Church Work in 
 
 State Universities 
 
 1911-1912 
 
 I 
 
CHURCH WORK IN STATE 
 UNIVERSITIES 
 
 1911-1912 
 
 REPORT OF THE FIFTH ANNUAL CONFER¬ 
 ENCE OF CHURCH WORKERS IN 
 STATE UNIVERSITIES 
 
 HELD AT THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA. IOWA CITY. 
 
 FEBRUARY 6 AND 7. 1912 
 
 Edited by 
 
 FRANCIS MORTON FOX 
 
 IOWA CITY, IOWA 
 JUNE, 1912 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 Address of Welcome. The Rev. W. D. Williams^ D.D. 
 
 Address of Welcome, President John Gabbert Bowman 
 
 The Conference. Church Workers Defined, The Problem Stated. 
 Discussion led by the Rev. J. Leslie French, Ph.D. 
 
 Religious Census in the University. Howard Y. Williams 
 
 The Student and His Home Church. Discussion led by the Rev. 
 Henry W. Foote. 
 
 The Claim of the Church on University Men. The Rev. James 
 Beveridge Lee, D.D. 
 
 Handling of Religious Problems of College Students. President 
 Francis J. McConnell. 
 
 The Preparation in Universities and Colleges of Religious Leaders 
 and Specialists (Investigation). Prof. Edwin Diller Starbuck 
 
 Report of Special Committee on Investigation of Biblical and 
 Religious Courses for Credits in State Universities (Ques¬ 
 tionnaire). Dean Charles M. Sharpe. 
 
 University Credits for Study in Religious Education. President 
 Albert Ross Hill.. . 
 
 The Relation of the University Student to His Church. The Rev. 
 James C. Baker. 
 
 How can the Denominational and Association workers co-operate 
 at the State University? Mr. A. J. Elliott .... 
 
 How can the University Professor and Advisor co-operate with the 
 University Pastor and Association Worker at the University? 
 Discussion led by Prof. C. E. Seashore. 
 
 The Personal Element in Religious Work for University Students. 
 The Rev. Matthew G. Allison. 
 
 Voluntary Bible Courses, The Rev. R. H. Edwards 
 
 How to reach the Student during the first four weeks of his Uni¬ 
 versity Life. The Rev. Howard R. Gold .... 
 
 Denominational Policies for Work among State University Stu¬ 
 dents. The Rev. Dean R. Leland. 
 
 Should a University Pastor Assemble his Students? Why? Wliere? 
 The Rev. E. W. Blakeman. 
 
 Financing the Work of the University Pastor. The Rev. Martin 
 E. Anderson. 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 The fifth annual meeting of the Conference of Church workers in State 
 Universities held at the State University of Iowa, Iowa City, February 6, 
 and 7, 1912, carried out its comprehensive program in detail with the single 
 exception of one address, viz., that of Dean Shailer Mathews, who was con¬ 
 fined to his home on account of illness. Sixty-eight delegates, covering a 
 wide field of religious and educational interests, were present. Sixteen 
 great educational institutions were represented, fourteen being universities 
 and twelve of these were state institutions. Nine religious denominations, 
 professors of colleges and theological seminaries, superintendents and secre- 
 taries of denominational boards, national and general secretaries of the 
 Young Men^s and Young Women ^s Christian Associations, pastors of 
 churches, university pastors and interested laymen composed the company 
 of earnest delegates who sat about the great tables in the senate chamber 
 of the Old Capitol building to give and to take, to speak and to listen, to 
 ask and answer questions on this vital subject of the church’s part in the 
 religious care of the 110,000 students in the state controlled schools of 
 higher education. It was preeminently a convention of discussions and not 
 of speech making and our loss is that we have no stenographic report of the 
 discussions to print. This report simply gives to you in printed form the 
 manuscripts as they were handed in. It is our regret that some of the 
 manuscripts have never reached us. 
 
 At the suggestion of the executive committee, a registration fee of one 
 dollar was voted and thirty-two delegates paid this fee to the treasurer. 
 Thus a precedent was made, providing such funds for the officers as are 
 necessary for the putting on of a convention. 
 
 The next annual meeting of the conference will be held at the State Uni¬ 
 versity of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, the date to be announced later. 
 
 Officers elected for the year 1912-1913 are the Rev. E. W. Blakeman, 
 Methodist university pastor, Madison, Wis., president; the Rev. T. M. 
 Shipherd, pastor First Congregational church, Lincoln, Neb., vice-president; 
 and the Rev. Wallace C. Payne, instructor, Kansas University Bible chairs, 
 Lawrence, Kansas, secretary and treasurer. 
 
 Extra copies of this report may be secured by writing to Francis Morton 
 Fox, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
OFFICERS AND MEMBERS OF THE CONFERENCE 
 
 President— Charles M. Sharpe, D. D., Disciple, Dean of Bible College^, 
 Columbia, Mo. 
 
 Vice-president—The Rev. Howard R, Gold, Lutheran University Pastor,. 
 Madison, Wis. 
 
 Secretary and Treasurer— Francis Morton Fox, D. D., Presbyterian Uni¬ 
 versity Pastor, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 J. Wilson Currens, Presbyterian University Pastor, Boulder, Colo. 
 
 G. Rast, Lutheran Pastor, Minneapolis, Minn. 
 
 Noble I. Elderkin, Minister, Plymouth Congregational Church, Lawrence,. 
 Kans. 
 
 W. M. Backus, Minister, Unitarian First Church, Minneapolis, Minn. 
 Charles M. Sharpe, Dean of Bible College, Disciple, Columbia, Mo. 
 Howard R. Gold, Lutheran University Pastor, Madison, Wis. 
 
 Vernon S. Phillips, Pastor, First Baptist Church, Madison, Wis. 
 
 Frank B. Bachelor, Pastor, First Baptist Church, Ann Arbor, Mich. 
 
 M. G. Allison, Presbyterian University Pastor, Madison, Wis. 
 
 Percy M. Dawson, Unitarian, Ann Arbor, Mich. 
 
 Dean R. Leland, Presbyterian University Pastor, Lincoln, Neb. 
 
 A. F. Elmquist, President, Lutheran Synod, Minneapolis, Minn. 
 
 F. M. Dowlin, Pastor, Presbyterian Church, West Liberty, Iowa. 
 
 H. S. CoNDiT, Pastor, Unity Presbyterian Church, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 11. P. Chaffee, Pastor, Baptist Church, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 J. E. Park, Secretary Y. M. C. A., Boulder, Colo. 
 
 J. Twyson Jones, Pastor, Congregational Church, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 W. W. Carlton, District Superintendent, M. E. Church, Mt. Vernon, Iowa.. 
 James C, Baker, Pastor, Trinity M. E. Church, Urbana, Ill. 
 
 Rollo F. Hurlburt, Pastor, First M, E. Church, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 Lloyd C. Douglas, Religious Work Secretary, Y. M. C. A., Champaign, Ill. 
 Prank H. West, General Secretary Y. M. C. A., Madison, Wis. 
 
 W. S. Richardson, Religious Work Director, Y, M. C. A., Minneapolis,. 
 Minn. 
 
 Howard Y. Williams, General Secretary Y. M. C. A., Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 .r. Leslie French, Presbyterian University Pastor, Ann Arbor, Mich. 
 
 O. H. Cessna, Methodist, Chaplain, Iowa State Agricultural College, Ames, 
 Iowa. 
 
 J. W. Innes, College Pastor, Presbyterian Church, Ames, Iowa. 
 
 ]>wight Witherspoon Wylie, Pastor, Presbyterian Church, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 J. H. Dunlap, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 Henry Wilder Foote, Secretary Department of Education, American Uni- 
 
tarian Association, Boston, Mass. 
 
 Luther E. Widen, Lutheran, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 D. H. Anderson, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 W. D. Williams, Eector, Trinity Episcopal Church, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 C. H. PuRMORT, Presbyterian Synodical superintendent of Home Mission.^, 
 l)es Moines, Iowa. 
 
 Guy V. Aldrich, State Student Secretary, Y. M. C. A., Presbyterian, Des 
 Moines, Iowa. 
 
 C. C, Eowlison, Pastor, Christian Church, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 E. P. Kobertson, Wesley College, University of North Dakota. Grand 
 
 Forks, N. D. 
 
 A. E. Vail, University of Illinois, Urbana, lU. 
 
 Martin E. Anderson, Presbyterian University Pastor, Champaign, lU. 
 
 Wm. Houston, Presbyterian University Pastor, Columbus, O. 
 
 J. Beveridge Lee, Presbyterian, Board of Education, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 John Andrew Holmes, Pastor, First Congregational Church, Champaign^ 
 Ill. 
 
 Eichard H. Edwards, Congregational University Pastor, Madison, Wis. 
 
 E. W. Blakeman, Methodist University Pastor, Madison, Wis. 
 
 Wm. J. Davidson, Methodist, Northwestern University, Evanston, lU. 
 
 P. H. Heisey, Pastor, Lutheran Church, North Liberty, Iowa. 
 
 C. F. Ensign, Pastor, Presbyterian Church, Marion, Iowa. 
 
 S. S. Klyne, Pastor, M. E. Church, Minneapolis, Minn. 
 
 Ina Scherrebeck, Y. W. C. A. Secretary, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 J. F. Eowlison, Pastor, Christian Church, Tiffin, Iowa. 
 
 Wm. M. Evans, Bible Department, Coe College, Cedar Eapids, Iowa. 
 
 Arthur L. Weatherby, Lincoln, Neb. 
 
 James T. Wylie, Pastor, Presbyterian Church, Oxford, Iowa. 
 
 S. N. Carpenter, Pastor, Lutheran Church, Carthage, HI. 
 
 C. E. Seashore, Lutheran, Dean of Graduate College, University of Iowa, 
 Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 Theo. M. Shipherd, Pastor, Congregational Church, Lincoln, Neb. 
 
 J. S. Moore, General Secretary Y. M. C. A., Columbia, Mo. 
 
 Frank A. Gilmore, Unitarian, Madison, Wis. 
 
 Ernest C. Smith, Unitarian, Chicago, Ill. 
 
 Francis Morton Fox, Presbyterian University Pastor, Iowa State Univer¬ 
 sity, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 Mrs. Francis Morton Fox, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 Horace F. Martin, Pastor, English Lutheran Church, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 G. W. Stewart, Professor of Physics, University of Iowa, Methodist, Bible 
 
 Class Teacher, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 Herman Brueckner, Pastor, German Lutheran Church, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 Eobert Taylor, Elder, Presbyterian Church, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
 H. Houghton Schumacher, Pastor, Unitarian Church, Iowa City, Iowa. 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2019 with funding from 
 Columbia University Libraries 
 
 https://archive.org/details/churchworkinstatOOconf 
 
jfiftb Hnnual Conference of Cburcb "KIlorKers in 
 
 Sfate Ulntrccstfies. 
 
 ADDRESS OF WELCOME 
 
 By the Eev. W. D. Williams, Eector of Trinity Episcopal 
 Church, President Ministerial Union, Iowa City. 
 
 “As president of the Ministerial Union, it becomes my duty, as it is my 
 valued privilege, to bid you all a joyous welcome. Vision, however imper¬ 
 fect, is better than no vision. As president of the Ministerial Union, it is 
 not out of place to remind ourselves that the genesis of university life in 
 America was given by the Eev. John Harvard, founder of Harvard Univer¬ 
 sity; it is fitting, therefore, that a minister should presume to welcome this 
 distinguished body to this city—the beautiful city on the Iowa river, and 
 we welcome you to our homes—cultured, refined, hospitable; and we wel¬ 
 come you to our hearts. 
 
 ‘ ‘ The Eev. John Harvard’s vision may have been defective, in some re¬ 
 spects, but it contained all the cardinal principles of an education at once 
 free and universal, and ethical, and religious. We, the Avorkers of today re¬ 
 present the same cardinal principles, and we welcome you, our co-workers to 
 the fellowship, and hospitality, of a comprehensive Christianity upon those 
 cardinal lines and in the warmth of our Christian love. May God direct us, 
 as we consult at this time, and plan for the spread of His kingdom in the 
 hearts of university people. May He give us the spirit of love and of a sound 
 mind Hhat we both perceive and know wdiat things we ought to do, and 
 also may have grace and power faithfully to fulfill the same. ’ ’ ’ 
 
 ADDEESS OF WELCOME 
 By President Bovcman, State University of Iowa 
 
 In his address of welcome to the Church Workers at the University, Presi¬ 
 dent John G. Bowman said in part: 
 
 Gentlemen and fellow workers: On behalf of the University, I am glad 
 to Avelcome you here, first, because you represent two distinct organiza¬ 
 tions, the churches, on the one hand, and the state universities on the other. 
 Second, because these organizations have a common and fundamental point 
 of contact in which their aims coincide. And third, because neither of the 
 organizations has realized fully how much alike their purposes are, or how 
 much better both can succeed by Avorking together with trust and faith in 
 each other. 
 
 Occasionally, a minister says to me, “But I have heard that you are a 
 
 7 
 
bad lot.’’ Yes, I have heard that same thing a good many times, and each 
 time the message merely leaves me more persistently optimistic and adds 
 seriousness in my heart to fulfill, with the co-operation of the faculty, a task 
 which is sacred. This task is to make spiritual as well as intellectual the 
 inward equipment of boys and girls for work; to have spring within them 
 the conviction that in addition to intelligence, righteousness and love are 
 useful and beautiful in any success. We may forget facts in logic or in 
 mathematics, but we can never forget a ray of light that penetrates into our 
 deepest life. 
 
 President Bowman, in concluding his talk, maintained that the spiritual 
 life of the University must spring primarily from the class rooms and 
 laboratories, that it must grow directly out of the lives of the professors 
 and instructors. ‘‘We must have teachers,” he said, ‘‘who, if need be, 
 would break rock at night to support themselves in order to continue in the 
 privilege of teaching. Such teachers will present their subjects, whether 
 these are botany, or chemistry, or literature, in such a way that the spiritual 
 life of the student will develop with the intellectual life. ’ ’ 
 
 CHUECH WOEKEES DEFINED 
 
 By Eev. J. Leslie French, Ph. D., Presbyterian University Pastor at the 
 
 University of Michigan 
 
 The purpose of the church as a whole is the lifting of humanity God-ward 
 and the realization of the kingdom of God on earth. The church is the 
 organization which in the minds of its leaders and supporters best serves 
 this purpose. There are other admirable organizations which have partially 
 the same general purpose, for example, the various social service agencies, 
 the organized temperance movement, the Y. M. C. A. and even more kindred 
 institutions, such as the International Sunday School Association, and the 
 United Society of Christian Endeavor. To meet various practical needs, 
 these institutions have perfected various organizations with their national 
 officers, campaigns, special workers, conventions and conferences. In like 
 manner, the church, in its various forms, is organized to better realize its 
 supreme mission. The church believes it will best realize that supreme 
 mission and its primary purpose in the specific form of organization it has 
 adopted. To the church, the success of its primary purpose means the 
 success of its institutionalized form. As applied to state educational insti¬ 
 tutions this means the success of the impact of the organized church as an 
 institution in these educational centers. In that success, it believes its 
 primary purpose will be realized. With this understanding, the definition 
 of church workers is simple. They are the men, who by profession and 
 sympathy are active and responsible in promoting the success of their par¬ 
 ticular ecclesiastical organizations. A conference of such men will include: 
 
 I. The pastors of local churches. 
 
 TI. Th associate, assistant, university and student pastors, guild secre¬ 
 taries and directors. 
 
 8 
 
III. The university officials, for whom these movements become factors 
 in general university administration. 
 
 IV. Professors and other laymen of local churches, who are interested in 
 specific efforts to reach the student body. 
 
 V. Students who are leaders in definite forms of church activity. 
 
 VI. State and national representatives of ecclesiastical organizations, 
 who have at heart the welfare of their student constituencies. 
 
 These church workers will welcome the co-operation and sympathy of 
 every particular organization whose primary object is kindred in nature. As 
 a conference of church workers in state educational institutions, we are 
 met to study the best methods that will make successful the approach of 
 the organized Christian church to these great and strategic educational cen¬ 
 ters. 
 
 THE PROBLEM STATED 
 
 The problem is two-fold. (1) How can we as a conference be made 
 aware of the most successful methods in reaching the student body. (2) 
 How can we as a conference best propagate in our state and national church 
 bodies and in state educational centers the movement for the religious care 
 and education of the 110,000 students involved. 
 
 THE RELIGIOUS CENSUS OF THE UNIVERSITY 
 By Howard Y. Williams, Secretary Y. C. A,, State 
 
 University of Iowa 
 
 In investigating the comparison of methods and results obtained from the 
 religious census in our universities, a questionnaire was sent to workers in 
 the leading universities of the middle west from whom replies definite in¬ 
 formation has been secured from twelve of these institutions. 
 
 The questionnaire sent out has three general divisions: 
 
 I. The methods of taking the census, 
 
 II. The information secured. 
 
 III. The definite use made of the census, 
 
 THE METHODS OF TAKING THE CENSUS 
 
 In nine of the twelve institutions reporting, the census is secured through 
 the regular registration department of the university. Six of the above 
 cases take the information on the regular matriculation blank, preserving 
 the census on permanent file. In two of the nine universities, separate 
 information cards for the sole purpose of taking the religious census are 
 furnished by the university and students are asked to fill them out in 
 addition to the regular matriculation blanks. In one university of the nine, 
 the Christian Association furnishes the information cards and the registrar 
 secures the desired information at the time of registration. 
 
 At two of the twelve universities, the census is taken by the united elforts 
 of the churches and the Christian Associations, Men are stationed in the 
 
 9 
 
various registration departments and they endeavor to secure the registration 
 of every new student who enters, by passing out information blanks which 
 the student is asked to return immediately. 
 
 At one of the twelve universities, the religious census is taken by the 
 Christian Associations in asking registration for their annual handbook. 
 Several of the Christian Associations in institutions of the first mentioned 
 class, where the census is completed by the university authorities, enlarge 
 the census securing further information in this same way as well as through 
 correspondence. 
 
 It may readily be judged that, through the handbook registration, a large 
 number of students are never reached, as they fail to apply for the book. 
 In the census taken by the co-operation of the churches and the Christian 
 Association, the same difficulty is experienced in the fact that many of the 
 students are either missed in the rush of registration days or they fail to 
 return the information blank. In those cases where the census is compiled 
 under the university registration, comparatively few students fail to register, 
 this being especially true when the information is secured through questions 
 on the matriculation blank. When separate religious census cards are used, 
 of course, a larger number of students omit this registration, 
 
 THE INFORMATION SECURED 
 
 Small variance is found in the information secured by the religious cen¬ 
 sus. Church preference and membership are the two points most desired 
 and are secured in every census taken with the exception of one institution 
 where the university itself takes the census and the only intelligence secured 
 is denominational affiliation. Increasing the efficiency of their census, two 
 of the universities ask for experience in religious or social work, in one of 
 these the census being taken on the regular university matriculation card. 
 In some cases where the institution is located in a large city, the student is 
 also asked for the exact church attendance or preference. 
 
 In passing, it is interesting to note that church workers find some number 
 of students who express a church preference for policy’s sake when no such 
 affiliation is felt. Other students show preference for a church different 
 than the denomination to which they belong, due to a like for the pastor, 
 social reasons, etc. It is amusing to discover cases among men, who, while 
 not affiliated with any church, express a preference for the Friends, in order 
 to evade military drill. 
 
 THE DEFINITE USE MADE OF THE CENSUS 
 
 In the application of the religious census to service, church workers vary 
 greatly. Practically no results are secured in some universities through the 
 efforts expended in compiling the census, while considerable advantages 
 accrue in other instances. 
 
 As expeditiously as possible university and local pastors should secure a 
 list of the students of their denominational affiliation and, in addition, those 
 of students expressing no church preference. It is possible, and in some 
 
 10 
 
universities, night work is indulged in to prepare these lists before the first 
 Sunday of the college year that the student may immediately be put in 
 touch with the church of his preference through invitations to receptions, 
 Bible classes and regular Sunday services. He can afterwards be followed 
 up by personal calls. In special Bible and Mission Study canvasses among 
 the university students for classes in the various churches lists are also 
 available. The Young People’s societies use the census and the Christian 
 Associations profit by it as a guide in their membership campaign, urging 
 the importance of aU church members uniting in one organization for war¬ 
 fare against forces tending to disintegrate character in the work of the 
 church co-operation committee, lining men up for church membership, and 
 for personal evangelism. In one university, the Christian Association pro¬ 
 motes separate gatherings of the students of every denominational affiliation 
 at which the pastor of the local church of that particular denomination is 
 present to address and become acquainted with the men. Plans for the 
 year are there made. 
 
 By these means, church workers are enabled to minister to the students 
 they are personally responsible for and thus the new student is tied up 
 inunediately to character building influences. 
 
 CONCLUSION 
 
 The consideration of that method which will bring the most satisfactory 
 results is most important because of the great need in our state institutions 
 of getting all students linked up at the outset to the church. The opening 
 days are strategic ones for the church worker and every opportunity and 
 advantage should be seized in getting in touch with the student and tying 
 him up with the pastor and church of his choice. This the religious census 
 makes possible. 
 
