"O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? The sting
of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to
God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, unmovable, always
abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour
is not in vain in the Lord."—1 COR. xv. 55-8.
"Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to
the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week
let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him,
that there be no gatherings when I come. And when I come, whomsoever ye
shall approve by your letters, them will I send to bring your liberality
unto Jerusalem."—1 COR. xvi. 1-3.
I have read this passage for one single purpose; it is to draw your
attention to the singular way in which St. Paul passes from the doctrine
of the Resurrection to the practical duty of Christian giving. It almost
startles us, who have not quite St. Paul's way of thinking about
collections, to hear him pass from that triumphant apostrophe of death,
"O death, where is thy sting?" to "Now concerning the collection."
This seeming incongruity in the Epistle, and in the Church's work, is
not confined to the Bible or to the Church; it runs all through life.
Man has a poor, fleshly body, needing food, and drink, and sleep, and
nursing; and he has an immortal soul. Say what you will, we cannot deny
that the body is there; and I do not think we shall ever come to deny
that the soul is there too, and will live, so long as goodness,
tenderness, and devotion, and truth, and being last. Life has got into
it; and the material framework which carries that soul-man's life
corresponds to himself. In our homes, in our national life, in our
business life there is the strangest intermingling of tragedy and
comedy, of what is reverent and sacred, and what is most secular, and
common, and mean. You cannot divorce the two. You may dislike the
commonplace, and the mean, and the material; but if you hope to preserve
the region of the spiritual and the sympathy of the good, that you can
only do by preserving the body; they are gone when you forget the body.
What is it that is the brightest, heavenliest thing in the whole earth?
It is love. No amount of mere common propriety, in the humblest action,
will make up for the absence of that which comes out in a sudden tear or
looks out in a sweet smile. We all know it, however earthly and material
we are. But what I have to say is this: Look at that sacred thing, that
love, which is almost too refined to put its hands on the soiling things
of earth; what do you find it doing? Nursing at the sick bed, doing
tasks that are repulsive, planning, with all kinds of material
medicaments, and helps, and reliefs, to ease bodily pain. Now, it is
easily possible for a coarse heart and poor bodily eyes to be in the
midst of all that is sacred, and secular too, and to call it all common,
and poor, and mean. It needs a quick, warm heart, and it needs almost, I
may say, some imagination, some touch of a fine fancy, something of that
Divine power which comes of tender affection and love, to do such acts
for God.
In the life of Christ's spiritual family, which we call "the Church"
(and by calling it "the Church" so often put it clean away out of all
control of common sense and of affection), the very same law holds. The
Church is worth nothing if it is not lit up and warmed with heavenly
devotion to Jesus Christ. It may look solemn at the Communion-table; but
it is not worth having if it does not reach men's hearts with fingers
which squeeze out their hardness, and make them penitent for their sins;
it is not worth having if it has not God, and Christ, and the life of
the soul all throbbing through it. And yet it has a body, and material
buildings, and expenses to maintain its earthly fabric and framework;
and the spiritual life and the spiritual love that will have nought to
do with these "cares of all the Churches," which Paul, the greatest
preacher and Apostle, carried, or with collections and planning for the
maintenance of preachers, thereby destroy themselves. If we try to put
away that, and say, "It is not spiritual," or "It is a low thing," we
are simply committing suicide of the religious life. It cannot live
without that. Christ Himself had to plan how His preachers were to be
maintained; and He spoke a great word when He said that they were to go
and live on those who could not preach; not taking it as
charity—never!—but taking it as a helpful service, which, combined with
their searching of the Divine Word, should make it triumph in the world.
"He that receiveth" into his house—maintaining him, that he may
preach—"a preacher" (that is the meaning of "a prophet"), "in the name
of a preacher"—not because he brings honour to the house, and because he
is a great man, but because he is a man who is converting souls, a man
that takes God at His word, and prays, and preaches unto men—will have
the same "reward" in heaven, Christ providing for the spiritual wants
and for the bodily wants of the preacher, and for his maintenance. And
so, if once we lived in good earnest into that real, loving, great,
broad thought of the actual life of Christ, we should not feel any
surprise when we read how St. Paul passes from the great triumph of the
doctrine of the Resurrection to the enforcement of Christian liberality.
