Newspaper Page Text
January U. 1911 J THE
STATUS OF MINISTER'S SONS.
Ever since we can remember inquirers hav
been asking why it is that ministers' sons usuall
turn out so badly, and investigators have bee
working on the problem with commendable dil
gence. Numerous plausable reasons have bee
assigned, usually with great deference to tb
ministers themselves, but with scant compasssio
lor the waywardness of sonh heedless of the wis
counsel and exceptionally wholesome example c
fathers.
It has been said that the high standards c
moral obligation imposed by fathers accustome
to expound and enforce the precepts of the mora
law, have discouraged sons from even attemptin
to walk in the paths of rectitude Again it hf
been said that the father's vocation assumes
merely professional aspect in the eyes of the so
and separates the two in their practical life t
that the bond of sympathy between the two i
practical affairs is not close or strong. It is ah
said that because the minister usually limitn li
>? n.nili (l,n ? 1 1 J J A
auu O V WXI WVU in jruutil IV tuc uiitrgcu U1 UU^Cl
of conning text books, he does not receive tt
broad and deep and intense experience of pra
tieal life which is needful to qualify him for r
sisting its temptations and surmounting its difl
culties. Much sympathy has been expended c
both the clerical parent and his son because <
the limitations which necessarily hamper tl
latter by reason of the odd variety of paren
age which he has inherited.
Always in exploring for phenomena to accoui
for an alleged fact it is well to assure ourselvi
that the fact exists in actuality and is not simp!
a figment of the imagination. We are rathi
inclined to the conjecture, in the case herein co:
sidered, that the regrettable conditions wthi<
philosophers and others have for so long a tin
been attempting to account for do not exist. I:
ueea some attention lias Deen recently given,
the subject by divers investigators and the weigi
of evidence as discovered and compiled by thei
rather tends to disturb the equilibrium of tl
long accepted proposition that ministers's soj
as a class turn out badly, and throw it off i
base.
*lJ>
Here is some testimony assembled by a Fren<
investigator, and we know that Frenchmen as
class are not partial to tihe clerical prot'essio
These and other facts herein quoted are gather<
by Dr. John G. Fagg, in the Christian I nielli
encer, who states that in a recent istsue <
"Who's Who in America" out of nearly twel1
thousand names, almost one thousand are soi
of clergymen.
"The distinguished French scientist, De Oa
idle, after careful investigation, affirmel that tl
sons of ministers actually outnumber for tv
hundred years, in the roll of eminent men, ar
flthftr /vluao aP Pamilioo A mnnr? A+Vinrc Vin nam
VUMN vx 10AU1AAU9* XXiUVlig *J V? ???"
these:
"In Science?Agassiz, L/inneaus. In Histoi
and Philosophy?George J. Romanes, Hal la
and Froude. In Art?Joshua Reynolds ai
Christopher Wren. In Poetry?Lessing, Tenn
son, Cowper, Gollsmith, Coleridge, Addison ai
Matthew Arnold. Among Essayists?Macanle
Jean Richter, Hazlitt. Among Novelists
Charles Kingsley and Henry James, and thr
daughters of clergymen?Jane Austen, Chariot
Bronte and Harriet Beecher Stowe.''
The Rev. Clarence Macartney in a recent t
tide on ''The Minister's Son" in the Oetoti
number of the Popular Science Monthly, i
minds us of these interesting facts: "In the d
tionary of National Biography, England, the
are one thousand two hundred and seven
names of eminent men who were sons of clerg
men. There are five hundred and ten names
famous^ men who were sons of lawyers, and thi
hundred and fifty who are sons of physiciau
In this single compilation of great names
PRESBYTERIAN OF THE 80
English history there are lour hundred and ten
e more sous of ministers than sons of doctors and
y mwyers together."
n The list of celebrated ministers who were
l* themselves sons of ministers is remarkable. Here
n are some of them: Jonathan Edwards, Henry
ie Ward Beecher, Charles Spurgeon, Matthew
n Henry, the two Wesleys and Dean Stanley.
In our American history the Field family is a
)l noble example of the induence of a clerical
household. The father, the Rev David E. Field,
^ was a minister of the Congregational Church.
x' One son, David Dudley, was the eminent jurist
il and law reformer. Another, Stephen J., was a
? Justice of the Supreme Court. Another, Henry
Al., was a well known clergyman. Another, and
a fourth son, was Cyrus W., who laid the Atlantic
11 Cable.
Of more notable men in our history who were
sous of ministers we find:
JO
k in History and Literature?Parkman, 13ancroft.
Holmes. Emerson. Lowell. Gilder, Van
jr
ie Dyke. Among Jurists?Field and Brewer.
e_ Among Educators?Faunce, James, Lounsberry.
g. in tbe Ghurch?Beecher, Alexander, Hodge and
Potter.
,n Mr. A. E. Winskip, of Massachusetts, in an
jf investigation some time ago, showed that the
ie l'amily of Jonathan Edwards produced two hundred
and eigkty-tive college graduates, thirteen
presidents of colleges, sixty-five professors, more
1 o.ttri/Awa on/^ 4 Ivi ?d- xr ni/lrVAC QHfl
It ",D" ICU ACVTT J gi O OiAU 14Ui VJ JUUgvo^ WU
g3 only one Aaron Burr.
ly Let us alter the original inquiry by the change
gj. of a single word: Why is it ministers' sons
n. usually turn out so well? It is a fair question;
jh rather more engaging than the original form
ae which has become familiar by long usuge.
