ftttrttnttr 
 
 3farttrtlj Anmupraarg 
 
 of 
 
 Snnrbrak? afti^nlogtral £*mtttanj 
 
 Jtermrrlg 
 
 Union Sibltral &*minari$ 
 
 Sagtnn, (§t\\a 
 
 a, 1912 
 
 3X9878 
 .73718 
 
FEB 3 ] 
 
 7.B7IS 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2009 with funding from 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/souvenirfortiethOObone 
 
Batmmxx 
 
 Jfartirtlj Amttwrfiarg 
 
 nf 
 
 S 
 
 m? 
 
 Hfotubrak? utywlngtral ^^mtttarg 
 
 3farm*rl«. 
 Union Htbltral l§*mtnarn. 
 
 lagtntt, ©I|tn 
 
 ifflag 2, 1912 
 
 Wptntb Wttabtt 11, lari 
 
Co <Bux Hopal JFrtentis 
 
 Wbo$z generous gifts fcatoe matJe 
 possible t&e establishment anD main* 
 tenance of tbe ^>eminarp anD en- 
 ableD it to tjelp so manp poung men 
 anD poung toomen into greater effici* 
 encp in t&e toork of t&e ministry of tfje 
 gospel of 3Iesus Cbrtst, tbis eouuenir 
 is DeDicateD. 
 
 [3] 
 
program 
 
 FIRST UNITED BRETHREN CHURCH 
 Dayton, Ohio 
 
 Thursday, May 2, 10:00 a.m. 
 
 President J. P. Landis, D.D., Ph.D., Presiding 
 
 Music 
 
 Prayer — Rev. D. Berger, D.D. 
 
 Introductory — By Chairman 
 
 Address — "Reminiscences of Forty-One Years of Seminary 
 
 Life" Prof. G. A. Funkhouser, D.D. 
 
 Music 
 
 Address — "Relation of the Seminary to the Denomination" 
 
 Bishop G. M. Mathews, D.D. 
 
 Greetings — Rev. H. J. Christman, D.D., President Central Theo- 
 logical Seminary, Dayton, Ohio. 
 
 Rev. David Van Horn, D.D., Central Theological Seminary. 
 
 Rev. E. H. Caylor, D.D., Columbus, Ohio. 
 
 Rev. J. E. H. Sentman, Williamsburg, Ohio. 
 Benediction — President H. J. Christman. 
 
 [5] 
 
Hon. John M. Bonebrake 
 
Introductory Words 
 
 J. P. Landis, D.D., Ph.D. 
 
 The crying need of our Church to-day, as of other churches, is 
 for strong and qualified leaders. The call is for efficiency. 
 
 The world is forging ahead with rapid strides in commerce, dis- 
 covery, invention, in its material, social, and political interests, and 
 the Church is in danger of falling behind ; indeed, some claim 
 that she is quite behind now. Said an intelligent speaker re- 
 cently, "The world has moved too fast for the Church." 
 
 Have the intellectual, moral, and religious interests of society 
 kept up with the tremendous development and onrush of material 
 things? Dr. Josiah Strong declared several years ago that the 
 "intellectual and moral progress has by no means kept pace with 
 material development." 
 
 Yet there is no lack of activity and activities in the Church. As 
 Dr. Kirkland, president of the Religious Education Association, 
 said recently in St. Louis : "Religious work is going on to-day 
 with never flagging zeal. The churches are extending their sweep 
 and sway, scattering their literature thick as leaves that fall in 
 Vallombrosa, sounding sermons in endless reiteration." 
 
 There are societies and organizations almost innumerable, 
 agencies galore, but there is a lack of power. Now, every Chris- 
 tian can point us to the true, ultimate source of power, the Holy 
 Spirit, but divine power, like all other kinds of power, works 
 through agencies and instruments, and, ordinarily, even the Holy 
 Spirit seems to be limited and handicapped by weak or inadequate 
 instruments. As in business, as in commerce, as in war, so in the 
 Church and the religious world, zeal, activity, enthusiasm must 
 be directed and controled by wise and skillful leadership. 
 
 Naturally in the Church the bulk of this leadership must lie in 
 the ministry. Religion is their avocation as well as their vocation. 
 If they do not, they should possess the qualifications to initiate, 
 inspire, and direct Christian activities and conduct them to mas- 
 terful issues. 
 
