The Social Gospel Movement and Washington Gladden
by Christopher F.
The current Christian influence in American politics would suggest that Christianity is necessarily linked to conservative politics. Most churches in American are overwhelmingly aligned with the Republican Party and therefore its politics. However, this alignment has not always been the case. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, the progressive movement in America had a significant religious wing that promoted what it dubbed the Social Gospel. This movement applied Christian principles to solve social problems of the day; “especially poverty, liquor, drugs, crime, racial tensions, slums, bad hygiene, poor schools, and the danger of war.” A significant leader of the Social Gospel Movement was Washington Gladden, who became involved in the movement while he was a pastor at the First Congregational Church of Columbus, Ohio. Gladden provides a stark contrast to politically active Christians of the 21st century. His ideas about race, war, unionization, women’s suffrage, corporations, and evolution were very liberal for his time, and certainly disparate from prominent conservative, Christian leaders of today.
Gladden’s ideas about racial equality arose early in his progressive life. In 1880 he wrote, “If the color of the waiter who leans over your shoulder at dinner does not trouble you, you have no right to object to the color of someone who sits on the other side of the table.” () At this period in history, such a level of equality was unheard of. Blacks were much more concerned with much smaller issues such as getting paid fairly as the waiter in Gladden’s vignette, for example. Being able to sit down to dinner together as equals was progressive even fifty years after Gladden’s death in 1918.
In a far greater display of his desire for racial equality, in 1912, Gladden wrote a letter to Booker T. Washington inquiring his opinion concerning women’s suffrage. He writes, “Dear Dr. Washington: Some of your friends here are anxious to know your attitude on woman suffrage I do not know that I have ever read anything you have written about it: and I make bold to write to ask you how it looks to you.” Gladden goes on to say that although he is not entirely confident that women should be granted suffrage he thought that he would vote in favor of the amendment. Here Gladden shows that he both values the opinion of a prominent black leader, uncommon for his time, and is in favor of women’s suffrage (even though he has his reservations). Both of these facts show that Gladden was quite progressive.
Gladden’s ideas about war were also quite different from prominent Christian leaders of the twenty-first century. He said, “I am unable to see that war is or can be anything other than a curse. I could be willing many times over to give my life for my native land, but to kill my brother man – no.” This is in stark contrast to the religious right of today’s political arena, most of whom supported the war in Iraq, and many of whom view it as a sort of holy war between Christianity and Islam. Gladden believed that Christianity could not support war in any fashion because it involved killing his fellow man, whom he believed it was his responsibility to save.
Perhaps Gladden’s most famous opinion concerned wealth and the economic practices of the wealthy. In a letter to The Outlook in April 1905, Gladden proposed that the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions turn down a $100,000 donation from John D. Rockefeller. He writes, “[Mr. Rockefeller] is the representative of a great system that has become a public enemy. The organization which he represents has been and now is a gigantic oppressor of the people… it Is abundantly clear that this great fortune has been built up by the transgression and the evasion of the law and by methods which are at war with the first principles of morality.” (Greenwood, 26). Gladden was clearly not interested in building up a massive ministerial empire, which is so often the case with today’s religious leaders.
Ultimately, if the Social Gospel Movement were more active in today’s society, and if more leaders like Washington Gladden were around, the church would have a much different perception on the political stage. Christianity has not always been aligned with right-wing, conservative politics and therefore it is not necessarily so. It has the ability to cover a broad range of political views and social ideas. However, due to prominent Christian leaders such as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, Christianity has been stereotyped to fit their personas. Gladden shows us that the spectrum is much broader than that, and that faith does not have to mean ignorance and conservative politics.
The current Christian influence in American politics would suggest that Christianity is necessarily linked to conservative politics. Most churches in American are overwhelmingly aligned with the Republican Party and therefore its politics. However, this alignment has not always been the case. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, the progressive movement in America had a significant religious wing that promoted what it dubbed the Social Gospel. This movement applied Christian principles to solve social problems of the day; “especially poverty, liquor, drugs, crime, racial tensions, slums, bad hygiene, poor schools, and the danger of war.” A significant leader of the Social Gospel Movement was Washington Gladden, who became involved in the movement while he was a pastor at the First Congregational Church of Columbus, Ohio. Gladden provides a stark contrast to politically active Christians of the 21st century. His ideas about race, war, unionization, women’s suffrage, corporations, and evolution were very liberal for his time, and certainly disparate from prominent conservative, Christian leaders of today.
Gladden’s ideas about racial equality arose early in his progressive life. In 1880 he wrote, “If the color of the waiter who leans over your shoulder at dinner does not trouble you, you have no right to object to the color of someone who sits on the other side of the table.” () At this period in history, such a level of equality was unheard of. Blacks were much more concerned with much smaller issues such as getting paid fairly as the waiter in Gladden’s vignette, for example. Being able to sit down to dinner together as equals was progressive even fifty years after Gladden’s death in 1918.