 Opinions gathered from the questionnaire and as a result of the study 
 lead to the conclusion that the census should be official or obligatory by the 
 university for the best interest of its institutional religious life. It should, 
 therefore, by all means, be taken by the registration department of the col¬ 
 lege and if possible on the regular matriculation blank. The information 
 can only be made complete when sought by official authorities. This official 
 census should be sought because of the desirability of every individual 
 church ministering to all the students affiliated with its denominations, a 
 condition which is made impossible under a census which is only partial as 
 is the case when it is taken by the co-operation of the churches and the 
 Christian Associations. Furthermore, this is deemed advisable because those 
 who are most apt to neglect or evade the census taken by the churches and 
 the Christian Associations, are the ones most needing character developing 
 influences. In the partial census, such are wont to be overlooked until after 
 the precious opening days and weeks of easy impression are passed and the 
 student has fallen into careless ways and has became harder to reach. 
 
 For the benefit of church workers in universities wdiere the census is not 
 taken by the university authorities, registrars and officials in those insti¬ 
 tutions where the census is compiled by the regular registration depart- 
 
 11 
 
ment, inform me that they can see no valid objection to the placing of 
 two or three questions concerning the religious life of the student on the 
 matriculation blank when so much personal information is requested. Cer¬ 
 tainly, they say, the religious status of the student is not less important 
 than his nationality, occupation of father, mother ^s maiden name and 
 many other such questions asked. 
 
 When vre come to the information desired the question is of course 
 raised as to how far we should go. Certainly if the student is a church 
 jiiember the name of the church should be secured, and if not a church 
 member the denominational preference. If neither a church member nor 
 an attendant, the faith preference. Catholic or Protestant, is desirable. 
 Where it is at all feasible a knowledge of the former experience the student 
 has had in religious or social work will contribute greatly to securing him 
 for definite service and in making religious w^ork more efficient in our 
 state universities. 
 
 The following questions to appear on the university matriculation blank 
 are suggested for a most efficient religious census. 
 
 (1) What is your religious denomination? (2) Are you a member of 
 the church? (3) If neither a church member nor an attendant give your 
 faith preference—Catholic or Protestant? (4) What experience have 
 you had in religious or social w’ork (Bible Class, Settlement, Foreign Mis¬ 
 sions, Y. M. C. A., etc.)? 
 
 Certainly our church worker must be accused of gross negligence w'ho 
 fails to avail himself, especially during the opening days and weeks, of the 
 knowledge of his problem gained through a study of the religious census. In 
 the quickly changing population of our colleges and the diversified re¬ 
 ligious status of the student body, with large numbers of men and women 
 to be reached in all too brief a space of time there is an increasing demand 
 that as Christian workers we know our constituency and that we divide 
 and place responsibility. This the religious census fully and accurately 
 compiled enables us to do. 
 
 THE STUDENT AND HIS HOME CHUECH 
 By Henry Wilder Foote, 
 
 Secretary, Dep’t of Education, American Unitarian Association. 
 Conference of Church Workers in State Universities, 
 lowm City, Iowa, February 7, 1912. 
 
 The problem of the religious life of the young man or woman who 
 leaves home to go to college is one phase of the larger problem of how to 
 Imld young people to the church. The student thus leaving home enters 
 a new^ life, with absorbing interests which are likely profoundly to modify 
 the ideals as well as the habits of his youtli. The home ties are w^eakened; 
 the church ties, especially, are liable to be cut. There are some students 
 Avho deliberately seize the opportunity to break all connection with organ¬ 
 ized relioion, wdio gladly drop attendance at services which have become 
 
 12 
 
irksome and uninteresting to tlieni. There are others whose interest in 
 the liome church has been but lukewarm, and who find the new life so 
 full and varied that the old ties are half unconsciously relaxed. There 
 are still others Tvho have been really attached to the home church but 
 whose conceptions of Avhat constitutes religion are seriously disturbed by 
 the new knowledge Avhich comes to them at the univeristy. Even the Chris¬ 
 tian Associations, admirable as much of their work is, often tend, when 
 they become a substitute for church, to weaken church ties, for the student 
 upon leaving the university finds himself no longer in touch Avith the church 
 of his upbringing. It is the function of the college town church to serve 
 as a link betAveen the church of the student’s boyhood life, and that other 
 church of his manhood’s home in the town Avhither he goes to settle upon 
 graduation. In a Avord, the ideal of the college toAvn church is to recei\e 
 the student from the hands of his home church, to minister to his religious 
 life Avhile at the university, and to send him on at graduation ready and 
 Avilling to take part in the church life of whatever community he may 
 choose as his permanent residence. There are these important links in 
 this chain;—that connecting the home church with the college town church; 
 the link which shall hold him to the latter; the transfer of his allegiance 
 to the permanent church home of his adult life. In this paper we are 
 concerned only Avith the first of these steps. 
 
 IIoAv, then, shall the home church discharge its responsibility to the young 
 man or woman leaving home for the first time to enter college? Surely its 
 first and clearest duty is to put the new student immediately into touch 
 with the church in the college toAvn. There is urgent need that ministers 
 should take this duty upon themseb’es more seriously than they do. Prob¬ 
 ably the churches with compact organization haA’e an advantage oA'er those 
 of the congregational order. Thus the Komau Catholic and Episcopal 
 churches have at least the machinery for doing this thing thoroughly. I 
 do not know how adequately other denominations deal Avith this problem, 
 but in our Unitarian churches, which are self-go\nrning and independent, 
 there is no way by which ministers can be required to meet their obliga¬ 
 tions in this respect. All that our national organizations can do is to ask 
 for the co-operation of local churches with the college toAvn churches by 
 giving new students letters of introduction before they leave home, and by 
 notifying the college town ministers of the students’ coming. Every year 
 about the time the universities open I print in our denominational pajAers 
 an open letter to our churches calling their attention to this obvious duty 
 which they owe to their young people. Next year I shall send a circular 
 letter to every settled minister from Avhose church it is at all }>robable that 
 young folks are going off to the university. It ought not to be necessary 
 to do this at all, for surely it is one of the most obvious obligations in 
 parish routine that the minister should be intimate enough Avith the lives 
 of his young people to knoAv when they are leaving home for the first 
 time, and that he should introduce them to the church of their own de¬ 
 nomination in the community to which they go. Unhappily experience has 
 proved that while some ministers are alive to their obligations in this 
 
 1 o 
 
 i O 
 
respect, many are quite oblivious to tbem. They apparently either do not 
 know when their young people go aAvay to college, or if they do know, are 
 too lazy or indifferent to trouble about writing a letter or two. That the 
 minister, or some responsible parish worker, should do this without fail 
 in every case is certainly the first and most undeniable obligation of the 
 home church to the student, but I knoAv no way of bringing about its 
 fulfilment other than the slow education of shiftless ministers to a be¬ 
 lated performance of routine parish duties. 
 
 This, hoAvever, does not, in my opinion, exhaust the obligations of the 
 home church to the student. I believe that young men or women have the 
 right to ask that the church of their upbringing shall prepare them for 
 the moral and intellectual problems which they are to confront at the 
 university. I remember attending a conference once at which a distinguished 
 cleric made the following complaint against the universities:— “What do 
 you do with our boys and girls at the university? We bring them up to 
 be good Christians; they join the church; they come to its services, until 
 they go to the university. But they come back from it with their faith 
 gone, no longer interested in the church, A^ery often with their standards 
 of morality seriously relaxed. ’ ’ 
 
 Of course the answer to that lament is that the home church had not 
 done its duty by its youths and maidens. It had taught them a theology 
 Avhich went to pieces when it came into contact with modern science and 
 history; it had presented a formal, conventionalized morality which seemed 
 ill-founded and lifeless to the student of ethics and economics. If the 
 student returning from college finds the intellectual and moral life of his 
 church lacking in adequate sanctions the fault lies not with the university 
 but with the church. The minister who has sneered at the doctrine of 
 evolution and indiscriminately damned the theatre has only himself to 
 blame if his young people, studying science and English literature, come 
 to think of him as either an ignoramus or a hypocrite. For the student 
 has a right to demand that his home church shall give him such an in¬ 
 tellectual background of religious thought, and such enlightened moral 
 standards that the studies at the university will not throw his religion all 
 out of gear. It is, of course, not to be expected that the average minister 
 can be right up to date on the latest wrinkles in science and philosophy, 
 but he ought to be at least reasonably in touch with the intellectual life 
 of the time. If he has done his duty the readjustment, which in any case 
 Avill be inevitable, will at least not throAv the student off his feet. 
 
 The same thing is true regarding morals. The home, and the home 
 school, and the home church are under obligations to give the youth the 
 moral stamina to meet the temptations of college life, which, after all, 
 are simply those of the world at large, in modified form. I am firmly 
 persuaded that in nine cases out of ten when a youth goes to pieces mor¬ 
 ally in college the home training is far more to blame than the college 
 surroundings. He has come to the university with the seeds of moral 
 decay already planted in him. He has not received from the home church, 
 or from his parents, or in his high school, the training in conduct which 
 
 14 
 
it ■vvas their prime duty to give him. When, therefore, his moral standards 
 fail, or when his religious faith suffers serious shipwreck, when he gladly 
 seizes the opportunity to drop church-going, something is wrong with the 
 home church. 
 
 These, then, are the two great obligations which the home church owes 
 to the departing student; first of all to have given him such an intellectual 
 background for religion that religion will not seem a weak and foolish 
 thing in the light of larger knowledge, and such moral stamina that he 
 can face with wisdom as well as courage the temptations of life; and 
 second, to put him into immediate touch with the church of his own de¬ 
 nomination in the college town, so that the natural ties may not be relaxed. 
 It is greatly to be desired that our churches should awaken to a keener 
 sense of these ob’V’ious duties. 
 
 THE CLAIM OF THE CHUECH OX UXIVEKSITY MEX. 
 
 By J. Beveridge Lee, Eepresenting the Presbyterian Board of Education, 
 and Chairman of Its Committee on University Work. 
 
 The religious life of student-bodies has been a matter that has concerned 
 churchmen in every age. When Chrysoloras came from Constantinople as 
 the first professor of Greek in Western Europe, at the beginning of the 
 Eenaissanee, he found the religious belief of university students to be 
 nominal, their lives immoral and the Church uninfluential. Others like 
 Guarino, the finest Italian-Greek scholar of his time, bravely but vainly 
 attempted to elevate the university life; and Vittorino da Feltre, the first 
 modern schoolmaster, resigned his chair in the University of Padua, after 
 growing hopeless in his battle with evil tendencies, and organized at Man¬ 
 tua, a school of the Xew Learning on a Christian foundation, that has 
 been celebrated for centuries, as much for its religious atmosphere and 
 manly spirit as for its sound classical teaching. Our age has followed the 
 example of Vittorino in the establishment of the Church School and the 
 Denominational College, in both of which it has been possible to maintain 
 and foster Christian ideals; but to follow his example farther, and to with¬ 
 draw from our university centers Avhere religious instruction has been 
 eliminated from education, those personalities that will utter the claim of 
 the Church and of religion upon the mind and conscience of students, 
 would be to evade our gravest educational problem and to ignore our finest 
 ecclesiastical opportunity. It is one of the signs of better things coming 
 that the Church has not evaded her task but that she has passed with 
 splendid persistence through those discouragements that always beset points 
 of departure, and is now in contact with our university life, with methods 
 and men to enforce her claim, and not without hope of means. 
 
 I have been asked to define this claim the Church has on University 
 men, and this I shall attempt briefly to do. The definition will issue clearly 
 if it is remembered that there are in the university life, in so far as con¬ 
 cerns the Church, three groups of students. 
 
 15 
 
First, there is the group of those 'who are ineuibers of tlie Christian 
 Church, Church-membership gives the university man a claim upon the 
 Church, and it also gives the Church a claim upon the university man. It 
 is a mutual covenant. It means sympathy, co-operation and help. It gives 
 to the 3 'outh an ecclesiastical mother; it gives to the Church an ecclesi¬ 
 astical child. This means that they are united in a common religious life 
 and worship and work. The claim of the youth is filial, for he is a spir¬ 
 itual child; that of the Church is maternal, for she is his spiritual mother. 
 Whatever maternal interest, solicitude and help can follow a son there it 
 is bound to go, and, ha\nng followed him to his university life, it there 
 lays claim upon him for his interest, solicitude and help. Her claim is a 
 covenanted claim. Neither university nor student Avill oppose this claim 
 if it guards its approach so as not to invade academic duties and rights. 
 And her claim upon the student is this that, as he reorganizes his religious 
 conceptions to meet the demands of his grooving mind, he shall turn to 
 his mother for counsel as he undertakes to re-define his beliefs, and shall 
 seek her help as he seeks to resolve those questions Avhich are left as a 
 residuum from scientific and philosophic class-rooms where reconciliations 
 are not attempted; that he shall give to her his confidence; that he shall 
 continue to practice those unchangeable liturgies of the soul that find help 
 in forms of worship; that he shall co-operate in attempting to realize the 
 world obligations and the sacrificial spirit of Christianity, and that he shall 
 graduate from his student opportunities a life that shall yield itself to 
 advantage God in His purpose of redeeming the world. Unless church- 
 membership is so nominal as to be meaningless, the Christian Church is 
 bound to claim just such vital, covenant relationship with every one of its 
 youth enrolled in university study. 
 
 Second, there is a group composed of non Church-members. They have 
 never entered the fellowship of the Church themselves but are affiliated with 
 it as the children of those who are churchmen. Upon this group, too, the 
 Church has a claim. It may not be so obvious or direct, but it is equally 
 valid. These youth are the heritors of generations of Christian influence 
 and life. The Church must remind them of those heroic souls with whom 
 their history is inextricably woven, and by Avhose faithfulness the channels 
 of hereditary good have been kept clean and full, and it is the business 
 of the Church to claim these heirs of Christian generations as members of 
 the evangelical succession. Centuries ago an old Father in the Church 
 preached one great sermon across northern Africa, rousing everywhere a 
 passion that had become decadent. His message is that which the Church 
 must voice to this group,—‘ ‘ Live up to your birthrights. ’ ’ The claim of 
 the Church as it utters this call is imposed and enforced by those genera¬ 
 tions that have passed into silence leaAung to the Church the rich legacy" 
 of its unfiuished campaigns and its war-cries. 
 
 And in every university center there is a third group. It is made up of 
 those youth who are unchurched. Neither of their oAvn volition nor through 
 hereditary example have they been affiliated with organized Christianity. 
 If an ancertral alignment existed it Avas fractured so far in the past that 
 
 16 
 
it has no influence or appeal. Upon the members of this group the Church 
 has a claim, Tt is the spokesman of the greatest of all universal truths. 
 It is the representative of the God Avho has said, “All souls are mine,” 
 and it is the historic embodiment of the spirit and teaching of the Christ 
 
 ^A■ho said, “ 1 will draw all men unto me.” As such it has a valid claim to 
 
 consideration as it undertakes to restate the fundamentals of the religion 
 that has been so potent in the lives of men whom the world counts as its 
 most intelligent and its best. Since it has come to pass that “the Ameri¬ 
 can state will never again undertake the most important part of education, 
 the development of the religions nature,” the entire responsibility in en¬ 
 forcing this claim rests with the Christian Church. 
 
 Such, I believe, is the claim of the Church upon the university man. It 
 is a claim that the Church may voice with neither A’igor nor tact. It is 
 one that the student may ignore or evade, and that he may neither hear 
 
 Avith zest nor accept Avith zeal, but the claim remains for Church and student 
 
 alike, a claim backed by an imperatiA’e that is diA'ine. 
 
 (Note: This is not a stenographic report but is compiled from the 
 speaker’s notes.) 
 
 HANDLING THE EELIGIOUS PROBLEMS OF COLLEGE STUDENTS 
 By President Francis M ’Connell, D. D. 
 
 (This address was printed in full in the Methodist Review, April, 1912.) 
 
 In describing the progress of the kingdom of God, the Master once spoke 
 of successive stages of growth—the blade, the ear, and after that the full 
 corn in the ear. It is easy enough to see the kingdom in the earliest and 
 the latest stages. The period of blossom seems divine enough, as does also 
 the period of ripened grain. There is an in-between period, lioAveA’er, 
 when the presence of the divine is not altogether a matter of sight—a period 
 of hardness and bitterness, when the kingdom is passing aAvay from the 
 stage of blossom and has not yet attained the richness and ripeness of 
 maturity. 
 
 If Ave may take these stages as in any sense real in the progress of tlie 
 kingdom in the life of the individual, Ave may Avithout great violence fit 
 them to certain organic changes through Avhicli the groAving life passes. 
 HeaA^en seems to lie round about the stage of infancy, the time of blade 
 and blossom. Heaven also seems to croAAn the head of the developed saint 
 with glory. But the period between, Avhen the youth is neither a child nor 
 yet a man, is one which it strains our faith to recognize as especially the 
 sphere of divine influence. Great as are the problems of the child-life and 
 the man-life, the problems of adolescent-life are greater still. Very often 
 A\e drift to the conclusion that in this period the mind must be left to take 
 care of itself, or we conclude that in so uncertain a time any sort of hit-or- 
 miss method of religious effort will do. The period is one of transition from 
 the state of absolute reliance upon the judgment of another to confidence 
 in one’s oAvn judgment; but rebelliousness and arrogance and conceit 
 
 17 
 
appear all along the way. In sore perplexity we often imagine that about 
 all we can do is to olfer a prayer for divine protection on the growing life 
 and then close our eyes and hold our breath. Still, if the in-between stage 
 is really an inevitable stage in the development of the kingdom, there must 
 be at least some general rules of wisdom to guide the spiritual counselor as 
 he labors with the growing mind, which is not white with the blossom of 
 childhood or golden with the glory of the harvest, but green with the sour¬ 
 ness of the half-ripe stage. 
 
 It will no doubt be an offense to the ordinary student to tell him that his 
 mind is green, but we do so without any of the implications and suggestions 
 which cling to that word when it is applied contemptuously to the student. 
 We have said that this is an inevitable stage of development, and therefore 
 a stage under the operation of divine law. It is not a stage at which we 
 are to make wuy faces. In the grain fields and orchards this is the stage 
 at which the sun turns his rays most directly upon the fruit. And while 
 half-ripe fruit is not to be used as food, it nevertheless has a beauty and 
 charm all its own. Much of the beauty of the ripe grain or the golden 
 fruit comes out of the thought of profit which we see as we anticipate the 
 day when w'e shall load the wagons and drive to market; but even when 
 looked at in itself and for its own sake, green fruit is not without beauty. 
 
 The minister who is so fortunate as to be placed in charge of college 
 students must realize that he is dealing with the problem of later adoles¬ 
 cence. The youth is about to emerge into the man, but he has not yet 
 emerged. As spiritual adviser, as preacher, as utilizer and director of 
 religious energies, the minister must not forget that he is dealing with 
 neither children nor men. He is dealing with life in the period of later 
 adolescence. Every once in a while a freakishness of a childishness that the 
 minister had hoped had passed will carry the youth into something absurd 
 or silly. Every little while boyishness will recover itself and masquerade 
 in the lineaments of a youth almost a man. And quite frequently, too, 
 there will come deeds of such virile might that the minister will rejoice 
 as at a fresh manifestation of the divine. 
 
 As spiritual adviser, it is well for the minister dealing with college stu¬ 
 dents to remember that this period of youth is not apt to be given to the 
 baser sins. Of course sin is sin, but there are sinners and sinners. The 
 most abject sinners are those who are guilty of breaches of trust and 
 responsibility, offenses against friendship, betrayers of love. Making due 
 allowance for the occasional offender of this kind, it must be said that in 
 general the college atmosphere is overwhelmingly against such evil. The 
 standards of honor among the students themselves are high, and academic 
 spirit is always for honesty in workmanship. Any one who has had 
 experience with a body of a thousand students, and with a city church 
 of a thousand members, knows that on the whole the temptations of college 
 life are not so much toward sordid spirit or traitorous ambition as are those 
 of town or city life. The college man who shows yellow’^ has but little 
 chance of keeping his standing in a college community, though he may re¬ 
 tain his standing elsewhere. The deep and dark sins against ideals of 
 
 18 
 
integrity, base betrayals of trust, calculating cynicism, are fortunately not 
 the sins against which the minister to college students has to contend. 
 
