^lilijiliiiiiiliil 
 
 4 
 
'^.'lo.'olA 
 
 -^ 
 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 ** 
 
 % 
 
 Ly 
 
 Presented bT^ro- ~S~S) . \) . C^.Ax <$j \ O ,^ ."D . 
 
 Division 
 Section 
 
-Jl^-^f^rv^. '^^ . ^^^ 
 
 
 THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION vVND ITS NEEDS. 
 
 Theological education has jDassed througli several stages of 
 development since the Eeformation. In the early Church the most 
 distinguished theologians were trained in the Greek universities. The 
 Christian catechetical school at Alexandria was established at the 
 close of the second century, the most famous heads of which were 
 Clement and Origen. The school of Antioch was founded at the close 
 of the third century, eminent members of which were Chrysostom, 
 Theodore of Mopsuestia, and Nestorius. The school at Edessa was 
 founded by Ephra^m, and it became a fountain of blessing to the 
 Syrian Church. In Western EurojDe from the earliest times, theologi- 
 cal education was given in diocesan schools and then subsequently in 
 monasteries during the greater part of the Middle Ages until the 
 establishment of the great universities, when the theological faculty 
 became the leading faculty in them. 
 
 I. Theological Education Since the Eeformation. 
 
 The Eeformation was led by scholars trained in the universities. 
 The chief reformers became professors in the universities which 
 passed from the control of the Church under the control of the State. 
 Theological education in Europe has been chiefly conducted through 
 the theological faculties of the universities until the present time. 
 There have been diocesan schools and provincial seminaries of vari- 
 ous kinds, but these have been supplementary to the universities and 
 designed chiefly for the training for the ministry of those who for 
 various reasons were unable to pursue the course of theology at the 
 universities or in the interest of parties in the churches. In all the 
 national churches of Protestant Europe the normal theological educa- 
 tion is carried on at the universities. 
 
 When the non-conformists were excluded from the universities of 
 Oxford and Cambridge, they were obliged to establish training-schools 
 of their own. They followed the model of the national universities 
 and gave the entire range of instruction so far as they were able, 
 
..> ■.\ • ■ ' •' ■ --^ ■■ ■■ ^ *' •-' y 
 
 academic, collegiate, and professional, in one ifistitution. This has 
 continued to be their method until the present time. Mansfield Col- 
 lege when it removed from Birmingham to Oxford threw ofE all the 
 preparatory studies and transformed itself into a strictly professional 
 school ; but it ejitered at the same time into such friendly relations 
 with the university of Oxford, that it gained many of the advantages 
 of a theological faculiy, independent of, but working in harmony 
 with, the other faculties of a great national university. 
 
 The early American ministers were trained at the British univer- 
 sities, chiefly at Cambridge and Glasgow. When our colleges were 
 established, they followed British models and gave theological educa- 
 tion as well as classical education. Harvard, Yale, and Princeton had 
 their theological professors and their Hebrew professors, and tlieolog- 
 ical education was included in their curricula. 
 
 Theological seminaries as such belong to the present century, and 
 they have had their chief development in America, in connection with 
 zeal for denominationalisni and the desire to perpetuate the tenets of 
 certain parties in the churches. It is significant from this point of 
 view that the first theological schools established in America were the 
 result of religious controversy. In 1782 the Associate Presbyteries 
 and the Keformed Presbyteries united in the Associate Eeformed 
 Synod. But there was a considerable number who refused the union. 
 Some of these constituted the Associate Synod and organized a theo- 
 logical school at Beaver, Pa., in 1794. The Associate Keformed 
 Svnod founded a theological seminary in New York in 1804. 
 
 The two great parties into which New England Congregationalism 
 was divided, the so-called consistent Calvinists and the moderate Cal- 
 vinists, each had in mind the establishment of a theological school. 
 The theological instruction at Harvard under Dr. Henry Ware was 
 Unitarian and this urged the orthodox to establish orthodox schools 
 as soon as possible. Happily the two parties united in the Andover 
 creed of 1808 and both were satisfactorily represented in the faculty. 
 