In a far greater display of his desire for racial equality, in 1912, Gladden wrote a letter to Booker T. Washington inquiring his opinion concerning women’s suffrage. He writes, “Dear Dr. Washington: Some of your friends here are anxious to know your attitude on woman suffrage I do not know that I have ever read anything you have written about it: and I make bold to write to ask you how it looks to you.” Gladden goes on to say that although he is not entirely confident that women should be granted suffrage he thought that he would vote in favor of the amendment. Here Gladden shows that he both values the opinion of a prominent black leader, uncommon for his time, and is in favor of women’s suffrage (even though he has his reservations). Both of these facts show that Gladden was quite progressive.
Gladden’s ideas about war were also quite different from prominent Christian leaders of the twenty-first century. He said, “I am unable to see that war is or can be anything other than a curse. I could be willing many times over to give my life for my native land, but to kill my brother man – no.” This is in stark contrast to the religious right of today’s political arena, most of whom supported the war in Iraq, and many of whom view it as a sort of holy war between Christianity and Islam. Gladden believed that Christianity could not support war in any fashion because it involved killing his fellow man, whom he believed it was his responsibility to save.
Perhaps Gladden’s most famous opinion concerned wealth and the economic practices of the wealthy. In a letter to The Outlook in April 1905, Gladden proposed that the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions turn down a $100,000 donation from John D. Rockefeller. He writes, “[Mr. Rockefeller] is the representative of a great system that has become a public enemy. The organization which he represents has been and now is a gigantic oppressor of the people… it Is abundantly clear that this great fortune has been built up by the transgression and the evasion of the law and by methods which are at war with the first principles of morality.” (Greenwood, 26). Gladden was clearly not interested in building up a massive ministerial empire, which is so often the case with today’s religious leaders.
Ultimately, if the Social Gospel Movement were more active in today’s society, and if more leaders like Washington Gladden were around, the church would have a much different perception on the political stage. Christianity has not always been aligned with right-wing, conservative politics and therefore it is not necessarily so. It has the ability to cover a broad range of political views and social ideas. However, due to prominent Christian leaders such as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, Christianity has been stereotyped to fit their personas. Gladden shows us that the spectrum is much broader than that, and that faith does not have to mean ignorance and conservative politics.
posted by Leslie Madsen-Brooks at 6:29 PM
8 Comments:
It's interesting that Gladden had such liberal while also being very religious. Was he unique in his views or was strong religious affiliation common in the progressive movement. Also, what is it that can attribute to the mostly very conservative views of religious people today? Was it a gradual shift or did it happen abruptly?
Interesting post! What stuck in my mind was the fact taht Gladden advised others to not take a commission from a source that he did not believe in. I dont think we see that very often in our political leaders today because its an unfortunate thing but to be heard politically often means that you need to be supported by donations. A question I have is about those who supported the movement. Were there areas of high/low support and how long was it around for? I cant imagine a lot of what he fought for was popular with a lot of the wealthy conservative types, so what economic class was his largest supporter?
Interesting post. I like how you discussed religious politics of the early 20th century to current attitudes of the highly vocal clergy. For his time, Gladden, of course, was not very much outside the norm of religious political leaders of his day, especially within the Columbus, Ohio area.
This post caught my eye because it showed someone who was defying what was normal in the church. It revealed the strength of Gladden to state his opinion even though the general crowd of people were not on his side. In result, many things he wanted became a reality. This just goes to show that just because the majority thinks a certain way it does not mean they are correct.
Could one link the progressive nature of the christian temperance movement at this period to the work of the black churches of the south during the Civil rights movement, the liberal nature of the congregation that is. Were these churches simply a forum for pastors to spread their message, or was the philosophy of american christianity fundementally different at this point?
Awesome Post. From your post, i noticed that Gladden did not only believe in 'liberal' thoughts, but actually served as a model for his vision. Calling for a rejection of a fairly large sum of money takes, for the lack of a better word, a lot guts. I enjoyed the comparison of the church and the right-winged conservative politics of today with that of the 1890s. But one question i have, whether its a specific type of religion that endorses specific politicians or is it an association of religons?
A very interesting post. However, one segment of the paper stood out more than the others. In the paragraph where Washington states that the color of ones skin shouldn't bother you, if the color of the waiter doesn't, it was said that blacks were more concerned with their wages than Gladden's comment about both races being able to co-exist.
Perhaps wages may appear to be of more concern to those African-American waiters [at the time], but the hope of eqaulity in every aspect of their life was a fire that never went dim. I don't believe, even in those times, African-Americans were content with the little society gave them. True equality in terms of race relations only comes when the law of the land, and those who exucute the law, cease to subscribe to irrational social norms, stereotypes, and ideologies of hate and racism.
He was also a poet. His "Ultima Veritas" reveals the mind of Christ.
Post a Comment
<< Home