WINTER 2020
SUNDAY SCHOOLS
By Elder Lemuel Potter.
Messenger of Peace, Macon City, Missouri, Monday, August 16, 1886, Vol. 12, No. 19.
Cynthiana, Ind.
DEAR BRO. GOODSON --- A few years ago there was a great anxiety on the part of not a few of our brethren, to meet in national convention, but for what purpose I did not then know, nor do I now know.
I remember, however, that I was opposed to it at that time, on the ground that I thought it would promote division in our borders. I believed, then, that should such a convention ever be held, there would be a move in favor of Baptist Sunday schools in our churches; and a move to introduce some sort of system for the support of the ministry; and the encouragement of a Baptist college, for the education of the ministry; and a move in favor of the reception of baptism of other denominations; and the establishment of a Regular Baptist publishing house.
As I was then opposed to all those things, and as some of our brethren seemed to think I manifested more willingness than wisdom, to speak up against them, I was not unfrequently thought to be too hasty in my predictions.
The things that I predicted as the object intended by my brethren, in wanting the convention, were bitterly denied by some who were at that time highly in favor of the meeting.
But time moved on, no convention was held, and the feeling in favor of such a thing seemed to quiet down in a great measure, and it now appears that instead of adopting the above named measures by conventional authorities, another plan is resorted to, to try to force them on the brethren and churches.
I meet with brethren, sometimes, when instead of speaking of our beloved Zion encouragingly, and in a manner to give us anything edifying, they, in their conversation, seem inclined to indulge in sarcasms and disapprobating expressions concerning all the brethren who do not feel willing to go headlong into all the new measures they may suggest. The great anxiety to improve the church seems to prevail with some men to such an extent that when they visit the church, they are not able to preach a gospel sermon, but must take up their time in telling the people how careless they are about the training of their children, and prayer, and other duties, and I have heard a labored effort of an hour at a time, exposing publicly the brethren and sisters. I have looked about me and listened to the brethren and sisters to see what effect that sort of preaching (?) had, and I have come to the conclusion that it does no good, and that no man would indulge in it if he felt as a gospel minister should feel when he preaches.
That some of our brethren favor the measures and means that I have named, is so palpably evident now that I presume no one would venture a denial of it, and as it is so public as it is, perhaps no brother would be unreasonable enough to think me unkind, or egotistic, if I should give a few thoughts on that subject, and lend my influence, if I have any, in the direction, which I believe to be best for our cause. I will attribute all the candor, honesty and sincerity to others that I claim for myself.
I have always been of the opinion that before I obstinately object to a thing or principle, that it was my duty to test it first, and find out, if I can, all its merits and demerits. Convince me that we should have a Regular Baptist Sunday School in our churches, and that it would be best for the up-building of the churches, and for our children, and then I am in favor of them. Then let us look at that matter for a moment. Those of our good brethren who favor such things frequently throw up to us that our children are leaving us and going to other churches, because we take no pains with them ourselves to keep them with us, and therefore they are in favor of Sunday Schools. Well, I have noticed our brethren in that particular, and their children, as a result of my investigations are, that if parents stand aloof from affiliation with other churches and their Sunday School, and teach their children the difference between us and others, the Arminians are not able to do much with them, but if our children are taught by their parents at home, that a Sunday School is a good thing, and that we are to blame as a church because we do not have them, it is an easy matter for us to account for why such children will go to Arminian Sunday School.
But we are told by our brethren that they do not believe in Sunday School for the purpose for which the Arminians do.
They also tell us that they do not believe in conducting a Sunday school in the manner of the Arminians, and that we need not fear Arminianism on their part, for they are as far from that as any of us. But then I ask, how is it that the children of some, at least, of our brethren who advocate Sunday Schools, attend Arminian Sunday Schools and take an active part, if you do not believe in them? To this question, I have met with the response, that the reason they go there is because we have none of our own to go to, and they desire to go to Sunday School.