 The efforts for union of kindred denominations at the close of the 
 eighteenth century having failed, denominationalisni entered upon an 
 ambitious career and each ecclesiastical party sought a rallying point 
 in a theological seminary. The Dutch Reformed Church established 
 their seminary at New Brunswick, N. J., in 1810, under John H. Liv- 
 ingston; the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church founded 
 their seminary at Princeton in 1812, under Archibald Alexander; 
 the General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church estab- 
 42 
 
630 TBEOLOGICAL EDUCATION AND ITS NEEDS. 
 
 lishcJ their seminary in New York in 1817; the Baptists planted 
 a seminary at Hamilton, N. Y., in 1819; the German lieformed semi- 
 nary was organized in 1825 ; the Lutheran at Gettysburg, Pa., in 1826 ; 
 the Methodists did not organize a theological school until 1847. On 
 the basis of these institutions, a large number of denominational 
 theological seminaries have grown up from time to time in the pro- 
 gress of religion in America. These theological schools have been 
 entirely professional in their character, standing apart from the col- 
 leges and the universities and having an independent life and devel- 
 opment. They have become denominational centres and the rallying 
 points of parties in the denominations. The colleges and the univer- 
 sities have for the most part given over theology to the theological 
 schools and have unfolded their courses of study without regard to the 
 science of theology. So far have they gone in this direction that 
 many colleges train students away from the ministry instead of pre- 
 paring them for the theological seminary. 
 
 Harvard and Yale, the earliest of the American institutions of 
 learning, were caught in the sweep of the nev\'' movement. But hap- 
 pily they did not discard theolog}^, but organized it into separate 
 faculties, Harvard in 1815, and Yale in 1822, giving it independent 
 life and development; so that, while the colleges were frequented by 
 students of all denominations, the Harvard theological school became 
 known as Unitarian and the Yale theological school as Congregational. 
 It is quite evident, however, that both have been so influenced by the 
 universities to which they have been attached that they have not 
 been so denominational as the theological seminaries that stood alone 
 by themselves, under the direct influence of the denominations. Thus 
 the Harvard theological school, which is unjustly put under the ban 
 as Unitarian, has in its faculty a Baptist and a Congregationalist. 
 And the Yale divinity school has ever been renowned for its breadth 
 and catholicit}'. 
 
 In recent times there has been a reaction against the isolation of 
 theological seminaries as merely professional schools. The Methodists 
 with their great practical sense have never taken kindly to them. 
 The wonderful progress of Methodism was made without any theolog- 
 ical seminaries whatever. But few Methodist ministers leceive their 
 theological training in them at the present time. Their Concord Bibli- 
 cal Institute was removed to Boston, to become a part of the Boston 
 University, and their Garret Biblical Institute was adopted as the theo- 
 logical department of the North-Western University. The new Chicago 
 
THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION AND ITS NEEDS. 637 
 
 University is designed to grow up about the Baptist theological semin- 
 ary at Morgan Park. Some may object that these theological schools of 
 the Methodists and the Baptists are parts of denominational universi- 
 ties and therefore dominated by strictly sectarian interests. But even 
 if this be so, the university connection overcomes in a measure the 
 evils of theological isolation. 
 
 We shall now call attention to the same general movement in con- 
 nection with theological schools of denominations differing from those 
 which are regarded as controlling the college or university with which 
 they are affiliated. 
 
 At Cambridge, Mass., there is an Episcopal theological school, 
 founded in 1867, which is not in organic connection with Harvard 
 University, but which is in such friendly relations that the faculty and 
 students have many of the advantages of the great university. It has 
 also been proposed to remove Andover Seminary to Cambridge, in 
 order to share in these advantages. Many think that this would be a 
 wise step, even if half the endowments were forfeited. The Episcopal 
 Divinity School in Philadelphia is in friendly relations with the Uni- 
 versity of Pennsylvania. 
 
 The Union Theological Seminary in New York was founded under 
 interesting circumstances, two years before the great disruption of the 
 Presbyterian Church in the United States. The design of the found- 
 ers was thus explained: 
 
 •'It is the design of the founders to provide a theological semicaiy in the 
 midst of the greatest and most growing community in America, around which 
 all men of modei'ate views and feelings, who desire to live free from party strife, 
 and to stand aloof from all extreines of doctrinal speculation, practical radicalism, 
 and ecclesiastical domination, may cordially and affectionately rally." 
 
