The roots of the religious and moral life of the Nation are chiefly in the country church. As in southeastern Ohio, so in any area where the church fails, degeneracy begins. The low and sordid moral atmosphere found in so many rural villages and communities, not only among the Eighteen Counties, but throughout the State (and far beyond the boundaries of Ohio) is altogether unnecessary. It constitutes a challenge to the church which can no longer go unheeded. Obviously, whatever reforms in methods and policies may be required to enable it efficiently to perform its task must be made.

(1) A Better Program

One of the chief underlying causes of the present condition of the churches is an imperfect conception of their function. We recognize the fact that the effective proclaiming of the Gospel is the essential if not the greatest and most important task of the churches, but the impression is still very widespread in the Ohio churches that to preach it from pulpit and platform is almost their only task. That this is not enough to bring the churches to their full effectiveness has been conclusively proved by the experience of foreign missionaries during the past hundred years. In proportion to the number of their missionaries, the missionary societies which have believed that proclaiming the Christian message is the only function of the church, have not made as many converts nor built up as strong churches as those which engage also in the work of healing the sick and teaching. The most successful missionary organizations teach not only Christian life and theology, but all that makes for what is best in our Christian civilization.

The welfare of a man’s soul may be increased by promoting the welfare of the rest of him, and the aim of the church should be to bring every man to the highest possible development of all his powers. In seeking to do so it will not only be more effective in creating a higher manhood and womanhood, but will also make its message better understood and secure a greater number of church members and adherents.

For our city churches also this is as true as for the foreign missionary field, although perhaps less obviously so. The equipment of so large a number of modern city churches for various forms of social service is a strong indication that those who control their policies recognize the necessity of a more diversified field of work.

The success and growth of the Y. M. C. A. is another indication of the truth for which we are contending. This institution which is a branch or arm of the Christian church has declared its aim to be the development of “soul, mind, and body.” As a result of this policy it is now engaged in many kinds of work which should also be done more widely and generally and so on a greater scale throughout the church. It receives large contributions of money from members of the churches, and it rightly undertakes and successfully carries out large enterprises where other church organizations fail to see their duties and opportunities and lag behind or remain idle.

Still another reason for believing in a larger function and mission of the church is found in the fact that every strikingly successful country church is found to be deeply concerned with the needs of the community, and is carrying out a broad and comprehensive program of service. This is true not only in the State of Ohio, but throughout the Nation.

Finally and conclusively, it may be added that the broader program was instituted and carried out by the Founder of the Christian religion, and was by Him enjoined upon His followers.

What the new program for the local country church should be is no longer a matter of conjecture. Country ministers in very many widely separated parishes of the United States have worked it out independently in trying to meet the needs of their communities, and have everywhere reached substantially the same conclusion. The program is essentially the same in all places where the most successful country church work is done. It has found an embodiment in the mass of country church literature which has been published during the past eight years, and it has been studied, tried, and proved to meet the need of large numbers of country pastors in Ohio and in many of the other States. How it has been carried out in some Ohio parishes is described in Chapter VIII, pages 75-87.

(2) A Better Ministry

To carry out the better program for the local country church requires an educated ministry. Ohio has suffered greatly from ministerial quackery. Very imperfectly equipped ministers, such as are found in nearly every county of the State, and unsound ignorant men, such as are so common in the Eighteen Counties, cannot meet the requirements of the new program. Doubtless the educational requirements of the discipline of many of the denominations are set too low, but even so, if the rules of the discipline were strictly obeyed, a large proportion of the present ministers would be eliminated. The new program requires trained men.

To get better men, better opportunity and better pay must be supplied. Fields of service must be created large enough, yet sufficiently compact and free from competing rivals, to make good work possible. The farmers must be convinced that better support of the ministry is essential, in their own interest. At the same time the best young men of the churches must be assured that the new program offers a field so promising as to make it worth their while to enter the ministry. The churches are wise enough and strong enough to do all this if they will address themselves to the situation and take it seriously.