Then it seems that if you cannot have what you like, you will take what you do not believe in. It would not surprise me if the children of those parents were to join the Arminians. The greatest surprise to me is that there do not more of them join other churches, under those circumstances, than do. If I could not give my children to others by pursuing such a course, I should think they would be hard to give away. But, as a rule, it is not true that our children are leaving us and joining other churches, especially where we are doing our duty in preaching the truth in our pulpits, and letting all see the real difference between us and others; but if they can see no difference between us and others, they are quite likely to join others.
We are also told that the object is to teach our children to read the Bible. I do not believe a Sunday School is necessary to that end at all, and no one need offer such a plea as that to me. I have heard it all my life, and have tested it until I am satisfied; and that Sunday Schools make better children, I am far from believing, for I have noticed those things as far back as I can remember, and there are two reasons why I do not like that as a plea for such things now. One is, that it is an insult, both to our fathers in the ministry,
our parents, who have universally opposed all such things ever since the missionary split.
The children of Baptist parents make as good citizens as others, and they are as intelligent, and as well versed in the scriptures, and about as many of them profess religion, and make good church members, and as few of them go to the penitentiary, and to the gallows, and in everything will compare favorably with those who have been brought up in the church, and have attended Sunday School all their lives. This is what my observation has taught me, and I think it is a fair test, in fact, I know of no better.
But then I might not be so much opposed to Sunday Schools as I am, if the brethren would tell me their real object in them, so that I could understand what they want it for.
They say they do not want it for the same purpose for which the Arminians do, and that they do not want them conducted on the Arminian style, and I would love to know just what they do want them for, and in what manner they wish them conducted.
Until I find out, I shall oppose them, for I know there is no Bible warrant for them.
As to a system for the support of the ministry, I am frank to admit that there are great irregularities in the practice of a great many of our churches, but instead of originating a plan to regulate that evil, I would suggest that our brethren read the scriptures on that subject, and that the pastors of churches impress on the minds of their brethren their obligations to perform the duties enjoined on them in God's word. One great trouble, in my opinion, on this subject, is the delicacy with which our minister speak of that matter. They seem to touch that subject very lightly for fear some of their brethren will make the remark that "he wants money," or that "he seems to have money on his mind," or some other remark that no christian man should ever indulge in about a man who make the sacrifice that a gospel minister must necessarily make if he does his duty. On account of such men our brethren endure hardships and say nothing, and often, when they can hold up under it no longer, they will begin to look out for new fields. Now, all this grows out of the poor minister shunning his duty in order to have the approbation of the brother that he thinks would make such remarks about him. I would suggest to ministers that they quit such a course, for the feelings of such men, and to the churches, that if they do not want something for nothing, that they never ask a man to serve them as a pastor or otherwise, unless they are willing to share with him in bearing the burden, whatever is necessary. The Bible is so plain on this subject that I see no need of getting up a system to improve our condition in that respect.
Let ministers and churches practice what the scriptures teach on that subject and the evil will be remedied at once.
On the school question, I think that times and circumstances should govern us in that matter. In the days of the dark ages, before printing was invented, and when the Bible was in manuscript, and when it cost so much to procure a copy of it that it could only be afforded by a few clergy, and when there was not one person in five hundred who could read the Bible, then, it seems, it was necessary to look for some plan and means for an education. In those times our poor brethren did all they could, under the circumstances, to acquire and impart to others, a knowledge of the Bible. Gundulphus, and perhaps many others, would take under their care and instruction, young men whose duty it was to preach the gospel; and in an early day in America, when the country was new, amid all the difficulties attending new settlements, clearing their lands, cultivating their crops, fighting the Indians, French, and British, and founding the government, when there were no school facilities, our brethren did their duty in forming a grammar school for the education of their young men.