 The evils of later adolescence are evils of physical appetite, frivolty of 
 spirit, and general thoughtlessness and heedlessness. In dealing with these, 
 the minister can rightly indulge a spirit of hope. If the right sort of in¬ 
 fluence can be kept upon the youth, the chances are that he will draw away 
 from these things. In the very fact that the youth is every day getting 
 older, there is hope. As regards the prevalence of sins of physical indul¬ 
 gence, the truth is no doubt bad enough. But it is not so bad as it is 
 painted. Taking the colleges of the country together, it is probably a safe 
 estimate to say that forty per cent, of the men are working their way, in 
 whole or in part, through school. Physical indulgence is not apt to be 
 characteristic of that forty per cent. It must be remembered that a small 
 portion of dissipating men can give a school an evil name all out of propor¬ 
 tion to their number. And again it must be remembered that the very influ¬ 
 ences which once were thought of as furthering the spirit of dissipation 
 are now in a measure set for sobriety. It may be a long time before fra¬ 
 ternities are all that ought to be in this direction, but they have taken some 
 very pronounced stands of late—as, for example, against the use of liquor 
 in chapter houses. Any one familiar with the colleges of the country for 
 the past twenty-five years will readily admit that dissipation in college today 
 is bad enough, but will insist also that it is not as bad as it once was. 
 
 The evil name that colleges get as centers of dissipation is helped on from 
 bad to worse by the entire willingness of the adolescent mind to do any¬ 
 thing it can to shock older minds. If a student joins his fellows in singing 
 a drinking song, the conclusion seems legitimate that the sympathies of the 
 singer are with the drinkers. There is nothing wrong with the logic except 
 that it will not hold good in the case of green adolescents. A hundred col¬ 
 lege students will sing a wanton drinking song. Ninety out of the hundred 
 may be total abstainers. Why do they sing? .lust to shock some one, or 
 get some one ‘‘up in the air,” or to enjoy the swing of the lilt, or for the 
 fun of it, whatever that is. The situation calls for patience and for posses¬ 
 sion of one’s temper. 
 
 A more common temptation is to a frivolty which is all the more danger¬ 
 ous because it is sometimes so serious. The student throws himself head¬ 
 long into a dozen enterprises, each of which on its own account is worthy 
 enough, but a dozen of them taken together will ruin any but the strongest 
 minds. Woodrow Wilson once asked a youngster why he did not do better 
 work in his classes. The youth replied that he was too busy running the 
 college. This may have been literally true. In these days of student self- 
 government and of manifold other student activities, the student may lie 
 busy ‘ ‘ running the college. ’ ’ And if ever youth needed guidance of the 
 right sort, it is in this matter of what might be called serious frivolties 
 The dean of Leland Stanford University has recently pointed out that the 
 organizational activities of our American colleges are fast becoming to 
 constitute a sort of college within the college, taking more time and energy 
 than the legitimate college itself. This, however, is more properly the prob- 
 
 19 
 
lorn of the faculty than of the minister, though it has a moral aspect in 
 the liability of the student to get a false perspective at a period which 
 needs to have the perspective kept true. 
 
 In counseling minds in the distresses of skepticism, the minister must re¬ 
 member that he is dealing with adolescence. Adolescent skepticism is of 
 two types, which, though contradictory, may be found at one and the same 
 instant and in one and the same mind—the thoughtless skepticism and the 
 thoughful skepticism. The thoughtless skepticism may come out of the 
 fondness for shocking older minds which is part of the green period. What 
 is needed in dealing with this type is good humor, even when the most radi¬ 
 cal vie^vs about the Bible or church or religious experience of the state or 
 the family are advanced. Along with the thoughtlessness, hoAvever, may go 
 a streak of thoughtfulness Avhich is at times melancholy almost to the point 
 of tragedy. Especially if the youth is introspective, are his reflections more 
 painful than he is apt to admit. Prom the standpoint of maturer experi¬ 
 ence, the situation is intelligible enough. The growing mind is a surprise 
 to the possessor. It is taking on functions which its owner did not forsee. 
 Old things are passing away and new things are approaching. Happy is 
 the youth at such a period if he has some wise counselor whose wisdom 
 shows itself chiefly in a Avillingness to listen. The great pastors have 
 always been the great listeners. If the skeptic learns that what he is saying 
 is not, after all, especially new—and what, after all, is harder than to utter 
 a new skepticism?—if he learns that the experience of skepticism itself is 
 not new, if he finds a patient listener to whom he can talk it all out, no 
 great harm is likely to come. Here again, we come upon one of the strange 
 contradictions of adolescent life. Ordinarily, talking skepticism fastens the 
 skepticism in the mind. Skepticism grows with utterance. In the case of 
 the minds with which we are now dealing, quite an opposite result may take 
 ])lace. Youths need the chance to talk themselves out. A college communi¬ 
 ty can possess no greater asset than a wise religious counselor who is willing 
 to drop anything at any time for the sake of letting youthful skepticism 
 have a chance to express itself. The adolescent mind passes through a sort 
 of intellectual teething-time. The wise minister, like the wise mother, is 
 at hand to see that conditions do not become too serious, but for the most 
 ]>art there is need for good-humored sympathy and for a resolution not to 
 doctor the patient to death. And above all is the need for that sort of 
 ])atienee which is willing to give itself to what to the onlooker may seem to 
 be a Avaste of precious time. The methodical plodder with his routine sched¬ 
 ule will not get far in pastoral Avork among students. There is this con¬ 
 stant need of a Avillingness to drop anything and talk. In general, the 
 minister is abvays in danger of ov'er-mechanicalized pastoral Avork. If a 
 man’s body is disordered, the man may call by appointment at the doctor’s 
 office betAveen 2 and 2:15 p. ni. and get a prescription. Doubts and temp¬ 
 tations cannot be dealt AAoth in quite so summary a fashion. The great pas¬ 
 tors always haA^e plenty of time. It is their business to find time. 
 
 The problem of preaching to college students is supposed to call for 
 superior intellectual ability. Good preaching anywhere calls for such ability. 
 
 20 
 
but the ability demanded by the college students is not of the kind some¬ 
 times supposed. The ability is not that of saying profound or learned or 
 abstruse things. It is the ability, first of all, which lays stress upon siin 
 plicity of statement. The less college preaching has to do with the prol> 
 lems of the class-room the better. Students are not especially anxious to 
 take an extra course of lectures on Sunday morning. They appreciate sim 
 plicity of statement above almost all other audiences that can be found. 
 But simplicity in a sermon, like simplicity elsewhere, is the costliest of 
 charms. The elaborately and gaudily decorated creations, whether houses, 
 furniture, picture, or sermons, are cheap. Simplicity costs. In preaching, 
 it costs long hours of brooding till what is irrelevant and unnecessary is 
 stripped away. Simplicity comes not so much out of the attempt to polish 
 a statement into artistic form as out of the effort to make the great essen¬ 
 tials stand out. It is reached not so much by going down to little things as 
 by reaching up after great things. The greater truth, the easier to state it 
 in a sentence. And when simplicity of this stamp has been reached, it is 
 marvelously effective. Striking the ordinary mind in the audience, it of 
 necessity touches all the minds above the ordinary. The more extraordinaiy 
 the student, the more he appreciates the statement which impresses the 
 ordinar}’^ mind. The preacher who can thus touch the lowlier mind with a 
 statement which is intelligible, is quite likely in the same putting of the 
 truth to give forth something that to the extraordinary mind is richly sug¬ 
 gestive. And the advantage of this sort of statement for the college mind is 
 that the college mind has to be hit, so to speak. ‘ ‘ on the wing.' ’ The mind 
 is changing rapidly in its view of things; and the preacher who can make 
 a live religious conception stick fast in a consciousness passing rapidly 
 through this period of transition, is indeed great. In laying stress thus 
 upon the virtue of simplicity, we are only calling attention to a quality 
 which makes teachers likewise popular with students. The element of state¬ 
 ment is almost always an element in the popularity of teachers who have 
 real hold on their students. It is said that Agassiz used to insist that there 
 are three stages in scientific exposition—first and easiest, the scientific mono¬ 
 graph; second and harder, the popular lecture; hardest and most important 
 of all, the expression of truth with such simplicity that tlie lowliest normal 
 intelligence is made to understand. 
 
 This word about popular teachers suggests another lesson which the min¬ 
 ister to college students con learn from the teacher. The really inspiring 
 teacher is the one whose mind is always in the mood of expectancy and 
 discovery. One phenomenon of college life is the popularity of the teacher 
 who is dealing at first-hand with facts. The facts may not themselves be of 
 one sort rather than another, and indeed it does not seem to make great 
 difference just what the facts are. But there is something so alive about a 
 mind which has just made, or is about to make, a discovery in any realm 
 at all worth while, that such a mind has the pov;er to interest and hold 
 others. Such a teacher speaks with authority. And the preacher who speaks 
 with like authority does not lack hearers. This does not mean that he is 
 to be forever talking about what others are saying about what is going on 
 
 21 
 
in the religious realm. It is well for him to know what the bibilical students 
 are saying and what the modern workers are trying to achieve in the mani¬ 
 fold applications of the gospel to modern needs. But more important is it 
 that he himself be in the attitude of expectant discovery toward the mean¬ 
 ing of the biblical revelation, and toward the teachings of experience in 
 his own life and in the throbbing life around him. The power to surprise 
 is one factor in the interesting presentation of the truth. Surprise is hardly 
 possible with conceptions which have not changed either in substance or 
 form in the last ten years. 
 
 And it goes without saying that the great appeal in religion, as elsewhere 
 in dealing with the adolescent mind, is the appeal to the heroic. It is a 
 great mistake to fancy that the way to influence young men for religion 
 is to make life easy. Of course the day of asceticism for asceticism’s 
 
 sake is gone. We avoid suffering, if good is not to come from 
 
 suffering. But the really heroic has never stood out to young 
 
 men more attractively than today. The college atmosphere itself 
 is full of it. If occasion arises, heroism is expected as a matter 
 of course. We may say all we please about the havoc which rich 
 
 men’s sons make in college life; but the fact remains that no realm is today 
 so free from subserviency as is the college atmosphere. Nowhere else does 
 a man count so nearly for what he is. Nowhere else is his measure so 
 accurately taken. And in the taking of that measure the element of the 
 heroic in a man is a great determining factor. The truth is that in our day 
 all the causes which appeal to the heroic have to find their recruits from 
 the college. If an appeal is to be made which calls for a complete disregard 
 of consequences, if followers are sought for in some forlorn hope where a 
 leader is going to almost certain defeat, if social reforms are to be under¬ 
 taken at home or missionary enterprises beyond the seas, where does the 
 appeal meet the largest response? If the minister to college students is 
 wise, he will not put the Cross of his Master out of sight. That Master 
 himself when upon earth drew around him a band of devoted young fol¬ 
 lowers, and did so without concealing the hardships of the nev\^ faith. The 
 Christian sphere is not easy. There is no use of our trying to make it 
 appear so. There is every reason why we should frankly recognize the 
 liardships. The most effective appeal to young men is that which gives 
 them to understand that hardship is to be expected as a matter of course. 
 If the Cross is rightly presented, it is to the young mind the most com¬ 
 pelling fact in the gospel. 
 
 It remains to say just a word about utilizing and directing the religious 
 activities of students while they are actually in college. Too often the 
 cry is raised that there is not enough which is distinctly Christian in the 
 work of the college student to furnish adequate means of grace for him. 
 Too often also it is tacitly assumed that the real work of the Christian is 
 to begin after he has passed beyond the college walls, college itself being 
 hurried through with impatience to reach the outer fields. And yet if we 
 believe in Providence at all, we must believe that the young people are in 
 college—if they have any right to be there—because a divine plan has put 
 
 22 
 
them there. Tlie college life itself is the great sphere for the exercise of 
 the Christian in grace, and the regular activities of the college are the 
 chief part of that sphere. If Christianity is to show itself worth while in 
 college life, it must come in as a reinforcement of the student’s energies 
 as he strives to do the regular work of a student. At least during the first 
 half of the college career the student ought not to concern himself over¬ 
 much with what he is to do when he gets out. He comes to college partly 
 to learn how to make decisions. Other things being equal, he ought to be 
 able to make a better decision concerning a life work in the latter half of 
 the college career than in the earlier half. If a student is a freshman, it 
 is his Christian duty to do the work of a freshman. Unless he is exception¬ 
 ally mature, he would better not trouble himself too much about what his 
 tasks are to be Avhen he gets out. 
 
 Who is sufficient to minister to the college student in this day? Probably 
 no one adequately. But sufficiency is, after all, a matter of degree; and 
 any man who has had a real call to the ministry, and takes that call seri¬ 
 ously enough to give his best to any task that confronts him, can be vitally 
 effective in shaping the moral life and religious experience of youths who 
 need most of all to have playing upon them the ripening influence of a 
 warm and genuine religious leadership. 
 
 EEPORT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATION OF 
 BIBLICAL AND RELIGIOUS COURSES FOR CREDITS IN 
 STATE UNIVERSITIES (QUESTIONNAIRE) 
 
 By Dean Charles M. Sharpe, Member of Committee 
 
 To THE Conference op Church Workers in State Universities: 
 
 Your committee appointed to investigate the official teaching of biblical 
 and religious subjects in state universities, and the method of accrediting 
 such courses when taught by other agencies, begs to report as follows: 
 
 The committee sent out a brief questionnaire to the iwesidents of some 
 thirty universities, embodying the following points: 
 
 1. What subjects that may be considered biblical or religious are now 
 included in the curriculum of your institution? 
 
 2. Are any such subjects taught adjacent to your cam])us by church 
 agencies? If so, does your insitution grant credits to university students 
 who may elect these courses? What is the practical arrangement under 
 which these credits are extended? 
 
 3. If church agencies should ofler such courses at the seat of your uni¬ 
 versity and should satisfy the academic standards maintained by your 
 faculty, do you know of any good and sufiicient reason why credits should 
 not be granted under proper restrictions as to the amount of Avork a student 
 might elect? What, if any, practical difficulties do you conceive to stand 
 in the way of such recognition? 
 
 Twenty-five replies were received ansAvering these questions more or less 
 fully. An analysis of the letters yields the folloAving data: 
 
I. The Universities offering more or less instruction in biblical and reli¬ 
 gious subjects as a part of the regular curricula are as follows: Wisconsin, 
 California, Michigan, Virginia, Iowa, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, Okla¬ 
 homa, and Utah. The amount of instruction in subjects of this nature 
 ranges all the way from one course to well developed departments with a 
 large variety of courses. The University of Wisconsin has a department of 
 Hebrew and Hellenistic Greek in Avhich twenty-seven courses are listed. The 
 University of California has a department of Semitic Languages with six¬ 
 teen courses enumerated. The University of Michigan has a department of 
 Semitics, Hellenistic Greek, and studies in the English Bible. Twenty-six 
 courses are printed in the calendar. The University of Virginia includes in 
 its faculty a professor of Biblical History and Literature who offers a large 
 number of courses of undergraduate and graduate grade. This chair while 
 coordinate with all others is maintained by a fund provided by a religious 
 agency. 
 
 Of the universities reporting, the four above mentioned are the only ones 
 that makes any large or special provision for biblical studies. It is, how¬ 
 ever, common in the departments of philosophy to find courses in Philosophy 
 of Religion, or History and Psychology of Religion. 
 
 An inspection of the descriptions of these studies in the various catalogues 
 reveals, as is to be expected, the fact that the highest academic ideals pre- 
 A’ail with regard to them. The interest is primarily scientific. This is as it 
 should and must be, and if it is sufficiently scientific to be sympathetic and 
 to pierce to the significance of the phenomena under examination nothing 
 more could be desired. 
 
 II. The following institutions recognize and in different Avays cooperate 
 Avith the extra-official agencies in the promotion of biblical and religious 
 studies: 
 
 1. The UniA^ersity of Texas. There are tAAo institutions offering such 
 instruction adjacent to the camjAus, viz., “The Texas Bible Chair” (Disci- 
 ])le) and “The Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary.” The instruc¬ 
 tion must conform to all uniA’ersity regulations, and is limited to students of 
 at least sophomore rank. The consent of the dean of the faculty must be 
 secured in advance in each case. The course must be completed with grade 
 of at least C, and no student may carry more than one course outside of the 
 university. The arrangement is said to be Avorking satisfactorily. 
 
 2. The University of loAva has an arrangement under which properly 
 qualified ministers of the various churches may give courses under the direc¬ 
 tion and superA'ision of a committee from the faculty of liberal arts. Such 
 courses are credited upon the same basis as other electh’es. They are not 
 open to freshmen. The privileges extended under this arrangement are open 
 to any religious agencies seeking them. 
 
 The UniA^ersity of Missouri. The Bible College of Missouri (Disciple) 
 offers a somewhat complete divinity course and its work is credited by the 
 university under the folloAving arrangement: Eight selected courses of 
 general educational value are recognized for credit and are assigned to the 
 oversight of the various departments in the unh^ersity in which they are 
 
 24 
 
most nearly related by reason of their subject matter. University standards 
 must be observed. The student must secure in advance the consent of the 
 (lepartment to vhich the subject he desires to study has been assigned, and 
 may not take more than nine hours during his undergraduate period. Thus 
 the Bible College is placed on the same basis as other professional schools 
 in their relation to the College of Science and Arts. Needless to say, the 
 same privilege would be extended any other institution of similar standing. 
 
 4. The University or Oregon. The Eugene Bible University (Disciple) 
 gives instruction in biblical and religious subjects adjacent to the university. 
 Its work is recognized to a limited extent and, in specific cases, is passed 
 upon by a special committee which recommends or refuses credits according 
 to its judgment. 
 
 5. University of North Dakota. Wesley College (Methodist) is affiliated 
 with the university and its Mork is credited to the extent of thirty-two 
 semester hours toward the A. B. degree. It is stated that this is considered 
 a highly desirable arrangement. 
 
 III. The following is a list of universities at which there are no agencies 
 offering biblical or religious instruction of university grade, but which would 
 l)e willing to extend credit for such under proper conditions: 
 
 1. Wisconsin. Informant writes, “1 know of no reason why such rela¬ 
 tions might not be entered into. No doubt practical difficulties would dis¬ 
 close themselves, but in advance I see none that are insuperable. ’ ’ 
 
 2. Kentucky. ‘ ‘ Such an arrangement might be effected if it were 
 clearly showm that the principle of the separation of church and state would 
 not be violated thereby.’’ 
 
 3. Colorado. ‘ ‘ We hould give credit for courses of a grade satisfactory 
 to our faculty. ’ ’ 
 
 4. Illinois. ‘ ‘ I know of no good and sufficient reason why such credits 
 should not be granted. ’ ^ 
 
 o. Arizona. “ I should approve it. ” 
 
 6. Montana. “Yes.’’ 
 
 7. New Mexico. “Yes.’’ 
 
 8. Wyoming. “Yes, we have urged the churches to this action.’’ 
 
 9. Utah. “We have allowed some credit toward entrance for Bible in¬ 
 struction. Just w'hat else might be done by the faculty I do not knorv. ’ ’ 
 
 10. South Dakota. “I think our faculty w’ould favor such an arrange- 
 )nent, properly safeguarded. ’ ’ 
 
 11. Washington. “We should welcome such a cooperative arrangement 
 While it is illegal for the university to assume direction or responsibility for 
 such instruction, the faculty has always accepted credits for religious in¬ 
 struction when presented from denominational colleges wliose other credits 
 were accejffable. These credits have largely been for Bible study and were 
 accepted in lieu of an equivalent amount of our own work in English litera¬ 
 ture. If church agencies should off'er courses near the university we w’ould 
 not anticipate any difficulty in the matter of adjustment of credits.” 
 
 12. Minnesota. “In all probability these courses would be accepted not 
 under a general legislative provision, but would be considered course by 
 
 25 
 
course. The trainiug and scholarship of the instructor, the subject matter 
 of the course itself, and the method of instruction would all have to be taken 
 into account. ’ ’ 
 
 ly. The following universities in the judgment of our informant either 
 can not do so, or do not think it desirable to grant credits: 
 
 1. Georgia. ‘ ‘ An effort Avas made several years ago to introduce biblical 
 subjects but objection was made on denominational grounds.” 
 
 2. Nebraska. '^By a ruling of our regents no university credit in the 
 general colleges can be given unless the instruction is given by a regular paid 
 member of the university staff. We found that the ghdng of credits for 
 work done under the direction of pastors and others was liable to be 
 
 abused.I feel we have already carried the scramble for credits to such 
 
 an extent as to degrade scholarship; I do not want it to degrade religion. ’ ’ 
 
 3. Nevada. ^‘Constitution prohibits the teaching of religious subjects 
 in the state university. ’ ’ 
 
 4. Cabforuia. ‘ ‘ The president asks me to say that he does not think 
 credit could be given for work pursued under the auspices of church 
 agencies. ’ ^ 
 
 5. “It would not be possible for the University of Michigan to grant 
 credit for courses taken under agencies that form no constituent part of the 
 university. ’ ’ 
 
 By way of summary it may be remarked: 
 
 1. There are five universities in which there is some sort of arrangement 
 by which biblical and religious instruction under the provision of extra- 
 oflScial religious agencies is recognized by the granting of credits toward 
 university degrees. 
 
 2. There are twelve additional institutions that are hospitable to such 
 arrangement if proper plans can be devised, and j^roper safeguards provided. 
 
 3. Freshmen are quite generally excluded from the courses under consid¬ 
 eration. The reasons for this might well receive consideration. 
 
 4. It does not appear that there is any specially outstanding objection to 
 the consummation of such arrangement Avith church agencies. In the five 
 cases in which adverse judgment is expressed different reasons, or no reasons 
 are assigned. 
 
