This tendency has two phases. In the cities the poor are practically
excluded from worshipping with the rich, and missions are established
for them as if they were heathen. There can be no objection to costly,
magnificent churches. Nothing is too good to be the expression of our
honor and love of God. But they should be like the cathedrals of
Europe, where prince and peasant may bow together on the same level
they have in the Divine presence. Christ made no distinction between
the rich and poor regarding their spiritual value and need, nor should
the Christianity named after Him. To the degree that it does, it is
not Christianity. The meek and lowly Nazarene is not its inspiration.
Perhaps the personage He told to get behind Him when promising the
"kingdoms of the world and the glory of them" has more to do with it.

The second phase of this tendency as seen in the country, is kindred
but unlike. Poverty may not be so great a bar, but moral delinquencies
are more severely visited, and the family under a cloud, through the
wrong-doing of one or more of its members, is treated very much as if
it had a perpetual pestilence. The highly respectable keep aloof. Too
often the quiet country church is not a sanctuary and place of refuge
for the victims either of their own or another's sin, a place where
the grasp of sympathy and words of encouragement are given; but rather
a place where they meet the cold critical gaze of those who are hedged
about with virtues and good connections. I hope I am wrong, but how is
it where you live, my reader? If a well-to-do thriving man of
integrity takes a fine place in your community, we all know how church
people will treat him. And what they do is all right. But society--the
world--will do the same. Is Christianity--are the followers of the
"Friend of publicans and sinners"--to do no more?