ said: "The gates of hell shall not prevail against it."—Matt. 16:18. then which is it, and where is it? The church is certainly a visible body of Christians, not founded by a man or men, but by Jesus Christ. Having a divine founder it is then a divine society, seeking men to save them from the degrading power of sin and everlasting punishment in hell. It is not then, as is so commonly and popularly thought, a human society founded by Luther, 1530; Calvin, 1541; Knox, 1560; Robert Brown, 1582; Roger Williams, 1639; John Wesley, 1739; or Swedenborg, 1783. In brief, the church founded by Jesus Christ is the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth, as Christ so often described it (Matthew 13:47, 5:19, 13:44); endowed with power from on high transmitted through her unbroken line of the Apostolic ministry, but obedient to her Divine Founder, who is at the right hand of God in heaven. This church of four distinct marks in the Acts existed before the completion of the New Testament at least some sixty years, and it was the church that by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit pronounced the New Testament inspired, and rejected other books claiming to set forth the life of Christ, three hundred years after it was founded. The Old Testament For three hundred years then, this Apostolic Church existed with Apostolic doctrine, ministry, sacraments, and prayers before she gave the New Testament to the world with her certificate that it was the Inspired Word of God. The Protestant Episcopal Church of America as the daughter of the Church of England, has ever possessed, and does now possess and hold more sacred, these four marks that identify her unmistakably with the primitive and Apostolic Church, as a true branch of the same. First, as to doctrine this church holds and defends the pure teaching of the early church, without taking from or adding to the same. There are few, indeed, who would question this. The Holy Trinity (John 14:16, 26; Acts 2:33; Gal. 4:6). The Incarnation of God's Son (Luke 1:35; John 1:14; Matt. 1:23). The Redemption of Man by Christ Jesus (Matt. 1:21, 20:28; Gal. 1:4). Regeneration and Holy Baptism (Titus 3:5; Rom. 6:4; Gal. 3:27). The Holy Communion (Matt. 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19-20). Confirmation (Acts 8; Heb. 6:2). The Resurrection of the Dead (Luke 14:14; John 11:23). The Judgment (Acts 17:31; Heb. 9:27). Belief in these statements and other fundamental teaching of Holy Scripture is in accord with the mind of the Apostolic Church. Secondly, as to the unbroken line of bishops, priests and deacons, who have succeeded for more than eighteen centuries other ministers Apostolically ordained, that has been most jealously guarded and maintained by the Episcopal Church. There may be some who have never given any study to the Apostolic succession of ministers in the church founded by Christ. No one could well doubt the fact or deny the doctrine who had patiently investigated the matter. The New Testament is itself witness to the fact that the Apostles appointed others to do Apostolic work and to be their successors; at least thirty Apostles are mentioned in the New Testament. Among them were Paul, Matthew, Barnabas, Andronicus, Silas, Luke, Now, if the original twelve could have eighteen successors, certainly they could, and have had a continual line of successors down the centuries. The titles of the three orders of the ministry may, at first, mislead the unlearned. (1) In the New Testament the highest order was Apostles. The second, "ordained in every city," were Presbyters (Presters or Priests), also called Bishops and the lowest order Deacons. As the Apostles began to die off, the title "Apostle" was limited to them and to their successors who had probably seen Christ, at the same time the title "Bishop" was set apart to denote the highest order which succeeded the original Apostles. This is stated by Clement of Alexandria in the second, and Jerome in the fourth century. While Theodoret, writing in 440, says: "The same persons were in ancient times called either presbyters or bishops, at which time, those who are now called bishops were called Apostles. In process of time, the name of Apostles was left to those who were sent directly by Christ, and the name of Bishop was confined to those who were anciently called 'Apostles.'" From Palestine the church spread to Asia Minor, Greece, Rome, Gaul, Spain and England, carrying with her the Apostles' doctrine, ministry, sacraments and prayer. In 597, when Gregory the Great, Bishop of Rome, sent Augustine to England, he found there the church with the four marks. After awhile the Bishop of Rome, by political methods, gained great influence over the English Church in so much that he was receiving from England greater revenues than the king. When the tremendous revolt against the papacy came about in Europe in the sixteenth century the English people simply ejected the pope's emissaries and with them, Italian influence and corruption from England and the English Church, the church remained essentially the same she had been for centuries. The word "Reformation" signifies the footing of something into a new shape. It is therefore not the destruction of the old and the substituting of the new, but rather the reshaping, cleansing and revivifying of the old. The melting down of the family silver and the reshaping it on new models is not to acquire new silver. Perhaps it was so distorted by abuse The reformation in England was effected on very different lines from that on the continent of Europe. Luther, Calvin, Melancthon, and others were individuals attracting to themselves multitudes of other individuals and together they establish societies of Christians. The Apostolical churches on the continent did not, as such, participate in the reformation movement. In England the reformation, i. e., the reshaping, restoring and cleansing, was more wisely conducted. The church there had existed since the days of the Apostles. For six hundred years it remained independent of the Roman world power, and it was only after the Norman Conquest that the papal authority became well established in England. When a reformation seemed necessary, it was conducted, not by individuals leaving the national church, but by the whole Church of England. In A. D. 1532 the quarrel of Henry the Eighth with the pope led to the overthrow of the Roman power in England. Henry is not to be credited as a reformer, much less as the founder of any church. He never made any attempt to found a church. When he was born, in 1491, he found the church existing in England, and when he died, in 1547, he left the same church, but cleansed and independent. The ancient church was not changed, and the old religion did not give place to the new. The papacy was opposed to the independence of the national churches for which the Church of England had always contended. Accordingly, when the power of the pope was broken and thrust out of England, the church was at liberty to restore Apostolic purity and freedom to the nation and the individual. Parliament prohibited the payment of money to the pope and appealing from English to papal courts. In 1539 the Bible was given to the people to read in their native tongue. The services were read in English instead of Latin. The chalice was given to the laity. The worship of the Blessed Virgin Mary was abolished and praying to departed saints forbidden. These reforms were conducted by the archbishops, bishops, priests, and deacons and laity, i. e., by the whole church. The pope was not without his adherents during this period, who opposed these changes most vehemently. But these traitors to the Church of England found they could not stem the tide for an open Bible and pure religion. In 1569 Pope Pius Fifth created the great sin of schism by commanding all in favor of papal power in England to withdraw from the English Church We can now come briefly to the Episcopal Church in America. She was established in the American Colonies under the oversight of the Bishop of London. In 1609 the Church of England planted her first church on American shores at Jamestown, Virginia. After the Revolution, the church in this country became the American Episcopal Church, receiving the Apostolic ministry from the ancient Apostolic Church of England. Samuel Seabury of Connecticut, was consecrated at Aberdeen in 1784 and William White of Philadelphia, and Samuel Provoost of New York were consecrated at Lambeth Palace in 1787. These were the first three bishops with jurisdiction, and thus was the Apostolic Succession maintained in the Episcopal Church in unbroken line from the days of the Apostles. In conclusion, the Protestant Episcopal Church has ever continued steadfast in the sacraments of prayers, and by these four undeniable and unmistakable marks shows that she is a true branch of the same church described in Acts 2. The question for the Negro now becomes, not which church do I like or prefer, not to which church did my parents belong, but which church did Christ found for me to be trained in. |