 5 . Taking the total impression of the data here presented, it would seem 
 that there is a decided preponderance of sentiment in the state universities 
 faAmrable to the recognition or religious instruction by the granting of uni¬ 
 versity credit for courses pursued under the auspices of religious forces, 
 provided such instruction be of suitable grade and character upon the 
 academic side, and provided a practical arrangement can be affected whereby 
 the universities can maintain a necessary oversight of the Avork so as to 
 guard against abuse. 
 
 Kespectfully submitted, 
 
 F. M. Bennett, 
 
 .1. L. French, 
 
 C. M. Sharpe, 
 
 Committee. 
 
 26 
 
A KEPORT OF AN INVESTIGATION 
 ON THE PREPARATION OF RELIGIOUS LEADERS 
 IN UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES 
 By Edwin D. Starbuck 
 
 The State University of Iowa 
 
 The following list of questions was sent to about 200 University and 
 College Presidents: 
 
 1. What, if anything, is your institution now doing to equip religious 
 leaders and specialists,— departments, courses, lectureships, etc.? 
 
 2. Higher institutions are now providing professional training for doc¬ 
 tors, lawyers, and other professional men. Should they provide a similar 
 opportunity for religious workers? If not, what should they do? 
 
 3. What class of institutions should undertake such work? 
 
 4. Would it, for example, fall properly within the province of State 
 Universities? Why? 
 
 5. Should such training be left entirely to theological seminaries? 
 Why? 
 
 6. What would be necessary in the way of instructors and equipment 
 over and above what you now have available to make it successful? 
 
 7. What position should such work occupy in the institution? 
 
 a. Similar to that of applied science, law^, and medicine? 
 
 b. A department of Liberal Arts with its head and assistants? 
 
 c. If leading to a degree, what degree or degrees? 
 
 d. As a special course supplementary to other departments? 
 
 e. Lectureships? 
 
 f. A branch of Pedagogy? Philosophy? 
 
 8. What subjects should constitute such a course, if established? 
 
 9. What may it utilize from other departments? 
 
 10. Would the ultimate scope be to equip: (a) Ministers? (b) Mission¬ 
 aries? (c) Social settlement workers? (d) Directors of charity work? 
 (e) Sunday School specialists? (f) Specialists for other college positions? 
 
 There were one hundred and forty replies to the inquiry, all of which 
 have been taken into account in making the report. Many replies were 
 hesitant, and a few people reported upon some special feature peculiar to 
 their own institutions. There are ninety-seven responses representing 
 eighty-nine institutions that went into some detail, and we have relied 
 upon these particularly in trying to present something of a composite 
 picture of the state of mind of educators in regard to this new and inter¬ 
 esting situation. 
 
 Only these last with a more or less definite program in mind were in¬ 
 cluded in the twenty-seven. There are, then, twenty-seven or a possilde 
 forty-seven who are doing something at the jiroblem. 
 
 Numbers mean almost nothing when we say that forty-seven institutions 
 have turned their attention more or less in this direction. One thing 
 stands out, however, with perfect clearness, that there is a tide in the 
 minds of university and college men in the direction of making the curri- 
 
 27 
 
eukmi useful for those who are engaged professionally in religious work, 
 and that much of this interest is already crystalizing itself in definite 
 plans for its accomplishment. More suggestive even than numbers as 
 jiulicating the tendency of the times is the fact that several institutions 
 are now focalizing their attention upon and wrestling with the problem. 
 
 Among the more significant experiments are the following: Drake 
 University with Professor Athearn as professor of the Psychology and 
 Pedagogy of Eeligion Avith a department in which work is required of 
 the divinity students and which has a full standing in the Arts college, and 
 Avith practice work, laboratory and museum facilities already developed to 
 ail extent that would do credit to departments with a considerable history 
 behind them; Butler College, after having at one time restricted itself to 
 ])urely college work has now established a graduate department for minis¬ 
 ters and other religious workers with Dr. Morro as its dean; Washburn 
 College, while passing over to graduate departments of universities the 
 Avork of preparing experts and specialists, has correlated the work in Psy¬ 
 chology, History, Pedagogy, Eeligioiis Education, practice work, Bible 
 Study, and the like, and has added to it sufficiently to prepare religious 
 teachers and social workers for their vocations; the University of South 
 Carolina, with a department of Eeligious Education, so far largely built 
 up out of the other departments, but already sending out trained men as 
 religious and social workers into factory towns and rural districts; North 
 Dakota, Missouri, and Texas, with affiliated denominational colleges, while 
 the universities attempt to co-operate by adapting their curriculum to sup¬ 
 plement those of the affiliated seminaries; this is but a variation of the 
 custom of some of the older institutions, of friendly cooperation between 
 endowed seminaries and universities, as at Harvard, Yale, Columbia, 
 Chicago, and a few others. Among the other institutions facing this ques¬ 
 tion seriously are Southwestern University, Wooster, Earlham, Carleton, 
 Coe, Northwestern, Oberlin, and Pennsylvania. 
 
 The question was asked: Should higher institutions provide similar 
 opportunities for religious workers as those which are now provided for 
 doctors, lawyers, and other professional men I The answers are overwhelm¬ 
 ingly in the affirmative. They stand: 
 
 64 Yes, unqualifiedly affirmative. 
 
 18 Qualified answers. 
 
 9 No. 
 
 It is safe to say that ten of the qualified answers are inclined toward the 
 “yes” ansAA'er, so that there are 74 as against 17 who think that if the 
 right conditions could be found or produced the higher institutions should 
 adjust themseHes to this kind of work. 
 
 On the question of what institutions should undertake such work, 
 
 47 say all colleges and universities 
 d say all graduate colleges 
 13 say endowed and private institutions primarily 
 12 say denominational institutions primarily 
 3 say endowed and private institutions only 
 
 28 
 
2 say state universities primarily. 
 
 Would such work fall properly within the province of state universities? 
 This question was propounded in order, if possible, to focalize more sharply 
 the judgments and to strike fire where there was any fire lying smouldering. 
 It succeeded in calling out quite vigorous responses. The answers stand, 
 
 46 yes 
 
 15 qualified 
 
 25 no. 
 
 President Hill of Missouri says, “Yes, the state university should aim to 
 develop the highest type of citizenship and to train leaders. ’' 
 
 The affirmative answers are just as emphatic from presidents of denom¬ 
 inational institutions as from any others. President Thomas of Middle- 
 bury, Vermont, says, “Yes, because they are pledged to promote the wel¬ 
 fare of the state, for which religious leadership is essential.” 
 
 The opinion of the state university officers upon whether or not their 
 own institutions should undertake the work may be of interest. Of twenty- 
 five state institutions represented, 
 
 16 say yes 
 
 5 are qualified 
 
 4 no (Ohio, Minnesota, North Dakota, California). 
 
 It was formerly believed that the religious leader was a preacher, and 
 that his preparation was to be left to the theological seminaries. This 
 opinion still can be found, but in college and university circles has passed 
 almost completely. An instance so rare as to deserve quoting is that of 
 the president of one of our highly specialized universities that attempts 
 nothing which even approaches an interest in religious problems. He says, 
 “The chief difficulty is in understanding what is meant by religious lead¬ 
 ers and specialists. Is not a religious specialist a clergyman? * * * I 
 suppose religious specialists must go to theological seminaries.” The ques¬ 
 tion was asked, “Should such training be left entirely to theological scju- 
 inaries?” The questions are remarkably one-sided. They stand, 
 
 6 ves 
 
 11 (jualitied 
 
 70 no. 
 
 Not only tlie mnnber of “noes’’ is significant, ))nt the (piality of tin- 
 replies is more so. The explosive intensity of the responses of sober mind¬ 
 ed educators as they rebel against the suggestion of leaving such work to 
 theological seminaries is instructive. “Never! Never!” exclaims one. 
 “They are back numbers,” says another. Another observes, “They are a 
 generation behind their time.” Still another remarks, “Many who could 
 be trained for effective service will not enter them, and inany seminaries 
 are too narrow. ’ ’ 
 
 The reaction against the old line seminaries, biased as it probably is, 
 and innocent of the awakening that is coming about in them, is indicative 
 of a tremendous change in the educational world in regard to what religion 
 is and what the religious worker should be, and the function of religion 
 in the scheme of things. 
 
 29 
 
It is the opinion of most of the respondents who have expressed them¬ 
 selves upon the point that the task of meeting the questions at issue in this 
 report is simpler than might be supposed. To the question ^‘What would 
 be necessary in the way of instructors and equipment over and above what 
 you have available to make it successful, ’ ’ sixteen believe that almost 
 nothing need be added. There are thirty institutions which say that one 
 professor, or two, or at most three, (usually one) would be sufficient. Mis¬ 
 souri says, ‘ ‘ One able professor will suffice with our present arrangement 
 with the Bible College.’’ Yale writes, “We already have the needed in¬ 
 structors with the exception of a man to devote his entire time to religious 
 psychology and education.” Middlebury says, “We could do much with 
 one man at $2500.” Clearly there exists already many of the courses that 
 would form the proper foundation for such work, and the problem is, first, 
 the co-ordination and organization of those courses already found in the 
 curriculum, and then the providing of a few other courses entirely funda¬ 
 mental to the work of religious leadership, as a center or nucleus around 
 which the others can be grouped. 
 
 Questions eight and nine were asked in order to learn what educators 
 ^vould regard as the nucleus and what the fringe, so to speak, of such a 
 course. Question eight asks, “What subjects should constitute such a 
 course if established?” and question nine, “What may it utilize from 
 other departments?” The replies of both questions were tabulated sep¬ 
 arately, but the results were so similar that the presentation following rep¬ 
 resents the fused replies to both questions. In all there are 62 kinds of 
 things suggested, all the way from Bible study to Biology, Anthropology, 
 and Archaeology. An attempt to group them under several main headings 
 gave the following table, in which the numbers stand for the number of 
 votes received for each kind of study: 
 
 Study of Eeligions 61 (Comparative E. 19, Hist, of E. 13, Phil, and Psy. 
 
 of E. 15, etc.) 
 
 58 (Including Ethics 21, metaphysics, etc.) 
 
 56 (B. as literature, Biblical Introd., Old and New Test.) 
 49 (Including negro life, social service, civics, etc.) 
 
 44 (Pedagogy 23, Eelig. Educ. 16, Methods of Bib. 
 Teaching, etc.) 
 
 42 (Including church Hist., Hebrew Hist., Life of 
 Christ, etc.) 
 
 29 (If united with Philosophy would be first in the list.) 
 25 (If united with Sociology would be second in the list.) 
 18 (Including Social Settlements and “Philanthropy.”) 
 14 (In Sunday Schools and Settlements under skilled 
 direction.) 
 
 9 (In a wide sense to include the Humanities.) 
 
 9 (Christian evidences, apologetics, applied Christian¬ 
 ity, etc.) 
 
 8 (Usually New Testament Greek.) 
 
 7 (Including Homiletics.) 
 
 Philosophy 
 Bible Study 
 Sociology 
 Pedagogy 
 
 History 
 
 Psychology 
 Economics 
 Missions 
 Pi eld Work 
 
 Literature 
 
 Christianity 
 
 C reek 
 
 Public Speaking 
 
 30 
 
Hygiene 7 (Including sanitation.) 
 
 Hebrew 5 
 
 Others 9 (Including Biology, Archaeology, Anthropology, etc.) 
 
 Perhaps it indicates the richness and diversity of religion that almost 
 any study seems to be an open door into it. President Evans of Eipon 
 says, ^^All subjects should be utilized and religion should be taught as an 
 essential of life and culture. ’ ’ Something like these opinions were ex¬ 
 pressed by nineteen persons. 
 
 There is here an unmistakable evidence of a shift of attitude as to the 
 nature of religion and its leaders. The curriculum proposed has little Greek 
 and less Hebrew. There is not much use for theology, and almost none for 
 Christian evidences and apologetics which our forefathers regarded as an 
 essential. Hebrew, which was one of the standard courses for the preacher 
 of an earlier time, has fewer votes now than personal hygiene and sanita¬ 
 tion. The religious leader has his interest centered not in an old order nor 
 in an abstract heaven primarily, but in a present, progressive, human world. 
 The religious leader is a skilled teacher, a lover of truth, a friend and helper 
 of man in a divinely human world. 
 
 It is going to be an important and difficult matter to know just what 
 place such work is to find in the organized life of our higher institutions. 
 To question seven, asking for an opinion of what place it should occupy, 
 there is a diversity of sentiment, but likewise a considerable unanimity. 
 There are 5 who believe that it should have a special college like that of 
 law or medicine. Sixteen others believe it should constitute a school in the 
 college or university, similar to schools of pedagogy, and political science. 
 The largest number, 40 in all, regard it properly as one of the regularly 
 constituted departments in the college of arts and sciences. Twenty of 
 these believe that it should lead to the regular A. B. degree, while three 
 are doubtful upon this latter point; five think that it should not in itself 
 lead to a degree. There are 18 persons who would have it constitute a 
 regular part of the curriculum, but would make it as a special course or a 
 special set of courses while not raising it to the dignity of a department. 
 
 Several persons would make this work a special branch of some other 
 department already existing in the college and university. There are four 
 departments equally suited to foster it, if one may judge by the experi¬ 
 ments already being tried and by projected plans; namely. Sociology, Peda¬ 
 gogy, Philosophy and Psychology, and Biblical Literature. Each of these 
 departments has its enthusiasts who regard the preparation of religious 
 leaders as a branch of its own work. 
 
 There is a growing sentiment in favor of the affiliated theological school 
 in connection with the university. No fewer than ten persons in addition 
 to those connected with institutions of this character advocate such a plan. 
 There is no instance in our records of any one who does not speak with 
 approval of the plan, unless it should be by implication on the part of 
 those who object to theological schools altogether and those who are of the 
 opinion that all such work can only properly be done in a college or uni¬ 
 versity atmosphere or in an institution in which the entire curriculum is 
 
 31 
 
specialized. It should be noted that in every instance so far those who 
 are engaged in the trying out of the experiment of the affiliated seminaries 
 are satisfied with the results up to date. We are informed that plans are 
 under way at Wisconsin and Michigan to establish seminaries of this kind. 
 For the present years, the affiliated seminary would be a necessary and 
 desirable way of meeting the demand for trained leaders. Denominational- 
 ism is still very strong, and the sects will prefer leaders brought up in the 
 atmosphere, if not also in the tenets, of their own faith. Ultimately, when 
 theological distinctions are softened and denominational differences are less 
 vital, it is possible that the entire program may best be assumed by the 
 institutions themselves, even the state universities. There is a goodly number 
 of respondents who believe that even now w^e hav attained to such a status. 
 
 UNIVERSITY CREDITS FOR STUDY IN RELIGIOUS EDUCATION 
 By a. Ross Hill, President University op Missouri 
 
 I can claim no special knowledge of the subject matter of religious 
 education nor any right to speak for university teachers and officers 
 regarding what may legitimately count toward the fulfillment of require¬ 
 ments for standard university degrees. I can only express briefly my 
 personal conception of what elements seem to enter into the somewhat 
 vague standards set up in the minds of university teachers touching the 
 purposes sought to be realized by university instruction, and in the light 
 of these attempt to pass a tentative judgment upon the claims to recog¬ 
 nition of certain phases of subject matter usually classed under the head 
 of ‘‘religious education.’^ 
 
 I shall deal first with the question of credit toward the degree of 
 bachelor of arts, for I have found that most people think a subject is 
 somewhat discriminated against which does not count toward that degree. 
 One purpose which academic study is supposed to realize is the develop¬ 
 ment of insight. That training which produces certain well defined forms 
 of efficiency in manual dexterity but which does not give insight into man, 
 humanity, or the laws of nature is not judged to be appropriate subject 
 matter for the study of candidates for the A. B. degree. This point of 
 view^ seems to be at least as old as the Protestant Church or the college 
 of liberal arts of a university. This insight may be interpreteed as en¬ 
 lightenment, an ability to share in the wmrld’s best inheritance in the 
 great realms of human thinking, a social orientation w’hich reveals to the 
 individual his relations to other persons and forces. One possessed of 
 this insight has come out of his provincial intellectual habits and know’s 
 something of what the world at large is thinking and doing and what 
 the impulses are that are moving it. The Arts course is supposed to give 
 students a view^ of the stage as a whole and of the plot of the drama of 
 life before they take up their several parts in the play. 
 
 For a long time the chief educational instrument for the realization 
 of this aim w’as thought to be the classical literatures of Greece and Rome. 
 
 32 
 
Why! Because they were the ark in which was preserved so much of the 
 higher life of the race, because they were supposed to give the individual 
 student a fuller membership in the life of mankind. The classics have 
 ceased to hold the place they once did on account of the rise of modern 
 humanities, such as history, sociology, political science, etc., wdiich, how¬ 
 ever deficient they may be in form and disciplinary quality, do really aim 
 to explore human life and to reveal to the student his social world, to 
 broaden his sympathies, and to quicken and give direction to his highest 
 human impulses. 
 
 Now an examination of the courses usually offered in the study of re¬ 
 ligion,— in Hebrew, New Testament Greek, Church History, Christian 
 Ethics, and the English Bible,— for which academic credit is likely to be 
 requested, will reveal that in subject matter they are naturally adapted to 
 the development of that human and social insight which has always been 
 one of the chief aims of academic instruction. To know oneself or to 
 know mankind is to realize, among other things, the fundamental nature 
 of the religious phase of human experience, and the significance of re¬ 
 ligion and religious institutions as both intrinsic and extrinsic factors in 
 the development of human civilization. To lack this is to fall short of 
 a true perspective or point of view from which to criticise life and life *s 
 values. It is to fall short of true culture. 
 
 I do not mean to say that this insight can be secured only by a study 
 of these subjects, for in psychology, sociology, ethics and other standard 
 academic subjects, this outcome is constantly realized through the broad 
 and inspiring presentation of them that characterizes many class rooms; 
 but the more direct approach to the religious phase of man’s life that 
 is furnished by the subjects mentioned above give them an advantage for 
 this purpose when they are treated by experts of equal ability and training 
 with those who teach academic courses in good universities. 
 
 This suggests to me the basis of the real objection that academic facul¬ 
 ties have to the recognition of courses meant to serve the direct purpose 
 of religious education. So long as there is any tendency to confuse 
 religion with dogmatic theology, courses bearing that label have slight 
 chance for recognition in academic circles. The spirit of university in¬ 
 struction is and ought to be positively antagonistic to dogmatism in any 
 form, and until religious doctrines and literature and church history can 
 be studied in the same spirit of discovery that now characterizes courses 
 in American history, to instance a field recently rescued from prejudice 
 and hyphocrisy, no just claim to university credit can be established. For¬ 
 tunately creedal religion is decaying, and spiritual, vital religion is 
 advancing; and the number of men qualified to teach university students 
 religious literature and history and the vital truths of religion is increas¬ 
 ing, so that the prospects are favorable for the rapid approach of the 
 time when universities can afford to accept credit for such courses as 
 were mentioned above from reputable Bible Colleges or to offer such 
 courses in their own programmes, where it is otherwise feasible to do so. 
 In short, the question of accepting credits from a Bible College should 
 
 33 
 
depend upon whether the professors in that College are qualified to take 
 chairs in the university itself, if the policy of offering courses in religious 
 education in the university were practicable. 
 
 But the aim of college education is not only insight; it is also appre¬ 
 ciation. A university should aim to bring its students to an appreciation 
 of the great values of life, and to this end the work of a university should 
 be carried on in an atmosphere permeated with ethical and aesthetic ideals. 
 Students in all departments and especially in the College of Arts, which 
 is supposed to develop the man of culture, should be in touch with the 
 best in the realm of literature and art. Now whether one considers the 
 sublime simplicity of its creation story, the marvelous sweetness of its 
 religious lyrics, or the majestic sweep of its prophetic eloquence, the 
 English Bible furnishes literature that is unsurpassed. No better edu¬ 
 cational material can be found within the whole range of humanistic 
 studies. Some time we shall realize that in every college of liberal arts, 
 aiming at the development of the man of culture, religious literature and 
 history and the fine arts should have equal recognition with foreign lan¬ 
 guages, political and social science, history, and the natural sciences. 
 
 Another conception that enters into the question of granting academic 
 credit to courses of university grade relates to the fundamental character 
 of such courses. From this point of view human anatomy and physiology 
 are allowed credit, but surgery and materia medica are not; botany is 
 accepted but horticulture is not; political science and public law fall 
 within the academic curriculum but those courses in law that aim at the 
 direct training of a student for efficiency in the practice of law are allowed 
 credit only in the School of Law itself. Now what about the customary 
 courses in religious education? That depends chiefly on the spirit and 
 method in which they are taught. Is their aim to give fundamental in¬ 
 sight and appreciation such as every man of culture should possess, or is 
 it their purpose to train young men for specific duties in the profession 
 of the ministry? Where the courses are taught in a theological school, 
 university professors are likely to regard them as professional in character; 
 and no matter how friendly the university may be toward religious edu¬ 
 cation the faculty may find some difficulty in according recognition, if it 
 has no school of theology and no degree in theology within which or 
 toward which the credit can be counted. This is not discrimination against 
 such courses but it is consistent with the practice of limiting the amount 
 of credit allowed toward the A. B. degree for any form of professional 
 study. 
 
