The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1886-05-29
Modern Evangelism.

them to $50 preach my gospel to every Great
ure.p 1t was the gospel they were to preach,
nottheir own crude conceptions, andill-consid-
cred opinions. The gospel of good tidings OF
salvation, not the uninspired gable of frail
and finite men. But what is the preaching of
the present day, that is, the so-called preach
ing of the ''sensationalists," the 'evangel-
ists,' the "salvationists, who loom up sud-
denly, ever and anon, and dart across the
moral heavens like meteors in the sky, and
as suddenly disappear and are heard OF no
more? The moral good they do-if they do
any-is like the effeC- of pebble thrown into
the water, which makes slight ripple upon the
surface that lasts but moment and straight
way is still again.
We do not include in this class the true
evangelist, the devout legate of the skies,
fully imbued with the spirit of his mission,
whose meat and drink it is to do his Masters
will, and to bear his message, in all earnest
ness, humility and meekness, to sinful men.
For such we have the profoundest respect, and
award them all honor in their high office.
But for the moral mountebank, the coarse
and ribald jester over divine things, the SEN
sationalist who breaches himself instead of
Christ. whoindulges',in witticisms and quaint
sayings, and utters strange and striking SEN
fences to draw the multitude after him, to fill
his pews or benches, nothing should be felt
but the profoundest disgust. Instead OF
preaching the gospel they talk on all the
leading topics of the times, the latest sensa-
ton, the fashions, the dudes, the labor agita-
ton, gaming, baseball, progressive euchre,
Waiting or "hugging set to music" and
a thousand such topics, into which they
manage to introduce sayings provocative
of daughter, ;" applause" profound SEN
sation, renewed laughter" and like evil
dences of irreverence, parenthetically inter-
jected into the reports of their utterances by
those faithful chroniclers of passing events,
the reporters for the press.
Reflection upon these subjects sometimes
presents the query whether there would not
be fewer ''evangelists" if money were out of
the question. 1t is to be feared that the col
lections which are sure to be not overlooked
on these occasions, bear an important part in
setting them on foot. Here it will be re-
piled by the advocates ofthese 'evangelists, F"
that ''the laborer is worthy of his hire" that
she who breaches the gospel should live OF the
gospel and like sentences. But it is not
the gospel, but something very different from
the gospel, that is now under consideration.
1t has been said of one evangelist, who has
filled larger space, perhaps, In the puohc
esteem than any other of recent years, that he
took out of Philadelphia sixty thousand dol:
lars, and out of Baltimore, forty thousand
dollars. These sums may be exaggerations,
and probably are, but the amounts contribute
ed we're said to be large. Another is said to
have refused to take less than two hundred
dollars per week for her engagements, and
exacted with such emphasis the payment OF
the last penny of it, as to excite Suspicion oil
a mercenary motive, even in the minds OF her
principal admirers. Is this christianlike? Is
it like the example of St. Paul, who could
appeal to his brethren and call them to wit
ness that he had not been charge to them
He worked at his trade of tent making and
earned his own subsistence. But there are
not many Pauls in the world in these days,
when "money answereth all things"
Censure should never be bestowed where 1t
is not deserved, and with all due caution In
this respect, it cannot be considered unde-
served, unless the tongue of common report
has dealt unjustly with some of these so-called
"evangelsts," whose love of silver equals it
it does not exceed their love for SIN
ners and their salvation. And as there is
high authority for saying that ''the love of
money is the root of all evil, y if that love be
present in such a degree, then evil lieth at
the door, How, then, can they presump-
tuously undertake the moral cleansing OF
others who are themselves unclean?
If it be desirable that everything should be
done decently and in order" then indecency
of word or gesture and disorder are out of
place in a worshiping assembly. The courts
of the kings and potentates of the earth OBJ
serve the courtesies, proprieties and formali-
ties cognizable in such assemblies. Will the
court of heaven accord approval to the grossest
departuresfrom such propriety and decorum by
men ostensibly engaged in the solemnities of
divine service. Is it reasonable to suppose
that the Almighty would employ such agents
to be the opponents of His truth and the ex
ecutors of His will? Is the assembly for His
worship the place for wit, jest, laughter and
applause? Has He not said, Reverence my
sanctuary; l am the Lord" Is the service
of the sanctuary-if rink can be called
sanctuary-to be made the source of gain
Shall such service be turned into money
getting? Can men, in very truth, serve both
God and mammon, when the highest authority
has said they cannot?
These things are submitted in all serious
ness to the calm consideration of many we'll
meaning people who lend their countenance
to everything that is new or strange in the
religious world, or that ministers to a morbid
craving for excitement or novelty. And we
seriously put the question to all such-is it an
honest and sincere desire for the evangelical
ton of the world and the promotion of Gods
kingdom 10 the earth, or is it something else