The Jackson standard. [volume] (Jackson C.H., Ohio) 1847-1888, 1880-02-19
Examiner and ChrOnicle.l
nnfnnf in TIln nir. rTrnSninnr nr

n DCiCSt III
So far as we know, no Theological
Seminary gives its students athorougl
course of instruction either in mora
science or in practical ethics. In mos
colleges moral science is taught, will
more or less thoroughness, as brancl
Of philosophy, and such instruction i
taken for granted by the Seminary
Both institutions assume that practic
al ethics are to be left to the individ
ual conscience. Or, if this be not the
case, lack Of time is regarded as a suf
ficient reason for the neglect to give
instruction on this subject.
We fully recognize the force of this
last consideration. The curricula Of
our colleges and seminaries are alrea.
dy OVercrowded, and to do thoroughly
well the work now required seriously
taxes the physical and mental strength
of the brightest students. But there
can be no study more important, at
least to the student for the Christian
ministry, than morals. His work is
to be largely the teaching of morals
to men, and it is Of the utmost impor-
tance that he be well prepared for the
work. Study of the Scriptures will
go far to prepare him for it; but in
addition to this he needs to be well
grounded in the principles of moral
science-the origin of moral law, the
constitution Of mans moral nature,
the nature of moral obligation, and
the ike-and this should be supple
mented by careful training in the
practical application Of moral princi-
pies to everyday life. Delicate ques-
tions Of casuistry can not be safely
left to an unframed mind and con-
science for decision. A large propor-
ton Of the students who graduate
from our seminaries have never had
any training in moral science, and
hardly any have had systematic train
ing'in casuiStry. The Romanists are
wiser IN their generation than we
P4otestants. Every candidate for the
priesthood has most careful training
in theoretical and practical ethics.
The Romish casuistry is defective, but
the training is admirable.
Fow great is the necessity for such
instruction as this may be inferred
from the disagreement Of any body of
ministers when they are called upon
to pass on a particular case. Take,
for example, the Talmage case as it
now stands. Mr.. Talmage accused
from his pulp some members Of the
Brooklyn Presbytery of moral rot
tenness," and declared that he had the
means of proving his charge. After
wards he ''recalledn these words, but
did not confess that they were untrue.
Now what could be palmer than this:
if Mr.. Talmage's words were true, the
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. number
Of scoundrels who are unworthy OF
a place in the ministry; and if the
words were false, Mr.. Talmage used
his pulpit to utter a SANDER of pecu-
liarly atrocious kind, for which moth
ing short Of an equally public confess
sion of his sin can atone?
In either case discipline is called
for. But the Presbytery refuses to in
quire into this case, for fear Of disturb
ing "the brooding influences of the
Spirit" Here is large body Of men
unable to agree on a case so plain that
no sophistry can obscure it. Can any
body doubt that the ministry needs
instruction in casuistry?
We should hear less of ministerial
indiscretions," and plagiarism" and
sundry other offenses that are so COM
mon as to make the fact Of mans
being a minister no longer a prima
facie evidence that he is a man of ex-
allied character. In a thoroughly
trained ministry these things would
be less frequent, and when they did
occur, the offenders would be prompt
ly disciplined by churches educated to
correct moral judgments by trained
ministry. We do not, we hope, un-
dervalue the most thorough instruc-
ton of the ministry in theology,
church history, and the other studies
Of the seminary curriculum; but if
candidate for the ministry must be
imperfectly trained in something, it
might be better in these than in so
vital a thing as moral science and cas-
ulstry.