 In the state universities which can at present have no schools of the¬ 
 ology or bible schools, the question of university credit for courses in re¬ 
 ligious education must turn on the recognition of such courses toward the 
 A. B. degree; and even where they are taught in accordance with uni¬ 
 versity standards and methods the logic of the situation would seem to 
 require the placing on them of the same restrictions that prevail in the 
 acceptance for academic credit of courses in law, journalism, etc. In the 
 University of Missouri we allow credit toward the degree of bachelor of 
 
 34 
 
arts in Hebrew, English Bible and other courses taught in the Bible 
 College of Columbia, but we restrict the total amount of credit that any 
 individual student may offer from the Bible College toward the A. B. 
 degree just as we do in the cases of credits secured in the professional 
 schools of the University itself. Any bible college or theological school 
 doing as high a grade of work as that done in the Bible College of 
 Columbia, is given the same consideration. While our arrangement may 
 not be ideal I believe it is working very well and the relationship between 
 the Bible College and the University of Missouri is helpful to the students- 
 of the University. 
 
 VOLUNTARY BIBLE COURSES 
 The Place, The Time, The Sort of Teaching, The Teacher 
 
 Discussion Led by Richard Henry Edwards, 
 Congregational University Pastor, Madison, Wis. 
 
 Let us not delay on the matter of place. The local church perhaps is 
 best, but any other place where the group can be held in pleasant sur¬ 
 roundings will suffice. 
 
 The time ought also to be settled largely by the convenience of the 
 members of the group. Just after supper on week day evenings, at 6:45; 
 or on Sunday mornings before or after church are good times. 
 
 The fundamental questions at stake in this discussion are the sort of 
 teaching and the teacher. Let us return at once to the matter of credits 
 to make clear our various points of view. Credits for courses in religion 
 have been variously stressed in this conference by one who is building a 
 college of religion, by another who is mapping out a scientific curriculuni 
 on religion, and by another who devotes himself wholly to pastoral rela¬ 
 tions with students. Obviously our view points vary widely. As a uni¬ 
 versity pastor I believe it is easy to over emphasize the importance of 
 securing academic credits for voluntary courses. Some men feel that if 
 a religious course can only be standardized and labeled as being in 
 some way up to grade, that the problem of religious study is thereby 
 solved. That depends wholly on what one is trying to do in his courses. 
 If he is attempting to teach the historical facts or the literary setting, 
 or the psychological process of religion,— if his purpose is primarily his¬ 
 torical or literary or scientific,— then the standardization of the course 
 and the granting of academic credits is a highly desirable thing. Such 
 academic work is certainly of the greatest importance and belongs in every 
 university curriculum. No one would question that. But if on the other 
 hand the university pastor is attempting to communicate the very content 
 and spirit of the message of Jesus, to make the truth of that message 
 meaningful in the personal life of his students, and to apply it to the 
 social life of his time,— if his purpose is primarily religious,— then the 
 standardization of his courses may or may not be of value. At any rate 
 it is a secondary question. The more I work along on these courses, the 
 
 35 
 
more I wonder if the real religious message would not by some subtle 
 process evaporate if credits were secured. Do the churches really want 
 the university pastor to do an academic piece of Tvork or an out and out 
 religious work? Of course the same man may do both things and that 
 might be highly desirable, some of his courses being credited and some 
 not, but I confess the conviction that our work as university pastors is 
 meant to eventuate in an emphasis on character more than in an emphasis 
 on knowledge. Our work is out and out religious work and it is no ficti¬ 
 tious distinction which I am drawing. The real task the university pastor 
 essays is the fundamental leading out of the moral personality of his 
 students, the quickening of their best aspirations, the clinching of their 
 best purposes, the firm setting of their wills to serve their generation in the 
 spirit of Jesus. This is a very different matter from teaching the facts 
 of Hebrew History, highly important as that may be and much as it may 
 incidentally contribute to vital religious education. There is a real dif¬ 
 ference between the two sorts of teaching and points of emphasis. A 
 university professor indicated this to me a few days ago when he regret¬ 
 fully declined to give a course in Bible Study next year for, as he said, 
 ^This vital teaching takes so much more out of me and is so much harder 
 than my regular teaching that I can’t carry it.” His finger was on the 
 spot. We don’t w^ant these courses to be easy. They must ‘ ‘ take more 
 out of” the men who give them than other teaching. They must have the 
 most skillful and expert teaching which the student can find in any line 
 of work. No other subject has a right to more superb teaching than the 
 subject of religion and most other subjects do not require as vital teaching. 
 
 In the actual history of college Bible work we should recognize to the 
 full the good done by the Christian Associations in groups led by students. 
 Much fundamental religious work has often been done despite the inade¬ 
 quate preparation of the student leader. We are deeply grateful for 
 what has been accomplished in these groups, and they have their place, 
 but we see clearly the need, also, of more maturity and finer intellectual 
 wnrk in their leadership. Their weakness has usually been the weakness 
 of zeal without knowledge. Let us not now set over against their w^eak- 
 ness another weakness and react to academic courses which may provide 
 knowledge but communicate no zeal. I believe that this may very easily 
 happen. Only the most superb teaching can communicate both knowledge 
 and zeal in the highest measure. 
 
 The teacher who can do this sort of teaching is in reality a rare person. 
 Though he serve the church he must not be an ecclesiastic. Though he 
 keep company wdth faculty men he must not be academic nor must his 
 Ph. D. degree, if he has one, bob up and hit the boys in the face every 
 time he teaches them. He must be as genuinely an inspirational force as 
 if he were a preacher, but not by means of exhortation. 
 
 I am glad the state is not trying to teach religion. It is not its 
 function. It would not do it well. I disagree with the gentleman who 
 says he does not expect to see religious development succeed unless the 
 faculty become responsible for it. Much as the faculty has to do in 
 
 36 
 
this regard, I would not expect to see religious development succeed if 
 the faculty were responsible for it. If we are not to have specialists for 
 vital religious teaching then we surely do not need them for swamp 
 drainage or poetry. We must all scale this w^ork higher— it belongs at 
 the very top. There is a w'onderful career of service in it. The teacher 
 of religion in a state university community has an almost unique calling. 
 Personal relationships must always be to him a more absorbing interest 
 than the classification of any body of facts, and this man’s knowledge 
 must glow as he communicates it or he cannot make the human spirit 
 kindle at his touch. There must be in his teaching always the luminous 
 quality of that inner light which lighteth every man coming into the 
 world. 
 
 KELATION OF THE UNIVEESITY STUDENT TO HIS CHUECH 
 
 L His Church at Home. II. His Church at the University Center—■ 
 
 a. Church Membership, b. Church Activity, c. Financial Obligation. 
 
 Discussion Led by The Eev. James C. Baker, 
 
 Pastor Trinity M. E. Church, Urbana, Ills. 
 
 In opening the discussion of this topic I shall reverse the order in which 
 its divisions are stated, inasmuch as the relation of the student to the 
 church at home will be in large part indicated by the conclusions regarding 
 his relation to the church at the University center. 
 
 I. Let us note, first, that there are three types of churches at State 
 University centers. 
 
 a. In most places the church is essentially a city organization with a 
 permanent membership, in which the students play only an incidental part 
 in the activities. This type of church, generally speaking, has been woefully 
 blind to its opportunities. I have letters in my possession from pastors 
 on such fields indicating that everything else in the church life is being 
 cared for save the interests of the student constituency. The students may 
 come and go, if they please, and get needed help, if they can. But there 
 is no appreciation of the fact that the prime responsibility of churches 
 set in the midst of the student population is to capture and direct and 
 sympathetically serve these leaders of tomorrow. 
 
 Sporadically this problem is now' being studied and various measures 
 have been taken, some of which have been described in this conference and 
 other conferences preceding. But for years the church has poured its chil¬ 
 dren into state and church schools and that magnificent stream of life has 
 flowed through these institutions and been lost to the Church in deplorable 
 numbers, because the Church has never realized that its finest asset was 
 worth any and all efi’ort to save for its own life. 
 
 b. In some places there is located near the University a church which 
 to all intents and purposes is a University church. Here the student is 
 more than an incident. He is looked after and membership has a real 
 
significance. He assumes responsibilities in the church, enters into its 
 varied activities, and is a substantial factor in all its undertakings. The 
 purest example of this type of church of which I have knowledge is the 
 one I am privileged to be pastor of in Urbana. 
 
 Let me describe it a little in detail. It is a normal, everyday working 
 community church. We have townspeople and faculty people in its mem¬ 
 bership, as well as students. But the townspeople are entirely sympathetic 
 with the University problem. For those who are not so sympathetic, there 
 is a downtown church on either side of us a mile away—an Urbana center 
 and Champaign center—and we urge them to transfer their membership 
 thither speedily if they have gotten in with us by mistake. 
 
 This is better than to have a so-called “University Church,” consisting 
 of students only. The latter plan forms a sort of “Class” church which 
 is rather unfortunate. It brings together a group of men of somewhat 
 similar tastes and leaves them out of touch with ordinary, everyday men 
 and women and their practical life. They are out of touch, also, with 
 homes and children in Sunday School, and so forth. The University church, 
 of course, provides unusually congenial surroundings for the student in 
 his college days; but it will put him out of touch with the sort of people 
 he will meet in the average church when he returns home or in the new 
 community in which he may live. The adjustment is quite diflicult. It is 
 exactly the same problem met in the case of the student doing all of his 
 religious work in the Christian Association. Again and again, students 
 greatly interested at college in religious work of the purely “student” 
 kind find themselves (when out of the University community) so out of 
 sympathy with the ordinary form of church life and activity that they 
 cannot adjust themselves. It would have been much better if they had 
 had part in the carrying on of the ordinary church in the usual way. 
 
 e. I have just described in part the third type of church—the “Uni¬ 
 versity Church, ’ ’ made up entirely of students—and then only with a 
 sort of “leave of absence” membership. They are af&liated with a church 
 which has no parallel beyond the University community. The only example 
 of this type I know of is the McKinley Memorial Presbyterian Church at 
 the University of Illinois. It has not yet been put fully to the trial. We 
 will all observe its workings with deepest interest. I am simply stating 
 my reasons for thinking that it is not the ideal type of church, the prime 
 one of which is that it is a “ class ’ ’ church. 
 
 We have approximations to it in various college churches like that at 
 Yale. “Here the student who brings his letter deposits it in the college 
 church. He is thereby absolutely detached from his home church. What 
 responsibility he maintains is altogether with the college church. Here 
 no financial responsibility for pastoral oversight or pulpit ministry is as¬ 
 sumed. These are supported by the college. Nor has he any choice as 
 to who shall be the preacher or pastor. These are provided without con¬ 
 sulting him. However, each class is represented by its deacons. Each 
 graduating class furnishes from its ranks two religious leaders for the 
 coming year. These are supported by college funds. The students are 
 
 38 
 
financially interested in local, domestic and foreign benevolences.’’ (Letter 
 from pastor in New Haven.) 
 
 II. In the very brief time at my disposal since the assignment of my 
 topic I have tried to get the judgment of as many pastors and college 
 presidents as possible on the question of church membership while in the 
 university. I have tried to classify the objections to the actual transfer 
 of membership. 
 
 a. Town pastors are unwilling to lose members—decreasing the roll 
 and losing such financial support as these members would bring. This 
 is terribly unworthy of Christian ministers, and is found not only in regard 
 to students but in the case of families leaving for a new community. I 
 have known families to be lost entirely to the church because of the short¬ 
 sighted policy of pastors in trying to hold them in the old home church. 
 
 b. A second objection is that the church in the University community 
 does not care properly for the students committed to it. A transfer of 
 membership from the home church in such a case, means too often a sep¬ 
 aration from the home church and no definite connection with the church 
 in the University town. This leaves the student during his college days 
 practically homeless, so far as his church relation is concerned. And 
 
 when the college days are ended, the condition is far more serious, for 
 this indifferent church does not attempt to follow the student and see that 
 he is tied definitely to the church in his old town or in the city or wher¬ 
 ever he may go. I was perfectly amazed to have a letter from a pastor 
 at one of our great State University centers containing these words: ‘^My 
 only objection to students disconnecting at home is their frequently leaving 
 their church letter when graduating and the University church being unable 
 to locate them later. I have dropped over two hundred names in two years, 
 largely student names which have been carried and long gone no one 
 knowing where they are. * * * j trying the affiliated membership 
 but unable to Avork it well with other duties. ’ ’ 
 
 Now this is what usually happens in churches of the first type described. 
 No one can question the seriousness of it—but the remedy is not in leaving 
 the letter at home. As well urge that because the same thing happens 
 over and over with families moving into small and large cities it is better to 
 leave the letters of those families in the village church. The remedy 
 is the pastor doing his duty, Avith Avhatever help is needed. 
 
 III. Noav I think we are all agreed that it is of most vital moment that 
 the student is to be brought into, and kept in, as close touch as possible Avitli 
 the church in his University days. All our Avork—in church houses, Guilds, 
 Associations, and so forth—heads up here, and justifies itself hero finan¬ 
 cially. 
 
 a. In connection Avith the church the religious and moral education 
 essential to the maturing life can best be giA’cn. Because of our funda¬ 
 mental American belief that church and state should be sej)arate, the 
 state cannot be responsible for this AVork. If the state should undertake 
 the responsibility we would soon be invoh^ed in endless difi’iculties. Yet 
 the work must be done and can best be done through the church organiza¬ 
 tion familiar to the student from childhood. 
 
 39 
 
b. Again, there is no time in the history of young men and women 
 Avhen they need guidance in matters of faith as they do in their college 
 clays. Owing to entrance into a “roomier universe’' and the necessary 
 adjustment to new processes and results of knowledge, there is in the great 
 majority of cases a very serious mental breakup. The student’s religious' 
 mental life becomes, like James’ baby world, “A great big buzzing, bloom¬ 
 ing confusion. ’ ’ He needs sympathetic wise direction that these days of 
 confusion may in the end be reconstruction days. Who is best qualified to 
 give such direction? Not the pastor at home away from the ever-changing 
 student sentiment, but the pastor at the University, who is sensitive to the 
 atmosphere and all the currents of the University life. 
 
 c. Parallel to the mental are the moral difficulties of the student. Be¬ 
 cause of loss of faith he often feels that in the field of conduct he is with¬ 
 out a pilot. Moreover, in the large freedom of the student community— 
 coupled with the freedom from the restraints of parental and community 
 opinion—there are inevitably new temptations. Here is work for the 
 church. 
 
 d. There is a lack of personal touch with the student on the part of 
 University men, which is compensated for in part through small church 
 groups. Many faculty men, moreover, appreciate as much as the students 
 the opportunities offered through the church. 
 
 e. The danger of overemphasis on the material at state universities is 
 apparent. We note the advantages to the community of effective engineers, 
 highly trained lawyers and physicians and accurately developed commer¬ 
 cial leaders, but the church is needed on the field to assert continually that 
 making a living even at a high rate of efficiency does not take the place 
 of making a life. 
 
 f. The problem of leadership is to be in some large measure solved 
 through the University church. Great numbers of our most promising young 
 ])eople are at our state institutions. They should be recruiting ground for 
 both lay and ministerial leaders. 
 
 IV. Granted—the need of the student being brought into as close touch 
 as possible with the church in his University days—does that mean that 
 he ought to bring his letter? Why not keep it at home? 
 
 a. University days are a very essential part of his life. When we com¬ 
 pare colleges and universities we find that in the latter the break with home 
 is apt to be more definite. ^ ^ Out of 495 graduates of the University of 
 Illinois last year (1911), the office of the Secretary of the Alumni Associa¬ 
 tion and that of the Alumni record have definite data that 342 are not 
 now living at their old home, the place from which they entered the 
 University. Of the 153 of whom there is no data, probably one-half are 
 not residents of their old home, according to the estimates of a member 
 of the class.” (Daily Illini). 
 
 The day a student leaves his home town for college, that day the town 
 ties begin to weaken, and the church ties fade along with the rest, and 
 because of the frequent changes of ministers in smaller towns, the bond is 
 still more weakened. The student’s obligation grows remote in the midst 
 
 40 
 
of his own activities, the requirements of the college, and of the new com¬ 
 munity into which he goes. It is not sensed clearly nor deeply. 
 
 On the other hand, if he is a member of a local church while in school, 
 he feels this obligation more clearly, and more deeply. It is quite true 
 that students as a whole do not feel any of these obligations with very 
 great depth, but they are larger the nearer they are and the more they are 
 thrown on their own responsibility. A student soon creates his own field 
 of interest where he is, and does not and cannot ‘ ‘ build new mansions for 
 his soul” back home, merely by memory and imagination of what was once 
 there. 
 
 a. The pastor of the home church should keep in close touch with the 
 student after he has left home and wuth the University church. 
 
 b. Whether the student brings his letter or affiliates—^it is a thoroughly 
 good policy and necessary in the largest way possible to keep the student 
 looking back to the community from which he came, studying the problems 
 of the home church in the light of his larger vision and his new activities. 
 
 c. While in school he should keep in touch wuth the home Young People’s 
 Society, the Sunday School, and the various activities which interested him 
 while at home. 
 
 d. He can help the Young Men’s and Young Women’s Christian Asso¬ 
 ciations get track of High School students and help look out for them. 
 
 VI. Relation of the Student to the University Church. 
 
 a. Its activities. There are countless ways in which the student may 
 be enlisted which I do not undertake to enumerate here. Suffice it to say, 
 he must be led to assume large responsibilities in the church life, both for 
 his own sake and for his growing usefulness in the years beyond those of 
 his University career. 
 
 b. Financial support. The student pays for the other things he desires. 
 As a matter of habit and principle he should support according to his 
 ability the church with which he is identified while in school. Care, at¬ 
 tention and tact will be necessary to secure such support, but the solicita¬ 
 tion and collecting offer still another bit of training for student leaders. 
 My experience is that the student likes to feel that lie is not ‘ ‘ dead 
 heading” his way in his church life. 
 
 A professor friend furnished me this note: ” If I had a son going away 
 to college, I should repeat the advice that a Princeton man some thirty 
 years ago gave his son who was going to Chicago to settle. ‘ My son, ’ said 
 lie, ‘I want you to do two things: find a thoroughly good boarding house 
 where you will feel at home, and then rent a pew in your father’s church, 
 and he seen in it cvcru Suitday, and here is the money for you to do it 
 with.’ I have never forgotten that remark. I believe that if the fathers 
 and mothers of students w^ould speak to them of this matter before th^ 
 boy or girl leaves home, tell them to unite with the church where the col¬ 
 lege is, and then give them money to cause a feeling of proprietary interest 
 in the church, half the difficulties of the problem would be solved. ’ ’ As it 
 is, the student is too often “neither up nor down,” neither an active mem¬ 
 ber at home nor any kind of a one away. No better conditions could be 
 devised to break his ties with the church. 
 
 41 
 
HOW CAN DENOMINATIONAL AND ASSOCIATION WORKERS CO¬ 
 OPERATE IN THE STATE UNIVERSITY? 
 
 By. J. E. Elliott, National Secretary Y. M. C. A. for Colleges and 
 
 Universities of the West 
 
 Something of the moral and spiritual need of students in state univer¬ 
 sities is signified by the presence at this conference of so representative a 
 group of religious workers among students. All have come because the 
 problem before us is so complex and so gigantic. 
 
 Without question one of the three greatest problems that confronts the 
 churches today is the problem that has brought this group of workers 
 together. As significant as other tasks facing the churches may be, their 
 solution in large part, rests upon the solving of the moral and spiritual 
 problems of the men and women in the universities. From these ranks are 
 to come a large percentage of the leadership of the future. 
 
 In the past, necessarily much experimenting has been doue and many 
 opinions have been expressed. However, it is but fair to state that there 
 never has been a time when all leaders, both those of the churches and 
 those of the associations, were so nearly of one mind as they are at present. 
 Without doubt, we may today discuss the subject before us with open and 
 unprejudiced minds; all equally desirous of seeing the largest work for the 
 extension of Christ's Kingdom accomplished. In so doing, the speaker 
 believes that we will make the largest contribution to our common cause if 
 we eliminate from our thinking personalities and extreme incidents and deal 
 with those principles that we believe to be fundamental. 
 
 1. We recognize that the church is the only organization that can per¬ 
 manently care for the religious life of the individual. All other organiza¬ 
 tions should, therefore, supplement the work of the churches and not allow 
 themselves to become a substitute for the churches. 
 