(3) Better Support

In a large part of Ohio the farmers are able and ready to multiply the amount of money they now contribute for the support of the churches. When it is made clear to them that better pay will bring a better minister, increased support will cheerfully be given. But the farmers will not give more money either for the support of an inferior minister, or to carry out the old program. They will demand their money’s worth, and this the present methods do not, in general, supply. The increased prosperity and consequent ability of the farmers to support the church more liberally is indicated by the fact that the total value of farm property in Ohio increased nearly 60 per cent during the ten-year period from 1900 to 1910.

But it must be remembered that increased support will not be given by the farmers unless the need for it, and what it will bring, is brought forcefully to their attention. This the individual minister cannot do, for to attempt it lays him open to the charge of feathering his own nest. It should be done by a State Federation of Churches or by such organizations as The Ohio Rural Life Association, acting through its own institutes and the farmers’ institutes, through the circulation of its literature, and through the formation of organizations for this purpose in the churches of the different counties. No matter how good work a minister may do, ordinarily he will not be adequately supported unless some special agency does this work.

(4) Better Acquaintance

The present system of circuits entails upon the country minister an enormous waste of time. If a man tries to do the pastoral work which is strictly necessary, he must spend a very large proportion of his working hours in driving to the widely separated points of his various parishes, crossing and recrossing as he goes the lines of travel of other ministers engaged in the same territory upon the same work. That the country minister should be called upon to waste so large a part of his life in this way is shameful because it is bad and inefficient organization, and carries with it an utterly needless loss.

To understand the significance of pastoral calling in a rural community it must be remembered that isolation is as characteristic of the country as congestion is of the cities. A large proportion of rural families look upon a minister who calls frequently as a personal asset of great value. He supplies opportunities not otherwise available for the discussion of matters of general interest or of deep personal concern. He calls attention to the things otherwise forgotten, and brings, or should bring with him, the inestimable advantage of intimate contact with a wise and well-trained mind. Moreover, a man full of good will to all going from house to house, sympathetically trying to help and understand, will inevitably modify the uncharitable and unjust public opinion which either exists or is believed to exist in most rural communities.

Equally effective are the incidental contacts of a minister engaged in community service, such as work with boys, or the promotion of welfare enterprises. Thus engaged he will inevitably get in touch with his parishioners, and supply the needs of individuals and of the community, at least as fully as the minister who devotes most of his working hours to pastoral calls. In such work less time is spent in the long drives or walks between houses which are necessary in systematic calling, while the minister gets to know the men better and bothers them less.

Without pastoral calling and community welfare work, the country minister’s service is sure to be ineffective. But as a matter of fact the country ministers of Ohio for the most part do very little of either. The country people as a rule, receive very few pastoral calls, according to the almost universal testimony of the country ministers themselves as well as that of other persons who live in the country. In Delaware County, for example, a prosperous county in the center of the State, there is an area of 82 square miles, with more than 2,100 people, in which only one minister makes any pastoral calls, and he makes very few. Half the townships of this county have no resident ministers.Mr. Gill found one township in the north-central section of the State in which the farmers’ families probably had not been called on once in five years. One woman had not received a call from a minister in twelve years. When finally called upon she became a regular and happy church attendant, though she had not been to church since her childhood. Another family was found in the same region whose house no minister had entered for nineteen years. In an Ohio River township, the members of a family testified that a minister had not called on them for twenty-five years, and still others asserted that no minister had ever entered their homes. From the reports of eighteen pastors in one denominational district it appeared that on an average each one made only six calls a year upon non-church members, although these were more than 60 per cent of the people. “Our minister does not know the people of this community” is common testimony everywhere in the country parishes.

The country minister’s influence is still further reduced because his term of service is short—usually but a year or two, rarely three years. Moreover, his efforts are commonly divided among several communities and thus are spread too thin to produce results. Add to that the fact that in each community the people whom he serves are intermingled with the parishioners of ministers of other denominations. Under these circumstances how can he become efficient in community service, and how can he get to know the people of his charge? Ordinarily he does not even attempt it. Under present conditions the country minister who does, generally accomplishes little and wears himself into discouragement.

