The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1883-02-21
Either Augustine or John Bunyan will
conclude this argument in our estimation.

Since the foregoing was written, we
have received the article from R. L. D"
published elsewhere. We are exceeding
ly glad to receive this article from R.
l.. D." because there is no one better
qualified than this able writer to give the
reasons why we ought to continue to re-
quire of all our ministers knowledge of
the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin tongues.
We sincerely desire to see both sides of
this question presented in the strongest
manner in which each argument can be
put, and can truly say that we have no
partisan" feeling in the matter.
"R. L. D. misstates the whole ques-
ton in the very caption of his article
"Shall we Revolutionise our Church by
Opening it to an Uneducated Ministry p
Very few in the Presbyterian Church
would favor the creation of an "unedu-
d@ed' ministry. The point is, What
constitutes education? We contend that
a man may be we'll educated who knows
no tongue but his own vernacular. We
have heard (but do not vouch for it) that
Herbert Spencer understands no Ian
guage but the English. Plato was well
educated, but he did not understand any
language, we presume, but his own. So
of Aristotle.
2. We agree with /" R. L. D. that the
Presbyterian ought to be equality"
Church so far as the standard of piety is
concerned, and that the sorry members
which swell the numbers of some of the
denominations are not worth having. 1t
is this quality" Church that we want to
send to Western Texas, Arkansas, Flor
ida, and the destitute fields in Virginia,
the Carolinas, and all through the South
We want men Of fervent piety, sound
views, and aptness to teach with or with
out the Hebrew and Creek who will
carry such Church into those regions
where Presby terianism is now unknown
8. "R. L. D." says our Lord educated
his disciples by three years training
But Paul did not have three years
training. And the Languages" were
not taught in the school which r. L.
D." refers to. In fact, in Acts iv: Is,
we are told that Peter and John were
unlearned and ignorant men"
The best statement of the qualifications
needed for bishop" or an "elder" is
ound IN l Timothy iii and in Titus i ;
SO, which is we'll paraphrased in the
Book of Church Order, Chap. ", sec. 2,
par. 2, He that fills this office should
possess a competency of human learning
and be blameless in life, sound in the
faith, and apt to teach; he should ex-
hibit a sobriety and holiness of CONVEX
sation becoming the gospel; he should
rule his own house well and should
have good report of them without.
Holiness of character, soundness in the
faith, good sense, aptness to teach: these
qualify man to preach the gospel.
Those who take different sides on this
question are, we susnect, much less wide
ly apart than they may appear to be.
The question ought to be very carefully
stated, and kept in view, or we shall get
to fighting in the dark. Most of the
disputation in this world is kept up for
want of clear statement of the issue.
The real issue in the present matter is
about this: Some think that the lines
are too tightly drawn at present about
The licensing Of men for the ministry
greater freedom and a more liberal pol
icy is desired Others (who array them
selves against them) are afraid to let
down any of the bars for fear that too
many will be taken down. They fear to
open the waste gate under the idea that
the waters will rush through with toe
strong current. AS usual, the middle
course is the true course. Make the sys-
tenn more flexible without filling the min
istry with lot Of scrubs.
1t is certainly fair matter Of inquiry
whether Il method which would exclude
from the Christian ministry such men'at
the late DR.. Jeter, the Rev. John E
Edwards, and possibly Sturgeon, may
not be too rigid
---------g------
JOHN NEWTON said if all the blind mer