but not for a long time; of late, in the place of the diverse, yet harmonious expressions of spiritual power, one with a psalm and hymn, another with instruction, another with prayer—alike the unquestionable utterances of true hearts, governed and filled by the same Lord—I have listened, in the town where I have lived, to little else (and at times with agony) but to long, wordy, tedious prayers, psalms and hymns out of place, and sung deplorably; false doctrines in teaching, sometimes confused and pompous, and therefore solemn to the vulgar—sometimes confounding truth and falsehood together, and almost all powerless; and alas! in the main, all alike considered good and to purpose, as long as the actors were more than one; and out and out true to this principle of liberty of ministry.”
A great deal must be allowed for individual taste. Probably the tone of the Open meeting in most places is far lower than it was in earlier days. Able and influential men abounded formerly, and are very scarce now. Brethrenism has shown itself lamentably incap- able of perpetuating a race of leaders. Its characteristic “haphazardism” (if I may be allowed such a term) comes out in this. No provision has been made for the higher studies connected with theology, and now that the contagious enthusiasm that once drew so many highly trained minds into its ranks has waned, Brethrenism is for the most part bereft of well qualified guides. Thirty-five years ago Dorman, while acknowledging the qualifications of some of the older leaders, spoke severely of their successors. “Of those that have been formed by the system, I would rather not say anything, although godliness and earnestness will always be in their measure owned by the Lord.”
To expect ends by the miraculous intervention of God, in the absence of those means that He has committed to human responsibility, has been a foible of Brethrenism from the beginning, and its noblest men
