“THE UNPOPULARITY OF THE CHURCH."

Manawatu Times, Volume XLVIII, Issue 3596, 31 March 1924, Page 9

“THE UNPOPULARITY OF THE CHURCH."

Last night at St. Paul’s Methodist Church the Rev. M. A. Rugby-Pratt, spoke on the alleged unpopularity of the Church, in introducing his .theme h e said that everywhere the conditions of life are changing and the environment in which we do our work is altering. The environment had altered for the Church, and one aspect of this change was seen in the chasm of cleavage between the Church and large masses of the people. The Church was confronted with the fact of a democracy largely alienated. The people wer e not unsympathetic to Christ but were unfriendly to the Church. The hostility was not co doctrine, nor to Scripture interpretation, but to the very existence of the Church. That feeling of hostility must not be under-rated. “What,” asked the preacher, "are the causes for the unpopularity of the Church? Primarily the Church was unpopular because of her unsparing condemnation of sin. In so far as she was faithful she must ever be unpopular. But beyond this reason there were others. Some complained of unpractical preaching. Some feared exploitation by the Church. Some charged her with showing a preference for broadcloth to dungarees. Others asserted the Church was not breathing the spirit of the modern age. Some said i't was the bulwark of the propertied classes. It was said to provide a religious basis for the existing order. It was charged with being deaf to the appeal for economic justice and unconcerned with the aspirations of the toiling masses . Men were asking why the Church should exist unless she helped to shape a better world It was high time to face the Questions men were asking. Hesitation and evasion were useless and harmful. As Professor Peabody had said “the only 'test of the Christian religion which the modern world would regard as adequate was its applicability to the solution of the social question.” The Church would be tested by its ability to produce a better world. The Church was confronted with a new situation The expansion of industry and the discoveries of science had produced two effects. First there had been the amassing of enormous fortunes, and secondly the aggravation of grinding poverty. The rich had grown richer, and whilst the poor were loss poor, their progress had not been uniform with that of the privileged. Education and other causes made the democracy alive to the evils associated with the modern social and industrial system. Unresisted individualism and unchecked competition had made life for many an endless struggle. Thousands were feeling they had missed life’s sweets, that they do not enjoy the full fruits of their labours and so they live under a burdening sense of social mal-adjustment. They had seen visions of a better world and (this had created the social problem. The social problem assumed an Industrial form. Men were asking for fairer conditions and better pay They asked for justice, not for generosity, for work, not for charity. They demanded a chance to realise their man hood and to live a freer, more human, more reasonable life. But while the form of the social problem was Industrial, its spirit was ethical. It was a demand for justice. It issued from a sense of wrong. The problem was freighted with moral significance. The claim that it was right, linked It with Christ’s purpose. The spirit of the social movement uttered itself in the motto “All for each and each for all.” The peril of the movement was that men were making a religion of their sociallsm.By focussing only on material things they might be robbed of all spiritual hopes and alms The social movement needed guidance. What should be their attitude towards It? Critical aloofness or unreasoning prejudice would be fatal. If the Church was not alive to the social aspects of its mission she would suffer. Pious sentiment could never veil neglect of the poor or oppressed. They must meet tho situation with sympathy and seek to understand.

the new problem. To modern conditions they must apply eternal principles. To class antagonisms they must present a gospel of brotherhood. They must show where healing is for the hurts of humanity. They must con demn Injustice, selfishness and oppression, The Church was Divinely called to rebuke the wrongs that curse the people, to denounce unrighteous conditions, to stand by just causes, and to ohamplon the rights of men. The 111 a of the world were the fruits of selfishness. No legislation could overcome that. The only law to eliminate It is the law of love ruling individual life. The social problem was really not one of conditions, but of character. Human nature blocked its solution. The social problem and the Christian task were one. That task was the reconstruction of men and women. Behind the problem of reforming society was the problem of reforming ourselves. In Jesus Christ alone was the dynamic for individual and social regeneration. He alone could transform men and create a partnership of brotherhood , His work was a progressive moral movement. It changed human hearts. It educated conscience. It formed Christian public opinion. Thus it was that Christ raised the standard of human nature. Not by revolution, but by gradual evolution would the transition be made from selfishness to brotherllness, and tho new sentiment express itself in fairer conditions and better laws. The present chasm between the Church and the masses would not be permanent. A better understanding was already being begotten. More and more would the Church become, as one had said, “'the strength of God to the weak, the joy of God to the wretched and the wealth of God to the poor,”