The Cairo bulletin. (Cairo, Ill.) 1???-1928, 1905-04-24
JOHN D.
AND HIS GIFTS
Rev. Porter PrOclaims Him
Greatest BenefactOrs OF Age
is UNJUSTLY ACCUSED
DECLARES GREAT FlNANclER HAS
DONE LARGE AMOUNT OF
GOOD WITH HIS
DONATIONS.


Cairo Baptist church last night to hear
Rev T. ]. Porter's sermon on the sub
ject, should John d. Rockefeller's |
Gifts be Accepted AS stated in yes
terdays mornings Bulletin. special |
interest attached to Mr. Porier's ser
mon because Of the fact that the ia
nous mill onaire is a member OF Mr.. |
Porter's denomination, and this, |
coupled with the interest which had
been aroused by statements from other
Cairo ministers in Sundays Bulletin
brought ont an unusually large crowd,
Rev. Porters Sermon.
Rev Porter began by referring to
the storm of unfavorabe comment
which was aroused by Mr. Rockefel
ler's gift of $4,000 to the Congrega-
tionalist foreign m ssion board. Many
protests had been made against &C
cepting the gift on the grounds that
such acceptance would be an endorse
ment OF the methods of the STANDARD
oil Trust
~The papers state that the Congre-
gatonalist board did accept the gift, "
said The minister, but they justify
their acceptance on two grounds. as
follows First, that the money was
not asked for. but that Mr. Rockefel-
Ter volunteered to give t. Second
that those in charge Of religious work
are not 10 investigate the financial
methods Of contribut ors. Not one of
the above grounds is satisfactory. II
seems very much our Of place To accept
a gift and then hold up before the pub
| lie as a target of criticism the giver
| III is not right 10 accept a gift on any
| such grounds, because in the first
place. III ii is right 10 accept a gift, II
must follow that 1t is right to ask for
Hit. In The second place, Il must neceS
fsariIy be the duty of those in charge
of relig Gus work. to Investigate the
methods of contributors, when taeir
lattention is called 10 them. So the Con
igregationalist board have utterly fail.
ed to justify their acceptance OF Mr.,
Rockefeiler's gift and harmonic such
acceptance with the severe criticism
of the benefactor. Some Congregation,
alist m nisters have gone so far as te
attack the personal character of their
donor.
Rockefeller's Incentive.
'Mr. Rockefeller gives as his incen-
tive for making this contribution 70
| the CongregationaIst board. the send
. ling Of Adonirum Judson by the Lon
don Congregational M ssion Society.
as a foreign missionary to India Ir
1872 Judson sailed with his wife toI
Asia During the voyage M was con
YER ea from the Congregational faitf
10 that of the Baptists Judson laboret
"A a Baptist foreign m ssioaary fcl
forty years Baptists are greatly In
ebted to Judson for what he accom-
Dlshed in India Mr. Rockefeller be
ing acquainted with these facts pre-
senss to This Congregationalst boar
which surrendered to the church 0
his own faith) the greatest fore "a
missionary in the history of foreigi
{ missions by way Of compensation tn
5 handsome sum Of 100000.
ITO any one acquitted with thes
5 facts, it may prove an easy task t
locate the basis Of the severe critic 81
of the greatest benefactor of the ag'
1t sounds 10 those OF other faiths lik
3 the Congregationalists are seeking
Z discredir the great Baptist Institution
J to which Mr. Rockefeller has contribu
+ ed so literally.
q Should Accept His Money.
The question we have been asked
= answer is-- Should Mr.. Rockefeller
gift be accepted?' II ne should offer
/ the Cairo Baptist church the some
100000 would II We accepted?' We a
swer, his gifts should be accep cd al
should he offer 10 us any given amour
for the carry ing on Of the Lords wol
IN Cairo we would certainly do rig
Z 70 accept It, However, this church hi
never received one dollar from Il
purse OF the beuesactor, nor do v
~ expect TO. We are under no obligat Of
q whatever to defend him. but speakil
n my own convictions churches and nj
n sion boards are justifiabIe in accepts
N the rs Of every man
IA Why It Should Be Accepted.
You may ask. on what grounds
h you justify such acceptance? In :
n FIRST place. 1t is every mans duty to
n benevolent No wrong that he m
a do. can remove his duty 10 give TO go
IN objects If II is the duty of m
n who IS a sinner to give, i must
n right to accept his gift II, for exa
II pie. the money offered does not belo
NJ 90 the one Offering It, as in case
~ was stolen, then he has no right
Il give Il. and It s ould not b. accept'
r But II the money belongs 10 the Civ
= he ought 10 give II and Il ought to
Y accep ed.
Another exampe--if the money
y gwen with The understanding EXPIRE
Y cd or implied. that those receiving
X gift, are to enporse the financial me
q ods of the donor and refrain from q
Il demnlng his wrong, then the NOR
4 Is not gift but brihe. The rex
4 lent Of bride Is as great q sinner
4 the briber. Iluc.i money should
ways be rejected and never accept
An illustration
"I.et me illustrate--if a saloonkee