PROVISION FOR THE WIDOWS AND CHILDREN OF OUR

MINISTERS.

To the Editor of the General Baptist
Magazine.

MY DEAR SIR,-I wish to call the attention of your readers to what I feel to be a crying deficiency in the organization of the General Baptist Connexion. I allude to the entire absence of all means of support for the widows and families of our deceased ministers. I am aware that attempts have been made to establish a fund, from which the necessities of such sufferers should be met, at least in part; but, besides that all these propositions have ended in failure, it appears to me, that even had they succeeded, the amount of assistance secured would have been miserably inadequate. I cannot but think that the only way to meet the difficulty, so as completely to provide against cases of want, sad in themselves, and disgraceful to us, is for every church to charge itself with the interests of its own minister in this respect; nor do I believe this to be by any means an unattainable result. The plan which occurs to me is the simple expedient of each church insuring its minister's life. I would suggest that all churches which raise a salary equal to £150 a year, should effect an insurance on the lives of their minis. ter's for at least £500; and that any churches whose pastors receive a sum below that I have named, should at all events insure for £300. If this were done, and understood to be done, so that it should form part of the implicit agreement between our pastors and their churches, I am sure that a vast amount of killing anxiety would be saved to many of our ministerial friends. In case of the removal of a minister, moreover, let the church to which

he goes, take up and continue his do the same in regard to his sucpolicy, and let that which he leaves cessor. It may undoubtedly happen, (though I think very rarely,) that a church is too poor to supply the whole of the annual payment, while offering the amount of salary which it raises at present. In that case, it would be better that a part of the necessary sum should be deducted from the minister's income, than that no assurance should be effected, since the very poverty of the church increases the anxiety of his position. I believe, however, that there is scarcely one of our churches which could not by a little extra effort do all I have suggested in addition to what it now accomplishes.

should

pay

There is still another plan, which (if it could be carried out,) would I think, prove very successful. It is, that each church in the Connexion into a common fund, the same amount as it would be required In this way we should form a miniato forward to an Insurance Office. ture company amongst ourselves, and at the decease of any minister, his family might receive a sum pro, portionate to the amount which had The difficulties in been paid in. working this plan, may, however, be sufficient to render my former suggestion preferable.

The occasion of my writing, is the of the death of the Rev. S. Wigg, news which has so effected us all, of Leicester. It seems to me extremely sad after so many years of diligent and faithful labour on his part, that his family should be left without anything like adequate means of support. I trust something of a permanent character may be done at the next Association-something which will cheer the hearts of our brethren in the ministry, by affording the assurance that they are valued and cared for.

455

STRICT COMMUNION.

To the Editor of the General Baptist

Magazine.

DEAR SIR,-My letter in the July number of your Magazine has called forth a severe and somewhat angry response. I am by no means desirous of prolonging a discussion, which to some extent, has called forth a feeling unsuited to the pages of such a publication as yours, but must beg permission before I withdraw from it to say a word or two in reply.

1.-Ås to the name that I adopt. The reasons that led me to select it, are entirely different to those that 'a whole Baptist' imagines, and the sharp rap that he gives me at the close of his letter, falls entirely innocuous. My reasons do not in any degree warrant his conclusion, nor do his conclusions at all fit the circumstances that make me just at present what I call myself," Half-aBaptist.'

2.-As regards the facts of the case in question. Either I have stated it clumsily, or my opponent has perverted the statement made, not having my former hurried letter with me, I am unable to say which. Let me now say that the Independent Church alluded to, had for many years been active and flourishing, and two excellent ministers had successively laboured long and effectually in this sphere of usefulness. At the close of the labours of the last of these, who entered on an important engagement elsewhere, it became I think entirely a Home Mission station. It was then that depressed trade and a decreasing population produced the natural effect, and the Home Missionary Society and the County Association gave up the work there, knowing as they did, that in both villages excellent men were pastors of the General Baptist churches, and by them the Word was faithfully preached. My only wish in the letter addressed to your readers on the subject, was to point out that this (I must say it,) unscriptural and

than any other to weaken dissent and break down Christian union. It has been the result in this case, and the unkind question, Why do they not go to the Established Church or the Methodists,' has been answered by several going to the former; and who shall say that none of them shall lose their spiritual life under the godless teaching of several of the worldly clergymen in that neighbourhood? If a whole Baptist' would force his Christian neighbours to sit under the ministry of a wicked and ungodly teacher, I am glad I do not subscribe to his creed; but I am rejoiced to know that such views are held by but a very small mi. nority of the body to which he belongs, and among whom I am happy to number many of my most esteemed Christian friends.

