The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1874-08-12
FREE MINISTERIAL EDUCATION. s.


in the Synod of Virginia, and as he insists much |
upon its publication it may be best to crafty his
wishes. At the same time it seems proper TO give |
it the company Of few notes By way OF correcting
some Of its many errors-oi which it hos nearly as
msny as could be put into the same compass
Brief notes on some Of them are all the occasion
requires
J. g" Free M.aisterial Education y " Church is
bound to pay The erpeases, IN money, Of all caadl- |
datss tor he ministry"
Where did our brother -. get this piece Of
information? L is all new to US that such an
idea Of education has ever been adopted by
the Church" or 1.-THE Church courts The
Church has indeed adopted the idea Of giving
hello mot by any means full supportl 10 some
mot " air. candidates for the ministry; namely
to those who are approved by their Presbyteries
which know them, and where their circumstances
are such that they need it.
In the outset, then, our brother begins in the
dark he is mistaken as to the fundamental point
belonging to the subject and if his voice" else
where corresponds with the writing here, his
brethren IN the Church courts are not altogether
inexcusable for thinking him somewhat be
nighted, though it would be unbrOtherly to look
upon him as an entity TO be put down" The
best way is 70 give such brethren, who really mean
well, litte room, mot too much, now and then
10 air themselves, and they may by and by get far
enough into the sui ect to understand that neither
al the time Of the " introduction Of the Presbyte
Ran Church in this land, nor at any other time,
did the "idea" Of free ministerial education
ever enter It's orthodox head.
>. The Christian people do heartily approve the
scheme Of belpHg such candidates for the ministry
as we speak Of The idea that the recommends
tons continued through long succession Of years
BY the Church Courts, misrepresent the mind of
our Christian people, is very incorrect. If they
do not give all that is needed, and have to be
pressed by appeals, is not the same true Of all the
other schemes Of benevOenee?
Beginning with No. I in this article, aud going
on through No. 7, we have few facts asserted,
and a variety Of opinions expressed, Of which 1t
may be truly said that not one of the former has
any application here and not one Of the latter can
be sustained
In No s. the writer tells US that L" aid ought no
doubt TO be given in some instances" Well, that
ought to be local. not Church aid Indeed
Why so How does organizing the matter and
bringing it under welldeGaed regulations, change
the principle from good to bad? Without going into
So argument Va venture to assert and upon some
knowledge, that upon the plan Of giving this aid
systematically, and through the recognized agencies
Of the Church, it is not only far more efficiently,
but in general far more wisely administered than
upon he plan of private, personal benefactiOns,
though VIC heartily approve of such when circum-
stances favor It.
g. IL the course of remark here used, and By
some others, 20 condemn the plan Of helping
didates into the ministry, is well founded, 1t may
be just as well turned against the plan Of helping
churches that need assistance. How easy to give
them the cold shoulder by saying that every
church with intelligence aud grace enough to be
a church will be able to work its way by itself
can plough aud hoe corn at $l2 month, or can
sell Luci6ar Matches and the effort will make it
all the stronger And, besides, this thing OF help
ing only robs them Of seErelanee and that spirit
of dependence whose value cannot be reckOned in
money" Churches ought not to be " craveus, but
men. &c. Now We ask what are pages OF that
kind Of talk worth
4. This is 40 age of wonderful discoveries, but
the most remarkable yet made in Church affairs
is the one here laid open tor the FIRST time to pub
lie view" There are too many preachers Ho10 -
From this it may be supposed that when J
meets his brethren in the Presbytery, and prayer is
offered that il may please the Lord of the lar
vest to send forth more aborers into the harvest,
he thinks the whole petition is simply mistake, so
far as these or any other ends of toe earth con-
cerned.
Then too just to think Of the business principle
upon which all this is to be regulated. 1t is just
Ike the market laws of corn and beef-the law of
demand and supply is to govern it. What grand
scheme for bringing on the millennium in the
shortest time possible Don't send the gospel
to any place except where there is a demand for it,
and pledge to pay for It :" So the world is to
be evangelical under the rules Of beef market
And then see how all this squares with the
writer own views about call to the ministry
He tells Us, in No , that the Scriptural idea is
that OF an irresistible force urging men to
preach and the question whether the Church
will help poor fellow to bear the expense Of pre-
paration is 20 be wholly repudiated. THE reader
viii please turn to what is there said But now
after the Lord and the Church Courts, have
counted this man faithful, putting him into the
ministry, then all this is reversed. Then the WOE
is me If / preach not the gospel is all gone and
the whole question Of his duty to preach depends
upon the state Of he paarket; that is, upon the
question whether the demand is equal to the sup
ply
But it is time to close these remarks There is
DO reason known to Us for opening general dis
cassion Of this subject The whole matter has
been at various times thoroughly examined, our
Church has made known its views, and there is not
an objection offered BY y. " that has not been an
sWered a hundred times. Ii any OF our Presbyte
RES OF Syuods are dissatisfied, or the Assembly
wishes 10 reopen the question: let it be SO. Or if
any one can suggest an improvement upon our
present plans, he is welcome But beyond that
there Is no reason known to US why old debates
should be re-introduced Il is freely granted that
beneficiary education" needs careful looking
after BY our Presbyteres to guard it against abuse
especially to see that none receive aid who may be
fairly expected to DO without it, and that the
amount does no, exceed what each case fairly re
ouires There is no doubt constant tendency to
excess on both these points. But this proves moth
ing against the plan ITSELF since it belongs to most
things In human society that they are liable to
abuse almost exactly 10 proportion to their capacity
for usefulness.
Hampdsn Sidney College next session