Systematic Beneficence in the Presbyterian Church [pp. 351-370]

364 SYSTEMATIC BENEFICENCE IN THE [April,
ren. As far, then, as the Church is concerned sh~ has the
fullest liberty as to schemes and plans.
(5)The only other argument we have heard in favor of
this method is from analogy. This is an age of concentration, and if business requires it for the achievement of suecess, the Church, it is said, should demand it for the prosecution of her work. This proposition we do not call in question. But is it trne as to business? We think not. Tbe
tendency of the times is to division of labor, and this as trade
and commerce increase. Men are everywhere making specialties in particular lines of business in our great centres.
One house gives its attention to laces, another to linens, a
third to Abbo~, a fourth to trimmings, etc., and it is the
same in every department. Or do we find this concentration
in State affairs? Does the City Treasury or the State Treasury lump together its different funds? Does the State Treasury supersede town and county treasuries? We might traverse other forms of labor and show from them that the
analogies in favor of a Central Treasury for the whole work
of the Church are as unreal and fallacious, but it is unnecessary. We can only further state that the success of a single
treasury in individual congregations proves nothing in favor
of its universal adoption and success. We have known the
saddest failure and the most decided advance side by side in
the same city as to weekly contributions. This feature of
benevolence is no novelty in our history as a Church. It has
been tried for years in several congregations and the same
has been given up as not accomplishing the end in view.
Then nothing can be gathered from recent successes where the
plan has been inaugurated. We have known similar advances
in the first introduction of other methods which had afterwards to be abandoned. The natural tendency of this system is downwards, and it will require the greatest efforts of
the pastor to keep the people up to duty. Giving in the abstract, or apart from il~e object aided, is a poor educator, as
will be seen, when the present race of givers, who have b@en
trained under other agencies, shall have passed away. All
this is said not in opposition to weekly giving and that as an