Life and Letters of Rev. Aratus Kent Introduction
|
|  Yüklə 1.75 Mb.
|
|
But I repeat. I have taken no position. I have simply answered two of your questions. Did the Board say that Beloit was Congregational? And did the members present allow the statement to go uncontradicted? With all frankness I stated the reasons why I could not contradict them. It is one thing to contradict another to endorse, You say if such statements came where you could fairly meet them you could nullify them, that is just what I want to see done. I am greatly troubled and have been for a long time. I cannot be a Cong. of the type it is assuming at the West (as I understand it), I could get along well with Connecticut Cong., but absolute independency is unscriptural and intolerable (to my mind.) Give me your views on that subject and in addition to the questions asked in my former letter, I will ask one other, Is it desirable that the N.S. Presb. Ch. should be obliterated or have they a distinct mission to fulfill? I write with great freedom to you as to an old friend but I do not want this correspondence to be published to the world, for I have an invincible dread of such notoriety. Did I mention that I had declined the agency for the Theo. Sem. Yours as ever, A. Kent Chas. Chetlain says he will not go back to Beloit. Waterman stays out for the present. Parker is hesitant and falters and it seem to me that all our young men are shunning an education & the ministry. What shall we do in the end? It will take care. _______
[Chaplin papers Beloit letter from Chapin to Kent] Beloit College, Sept. 15, 1854 Rev. A. Kent Dear Br., Your favor of the 24th Ult. came duly to hand. I thank you for the prompt “straight out” expression of your views. It is just like yourself to give me the opportunity I have long desired to make corrections on some points which I knew to be misapprehended by brethren whose entire confidence we want always to deserve & enjoy. I can sympathize with you fully in the feeling you express respecting your position between Presbyterianism & Congregationalism, those forces once accordant & cooperative now bristling with a show at least of antagonism towards each other. The feeling is a real one with me personally & stronger still in my identification with the College. My chief anxiety respecting this institution come from the fact that the partizan leaders seem to mining off with Congregationalists & Presbyterians & leaving us who cannot follow such lead either way to feel deserted & lonely, I believe there are hundreds & thousands of good men, ministers & laymen, on this field who have the same feeling. The question is whether we shall each cherish the feeling by himself & meantime let the busy work of dissolution go on, til we are dragged away against our will into a partisan attitude, or rather let our sympathies flow until we are drawn together & fell & show some strength & some determination to stand upon our common ground. On that ground Beloit College was planted, there it stands to day, unswerved by a hairsbreadth from its neutral, nay rather I should say its common position. On that ground do I believe it is destined to flourish & accomplish a good and precious work in the cause of our Lord & Head. This is my assertion & conviction, but facts to which you refer or rather misinterpretation of facts, seem to throw doubt on the truth of the statement. Let us then freely & particularly sum over the points. 1st Point. “With regard to Beloit College it is maintained that while half the directors are nominally Presb. yet the executive comm. all sympathize with Cong.” I turn to our list of trustees & find four of the number to be connected with Presbyterys, five with Cong. Ass. & the remaining eight:all from Wisconsin:with conviction & these last so far as I know their views just equally divided in their silent preferences between sound Congregationalism & moderate Presbyterianism. The board does not contain a strong position on either side unless you & Br. Peet are to be so classed. For so large a body so gathered it seems to me wonderfully free from men fond of extremes in anything. In this respect it it not peculiar? Can you name another consulting board of the kind equally marked in this respect? Does not the college owe much of its prosperity to the fact that it has been under the direction of men who have really no minor ends to gain, but devote their energy & zeal to the one great work of laboring for Christ & his general cause? Has it not been a policy, wisely chosen, to keep our board filled with such men? & Ought we now to abandon that, to appease the clamors of suspicious & carping on either side? The Ex. Com. reads on the record book & has read for nearly two years now “Chapin, Clary, Fisher, Hinman, Talcott.” I know how the sympathies of the first named men & can speak pretty confidently of the rest. If you were to bring the first named to the dividing line between the two denominations & bid him pronounce shibboleths he would tell you he would pronounce it either of the two ways with equal ease, that he is ready for the sake of peace & tho privilege of fighting in a good cause to speak it as may please you best, but as a passport to any partisan band, he will not speak it at all, but hold his tongue & go by himself if need be seeking some sphere of action where he may shout the watch word “for Christ the Head” with all his might & follow the shout with action undivided with by any side issue. If you catch the sound as it comes from his lips in his unconscious utterances of the word, you will detect most generally the Presb. accent, as that which use & habit has made on the whole most agreeable. In other words he sympathizes with Presb. & Cong. in all their common interests & work with neither in their nice distinctions. His choice is for a combination & like bets elements of both, which would take Peet form. Clary and Hinman are of much the same mind. Fisher is not far removed from the