Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

(tafrihtions. THE POLITY OP METHODISM— No. IV. IN WHICH SOME OF THE EVILS CONNECTED WITH THE ITINERANT SYSTEM ARE CONSIDERED. There are two causes connected directly with the Itinerant System, remote in them selves but radical, which have much to do with the deficiencies of our church as a pastoral system, and by consequence, with the defections therefrom. The first is the frequent change of pastors; the second, the heavy work imposed upon our pastors, as such, under the circuit system. I am no new convert to these objections, having writ ten for the Advocate, some twenty years ago, a series of articles, tinder the caption ot “ Facts and Figures/’ in which the same ground was taken. ’Tis true, I have clear er conceptions, both as to causes and reme dies for the existing evils, but even at this late day it is very difficult to tell how we shall introduce a perfect pastoral system, which will not mar the beauty and force of the Itinerancy, as a preaching aggressive system. Mr. Wesley easily saw the defi ciency of his plan in this respect and im posed upon his preachers the duty of “visit ing from house to house, 5 ’ aud established the class meeting system, as a sub-pastorate, for the protection of the members in the absence of the preachers. Both of these schemes are perfect failures under our pres ent system of operations as I expect to show in the course of this argument. As pre-requisites to a good and effective pastor, I affirm that he must first have the confidence of his people, and secondly their affection. How much of either of these es sential qualities can be obtained in the short term of one or even two years, it is difficult to say; but one thing is certain, in order for these and other "high qualities of pastor ship, time is necessary —a long time. The pastor must become identified in feeling and sympathy with the people of his charge. Like the faithful and long tried family phy sician, he must be as one of the household, entrusted with their secrets, acquainted with their history, their griefs and joys, and be admitted as a counsellor and confidant. Can this be effected in one or two short years ? Why, the very fact that our people know that the preacher is a bird of passage, soon to be removed, prevents them from placing that confidence in him, and loving him as they'otherwise would. lie feels similarly in reference to his charge, and is all the while preparing for the change, not desiring to have too many ties to be broken so soon, by that “ mild word, farewell.’’ “ A member of the Georgia Conference ” admits that our children do not love the church cf their fathers like those of other communions, but fails to tell us the true reason. It has its foundation in our non pastoral system. The church and the pas tor are interchangeable if not identical. If they love the one they will love the other. But how can they have much affection for a man whom they see but rarely, and then, perhaps, only in the pulpit? No wonder that our young people get some venerable pastor of another church, whom they have known and respected so long to marry them rather than the uew circuit preacher. No wonder that they frequently send for him when sick, and even have funerals preached by him. And no wonder that he wins tlie hearts of our children, by their long associa tion and kindly offices, and induces them to leave the altars of their fathers. For under the circuit system frequently whole churches and congregations are seen by their preacher only occasionally, and the interim is sup plied by the resident pastors. This is par ticularly the case where Itinerants locate their families in oue county, and preach in another, a system that is inaugurated through out the length and breadth of the laud, from the stress of circumstances, and is damag ing us more seriously than ever in our pas toral relations to the people. We must have a church that our children can love if we wish them to remain with us. In order to do this we must have a pastoral system, that will enable us to contend successfully with Other churches. There are very serious evils also connect ed with the Itinerant system to the ministry themselves, which t_cy all know by sad ex perience. Among these may be mentioned the frequent breaking up of house keeping, tlie loss of furniture, expenses of travelling, inability to keep a library, changes of teachers, Sabbath schools, and associations for children. And then no permanent home for them to love, that wherever they wander in after life their affections may clus ter around the “sacred words to memory dear” of home and mother! But to tlie fond parent, who loves his children and feels for their well being in time and eter nity, no cross is so heavy as that which sep arates him from them, when he knows that his presence