(5) Rearrangement of Circuits

The old circuit system under which many of the denominations developed their work and which is now the system employed in nearly all the larger denominations in the State, was of undoubted value in the beginning of their work in pioneer days. But like many other efficient methods of early times it has ceased to be the best method for present needs, in the form in which we now find it at work. This is true except in a few instances where it appears in such a modified form as to be adaptable to present conditions.

Under the circuit system it has often been accepted as a policy by church officials that every church must have a minister and every minister a church. The advantages accruing both to the churches and ministers from a reasonably cautious and not too consistent application of such a rule are obvious. But failure to use such caution and too great insistence on its universal application too often have resulted in the employment of unequipped and uneducated ministers and sometimes even of men whose character was questionable, which in turn, has helped to bring about a low standard of pay for the minister. The pay of the skilled has fallen to that of the unskilled, and the total result has been to cheapen the ministry. The standard among farmers for the support of both church and minister, therefore, has fallen low. We must have a greatly modified system or a better system before the ministry can be better paid.

Under the circuit system as now applied in Ohio the churches too often provide for but little else than preaching. Even the Sunday school, one of the most hopeful and valuable kinds of church work, is hampered by it, for this work needs the leadership of a trained ministry, which the present circuit system tends to prevent. The minister with a circuit can rarely attend the services of his Sunday schools, and the task of promoting the Sunday school work during the week in the several communities of his charge is usually too arduous for him.

In times past it has been held commendable for a denomination to establish one of its churches in every community, regardless of the number of churches already there. By making use of the present circuit system, it has been possible to establish and after a fashion to maintain a church almost anywhere. Hence the present unfortunate multiplication of churches.

When rural communities are overchurched, as under the working of this plan in Ohio most of them are, competition between them necessarily results not in the survival of the fit, but in the continued existence of an excessive number of bloodless, moribund churches, whose energies are almost entirely exhausted in the mere effort to keep alive.

When the circuit system is adopted by more than one competing denomination in a field as it is in Ohio it helps to perpetuate interchurch competition. When one adopts it all others must, or retire from the field. It cannot be held that the resulting competition helps to make more Christians, or that it tends to develop character or community life. On the contrary, it reduces both the power of the church as a whole and the influence of the individual churches for personal righteousness and community welfare. Then, as the churches under the competitive system grow weaker, they must be yoked in larger circuits. So far has the practice gone that in one circuit in Ohio there are actually ten churches.

A variation of this system is found in certain Holy Roller churches where an undefined number of churches together depend for their leadership on a group of itinerant revivalists. Frequent or occasional seasons of revival services often constitute the sole activity of these churches, yet because of the weakness of the latter they are succeeding or have succeeded in crowding out many churches of the older denominations. There is a clear instance of this in the western half of Pike County, where nearly all the churches are abandoned excepting those of the Holy Rollers—a striking example of reverse selection or the survival of the unfit.

The movement for the conservation and improvement of rural life has no greater enemy than the misused circuit system. Not only does it weaken the churches, but it necessarily discourages the development of the community and of community life. With his efforts divided among three or more different communities, his parishioners mingled with members of competing churches, the country minister cannot hope for the coÖperation necessary to effective leadership. His success in any work for the community, because it would add prestige to his church, as a rule is not desired by the members of other denominations. The entire circuit situation as it works to-day in the region here under investigation whatever may be its value elsewhere tends to make the modern program of successful churches entirely impracticable.

Escape from the deadening environment of the country church circuit is the ardent desire of most country ministers who have had any reasonable degree of equipment for their vocation, and self-improvement as a preacher seems to be the only way out. The circuit minister of such equipment naturally regards his present work as temporary. He looks forward to leaving the country through promotion to a town church. The city, where he hopes to be, and not the country, where he is, becomes for him the only field for success in the ministry.

It is evident, therefore, that country parishes to be successful must be more compact. As a substitute for the circuit, churches in a small community where there are too many should be united in the support of one resident minister. If they cannot support him, then other adjacent churches should join with them in a federated circuit under a single pastor. Such is the right use of the circuit in the country.