 It received the name of Union Tlieological Seminary, and in its his- 
 tory it has ever been true to that ideal. Its directors and faculty 
 were the leaders in the reunion of the Presbyterian Church. They 
 are at the present time leading the way in the direction of a larger 
 reunion of Christendom, and are in sympathy with all that is large and 
 broad and solid in Christian theology and Christian life. Union Sem- 
 inary has recently entered into relations of courtesy with Columbia 
 College and with the University of New York. These relations are 
 thus expressed in the annual catalogue : 
 
 " These university courses by the covu-tesy of the institutions offering them, 
 are open to such students of the Seminary as are recommended by the Faculty. 
 Recommendations will be given only to students of superior scholarship, and 
 
638 THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION AND ITS NEEDS. 
 
 only on the condition tliat these special university courses shall not interfere 
 with the regular work appointed by the Seminary. 
 
 "By terms of agreement between the Seminary and tiie University of the 
 City of New York, the Univei'sity ' will admit witiiout fee to special lectures in 
 the Graduate Division, and also, with the consent of the Professor occupying the 
 chair concerned, to other lectures in the Department of Arts and Sciences, 
 students of the Seminary recommended by the Faculty of the Seminary. ' 
 
 "According to an agreement with Columbia College, permission is granted 
 to students duly recommended, ' in such number as ma^' be approved by the 
 President of tlie College, to attend the lectures delivered in the School of Political 
 Science on Political Economy and Sociology, and the lectures in the School of 
 Arts, on the Semitic Languages, Philosopiiy and Ethics, without the payment of 
 fees.' " 
 
 The same terms were offered at the same time to the General Theo- 
 logical Seminary of the Protestant Episcopal Church. These are 
 doubtless the beginnings of a more extended movement. 
 
 We have thus traced three stages of development in theological 
 education in America: (1) as a part of the college, (2) as an indepen- 
 dent professional school, (3) as an independent school in friendly 
 alliance with the university. 
 
 11. Advantages and Disadvantages of Theological 
 Seminaries. 
 
 "We are now prepared to consider some of the advantages and dis- 
 advantages that have sprung out of theological seminaries. 
 
 1 . The Isolation of Theology. — Great advantages have arisen from the 
 organization of theological seminaries as separate institutions. The- 
 ological education has made rapid strides forward. In the olden time 
 two professors in the colleges, the Theological professor and the 
 Hebrew professor, were deemed sufficient for theological instruction. 
 In the seminaries it has so increased as to make a full course of three 
 years and a supplementary course for graduates who are able to pur- 
 sue it. The chairs of instruction have increased so as to represent 
 the four great divisions of Theology, Exegetical, Historical, Syste- 
 matic, and Practical ; and Exegetical theology has been divided be- 
 tween the Old-Testament Professor and the New-Testament Professor. 
 The older Dogmatic professor has been put between the professor of 
 Biblical Theology and the prof essor of Apologetics; and Polemic The- 
 ology hag in the best institutions yielded the field to Christian Sym- 
 bolics. A study of the catalogues shows the improvements that have 
 been made, especially in recent years. 
 
