Part 2

"The preacher in the country and in the old days could get along very well between the neighborly gifts he received and the produce of his little farm or garden when these were added to his small salary. But when, without increase of salary, that same man is placed in the city in our days of swollen prices for necessities, he is hard put to it to keep out of debt and remain honest in the ministry. Under the pressure some men have turned to crooked schemes, to selling mining stocks and other bogus investments, and some have gone out of the ministry. But the greater number have stayed in and are working hard to make ends meet and to stay straight.

"Ministers have gone wrong because they have not been trained right in their professional schools; they have been educated only for oratorical labor, and that with the intent of persuading men to certain things by dint of their eloquence. What seminaries are giving courses corresponding to those in other professional schools on professional ethics? They have gone wrong in instances because their employers, the people, have not treated them right, have not given them a fair chance to live right; they have paid them, and are paying them less than we pay mechanics and clerks, and yet they expect the minister to live according to their social standards.

"When the people who employ the ministers will give them an honest return for their work, when they will also encourage them to be honest in their preaching and teaching, there will be fewer unworthy ministers. When the theological schools get out of their shells and into the cities, and the preachers get out of their cloth and among folk, when they take off their garments of sanctimoniousness and get busy helping and leading others to better living, and to making this world a better place to live in, the ministers will be a good many notches higher in the world's esteem. It is needless to say there are a great many ministers who have made good in these ways."

We have thus a view of the clerical profession from the inside, the writer having turned state's evidence. In the closing paragraph there is an intimation that liberal preaching, or "honest" preaching, with a discarding of the cloak of sanctimoniousness, will react on clerical morality and thus raise the preachers in the world's esteem. That view is borne out by the figures showing that the ministers of the liberal sects are the best behaved.

The editor of the "Baptist Standard," commenting on the article which he prints and which we have quoted, attributes the clergy's poor reputation for morality to the "yellow journal," which he says "will get twice as black in the face as it will over any other person of equal prominence." The Baptist editor complains because--

"A cross-roads clergyman who runs away with his organist will get more attention than a congressman who goes off with his stenographer. The senile philanderings of a former United States senator did not get a front-page position so often as did a comparatively obscure clergyman who a few years ago failed to get gold out of sea-water, but did get it out of the purses of customers who thought they had a 'good thing.' Why? The answer throws a flood of light upon the question at issue. Because out of tens of thousands of ministers, all of them working under the obvious limitations and temptations to which the article makes reference, those who go wrong are so few that, when such instances occur, they are played up, because they are news. When a lawyer or a physician, or a bank president, or a commercial traveler is found with the broken fragments of the seventh commandment on his person, it is no news, at least relatively speaking, and it is given an inside page. This is an unconscious tribute of the sensational press to the high estimate in which the clerical profession is in general held."

The theory of the religious editor might account for the notoriety given a delinquent minister, but no amount of publicity could create the fact of his delinquency. He has to run off with his organist before the yellow journal chronicles the event. And if more publicity is given him than is received by the lawyer, physician and bank president when the facts come out, the notoriety in known cases is more than offset by the secrecy preserved by the minister's congregation and friends in nine cases out of ten, so that the papers never get hold of the matter at all.

But the defense based on extraordinary notoriety breaks down when we remember that the preacher who wrote the article we reproduce does not depend on the press for his knowledge of the clerical character. He has first-hand information of his own, and makes the assertion, moreover, that "it would be hard to find a man or a woman who has not at some time in life become personally acquainted with a professed exponent of religious truth and high moral ideals who has demonstrated the depths of human depravity." This may or may not be an exaggeration; it agrees, however, with the testimony of purchasers of the previous editions of this pamphlet, who generally fail to find in its pages certain cases of clerical depravity they have individually met. And we do not suppose that one act of immorality in a thousand committed by clergymen is ever known to anyone but himself. Not regarding ministers as worse than other men in this respect, we may yet reasonably conclude that they practice the customary male reserve, and therefore are no more given to relating all the incidents of their lives--the only way such incidents could become known--than members of the laity.

