ARTICLE VIII.

MINISTERIAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

BY REV. DANIEL P. KIdder, d.d., PROFESSOR OF PRACTICAL THEOLOGY IN DREW THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY.

No interest of any church is greater than that involved in the proper education and training of its ministers. All earnest churches give great attention to this subject; and it is not an unfavorable omen of the future of Christianity that at the present time the best methods of ministerial preparation are the subject of mutual investigation on the part of different Christian denominations.

In the belief that so far as such investigations may be conducted in a fraternal spirit they can hardly fail to be advantageous, the present Article has been written. It is but just to the writer to say that it was not volunteered, but produced in answer to specific inquiries from a highly respected source.

Those inquiries assumed that the successes wrought out by the Methodist Episcopal Church during the comparatively brief period since its organization in December 1784, were in no small degree due to the efficient character of its ministers. They further indicated that many ministers and people of sister churches were desirous of understanding the nature and requirements of the system of ministerial preparation recognized by the church referred to, and also the nature and extent of any modifications of the system found desirable within recent years. The effort to respond satisfactorily to such inquiries makes it necessary to present a brief summary of facts which will illustrate in historic order the origin, development, and modifications of the system in question.

The idea seems to be more or less prevalent that very

decided, if not radical, changes have recently taken place in that system; whereas facts will show that the recent adoption of institutional instruction for ministers is but a realization of the full plan of ministerial preparation originally proposed by Mr. Wesley, and in perfect harmony with the system of training or field discipline which he and his followers were led to adopt as a providentially dictated necessity of their initial work.

The Methodist Episcopal Church owes its origin under God to what is known as the great Wesleyan revival of the eighteenth century. Two distinguishing characteristics of that revival were, first, a prominent recognition of the divine call as a necessary prerequisite for every true minister of the gospel; and, secondly, the practice of enlisting lay co-operation as a direct auxiliary of evangelistic effort. It cannot be claimed that either of these features of his subsequent ecclesiastical system was originated by Mr. Wesley. The first he believed to be required by the word of God. The second was taught him by the providence of God, contrary to his early and churchly prejudices. Nevertheless, both were, in due time, heartily received by him and his early coadjutors, and have been cherished with equal cordiality by his successors to the present day. In reference to the second, the process of persuasion was gradual and instructive. Among the earliest fruits of the preaching of Wesley and Whitefield were converted men of the common people who were impressed with the duty of warning sinners to "flee from the wrath to come." Corresponding to this important fact, the necessities of the work of grace in which those great evangelists were engaged were so pressing that they felt compelled to welcome sincere and promising cooperation by whomsoever offered. From ministers of the Church of England, with a few exceptions, they encountered either cold indifference or bitter opposition. Hence, from the first they encouraged good and competent laymen as "helpers," to read and explain the scriptures and to exhort wherever they could find listeners.

But even this policy, especially in the mind of Wesley, was far from that of sanctioning lay preaching. To the latter he was brought unexpectedly to himself. The story, though often told, has still its significance. In the year 1741 Wesley, on going from London to the north and west of England, had left Thomas Maxfield in the Foundery Society to read the scriptures, pray with the people, and give them suitable religious advice. This man, who was one of his earliest converts, and who had accompanied Charles Wesley in his travels for a year or more, was insensibly led from praying to preaching. Wesley received a letter at Bristol informing him of the fact. His prejudices for "church order" were still strong, and he hastened back to London, with no little alarm, to check the new irregularity. But his mother, a woman of extraordinary capacity, and herself the widow of a clergyman, was at hand to influence his conclusions. "She perceived on his arrival that his countenance expressed dissatisfaction and anxiety, and inquired the cause. 'Thomas Maxfield, he replied, with unusual abruptness, 'has turned preacher, I find.' She reminded him of her own sentiments against lay preaching, and that he could not suspect her of favoring anything of the kind without cause. But 'take care,' she added, 'what you do respecting that young man; he is as surely called of God to preach as you are.' She counselled him to examine what had been the fruits of Maxfield's preaching, and to hear him himself. He heard him. It is the Lord, let him do what seemeth to him good,' was all he could further say."1 From that time lay preaching, under the regulations which will be explained further along, became a feature of the Wesleyan economy. Nor was a long period required to demonstrate its inestimable value as an agency for bringing men to the knowledge of the truth. After only four year's experience with his lay preachers, whose number continually increased, Wesley vindicated them and their office fully in his celebrated" Appeal to