 The course in theology is still very defective in the great majority 
 
THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION AND ITS NEEDS. 639 
 
 of the theological schools, and is still far from perfection even in those 
 most richly endowed and manned; but no one can deny real and 
 great progress. There are few seminaries which give instruction in 
 Theological Encyclopeedia, that general survey of the field of theology 
 which is important to introduce the student into his studies and give 
 him a general idea of the work before him. There are few which 
 teach Symbolics, that important theological discipline which compares 
 the official confessions, creeds, and catechisms in order to determine 
 the faith of the several denominations and accurately state their con- 
 cord and discord ; a work which is of incalculable importance in the 
 advance towards Christian unity. There are few which teach Biblical 
 Theology, that science which gives the theology of the Bible itself 
 in its historic formation, as distinguished from the theology of the 
 creeds and the theology of the theologians. There are few which 
 teach the history of dogma and show the gradual evolution of Chris- 
 tian doctrine under the guidance of the divine Spirit through the 
 Christian centuries. There are few which teach Religious Philosophy 
 and Comparative Religion, sciences of great importance in order to 
 show the origin and development of religion in man, and the history 
 of religions in our world; for upon the right understanding of the 
 essential principles of religion and of that which the great religions 
 have in common, depends our appreciation of the distinctive principles 
 of Christianity, and a clear insight into the real missionary work of 
 the Church. There are few which teach Christian Ethics, the science 
 of holy conduct, for they have been content wdth a college education, 
 usually very defective, in so-called Moral Philosophy. There are few 
 which teach in any comprehensive and scientific manner the evolution 
 of Christian Institutions, or pay proper attention to Christian Art, 
 Christian Architecture, Christian Song, and Christian Liturgy. There 
 are few which give any sufficient attention to the English Bible and 
 the practical exposition of Holy Scripture to the Christian people. 
 These and many other things demand more attention in our theolog- 
 ical schools. 
 
 The backbone of theological training is still Hebrew Exegesis, 
 Greek Exegesis, Church History, Systematic Theology, Pastoral The- 
 ology and Homiletics, and these too often with limited range and in 
 crude, mechanical, and unfruitful methods. The scientific method is 
 beginning to revolutionize theological education ; but this movement 
 is only in its beginnings. It can make progress only through great 
 and bitter theological conflict, owing to the opposition of conserva- 
 
640 THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION AND ITS NEEDS. 
 
 tives to any and every iii)2)rovement in methods and scope of instruc- 
 tion, and also on account of the few teachers who are properly quali- 
 fied for the work. 
 
 It will be evident to any one who has carefully considered the 
 subject and who aims to improve theological education in our country, 
 that that improvement can come only by single-hearted devotion to 
 theology as a science, as an important section of universal knowledge ; 
 in other words, as a part of the university course. Theology has shut 
 herself off from her sister sciences in America during the present 
 century, and has paid the penalty in well-merited neglect by the 
 learned men of other departments of knowledge. Theology is the 
 queen of the sciences, but she can reign only in the university. She 
 dethrones herself when she retires by herself into the theological 
 school. Theology in Europe is far ahead of theology in America, 
 because it is in the full stream of university life, whereas in America, 
 isolated in theological halls, under the domination for the most part 
 of the conservatives in the denominations, it has lagged behind in 
 the development of other branches of human learning. 
 
 2. The Minislry^s Need of Better University Education. — Theological 
 training in theological seminaries has had the advantage of giving the 
 ministry as a class a higher professional education than they could 
 have had in the colleges, because theological students were gathered 
 apart by themselves to devote themselves to a professional career ; but 
 this has had the disadvantage of training them away from their col- 
 lege-mates in other professions, and has alienated them from the pro- 
 gress made in the other departments of learning. If one compares the 
 theological education given at Oxford and Cambridge with the educa- 
 tion given in the theological halls of the Free Church of Scotland in 
 Edinburgh and Glasgow, he will be astonished at the immense ad- 
 vance of the purely professional school over the universities in the 
 department of theology; and yet it cannot be said that these theolog- 
 ical halls have been more fruitful in great preachers and theological 
 writers than the English universities. It should be stated, however, 
 that only a small portion of the clergy of the Church of England are 
 educated at the universities, while almost all the ministers of the Free 
 Churches of Scotland are trained in tlieological hails. The reason 
 of it has often come before our mind, in conversation with representa- 
 tives of these institutions. The strength of the English clergyman 
 who ha-s been trained in the university is that he is in fellowship with 
 the men of learning of his university. lie is in sympathy with the 
 
THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION AND ITS NEEDS. 641 
 
 entire range of human culture. The other professions are interested 
 in theology and the clergyman is interested in the other professions. 
 They develop in harmony and in mutual sympathy and help. This 
 is in a measure true of the minister of the Church of Scotland who is 
 trained in tlie national universities, as compared with the minister of 
 the Free Church trained in the theological hall. The theological 
 training in the free colleges is much more extensive and thorough, 
 and yet we do not find the difference in the ministry that one might 
 expect under the circumstances. There is such great advantage in 
 the university connection that it counterbalances the advantage of the 
 improved curriculum and greater force of teachers in the theological 
 schools. If there is any way in which we may combine the advan- 
 tages of an independent theological school with the advantages of a 
 university connection, v/e shall enter upon a new era of theological 
 education. 
 