Now I am going to spend the time at my disposal this morning in a very
practical way. I hardly think that it needed that introduction to
justify this use of the time at a Sunday morning's service; still,
possibly, what has been said may be of use, not so much as a
justification, but just as a preparation. I think that these things are
for you. The subject is not a mere question of Church business; it is
not a mere question, either, of interest to the men whose minds have a
little of the statesman in them, and who consider the problems of Church
government and Church management, as well as of national government and
management; but I will say that it is a subject which ought to have a
thorough interest to every one of you. I have been led to take it as my
subject this morning because I was sent, a fortnight ago, by our Synod,
as a deputy to one of our largest Presbyteries in the North, in order
that I might interest congregations there in our Church's financial
system of maintaining the preaching of the Gospel throughout this
country; and I had the feeling, when I was doing it, and I had the
assurance from those whom I visited, that it did them good. I have
thought, therefore, that it might do my people good. Moreover, I had
this feeling about the very strong and plain things that I said to them,
that I should hardly be an honest man if I did not care openly to say
the same things to my own people. Nay, I was led in some things to speak
of my congregation, and what they had done not only for their minister,
but for all the schemes of the Church, as an example; and therefore I
feel my honour somewhat pledged that our congregation should not only do
well, as it has done, but should do better. I say these things that I
may have your sympathy in what I am going on to explain and to say to
you.
The special subject, in our Church's government and economy, of which I
want to make you understand a little is what is called the "Sustentation
Fund." I wish to be short and to be simple. Let me begin in this
fashion: We believe that wherever there are Christian congregations who
have the love of their Master in them, and some spiritual life, all
these are blessed spots and centres, wherever they stand. We know how
sorrows are soothed away by that Christian brotherhood and friendship,
by those common prayers and praises, and by those words of truth which
are read out of the Bible and often spoken by preachers. We believe
that, or we do not believe in Christ at all. That is how Christ comes to
men and women, and boys and girls, and little children, on earth. Oh, He
does nothing for them like that! Well, now, it is a very practical
question, that comes to all Christian men and women who are gathered
together into any section of Christ's Church, how they can make their
ministers, and their managers, and their elders, and their deacons, and
their office-bearers (by whatever name you call them), and all their
members, most useful and effective for good. It is the first question
that their Master puts to them. He says, "Do your best." It is the duty
of every Church in England just now to do everything in its power, by
business methods as well as by spiritual methods, to make every
congregation have a happy, harmonious, earnest, liberal, joyful,
successful Christian life.
Now I will say this: It seems to me that the good which will be done by
any denomination in England just now depends, of course first of all on
its possession of the living Spirit and heart of Jesus Christ in its
members; but that is not my subject to-day; I am talking of the material
side, the body surrounding the soul; I say, the good which will be done
by any Church in England will depend upon three things: first of all,
that it shall have devised a government which will exercise
power—superior control—over individual members, office-bearers,
ministers, congregations; which will preserve a harmonious, law-abiding,
just, and generous spirit and conduct between them all; not leaving it
to two individuals in the Church, or some individual member, to fight
the thing out, if a disagreement arises, without asking, before an
impartial tribunal, which party is right, and each of them being willing
to take the right. I say that a government which, without the evils of
undue centralization, without crushing individual freedom, and liberty,
and enterprise, will combine all congregations into one strong, united
body, powerful to do Foreign Mission work and Home Mission work,
cemented together so that the strong carry the weak when they are
overtaken by sickness or disaster—and the strong get the blessing when
doing work like that—a government the likest to that is a government
which will make the most useful and the most spiritual and successful
Church in our England. I say that I have watched the progress of things
in these times of profound interest, and it seems to me that men are
looking at one another in the Churches for what is good and desirable.
That I believe to be our attitude in watching other Churches, and to be
the attitude of other Churches in watching us. I look forward to a
powerful, happy future in consequence.