same & Talcott I suppose a decided Cong. but with little influence beyond that of any one member of the board because he is so seldom present at Com. meetings. And just here to meet another question or two: whatever may be the influence of the executive comm in giving direction to the movement, that influence is not to put the college under the control of Congregationalists, nor to give that denomination an ascendency in its affairs. The study of the com ever since I have had a place in it has been to keep the institution above the control of either Presb. or Cong. whatever may be the position of Br. Clancy & Chapin in the com, their sympathies are not with Cong. against Presb. If forced to take sides I can not tell where they will be found. One of them I known is determined to postpone the consideration of that question as long as possible. Which ever of the two denominations is most zealous for carrying the little peculiarities of its own issues into everything will probably have least of their sympathies. 2. “The President & Professors are all Congregationalists. They & the students with few exceptions attend the Cong. Ch.” This I suppose to be the statement from which all the others have been strained out by forced influence & is not at all true as laid down. So far as there is truth on it, a brief account of the actual history of these matters will show that for the conclusion drawn from it, it is a false premise. When the college was located & for a year after our first professors were appointed there was but one church in the village. Prof. Bushnell & Emerson, the one a licentiate of a Presbytery the other of a Cong. Ass. joined the Ch. which then was. By & by certain members of that church became weary, they did not like their minister & fretted at somebody or some thing that was not quite right. They withdrew & formed another Ch. The denominational question was not agitated in the movement. The greater part of those who withdrew were attached to the Cong. order & it was not until after tow or three years that the ch. took its place in connection with a Presbytery. Now what should our two Prof’s do? They were not dissatisfied with Br. Clary’s preaching, nor had they any thing to complain of in the management of the Ch. affairs. They could not countenance disaffection on such grounds. They quietly kept their places & allowed the movement to go on, when no influence of theirs could relieve the difficulty. Mean time the Board made an effort to get Mr. Baines to take the Presidency. Prof. Lathrope the one next appointed went into the new ch & continued in it a faithful & reliable member til he left. The next appointee was Prof. Squirer, a Presbyterian, tried and approved as such in former days. On accepting his post, he transferred his ecclesiastical relation to this region and joined the Presbytery. The Board next appointed their present President. The resources of the College gave no reliance for his support, an opportunity was presented for securing a considerable portion of his salary by supplying the pulpit of the Cong. Ch. For two years he earned in this way one half to two thirds of his salary. He would have been just as ready to enter the same arrangement with the other church had the way been opened. But with his family thus into relation to the Cong. Ch. ought he have abandoned it as soon as his term of service expired? I know that on his mind the denominational char. of the two churches has no might at all. The only consideration apart form that just named which could come into the account was the fact that those from whom nineteen twentieths of all that had been contributed in Beloit for the college came remained with the old church & they might perhaps expect the head of the institution to abide where its best friends were. This had no great might yet might perhaps turn the balance of even scales. For the next move the Cong. Ch. & the College united to secure the services of Dr. Spear, a good Presbyterian to act in the joint capacity of pastor & Prof. of Theology. How that was thwarted I need not tell you. The movement was made in good faith to carry out the policy of combining the two denominations in this great work, It was a sore trial, a disappointment to some of us, that the movement was so earnestly counteracted. The next permanent appointment was that of Prof. Fisk, no question was raised as to his denomination. It was the man one fitted to and willing to take the post whom we wanted. We knew of him only that he has a call on the one hand to a Pres. & one the other to a Cong Ch. & would find no difficulty from any denominational pressures in accepting either. He was ready for himself to waive any Cong. choice of his own & join our Presb. Ch. But on account of his mother in law who was home with him & whose preference is quite decided. He has taken a seat in the Cong. Ch. Prof. Porter just appointed is strongly attached to Dr. Binesmade personally as an old & much valued friend. That rather that any denominational feeling may hold him in the same connection. Of those appointed as tutors two have been Presb. & three Cong. In the pulpit & in the Sab. school of the Presb. Ch. the members of the faculty have ever been ready to sunder any assistance they could to help on the instructs of that Ch. gratuitously and cheerfully have they supplied that desk in the absence of the pastor to attend Gen assembly or by reason of sickness of for other cause. And as far as delicacy would permit have they been forward by prayer or otherwise to help on the interest of that ch. Now in view of these things I ask id it anything but a fallacy to say the least to argue from the base fact that a majority of the faculty attend upon the Cong. Ch, that the College is under Cong. control. (In respect to the students it is generally true that from ten to twenty regularly attend the Presb. Ch. & it would please the faculty if more would go but they do not wish to compel them. I think the example