The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-09-25
THEATRICAL PREA CHING.

On Monday we expressed oar views on
,ho spbiect of the new system of preaching in
.ho theatres of eur city. We condemned it in
an honesty. From the numerous oommuni-
.o,;ons we have received we select the ablest,
tbe one given below, from the Rev. Dr. Nadal,
:, ,bo Methodist Church. II is courteous and
" 20 email force, yet we cannot change our
O-rrosssd opinion Zone jot or one tittle."
e,o,,oes such as those at the Chestnut
60, rhoa,re last Sunday evening SAVIOR too
inch of "claptrap," and true renglon ana
.anso,ional preaching are as lar asunder as
a. ontipodes. We therefore give the oppo-
ri,o view of the question.
u,,,va IN THEATREs-THE EVENING
PREAOhit' TKIEGRAPH'S ARTICLE,
..s Fditors:-We regard your paper as
ttbe fairest and broadest OF It's class in the
Onloie OILY n country. Even thearticle Wnich we now
propose to crisl5e sb ~ be heart of the writer to
oar1e o6 Se the cause Of Christianity and public
morals You are eyideng Ind Iedd1pbs bs b,rcb pr t%e
hUi in our opinion, you are mistaken. " the
ccbSaracter of bhe services at the Chestnut Street
Intetsitng beyond what is found in your article,
and shall, therefore. raise no issue with you
aSicS a93icSS 'io You complain. We simply dissent
wmnSt wntGtn heartily from your views con-
CeTning the prttbP1t tbPeatTe. Pe accept your ar
slnn, Of the reasons which have in
duced the Young ana oF Vn
SUstIv sum them mp by saying thaI the friends
of the movement believe thaI IN TINS way .Che
mnid not otherwlse hear It," Certainly; that
is one of the reasons for building churches, and
tbe particular and strongest reason lor Dullulng
Sntea9ion III channels and Sunday school rooms in
6esiitute localities. That, in substance, is the
reason Tor IN dne aIeT those who will not come to
ns We must use all possible innocent skill to
induce men to hear the Gospel al anu d De saHeu; b
Now, Mr. Editor permit us 10 examine tne
ohiections of your article to this innovation, SO
called First, you characterize II as AN atlIempt
10 amalgamate the Church ana tne Worlu' ~
10 10 carfa1nly an attempt to bring the sinful
world TO Christ-to convert wicked men ana
bring them into the Church But 1t IS no more
an ATTEMPT to amalgamate the world and the
Church than we are guilty OF Wnen we renI
our pews or furnish free sitLings IN our
to persons who are not CHRISTIANS. Inc opJecI
in both cases is to preach the Gospel to sinners
10 win the world over to Christ, not TO yleIu Ihe
Church up to the influence OF the world. Inc
fact that the church was built for worship, ana
the theatre for amusement, does not alter Ihe
case in the least. Christians must be instant
ont of season" as well as "in season." II people
cannot be brought to church, we must preach 10
them wherever we can find them. ,.
Again, the article in question asks iii 1t IS
safe to mix opposing elements?" Certainly not,
when the aim or the natural tendency OF tne
mixture is to the mastery of good by evil But
where the aim or the natural tendency OF such
mixture is to purge out the evil then by all
means let the mixture take place. Ana the
result will not be "to weaken the barriers be-
tween the Church and The world" but to in
crease the number of believers, and make the
buIwarks of the faith stronger. The barriers of
the Church are not intended to keep sinners
out but only to keep sin out and 10 defend
penitent sinners after they have been brought
in The barriers are not gateleSs.
Nor can we feel the force of the argument
which would sho " that the sight of the minis
ter on the STAGE surrounded with the parapher.
MALTA Of the theatre" would make the theatre,
rather than the Gospel, prominent in the minds
of the hearers. The effect on true Christians
would be to fill them with gratitude at the con-
trast between the Gospel and the Vanities and
impurities Of the theatre, and especially at the
thought that so many would hear the Gospel to
whom it had so long been strange sound.
With the regular theatre.goers the result might
indeed be- as THE TELEGRAPH claims, a mixture
OF the sacred and profane, of Shakespeare and
Matthew. The hymn, as you say, might easily
come in contrast with q trivial song of the even
ing before. But, surely, it would be we'll to stir
little salt into the bitter fountains OF worldly
feeling and thinking. Matthew and jeremiah
had better effect an entrance. They must be in
before they can be masters. Indeed, the Gospel
of Christ is bold. 1t dares to go into any com.
pdny, only 1t will go in It's own spirit and with
lts own arms, TO conquer and purify.
We may be told that "the attractions of the
ordinary churches are sufficient for all who de-
sire" That may be, but the Bride of Christ
be saved She would do everything in her
power to awaken the desire. She would arrest
them in their career on the road to ruin, and
beg them TO hear the story of the Cross. She
knows that, by nature, all are children o.
wrath.
We are not sure that we understand what is
meant when the article in The TELEGRAPH
tells us that "the quiet, dignified, orthodox
way OF going to heaven is quite broad enough
for all that desire to travel in IT," Does it NEAR
that II is not orthodox to preach religion out
side of church? When the article iu Question
declares that "if sinners will not hear the Cos
pei In the regular churches, etc., they hat
better let Christianity alone" we fear the sin
ners will hardly heed the exhortation we he,
them, on the contrary, to hear the Gospel any
WheIet ana from any minister rather than no
az all; for the Word of God is Intended t
chsnge the perverse mind; and the mos
curious, pfolane, Scothng hearer may become
Al quoilng the Divine words:-'If thew hea
not Moses and the Prophets, neither will the
De persuaded though one rose from the dead
FOR the reason furnished by this text, we oppos
The purpose for which 1t was quoted. We sa,
let them hear Moses and the Prophets Thei
rs no other chance for their salvation. MAI
them near follow Them up and down throug
In word, the argument of THE TELEGRAP
assails the economical principle on which u
evan gelism of the Christian Church is base
In accordance with this mistaken view, 81
ned and street preaching of Wesley and VIII
Held was all wrong; nay, the very Apostl
were wrong In preaching In the prisons by b
Wayside, by the streams, in the desert,
wherever they found a soul to be reproved
Instructed. In this view 1t is wrong to preaC
especially, In any place whose aim is n
in sympathy with religion. 1t is Wro
TO attack sin in its strongholds, even when
vited. Our Saviour ought not To have preach
in the house of Simon the Pharisee. 1t is wro
TO go into drinking house to eXpOstuate wi
It's visitors; II was wrong for the early Meth
dist preachers to go to the fairs in England a
snatch the poor sheep out Of the mouth of {
non; so far from agreeing with this view,
nolu IL TO be right to preach wherever men o.
women are found to listen. If the gamblers
tLnis Lnnitssu'slphla should unite to ask preaching
1an, 1nelI ,olsss, and should select and tit up tn
nnesI saloon for that purpose we ought To
ano preach. And the same would hold of n.