The second thing which seems to me to be a great spring of a Church's
usefulness in this modern England is the earnestness and success with
which it devises methods of instructing its young people; not merely
winning their affections for Christ, but giving them a reason for the
faith that is in them; not merely teaching them that there is a Saviour
to protect them at the Judgment, but giving them the life and thoughts
of Christ, and that knowledge which shall cause them to grow into the
perfect manhood of Christ. I say, the Church that most successfully and
thoroughly, from the children in the Sunday-school and in the
Bible-classes to those under higher systems of instruction, carries
forward a knowledge of the Bible, and of God's ways with man, and of
human nature in its religious aspects, to its young people, will be the
greatest blessing in England; and once again I see that all the Churches
are awake to it.
And the third thing is this (not by any means that there are not other
things, which are perhaps just as important, but these three stand out
prominent on account of the state of men's minds in England just now):
the Church that can devise a method which will fill its pulpits with men
who are not merely earnest converted men, loyal to Jesus Christ, but men
abreast of the intelligence and thought of the times, men who have a
calm reliance in their own faith by having looked all difficulties in
the face, men who have something of the self-control and the large
thoughts that come with culture; men who will be, not despised, but
respected by the people that come to listen to them, and with whom they
come in contact in the sorrows and trials of life—the Church that can
best fill its pulpits with such preachers, and put such pastors into its
congregations, will do the best work in England. And, mark you, it is
not merely a question of denominational success; God forbid that I
should care for that; but that Church is best fulfilling its Master's
command, best doing its Master's work, most contributing to the
realisation of that time when Christ shall be King of men.
I now come to the particular part of our Church's method of government
and order which I have chosen for explanation to you to-day. We aim at
having all our ministers men who, with great differences of original
natural ability, have at least had all the thorough discipline and
culture that training can give them. Our ministers have all passed
through a high school course, a University course, and a course of study
at a theological hall. Now, all that means a period of education of
something like at least twelve years. We aim at having men who have
ability, men who will be able to bear themselves, in all the relations
of life, with dignity. We aim at having men worthy to speak in Christ's
name. It is a worthy aim. Well, now, how are you to have such men? By
praying for them; by planning thoroughly disciplined study for them; by
seeking them out in families, and persuading and inducing them to give
themselves to the work of preaching Christ's Gospel, and keeping alive
spiritual love and truth in people's hearts. It is a worthy object. But
I will be very plain: the Church's hands are largely tied by a very
mean, material fact; it is the question of the salary which is attached
to that office. If it be a wretched pittance, then it is a simple matter
of fact that you will not get men who are capable of taking a position
in the Christian world with dignity and efficiency to devote themselves
to the work of preachers. Why should they? You say, "Why should a
mercenary motive act?" Very good; why should it? But it does. But why
should it not? Sometimes it is said, "You must not make the ministry a
bribe by the largeness of its emoluments." Does it cease to be a bribe
when its emoluments are a pittance? You only lower the level of
temptation to an inferior grade of men, as well as where nothing is paid
at all. God meant that men should be tempted, and you cannot get rid of
it; they must battle with it and withstand it. But how does the thing
work? I do not think that many men of much ability will be tempted, at
least till the Millennium comes, by the emoluments of preaching, however
good they come to be. I, for my part, should regret if it ever became a
temptation to the highest ability—a money temptation, I mean. But what I
have to say is this: I am talking of a thoroughly adequate
maintenance—not of _payment_. The kind of service that is done by a man
who saves a human being from sin and hell is a service which cannot be
_paid_. That man can only be maintained to do that work; there is no
money equivalent to such a service. Partly the same thing is true of a
medical man's service; he saves a life. Why, if you paid him the
commercial value of his service you must give him your fortune; he saves
your _life_. There are some things which cannot be paid for. You cannot
pay for the love of wife and children. The sweetest things cannot be
paid for; you can only show your appreciation of them by a worthy
maintenance; it would be a pity to talk of paying for them.
