Southern Christian Advocate

THE CLASS MEETING QUESTION.

Brg. Editor,—I see in your last issue that Dr. Summers has reached the shore in safety. His coast survey was no doubt carefully made, or else he could not have come in as safely as he has done, from a coast as shoal and tideless, as the one we have been sailing round. I feel myself no little honored that the Doctor should so kindly ask my endorsement of his report. This I give gladly and entirely. His paper is always at par in any lively Methodist market—but if he thinks my endorsement will increase its security up to a premium, I will gladly give him the benefit.

I do this, because, if I understand him, he is a genuine Class Meeting man. His difficulty is not with the institution, as to whether it has any credit in Scripture language—nor even as to its being a suitable condition of brotherly affection and Church association; but as to whether the rule can be literally carried out in all localities as laid down in Wesley's original Society ideal of its uses. In a word, it is now with many of us old men, a question of moment whether Methodism in America—as a Church organization—has not suffered greatly by attempting to organize a Church proper, in the mould in which Mr. Wesley only sought to organize a religious society, with such rules and regulations as would assist in carrying on a religious revival. I apprehend that the weekly meetings of Mr. Wesley out of which grew the Class Meeting idea, were in their origin nothing but a meeting of anxious seekers and young converts, called together to inquire how each one's soul prospered in the divine life. But the evidence of their wise adaptation to spiritual improvement and Christian communion gathered around them a heavenly prestige, which led to their becoming at last a graft on the stock of Methodism.

Indeed, early Methodism got on so well with this style of worship, that it saw not how it could get on safely without it. It was so closely adopted as to be made a test law. I will not argue the right of the Church to do this, though I think I will do so hereafter. At present, I will only say, that I do know the Church is not doing half as well now—either in spiritual godliness or in brotherly love—as it did in the days and years, when Class Meeting was duly observed by Methodists generally, and the rule vigorously enforced against every defaulter.

Does any Methodist in Georgia doubt my knowledge in this case or question its truth? If not, how is it or why is it that these two evils, neglect of Class Meeting, decay in spiritual godliness, and diminution of brotherly love, should come over the Church so simultaneously, and run so parallel as they do?

That Church members must meet in some other way than market, or neighborly visiting, or even the convocation at Church, on Sunday, to promote spiritual improvement and true brotherly love, is just as evident as the experiences of life. No one will deny it. Now, therefore, I ask all honest Methodists, if they can think of or devise any other mode of intercourse in a Church, as well calculated to promote spiritual communion and brotherly love among Church members, as a well conducted Class Meeting, which is in all sound sense views and intents, a spiritual communion meeting? And if not, are they aware that every neglecter of Class Meeting does for the Church in effect exactly what he would do, if he were to lay his plans and levy his purposes, to destroy spiritual communion and brotherly love out of the Church.

I assert upon the unerring testimony of observation and the knowledge of personal oversight, that while the love of Class Meeting continued and the Methodists communed together spiritually, they were one of the most united and loving brotherhoods, ever known in the form of a Church. But since this goodly and godly intercourse has been ignored by many and abandoned by others, this fraternal style of love and Methodistic fellowship is frittered away until there is none of it seen, only in the partialities and reasons of communional love that are outside of Christian affection, as an obligation of fraternal recognition, until the Methodists have become the most disintegrated Church—in as far as Church adhesion itself is involved—that is in all the land.

I am satisfied, taking our Church as the argument and as the proof, that the true idea of a Church affinity can be entirely lost in that of a denominational one. This I regard as the condition of our Methodist association at this time. Meeting together at the stated time of preaching will preserve a fair denominational attachment; but it is only in such religious meetings as leads to bearing one another's burdens, to mingling Christian joys and sorrows together, in one family communion, that the fellowship of Christian affection and brotherly love, can be either kindled, or kept burning.

For all these, a real Class Meeting is supremely fitted. So also is a love feast where members speak freely and to the point. It is a divine commingling of deeply interested hearts into one ocean of sympathetic love. The communion of saints is not at the sacrament as most of us imagine. It is in those meetings where of set purpose and by appropriate measures, we can transfuse our own experience into one another—making our experiences of grace a religious commonwealth, and a common inheritance. As long as religion lives in its first form and degree, such intercourse as Christians find in Class Meeting and love-feasts, is much admired. But after a religious chill of long continuance and these original coals of first love are carefully covered up in ashes, as a kind measure of preserving seed of it, the saloon wins largely against Class Meeting. My witnesses are everywhere.

L. PIERCE.