 2. The problem that is confronting the churches in state university 
 centers is more than a community responsibility. From the homes, repre¬ 
 senting many churches and many denominations, there come to these state 
 universities young men and young women who are to remain in the college 
 community but for a limited period of time. The representatives from a 
 single denomination may be numbered by the hundreds while the permanent 
 residents of that specific denomination in the college community may be less 
 than a score. It is very clear that this mere handful of Christians repre¬ 
 senting this denomination, devoted as they may be, should not be expected to 
 bear the entire responsibility for the religious care of the hundreds who 
 have come from churches from the whole state. If the representatives of 
 any denomination from the entire state make the problem in any university 
 center any greater than the clinrch of that denomination in the college 
 community is able to adequately minister to, then the churches of that 
 denomination from the entire state whose representatives make such a 
 problem should be expected to provide their legitimate share in establishing 
 and maintaining a wmrk that is adequate. 
 
 42 
 
3. The fundamental features of a church that shall intelligently grapple 
 with the problems in our state universities are: First, a pastor, who, 
 because of his personality, training and experience, has a vital message for 
 students and is amply qualified to give such a message and conduct work 
 that will appeal to students. Have we not reached the time when we may 
 say with one voice that we consider the pastorates in state university centers 
 second to none in importance, and that we should join in a united policy to 
 have called to university centers the greatest pastors of the day? It is the 
 opinion of the writer that while we may have theoretically believed in such 
 an emphasis we have not consistently endeavored to so emphasize the pas¬ 
 torates in university centers that the greatest men in the pastorate are 
 persuaded that the most highly multiplying influence that a man may have 
 today is in one of these university centers. Much of indifference on the part 
 of the students while in college relative to church attendance and activity 
 in church enterprises is due to the fact that the pastors of the university 
 centers have not understood the students, were not able or were not willing 
 to adapt their message to the student’s needs. The writer has visited 
 University centers where students by the score were leaving their denom¬ 
 ination to attend services of another denomination solely because the ap¬ 
 peal of the pastor of their own denomination made no appeal to them. 
 Moreover, there are some University pastors whose efficiency in the work 
 they are called to do has been seriously impaired because the pastor of his 
 denomination in the college community did not have the personality, mes¬ 
 sage or plan of work that appealed to students. Likevcise much of the 
 criticism which has been hurled against the Christian Associations in ref¬ 
 erence to relationship has been unjust because of the existing barriers 
 which the church placed between the students and itself which no organ¬ 
 ization could overcome. The day is past when the loyalty of students can 
 be held by the authority or ritual of the church. It should, therefore, give 
 us the greater concern that the pastorate in these strategic centers be so 
 magnified that men will be secured who will themselves be a great living 
 apologetic of the opportunity in the Christian ministry. If the pastors 
 of the churches attended by students do not appeal to students one of two 
 things will inevitably happen; either the students will become totally in¬ 
 different concerning religious worship and church activity and not attend 
 church at all or else they will seek the man who has the message that ap¬ 
 peals to them. 
 
 Are we not further agreed that in a church where the University pastor 
 conducts public service for students and residents, a church aided by con¬ 
 tributions from individuals or churches outside the college community to 
 enable it to accomplish a more adequate work for students, that the pastor 
 should consider his first obligation to the students? Are we meeting the 
 situation by simply lessening the financial burden of the church in the 
 college community, contented that the message from the pulpit be chiefly 
 for the residents of the community? When a larger part of the problem 
 becomes the students should not the pastor prepare bis sermons and or¬ 
 ganize his work with the students chiefly as his objective? If work must 
 
 43 
 
he delegated to assistants should not the less important work be delegated? 
 In short, if a church’s constituency is made up of one hundred residents 
 and six hundred students for which class has the church the maximum re¬ 
 sponsibility? I realize that this is a very delicate problem to adjust, but 
 it seems to me that there is great need for clear thinking here. Personally 
 I feel very keenly that there are many centers where the whole cause will 
 be better served if the pastor will consider his first obligation to the stu¬ 
 dents, and when his combined work for students and members of the com¬ 
 munity demand an assistant he will delegate the smaller work of the 
 community rather than the work among students. I am in entire sympathy 
 with the University pastor but believe that he should either be the pastor 
 of the local church or an associate to the pastor of that church. I believe 
 the time is not far distant when in these great University centers we will 
 see as pastors of churches especially interested in students not only the 
 greatest personalities in the pastorate, but associated with them men and 
 women especially qualified for specific tasks. 
 
 Second, we should realize in our University centers in the very near 
 future a material equipment for the churches that is more adequate. Our 
 denominations have poured their thousands and millions of dollars into 
 the denominational colleges. The coming decade should witness the pour¬ 
 ing of millions into church material equipment in these great state uni¬ 
 versity centers. It is useless to think of calling a $5,000 or $10,000 pas¬ 
 tor to a university center and expect him to work in a $20,000 equipment. 
 If the church shall adequately serve the churches of the state which are 
 pouring the cream of their young manhood and womanhood into the state 
 universities then each denomination must have in these centers a material 
 equipment where an ideal work for young men and young women of Uni¬ 
 versity age may be carried on. 
 
 Third. There is a growing need for the regular curriculum work of the 
 state universities to be supplemented by thorough, comprehensive courses 
 in Eeligious Education. The leadership of these courses should be by men 
 who are recognized intellectually as the peers of the deans of any de¬ 
 partment of the university and who likewise possess an attractive person¬ 
 ality and a vital religious experience. Any movement to establish Bible 
 chairs or combine denominational colleges with the state university without 
 duplication of effort should meet the approval of all. Such a work does 
 not in any way conflict with the voluntary religious education work of the 
 churches or the associations but should enable them to be more eflicient in 
 their work. 
 
 Any work of a church in a university center which is adequate will not 
 only consider its problem in terms of the men and women who are present 
 for college work, but will feel a responsibility for devising ways and means: 
 First, for exerting the maximum influence over the young men and women 
 in the communities from which students come by discovering the maximum 
 points of contact between the strongest and most representative life in the 
 college church with those who are able to be the college men and women- 
 of tomorrow. Second, by seeking in every possible way to efiiciently train 
 
 44 
 
men and women in religious activities in relation with the church so that 
 after graduation they may become the trained workers in the church such 
 as superintendents of the Sunday School, teachers of classes, office bearers 
 in the church and in many other ways occupy places of Christian leader¬ 
 ship in the communities where they are to reside. 
 
 6. The experience of those who have been most successful in their work 
 among students has clearly demonstrated the fact that we must discover 
 ways and means in our religious w-ork whereby the maximum responsibility 
 and initiative for the religious welfare of the student may be placed upon 
 the shoulders of the students themselves. Unless this is done we shall not 
 succeed in solving our problem and we shall fail to give to the communi¬ 
 ties of the state a religious leadership that is adequate. 
 
 7. Those who are closest to student life realize that some things can 
 best be accomplished by wmrking together. The unity of the Christian 
 forces in a great campaign such as the one held at Illinois recently where 
 the entire university was influenced in a marvelous manner is but evidence 
 of what may be accomplished when our forces are really united. While 
 it is important to encourage church loyalty and every student should be 
 instilled with the fact that the church of today, notwithsanding any criti¬ 
 cism to the contrary, offers the greatest opportunity of organized Christian 
 service to the majority of college graduates, yet a large part of the prob¬ 
 lem in our university centers is among the non-churched, hundreds not even 
 signifying a church preference. Without question we will do well to move 
 upon this body with forces united both from the aspect of giving concrete 
 service to Christian students and also from the aspect of reaching the 
 unchurched. With so large a percentage of our problem still unsolved 
 and with demands so distinct for both denominational and interdenom¬ 
 inational activity, should we not all exercise the greatest statesmanship 
 that the maximum results may be secured? 
 
 8. The end of all interdenominational work must be to magnify and 
 intensify the work of the churches which it serves. Churches can not be 
 expected to give their best life continually for interdenominational leader¬ 
 ship which in turn does not make the church the anchor of all its work. 
 On the other hand if it is the business of the churches to evangelize the 
 world and they can best discharge a part of its obligation to the men and 
 women of the college in interdenominational activity, have we not a right 
 to expect an earnest expression of its purpose? 
 
 9. Every interdenominational agency must have some recognized basis. 
 This basis must be determined by the wmrk it seeks to accomplish and its 
 control must be in the hands of those Avho believe in the objective and urc 
 willing to wmrk together. This is highly specialized work—a task for ex¬ 
 perts. Consequently this federated activity must have a more vital and or¬ 
 ganic community of interests than that Avhich should obtain in a loosely 
 co-ordinated society of those who find common ground only on such sub¬ 
 jects as good morals, social service, adequate governmental and humani¬ 
 tarian ethics. 
 
 10. We have now come to the consideration of the Young Men’s and 
 
 45 
 
Young Women’s Christian Associations. Before the churches felt the need 
 of increasing the efficiency in denominational work in state university 
 centers, the associations had been organized and were struggling, sometimes 
 against almost unsurmountable obstacles, to enlist and train students within 
 the universities in unselfish service. That there were and are weaknesses in 
 the work no one will deny, but that these organizations have enabled the 
 churches to make much larger contributions to the extension of Christ’s 
 Kingdom no one will deny who views this situation discerningly. It is 
 worth our consideration that as a result of a branch of the association’s 
 activity there are now on the fields we call foreign over 5000 men and 
 women who were led to volunteer for the foreign field while in the college 
 through the work conducted by these organizations. 
 
 There is scarcely a college in the land where these organizations are not 
 to be found. Nearly two hundred men are giving their entire time as 
 secretaries of the College Young Men’s Christian Associations and in many 
 of the state universities large, well equipped association buildings have 
 l>een erected. The young women are likewise well organized and are sum¬ 
 moning to their leadership the strongest Christian women from the colleges. 
 The work that is being accomplished in every institution by these associa¬ 
 tions speaks for itself and there is no need to mention the summer con¬ 
 ferences, the institutes, conventions and various other association activities. 
 All are additional testimony of the fact that there is much work for our 
 students that can best be accomplished by working together. During all 
 these years the associations have insisted that they should be maintained 
 as student organizations, believing that the maximum responsibility for the 
 work should be borne by the students themselves, and even in associations in 
 control of large material equipment with few exceptions, half of the mem¬ 
 bers of the board of directors are students, associating with them only 
 a sufficient number of professors and business men as will insure repre¬ 
 sentative, wise and adequate supervision. Have not the Young Men’s and 
 Young Women’s Christian Associations the organization objective and ex¬ 
 perience to entitle them to remain the interdenominational agency of those 
 churches that can work together? 
 
 If there is a distinct place in our state universities for a denominational 
 and an interdenominational work it is likewise clear that there should be 
 a unified policy. There should be the clearest understanding between the 
 leaders of the churches, the leaders of the associations and the leaders of 
 other religious or philanthropic organizations or agencies in the college 
 community. If each has a distinct work and the responsibilities of each 
 are clearly defined then there need be no suspicion or jealousy. Our com¬ 
 mon cause has suffered much in the past because too often we have believed 
 ourselves to be entirely sufficient. If we can agree on the objectives of our 
 work then there should be no difficulty in adjusting methods. We recognize 
 the need of denominational as well as interdenominational activity, then 
 all representatives become responsible for promoting denominational and 
 interdenominational work. There need be no overlapping of work, no back¬ 
 biting or heart aches for our objective is clear, our policy unified and our 
 responsibilities defined. 
 
 46 
 
HOW CAN THE UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR AND ADVISOR 
 CO-OPERATE WITH THE UNIVERSITY PASTOR 
 AND ASSOCIATION WORKER AT 
 THE UNIVERSITY? 
 
 Professor C. E, Seashore, Dean of the Graduate College, University of 
 Iowa, led this discussion. The brief, but suggestive, outline, which follows, 
 was placed in the hand of each delegate by way of preparation for the 
 discussion: 
 
 1. By his attitude toward religion. 
 
 a. In his teaching. 
 
 b. In his direct utterances on religion. 
 
 c. In his unconscious attitude. 
 
 2. By his relations to the student. 
 
 a. As a personal friend. 
 
 b. As vocational expert. 
 
 c. As spiritual adviser. 
 
 3. By his attitude toward the religious worker. 
 
 a. In university fellowship. 
 
 b. By church relationship. 
 
 c. In direct cooperation in special cases. 
 
 THE PERSONAL ELEMENT IN RELIGIOUS WORK FOR 
 UNIVERSITY STUDENTS 
 
 Discussion led by the Rev. Matthew G. Allison, Presbyteran University 
 Pastor, University of Wisconsin. 
 
 “Personal Work” is not a popular subject. It is but another name for 
 the old “pastoral work” which ministers usually dislike so much. This 
 work is not popular because it seems rather old-womanish. It has nothing 
 spectacular about it as preaching has. 
 
 But it is more disliked because it is such hard work. It is much harder 
 than preaching. It is much easier to preach to a thousand people than to 
 talk to one man. Many fine preachers would lose their heads at once if 
 one man should get up in the congregation and begin to dispute with them. 
 And many fine preachers are absolutely helpless when it comes to talking 
 in private with just one person. 
 
 But the best kind of preaching, as Beecher said, is when there is only one 
 of a congregation and you have him by the lapel of the coat looking into 
 his eyes. You meet a man then on his own ground. You must get down to 
 business. You can’t ramble along about things that may be of no interest 
 to him. You must face his objections and answer his arguments. You deal 
 with him at home, where he lives. 
 
 The greatest results in all departments of ‘ ‘ work with people ’ ’ are 
 produced with the personal method. The politician does not depend for 
 his election on campaign speeches and band-wagon parades. He depends 
 
 47 
 
on the day and night gum-shoe method of meeting this individual and that 
 face to face and hand to hand. The merchant does not expect success 
 merely through having a fine store or even advertising his goods well. He 
 sends personal letters or catalogues to people individually and his drum¬ 
 mers go out and deal with them where they are. 
 
 The two men who are most responsible for what our modern world is, 
 intellectually and morally, accomplished their results by this means. 
 Socrates had no school. He wrote no books. He made no big addresses. 
 He spent his time going around the city of Athens talking to this man 
 and the other on the street corners. He made himself such a public 
 nuisance and exerted such influence, by this means, that Athens finally 
 put him to death. It is said he was subverting the youth of the city and 
 overturning the state. And his ‘ ‘ dialogues ’ ’—his conversations with 
 those to whom he talked—are the foundation of modern philosophy. 
 
 Jesus had no church. He wrote no books. He held no big conventions. 
 He wandered over Palestine, hither and yon, talking to this man here and 
 that woman there. After two or three years of it Palestine put him to 
 death as the nation’s most dangerous man. His conversations reported 
 by those who overheard him are the foundation of modern religion. 
 
 Jesus’ method was the method of dealing with the individual. He 
 would turn away from crowds but not from a man or woman. Even that 
 one of the Gospel accounts of him which would be least thought of as 
 showing this is a hand-book on this. It is the Gospel of John. It is com¬ 
 monly thought of as a Gospel of deep Christian thought and profound 
 theological discussions. But it is a story from begining to end of Jesus’ 
 dealing with individuals, and the results. Even the profound thought is 
 either addressed to individuals or arises from relations with them. 
 
 For illustration, run through just this one Gospel, chapter by chapter. 
 In the first chapter we have the gathering of the first disciples, one by one. 
 In the second, Jesus is going the length of the land to attend the wedding 
 of a young girl friend and to begin his ministry by saving her wedding 
 from failure. In the third chapter, he is sitting through the long night 
 talking with Nicodemus. In the fourth, he is leading the woman of 
 Samaria into the light. In the fifth, he is healing the lame man at Bethes- 
 da. The sixth is the account of the feeding of the five thousand but 
 through his influence with a little boy who gives up his dinner for the 
 occasion. The seventh comes out of the fifth. In the eighth, he is face 
 to face with the woman taken in sin. The ninth is the story of the healing 
 of the man born blind and the tenth comes out of it. In the eleventh, 
 he risks his life for Lazarus, an otherwise unknown friend. The twelfth 
 is the aftermath of this. From the thirteenth to the seventeenth he is 
 behind closed doors talking to his twelve disciples collectively and indi¬ 
 vidually. His relations with individuals in the remaining stories of his 
 trial, death and resurrection are too numerous to mention. The Gospel 
 closes by his appearing to convince one man, Thomas, that he is alive 
 again. 
 
 Then read the appendix in the twenty-first chapter. It is the story of 
 
 48 
 
Jesus taking one man, Peter, apart to tell him of his future and that he 
 must live his individual life regardless of the way the others go, even 
 his best friend, John. “If I will that John tarry till I come what is 
 that to thee? Follow thou me’’ are the last words of Jesus spoken on 
 earth recorded in this latest Gospel. They express the feeling of the 
 writer who was Jesus’ most confidential friend that the Christian religion 
 is a personal matter and is to be made to go in the world by facing the 
 individual man and bearing hard down on him. 
 
 It is by this personal method that workers for Jesus succeed. I was the 
 pastor of a church for years. I tried sociological, world-regarding 
 schemes and failed. I tried mere preaching and failed. I tried evange¬ 
 listic meetings and failed. Then I tried face to face personal work and 
 succeeded and whatever success I have today is due to the same method. 
 
 It is so with others. Evangelists get converts by first getting church 
 people to volunteer for personal work and then setting them on this indi¬ 
 vidual and that. Tw^o ministers with churches across the street from each 
 other in the town where I live received into their churches about two 
 hundred members apiece the last year, most of them in each case on con¬ 
 fession of faith. They did it because they are both indefatigable chasers 
 of the individual. Dr. Talmage was the most popular preacher of the 
 nineteenth century. ‘ ‘ Follow the crowd, ’ ’ said the policeman when a 
 stranger asked the way to his church. But Dr. Talmage Avas no pastor and 
 his church has disappeared from the earth. Dr, Cuyler Avorked beside 
 him with the motto, ‘ ‘ A house-going pastor makes church-going people, ’ ’ 
 and his church is still doing business at the same old stand and is one of 
 the strongest and most influential churches of the land. 
 
 Now this is our university pastor method at Wisconsin. It is the first 
 and fundamental feature of our AAork. Whatever else we do or do not, we 
 make it our aim to see all the students of our respective churches, and 
 those of no church, personally and individually, during the year, and to 
 present to them the subject of religion and the church. As to the success 
 of our method, we leave the pastors and churches of Madison to say. We 
 ourselves feel it so fully justified that we recommend it as the first feature 
 in their work not only to all uniA^ersity pastors but to all other ministers 
 and church workers. 
 
 Personally, I feel that under present conditions it is about the only 
 Avork to which the university pastor should give his attention. Not that 
 other kinds of work are not important, but our Avorking force is small and 
 if we do this work satisfactorily we shall not have time for much else. 
 And if we do this, we do Avhat all other kinds of Avork aim to do. For 
 we meet our constituents on their OAvn ground. We come face to face 
 with their individual needs. And we have an opportunity to ansAver these 
 needs with direct personal words which can always do more than a multi¬ 
 tude of roundabout methods can accomplish. It was the Avay Socrates 
 turned Athens upside doAvn and founded modern philosophy. It was the 
 way Jesus turned Palestine upside down and founded the modern church 
 and the modern world. 
 
 49 
 
HOW TO REACH THE STUDENT DURING THE FIRST FOUR 
 WEEKS OF HIS UNIVERSITY LIFE 
 
 The Rev, Howard R. Gold, Lutheran University Pastor, 
 University of Wisconsin, 
 
 To reach the student effectively during the first weeks of his university 
 life is one of the essential functions of the Christian worker. The demands 
 upon the attention of the student are almost overwhelming and it is a bit 
 of fine strategy on the part of the worker if he confronts his man with the 
 claims of the church before, or at the same time, that athletics, fraternities 
 and similar interests present and urge their cause. The strategic charac¬ 
 ter of the first weeks has not been sufficiently recognized. We have often 
 labored for the Avhole year and have not even accomplished the purpose 
 which might easily have been attained in the first or second week. 
 
 It is necessary first of all to locate your student at home. This may be 
 done by conference with his pastor and later with him. The pastors of 
 the territory from which an institution draws its students chiefly should 
 be acquainted with the university pastor and should not fail to advise him 
 of any students that may have decided to attend that institution. Pastors 
 everywhere should inform the university pastor, local pastor or association 
 secretary of the movements of their student members. When the home 
 pastor is negligent, the university worker must be all the more active. 
 When the student’s name and address are ascertained, correspondence with 
 him may begin. He may be invited to the local church and canvassed and 
 enrolled in a Bible class. He has now come into touch with the university 
 pastor and will look forward to meeting him. Correspondence with parents 
 must be conducted judiciously, if at all, at this time, or the student 
 becomes suspicious. 
 
 The task to locate the student at the university still remains. Most 
 students find their living quarters after arrival and the surest and quickest 
 means of obtaning the address is the office of the registrar. Nearly all 
 universities take a religious census. All of them require the street ad¬ 
 dress. 
 
 A large number of students are strangers in the university town. To 
 these and many others, a valuable service can be rendered. The Christian 
 Associations are well equipped for this work. There are deputations of 
 student workers to meet the incoming trains. There is a check room for 
 baggage at the building. There are information and employment bureaus, 
 the bread line” frequently requiring the services of two or three active 
 deputies. “Stag parties” and “mixers” are on the program every even¬ 
 ing and Association Hall, through its officers and reinforcement of workers, 
 if alive to its opportunities, is pulling long strokes. The first evenings 
 away from home and when many restraints are removed, when excitement 
 runs high on the campus and down town, are critical for the new student. 
 