Now, suppose that the maintenance awarded to ministers, to preachers, be
so small that they cannot live and bring up their children as men of
such culture and such ability are made by God to require that they
should be able to do; what is the effect of it? You often break that
man's heart; you embitter it; he would be more than human if you did
not. To go about begging for wife and child! That is the result; and it
is not the result of mere disaster, but of stinginess and meanness in
Christian England. I will tell you how it works. Where shall we get
young men with brains, with talent, with ability, that they may give
themselves to a life which is not thought to be worth a decent
maintenance by Christian people? Look at it. Here is a young man, a
member of some country Church; God has moved his heart, and made him
wish to do all the good he can in the world. He has a feeling that he
could do more if he were a minister. He would like to be one. He knows
himself to possess powers to rise in the world and take a position of
eminence, a position of dignity, and to do good in that fashion. Here is
this youth with a warm heart, who wishes to be a minister. But I will
suppose that the minister of his congregation has had some wretched
pittance to live on, has been worn out with the cares of just making
ends meet, has often been behindhand, has been talked of as such, and
more than talked of, even by kind-hearted Christian men and women, with
something of pity, and something of concern; and this youth says to
himself, "That is the life of a preacher." He would be more than human
if he thought it right and wise to choose it. And what of his father and
mother—will they encourage him to do so? They would not be parents if
they did. They will tell him, "Do not you suppose that there is anything
so excellent, or dignified, or worthy, in a minister's work." Ah, you
may say that it is a mercenary thing! True; but where does the
mercenariness begin? who brings it in? After all, men will go by reason,
and they will estimate what are the worth and dignity of the career of a
preacher of the Gospel by what Christian men and women set them down at
in pounds, shillings, and pence. That is reason.
I have said these things strongly; I have said them very strongly here,
because, though I dislike to speak of things concerning ourselves, I am
bound to say frankly that you to your minister have always acted with
rare liberality and generosity, beyond what sometimes I have thought was
proportionate. You will perfectly understand, then, that in what I speak
it is not to reproach you; far from it; it is to interest you, and make
you feel the importance of this question.
Since I came to be myself a teacher of theological students, and to take
a pride in my students, and to seek that they should be able ministers,
I have come to feel how my hands are hampered and crippled, and that the
best men are kept out by such poor, mean drawbacks as these. You will
understand me.
I now come to explain more fully the working of the particular method
adopted by our Church to maintain an honourable, able, dignified
Christian ministry: We call it the "Sustentation Fund." The immediate
aim is this, to gather together the strength and liberality of rich
congregations, and distribute them in districts where they are poorer.
In that way the poorer congregations are able to give a more handsome
maintenance to their ministers. In that way, instead of the Church
having men of parts, and culture, and dignity in the wealthier charges
only, it has men of at least fair eminence, and dignity, and ability in
all its branches; and that is an immense advantage. If it is a bane to
society to have too great extremes of wealth and poverty, it is the same
with the Church. If any Church is bound to avoid it, it is _our_ Church;
for one of the central principles of our Church is that its ministers
and office-bearers should all sit as equals in a deliberative assembly,
and that none should be able to make their will press upon others. If
you have one set of ministers begging for doles from other and richer
ministers, what have you? You have destroyed the Church as a
brotherhood, as a family. Now I have given you in that a reason why we
endeavour to distribute the generous strength of the richer among the
poorer congregations by the Sustentation Fund. Another method would be
by an Augmentation Fund, by which wealthier congregations would dole out
money to poorer congregations. That is not our system; our system is
this: Every congregation is asked to give, "as God has prospered them,"
to a fund which we prefer to call by our old Scotch term, a
"Sustentation" Fund; they have to give all that it is in their hearts to
give to that fund, and they send it up to a central committee, charged
with the duty of distributing it. The whole amount is divided by the
number of the ministers, and an equal share is sent to each. Note how
that works. It does not preclude the wealthier congregations from adding
a supplement, as it is called—adding as much as they like to the income
of their own minister. It would be unreasonable that a man should not
give more to the minister to whose ministrations he has attached
himself, and who has drawn out his sympathies; and therefore no such
liberality is asked to this fund, which goes among all the ministers.