of the faculty has little if any influence in determining the choice of the students.) The fact is due not to denominational zeal, but to peculiar circumstances. Taking the two churches as they actually exist here, there is perhaps a power of attraction to the Cong. because their is apparent a heart of real warm sympathy in our work which does not reveal itself so happily in the other. We would have it otherwise & if our brethren would but cease to regard us only with suspicion give us their confidence without claiming exclusive privilege, I think it would be otherwise. These statement cover most of the points in your letter. The only thing remaining is the intimation that neither Br. Sons nor Br. Eddy are members of either board. On denominational grounds I know there is no objection to either of them. It was suggested at our last meeting at Rockford that Br. Sons he appointed & the only reason why action was not at once taken accordingly was that there too few members present. Mr. Emerson of Rockford was appointed a trustee, chiefly in order to have an efficient, wise working man on the com, Mr. Eddy’s name has never been mentioned, nor even suggested in our board. The question has been raised in the com. of recommending him. Personal feelings on the part of two or three of the com. growing out of local matters might perhaps mar the harmony & pleasantness of our meetings. The com. have not felt therefore like leading in the move. Yet there would be no objection raised if his appointment were deemed necessary to the interests of the institution. I have no such feelings at the same time Br. E. does not seem to me such a kind of man as would be most desirable as a wise counsellor in such an enterprise. I know of no facts to warrant the statement that any Presb. young man have imbibed Cong. preferences & am at a loss to understand whom you refer to as having passed from the Presb. Ch. through our hands to become Cong. preachers. I know of two or three instances in which the sons of Presb. members have attended our cong ch but attraction was something else than the ??? of the denomination or the influence of the faculty & I am not aware that any change of principles has followed. In all such cases when known to us we invariably ask if the parent or guardian approves the choice of the student. I have written at length because I have not time to be short & I wished to make “straight out” work on these points. I did not think that most of the circumstances of which I have spoken were known to you & that they furnish sufficient ground for you to real the grave charge of denominational bias brought against us. I cannot believe that your confidence in our course is really influenced or that you regard our condition & prospects with any sorrow, as a failure of long cherished hopes. My conviction is strong that there are some of our Presb. brethren who would force all things educational, missionary, etc. into exclusively denominational channels& that there is with them a secret wish which is real father to the charge which is urged against us that we are under Cong. control. Their strong coloring out to say misrepresentation of the few facts to which you refer might perhaps raise a doubt or fear in your mind sufficient to keep you silent, To relieve that doubt and fear I am sure you need only to get as near as possible to our secret thoughts and aims. You will find the pulses of our sympathy to be as even & true to the policy in which this college originated as is possible amid the tumult of denominational strife which is raging around us. The movement could not now be stated on the principles which ruled the conventions from which it preceded. It has ever seemed to me to be a wonderful and happy arrangement of divine providence which brought Beloit College into being & gave it some strength before the waters of strife & contention were let out. Amid the darkening waves between the opposing currents it stands unmoved from its first foundation, giving strength steadily and surely. The fury of the conflict will out always last. when the noise & tumult subside as they will in due time I believe that you & I dear brothren shall rejoice & thank gos that we have been permitted to have some past in putting it just when it is & building it up on the common ground of our precious gospel faith, Now we are tired. Perhaps under the pressure of peculiar relations we are unconsciously binding, each his own way, so that we may seem to be a little drawn apart, but our feet are plan ted on the same ground too firmly to be really separated. We shall right up when the wind lulls & find ourselves as close together as ever. Praying that we all may be kept by divine spirit & guided by divine wisdom. I am sincerely yours, A. L. Chapin _______
Galena, Sept. 9/54 This application makes a heavy draft upon your treasury. It is in midst of wide spaced desolation, there being no minister of your order within 15 miles. Error and sectarianism have held sway and my occasional labours there in old delapidated log school house have made but little impression. They think they have done their utmost and this is the first time they have done anything. Mr. Peffers went there at my earnest request and with an expectation that he would preach 1/2 the time at Elizabeth. But the last reliable man is about to leave that field of Downers' and Neil's first labours. He has been encouraged by Br. Spees to ask more than as a single man I should have advised, but not more than faithful ministers ought to have. His going there is likely to result in getting up two good school houses which is not a small matter. Altogether he will get 450 or 500 besides his outfit is more than I can divine. A. Kent ______