 Leadership implies the elements of intelligence, wisdom, knowl- 
 edge, zeal, skill. It consists not in mere preaching ability. The 
 minister of to-day must not be less a preacher than heretofore. 
 There must be no justification of the criticism that the pulpit is 
 
 [7] 
 
weak or behind the times, that the preacher is dealing with 
 effete themes, or handling the most important subjects with feeble- 
 ness and perfunctorily. But it is not enough to be a strong 
 pulpit man, an orator, he must be a teacher, an administrator, 
 an organizer, a model among men, a leader. 
 
 Still, knowledge and intellectual force and grasp must lie at the 
 basis of his work. He should be a scholar, especially a Biblical 
 and theological scholar. But it were a mistake to lay the stress 
 on scholarship alone. He must also have zeal, enthusiasm, energy, 
 drive, but these controled and directed by intelligence and 
 knowledge. 
 
 Every man, also, to insure his fullest measure of success, must 
 have his professional training. Many men do well who might 
 be doing much better. It goes without saying, other things be- 
 ing equal, prolonged and rigid training, schooling, will make 
 a man more powerful, more efficient. 
 
 The idea is the securing of strong religious leaders, especially 
 for the purposes of the present consideration, in the ministry. As 
 President Kirkland said in St. Louis : "It is no accident that 
 produces our commercial leaders of to-day. Our engineers have 
 gone through long courses of instruction before they undertake to 
 open a mine or lay a railroad track. Our generals have the best 
 guidance that science and experience can furnish before they 
 undertake to direct an army. Our physicians are not allowed 
 with careless indifference or ignorance to trifle with life or health. 
 . . . The lesson of the century is in the field of education ; 
 the one universal call is for training." 
 
 Education for ministerial efficiency is a need to which onr 
 Church has not yet given adequate heed. Our Church is not top- 
 heavy. Not many men among us have been ruined by excess of 
 intellectuality. We are not yet troubled with superfluity of learn- 
 ing. Our salvation and usefulness have not at any time been 
 imperiled by the damnation of culture. 
 
 No work in any church is more fundamental or has priority 
 of importance over that for which the theological seminary stands. 
 Its importance is not yet seen or felt by the mass of our people. 
 I repeat, the crying need of the Church and the churches is 
 strong and thoroughly qualified leaders. No church rises higher 
 than her ministry. If the ministry is weak, the church will be 
 weak ; if the ministry is ignorant, the church will not be charged 
 with intelligence ; if the ministry is effusive or fanatical, so will 
 the people be. "Like priest, like people." 
 
 [8] 
 
Since the founding of the Seminary, 407 have graduated, in- 
 cluding the present class. As many more have been here a 
 longer or shorter time. 
 
 Many of the most responsible positions in the Church are filled 
 by our graduates. Quite a number have gone to mission fields. 
 Not a few of our strongest churches are being served by others. 
 The influence of the Seminary is felt throughout the denomina- 
 tion, but our aspiration is that in the future she may be a far 
 greater power for good. She must stand for and do all she can 
 to provide a strong, consecrated, godly ministry. The Church 
 must put the institution in material endowment and equipment, 
 when she can do her full part toward supplying this greatest need 
 of the Church. 
 
i&emint0cenc£0 
 
 IRefc. George a. JFunk&ouser, D.D., Hit. D. 
 
 JFort^one geara $arot£000t of 
 jRcto ^e^tament Eitecatuce and &nst&i0. 
 
 [10] 
 
Reminiscences 
 
 To the Seminary and to this Church, October 11, 1871, will 
 forever be a notable day, for in the afternoon of that day it 
 was the privilege of about seventy-five of our ministers and 
 members to witness the opening exercises of Union Biblical Sem- 
 inary in what was then Home Street United Brethren Church, 
 now Summit Street Church, 
 
 The Senior Bishop, J. J. Glossbrenner, presiding, read II. Tim- 
 othy, chapter second, and announced Hymn 383 (by Isaac Watts), 
 especially appropriate to the occasion of starting a new enterprise. 
 
 " Praise, everlasting praise, be paid 
 To Him that earth's foundation laid ; 
 Praise to the God whose strong decrees 
 Sway the creation as he please. 
 