The indictment really is not against the ministers as men--it is against their religion and their profession. There is so close a relation between religious emotion and what is called desire, that scientific men have written treatises and books on the correlation of religion and lust. The more fervent the preacher is godward, the more ardent is he womanward--and piety works the same way with the sisters. Our preacher who has turned state's evidence blames among other things the pastoral visit and the emotional women who place temptation before the man of God. He is concerned only with the minister, but the minister is as often a tempter as a victim. He improves the opportunities the pastoral visit affords, and makes his share of the advances. It may be that only men without mental honesty--men who are willing to profess to believe and to teach what they feel is false--are entering the ministry. In that case the worst is to be expected, and their conduct is accounted for by their lack of principle. The "Standard's" contributor offers the novel excuse that the minister uses up so much of his virtue in phrasing and uttering moral precepts that he has no strength left for applying them. The proposition is worth the notice of the churches; for if true it means that the vocation of a preacher devitalizes a man of his moral stamina.

The religious editor and his contributor disagree on an important point. The editor holds that the fuss made over one minister who goes wrong with his organist is a tribute to the high estimate in which the profession is held. On the other hand, the contributor represents that most ministers are moral skates, and that any high estimate the profession enjoys is due to the few decent exceptions. The distinction is vital.

The orthodox religious standards to which a minister is supposed to measure up are admittedly responsible for much moral laxity. Besides the sincerely orthodox preacher (whose religious austerity never prevents him from erring sexually), there are thousands of ministers who live a mental or intellectual lie by remaining in the church and preaching the creeds they do not believe. And the church does not trouble itself about the minister's doubts so long as he keeps them to himself. What can the church expect, then, from the religious hypocrite in the pulpit except that he will be a moral hypocrite out of it? Is he going to be dishonest as a preacher and honest as a man?

The Baptist paper's contributor puts the query: "Do ministers of the churches, that is, clergymen, priests and preachers, go wrong in any greater proportion than do doctors, lawyers or teachers?" He gives a negative answer, "mathematically," but the very asking of the question proves that an affirmative reply was not unexpected. Had he included editors in his list it could have been given. The literary and editorial professions are very poorly represented in our prisons, and even printers are exceedingly scarce.

This compilation, periodically revised and enlarged, has been before the public in its nine successive editions since 1881, as is stated in one of its prefaces; and considering that its information is based on newspaper reports, the number of corrections demanded by the ministers whose names are herein enrolled is small. The following is the only threat of action with which the publishers have been menaced. We follow the style of the clerical gentleman, who writes:

"BLUFFTON O.--5-12/1905.

"The Truth Seeker Co., No. 28 Lafayette Place, New York, N. Y.

"Sirs I notice you have published a Book The title of which is Crimes of Preachers in U. S. and Canada In which you have the name of Shelter, of McClure O. Now sirs, if the Copies of that Book is not called in and DESTROYED AND ITS PUBLICATION CEAS at once and the same notice bein given in your paper so published by your Co. in side of 20 days, ACTION will be taken against YOU immediately for blackmailing. The above name used by you is the untruth,

"Trusting to heare from you early. Yours.

"J. Shelter."

Mr. J. Shelter heard from the publishers early, but not only did he fail to keep up the correspondence, but apparently abandoned altogether his contemplated action. The charge against the Rev. John Shelter, of the United Brethren church, is that in 1890, at McClure, Ohio, he sold liquor without a license. All we can gather from his apparent denial is that the name used by us is not the true one. However, he does not take the trouble to correct it.

Another correction was personally solicited. In the ninth edition appeared an entry condensed from the following newspaper clipping, dated at a Connecticut town:

"If the Rev. ---- ----. ----, the ---- minister who eloped with Mrs. ---- ----. ----, of ----, and who is being sued for divorce by his wife on the ground of intolerable cruelty, had been publicly drummed out, his expulsion from the Methodist church could not have been more emphatic and humiliating. This afternoon, after more than an hour's debate in executive session, the New York East Conference of the Methodist church voted, practically unanimously, to allow him to withdraw 'under complaints.'"

Our entry, above mentioned, concerning this preacher, recorded: "Eloped with a married woman; cruelty to wife; expelled from the ministry." The entry should now be: "Personally appeared before us the reverend gentleman whose name is suppressed and requested the removal of the aforesaid entry, on the ground that there was no elopement." While acceding to the request, we have the feeling that with his name left out the book does not quite justify its title. The preacher whom the New York East Conference of the Methodist church got rid of in the emphatic and humiliating manner described by the clipping is now a Presbyterian clergyman and doctor of divinity. The names of more deserving men are very likely retained, for the gentleman showed himself so lacking in loyalty to his class that he voluntarily gave information regarding other Methodist ministers, including a well-known editor, which could have been used to their hurt.

