Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1883-03-03
NEWSPAPER AND PULPIT.

many tilt, and very few have been the
instances when either has convinced the
other as to its legitimate sphere. At st.
Louis, the other day, Rev. DR.. Merrill,
an eminent Congregationalist, delivered 9
sermon that is attracting considerable at.
tention. In that discourse he held that
the pulpit is foolish TO manifest displeasure
at the attention given to religion by the
newspaper for as large minority of read
ers are interested in religion, he is a wise
managing editor who furnishes matter to
attract this minority, as well as to publish
the details of the last murder or suicide.
We were not aware before that any con.
siderable representation of the pulpit OBJ
3, jected to the publication of religious news
in the secular press. The reverend gentle.
man, if correctly reported, mistakes the
objection of his own class. What they dc
protest against is the attsmpt on tie part
of some Of the secular press to lead in the
matter OF religious belief, and to that ex.
tent the demurrer of the pulpit is taken
with force. DR.. Merrill believes
that the average secular paper
wishes religion no harm, and
therein he is right. He believes that the
average reporter gives the pulpit its due,
and again he is just. Ali he asks of his
people is that they will not accept the
daily paper as a guide in spiritual matters.
He holds that while the press may prop
erly discuss all topics within the range of
public knowledge. no one man can be a
leader or sufficient authority. To give
one authority in religious matters, he main.
tains that there must be special qualifica.
| tions and a certain training. The ordinary
editor, says Mr.. Merrill, who should at
tempt TO discuss with derision the views of
Proctor, Mitchell, or Young, on the higher
questions Of astronomy, would excite pub
lie contempt. What the preacher holds,
in short, is that he only is authority who
has patiently, devoutly and candidly
studied the truths of religion. The limita.
tions upon the time of newspaper, he
thinks, prevent it being an authority on
religious matters that should be accepted
by religious people. The modern church
he regards as in peril from the press only
SO far as it forgets this matter of limitation
of time as to newspapers, and that a
man who is excellent authority on one
topic may be none at all upon another. He
does not. therefore, advise his people not
to read the secular press, but to read with
discrimination, and not to permit the hur.
ried and "ephemeral thoughts of the ed.
itor to displace the Word of Cod"
In this expression he gives evidence of
the advance of the church from the tram
mels of that condition which at one time
would not have tolerated an utterance of
that character. The doctor is correct in
holding that ideas are only worth them
selves. A thought, he says, should not
have undue weight simply because it ap-
pears in print, nor, we may add, because
uttered from the pulpit; for, as he well
says, the truth will abide though every
man believes lie. The press will continue
to notice the pulpit, and occasionally, it is
to be presumed, to take issue with it, but
we do not understand it to have set itself
upas an authority. The question as to what
is authority, and what is the qualification
of an authority, is itself one of the issues
which the modern pulpit discusses most
While it may be admitted that the secular
press is wiser, in the main, to confine itself
to matters secular, yet if it did SO to the
total exclusion of religious matters, none
sooner than the people of the church
would criticise it as lacking in one of the
essential elements of true journalism.
Even in the matter of publishing religious
news and current religious opinions as re-
Elected in the church journals, the secular
press cannot hope to escape criticism. II |
it is true to the news quality of journal
ism, it will present the varying current ex-
pressiors of those branches of the church |
which are antagonistic to each other. |
The pulpit does not hesitate to |
criticise the press, and the latter has |
never taken exception to its right |
to do so, nor should it. The age and the
time will not condemn for opinions cake, |
and the discussion of fundamental truths |
must engage the attention of all classes,
for truth is not the property of any to the
exclusion of others. Generally the discus.
sions OF religious dogmas by the daily
press are Improbable, but the publishing
of the truth as it develops through the
evolution of knowledge, whether it be in
the press secular or religious, from rostrum
or from pulpit, is the need of the world
and of religion, Let the press treat the
pulpit fairly, and the pulpit treat the press
justly, each recognizing the great influence
of the other, neither concealing error, fear.
ing the truth or condemning for opinions
sake, and any supposed conflict between
press and pulpit will be heard of no more.
Both are mighty forces in the advancement |
OF the race, the development of truth, the
attainment of the highest possibilities OF
civilization and the dissemination of knowl.
edge. But neither one can afford to live
in cell-they must face the sunlight Of
day, and meet and resist the forces of
error. But it does not follow that they |
must necessarily engage in battles royal,
or burn each other at the stake.
INDUSTRIAL EDUCATION.
Out OF the struggle necessary at each |