The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1882-12-23
Paving the Preacher.

1t is not our purpose In TINS artlcle
to speak of churches and preachers.
and of the reciprocal duties Of pastor
and people from a religious point OF
view, but to treat it on heloWer plane
of business. We wish to present the
busines view of the matter solely, and
of the duty of people to pay for what
they get from their preacher, as an
obligation as binding upon them by
all the rules and principles of busi-
ness, honor and honesty, as is the OBJ
legation to pay their teacher, or doc
tor, OF merchant, or butcher for what
they get from him.
One who makes no pretentions to
that sort of christianity or religion
which ever demands the services ofa
minister; who meyer enters achurcb;
J. -whesnever has 9 child baptized; who
would not permit the services of q
clergyman in sick room or in cham
Der of death who would return to
the dust from which he sprung with
out the services of the church, might
plead that he was not required to
contribute in payment for what he
refuses to use. This argument is not
addressed to such, but TO those who
go to place of worship, whether fire.
quently or infrequently, who hear
preaching, who call on clergymen to
christen their children, to visit their
sick, to bury their dead, or to perform
any spiritual or pastoral Office for
them or their families,-is it right, is
it just, is it honest, that these should
accept, without pay, the service Of
clergyman, be beggars Of the preach
er'S wore, almOner~ on the bounty of
those who do pay How can it be
justified? On what principle can it
be excused? What plea in abatement
can be offered ?
We are told by those whose busi-
ness it is to receive the contributions
Of the people to pay the hire Of the
laborers who work in the vineyard
of the churches, that there are people
using and enjoying the labors ofthese
laborers, but who persistently and
constantly neglect or refuse to pay
any portion of the hire. This may
! be religiouSIy all right--We do not
| profess to be at all expert in Judging
! of the religious aspect Of any line Of
conduct, nor is it in accordance with
our taste to criticise, directly or indi-
rectly, any ones religious course
but as business proposition it is all
wrong. The demands of religion may
be complied with, for aught we
/ know, when one says prayers, and
sings hymns and hears sermons, and
abstains from doing that which is
forbidden, even if the contract with
the preacher is disreguarded if his
services are used without cOmpensa-
ton; and his work accepted without
paying him for it. AS we said before
we are not discussing the religious as
pect of The case. But it is not fair
and square misunderstanding. Such
course pursued in the common secu-
lar affairs Of life would not work, and
he who tried it could not preserve
the respect of his fellow men.
one had just as we'll be a beggar of
bread and raiment, at this day in this
| land, as to be beggar of the clerical
or pastoral services, or the ghostly
functions of the clergyman. What is
the difference? What right has one,
not being a pauper, to sponge on
church? you don't pay any part
Of the salary of the preacher to whose
congregation you belong, somebody
must do it for you, or the preachers
work must stop. What right has any
one to sit quietly by and let another
pay for what he gets? Should not
ones self-respect blush at such sug-
gestion? If you don't pay any part
of the coal bill, or the costs of lights,
whose fire and light are you taking
without pay, and without 50 much as
saying "by your leavew 1t may be
a first rate religion to do this, but it
is dreadful poor busines. Giving may
not be necessary to make Heaven
at the end but paying for what one
! gets, whetherin church or in astore,
is necessary to sustaining those 'prin-
clples of honor and honesty that are
supposed to characterize the business
relations Of people. 1t is an obliga-
ton to be discharged, not for char
ity's sake, but for Justices sake. 1t
Is not charity to pay the preacher his
honest dues, according to contract :;
1t is unjust to withhold them from
him. 1t is not giving to pay the
preacher for the work he does for YOU.
any more than it is giving to pay the
tailor for the garment he makes for
you; it is settling a bill you owe in
as complete sense as it is to pay the
bill rendered for spring bonnet.
Those whose business it is to make a