[The 1st Cong. Ch. of Shabbona & Presb. Ch. of Melugin's Grove Ill., Oct. 9/54 apply for $200 aid in support of Rev. S. Baker, 12 mo. from from....to labour also in the vicinity.] Brooklyn, Oct. 28/54 I recommend that the A.H.M.S. grant $215 to these two feeble churches in support of Rev. S. Baker for one year on condition that their subscriptions for $185 be immediately made up and not neglected until near the close of the year as is too frequently the case and with the understanding that he cannot have this commission renewed unless he lives in the vicinity of these churches. A. Kent
_______ [The 1st Presb. Ch. of Rockville, Ill. Oct. 12/54 apply for $275 renewed aid in support of Rev. John Peck, 12 mo. from Oct. 20, 1854 to labor also at Manteno vicinity.] Brooklyn, Oct. 28/54 I know no reason why the amount asked should not be granted. My impressions when I visited that neighborhood were all favourable. A. Kent _______
Galena, Dec. 13/54 Rev. Mr. Badger, D.D. Dear Sir, I loaned Br. Raymond $50 some 2 or 3 years ago and have never been able to get it. I spoke of it to a common friend of ours at Shullsburg, Mr. Esty, who told me that he owed him also. And he has $100 of Home Missionary money as the treasurer of 2nd Presbyterian Ch. in his hands, and he says Mr. Raymond informed him that there was $150 due him from your Society. I doubted the correctness of the statement and write to inquire. If it be true that these is 150 due him, I should think that it right to appropriate 50 to myself. Please inform me and if you please give him an order on me for $100 or 50 which will enable me to get what ought to have been paid long ago. Br. Raymond is not careful to meet his engagements in pecuniary matters as he should be. I have frequent occasion to lend to missionaries and do not find them always careful to pay promptly. Yours truly, A. Kent
I have just read a letter from John Rice (an excellent layman) who has gone to Nauvoo to do good. He says they have a S.S. of 100 and are about to organize a Church New School Presbyterian, want an energetic man. Have you the right man in view, they will raise 200 for him. _____
[ed. note: no date, no place, presumably refers to the preceding letter] Your letter of Dec. 18 is before me. I presume it was before your payment of 150 that the remark was made and now that it is paid, you need not care for it unless you hear from me again. I have spent the 2 last Sabbaths "in prospecting" on a new field, visiting and preaching and for a rarity I received a 1/2 Eagle269[269] from mine host. A. Kent ____
Galena, Dec. 26, 1854 It is about a year since I visited Kankakee. There was then a large population gathered there and materials to organize a Presbyterian Church and a Presb. minister employed and the prospect of building a church speedily. But a series of wants have prevented them from securing a permanent supply and hence they have made no application to our society. And now if this Cong. Ch. should receive aid and this crowd out their application, it would probably result in dividing the community between Congregationalists and O.S. Presbyterians, as has been the case at Savanna and Albany and Union Grove. This would greatly increase the dissatisfaction already felt by Presbyterians who are still desirous to cooperate with Cong. and with our Society. I am not informed of the exact amount of preaching which has been secured there by Presbyterians but I know that a number of different clergymen have laboured there during the interval since I visited Kankakee. Further that this I have no opinion to express. A. Kent
Perhaps it would not be amiss to add that the hand of Joab is in this movement as it appears to me. _____
[The Cong. Ch. of Kankakee, Ill., Nov. 30/54 apply for $300 aid in support of Rev. Wm. Gay, 12 mo. from Oct. 29, 1854. Rec'd by Rev. J.C. Holbrook - remarks by Rev. A. Kent. Inexpedient] Galena, Dec. 26 While engaged in expressing my views of Kankakee and the claims of the Cong. Ch. Br. Holbrook called and we talked the matter over and he says that I have not understood the the facts and yet acknowledges that he knew nothing of the matter until recently. So if you think best for me or any one else to go on the ground I shall be ready to do your bidding. He thought me sectarian. And I told him I had always been an avowed Presbyterian but challenged him to show that I had abused my office for sectarian purposes, and assured him I was ready to leave the agency when my services were not wanted. A. Kent
_________ [The Cong. Ch. of Savanna, Ill. Dec. 20/54 apply for $325 renewed aid in support of Rev. J.J. Hill 12 mo. from Oct. 1, 1854 to labor also at Fulton.] Galena, Dec. 26, 1854 This is a pretty hard case (and I will state it as well as I can) both in relation to the Church and the minister. The Church was organized by Br. Emerson (whose certificate is enclosed) after lecturing on Congregationalism as he stated to me and the consequence is likely to be that it will be swallowed up by the Old School Body - a New School Presb. Ch. would have superseded the necessity. When Br. Hill came back across the Mississippi I knew not but that he was a successful labourer, but from all I can learn of him at Albany and Fulton and Savanna he is very inefficient. His field at Savanna is quite limited, but they expressed a wish to retain because if they are left destitute they fear they shall not be able to finish their meeting house. And Dr. Reed (a decided Cong.) expressed the opinion to me 4 weeks since in presence of Br. Hill that they must have a new minister at Fulton City. In view of all I heard in both places I expressed to Br. Hill some doubts about recommending an appropriation for another year which has led him to give so minute a description of his wants (for you will perceive the application is in his own hand) which I doubt not is entirely correct and led him also to fortify his position by the certificates of Brs. Pine and Emerson. The former of whom knows nothing probably but what he has heard from Br. Hill. I see no prospect of his being employed at any other point and of his requiring less than 300 for the next 5 years. It is at present doubtful about the R.R. reaching Savanna in some years. |