Newspaper Page Text
Laymen and Their Work
IP THERE HAI) BEEN NO SONS OF
PREACHERS.
The occasional bad son of a good
minister keeps ever alive the old dis
cussion of bad boys from the parson
age. No saying is more general any
where than the much-repeated state
ment that sons of ministers are the
worst in the community.
Just why ministers should have the
reputation of making bad fathers, and
their sons the reputation of being bad
sons, is not clear. The records do
not support the criticism. Whether
it is because ministers are the most
available subject for discussion, or be
cause people expect them to have per
fect lives, fit for examples to all; or
because of the wonderful contrast be
tween a good father and a bad son,
the discussion will not down, but goes
merrily on.
It is much easier to disprove the
statement than to stop the discussion.
The old statement that "truth crushed
to earth shall rise again" does not
provide that it shall not be again
crushed to earth. Moreover, the peo
ple who need the facts and the truth
seldom get them. Error seems hard
to exterminate.
The bad son of a good minister,
and the ever-living critics of that son,
started me to investigating actual
facts and records. To make the work
complete would take years, and vol
umes would be necessary to record
the facts. Space here will only per
mit suggestions that students can fol
low in their own research.
The fact that we are just now try
ing to improve the human race, and,
partially, If not completely, restore
it to perfection of mind, body and
soul, gives Interest to this and every
question relating to peopling the
earth with perfect and desirable peo
ple.
I will not handle this question in
a sentimental fashion. Sentiment has
caused many troubles. Cold facts tab
ulated from enough cases to establish
a rule or law are necessary. The evi
dence must not be biased. It must
be so clear that all can follow and
understand It. I wish to avoid, if
possible, tiresome data which the
average reader will not follow, and
simply give the summary of facts.
Far Ahead in Presidential Race.
What ought we to expect in min
isters' sons? Simply the average son
of an average man. If he is mors
than that, give his parentage credit
for extra fitness. What, then, should
we expect In America as a whole?
Approximately one man in every
three hundred men in America is a
Protestant minister. Assuming that
ministers have as many children as
the average man, one boy In every
three hundred Is the son of some
minister. Under this ratio we would
expect ?
One President In every three hun
dred Presidents to be a minister's
son.
One Senator of every three hun
dred Senators to be a minister's son.
One Congressman In every three
hundred Congressmen to be a minis
ter's son.
One Governor in every three hun
dred Governors to be a minister's son.
One author in every three hundred
authors a minister's son.
One millionaire in every three hun
dred millionaires to be a minister's
Bon.
To avoid confusion, 1 have not fig
ured the ratio to fractions, but the
rule is so nearly correct that it Nrrn
better than confusing details would
Reem. Three out of twenty-nine Pres
idents have been sons of ministers ?
Arthur, Cleveland and Wilson ? al
most one in every nine, instead of
one in every three hundred, as we
should expect To place the ratio in
terms of years, we have a right to
expect a son of a minister to become
President once in every three hundred
Presidents or once in every twelve
hundred years. Since the ministers'
sons have furnished three Presidents
already, they will maintain an aver
age if they do not furnish another
President for thirty-six hundred
years. These are cold facts and fig
ures. Preachers' sons have won the
race in the presidential class. Nor
have I attempted to count the Presi
dents who were grandsons or great
grandsons of ministers. To do this
would take so many of the Presidents
as to make the race uninteresting.
Some Notables Among Ministers'
Sons.
Among Senators, Congressmen and
Governors the ratio is about the same,
although it varies in certain periods
of time. To attempt to name the
sons of ministers who hava served in
the United States Senate or Congress
Is not the object of this article. The
only two Democratic Presidents we
have had since the Civil War were
sons of ministers. Cleveland was
born at Caldwell, N. J., where the
house in which he was born is still
well preserved.
Woodrow Wilson, the other Demo
cratic President since the Civil War,
was the son and grandson of a cler
gyman. He was born in Staunton,
Va., Just before the Civil War (1856).
That these two men should have
served two terms and been strong
outstanding characters of their day
would indicate that virile men can be
raised in parsonages and manses and
rectories.
To name the leaders of the Puri
tans Is to name the ministers. Some
of the founders of colonies were min
isters ? among whom were Roger Wil
liams and William Penn. To name
the sons of ministers among the early
settlers Is to name the foremost
among the leaders. Every one who
has read the list of signers of the
Declaration of Independence will
never forget the bold writing form
ing the name of John Hancock ? the
first signer. Hancock was a minis
ter's son. Henry Clay, who did much
for his country in the first' half of
the nineteenth century, was a minis
ter's son.
Among the makers of America no
family has furnished a single crop of
three children who have stood high
er in America than the Field family.
The Rev. David D. Field was a preach
er of Stockbridge, Mass. Three of
his sons were:
1. David Dudley Field (1806-1894),
jurist and compiler of law codes.
2. Stephen J. Field (1815-1899),
Justice of the Supreme Court of the
United States.
3. Cyrus W. Field (1819-1892),
who gave us the Atlantic cable.
That brings up the question of
families of clergymen. Does great
ness and ability Increase with each
generation? Henry Ward Beecher
was the son of Lyman Beecher, a
minister. John Wesley and Charles
Wesley were sons of a minister.
These men have left the Imprint of
thpir leadership on the world for cen
turies to come. Bishop E. H. Hughqs,
one of tha most brilliant Church lead
ers of to-day, and his equally gifted
brother, Bishop Matthew Hughes,
were sons of a Methodist circuit rider
out in the mountains of West Vir
ginia a half century ago. Bishop John
Hamilton, now chancellor of the
American University at Washington,
was the son of a Methodist preacher,
as was his brother, Bishop Franklin
Hamilton, who died in Pittsburgh a
few years ago, shortly after his elec
tion to the episcopacy.