The territory thus placed under one minister may be so large as to make it desirable to employ a paid assistant to the pastor. Freed from the necessity of long drives to other communities, the pastor can make many calls nearer home. Community enterprises, under this system made possible, will bring the pastor into personal touch with the people. He will become their friend and they will wish him a long term of service among them. And only when a minister has been two or three years in a community can he begin to render his most effective service. The enlarged and unified parish, such as that of Benzonia, Michigan, or Hanover, New Jersey, should be carefully distinguished from the misused circuit, which now plays so significant a part in the church life of Ohio. Parishes like these afford all the benefits of the circuit with none of its defects.

Map 11

(6) More Resident Ministers

While the preaching of a good pastor is an indispensable factor in the individual development of his parishioners and in the progress of community life, that of the non-resident is by comparison of little value. It is shooting in the air without seeing the target, like the fire of artillery without the aid of air scouts. There is no greater force for righteousness in a country community than a church with a resident minister, well educated, well equipped, wisely selected, whose term of service is not too short. The church is the only institution which can hope to employ a man of this type to give his whole time, as a minister can, to the service of his community.

The right kind of resident minister will have a strong and intelligent desire to secure opportunities for the best development of his children and to create a favorable environment for them. He will therefore take a keen interest in the schools, in the establishing of libraries, in play and social life, in keeping out evil influences and promoting general decency. He may fairly expect to see the fruits of his labor, and will be all the more likely on that account to become interested in the economic betterment of the community. Such a man will stimulate it and help it to make use of all available means to further the general welfare. A church with such a pastor is community insurance against degeneracy and decay.

One of the most striking examples of the service of a resident minister during a long pastorate is found in the life of the well-known John Frederick Oberlin, a free biography of whom has recently been made available to all country ministers. Large numbers of modern examples may also readily be found. One is given on pages 77-80 of this report.

There are few more deplorable wastes than that of the church in the use of its rural ministry. This waste alone is enough to account for much of the decline in country life, because under the present system only a small fraction of the normal influence of the ministry can be exerted. And it is a needless waste, for it is fully within the power of the churches through their officials to correct it. The minister must be given a field of such a character that it is possible for him to do his work, and he must be given that adequate support which proper church administration can most assuredly secure for him. Only when these readjustments have been made will it be fair and right to appeal to the young men of education and ability to enter the rural ministry, and stay in it.

The thing can be done. We have in mind a rural township with less than 2,000 inhabitants, lying in a hill country, which has six resident ministers in its five villages, while the term of service of the minister of each of the parishes is nearly always long. To establish at least one resident minister in every township is not too high an aim. The people can and should be brought to understand that the value of a successful minister rises in increasing proportion with his knowledge of the community and the length of his service.

(7) Interchurch CoÖperation

To substitute coÖperation for competition is an essential condition of rural church progress, at least in Ohio. Whenever the new program is adopted by a community it will discover that interchurch competition is hostile to community prosperity. Many rural communities already know that interchurch coÖperation is desirable. But the great question is how to secure it. Nearly every community is aware that it has too many churches, but the task of reducing the number or securing interchurch comity is a problem beset with difficulties. These difficulties, however, are by no means insuperable. Many communities have already found ways to overcome them.

In every community which really requires more than one church or pastor, there should be a federation of churches; that is, a joint committee of pastors and delegates officially appointed by the several churches to learn and meet the needs, religious, or social, which require concerted action. While such federations, which are carefully to be distinguished from federated churches, are common in our cities, comparatively few are found in the country. One of these is in Shiloh, Ohio, a description of which may be found on page 75. There appear to be no very great difficulties in the way of bringing such federations about.

In communities whose compactness permits, and whose population and resources require, that there should be only one congregation and pastor, but where two or more churches already exist, the churches clearly should either be united organically in a single denominational church, or a federated church should be formed. Descriptions of federated churches may be found on pages 59-69.

In a township or community where population and resources are inadequate to support more than one pastor, but where the population is so distributed that more than one place of worship and organized church are required, a federated circuit may well be formed and a common pastor be employed. In such case the several churches should be officially represented by a joint committee which would act for the circuit not only in employing the common pastor, but also in learning and meeting all the religious and social needs which require concerted church action.

