Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1914-05-16

Copyrighted by the Frankenburg Co..
CHAPTER xlII.-(Continued)
Charles G. Phinney, the evangelist
who Is SO often quoted and praised by
Rev. w. A. Sunday, was severely crit
icised by the famous DR.. Beecher and
others because of the methods he EN-.
ployed. John Wesley from 1889 to the
close Of life was prosecuted and an.
noyed; not alone by the magistrates,
but by the clergymen Of his country,
and these differences extended into
his own family and threatened the
natural ties which bound him to his
brother Charles. George Whitfield
could not agree with his great friend
Wesley, and papers and tracts were
continually published against him al
though he conducted wonderfully sue
cessful evangelical campaigns both In
England and America. The friendship
which existed between Whitfield and
John Wesley was at one time actually
broken and for long time seriously
impaired by differences of opinion
which they held upon church govern
nsut. H,
| It IL not strange therefore that W.
IA. Sunday should come in agitated
Ieon6ict with some Of the leaders In
church work everywhere he goes. It
remained, however, for episodes grow
ling out Of the campaign in Columbus
ito attroct international attention to
develop what has come to be known
10 tho Gladdsn9anday controversy.
This controversy was taken up, not
only in the columns Of the church pa.
pers, chief Of which was tho "Congre-
gationalist," but was caught up by the
secular press everywhere and given
extrserdinary space and attention.
DR.. GLADDEN. II probably the greatest
church authority and the most power
ful intellect who ever set himself in
opposition to Mr.. Sunday and hin
works. A dispassionate survey OF the
results Is almost impossible at the
present time (November, 1879.
Certain features that are easily ap
parent, point to divided result One
thing conclusively established by the
controversy was the tremendous 10y
atty Of those who had been most
intimately associated with Mr.. Sunday
in his several campaigns. Opposite
to this was the unquestioued fact
that DR.. Gladden's attitude and rea'
soning withheld from Mr.. Sunday q
call to indianapolis and possibly other
cities. Moro serious than anything
else. however, was the strife and dis
sension which the controversy pro
voked among the less intellectual and
more bitterly partisan of church work
ers on either side. Both parties to the
disagreement, 20 fer a they were In
dividually concerned, let the matter
drop whom their side had been given
to tho public.
Mr.. Sunday himself never took part
In the discussion. Whatever was said
in his behalf WAS made public by
friends who may, or may not, have
hssn fully authorized in the premises.
At no time did Mr.. Sunday in any OF
his public addresses mention Dr.. Glad.
den by name, and such publications
- appeared coupling the two names
were due to unauthorized reproduc-
ton Of essentially personally CONVEX
sation.
On the other hand, DR.. GLADDEN. who
lad opposed the coming Of Mr.. Sun
day to Columbus maintained the strict.
est silence after this had been deter.
mined upon. At no time during the
Columbus campaign did he do or say
anything which could be construed as
opposition, unless it was the maintain
ing of his regular Sunday services.
His nrst public r-terance appeared
in the issue of the congregational
ist" May - mere than three months
following the close OF the Sunday
campaign In Columbus. Because of
Or. Gladden's international promi.
hence in the Congregationalist fold
and in the educational and religious
world generally this article provoked
the most widespread discussion.
Dr.. Gladden's article appeared In re-
Spouse to hundreds of requests poured
In upon him from all sources where a
Sunday campaign was contemplated.
Came from people who differed from
the evangelist in his methods. Leav.
Ing out of account for, the moment
tho differences in personality, which
in themselves would have made any
cooperation between those two men
impossible, 1t is Of importance to
know first DR.. Gladden's attitude on
some Of the doctrines which Mr.. Sun.
day breaches. In his paper entitled
"The Trouble About Billy Sunday"
published May 20, 1913, in the "Con.
Eregationalist," DR.. GLADDEN. says:
''The intolerance and violence which are
the native breath Of Mr.. Sunday furnish
the first and strongest reason for refusing
to work with him. In his first or second
day in Columbus Mr.. Sunday said, The
Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood
Of Man is the worst rot that ever was
dug out of hell, and every minister who
breaches it Is liar. I could hardly be-
liava NV ewes when I read it. but I made