is essential to aid the mother in rearing them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. It is well known that partic ularly in reference to boys, a father’s exam ple and counsels are essential to their being brought up as they should be. Few mothers can keep them in proper bounds after a certain age, and it is painful to a fond fa ther’s heart to have to leave them to tlie cruel temptations of the world, to fulfi l another, but certainly not a higher obliga tion. No wonder that we frequently find the children of Itinerants, irreligious, dis solute and profligate. No wonder that many good preachers have been driven to locate because they felt their presence essential at home, not only to provide for the temporal but spiritual interests of their children. Thi3 evil does not apply in as many cases as it formerly did, (thanks to the modifications which have been made,)but yet upon many the same heavy and unnecessary burdens still rest. Another evil resulting to the ministry and to the church from the Itinerant system, is that it minifies the preaching capacity of our ministers. Hence, not unfrequently our stationed preachers desire a change af ter the first year, because they have preach ed out their quota of sermons. The second year is one of harder study, and of course of greater improvement. Would not the third year act in the same way? We have fre quently heard the remark from Bishops and presiding elders, that there are but few preachers who could sustain themselves well the second year. Why ? Because the sys tem has contracted their preaching capabili ties. They have been sent to new fields of labor where they could preach old sermons without the study requisite to make new ones. From the same principle a number of preachers always prefer circuits, distrusting their own ability to preach to the same com gregation, from different texts during a whole year, or rather being too indolent to undertake the labor requisite for such a work. A circuit is what they want, and the larger the better, as they can preach the same sermon over and over again to different congregations. I once heard a wag tell of an old preacher in the Georgia Conference, who was appointed in charge of a four weeks circuit, and a young man preparing for the ministry, went around with him as an ex horter. The old man had preached in al most every iustance, from the passage re ferring to “ Peter’s wife’s mother being sick of a fever,” until the young exhorter had tired out with text and preacher. Approach ing the village whence they had gone forth, they heard the solemn tolling of the church bell. “Ah ! said the old man, “ someone has died since we left. I wonder who it ean be?’’ “ I cannot tell,’’ said the young man, “unless it’s Peter’s wife’s mother, who has been sick so long.’’ Whether the story is true or not, the old preacher is a-n apt repsentative of a large class of circuit preachers. [Query—ls a sermon conned and preached by rote until it becomes stale and insipid to the preacher himself, more likely to accomplish good, than a fresh one written and read every Sabbath after hard study and a prayerful preparation ? And yet we condemn the one, and approve the other.] But we have already stated that the heavy work which a preacher has to do, under the circuit system incapacitates him for effec tive pastoral service. He has charge of so many churches, scattered over such a scope of country, and the members still morescat tcred and distant that to carry out the in junction of the Discipline of “ visiting from house to house,” would, consume every day in tlie year without having accomplished much. The very magnitude of the work dispirits him, from doing what he might do, aud he satisfies himself with staying all night occasionally with some of the leading members, dm ing a two days’ meeting.— Hence the ail important interests of Sab bath Schools, class meetings, instructing the children, visiting the sick, and those who neglect their duties, are dispensed with unless there happens to be a zealous lay man who takes the matter in hand. But we have found it universally the case, that no interest of the church works well, un less the pastor takes the lead in it. Hence the class meeting has become obsolete more from tliis than any other cause. The preachers do net foster it; how can the lead ers sustain it, without their presence and countenance ? A system then which looks purely to the pulpit lor its success, and expects class lead ers and laymen to do the pastoral work, will always fail when it comes in contact with a well organised educated ministry, which takes the entire pastoral supervision of the church in their own hands. Will you allow anoth er anecdote by way of illustration. A lady of wealth, brought under conviction by a Providential cause, once applied to me, (as our preacher was absent at his home some forty miles distant) for spiritual advice, and to become acquainted with the polity of our church. I gave her a Discipline, and ad vised her to attend our class meetings, which she did, and at one of them came to the al tar as a penitent. She was pleased, and came several times, until an ignorant class leader read as a lesson the Bth chapter of Romans, skipping the 29th and 30th verses, which begin : “ For whom £he did fore know he also did predestinate,” for fear the Calvinism in it might do harm. The lady quit us immediately and joined another communion, because, as she afterwards told me, her religious taste was oifended (and justly so.) by the representative of our church. “ Yerbum sat sapienti. Sparta, Ga. E. M. P. TO THE DELEG A TES TO THE GEN ERAL CONFERENCE OF THE M. E. CHURCH SOUTH. Beloved Brethren : —As you are cur rep resentatives, elected without an avowal of principles, and sent forth without any in structions, it will be your pleasure to hear any suggestions intended to promote the peace and prosperity of our Zion. As wise and good men you will discriminate between the wholesome and worthless —receive the one and reject the other. Such being the ca'ic we avail ourself of the courtesy of these columns, and proceed to address you. lou have been addressed before—ad dressed week after week by pros and cons. That is right. I3ro. Myers never monopo lizes, disputes the right of discussion, or obstructs the channels to a clear conscience. Fortunately, the brethren are good and true, and are seeking to solve the same problem— a problem susceptible of the same solution, if their data—seeing and hearing —were less dissimilar. Rut different premises do not usually yield common conclusions.— Hear them. Some will say “ nine-tenths of the people are clamorous for the proposed changes“other some’’ say, “not so.” Some say, “ the storm is upon us—make for the dry dock, let the old ship be reno- SOUTHERN CHRISTIAN ADVOCATE. vated from keel to upper-deck, engine, boil er, and all;’’ but, to others, the sea is smooth, the ship steady, aud the wind as gentle as a babe resting on a mother’s bosom. The issue is made. Conservatism and radicalism are marshalling their forces. Under which banner shall we march to the world’s conquest? Shall we conclude that polity is unimportant because it is uninspired? Must we cast away our old “ camp-furni ture’’ because we are striking tents for an other station ? Will we revolutionize the entire machinery because it may be done without sacrilege? No, brethren, thousands of Methodists exclaim, no. Woodman, spare that tree. Remove the ax from the root. Long has it furnished foliage and fruit for the families of the Kingdom. Beware, lest a temporizing policy, by succeeding it with j a great green, magnificent nothing, shall I present no “ first fruits” and thus offend the 1 Princely Proprietor. Our language is not too strong. The plan proposed, if adopted, will culminate in a complete change of our church govern ment. Beginning high up —with the Epis copacy—coming on down through the cler gy—it seeks to revolutionize the entire con nection. Weigh the expressions, “ modifi cations in our polity,’’ “ a Bishop for each State,’’ “ extended Pastorate,” “ a New Methodist Temple'' If the present Gener al Conference does not suffice, another must “convene in ’67.’’ One advocate of the policy speaks of their “cautious movements, and patient masterly refrain.’’ Cautious movements! Tracks covered up ; small ! checks on the credulity of the people called Methodists. Masterh/ refrain ! Very ; simply to demolish, in one day, a large and imposing structure —the embodiment of the wisdom and activities of an age. Hear him again: “The people have ripened into a willigness and fitness for the changes.”— Why, brother, the people have but recently thought of them —certainly never sought them. The'preachers are radical —the people are conservative. Spare the people. So far from “ ripening into a willingness’’ you havn’t given them time to ripen into any thing. Your hasty measures substitute the laws of growth —inaugurate the inconsider ateuess of “ opening buds with needles,” aud “ bringing forward fruits by ovens.” Another advocate, a thorough tactician, knows that the talk about men not being driven is tlie merest moonshine, and seeks to throw us from the track by showing how badly we are scared at “ measures for the development and expansion of the church.” Convenient phraseology. Quite opposite. But who are the alarmists ? Answer—those who can see no safety or success in the pres ent system —those who disturb the repose of passengers by constantly crying, “ the ship is sinking.” Brethren, “ let your modera tion be known unto all men.” If we are alarmist at all, it is for your sake. The ves sel has been long and successfully tried, and, imperilled by innovations and vul- Jierable in “dock yards, ’ it is immortal amid he assaults pf sea / So much by way of Explanation and coins l pliment. With your permbsion I will now proceed to advertise the errors of these good but mistaken brethren. Error No. I.—Their reasoning would land us, and all the world, at the conclusion that Methodism is a failure. Judging from the severity of their strictures and the char acter of their comparisons, a stranger would hesitate to say, that we had any ministry, membership, doctrines, discipline, or sacra ments. Methodism has been caricatured until her own familiar friends are almost ready to lift up the heel against her. Pres byterianism, Catholicism, Episcopalianism, all are paraded and pitted against our poor, despicable, half-deveioped economy; and, if our children have not learned an estrange ment, it is because we are the parents of a dull and inapt progeny, for they have had “ line upon line, precept upon precept.’’ The policy of other denominations is quite different. They cling together, conceal de fects, parade excellencies, praise preichers, formulas, everything that, appertains to the sect; and, if a denied scriptural conversion and an ignored Christian experience afford no general encampment, they will rally to the dogma of apostolical succession, lie down amid the lines of a “Liturgy,’’ or shelter iu the skirts of a surplice. My heart is sick of the comparisons. So far from being a fail ure, Methodism —as regards the true end of a Gospel Church, and that alone should be sought by good men —stands* like Saul among the prophets, “ higher than ot them from its shoulders and upwards.” Her membership is numbered by thousands in city and country. Many of them are our most intelligent and influential citizens ready and renowned enough to stand before Senates and Kings. Many of them are the bone and sinew of the country; and many are “ the poor” to whom the Gospel is preached by our economy. Remote from railways, locked up iu mountain secluded in quiet glens, it is the glory of Methodism to outstrip commerce and civili zation, plunge into the pathlesss wilderness, and break to God’s poor the bread of life —to pluck them as brands from the burning, while other communions recline on sofas and wait for calls and steam. Her doctrines, like great battering rams, are borrowed in every successful assault on the Gibraltar of siu. Her ministry, sensi ble and studious, compare favorably with other pulpits, and from obscurity often rise to the highest stations, are wise to win souls, represent us in the General Conference, criticise the mother of their manhood, con tend against licensing’ un-Latined and un- Greeked applicants, and clamor for Theolog ical Schools. Her converts, the advocates themselves being judges, are far more numerous than those of any other denomination. The loss of some, by the world and flesh, argues no failure—the Saviour lost some iu the same direction. The loss of others, by other churches entering into her labors, is not a loss —they will shine as stars in our crown of rejoicing. The loss of others is no more attributable to an economy faulty as to a limitation of the pastoral term, than the loss of faulty fruit, or blasted wheat is at tributable to the retirement of a faithful overseer. So far is a limited term from be ing the cause of these losses, nothing less than a forty-horse-power would suffice to as sociate them as cause and effect. The se cret of our rotten fruit is largely (not whol ly) couched in these few words: ice have threshed it down before it was ripe. But a slight imprudence in the laborers, should not be construed into a general derange ment, or call forth a sweeping proscription. Be sober, brethren. Methodism is not fallen. Her dividends are large, handsome, frequent. The world is astonished at the results. Methodism is not dead. Her mis sion is still unfilled. Heaven and earth ne,ed her. A bright future awaits her. Let the Genera! Conference rebuke the de mands of worldliness, bury dead enactments, infuse, new life into the living, and adjourn to their charges baptized with blood and power; let the preachers imbibe the power ful, unselfish, self-sacrificing spirit of Christ and the framers of Methodism, return to the practice and administration of Disci pline, and D. D.’s, Professors, Circuit aud City Pastors, one and all, prepare for “ march’’ or “ halt,” for missions, tions, districts or circuits; and let the people take larger views of the mission of Christianity, put away their starvation theo ries, aud dedicate themselves, children and substance to God —then will the brightness of a still more glorious day break upon us, “violence will no longer be heard, nor wast ing or destruction seen in tlie borders of Zion ; her sufi shall no more go down, nor shall the moon withdraw her light, but the Lord shall be our everlasting light and our days of mourning shall be ended.” Brethren, if Methodism has failed, it has not failed to the extent assumed in the rea soning of the advocates for change. Their diagnosis is at fault—therefore their reme dies, though well meant, are badly timed. A gentle astringent might be more saluta tory than their powerful laxatives. Much of this communication being necessarily dis cursive, I propose, in my next, a more rigid analysis. Should the vessel go down, in the meantime, I will abandon a water passage and strike through the woods. Very respectfully, yours in the Gospel, March Ith. J. B. McGeiiee. CHANGES IN METHODISM. 13Y REV. JOSEPHUS ANDERSON. There are two things essential to the highest development of man— -fixed, princi ples, and freedom as to outward forms. — Without settled principles, progress is im possible, because there is no firmness of pur pose, no strength of character, no persever ance. Tb*?so arise from settled principles. The foundation must be deeply ~ laid, and strong, or the superstructure cannot stand. A man destitute of principle cannot be trust ed, and society without a public sentiment in favor of virtue cannot be happy and prosperous. On the other hand, such are the diversities of sentiment in minor affairs, such the variety of circumstances surround ing men, and such the differences in times and places, that freedom in outward forms is necessary. Thus no one government can be devised as suitable for every people or every age, and to attempt it would be mad ness. Hence national councils and legisla tures, and changes in law as the times in dicate a demand for them. The Christian religion recognizes these philosophical principles. The conditions of salvation, the existence of the Church, the sacraments and tne ministry arc fixed and unalterable. They stand by Divine appoint ment. But so far as the outward forms, the method of Church government, and such things are concerned, we arc left free; and this freedom has been used in every age, and every branch of the Church, iu making such changes as were deemed necessary.— This freedom is an article of our religious creed, aud certainly the practice of Method ism has been consistent therewith. Mr. Wesley made many changes before his death, and they have been made from that day to this by every body competent to legislate. The question arises, do we need further changes ? That we do, is the general im pression, and I believe our future existence depends upon meeting the demand. The process of disintegration commenced at a very early period of our history, and it has continued, and is still going on. It is in creasing; and the new and singular con junction of circumstance now existing in our country will accelerate it greatly. At the same time I believe the period has arrived when we may enter upon a career glorious in usefulness, if we will seize upon the golden opportunity and rise to the demands of the hour. What do we need? First of all, such a system of lay representation as shall bring the ministry and laity nearer together, and enlist the energies of th’e whole church in the work of Christ. It never was intended by Christ that everything should bo in the hands of the ministry. With us everything starts with the minister, and he moves the whole machinery. Success depends entire ly upon him. It is the greatest marvel of the age that we have gotten along so well. Nothing accounts for it but the piety and earnestness of our ministers. But for their indefatigable efforts the period of decline would have come long ago. It is no wonder that they call lor lay agency and co opera tion. AVe must have a system that puts the whole church to work, for it takes the whole church to preach the gospel. It' must not be left to the preacher to move every wheel in the machinery—some of them must go on whether he will or not. The plan mus. be changed so that each will have his allot ted work, and each act upon the other. Now the preacher act3 upon the whole. The term of the pastorate is a matter of secondary importance compared with this. Under the present system, extend the pastorate, and what have you gained ? Time for acquaint ance with the people and for acquiring in fluence, and that is all. The same evils in here in the system. The preacher moves everything, and the practical working will be the same. It is not length op time which our pastors need. A wide awake, Paul-like minister will learn more of a community, and be better known by the people, and se cure more influence in one year, than .the majority of our preachers would in twenty or a hundred. The demand is not for time in the pastorate so much, as for an earnest ministry, and a system of lay representation and monthly conferences. The present state of the ministry will not allow of an indefinite extension of the pas toral term. It will not do to s6nd them, at a general thing, to the same place more than two years. Some might be stationed in the same charge for many years; and it occurs to me that all our large cities should be made exceptions to the rule of limitation.— This is about as far as we can safely go at present. In the meantime, with the laity in our councils, the standard of ministerial at tainments will speedily rise, and we can con tinue to extend the term as we are prepared for it. Then put an enterprising bishop at the head of each Annual Conference, to stay there from one General Conference un til another, when all the bishops shall re ceive their appointments—leave the question of the presiding eldership, or of chairmen of districts to be determined by each Con ference for itself—abolish the probationary system, or adopt a regular form of reception into full connection—change the name we bear to that of Episcopal Methodist Church— revise the plan of missionary operations— and set forth a system of religious labor for the colored population, and I believe the tide would be taken at its flood and lead to a fu ture cf glorious success. The responsibility of the next General Conference will be very great, and the whole church should cease not to pray for the guidance and enlightenment of the Holy Spirit. May the great'Head of the Church direct us. Amen. -- * -• • » —.— The Pastorate. From a few stray copies of the Advocate which have recently fallen under my peru sal, I perceive that the changes to be made in the Constitution ot our Church are being extensively mooted. AVhat I have to say on the subject is the result of a long course of* personal observation, and not derived from the suggestions of others; and if there shall bo found to be any merit in the views now presented, I shall esteem myself singularly fortunate, to have been heretofore shut out, by circumstances beyond my control, from the arena of discussion. Mr. \Y r esley, in retrospecting the great work that he had accomplished through long years of toil and suffering, emphatically de clared that “Methodism was but the child of Providence.” In the utterance of this sentiment he exhibited at once the humility of the Christian and the wisdom of the Phi losopher. By a strict and uniform adherence to the principle embraced in that sentiment, Methodism, under the plastic hand of its great founder, has, by gradual advances, be come what it is—a separate, distinct and in dependent organization—a church. Had that truly humble Christian imagined for a moment that he was io be recognized as the founder of a sect, he, doubtless, would have shrunk appalled by the responsibility cf the position. But witli the single purpose of spreading Scriptural holiness throughout the land, he pursued his task with a zeal that knew no flagging, looking neither to the right nor to the left, but following with un faltering step the path that Providence should open to him; and now behold the result. Shall we of the present generation imitate his example, or shall we, self satisfied, fold our arms and console ourselves with the de lusive idea that, as a church, we had already attained to the prize of* our high calling.— The same Providence that guided his steps will still continue to enlighten our path, if we are but as single in our purposes as he was. May God help us so to be. AYhen Methodism first crossed the great water, it found here a wilderness to be sub dued. T rue to its original mission, it sent out its self-sacrificing “itinerants,” whose footsteps*kept even pace with those of the pioneer settler. This was then its mission ; this is now its mission, and this, I trust* will ever he its mission as long as there shall remain on the earth one human being to be hunted up and brought into the fold of Christ. But is this its only mission ? Must Methodism be content to clear the forest, fallow the soil, sow the seed, harvest the crop, and then leave the great garner house to the conservation of other hands? It seems to me, that if we will only lay aside our prejudices in favor ©f “old customs,” and remembering that “Methodism is the child of Providence,” open our eyes to the teachings of that Providence, wo will very soon come to the realization of the fact, that a new mission has been imposed upon us as a church —that of preserving the precious fruit which has been produced by so much self-sacrificing labor. How shall this be ef fected ? Not by destroying, or even impair ing the efficiency of the itineracy. God forbid ! But by so altering the Constitution of the Church that the pastorate may be es tablished wherever it may be found to be needed. To assume thafthese two elements may not be made to work in perfect harmo ny is to pay a very poor compliment to the intelligence and legislative capacity of our General Conference.