 Strong ties between the student and the local church should be formed. 
 
 After he has been located, literature may be sent but nothing can take 
 
 50 
 
the place of a personal call. The pastor should call. A mature student 
 of an upper class or church member may call. Groups of students can 
 render a good service by calling on a given number of neAv comers and by 
 appointment bring them to the church service on the first Sunday. Then 
 comes the further and equally important task of enrolling the student in 
 a Bible class, unless this has been done by mail, a young people’s society 
 and perhaps as an affiliate member of the local church. Different methods 
 will obtain here in different communities but no one will dispute the claim 
 that the work must be done as early as possible. 
 
 At certain universities, a comprehensive plan including all Bible courses 
 is made and a canvass conducted, usually by the Christian Association, for 
 the courses whether given by the Association or the churches. This work 
 done early and thoroughly will give Bible study a prominence and impetus 
 that will help largely in overcoming the usual obstacles encountered by 
 these voluntary courses. 
 
 A reception by the congregation, perhaps arranged for by an auxiliary 
 society, will help to make acquaintances quickly and if the older mem¬ 
 bers of the church are there, as they should be, it will open the way for 
 invitations to their homes. Not enough homes are opened to the student. 
 It is a feature of service that a good social engineer will use to superior 
 advantage. 
 
 A worker will not fail in these opening weeks to pick the natural 
 leaders and give them special attention. Key men should be selected and 
 stationed but not over burdened with responsibilities. 
 
 Whatever the method of procedure, be assured that it is not as im¬ 
 portant as the earlier application of it. There is scarcely a phase of the 
 entire year’s activity that can be begun after the first three or four 
 weeks with the expectation of maximum results. If what the Christian 
 worker has to offer is of any importance at all, then it is of sufficient 
 account to be presented promptly, vigorously and adequately to the new 
 student with the full conviction that nothing he can get in his entire 
 course carries with it greater and more enduring benefits. 
 
 DENOMINATIONAL POLICIES FOR WORK AMONG STATE 
 
 UNIVERSITY STUDENTS 
 
 The Rev. Dean R. Leland, Presbyterian University Pastor, 
 
 University of Nebraska. 
 
 I notice that above the platform of the assembly hall of this university 
 there is inscribed on the wall a quotation from the famous ordinance of 
 1787, declaring that “Religion, morality and knowledge being necessary to 
 good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of 
 education shall forever be encouraged.” Religion has always been recog¬ 
 nized as a necessary part of education in American colleges and is therefor(‘ 
 consistent with the American plan of separation of church and state. 
 When the state supported institutions were established, official and authori- 
 
 51 
 
tative supervision of the religious life of students could not be provided 
 It was expected, however, that the church would supplement the work of 
 the university and supply this necessary part in true education and life. 
 
 The official seal of the University of Indiana is an open Bible, that of 
 the University of Kansas is a figure of Moses before the burning bush with 
 the Latin inscription, “I will see this great sight why the bush is not 
 burned.’’ It is said that a home missionary suggested the plan of the 
 University of Michigan. The first president. Dr. Tappan, cherished the 
 hope that the denominations might establish their divinity schools at Ann 
 Arbor and the second president, a religious leader in his day, became a 
 Bishop in the Methodist Episcopal Communion. When we consider this 
 early recognition of religion, that church leaders were identified with the 
 first state universities and that the students in these institutions came from 
 the same constituency as those who attended the church colleges, it seems 
 strange to us now that there ever should have been a misunderstanding 
 of the plan of secular education, and that church and university should 
 have assumed an attitude of indifference, sometimes of suspicion, and 
 occasionally of antagonism. Finally, university authorities found themselves 
 overwhelmed with the problem of the individual training of large student 
 bodies and the need of the guidance and the restraint and the ideals of 
 religious life was keenly felt and so the call went out to the church to 
 help in this cooperative work of supplying the religious needs of state 
 university students. 
 
 As early as 1884 two or three of the denominations had established 
 guild halls and church dormitories in three or four institutions. The 
 Church of the Disciples of Christ, through the woman’s mission board had 
 inaugurated a plan of Bible chairs for Bible study. In 1896, some one 
 made a religious census of the larger state universities and the remarkable 
 growth of these institutions began to be appreciated. The church was 
 somewhat startled to find such large representation of the respective de¬ 
 nominations in the student body. The Methodists were amazed to find 
 that there were enough students affiliated with their church in sixteen of 
 the leading universities to make nine universities the size of Wesleyan at 
 Middletown, Conn., and the Presbyterians woke up to the fact that there 
 were as many students from Presbyterian homes in seventeen universities 
 as were found in the total enrollment of the thirty-seven Presbyterian col¬ 
 leges of the whole land. Eealizing the situation with growing sympathy 
 for each other, church and university gradually approached each other. 
 Today, the experimental stage is passed. With mutual understanding, the 
 denominations are now gradually developing a settled policy and the 
 methods of accomplishing the task are becoming clearer and clearer through 
 success and failure. 
 
 I think it would be well for me at this point to give a summary of the 
 situation as it now stands and then describe, as well as I can, the definite 
 policy of two or three of the denominations that seem to be working toward 
 a definite goal. It is difficult to classify various plans, for we have a 
 dozen different denominations in a score of universities working throvigh 
 
 52 
 
many agencies—the local chuich, endowed lectureships, Bible chairs, 
 parish houses, guild halls, church dormitories university pastors, here and 
 there an affiliated church college or theological seminary. In all this 
 variety, the many little problems of adjustment are being patiently solved 
 by those in the local centers who best understand the situation and the 
 national bodies, with a wider outlook are trying to direct the work along 
 broad lines. If, at the beginning, the denominations had misgivings as to 
 the wisdom of entering this inviting field, now the church knows that in 
 so large a field there is work for all, and she feels that she is fulfilling a 
 great responsibility, and that the denomination is the most effective approach 
 to the student body and the best agency for supplying the religious needs 
 of the students. The denominations have reached the conviction that the 
 religious element in education and university life, which the state cannot 
 directly supply, may be best fostered by the cooperating church. 
 
 With this general statement let us now outline the policy of two or three 
 of the denominations. 
 
 The policy of the Unitarian church may be understood by a study of 
 the recent reports of Mr. Foot, secretary of the department of Education 
 of the American Unitarian Association. The Unitarians were among the 
 pioneers in this field, early realizing the importance of the college town as 
 a strategic center of influence. They were the first to plant new churches 
 in the university towns because university centers and so church extension 
 has been much encouraged through a realization of the needs of these 
 centers. This church looks forward to the planting of new churches in 
 college towns wherever a nucleus is found sufficient for the undertaking. 
 The most significant innovation has been the enlistment for the past year 
 of eleven student assistants in the churches at Ann Arbor, Iowa City, 
 Ithaca, Lawrence, Lincoln, Madison and Urbana. The success and value 
 of this plan was tested first in the University of Illinois. In accordance 
 with the spirit of the Unitarian church, lectureships are regarded as an 
 important adjunct and as soon as financial arrangements can be made, 
 the institutional methods which are of value in this field will no doubt be 
 encouraged. 
 
 The Church of the Disciples several years ago determined that the 
 teaching function in this work should be emphasized. The Bible Colleges 
 affiliated with the Universities of Missouri, and California, and Texas are 
 illustrations of this plan. By this method the church seeks to train young 
 men and women for the ministry and the mission field and at the same time 
 afford opportunity for all the students of a university belonging to this 
 denomination to study the Bible. The Church of the Disciples has but fe\r 
 church colleges and this plan has doubtless supplied a real need. Bible 
 chairs have been established in other Universities. The woman’s mission 
 board was given the responsibility of meeting the financial needs of the 
 Bible chair. There are now five institutions in which such w'ork has been 
 inaugurated. 
 
 I have been much interested in the manner in vdiicli the Lutheran church 
 has approached the problem of supplying the religious needs of students 
 
 53 
 
affiliated with this denomination. From the traditions of the Lutheran 
 ehurch it might be expected that they would become interested in a work 
 of religious education of young men and young women. They must hear 
 a familiar voice urging them on. Martin Luther once expressed a senti- 
 jnent which sounds very modern. ‘^Therefore, I beg of you all,’^ said he, 
 
 ‘ ‘ in the name of God and our neglected youth not to think of this subject 
 lightly as do many who do not see what the Prince of this world intends. 
 For the right instruction of youth is a matter in which Christ and all the 
 world are concerned”. In the spring of 1907, the Lutheran Home Mission 
 Board called Mr. Howard E. Gold to take charge of the work at Madison, 
 with special instructions to study problems at the University of Wisconsin. 
 In 1909, the Synod of the Northwest appointed a committee to promote 
 this work at the same time memorializing the national body, the General 
 Council, to immediately take up the matter and this council through a 
 committee is now conducting the work and continuing a study of the field 
 at Minneapolis and Madison. 
 
 It has been impossible for me to gather full information in regard to the 
 policy of the Episcopal church. We know however that they approve of 
 the guild house plan with its lectureship at Ann Arbor and in three insti¬ 
 tutions, West Virginia, Indiana and Illinois, church dormitories are con¬ 
 ducted with a rector in charge. 
 
 The National body of the Congregational church has declared its hearty 
 sympathy with this work but leaves the matter of its development to 
 those in the local centers and the State Associations. 
 
 The Presbyterian church has been interested in this field for a long 
 time and its interpretation of the needs of the state university student 
 may be traced in the various deliverances of the General Assembly. Infor¬ 
 mation about the universities had come to the General Assembly through 
 individuals located in university towns. Finally the evangelistic commit¬ 
 tee appointed such men as Dr. James B. Lee, a representative of the 
 committee and Dr. Buchanan of Wheeling, the seat of the university of 
 West Virginia, to make a visitation of the universities and to report what 
 was being done. In 1904, the Assembly directed that the College Board 
 should make university work a part of its regular program. This Board 
 held the commission for tw^o years but found it inexpedient to continue 
 the work and in 1906 the task was placed in the hands of the Board of 
 Education. Synods in which this w^ork had already been started were 
 commended and the secretary of the Board was instructed to visit the 
 students of the state universities to present the claims of the ministry. 
 Co-operation with the various synods was more and more developed. In 
 1907, it was recommended that the Board of Education prosecute a defin¬ 
 ite and vigorous work for the supply of the religious needs of the students 
 and funds were to be gathered. A plan which was inaugurated at about 
 this time has greatly helped to interest the church as a whole in this field. 
 A pre-assembly conference has been held for two or more years, consisting 
 of a panoramic exhibit of the universities, reports from the university 
 pastors and general discussion. This has helped to educate the whole 
 
 54 
 
church to the needs of the field. In 1909, an important step was taken 
 looking towards financial support. Doctor Wallace Kadcliffe, who was 
 acquainted with the Michigan plan, had declared as early as 1890 that the 
 only hope for the permanency of this work is endowment and experience 
 has proven the wisdom of his statement. For the past three years the 
 Board of Education has encouraged the raising of endowment, the Board 
 of Education being the trustee of such funds wherever mutually agreeable 
 to the Synod and the Board. In March, 1910, a distinct department of the 
 Board of Education was organized, called the Department of University 
 Work. Dr. Eichard C. Hughes was appointed secretary to direct and carry 
 out the whole plan. Since Dr, Hughes’ appointment, important matters of 
 policy have been settled. One touching financial support and the other re 
 lating to the best method. I can do no better than quote the resolutions 
 adopted. The progress of the work requires a policy which will make it 
 possible to accomplish results from time to time more speedily and effectively 
 in the reaching of the university centers demanding prompt attention. The 
 present system of requiring Synods to finance from two-thirds to three- 
 fourths of the expense of the University work before this Board will appro¬ 
 priate its quota is found to be inadequate to meet conditions as they arise 
 in certain Synods. 
 
 THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board adopt the following 
 policy, that the Board guarantee the salary of the University Pastor and 
 the incidental expenses of the work at the university within the bounds of 
 that Synod, whole or in part, as the situation may require, and that the 
 Department of University Work shall endeavor to secure from the churches 
 and individuals, within the bounds of the Synods where this policy is put 
 into operation, such extra offerings as shall recoup the board for the 
 advance appropriations authorized above. 
 
 The effect of this plan has been of great help in the extension of the 
 work so that at the present time there are University Pastors in fifteen 
 universities. 
 
 The other declaration of the Board is an emphasis for method. Looking 
 over the field it was found that there was a great variety of agencies used 
 and the Board while recognizing the need of pursuing different policies 
 based upon local conditions at each university center, aflirms its unalter¬ 
 able conviction that the personal tcorJc of the university pastor with the 
 individual students is fundamental in this work, and that this pastoral 
 care, leading up to contact with the local church, is absolutely necessary 
 to the success of the movement for the spiritual welfare of the student body. 
 There is no discrimination here between methods that have been found by 
 experience to be of value, but as Dr, Cochran once said, “Let us not be so 
 particular about the way in which the Avork is done as the spirit that lies 
 behind it. The right spirit will determine the true method whether it be 
 institutional or semi-academic or whether the whole Avork is embodied in 
 one man. The great fact must never be lost sight of that a shepherd is 
 following his sheep. The important thing is that some one in some Avay, 
 with an understanding of the university spirit and love for the young and 
 
 55 
 
eager heart, is giving bis days and nights to the task of keeping true and 
 clean and serviceable the educated leadership of the new day. ” Or as Nolan 
 E. Best has expressed it, speaking of the distinction between the Y. M. C. 
 A. work, which he characterizes as the big brother idea and the work of the 
 church. ^ ‘ The church, ’ ’ said he, ‘ ‘ is the evidence of parental faithfulness and 
 devotion. It is the father and mother idea of Christian ’vvork. ’ ’ 
 
 I had hoped to have time to gather up the points of general agreement 
 among the churches and to indicate in what ways we are all moving toward 
 the same objective. It is evident that this work is the expression of the 
 new spirit of the church. The local centers co-operating with the national 
 bodies, each denomination caring for its own but anxious also that the 
 church as a united body shall perform its whole duty m satisfying the 
 religious needs of the University centres. The church wants to make this 
 a broad work, a patriotic ivork, a work of true education. 
 
 We all regard the pulpit of the local church as most important and be¬ 
 lieve that the local church of each denomination at the university center has 
 a special function acting for the various churches of the denomination where 
 they cannot act for themselves. 
 
 Important advances are yet to be made along the line of the teaching 
 function. The Bible colleges of the Christian church, Wesley College at 
 North Dakota, the school of religion at Ann Arbor, the Iowa plan of uni¬ 
 versity credits, indicate the possibilities of the academic side of our work. 
 Prof. Starbuck’s investigations as reported in this conference indicate the 
 trend of the universities themselves in this matter. Prof. Kelsey of Ann 
 Arbor in a recent article in ‘‘The Continent’^ suggests a new advance. 
 He declares that while ‘ ‘ each denomination may make provision for the 
 pastoral care of its own, such provision does not afford a method of reach¬ 
 ing as a w^hole the enormous student body, churched and unchurched, of 
 our state institutions. The goal will not be reached until some way is 
 found to bring the preachers of greatest power from time to time into 
 immediate contact with the general body of students, gathered without 
 regard to denominational affiliations to hear the message. Will not some 
 great-hearted man or w^oman establish a foundation, like the noble Sage 
 foundation for humanitarian work, or the great Carnegie foundation for 
 the advancement of teaching, wdiich shall have as its sole function the 
 bringing of the most pow^erful interpreters of spiritual truth face to face 
 with the vast throngs of students in state institutions!’’ And then Doctor 
 Kelsey asks the question, “Is this merely a dream?’’ I feel that this 
 conference is able to answer this question in part. At the University of 
 AVisconsin a co-operative plan is shared in by the University Pastors’ 
 Association and the president and regents of the university, under which, 
 at intervals each year, three or four men of national eminence in religious 
 work are invited officially to the university to address the whole university 
 at convocation. The Biblical Institute held at the University of Kansas 
 also shows what may be done even under present conditions. Several days 
 together each year are set apart for special attention to Biblical and 
 religious topics. University professors, during these days, in their regu- 
 
 56 
 
lar courses, touch in their lectures points of religious significance. Eminent 
 religious leaders are guests of the university and address the whole body 
 of students in mass meetings. And so Professor Kelsey is not a dreamer 
 but a prophet, and we may not fully understand what may be the future 
 development of the work we represent. 
 
 Meantime we must strive to show ourselves approved unto God, This we 
 know, that faithful, wise, pastoral care has kept hundreds of students 
 true to their faith and sent them out into the world committed to Chris¬ 
 tian service. Many have decided for the ministry, for mission work, and 
 for Christian leadership as laymen. The spiritual victories have been 
 many, and the results have far surpassed the most sanguine expectations. 
 The denominations are measuring the great value of these significant 
 results. As our work widens in scope so will the policy of the churches 
 broaden, and this movement in which we have a part will be regarded in 
 time as one of the most important educational and religious movements 
 of the new century. 
 
 SHOULD THE UNIVERSITY PASTOR ASSEMBLE HIS STUDENTS? 
 
 WHY? WHERE? 
 
 Ed\vard W. Blakeman, Methodist Episcopal University Pastor at 
 The University of Wisconsin.—Madison, 
 
 One of the distinct purposes of this movement is to reclaim these centers 
 for organized Christianity. This purpose can be accomplished only as a 
 church loyalty is developed in the university community. The state school 
 must by its foundation, according to some, assume that education can be 
 complete with religion omitted and religious organizations ignored. The 
 church worker at a state university is at once confronted with the problem 
 of lifting before the university community the vital piety of an historic 
 denomination. 
 
 In the doing of this task we need to hold carefully to one fundamental 
 distinction. The university as a “community’’ is one thing and the 
 university as an “institution” is another. The state owms and operates 
 the institution. From this, we, as religious bodies, are excluded. The 
 community of students and teachers on the other hand is a community 
 of 3000 or 4000 souls. As such the field is an open subject of our mis- 
 sionaiy propaganda. In this community the city has governmental rights, 
 the politics of the land has party or political right, and the church of Jesus 
 Christ a spiritual right. From the very nature of the case these indi¬ 
 viduals are ours to evangelize,—to church, to organize denominationally. 
 
 It is because of this purpose and in the freedom wdiich follows in the 
 wake of this fundamental distinction that I claim that the church w'orker 
 should assemble his students. His w^ork will be efficient in the purpose 
 to which I have confined our thought in exact proportion to the group 
 loyalty developed. Group loyalty comes of group consciousness. Group 
 consciousness springs from contact of man wdth man. It is only as men 
 rub elbows in a common cause,— lift together a common burden, that 
 
 57 
 
they understand social diflSiCulties or appreciate a moral task. Within the 
 historic religious bodies which we men have the honor of representing, 
 the thousands of humanity have wrought together and triumphed. Here, 
 then, is an heritage for the student body in any state. Let the content 
 of these great religious institutions make its appeal and the heroism 
 of spiritual leadership combined with the intensity of the critical theol¬ 
 ogian will lead from our college halls other Luthers, other Wesleys, other 
 Beechers, other Simpsons, and an occasional Philip Brooks. 
 
 All through these conference sessions there has sounded an eloquent 
 testimony of the fact that those who toil together, those who ‘ ‘ sympathize ’ \ 
 —suffer together,— learn the social difficulties and come to appreciate 
 the moral task before us. Here are thirty men assembled, with others 
 to advise. Yonder is an host of America’s future leaders, and we see 
 them in Ohio, in Minnesota, south in Missouri, and yonder on the Pacific 
 coast “as sheep having no shepherd.” As Ave are here developing a group 
 consciousness, a group loyalty, so should each church leader at each 
 state institution join the students under him to the church of his con¬ 
 nection and lay upon them the burdens of the Kingdom of God. In so 
 doing he will make the contribution of Congregationalism or of Presbyter¬ 
 ianism, or Methodism, to the university community, to the life of these 
 western states. 
 
 In the second place, the pastor should assemble his students because of 
 the enthusiasm of numbers. Enthusiasm produces winning athletes and 
 strong orators; wffiy not capable religious leaders,— preachers and lay¬ 
 men who excel. We “mass” for football because it gets results. Let 
 the Baptists “mass” for the production of that element of contrition 
 AAdiich the faith has helped contribute to our civilization. The athletic 
 department calls back graduates to appeal to the sentiments of under¬ 
 graduates and move them to fill the bleachers and back a team. Let us 
 commend Methodism for its emotional appeal in the student world if it 
 can arouse young men from apathy and spiritual sloth. 
 
 Few people know that there are between 500 and 1000 Congregational- 
 ists; 500 and 1000 Presbyterians; 500 and 1000 Methodists; 500 and 
 1000 Disciples of Christ; 500 and 1000 Episcopalians; in each of our 
 state schools. The student, I have found, is much encouraged when he 
 comes to knoAv that he marches shoulder to shoulder wdth one-tenth of 
 the student body religiously. Let him sit together today Avith 500 others 
 who haA'e had the same strict religious discipline as he,— Avho have been 
 Sunday-Schooled as he has,— wffio haA^e been singing the same sacred 
 hymns Sunday after Sunday, and almost hearing the same sermons from 
 the same preacher,— and he goes forth tomorrow on a higher moral 
 plane; able to make a far better fight for a character than he ever made 
 before. 
 