 Into this new era, it seems, we are now entering by the connections 
 established between theological seminaries and universities in Boston 
 and Philadelphia, New York and Chicago, as well as in the old uni- 
 versities of Harvard and Yale ; and in the friendly relations between 
 Mansfield College and the Manchester New College and the University 
 of Oxford. The educational movement now in progress in Scotland 
 will also doubtless result in giving the theological halls of the Free 
 Church and the United Presbyterian Church university advantages. 
 These university connections enable the students of theology now in 
 the seminaries to keep in touch with all the professions and to move 
 with the general currents of human thought. We may hope from 
 this friendly intercourse that the hostility between science and relig- 
 ion, philosophy and theology, may pass away, and that theology 
 itself may expand with the appropriation of fresh material from all 
 departments of human investigation. 
 
 3. The Laymen's Need of Theological Education. — There is a certain ad- 
 vantage in the separation of candidates for the ministry and their isola- 
 tion from men of other callings in life. It makes a homogeneous body 
 of men who have consecrated themselves to the service of Christ in the 
 work of the Christian ministry. There is more unity and enthusiasm 
 in work among them which comes from specialization. But there is a 
 very serious disadvantage also in excluding from theological training- 
 men of other callings in life. It is a very remarkable evolution in 
 American religious life that while the layman has been raised to an 
 equality with the minister in the government of the church, lay- 
 
642 THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION AND ITS NEEDS. 
 
 men have been excluded from theological training in our seminaries, 
 and deprived of the opportunity of securing the education that thej 
 need to really make them equal with their ministers. In the previous 
 centuries they could study theology in the colleges and universities 
 alongside of the ministry. So now in the universities of Europe 
 they may freely study theology. But in our theological seminaries it 
 has been a common rule that all but candidates for the ministry 
 should be rigidly excluded. Thus we have gained the position where 
 the ministry are highly trained in theology, but the elders, vestry- 
 men, deacons, and other leaders in the practical work of the Church 
 are without training in theology. It is not strange under such cir- 
 cumstances that many of the ministry should feel that they are trained 
 far above the understanding of the people, and that it should be so 
 difficult for the theological student when he goes forth from the theo- 
 logical school to bring his mind into sympathy with the people. 
 
 Theological education should be free, ojjen to any man or woman 
 who has sufficient elementary training to pursue these studies. The 
 Church at the present time needs laymen who are trained in theology. 
 It is not necessary that these should undergo the entire course of 
 training that ministers undergo, but it should be open to those prop- 
 erly qualified, so that they may pursue those studies that seem to 
 them important for their work in life. The new departure of Union 
 Theological Seminary in New York, in opening its studies to graduate 
 students of Columbia College and the University of New York, makes 
 it possible for lawyers, physicians, and teachers and others who desire 
 theological training to secure it in an institution already established 
 where there are many courses of study suitable for the purpose. It 
 will be the inevitable result of this policy that new courses will be 
 established which will be appropriate for students of this class. 
 Doubtless those other theological seminaries which have university 
 connection, will ere long open their courses of instruction in a similar 
 way, if they have not already done so. And thus once more theology 
 will enter into the circle of the sciences and take her proper place — ■ 
 giving and receiving unspeakable benefits. 
 
 The professions are more interwoven than they used to be. There 
 are important points of contact between ecclesiastical and civil law 
 which both lawyer and minister should know. There are important 
 connections between medicine and theology which physician and 
 pastor should understand, in order to harmonious action in those cases 
 where disease of body and. disease of soul are blended. By the co- 
 
THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION AND ITS NEEDS. 643 
 
 operation of the faculties of instruction through the medium of a great 
 university, all this instruction can be given with economy and with 
 propriety, and the professions will be improved by mutual acquaint- 
 ance. Theology has much to learn from law and medicine and she 
 has favors to bestow in return. 
 
