The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1886-07-14
Money Versus Picty.

The conviction grows among some OF our
best and most thoughtful people that me
church has lost much by unduly StreSSing
money-collccting and moncy-SiVmg as evil
! denccs OF ministerial efficiency and personal
! piety. 1t has come to pass that a minister
influence and rank in his Conference iS con-
ditioned largely, if not princ!pally, on his
success in raising Church funds; ana the
! character and standing OF the Eirlnoer Is III
! like manner, measured by his libcrality In
! the use of his money in the interest Of God $
! cause. This growing tendency 10 measure
ministerial and Christian character by IN"
moncy-standard has been observed with = Sc
! robustness amounting 10 alarm, ard more than
once has the warning voice been lifted against
: ii, rs an evil of the gr,vcst kind. The Idco,
cate stands pledged for the incu!t'niion ana
! encouragement of the grace Of Christian lib
crality. Christian giving is both Il means and
/ an evidence ui grace; but it is not the only
| means, nor is it the chief evidence OF that
| personal piciy that should characterize every
! true believer Some Of our most liberal men
are the least piOuS. and IL may be true that
| some of our best collectors among the clergy
have the fcwcst convcrts.-SOuthefm CHRISTIAN
| 4 dCOcutc.
The above paragraph furnishes food for
thought. Let us change word or two in one
or two sentences OF the above, and sec If it
docs not strike at q shameless practice which
may have been pursued by some Of our
church organizations in the past?
| For instance: at has come to pass That Il
1 III
respective ciyhborhoods is sconditioned lai &C.
ly, if not principally, on his libcrality in buy
| ing the votes Of church members BY c0ntribu-
tions to thcrchurch funds; and the character
and standing of tile member is in like man.
ncr, measured by his readiness to sell his vote
to any candidate who may give the building
! committee liberal subscription to repair the
church in which the voter prctcndS to wor-
ship God"
We hope that no candidate in this election
may make himself liable to the charge of cor
ruptipg our church members by the use of
money, and we hope that no sclfrcSpccting
building committee may compromise their
own standing either by asking, or receiving,
money from candidates who have no other in.
: tcrcst in their churches than to receive the
votes Of the members in return for the money
thus expended. Are the votes of our church
members to be bought in the highways by
the dozen? Are subscription prcscnters au-
:, thoriZcd to give or to take from any candi-
date, the votes of their respective fellow
church members, as the official aspirant may
give or refuse money? We ask If the prac-
tce of blackmailng candidates is not q
shameful and disgraccful one? Docs not
the giving OF money to church in which the
candidate has no interest, look like desire
to buy the votes of its members? We submit
that it does. If it is wrong to carry OH the
rattle at our church fairs, VIC would add that it
is more reprchensible to blackmail the candi-
dates who may be seeking an honest express
sion Of the voters OF the county at the ballot
box. What arc We to expect if the ballot box
shall become corrupt through the inilucncc Of
the church?