Q. Ministers' sons usually turn out well because
to they are well instructed in the great principles
ht of righteous living and are provided with ample
_ incentives for imbihincr those nrinciolefc.
le They usually turn out well because they have
Qs the advantage of godly example.
Is They usually turn out well because they are
incited to high ideals, are taught that character
is the goal of life and that spiritual possessions
a are the true and lasting treasures of the soul.
n They usually turn out well because they are
jd impressed with the ideal that service constitutes
g. one's value to society and is a perennial source
[jf of happiness to him who renders that service.
ve They usually turn out well 'because by careful
as tuition and under righteous example they learn
that it is noble and praiseworthy to give time and
n_ thought and effort to making the befct of one's
ae .self, developing all of one's powers and oonsecro
rating them to God and humanity.
iy They usually turn out well because they are
es instructed in the great realm of God's truth,
natural and revealed, and have a large grasp of
t the greatness of their God and the greatness of
m service and the opportunity dedicated to his
id ?loi7y_
They usually turn out well because they have
impressed on their minds from infancy to man,yt
hood, in some substaptial form of expression, the
great truth that "Man's chief end is to glorify
oe (4od and to enjoy him forever." m.
;te
The versatile editor of The Advance makes a
it- good point concerning the nature of true liberty
ier and the distinction between liberty and unbrid
1../] li/i/moA /m? v\tr an illnatwo f i An a
re* iru lIUCll^C, vi nucuuxuj %jj au liiusuaiiuu. n
ic- man bought all the canaries that he found in a
>re certain shop, and remarking, '' I have spent the
ty past fifteen years in one of these things myself,"
;y- pointing to the cages, "and I will not see a Livof
ing creature confined in one if I have power to
ce release it," opened the cages and scared the litis
tie birds out of the shop. The birds, the editor
in writes, which this modern "Jean Valjean" re
I U T ii (59) 11
leased were doubtie* dead within six hours.
They were not used to such freedom an was given
them. They had been carefully housed and provided
for all their little lives. They had never
learned how to secure their own safety. To them
"liberty" meant inevitable death. "So," he
adds, '' we know certain parents and some school
teachers who are so enamored of a child's lib
erty' that they are insensible to the dangers of
unintelligent liberty, and instead of surrounding
the boys and girls entrusted to their care with
safeguards and the accompanying provisions for
a long life and a happy one, they turn them loose
amid the world's wintry environment, where a
moral death surely, too surely, awaits them. The
restrictions of morality may not be to our taste,
but the freedom of sin leads to the gates of
death, which close upon the soul with a restraint
more severe and never relaxed."
We fequently have requests to petition members
of Congress and the Senate in behalf of,
or against, certain pending measures. It is a
privilege of patriotic citizens to comply with
such requests if the public welfare can be
promoted thereby. Many of our best men fail
to realize that citizenship entails solemn moral
obligation, and to ignore that obligation is to
assume a degree of responsibility for bad laws
and corrupt government. Recently appeals were
sent out to patriotic citizens to petition Preteirlanf.pl^of
Wilsnn aoroinot ?T\nni?ita??.n+
?.VMV v?vvV U^uiuub HiV a|/|/umbvuuiw VL
one, John T. McUarw, a Roman Catholic, as
postmaster-general in his cabinet. After remarking
that Gov. Wilson is being bombarded
by such requests, the Presbyterian Examiner
says: "If we do not join the ranks of petitioners
it is not because we think it would be proper
to appoint a Romanist to a position in which
he could exclude arbitrarily from the United
States mails anything that could be construed
as unmenaiy to ttome, out Decause there is no
good reason to suppose that a man like Woodrow
Wilson is less intelligent or leas patriotic
than his fellow citizens. Roman Catholics have
and ought to have just the same civil rights
as Protestants. But there are very good reasons
why an office of such opportunities as
postmaiiter-general of the United States should
not be given to one whose obligation to his
Church is necessarily greater than his obligation
to his country." And we may add, "one
who is pledged to secure the advantage of his
Church at the expense of the State and at the
expense of the civil and religious liberties of
the people, if he has opportunity."
There ia an enormous waste of good postage
going on just now. We asked a pastor the other
day, "What are you doing with all the letters of
advice which you are receiving these days, as to
the way in which you should run your church,
conduct your evangelistic efforts, divide out
your Sundays, stimulate your people, set them
to work, to giving, to prayingf" "Why," said
he. "I do not even read them. I see at a glance
what they are, and away they go into the waste
basket. I am no child. I have been doing these
mings, ana witn an tne earnestness ana intelligence
that God is willing to give me, combined
with all the experience he has granted, since long
before my advisers were born into their kintergarten
work!"
The will of God be done. The important
question for each one of us as we enter the
New Year is, Am I ready to do my part in
seeing that the will of God is done? It will be
a sad year for us if we have no part in the
doing of his will. It will be a glad year for
us if we give ourselves heartily and with all
our soul to doing the whole will of God for
us and for all the world.