 III. Theological Education and the Public. 
 
 Theological education has also an important relation to the public. 
 All education should aim at the public welfare. Much more should 
 theological education keep in mind the religious needs of the people. 
 It is evident that the Church needs for its work something more than 
 an educated ministry. It needs ministers trained to the highest de- 
 gree of excellence. But it also needs men who have no more theolog- 
 ical training than is necessary to enable them to work efficiently in 
 very humble spheres. 
 
 1. Education of Lay Evangelists. — The history of the Methodist Epis- 
 copal Church, the experience of the Cumberland Presbyterian Church, 
 and the practice of the Salvation Army show that there must be a 
 theological education of an army of men and women far beyond the 
 capacity of all of our theological schools as they are now constituted. 
 The Presbyterian and Congregational Churches forfeited the suprem- 
 acy of America by insisting upon a highly educated ministry and by 
 neglecting to train men of lower grades for Christian service. These 
 churches committed no error when they insisted upon a learned minis- 
 try, but they did commit a grave error when they neglected to provide 
 an additional ministry for the people, of men less highly trained. The 
 Methodist and Cumberland Presbyterians did noble service and reaped 
 well-earned rewards, when they sent forth evangelists with quite mod- 
 erate training into the vineyard to do the work no others could do. 
 
 The demands for Christian preachers and teachers, at the present 
 time, are vastly in excess of any other period of the world's history. 
 The evangelization of our cities, of our outlj-ing populations, and of 
 the heathen world is the greatest religious problem of our time. 
 We need an enormous army of evangelists for this task. It is impos- 
 sible to train them all in the theological courses of our seminaries. 
 We must either have new institutions established for the purpose, or 
 our theological seminaries should have sufficient elasticity to adapt 
 themselves to the work. No one can be more earnest than we are to 
 climb to the highest reaches of Christian theology and to expand the 
 
644 THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION AND ITS NEEDS. 
 
 theological course and lengthen it and perfect it in every way for 
 those who are able to pursue it. But at the same time, we think that 
 the theological seminary owes a duty to the public; that it should do 
 a work for the lowest as well as the highest ; and that it may rise all 
 the better to the loftiest aims, if it is open-minded and large-hearted 
 enough to consider the needs of the Christian people. It is better to 
 do all this work through one great theological institution than to 
 undertake to establish several institutions with special ends in view. 
 A thet^logical seminary in New York properly equipped, might train 
 all the Christian workers that are needed for our churches, laymen as 
 well as ministers. An increase of teachers and endowments would be 
 needed, but this would be more economical and fruitful than the erec- 
 tion of feeble supplementary institutions. 
 
 The theological seminary should follow the example of our best 
 colleges and grow in all directions, expanding and reaching upward, 
 and at the same time striking its roots downwards as a true tree of 
 life, to feed the people of God. 
 
 2. Tic: Work of Theology in University Extension. — The universities 
 have learned that they owe a duty to the whole community. When 
 the American colleges and universities failed to understand the signs 
 of the times, the Chautauqua movement showed by its rapid progress 
 and its enormous expansion that the people demanded some at least 
 of the education that the colleges had been retaining for certain classes 
 in the community. The English universities have seen the impor- 
 tance of the movement and have organized university-extension courses 
 with beneficial results. Some of our American colleges have com- 
 bined in a similar movement. The theological seminaries have a duty 
 in the same direction. Theology is for the people as well as for the 
 ministry. There has been no time since the seventeeth century in 
 which the people are so much interested in theological problems as at 
 the present time. Our theological seminaries, especially those situated 
 in the great cities, should arrange courses of lectures and training 
 classes for the public instruction of men and women in theology- The 
 theological seminaries may vastly increase their usefulness by enter- 
 ing into this field. Doubtless an increased number of teachers would 
 be required, but it would be more economical and more fruitful in 
 good results, to furnish them for the institutions already established 
 and to use with them the teachers and the buildings, and the appara- 
 tus already in existence. It may have a wholesome effect upon pro- 
 fessors and students if they should thereby be brought into closer 
 
THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION AND ITS NEEDS. U.o 
 
 contact with the Christian public. Any tendency to undue specula- 
 tion and theorizing would be overcome by the demands of the people 
 for plain and practical instruction. 
 