But is such a thing needed now for our young men? Our brethren, if I understand them, do not advocate the idea of a theological school for our young ministers, and if they do not, then I should object most seriously to such a thing, and if they do not, then school facilities are such that I cannot see that we need a school of our own to give them a secular education. Every father, who is able and wishes, can school his boys and girls in this country, as cheaply and as easily without a Baptist school as with it. And now as there are already schools in full operation, it would be a great deal cheaper for the Baptists, if they wish to educate their young preachers, to patronize them than it would to go to the enormous expense of an outlay of fifty thousand dollars to get up just such a school as already exists, only they have not the name, Regular Baptist. I should not think that any of our brethren would object, if church wishes to send a young man to school, and give him a thorough education. Neither do I suppose there would be any objection to any of the brethren, if they wish, to start up a school, but that such a thing is absolutely needed by the church, I fail to see. It is true that other denominations have their schools, but they are strictly denominational, and all of their churches are taxed to support them.
For an example, consult the discipline of the M. E. Church. It may be said that we do not wish to burden our church with taxations and heavy assessments in order to support a school. But then, some sort of a system will be necessary if we have a school, and we might learn from our religious neighbors, who have had experience in such things, how would be the best way to raise the needed funds.
School houses and furniture do not spontaneously grow, and teachers do not offer their service for nothing, and before we can successfully have such a school, the best means and measures for such an object must necessarily be sought.
But surrounded as we are in this age and country, with good schools in almost every part, it seems to me that it would be unreasonable on our part to go to the expense of erecting buildings and furnishing them with school apparatus, and employing teachers in order to give our young men just such an education as they could get at the schools already in operation. It seems to me it would be like this: I have a family of children to educate, and rather than have them patronize the schools that I have access to, I go to work and erect a new school house of my own, and
is, under my control. It would cost me just as much to board and pay tuition, after I got my house built and teachers employed, as it would to send them to some other school.
I hardly think that the Baptist church needs a school of that sort.
If individuals wish to get up such a school, no one would object that I know of, but if they are going to accuse the churches of not doing their duty unless they go into it by church acts, as churches, then I do seriously object. As to how the Regular Baptist church is to proceed to have a college, I do not remember of ever having heard a suggestion from any of the brethren who need such a school.
As to a Regular Baptist publishing house, by which to print books and papers cheaper, I confess I cannot see how a Regular Baptist could publish cheaper than anyone else. We are mistaken if we think that a paper costs us more because we have no publishing house than it would if we had one. The way for us to have a cheap paper is to give our editor a sufficient list of subscribers to enable him to give us a paper cheap. It costs our editor as much to print a paper for a hundred subscribers as it does for a thousand, except the cost of the paper he uses, and the extra press work and mailing, but a hundred subscribers would only pay him $150 a year at $1.50 a copy, while at the same price, a thousand subscribers would pay him $1,500 a year, and cost him only a trifle more. So if we could give him a list large enough, he could give us a large paper for $1.00 a year, and give us a weekly paper at that. All this he could do without a Regular Baptist printing house, and if he could not get the subscribers, he could not do it with it.
So, if our brethren want cheap books and papers, let them patronize our authors and editors freely. If they do not, it could not be afforded them if we had a dozen Regular Baptist publishing houses.
As to publishing the Bible, I do not know of any one denomination that publishes the Bible. The American Bible Society does publish it, and all denominations have had a hand in it that would, and I do not think it belongs to any one denomination more than another. That society has published a great many Bibles and testaments, and put the prices down so low that I feel confident that no sort of an institution can give us Bibles cheaper than they do, for it has ever been their rule to give the Bible to those who were not able to buy.
I look on the work of this society as a good work, and would rather work in it and for it than anything of the sort I know of. It publishes cheap copies of the Bible, which no other publishing house does, and a copy of the whole Bible can be bought from it at about forty cents.
The Bible furnished by it are clear of all those costly features and explanation that you see in many Bibles now-a-days, published by other houses.
There are other publishing houses that publish the Bible, as Potter, Holman, Hubbard Brothers, and many others, and some of those companies have invested in their establishments $1,500,000.00 and have their stereotyped or electro-typed plates for the Bible already made, so they have no type-setting to do, and when they want to print the Bible, they have nothing to do but the press work and binding. It would require a great deal of capital, time, and labor for us to compete with them.