In securing pastors and in other matters where assistance is needed, the local federated churches and federated circuits should be aided by the State Federation of Churches if there is one, and if not by such bodies as the Committee of Interchurch CoÖperation of the Ohio Rural Life Association. Both Federation and Association are necessary for other purposes, and therefore no ground whatever exists for the objection sometimes made that federated churches will require the formation of new organizations to supervise them.

While it is true that an uneducated minister ordinarily cannot satisfy the people of various denominations, and that usually he is sectarian in his thinking and point of view, it is equally true that where a well-educated man is pastor, the needs of the people of various denominations can easily be met and church unity be made possible.

(8) Community Churches

The most successful rural church is the community church. Its members work chiefly not for the church itself, but for the community. Its ambition is to serve every person in its neighborhood, to create an environment favorable to the highest possible development of every person in the neighborhood, and to stimulate other organizations and persons to serve the community in every possible way. It is conceivable that there might be more than one such church in a neighborhood, but in this discussion it is assumed that a community church is the only church in the community, for by far the larger number of rural communities in Ohio should have but one church. Since, on an average, there are five churches in a township and only 1,448 persons, the formation of community churches is evidently both advisable and important.

The community church may be a denominational church or a federated church. It is the judgment of most of the denominational officials who are members of the Committee of Interchurch CoÖperation of the Ohio Rural Life Association that wherever possible churches should be united in one denominational church through the reciprocal exchange and elimination of small churches by the denominational organizations. In such an exchange church members of denomination A would unite with the church of denomination B in community M, while members of denomination B would unite with the church of denomination A in community N, and so on. A number of such exchanges have been made, and so far as can be learned, they have worked well. But the members of the small churches frequently refuse to carry out this plan. They often care more for their local church than for their denomination, and are not willing that their own church organization should be destroyed. While such exchanges will doubtless continue to be made from time to time, it is unlikely that rapid progress will be achieved by this method alone.

On the other hand, the members of a local community are usually ready to form a federated church when they understand it. This has been done in Northfield, Aurora, Wayland, Olmstead Falls, Milford Centre and Huntington, in Greene Township, Trumbull County, and in many other communities. A description of some of them may be found on pages 60-69. If the officials and superintendents of the church should become as favorable to the formation of federated churches as they are to exchange between denominations, and should actively further the movement, they could without question bring about the unification of the churches in very large numbers of communities which stand greatly in need of it.

Here then we have two possible methods of uniting the Christian people in the rural communities. One of them—denominational exchange—is favored by the officials but often opposed by the people in the churches. The other—the federated church—is favored by the people in the churches and opposed by many of the officials.

It is our contention that in the majority of cases the method preferred by the people is more desirable than that preferred by the officials. For a man to leave his own denomination and unite with another often involves action against the conscience. In some of the denominations, for example, the members have been trained to think it undesirable to subscribe to a creed. But creed subscription is required by the churches of many of the denominations as a condition of membership. In such cases the church officials may properly hesitate to urge a part of the people to do what they believe is not right.

Another reason which often makes it impossible for the church member of one denomination to unite with the church of another is a temperamental distaste for the idea of submission to some special system of discipline. To all Protestants this is clear so far as the Catholic Church is concerned. To many it is just as clear in relation to some of the Protestant bodies.

The official objections to the formation of federated churches involve no questions of moral principle, but merely those of expediency and the smooth running of existing ecclesiastical machinery. It is held by certain officials that the federated church tends to promote autonomy in the local congregations, and that it will impair the authority of the denomination. But this increase of autonomy has already taken place in the city churches, which, as a matter of practice, whatever the denominational theory may be, manage their own affairs. There is here no loss to the denomination, nor is there likely to be when the country churches are strengthened by federation.

In the long run the officials who now entertain objections to the federated church will doubtless not permit them to stand in the way of rural church progress. Particularly will this be true when a minister of their own denomination is to be made pastor of the federated church. It would seem wise, therefore, for the denominational authorities to agree that when federated churches are formed the choice of pastors should be made, so far as possible, on the basis of interdenominational reciprocity.