An act of favoritism on our part which we might prefer to commit would be in the case of the reverend president of a Southern college who came to Philadelphia for some unremembered purpose, and was found dead in the house of a woman with whom he had made an assignation. This book would be kinder to his family than were the public prints at the time of the tragedy if it would do any good to the survivors. One toward whom we have not felt that any especial consideration is due is a minister of Jamestown, N. Y., who disappeared from a steamer on the Sound in circumstances pointing to suicide, leaving with his effects a note in which he said: "Let not those 'insane babblers' or Infidels get hold of this for their miserable, God-dishonoring yearly book on the crimes of preachers." We cannot see that it dishonors God to print what God permits his preachers to do. The man in this case wished his wife and relatives to regard him as dead because he had another woman in view, and was shortly found living with her in Albany.

Some amusing uses have been made of this volume. In 1909 the opponents of a bill before the legislature of California cited, to its prejudice, the fact that members of the clerical profession were against its passage. The gentleman who appeared before the legislative committee in behalf of the bill offered this list of reverend delinquents and inquired whether these were included among the ministers whose opposition was allowed to weigh with the committee. Ministers who undertake legislative work and pose as "Reformers" are often unfortunate in their moral character. There has been a singular series of mishaps among the conspicuous maintainers of the sanctity of the Sabbath who have allied themselves with organizations to promote Sunday observance by the saloon-keepers. The following list of them gathered in a single state is taken from a Detroit newspaper called "Truth" in 1905:

The Rev. R. G. Malone, superintendent of the Grand Traverse district, arrested for licentious conduct; fled the state; now in employ of Minnesota League.

The Rev. George Kulp, League orator, Grand Rapids, arrested for adultery.

The Rev. Ralph Baldwin, League in Saginaw, fled after being exposed in a liaison with a Detroit woman.

The Rev. John M. Wright, an organizer and orator for the League from Muskegon, proven guilty of perjury in a divorce case.

The Rev. Orson D. Taylor, a Saginaw League organizer and orator, sent to House of Correction for thefts.

The Rev. E. I. Waldorf, another Saginaw League worker, sent to House of Correction for thefts.

The Rev. C. E. Lee, a prominent League worker and orator in Grand Rapids, expelled from his church for licentiousness.

The Rev. J. Printer, a Branch county League organizer, fled the state to escape arrest for bigamy.

The Rev. Charles Kirchner, St. Clair county League organizer and orator, betrayed his foster daughter.

The Rev. Jos. St. Johns, Pontiac member of the League's force of workers, serving a term for assaulting a colored girl.

The Rev. J. R. Andrews, a Lansing League orator, expelled from church and arrested for blackmail.

The Rev. S. A. Northrop, one of the League's most gifted orators at Owosso, expelled from his church for undue intimacy with women of the congregation.

The Rev. John Smith, a Grand Rapids League orator and ardent supporter, eloped with one of the women of his church.

The Rev. Dr. J. G. Holiday, Manistee county organizer, expelled from his church for swindling.

The Rev. William P. Squires, Bay City organizer and orator for the League, expelled from his church for falsehood and swindling.

The Rev. A. C. Marshall, from Amboy, Hillsdale county, League worker and orator at Corunna, expelled from church for licentiousness.

There have been a number of clerical reformers in the East whose records cannot be cited to their advantage. One went against the Sabbath breakers in Brooklyn, was arrested for blackmail and forfeited his bond. One in West Virginia fought the theaters and Sunday trains, but he turned out a gallows bird, a bigamist, and the thief of his children's inheritance. One went to combat license in Brattleboro, Vermont, but turned up too drunk to go on with the lecture. One in New Jersey railed against Sunday liberty, but beat his wife and eloped with a choir singer. One of Boston stood in the pulpit with the blood of a girl seduced and murdered on his hands and demanded legal suppression of Sunday baseball. The "phrasing of morality," thus becoming a habit with the clergy, does not conflict with their other vices.

Wherever a reform is attacked by the clergy on moral grounds the usefulness of this work is appreciable. In Pittsburgh, Pa., the secretary of a Socialist group was debating with a prominent Presbyterian minister, when the preacher incautiously asserted that Socialism would break up the home, and paraded the horrible example of a Socialist professor who had been divorced by his wife. The proponent of Socialism, expressing his regrets that so irrelevant a matter had been brought into the argument, produced a copy of "Crimes of Preachers" to show how the home had fared at the hands of men of his opponent's profession.