 8. Practical Training in Christian Work. — One of the most whole- 
 some effects of the establishment of theological seminaries in great 
 cities is the combination of practical with theoretical training. Theo- 
 logical students are thereby brought into connection with the practi- 
 cal work in missions and charities and religious work of all kinds. 
 They see the best methods, they engage in the most efficient enter- 
 prises, they hear the ablest preachers and lecturers, and become famil- 
 iar with the entire practical work of the Church. They learn about 
 men of every kindred and tongue and country. Their mind and their 
 sympathies are enlarged. The religious work of a great city is to the 
 theological student what hospitals are to the medical student, and the 
 courts of justice are to the law student. It is true there is peril here 
 that the practical work with its pressing claims may withdraw atten- 
 tion from tlie theoretical training. But the peril has to be confronted 
 by the minister, and the sooner he faces the difficulty under the ad- 
 vice of competent instructors and overcomes it, the better for him. 
 It is one of the most important lessons in life he has to learn, to so 
 marry precept and practice that divorce will forever after become 
 '.mpossible. 
 
 It will be evident to those who have followed the exposition that 
 has been given of the history of theological education, the advantages 
 and the disadvantages of the past methods and the suggestions that 
 have been made as to new methods, that theological education is very 
 far from its ideal. Much needs to be done in order that theology 
 may take its proper position in the university, may do its duty in the 
 training of evangelists, and may give the Christian people that theo- 
 logical education which they need. But if the Christian public will 
 unite with Christian scholars and undertake the task, many things 
 that seem difficult and even impossible now will be accom.plished 
 without strain and with the most excellent results. 
 
 C. A, Briggs. 
 
PENSIONS : TIME TO CALL A HALT. 
 
 The pension question is attracting great attention throughout the 
 country, and the veterans of the war are taking an active part in the 
 discussion of it. Their views differ widely. On last Decoration Day, 
 a gentleman who was an officer of volunteers during the war and is 
 now a civil officer of the State of New York, in a public address 
 declared that the Government had been so mean and penurious in its 
 treatment of its defenders, that he could see no remedy except by the 
 formation of a Soldiers' Party which should demand justice for the 
 veterans. On the other hand, soldiers in some parts of the country 
 have organized societies to oppose the further increase of the pension 
 roll, and to protest against representations made to the effect that the 
 veterans are clamorous for more pensions. They declare that such 
 statements are libels on a class of patriotic men and are calculated to 
 rob them of the good name to which they are entitled, and to deprive 
 them of the high place as brave and patriotic men which would other- 
 wise be accorded to them by coming generations. 
 
 "Which side is right? To aid us in deciding this question, let us 
 examine a few statistics. The following are taken from the last 
 official report of the Commission of Pensions dated June 30, 1891. 
 
 1865 
 1870 
 1875 
 1880 
 1885 
 1890 
 1891 
 
 Those who mourn over the illiberality of our Government towards 
 its defenders, may find some relief in a careful study of the foregoing 
 figures. If they still remain convinced that republics are ungrateful 
 and that ours is particularly so, they may discover a ray of light in the 
 following assurance given by the Commissioner in his report, page 21 : 
 
 " I desire to call your attention to the reports made to the Department dur- 
 ing the past four months, showing the number of pension certificates issued, the 
 
 Total number of 
 
 Amount paid for 
 
 pensioners on roll. 
 
 pensions. 
 
 85,986 
 
 $8,535,153 
 
 198,686 
 
 37,780,811 
 
 234,821 
 
 29,683,116 
 
 250,803 
 
 57,340,540 
 
 345,135 
 
 65,693,706 
 
 537,944 
 
 106,493,890 
 
 676,160 
 
 118,548,959 
 
\ 
 
. rJ,rt-c.f\,UrJiii»!Si^/B&L 
 
 
 Date Due 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ - i '^ '■! 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 u l^ ^ 
 
 i. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • Culi 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 
 .1.^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 '< sr 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 r 
 
 
 
 
 ■ .A;UV 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 (|) 
 
 
 
 
::Ji:'Mi^;i:i:i':'t':ii.|:|M||!' 
 
 iiiiSiiiiii