Again, the weaker congregations are urged to contribute a sum which is
equal to their common share; but if they come short the deficiency is
made up by the surplus from the other Churches. For instance, suppose
the distributed sum is £200, and one congregation sends £230. Of that
sum £200 comes back, £30 remains, and goes probably to some congregation
in Northumberland who have only sent up £170.
Now, I have no time to go into details, or to talk about objections,
technical objections, and so on; but just let me show you very briefly
some of the advantages of this way of working. I have spoken about the
sentiment of the thing. Ministers, like men, have feelings. The poorer
ministers prefer to get their larger stipend in that fashion, rather
than getting the money as a dole. That point has to be considered; and
when you remember how great a part feeling plays in all our life you
will not disregard such a thing, even if it is only sentiment. But look
at the thing practically. It may be said, "What is the use of sending up
the whole amount? What good is there in a congregation sending up £230,
and getting £200 back? What good is there in a congregation sending up
£170, and getting £200 instead? Cannot you just as well send the £30?"
If you did that it would become a Dole Fund; it would not be a
Sustentation Fund. Then is it a mere difference of arrangement or
sentiment? Not a bit of it. I will show you how the thing works
practically. It is one of those secondary sorts of advantage which
generally go, more than anything else, to prove a principal good. I
suppose that, if you have ever thought of it, you are not surprised to
find that Church business is constantly done in a most slovenly way. I
suppose you are aware that even down in the City there are many offices
where things are done in a slovenly, hap-hazard fashion. If that is so
in business, and parish matters too, it is worse in Church matters; for
even Church people seem to think that Church business need not be done
with the same method and regularity as that with which secular matters
should be done. Now, that is especially the case in country
congregations, and the bearing of it upon finances is that moneys are
not collected as they should be; they are not asked for, and are lying
out when they ought to come in. A man who can give a shilling a month
cannot get up twelve shillings at the end of the twelve months. All of
you who are business men know what an immense advantage it is to
business to have the whole of the book-keeping, and everything, done in
an efficient manner. I saw, in this visitation of mine, congregations
that had not connected themselves with this Sustentation Fund whose
business affairs were in a shameful condition. It meant that the
minister did not get his salary; it did not come in at the time; not
that the money would not be given the moment it was applied for, but the
treasurer was careless about it, and never thought of it. You can see
the foolishness of such a position, and what a bad thing it is for the
Church. What do they care about giving, when the thing is done in that
careless fashion? Now, the Sustentation Fund means that the whole money
collected for the minister's maintenance goes up to London; and the
country people down in Northumberland try not to disgrace themselves in
the eyes of the central officers in London, and the central officers in
London have no hesitation in giving them a reminder. The advantage is
the same as it is to a business house every year to have all its books
and business pass through the hands of an accountant. It makes a man
careful; things do not fall behind. This mode of working brings
regularity and punctuality, not merely into the Sustentation Fund, but
into the whole of the funds of all our charges. Well, but you may say,
"What is the use of aid-giving congregations sending up their £200?"
They do it, who do not need it, to get the others, who do need it, to do
it too.
I have shown you what a very practical thing the Sustentation Fund is. I
am now going to mention an advantage which requires little more of
Church statesmanship to appreciate it. It is not the minister, but the
congregation, who gets the greatest benefit; I will tell you how.
Ministers do not like to go to congregations where they are kept in
arrears, and where they do not get that proper maintenance which they
should, just through carelessness, or where they have to ask the
treasurer for money. To revert to the commercial illustration, you would
not go as partner into a firm where all the books were carelessly kept,
and everything was in a slovenly, negligent condition. And the
congregation that has its whole business arrangements and financial
affairs completely regular and punctual stands in a much better position
when it has to seek a minister than one that has not; it will get a
better man. That is a very real consideration.
Once more, the system of the Sustentation Fund acts in such a fashion
that does not allow congregations to impose on it. The Committee of the
Sustentation Fund say this: "We fix with the poorer congregation how
much of the money it shall send up, and we undertake that it shall share
with the richer congregations so long as it does its duty." If they find
that it is imposing on them, then they act very sharply; but if there is
some local disaster, the loss of a wealthy member, or some sweeping
misfortune, the Sustentation Fund will do what a family does for a sick
child; it will nurse the sick child till it is strong again, and will
not let it die out.