In view of the urgent needs of the rural communities, as a rule, those methods should be adopted which are most acceptable to the local people whose interests are involved. When the people of a community come to desire united Christian action in promoting community welfare, their zeal will usually be strong enough to overcome the difficulties in the way. But this desirable consummation is greatly retarded where opposition is made by the denomination or its officials. Until the church officials and denominations are able to propose some other practicable plan for the readjustment of church life to community welfare, a plan which can be carried out, the demands of the situation certainly require them to help rather than hinder the movement for the formation of federated churches. In any event they will not be able to stop it.

In the investigation striking cases were found of denominational officials opposing Christian unity in the mistaken belief that they were acting in accord with the sentiment of their denominations.

It has been reported to us that a certain denominational official has tried in ten different communities to prevent interchurch coÖperation, although the local churches and the local people were for it. It might in charity be contended that in nine of these it was not Christian coÖperation itself that was opposed, but rather the form of coÖperation embodied in a federated church. But in the tenth community it was clearly Christian coÖperation and not the form of it to which this official was hostile, for the people of the two local churches were merely meeting together, in union services on Sunday evenings, and for an occasional communion service. No federation or organic union was contemplated. But the old minister was removed, and a new minister was sent to the field with definite instructions to break up what unity there was. These instructions he carried out so thoroughly that the Christian forces in the community were greatly reduced in effectiveness.

In another community an official persistently tried to prevent the formation of a federated church, although himself acknowledging that he sincerely believed it was the very best thing that could be done for the local people. From two other communities it was reported that this same official was the only obstacle in the way of Christian unity. It is entirely probable that in many other communities these denominational officials have opposed Christian coÖperation, for only incidentally did the authors hear of the cases reported.

(9) Nonsectarian Support

To give strength to the movement for interchurch coÖperation, a strong interdenominational or undenominational backing is needed. On the part of the higher leaders and officials there is no lack of genuine desire to further interchurch coÖperation. The same desire is shared by very large numbers of the younger ministers who are properly trained for their calling, and by many older ministers also. The movement, however, is often halted because of a feeling that somewhere in the denomination there is a strong sentiment against it.

Faintheartedness is the greatest obstacle to coÖperation between churches at the present time. Numbers of actual instances could be given if it were proper to do so. What is needed, therefore, is an active movement between or outside of the denominations, to strengthen those officials who hesitate to promote interchurch coÖperation. Such a movement would finally reveal the fact that the prevailing sentiment in the denominations is really in favor of coÖperation and not against it, and many who now oppose it or refuse to help would become most valuable agents in promoting it.

It must not be assumed that the day of denominations is past. Although, as between most of the denominations, theological differences no longer exist, and other differences between many of them are small, denominational feeling is still dominant. The slight differences loom large. Denominational officials for the most part feel that their chief duty is to their denomination, from which they hold their official power; and this duty is very absorbing. Hence it is often most difficult to gain support from denominational authorities and churches for interdenominational projects.

Moreover, the direction of interdenominational organization, at the present time, is largely in the hands of men who are responsible for denominational interests, or the interests of other organizations which require their wholehearted and undivided support. While the coÖperation and combined judgment of such men is invaluable in the wise direction of interdenominational projects, in Ohio they fail as a driving force. This is now the chief cause of weakness in the interdenominational movement for church and country life in the State.

Both the work for the country church and for the promoting of rural business are rendered ineffective by lack of pecuniary support. In spite of this, however, plans for progressive work both for rural business and rural church are well developed, and have been tested; and moreover, the feasibility of progress in both these lines of endeavor has been thoroughly proved. Two things, then, are now required. These are funds and federated or independent direction of their use.

We may well expect that adequate funds will be given for carrying on this work in the years immediately following the war. After the sacrifices of war those of peace by comparison will not seem large—while the sacrifices of both peace and war are equally necessary for the realization of the high ideals which as Americans we cherish.

This war as nothing else has done, has caused men in general to realize that there are tasks for all other than the commercial enterprises of the day, and that each of us must accept his share of the responsibility for their performance. What is worth fighting for during the war is worth working for after the war.