The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1905-03-28
is IT RIGHT TO ACCEPT ROOKIE
FELLER'S MONEY?

Is it right for church to accept
the money of Mr.. Rockefeller for mis-
sions or for its colleges?
For several years there has been
what might be termed an academic
discussion of this question, but it
comes up now in a decidedly practical
shape. Last week number of Congre-
gational ministers protested against
the acceptance by the American
Board of Foreign Missions of $780,
600 which Mr.. Rockefeller proposed
to donate them for Foreign Missions.
And now comes Rev. DIR. Washington
GLADDEN., pastor of the First Congre-
gational church of Columbus, Ohio,
and Moderator of the General Coun-
ell of Congregational churches of the
United States, and takes strong
ground against the acceptance of the
greasy money, soiled by the standard
oil RELENTLESS rapacity" In a sermon
delivered on Sunday morning Dr.
GLADDEN. discussed the gift and said:
''The money proffered to our board
of missions comes out of a colossal
estate, whose foundations were laid
in the most relentless rapacity known
to modern commercial history.
1.-THE success of this business from
the beginning until now has been
largely due to unlawful manipulations
of railway rates
1.-The United States government is
engaged in a strenuous attempt to fer
ret out and punish this injustice. And
the people of the United States have
tremendous battle on their hands
with the corporations greed, which
has entrenched itself in this strong
hold. and has learned to use the rail-
ways for the oppression and spoil
alton of the people.
"And now. on the eve of this battle,
they are asked to accept a great gift
of money from the man who, more
completely than any other, represents
the system they are summoned to
fight.
II hope they are not mean enough
to take this money and then turn
around and fight him. I hope they
are not so faithless to their obliga-
tons as to take his money and shut
their mouths or become his apologists.
1--WE do not want this mans money.
To accent it will be to work the con-
tempt of millions of honest men: to
reject it will strengthen our church
in the affection and respect of millions
who are inclined to doubt whether
the churches love God more than
mammon.
"Our missions will be richer and
stronger without 1t than with it, and
we shall lose nothing by our loyalty
to the things unseen and eternal"
Heretofore these churches that have
taken Rockefeller's money have held
that its acceptance implied no obli-
CATION to the donor and put no seal
upon the lips of the recipients. But
DR.. GLADDEN. takes a different view,
for he says: 81 hope they are not
mean enough to take this money and
then turn around and fight him.
The late Rev. John Tillett, of North
Carolina, took money from saloon
keepers and kept up his fight upon
saloons upon the theory that their
money had served the devil long
enough and it ought to be put in the
service of the Lord Was that good
man wrong in taking that view? IT
is the only view that can be held by
churches that take money gotten in
debauching or an illegal business.
The whole matter seems to resolve
itself into this: Does the gift from
a man like Rockefeller carry any OBJ
legation to those receiving it "to shut
their mouths or become his apollo
gists?" If it does, then it is wrong
to take a cent of the money proffered
and this is so plain as to need no
argument.