Once again, look how this system improves the position of the
congregation (to use a commercial phrase) in the ministerial market. See
what the Sustentation Fund amounts to. You know how the credit of a weak
State is improved when a powerful State backs it up; it can borrow at a
lower rate of interest. Any man, or any firm, whose business is
punctually done, and whose books are properly kept, can get money from a
banker much more readily than one who has the reputation of being
slovenly. And the system of the Sustentation Fund improves the character
of a congregation; it gives the shield of the whole Church to an
individual congregation; it says that disaster shall not depress it; it
carries such a congregation through a time of difficulty. A minister has
more heart to go to a weak charge, to a congregation exposed to such
disasters, when that congregation has its credit backed by the general
credit of the whole Church. That is a businesslike and statesmanlike
consideration, and it is a very real one.
There are a great many other things which I could tell you. Let me
mention one fact to show what our Sustentation Fund has already done. It
has always been weak hitherto, and there has been a great deal of
opposition to it, and there have been a great many difficulties in
introducing it. It has not been able to do what it would do if it were
strong; but I will tell you what it has done already. In Northumberland,
where our Churches get the best members and Church officers—young men
brought up properly—young women brought up with prayers morning and
evening—Churches with full light in them, but very poor—in these
Northumberland Churches the annual ministerial stipend has in many cases
been nearly doubled. Of course you may say that many ministers are not
worth even £200 a year. That is true; but if they are not worth £200 a
year they are not worth anything; it is better to have them out. It is
not a question of degree or amount, but the question is, Is the man
doing a minister's work in an honest way? If he is, it is not fair that
he should have to struggle on upon such a pittance as many of the
ministers have been receiving. Well, now, I will tell you what the
Sustentation Fund has done. With the exception of two or three charges
that have to be nursed by the Home Mission Fund, and put, as it were, on
the child platform, this Sustentation Fund has given to every one of our
ministers an annual income of £200; and what has it proved? That our
giving it has brought before the congregations the duty of supporting
their ministers as has never been done before. It has taught them to be
more liberal in maintaining their ministers; it has induced them in that
way to be more generous and liberal themselves.
Now I have left myself no time for some more spiritual thoughts with
which I wanted to end. I do not think that it much matters, if you
remember how the spiritual lives on the practical material working of
Church organisation; but I just want to say this (I wish I could feel it
for myself, and I do wish that our members could feel it), that there is
a great risk of well-to-do congregations unconsciously growing very
selfish, and being shut up in themselves. That position brings a curse
with it if it brings a blight in the heart, and if we come to Christ
just to get our souls saved, and then selfishly congratulate ourselves
upon that. Christ wants a great, loving heart, panting to do good to
every one, and to save him from sin. He says, "Do not be satisfied with
just coming to say your own prayers, and sing your praises, and get your
sorrows comforted, and have your joys brightened, by belonging to a
congregation; but think of all the great Church everywhere, and whether
you might not do something for it." I think that God gathers us into
congregations just for the same reason that He gathers us into families.
Our love is too weak to be left spread out—it would die altogether; it
would be chill and cold as the world—and so he shuts it in, and bids a
man love wife and child with family affection; and so he nurses that
love, and makes it profound. What is it that causes the love of father
and mother to be so strong and tender? Is it not that there are such
endless demands upon them for giving their money, and time, and prayers?
It is God's greatest gift. But sometimes I see men and women misuse it,
and make gigantic walls, and turn them into prison walls, and they do
not care for any human being outside their little circle. It becomes a
blight and a curse to them. Our Church is strong now in England under
the Presbyterian system, while others are isolated. There is a real
danger that our hearts will be dried up and narrowed; and I put it to
you that here is one means of counteracting it, by giving with a warm
heart, thinking of the manses away in the North, and the ministers'
homes, that will be made happier and better by the liberality of those
whom God has prospered. The Church that shows most liberality and
loyalty to others is the Church that will have most love and loyalty to
the Master.