A genealogical table of the Wood
bridge family can be traced to 1493,
and in fourteen generations there is
only one which did not produce one
or more ministers. There seems lit
tle doubt that this family for four
hundred years has been like a foun
tain of living water, ever helping the
world to bear its burdens and do its
work.
One in Every Ten Is a Lnidrir.
E. H. Harriman, the multi-million
aire railroad magnate, is reported to
have said that once when he was the
hungry child in the family of a poor
preacher, he promised himself he
would have everything he wanted
when he became a man. If he did
not get everything he wanted in later
life it was because shrewd brains and
$100,000,000 could not get It.
In Wilmington, Del., It was my
pleasure to know of every leading
banker. At that particular . time,
some ten years ago, six of them were
grandsons of a Methodist bishop. I
cannot get a correct list of all the
millionaires in America, but it is my
impression, formed from a very in
complete list before me, that one In
every ten is the son or grandson of
some minister.
And please do not forget that we
are to look for only one in every
three hundred persons in every prom
inent class to be the son of a min
ister, whereas we are finding one in
every ten; that is, sons of preachers
produce thirty prominent leaders
where we should expect only one, as
compared with the average home.
Lest it might be claimed that the
above facts are not full enough and
complete enough to establish a law,
Who's Who, telling us about leading
Americans in literature, science, gov
ernment, finance, and so on, contains
nearly 20,000 names of leading Amer
icans. The study of an old edition
of 12,000 names showed approxi
mately 1,000 as sons of ministers.
This is perhaps the best general au
thority on the subject we have. I
have not had time to tabulate and
make count of all names in the lat
est and largest volume, but such work
as done still shows about the same
ratio as among the Presidents ? one
in ten, where we should expect only
one in every three hundred.
I stopped trying to find why so
many sons of preachers fall as com
pared with sons of other professional
leaders and began trying to find why
and how they succeed so well. Pos
sibly the minister chooses a thought
ful mother for his wife. Possibly self
denial in the average preacher's home
teaches the child resourcefulness and
develops initiative and character.
Perhaps the spiritual atmosphere
gives vision and courage. Perhaps it
is all of these and then some other
things, but the sons of ministers suc
ceed better than any other class of
children.
What is the quality of these sons
of preachers? Their number out
classes all others. Is the quality
maintained? New York In 1920 fur
nishes part of the answer:
Thomas W. Lamont, the financier,
was a minister's son.
The editor ot the Literary Digest
was a minister's son.
Two of his associate editors wera
ministers' sons.
Lyman Abbot is a minister's son,
and two of his sons are sons and
grandsons of ministers, and the list
might continue if space permitted. I
need not mention such men as Henry
Van Dyke, William James, Henry
James, Richard Watson Gilder, Oli
ver Wendell Holmes,, James Russell
Lowell, Francis Parkman, Louis Ag
gasiz and others, some of whom have
finished their work and are dead. Nor
need I call attention to one of the
foremost figures to-day ? our Secre
tary of State ? Charles E. Hughes,
who is the son of a Baptist clergy
man. Are these men just space fill
ers? Do they hold their jobs by mere
favoritism? They were not born with
the prestige of wealth or powerful in
fluence. Each has had to climb the
ladder to the place attained by sheer
ability.
Let us look over other years. Lin
naeus, the great botanist, was the
son of a minister; Jenner, who gave
us vaccination against smallpox, was
the son of a minister; Sir Christo
pher Wren, the great architect, was
the son of a minister; so was Sir
Joshua Reynolds, the great artist;
Hallam, Froude, Charles Kingsley,
were all sons of preachers.
A whole line of poets were sons
of preachers. Tennyson, Ben Jonson,
Cowper, Goldsmith, Coleridge, Addi
son, Young, Keble, Matthew Arnold
and others were sons of preachers.
Eight out of the first thirty-seven
names selected for the Hall of Fame
In New York City were borne by sons
of ministers, when only eight in 2,
400 should have been expected.
What do some of the sons of min
isters themselves think? In 1911,
when he was Governor of New Jer
sey, Woodrow Wilson was quoted as
saying: "I believe that to be the
son of a minister has been in a great
many ways a distinct advantage to
me. To be the son of a minister
generally means the association
throughout one's youth with a man
of character and cultivation devoted
to the highest things both of thought
and action, and that must surely con
stitute a great advantage."
Dr. John H. T. Finney, one of the
foremost physicians of Baltimore at
that time, and whose father and
grandfather were ministers, is quoted
as saying: "There is no doubt in
my mind that as the twig is bent,
so the tree is inclined. In my own
case, I have frequent cause to be
thankful that the training I received
from my father <vas what it was. It
is a good thing at times to have one's
moorings pretty firm, and I think the
training which the majority of chil
dren receive in a minister's family
is better than that found In the aver
age family circle. I know I was ex
ceptionally fortunate in my own fath
er, and I shall never cease to be
grateful that I had the benefit of his
training during the years when It was
most needed. I know whatever suc
cess I have obtained In my profes
sion has been due more to his influ
ence than to any other."
These two opinions, given by two
great thinkers, In their respective
lines, need no additional support.
They are typical of opinions from
others who have been successful ? al
though sons of ministers.
In almost every case the mother m
the pnrsonage comes In for even a
greater commendation than the min
ister himself. Her devotion, ideals,
self-sacrifice, self-denial, courage, pa
tience, faith ? all enter Into the giv
ing a minister's son a thirty-times'
better chance to succeed than the son
of the average {pan.
(Continued #n page 13)