The answers to question 9 indicate that the running expenditures of the churches are often less and that the money is more easily raised to meet them.
To question 10, nine of the answers denoted an increased attendance, five no noticeable change. No church reported a decrease. In one case the answer was obscure.
The answers to question 11 report that eight have increased in membership, five have remained stationary, one reports normal additions, and one a slight decrease.
In answer to question 12, twelve churches reported a favorable effect upon the social life of the community, two recently formed reported that there was no marked effect yet, while one gave no answer. All but one of the correspondents cherish a strong opinion that the federated church is the best arrangement when a community is overchurched and the churches are small. One pastor of a federation had nothing to say.
The following are the replies to the request made at the end of the questionnaire, “Kindly express frankly your opinion of the federated church as a means of securing Christian unity and church efficiency”:
1. “Nothing to say.”
2. “I do not see any reasons why two or more churches of Congregational form of government should not federate, but it would be difficult to federate with Episcopal form of church government.”
3. “The efficiency here has been greater since these churches federated than it was before. No church could support a pastor. The Baptist Church had been pastorless for three and a half years. The Congregational Church was supplied by students from Hartford Theological Seminary. Now they pay a fair salary and give free use of parsonage. Federation is the best solution of overchurched communities.”
4. “The federated church should be adopted in rural communities and in many small cities. I see no other way to bring the church into its place as a social and religious power.”
5. “It is my opinion that for a community that is like this one a federated church is a great means to secure Christian unity and efficiency. At our last meeting there were but two who were not enthusiastic for its continuance. Our field here would be much better if there were not another church in the community outside the federation. There is still the Unitarian Church outside the federation which necessarily makes a divided leadership in the small community. Our federated church has grown from two small churches to the position of dominance in the community. Our decrease in benevolences is largely explainable and excusable perhaps in that it occurred during the time when there were so many other things to take care of, relative to the federation. It will not happen again, but for a part of the time we were without a pastor and during the rest of the time exceedingly busy getting things adjusted.”