Incidentals to the downfall of the preachers are sometimes dramatic. One exhorted his congregation to confession and repentance, whereupon his contrite landlady, much moved, made public the fact that she had been living with him in adultery, and asked for prayers. Another, having worked his hearers to the proper condition, said: "Let us all lay our sins upon the altar." A young woman with an infant in her arms came forward and, handing him the baby, said: "Here's yours." It appeared that he was the father of the child, though not married to the mother.

Reference has been made to the papal decree, which of late years has shown renewed capacity for mischief, protecting a priest from prosecution by any Catholic without a bishop or other superior's consent. It is a survival of the "benefit of clergy" law under which the church claimed the right to try the cases of clerical offenders, instead of letting them go before the civil courts. The working of this decree was illustrated in New York recently when a priest attempted an immoral act with an eight or ten-year-old girl. The mother of the girl, unmindful of the prohibition, reported the case to the police, and caused the lecherous clergyman's arrest, but later, having been advised by one of the higher clergy of the diocese, withdrew the charge and declined to testify against the accused, who appears to have been liberated after a reprimand by the court. It must be obvious that with this rule in force, all but the most serious offenses of the Catholic clergy will escape public notice. When in 1913 the murder of Anna Aumuller had been traced to the Rev. Hans Schmidt, a priest of a New York church, the police arrested and the courts convicted the reverend criminal; yet the Rev. Hans Schmidt had committed other crimes previous to this, and was known by his Catholic acquaintances to be a man of immoral life. He enjoyed, however, the benefit of clergy, and was protected by it from the exposure that would have come earlier but for the Catholic ban on "scandal," and that would not have come at all but for his sensational crime. With this wall of secrecy thrown about the priestly life, we know not what immoralities and crimes take place among the clergy and never come to light. While this edition of "Crimes of Preachers" is in preparation a Chicago Catholic priest, in line for distinguished honors from his church, takes an automobile "joy ride," visits a saloon in the suburbs and ends the outing by stabbing a station agent to the heart. The published offenses of the priests are such, usually, as in the nature of things cannot be covered up. For them there is no such offense as conduct unbecoming a priest, carrying the penalty of deposition and exposure.

In this edition an attempt has been made to shorten the list of terms by which the offenses of the preachers have hitherto been described. Now such breaches of good morals as were variously named "Beecherism," "immoralities," "lascivious conduct," "lechery," "scandalous conduct," "unministerial conduct," and the like have been brought under the head of "Immoralities with women and girls miscellaneously and variously described," which is as definite as the previously used terms, and saves space.

It will be observed that the total number of offenses charged is considerably greater than the total number of ministers involved. This results from the complicated character of some of the delinquencies of the reverends. A married minister betrays a young woman, thereby committing seduction and adultery. There may be a child and a charge of bastardy. He may run away with her, adding elopement and desertion of wife and family, and often divorce. Elopements are numerous, and they are mentioned here only when complicated with adultery or desertion, since the unmarried parson is entitled to his romance, and not to be censured above other men if he makes a runaway match of it--the woman concerned having reached or survived the ages of discretion without any matrimonial alliance at present existing. So the adulteries, seductions, etc., are all enlarged, while only one name is added to the number of ministers.

In only about two-thirds of the cases are the denominations of the clerical law-breakers known, that detail being often omitted by rural reporters or correspondents in whom the news sense is but imperfectly developed. The instances in which the communion is supplied give the Methodists first place, Baptists second, and Catholics third. The number of each is not disproportionate to the total number of clergy of the given denominations. Nothing appears to show that there is any great disparity between sects or between Protestants and Catholics in point of morality. There are, say, 170,000 ministers in the United States, 15,000 of them Catholic. That is ten parsons to one priest. Of the 3,795 ministers in this directory, 325 are Catholics, or about 1 priest to 10 non-Catholic clergymen.

Catholics do not have so many clergymen in proportion to their communicants as the Protestant sects. With them one priest has to serve a thousand adherents (provided they have the sixteen million communicants they claim), while the Baptists, with less than six million communicants, have nearly forty-three thousand ministers, and the Methodists, with seven million members, report upwards of forty-one thousand ministers. With such a multiplication of pulpiteers and a low standard of qualification for the ministry, the bad preeminence of the Methodist parsons is explained. It has been noticed already that priests are not publicly exposed in such peccadilloes as might cost a Protestant minister his pulpit or a layman his standing in the community.

It cannot be inappropriate to quote the following comment on an excuse offered for the two delegates to the Methodist conference of 1912, who were caught with the broken fragments of the seventh commandment on their person, or rather almost in the act of breaking them: