صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

give her the benefit of a mixed and miscellaneous ministry. I am not disposed to enter very much into a consideration of the arguments of Dr Buchanan, iu which, even assuming the practicability, in a pecuniary point of view, of the erection of other halls, he questioned its expediency. I cannot but remember that this is altogether a new proposition in the Church of Scotland, that is now apparently laid down by our friends, that the best thing for Scotland, in respect of theological education, is the concentration of it in a single hall. Dr Buchanan alluded to the case of England. He, however, admitted that there were certain differences between England and Scotland which were in favour of Scotland, in respect of the parish and burgh schools. To these I would add our universities and our colleges. (Hear, hear.) I add our colleges for literary and philosophical learning; and I say that it has always been the principle of the Church of Scotland that, as far as possible, there should be connected with these, institutions for the study of theology. (Hear.) I think that is a sound principle which has been handed down to us by our forefathers; and I believe that it was recognised even down to our own day. I do not found very much upon the deliverance of the Assembly on this subject since the Disruption; but I call attention to the fact, that not in the Inverness Assembly only, but in the Assembly at Edinburgh in 1845, the expediency of extending the means of theological edi cation was solemnly acknowledged, and was not hastily, but deliberately supported by the Committee appointed on the subject, who declared in their minutes that they met from time to time to consider it. I cannot forget that we over and over again heard the opinion of some of the ablest of those who have been called hence delivered in favour of the principle that, as soon as circumstances would permit, it would be desirable to see theological halls elsewhere than in Edinburgh alone. (Hear, hear.) In regard to the question of the number of students I altogether demur, with all deference, to the principle laid down by Dr Buchanan. The facts which Dr Buchanan stated in reference to the few years that have elapsed since the Disruption, constitute but a very narrow field of induction. By his own confession, various circumstances may explain both the unusual number of students in the session 1845-46, and the diminution which has taken place since. Without admitting that the Aberdeen hall has acted as a drain upon that of Edinburgh, we have never contended for a hall at Aberdeen, at Glasgow, or any other place, as a feeder to the hall at Edinburgh; but we believe, that on the ordinary principles that regulate supply and demand in religious and theological training, that humanly speaking, the putting down a hall alongside the means of literary and philosophical training, will act, not indeed as a feeder to the central hall at Edinburgh, but as a feeder to the Church herself. (Hear, hear.) Upon this subject, let me just say that I cannot go along with the views of Dr Cunningham and Dr Buchanan as to the sufficiency of the number of students. I can heartily go along with Dr Cunningham to a considerable extent, that we might rejoice rather in a diminution of the number of students at Edinburgh than in an increase of them at present. I rejoice in the proposal which has been made for testing the qualification of students before they enter the hall. I trust that there will be but one voice and one heart throughout the Church to go into this proposal; but I connect with the decrease that might be desirable in the existing number of students at Edinburgh, the importance of affording facilities for theological education in other parts of the country. (Hear, hear.) I would have no objection to cut off some of the students in Edinburgh-anoble band of men they are, take them all in all—(applause) -and containing some of the most generous youth that ever adorned any land; but it is no discouragement to them to say, that there are some of them who might be thus tested, and that the decrease which might take place in the meantime in the number might be no great evil. What would be the practical working of the plan of liıniting theological education to our own central hall ? I believe that, proceeding on the ordinary principles of human nature, the practical working of it would be very much that which was stated to us by our excellent friend from Aberdeen in the forenoon, namely, that from its central attraction it would be resorted to by the rich, who possessed the means of enabling them to come to Edinburgh to avail themselves of its advantages, or of the highly gifted,

[ocr errors]

who might through their talents obtain the means, if the means were provided by bursaries or scholarships in sufficient abundance, which they could take by competition. It will, however, be observed, that you would lose to a large extent that accession of students that might be expected from that most valuable class, the middle ranks, as the hall would not be within their reach without incurring great expense which they could not afford, and without taking the bursaries and scholarships in competition, which would be carried off by the highly gifted. If the hall was within their reach, the men who belonged to these ranks might devote themselves to the study of theology, and approve themselves most faithful ministers of Christ. (Applause.) I cannot agree with Dr Cunningham and Dr Buchanan that we have at present a sufficient supply of men for the ministry. (Hear, hear.) It is very easy, no doubt, to make a calculation of the number of vacancies that occur, and the number of students that are licensed every year. We have not, however, statistical information on this point. We have no exact account of the number of students and preachers which passed before the Disruption; but I cannot shut my eyes to the plain fact which has been adverted to to-night, that when vacancies occur there is such a demand for preachers and for ministers, that many of our young men are prematurely launched on the field of pastoral labour. What occasioned the necessity for passing last year an interim act, and sending it through Presbyteries in terms of the barrier act, proposing that every preacher, when licensed, should serve a year before being called to a congregation? (Hear, hear.) It was a notorious fact, that from the demand for preachers, the best of our youth are prematurely hurried into the pastoral work; nay, that many of them are engaged, as it were, before they obtained their licence to preach, the congregations of the Church keeping their eyes upon those who were peculiarly fitted for them, owing to the scarcity of the supply. This very year we have been compelled to shorten the curriculum, in order to supply the demands to labour in the colonial field; and every year we are pressed with similar applications, all showing that the supply is inadequate even to the existing demand, not to speak of the fields that are opening before us. The ordinary principles ought to regulate us in such a matter as this, namely, if we want a supply of men, we must not wait till there be a demand for the means of theological learning,-we must not wait till they flock to the means, but we must bring the means near to them. (Hear, hear.) What could be said of this principle in reference to Church extension, if it were maintained that we should not go on with the extension of the Church until all the existing churches were filled to overflowing. If we could not act upon this principle as regards the people at large,-if we must strive to create a demand for ordinances by providing them with a supply, we are equally bound to act upon the same principle in reference to theological students. (Hear, hear.) We have been well told that the mere multiplication of halls will not multiply students. We must, along with such steps, adopt vigorous measures to carry out the plan which the Convener of the Sustentation Committee urges; and I say, that if we hold out the prospect of adequate provision for the ministry, it stands to reason, that by placing within the reach of the youth of Scotland the means of theological training, along with the means of literary and philosophical training,-if we do the same thing in reference to them that we do in reference to the community, by bringing the means of grace home to them,-we will create a demand for theological education, and put it within the hearts of many of the youth of Scotland to devote themselves to the work of the Lord. (Applause.) I have only, before closing, to say, that I am far from agreeing with those who think that the limiting our efforts to a single theological institute, is the most likely way to elevate either the professors or the students. I cannot help thinking, that it is a principle of common sense, that if you increase the number of professors, the greater is the likelihood of your finding eminent men among them; and I do think, that if you increase the number of students, the greater is the likelihood of there being eminent men among them too. (Hear, hear.) Edinburgh will always command the elite of our professors, and the elite of our students; and I just put it to our excellent friends themselves, who are for raising the standard of theological education, whether, if there were fourteen or fifteen professors in Scotland, they would not be more likely to get an eminent man from among them to supply a vacancy in Edinburgh than now, when they have simply to look abroad on the hard-wrought pastors of the Church to take from among them

T

a man who, at the time of his election, has scarcely time even for the common study necessary for his Sabbath's work. (Applause.) I say the same remark applies to students. I have great faith in the efficiency of theological education. I have great faith in such lectures and instruction as is given in our Edinburgh College in the chair of polemical and historical theology. This Church can never consent to have that chair vacated in the way that my excellent friend proposes. I feel confident that the Church will exert her authority for this purpose as vigorously as she exerted it yesterday, and will refuse to let Dr Cunningham abandon that chair as she refused to allow Mr Macnaughtan to abandon his charge. (Applause.) That chair, to my mind-the chair of polemical and historical theology-with all submission, is greatly more important than even that of exegetical theology of which Dr Cunningham spoke. I can conceive of the ordinary Professors of systematic theology being led to give their students large training in exegesis, but I cannot conceive of the supplying their lack of the chair of polemical and historical theology. (Hear, hear.) With all my confidence in the efficiency of a high style of theological training, I demur to the principle, that we should place all reliance on it. A high style of theological education may do much. The bringing our students through classes in which they have the utmost possible information communicated to them may, indeed, do much to call forth their native talent, but I have some doubts of the alternative of passing all our students through a single hall, however highly equipped it may be, or of opening several halls in other parts of the country, such as students might be prompted by their native talent to take advantage of,-I have some doubts in regard to which of the two plans would send forth the ablest and most practical preachers of the Word of the living God. We all know that during the former period of the Church's history, much was left to the spontaneous working of young men coming forward to the ministry of the gospel. I rejoice in the statement made by Dr Cunningham, that while contending for a highly equipped theological hall here, he has no sort of objection to recognise the principle of other agents not thus highly equipped going forth to God's work; but I do not quite agree with him in thinking that it would not be a benefit to have these other agents, even if they cannot take advantage of the highest style of theological learning which we provide in Edinburgh, to have access to a somewhat inferior training-inferior, I mean, in point of amountin other parts of the country. (Hear, hear.) We cannot trust all to our Theological Professors. We can trust the present men to the utmost possible extent-we can place much reliance, moreover, on the full power we now have as a Church to fill up vacancies-we can place much reliance on the right arrangement of the theological classes-but I cannot help thinking that our excellent friends on the other side are somewhat exaggerating the power of the mere apparatus, the mere machinery, however excellent and admirable it may be-I cannot help thinking that they are overrating-somewhat naturally overrating, as I think, in their circumstances -the power of such machinery to bring out, as if we could manufacture mind, a highly-furnished and highly-gifted Christian ministry; and I cannot but think that by spreading the net wider, we might get, under God, better fish—I cannot help thinking, that by spreading the net a little wider, we might embrace within it, according to the ordinary chances in human affairs, better instruments for His service and glory. (Hear, hear.) But let us not in this matter proceed hastily. I do not desire to see our Church rushing on rashly in this course. It is quite plain that unless we carry the intelligent mind of the community along with us, we must stop in the matter. All I contend for is, that we should endeavour, first of all, to make up our own minds as to what is most desirable, and then to go forth and put it to the people of Scotland whether they will support us or no. (Hear, hear.) We have inherited from our fathers the character and claims of the national Church of Scotland. I cannot but look with serious alarm on this proposal, which seems to me to be the first step in the direction of abandoning practically that claim. (Hear, hear.) I say that, inheriting, as we do, from our fathers the character of the national Church, we have inherited from them, too, the national Universities. (Hear, hear,) They belong in right to us, these Scottish Universities. (Applause.) They are ours by the constitution of the country-they are ours by hereditary claims; and I think it is but in the direction of asserting and vindicating these claims when we maintain and act upon the principle which our forefathers always avowed, not of limiting

theological education to a single university seat, but of planting it down alongside in every place where the means of scientific training was afforded to the youth of Scotland. (Applause.) That is the principle which has I think been handed down by our fathers. We may not be able to carry it out-we may not have the means -we may not be able to carry with us the sympathy of our people; but I contend that we are bound to make the attempt; and I have great faith that if we make the attempt, we will not find the people of Scotland indifferent to the object. It may be said, that to maintain five professors at Edinburgh, and three or four at Aberdeen, would be found at the present moment to be a most formidable thing for Scotland to face. We, however, have never brought the claims of the theological institute before the country fully. We have never broadly put it to the people of Scotland whether they will give us five, or six, or ten, or a dozen professors. What is it that we are asking for? Is it so great an effort to the people who have so gladly and cheerfully come forth to support six, seven, aye, eight hundred ministers of the gospel? (Applause.) Is it asking so very much that they should come forth to support some five, six, ten, or even fifteen men of leisure and study-leisure for searching God's Word-leisure for training up the youth that are to minister to them, and their children after them. (Applause.) Have we too many students in the Free Church of Scotland ?--have we too many learned men? Will the people of Scotland grudge fifteen places for men of leisure and study to deliberately qualify themselves for training up the youth of Scotland? I cannot believe it, if we can shew a case—a case not of necessity, our people have not waited for a case of necessity hitherto; and if we can shew a case of mere advantage-if we can shew to them clearly that it is for the good of souls that there should be fifteen, aye, thirty, or even fifty men, with leisure for cultivating the science of theology, I do not think that our people would be slow to respond to our call. (Hear.) We are not asking them to take a step in the dark. We must go to them at any rate-we must go to them in order to explain the necessity of having two exegetical chairs--we must go and tell them of the need of an extension of the hall at Edinburgh. (Hear, hear.) I venture to say that if we have to go to the people of Scotland, we may as well go to them pleading for a great as well as for a little extension. We may as well go to them to the extent of at least pleading not merely for the extension of theological education here, but for a little more of their liberality, in order that we may provide the means of theological instruction elsewhere. (Hear, hear.) I have spoken somewhat widely. I have been exaggerating-I have been overstating the case. What have we been pleading for? We have been pleading for this-that Scotland's Free Church may not be in the position of having her places for men of learning and men of leisure, restricted to five or six. I do not despair. I feel confident that we, in the long run, will be able to satisfy the Church and the country, that the two objects the keeping up of a high standard of theological training, and abundant means, both here and elsewhere, for the entrance of young men into the ministry, are not incompatible and inconsistent, but that they mutually fit one into another, and would mutually promote one another. (Applause.)

Mr SHERIFF MONTEITH said, I would not presume, at this late hour, to detain the House; but as the reverend gentleman who has just sat down has referred to the state of public opinion on this subject, and as I have occasionally opportunities of knowing public opinion to some extent, I take leave to offer one or two remarks on what has fallen from the reverend Doctor. And I never was more impressed with the importance of any debate that has arisen in the course of the history of this Church, and I do consider this to be a most important crisis in the Church's history. The topic upon which this night's deliberations are to turn is, whether the Free Church of Scotland is brought into the position of a national institution, entitled to take possession of the length and breadth of the land, or whether we are to take a step which would have the effect of sinking us down to the level of a contemptible sect? We are told that unquestionably we are a national Church, and that as a national Church we ought to have a College at every university seat in the kingdom. I admit that we are the inheritors and heirs of the principles of the national Church. We are at this moment, I apprehend, the national Church,-strong in the learning of the clergy and affections of the people; but we shall lose that proud position the moment we bring down the learning of the clergy,—the moment we

bring down the standard of the men in our front ranks,-then, I say, the knell of the Free Church will be rung, and instead of being a national institution, it will sink down into a sect beneath contempt. (Cheers.) I confess that nothing makes this remark appear to me of greater importance than just what we have heard with respect to the exigencies of the age. Dr Candlish has adverted to these exigencies in his motion; and what are the exigencies of the age? I say that we are entering upon an era in the history of Europe, which renders it necessary to keep up the standard of theological learning, when we are about to be deluged by German rationalism and infidelity. The flood is advancing upon us gradually, and unless a high standard of theological education is to be maintained,--a higher than Scotland has ever seen, we shall not be furnished with champions to fight the fight of faith, but shall be overwhelmed by that flood which is beginning to set in over all the land. (Hear, hear.) I therefore think the exigencies of the age one of the strongest possible arguments why we should not let down the standard of education, but do everything in our power to raise it. Now, it is important to keep in view what is the real point in debate at this moment. Some of the honourable and reverend gentlemen who addressed you would seem to represent the question as being,whether, supposing we are in possession of the length and breadth of the land, as the national Church, should we not have two or three national colleges? Now, that is not the issue. The issue is not whether two or three colleges are better than one; but the issue is, what is our present duty? what ought we to do in the present circumstances of the Church? Ought we to make one perfect educational establishment, or convert it into two or three minor establishments, utterly diluted and worthless? (Hear, hear.) Now that being the question,-whether it is better to have one good and complete establishment, or two or three minor ones, the gentlemen who have spoken on the other side have attempted to blink that question, and represented it as somewhat different; and this is the sum and substance of the fallacy which runs through the whole of the speech of the reverend Doctor who has just addressed the house. He does not venture to come forward and plead before the Church that it is not better to have one fully equipped university, than two or three deficient ones; but, forced by the exigencies of the case, he allowed a little of the cloven foot to appear. (Hisses and cries of "Oh!") He says there is no greater advocate than he for a high theological standard; but when he comes to the argument, it just results in telling us that we exaggerate the importance of theological education, and that a mixed ministry is the best for this country. Now, if it be the opinion of this house that we should adopt machinery for erecting an inferior article in the Church, as well as a superior one, then, I say, affirm the proposition of the reverend Doctor. But if you are of opinion, on the other hand, that it is of the utmost practical importance to maintain a high theological standard, then you are bound to adopt the motion of Dr Cunningham. (Cheers.) Then the reverend Doctor has told you that there are gentlemen who appear to exaggerate the importance of human means, they seem to think, he says, that the elevating of the standard of theological requirement is the great means of raising an evangelical ministry. Now, I am sure that no such sentiment escaped from the lips of Dr Cunningham. (Hear.) We all know that all we can do is to use the appointed means; and that it rests with the Spirit of God to raise up an evangelical ministry; but is it any reason why we should not use the best means in our power, and give our clergy all the advantages of human learning, that we cannot inspire our ministers with the spirit of the gospel? I venture to say that a stranger argument never proceeded from the mouth of an ex-professor. (Laughter.) I have nothing to say on the importance of maintaining a high standard of theological attainment. That is freely admitted; but it is said that although we have a high standard, which in the abstract is of very great importance, yet we are virtually destroying the efficiency of the Church, because of the want of ministers-a want which must therefore be otherwise supplied than by the central institution, which has been found defective for the purpose. A great deal has in fact been said about the central institution being virtually found wanting in efficiency. ("No, no.") It is the first time I ever heard that proposition. I have had some opportunities of knowing the state of public opinion on this subject, and I think the general opinion is, that if any department of the Church has been crowned with success, it is our Theological Hall in

« السابقةمتابعة »