1 See Stevens's History of Methodism, Vol. i. Chap. v.

Men of Reason and Religion." After having repeatedly and patiently replied to objections against lay preaching and lay preachers, he became more severe, if not more convincing, in his replies. In one instance, when a clergyman had reproached him for his manifest "breach upon the order of the church," he closed his explanations with this emphatic declaration: "Soul-damning clergymen lay me under more difficulties than soul-saving laymen."

ences.

The rapid extension of the work in connection with the efforts of Mr. Wesley and his coadjutors soon rendered formal consultations necessary. Hence, the origin of ConferThe first Conference was held in London in the year 1744; and there were present, besides Mr. Wesley, five clergymen of the Church of England, and four lay preachers, including Thomas Maxfield. At that initial Methodist Conference, the question of ministerial education was formally considered, and the conclusion reached was indicated by the following record:

"Q. Can we have a seminary for laborers?" "A. If God spare us till another Conference."

At the ensuing Conference the question was repeated in this form:

"Q. Can we have a seminary for laborers yet?" "A. Not till God gives us a proper tutor."

Thus it appears that an institution for ministerial education was at that early day proposed by the founders of Methodism, although its realization was delayed for a long period by providential hinderances. Chief among the hinderances was the pressure for all available help to occupy, without delay, the fields of ministerial service which opened before them in so many directions, and with such urgent calls.

In these facts inay be seen a striking illustration of the principle that "Man proposes, but God disposes." So far, however, from interpreting providential hinderances as reasons for inactive waiting, or for any pause in his work, Wesley rather felt quickened by them to greater activity in 1 Wesley's Works (Am. ed.), Vol. v. pp. 156-160. VOL. XXXIII. No. 131.

71

making use of such means of ministerial cultivation as were possible, aside from institutional advantages. It is affirmed by Wesleyan authorities that he never abandoned the design and hope of "a seminary for laborers"; but in his intense desire to work while his day lasted, and to do what his hand found to do, he was led to devise a system of ministerial training, or education in the ministry for the ministry. Nevertheless, he was ever on the alert to realize, as far as possible, his original idea of what was desirable as a means of thoroughly preparing ministerial laborers for their work. On one occasion he actually collected together at Kingswood "seventeen of his preachers, whom he divided into two classes, for the purpose of reading lectures to them every day during Lent, as he had formerly done to his pupils at Oxford." Before one class he read and discussed Pearson on the Creed, and before the other Aldrich's Logic. To both he gave "Rules for Action and Utterance." It is not recorded whether the entire period of Lent was thus employed; but Tyerman records the opinion that about a month was devoted to this form of ministerial training. That author adds, "Who were Wesley's favored pupils? This is a question we cannot answer; but from the books selected we learn that Wesley's object was, (1) to teach theology; (2) the science of reasoning; (3) the art of elocution. Leisure hours were occupied in making preparations for the Christian Library, and in preaching in the surrounding neighborhood."

While Mr. Wesley and his associates freely encouraged unordained men to preach, whom they believed to be divinely called, yet they by no means allowed men to enter upon that work at will, or upon their own impulses. They permitted no one in connection with their organizations to preach without a license, annually renewed; and no license was granted unless, in addition to the candidate's profession of a personal belief that he was moved by the Holy Ghost to preach, the following questions could be answered affirmatively by an official council of his brethren:

1 See Tyerman's Life of Wesley, Vol. ii. p. 34.