As to other books, I do not understand how a Regular Baptist house could print and bind them cheaper than other publishers could, and if they could not, I do not see how it would benefit the Regular Baptist church, or the printing office either, to give it the name of Regular Baptist. [But it may be said that there are] some works gone out of print that we need republished. Suppose there are, is it necessary to get up a Regular Baptist office to publish them? Tell me what the work is, and insure me to sell a sufficient number of them to justify me, and I will get them published cheaper than to buy an office and print them. It is no trouble for our brethren to get printing done, but the main trouble is to get sales for it after it is printed.
It is not for want of a Regular Baptist publishing house that we have no more publications among us, but is a want of a market where we can dispose of our productions. Other denominations publish their tracts, pamphlets and books of every description, and often have their colporteurs traveling over the country to sell them, and they publish a thousand and one little things that you could not give to our children.
Then, before I favor the idea that our church needs a Regular Baptist publishing house, I would be pleased if some one would tell me why.
Yet, if our brethren wish to form a company and establish a publishing house, I see no reason why they should not be allowed the privilege. This is a free country, and our brethren have as much right to an enterprise of that sort as others, so far as I know, and when they get their house in running order, and wish to call it by the name of "Regular Baptist," I see no harm it will do to the church. I have often known dry goods merchants to call their store "The New York Store," and I do not suppose any one complains of it. New York is under no obligations to support such a store, and so long as the church is under no obligation to support the printing office, who should object? I should think the man that would, not very capable of judging what he himself should do.
There are some things that I object to, and I will here name some of them.
I seriously object to Sunday Schools, because they are unscriptural, and the spirit that advocates them the strongest, seems to impugn the motive, and show an utter disregard for the feelings of our brethren who oppose them. They also seem fully determined to force their measures on the brethren, even if it causes division among us. They seem to regard us as perpetual fault-finders, and chronic grumblers, if we either act of speak against their measures, and some of them have led me to believe that they would rather get us into those things than to see the church prosper ever so much without them.
The plea for such things charges us of being opposed to anything that has a tendency upward, and they are continually saying some unpleasant things about their brethren.
The determination for those things is such that I have heard one case where some of the members of the church desired a Sunday School, and other members objected, when those wanting it said they were determined to have it.
I am opposed to the reception of the baptism of other denominations, and that is practiced by some of our brethren.
I am opposed to this untiring annoyance of our people about a publishing house, or a Baptist college.
I am opposed to the continual cry that our churches are on the decline for want of social meetings, prayer meetings, and other things.
I have no objection to a prayer meeting, and I have no objection to the brethren and sisters telling their experience, if they feel like it when they are together.
I object to our preachers, in their sermons, speaking of all the faults they ever knew of their brethren, and the carelessness of our people in behalf of their children.
I do not love to see our people made worse than all the rest of the religious world, as regards their daily life at home, and their practice as
I object to finding fault with them on the ground that they are not like other people religiously, for if we must be like others before we will be right, the sooner we disband and go and join them, the sooner we will be right.
No one but myself is responsible for the position I have taken, and I may be alone in the view of the things that I have mentioned. I hope not, however.
Your brother as ever,
LEMUEL POTTER.
TRADITIONS OF MEN.
"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." - Colossians 2:8.
It is very essential that the churches heed this important admonition of the eminent Apostle, because of the evident danger of being thus "spoiled." The Lord has commanded His children to come out from among the world and be separate, promising to receive them as obedient children and be a Father unto them.
It is impossible for them to pattern after the institutions of the world, and remain a separate and peculiar people.
I wish to give some attention to modern "philosophy and vain deceit" by which men seek "to spoil" the church of Christ.
OLD LINE PRIMITIVE BAPTIST VIEW OF SUNDAY SCHOOLS
By Elder Ralph E. Harris.
The first Sunday School in America was patterned after one which was formed in England by Robert Raikes, of Gloucester in 1781. His purpose for establishing such a chool "was to take poor needy chidlren from the streets, from the factories, or elsewhere, who were sent to no other school, and teach them cleanliness and good manners, teach them the alphabet, and the rudiments of an English education." It was only