I might add a thirdly to my letter, but I would rather not enter on the theological discussion of the question which my opponent seems to invite and to wish for. Instead of this, let me briefly relate a conversation that I once listened to between a late excellent minister of your body and a worthy and excellent man the deacon of a flourishing village church in Leicestershire. At the time I allude to, strict communion was the almost universal practice of General Baptist churches. After the afternoon service, as we sat at tea, he said, 'I have been thinking brother S. about our practice as to the refusal to admit Pædo-Baptists to our communion, we shall not after all refuse to meet them at Christ's table in heaven; so are we right in doing so on earth?' My excellent old friend brought the full battery of whole Baptist argument to bear on the subject but elicited this reply, I don't intend to argue this subject from our point of view, but I only repeat, if we believe we shall meet in heaven, are we right in refusing this association on earth?' Both of these excellent men have passed away from this world and its miserable bickerings. I can fancy that they rejoice to see in your body more enlarged views than was their

practice on earth. I was but a boy at that time, since then I have taken up the position of a baptized believer, but the argument of this sainted minister has sufficiently convinced me of the utter inconsistency of the views that, to the time of his death, enthralled him, and I must still speak of it as being contrary to the teaching of Scripture, and the loving spirit of the Saviour.

In withdrawing from this discussion, I can assure your readers that I have brought it forward only from a painful sense of the injury that in one instance was done to the cause of dissent through the determined adherence to this rule; and knowing that an immense majority of Baptists were decidedly opposed to it, I felt anxious to lay before your readers what I had seen of the practical result in the case alluded to. The unkind, acrimonious, and uncharitable spirit displayed by my opponent, makes me more resolute than ever in declaring myself in contra-distinction only

HALF-A-BAPTIST.

Then the vanity, display of finery, and frivolous talk. These are incidental, may be checked, and are counteracted by the speeches that follow.

Ah, but that is just, say the objectors, what often does not happen: the very speeches are not profitable. This is the sorest place of all. I fear this objection is too often too true. Do try, dear sir, try your best to amend it.

1.-Is there not frequently a good deal of most valuable time lost before the public speaking actually begins ? seven o'clock instead of quarter-past, or half-past six.

2. And then long hymns and prayers, just to fill up the time.

3.-And many a time the principal speakers are put so far back in the meeting, that many of the hearers are disappointed, wearied, and ob liged to go away, before they get what they came for. This is abomin able, but happily, it may easily be remedied.

4. The next is worst still. When ministers of the town or neighbour. hood are, through the indiscretion of the chairman, called on to occupy

PLATFORM.

To the Editor of the General Baptist

Magazine.

DEAR SIR,-Like thousands besides, I am what may be termed, a decided believer in tea parties for religious purposes. I believe they do a kind of good not otherwise attainable. I am therefore grieved, whenever I hear religious people say they do not like them. I have sometimes suspected that the comparative gentility of the objectors had something to do with their dislike; but I must acknowledge they have something specious to urge against these gatherings.

First, the trouble. Well, there is trouble, no doubt. But no good is to be had without trouble; and this is willingly borne by many young kind-hearted friends, and it does them good..

the meeting, they are apt to forget that the people did not come to hear them; they are then only as ornaments, or supporters, and they should have modesty and sense enough to be very short.

5. But what is still worse, they often waste our precious time, by telling us they do not know what to say. This often turns out true; but how inexcusable for a man to talk when he has nothing to say worth hearing. And why has he not? when he knew beforehand he would be called on to direct the thoughts and improve the minds of a large party.

6. Thus unprepared, no wonder he utters things either silly, or dull; things worse than idle odious, fulsome compliments, perhaps about woman's influence and the ladies; stale jokes, and bits of fun, which make people laugh, and spoil the whole spirit and tendency of the meeting. This is most disastrous.