 Again, the minister is to look upon his congregation as the machinery 
 by Avhich he as the operator is to create followers of Christ, if I may use 
 such an illustration. It is not the business of the university pastor to teach 
 his own and then draAv his pay. He is placed oAxr the membership to 
 
 58 
 
increase it. He cannot direct the energies of six or seven hundre<l people 
 to this purpose unless he assembles them,— gains their confidence, and is 
 accepted as their leader for certain definite and specific ends. Here is 
 the power of the pulpit. The pastor, daily among his people, within and 
 without his membership, can stand forth upon Sunday and apply the 
 teachings of the Scriptures to the experiences and the problems con¬ 
 fronting the community. Without this possibility, the university pastorate 
 is denied one of its greatest assets. With it, the office strikes the strategic 
 point of our civilization, and the coming men of our society are reached 
 by the voices of God which echo and reecho throughout the Bible and are 
 heard in all life. 
 
 You ask then, “Where should the students be assembled'?” I answer, 
 ‘ ‘ at the most advantageous spot in the quarter. ’ ’ It may be the local 
 church; it may be a rented hall, or a college building. It must be 
 properly located. That, to my mind, is the first and all-important con¬ 
 sideration. 
 
 We dare not dogmatize on this point. After studying carefully the 
 condition at five university centers it becomes apparent that we cannot 
 generalize. Four separate issues are involved however:— 
 
 First. The location of the local church. 
 
 Second. The character of that church. Is it sympathetic— has it room? 
 
 Third. Would the city and the university adherents be able to maintain 
 two churches? 
 
 Fourth. Is it wise to divorce “town” and “gown” in the place of 
 worship ? 
 
 At Minneapolis the city churches are near. Let them expand to ac¬ 
 commodate the students, each group assembling at the church of its con¬ 
 nection. At Michigan the Ann Arbor churches are well situated and Guild 
 Halls are thus practicable in connection with these churches. At Illinois 
 and Texas, where the largest investments have been made, separate churches 
 much loved by the entire student body are training students for layman- 
 ship and getting for the churches and the students remarkable spiritual 
 results. 
 
 If, as at Madison, the churches are far removed and a bit indifferent to 
 the problems of student life, it devolves upon the university pastor to erect 
 near the school a meeting place. The while this is being done, he does 
 well,— according to the opinion of this and previous conferences,— to 
 work in conjunction with the local church, acting as an associate pastor. 
 
 In conclusion, let us hold firmly in mind that the purpose involved is 
 to bring the vital piety of each historic religious body in its own identity 
 to bear upon the total life of the university community. Let each as¬ 
 sembly of students and every institution erected conform to this purpose, 
 and let us continue insistent and persistent in our effort to sweeten, to 
 strengthen, to ennoble American life by appropriating today and here the 
 heart experiences of humanity as recorded Godward in these denominations. 
 
 59 
 
FINANCING THE WORK OF THE UNIVERSITY PASTOR. 
 
 The Rev. Martin E. Anderson, Presbyterian University Pastor, 
 
 University of Illinois. 
 
 The outstanding need as I see it in the university pastor movement is 
 that of stability. It lacks of permanency. There are those who believe 
 that the movement is but a passing cloud in the university firmament. 
 They predict its speedy and sure passage into sweet oblivion. I do not 
 share their pessimism. I believe the men in the movement are too far- 
 seeing to fail to take the steps which will insure permanency. In the 
 few minutes allotted to me, therefore, I wish to make a plea for perman¬ 
 ency. 
 
 There is no need that I should urge the permanent retention of the 
 university. All can see that our state universities are here to stay. I 
 am not so familiar with the condition at Iowa, but in Illinois the legis¬ 
 lature has surely taken steps to insure the permanency of its sole insti¬ 
 tution of higher learning. As you are doubtless aware, provision was 
 made at the last session of the legislature for a mill tax, which will give 
 the university an income approximating $3,000,000.00 annually. Computing 
 this at the rate of 4 per cent, it is the equivalent of an endowment fund 
 of $75,000,000. This permits us to predict a future for the University of 
 Illinois. I doubt not but that the other state universities represented 
 liere are on as permanent a financial basis as the one referred to or wiU 
 soon be in a similar position of prosperity. There is no question then 
 but that our fields for service will always remain. 
 
 It is not necessary to say anything about the importance of this field. 
 Doctor Carrier, president of Waukesha College, calls it the greatest home 
 mission field in this country and some of us heard Mr, John E. Mott, 
 doubtless the greatest living authority on fields for Christian service, a 
 man who has visited thousands of fields all over the world, say, ‘^Nowhere 
 is there a larger field for Christian work than at the state universities.^^ 
 When a man like Mr. Mott with his worldwide vision makes the statement 
 like the one quoted, it should convince us that the fields in which we serve 
 are worthy of the best efforts of the biggest men. There can be little 
 or no question in the minds of all fairminded people but that the university 
 pastor is helping very materially to solve the perplexing religious prob¬ 
 lem at the state university. He has proved his worth. Wherever he has 
 been permitted to serve any reasonable period of time, testimonials can 
 be produced which will show that his work has been most effective. The 
 experimental period in our work has passed. The system has been tried 
 and found effective. Some of you will remember the words of Dr. Van 
 Hise, president of Wisconsin University, in this direction. I quote him. 
 ‘^It seems to me that in having each church look out for its own, as is 
 being done here, each group of students is being looked out for by those 
 who are in sympathy with their ideas, beliefs, and faith in a manner best 
 adapted to each individual group. In having the various groups and in 
 having a man giving his attention to each group there is also the stimu- 
 
 60 
 
lus and personal relationship which would not be possible, under another 
 arrangement, and therefore T conclude,^’ said Pres. Van Hise, “that it 
 seems to me that the state of Wisconsin and the state university are to 
 be congratulated because they could not take u]) the work of religious in¬ 
 struction officially. It has been provided for better than we could have 
 provided for it.” 
 
 I take it therefore that there is no question in the minds of any present, 
 first, that the fields in which we work will always remain. Second, that 
 this field is big enough to engage the earnest attention of the most 
 worthy. Third, that the university pastor is doing a most valuable work 
 on this field and should be retained. Hence the plea for permanency. 
 
 There are two things which will serve to temporize this agency. One 
 is, inadequate men for the field, the other is, inadequate support and 
 equipment for these men. 
 
 The danger is always present of putting a small man in a big job. 
 Nothing will kill the job as quickly as a man beneath it. Our jobs are 
 too big for small men. The position merits and demands men of vision, 
 men of capacity, broadminded men, men who abhor sectarianism, and are 
 prudent enough to say the least about denominationalism, men with strong 
 personalities, sympathetic natures, youthful spirits, able to think, to feel, 
 to act with the students, whom they serve. No man is too big for our 
 jobs. No one of us is big enough for the position we hold and the strongest 
 )man is none too strong for a field like ours. Such a man must have 
 adequate support. 
 
 The salary of the student pastor should be at least equal to that of the 
 full professor in the university where he serves. He should be able to 
 live on a par with the average professor. His income should be sufficient 
 to enable him to keep abreast with the times in his reading, and in his 
 travels. He should be enabled to entertain on a large scale, and on as 
 high a scale as any of the university professors. This salary should not 
 only be sufficient but it should be paid promptly at a specified time. This 
 is not the condition which exists at present in all our university centers. 
 I heard the other day of a university pastor, a man with a family, a man 
 who is doing a real work, who not only fails to receive an adequate salary, 
 but he himself told me that his committee is not always able to pay 
 him all of the salary which they promised him, and he is compelled to 
 work along commercial lines to earn enough to make ends meet. I know 
 of another university pastor who has to do outside preaching on Sundays 
 to make enough money to enable him to continue in his work. These 
 things, brethren, ought not to be. Our movement will surely die and die 
 speedily unless some provision is made for the support of the university 
 pastor which will be reliable. The university pastor, who has responsi¬ 
 bilities toward his family to discharge cannot be expected to work with 
 freedom unless he knows that there is sufficient money in the treasury to 
 pay his salary and necessary expenses from year to year. There is nothing 
 which puts the damper upon the ardor of a man quite as much as a 
 deficit in the treasury. A school boy was once asked to define a deficit, 
 
 61 
 
said he, ‘ ‘ a deficit is what you have got when you have got less than 
 when you had notliing. ’ ’ It is a pretty good definition of the work, it 
 strikes me. The fear of a deficit in the treasury, perhaps more than any 
 other one thing has kept strong men from entering our field, and the 
 presence of a deficit in many instances has driven men from the field. 
 
 At present the university pastors are supported very largely by the 
 contributions of the local church or the churches of the state. In some 
 cases, partial support comes from the church boards. This method, as it 
 strikes me, is entirely inadequate and does not insure permanency. No 
 university pastor ought to be willing to depend on boards and church 
 collections for his support. They are altogether too fluctuating. You have 
 the element of human nature to contend with. It takes too much of one’s 
 energy and time to speak at conferences, in churches, in committee meet¬ 
 ings, etc., during the year, and yet this must be done if the money is to be 
 forth-coming. It is the policy of some of the church boards to prevent their 
 university pastors from doing any financial work. This is an ideal policy, 
 provided it works, but my opinion is that it will not wmrk. The only solution, 
 as I see it, for the problem of permanency in the university pastor move¬ 
 ment, is an adequate endowment for every movement. 
 
 I suppose my position on the program at this point is due to our experi¬ 
 ence at Illinois. When I accepted the position of university pastor for the 
 Presbyterian church in May, 1909, I required the committee to specify in 
 the call that I w^as not to be responsible for any financial work, except as I 
 might be wdlling, from time to time, to advise with the committee. I wanted 
 to be free to spend all my time with the students. Part of the salary of the 
 university pastor was then paid by the Board of Education, the rest came 
 from the different churches of the state. While pay day was not as regular 
 as it might have been, we were fortunate enough to be able to meet our 
 obligations, but there was so much uncertainty about our ability to do this 
 that the arrangement was hardly satisfactory. At that time, in May, 1909, 
 the funds for current expenses were low. We had no property and only 
 two conditional promises which it seemed impossible to realize upon tow'ard 
 an endowment fund. We had a conditional offer of $10,000.00, provided 
 we would raise $50,000.00 more before May 1, 1910. This offer had been 
 standing for four years. My two predecessors, in the office of university 
 pastor, had refused to engage extensively in the financial work. The man 
 immediately before me secured another offer of $5,000,00 on the same condi¬ 
 tions, This left $45,0000.00 to raise and less than a year in which to raise 
 it. My understanding was that this money would be raised by the synod’s 
 committee of fifteen ministers and elders. It depended upon them to do 
 this. The time passed quickly. Four or five months went by and little or 
 nothing came in for the endowment fund. Finally a prominent churchman 
 urged me to lay aside my aversion to financial work, leave my work at the 
 university, and go out for the money. I objected seriously to this, but was 
 finally persuaded that it had to be done. The board’s secretaries, Drs. 
 Cochran and Hughes, rendered good service in our campaign, bringing in a 
 total of about $2,500. The committee on Christian education in charge of 
 
 62 
 
our movement cooperated most loyally, not too much praise can be given to 
 our worthy chairman, Dr. \V. S. P. Bryan of Chicago, and other members of 
 that committee. During the remaining months of that year, I presented 
 the work from Sunday to Sunday in the pulpits of the state and can¬ 
 vassed the different communities during the week. In all, it was my 
 privilege to hand over to the treasury about $30,000.00 towards this 
 endowment fund, $22,000.00 of which I collected during the last eleven 
 days of April. On the first of May, we v/ere able to wire the original donor 
 that we had made good, and we received the $10,000.00 which he promised. 
 During the same year, we collected $6500.00 more for grounds and build¬ 
 ings. We purchased a most eligible site in the heart of the student residence 
 district. The house was used as a Guild Hall for over a year. During the 
 past summer, this house was moved to the rear of the lot, a third story added 
 and the house changed from cellar to attic, and now serves as a residence 
 hall for young women. There are nineteen rooms in this house, some twenty 
 university women room there and twenty-four are boarding there. It is a 
 safe Christian home for university girls. On the front of the lot, we are 
 erecting the University Presbyterian church for students at a cost of 
 $30,000.00. Since February 5, 1911, it has been my privilege to gather in 
 some $34,000.00 more for grounds and buildings. In all, we have collected 
 over $100,000.00 for our work, $60,000,00 of which is invested in stocks, 
 bonds and mortgages, and bringing in annual income at an average rate 
 of about five and one-half per cent. We have still to raise about $13,000.00 
 and then we feel our work will be on a permanent basis. 
 
 My reason for relating this bit of history is to show how similar our 
 position was to what yours is now. If I had taken the view that many 
 university pastors hold it may be that we would be no better situated 
 financially than we were during the three years before I came or than some 
 of you are at the present time. I am not relating these facts to advertise 
 any special ability as a financial agent, I do not claim to have any. My 
 only reason for citing these facts is to inspire some of you to go and do 
 likewise. What one university pastor has done other pastors can do. It 
 means much hard dork, and much self denial, but the results are sure 
 and the satisfaction is sweet. 
 
 Some of you may be interested in knowing the method pursued in our 
 financial work. My theory is that it is far better to devote all of one’s 
 time for a while to the financial end of the work than part of one’s 
 time all the while. It is far better, in my opinion, to spend a year or two in 
 financial work than to have to work under financial worry and limitations 
 all the time. Our method then is to leave the university field and present the 
 cause in the different pulpits of the state on Sundays and to folloAV tlie pre¬ 
 sentation with a canvass of the individual members of the church during the 
 week. For a while, I did not realize the importance of representing the 
 work fully, in the church, before approaching the members. I remember 
 going to a woman of means and presenting the needs of our work. She 
 gave me a very respectful hearing, lasting about five minutes, when she 
 
 63 
 
politely informed me that she had no money to give me. I was much disap¬ 
 pointed. I had expected great things from her. I asked her pastor to give 
 
 me a few minutes in his pulpit on Sunday morning. He told me to take all 
 
 the time I wanted. I spoke for twenty minutes on the need for our kind of 
 work at the state university. On the following day I called to see this 
 woman again. She was present at the service on the Sunday preceding and 
 heard all I had to say. I had twenty minutes with her then and if I had 
 
 failed to make an impression it was all my fault. I felt sure that she 
 
 thought more favorably of our work now than she did on my former visit. 
 After a few minutes, she informed me that she was willing to give me a 
 thousand dollars for the work and that she felt that our field was a needy 
 
 field. It took me no time to convince her that she ought to give at least 
 
 two thousand dollars, which at five per cent, would mean $100.00 a year of 
 her money going into this work. I have called upon that woman three or 
 four times since then and have secured in all $10,000.00 from her. Had I 
 failed to secure her attention for twenty minutes at that morning service I 
 
 am quite sure that we would never have received a cent from her for our 
 
 work. By all means present your work fully, preferably at a morning 
 church service, if you want to make a successful appeal. 
 
 We do not pass subcription blanks at these church services. Our experi¬ 
 ence has proven that this method is not productive of results. Not long ago, 
 we spoke for about twenty-five minutes on university work in a little country 
 church, subscription blanks were passed, the church officers urged the people 
 present to fill out these blanks and leave them before leaving the church. 
 The total received from this method at that service was $3.00. We were 
 much disappointed, of course. As a result of Ausiting a number of those 
 people in their homes, we secured twenty times as much as we had by the 
 former method. 
 
 We never ask for collections, when presenting this work. Another experi¬ 
 ence which may be of value to you in your canvassing work in a small 
 country church, we presented the work fully in the morning and gave a 
 popular illustrated lecture in the evening. At the close of this service, the 
 pastor of the church urged his people very strongly to give liberally for the 
 support of university work. When the collection was counted, we found 
 that we had a little over $8.00. I was worn out, discouraged, and disap¬ 
 pointed. Not satisfied to return to Champaign with only $8.00, I asked the 
 pastor to give me the names of a few of his people and allow me to call 
 upon them. He gave me about six names. All of them, I think, had been 
 present the evening before, and had contributed when the collection was 
 taken. As a result of the personal canvass we made that morning, we secured 
 over $300.00, practically all of it in cash. The six people interviewed gave 
 about $5.00 when the collection was taken, and over $300.00 when the gum 
 shoe method was used. There is, in our opinion, no other effective method 
 than this same personal, man to man, individual, gum shoe method. Do not 
 waste time on anything else. Save your postage, your correspondence may 
 bring a little but if you would spend as much time and money in making 
 personal appeals, your results would be far greater. 
 
 64 
 
Our policy is to strike while the iron is hot, we feel that this is the Lord’s 
 work and there is no better day to prosecute the Lord’s work than on the 
 Lord’s day. We see as many as we can on Sunday afternoon, present the 
 work, if possible, on Sunday morning, call on the people Sunday afternoon, 
 preach again Sunday night, see a few more after the evening service, go 
 out early on Monday morning and continue until the field has been 
 thoroughly canvassed. Not the easiest kind of work, I grand you, 
 but the kind of work that brings results. Our plan is to size a man 
 up, and ask for twice the amount you expect to receive, we find that it 
 is an advantage to let him know about how much we expect to receive from 
 him. We compliment him by letting him know' that our impression is that 
 he is able to give at least twuce as much as he really is able to give. We 
 can’t always be sure that we have made the right estimate, we were agreeably 
 disappointed on one occasion. I remember asking a man for $200.00, 
 expecting to receive about $100.00. To my great surprise, he said, “Make 
 it $250.00.” I hardly knew what to say but recovered suf&ciently to thank 
 him and to ask him when he wished to pay it. “Oh, any time,” said he. 
 “Now',” said T, “Yes, but I haven’t my check book with me.” That will 
 be all right,” I replied, “I have mine here, w'hat’s the name of your bank?” 
 And as he named it, I scratched out the name of my bank, filled in the 
 proper name, wwote in the amount to be paid to so and so, treasurer, handed 
 it to him and without any question on his part it was signed. Get the cash 
 on the first interview, if it is at all possible to do so. “A bird in the hand 
 is w orth tw o in the bush. ’ ’ We spent about a year in the insurance business. 
 When agents came to our office and spoke of the bright prospects they had, 
 we paid little or no attention to their remarks, what we w'anted to see was 
 signed applications. See your man, land him, don’t let him put you off, let 
 him know that the only thing that will make you get up and leave is for 
 him to “come across.” 
 
 If you havn’t secured the amount you w'ent after from an indmdual, keep 
 after him until you get him. May T relate another experience. I w'rote to 
 a certain w'oman of means and said to her, that w'e w'ould have to receive 
 $10,000.00 from her for our work and that T w'as going to call on her very 
 soon to present the matter more fully. She wrote back, “Enclosed please 
 find check for $1,000.00, since you have the whole state to canvass, I think 
 this is my share.” I thanked her for her check, but said that it was still my 
 opinion that w'e w’ould have to have $9,000.00 more from her, and that I 
 wms going to call on her soon to receive it. I made several calls before I 
 got it, but it came. She gave the $10,000.00 w’e had originally set out to 
 receive, not in one sum, but in smaller sums, all of them aggregating 
 $ 10 , 000 . 00 . 
 
 If our w'ork is to be permanent w'ork, fellow university pastors, it must be 
 adequately endoAved. If endoAvment funds are going to be raised, in 
 nine cases out of ten, you who are on the field will have to raise them. This 
 money as a rule does not come through the committees or through financial 
 agents. The people w'ill listen to you and w'ill respond to you as they wall 
 
 65 
 
to no other. Yon are on the field, they respect you, they will help you. 
 Don’t lose any time sitting around waiting for others to complete your 
 funds. Get out and hustle for the money, it will be hard work, while the 
 campaign is on, but it will be much easier sailing when the fund is com¬ 
 pleted. I don’t like this financial Avork any more than the rest of you do. I 
 do it because I know it must be done, and it seems as though the university 
 pastor must do it. My job is that of pastor to these students. I want to 
 reach them definitely for Jesus Christ. This financial work is only one of 
 the means to that end. In many instances, my fellow Avorkers, Ave have the 
 last chance Avith this imb’ersity student. If they slip through our fingers 
 and leave the university unsaA^ed, the chances are that they will neA’er be 
 reached. We cannot emphasize the importance of our Avork too much, nobody 
 carries greater responsibilities than we do. I trust that we may go from this 
 conference Avith a neAV vision of this responsibility, with a neAV Ausion of the 
 bigness of our task, AAuth renewed resolution to put a man’s strength, 
 supplemented Avith all divine power, into this man’s job. Men let’s throw all 
 our strength into this financial Avork, make eA’ery movement stable, strong, 
 permanent, then let’s throw every ounce of energy aa’c have to make our 
 endowment fund, our building, all our resources, serve Jesus Christ and 
 adA^ance Ilis Kingdom. 
 
 
 66