The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1883-01-17
For the Central Presbyterian
A Leaf from the Methodist Book

Recently much has been written about
the need of some change in the working
of our system. 1 will venture sugges-
ton or two.
Last year 800 of our churches were
destitute of preaching If we cannot do
better than that we had better hand them
over to the Methodists. They would go
to work at once and group them, and
send ministers to them. Those churches
would never be without the ordinances of
the word again.
But that would be to confess that their
system is better than ours. I think we
had better apply their system at least, to
our weak churches. But some one saws:
That would never do. That would not
be Presbyterian. That would be suicidal
to Presbyterianism." Is it Presbyterian
ism to have 32O churches, not simply va
can't but without any preaching at all for
a year, and for years and years, many of
them? In fact the way things are going
on now in some parts of the country it is
only question of time when, like our
Episcopal brethren, we will exist only in
the towns and cities Would, what I
suggest, be any more non-Presbyterian
than the Congregationalism prevalent to
such an extent In our Church? MANY
Of our churches are virtually Congreea-
tional. Last Sunday told my people,
in presenting the cause of Sustentatior.
that 800 of our churches were absolutely
destitute of preaching. because they could
get no assistance. felt Inundated to
have to say it, especially as some Metho
dists were present.
Well, then, what do | suggest? Just
simply group feeble churches put enough
together to make a self-sustaining field.
or able to give support with little aid
from the Sustentation fund and then
send ministers to supply it. This is by
doing it now in the case Of the evangelist.
If Presbytery can send an evangelist to
a score of churches lying around loose,
surely it has, and ought to exercise the
Prerogative Of grouping its churches, and
sending ministers to those fields if need
be. We have in the Presbytery of East
Hanover an evangelist in Suffolk. If it
can be done in one case, why not do it
with all our feeble churches, and so have
none without the preaching of the Word.
But how about getting ministers for all
our fields, supposing all the Presbyteries
to have all their churches in good shane
as suggested? We are told officially that
if our ministers who are forced to give
part of their time to secular pursuits
were adequately supported, it would be
the same as securing fifty or sixty new
men for the Lords work According to
that we have at least fifty ministers, able,
willing anxious to be engaged fully in
the work. And this in face of the cry
for more ministers. 1t is not lack of
ministers as much as lack of something
else that is the matter DR.. McIlwaine
says it is lack of means. No doubt there
is great lack of that. But if we had all
the money he calls for, still we would
see that something was wrong There is
something the matter with our system.
In theory it cannot be excelled. Tn its
working the Methodist system is far SUI
perior. If our system is like reaper,
splendidly gotten up, beautifully painted
and vanished, with capital team hitch
ed to it, and the Methodist system, if
you please, is like the old fashioned era
dies, give me good cradles to 20 into
my field ready to be harvested, and you
may 90 somewhere else with your fine
reaper if there is something about it is so
out of gear" that you leave one-third of
my wheat uncut. Our Presbyterian
reaper is badly out of gear. The Metho-