 Oh, for a strong, a lasting faith 
 To credit what the Almighty saith ! 
 To embrace the message of his Son 
 And call the joys of heaven our own." 
 
 Having offered an earnest prayer, the Bishop introduced Rev. 
 L. Davis, D.D., senior professor, who delivered a formal address, 
 saying in part : "The time has come for the opening of the 
 Seminary. Yes, it has come, but not a moment too soon. Many 
 of our members have long prayed to see this day, and lo, it is 
 here! In fact the whole Church has long felt the need of an 
 institution of this kind." 
 
 He defined its object to be "a better educated and more conse- 
 crated ministry, the most pressing need of all" ; declared "the 
 Church and the world demanded it," that "other denominations 
 will watch us. . . . God is the starting point. His word is pre- 
 eminent. . . The high purpose of the founders of this Seminary 
 is to be co-workers with God in raising up and sending forth able 
 
 [11] 
 
ministers of the New Testament. . . . The work of the preacher 
 is not narrow, technical, and confined. No, no, it is as broad as 
 human wants. It takes hold of man as man and all there is of 
 him. . . . This, then, is the sum of all our aim, namely, "To make 
 men wise and holy, for God was manifest in the flesh." 
 
 The writer, then the junior professor, was called upon and is 
 reported to have said : "We may confidently hope that under the 
 divine blessing this Seminary may, in coming time, not only do 
 a humble part in the enlightenment of our country, but send 
 out its light beyond, proving a blessing even to distant lands. It 
 has been said that posthumous fame is best attained in founding in- 
 stitutions of learning. This is true ; and you who have been engaged 
 in founding this Seminary are doing a work for which after gen- 
 erations will rise up and call you blessed. It is to be hoped that 
 the means and prayers of the Church will be freely given for 
 the building up of this institution. The founding of the Semin- 
 ary is a step forward for the Church. It could not and would 
 not go backward. The future will be one of continued progress." 
 
 After prayer by Rev. W. J. Shuey, who did much in the General 
 Conference of 1869 to bring about such an institution, remarks 
 were made by Rev. J. P. Landis, pastor of the church, and Rev. 
 D. Berger, secretary of the executive committee. The next morn- 
 ing five men enrolled as students : Wra. Dillon, E. H. Caylor, S. 
 L. Livingston, J. E. H. Sentman, a Methodist, and W. J. Pruner, 
 all living to-day. Six others entered later, making eleven students 
 the first year, eight of whom graduated three years later, 1874. 
 Of these all are living except one, Rev. J. D. Holtzinger, who 
 died June 4, 1907, having been in the ministry fifty-four years. 
 
 A number of this class served as pastors while in attendance, 
 and one of them at least, W. J. Pruner, now of Chicago, did 
 not miss any recitation or exercise during three years. 
 
 The attendance went far beyond Bishop Edward's dream ; 
 namely, that "the Seminary would have three professors and one 
 student." Another Seminary opened three weeks later with four 
 professors and four students. 
 
 Since that historic day, October 11, 1871, 407 have graduated 
 and about as many more have taken partial courses, so that be- 
 tween 800 and 900 have been helped to a larger vision and to 
 greater efficiency in their life work by this institution. 
 
 What kind of soil and atmosphere had this tree bearing so 
 much fruit for forty-one years, and seed after its kind growing 
 into other fruit-bearing trees, and their seed into other trees, 
 and these in turn into others, and on and on? The last one of 
 former students to enter into his rest, though not an alumnus. 
 
 [12] 
 
brought 2,200 into the Church, 17 entering the ministry, and has 
 given to the world a son of international reputation as a Chris- 
 tian worker. 
 
 What reception had this new child of the Church? It had no 
 lineage, no inheritance, not even a dollar, not a foot of ground, 
 not a building to shelter it, not even a brick, not a book, and no 
 home. Its only asset was faith and hope. 
 
 Besides its poverty in material things, it was not very welcome. 
 The atmosphere, too, was not warm. A good many looked unlov- 
 ingly at the little creature expecting, not to say hoping, it would 
 die an early death, and that they would be at the funeral. 
 
 True, conferences passed resolutions, and ministers gave the 
 money to enable it to live the first year ; but the people were 
 curious rather than warmly sympathetic, for as yet they had made 
 no sacrifice for it. They did not understand how this poor child 
 would, in a few years, minister to their highest welfare in every 
 way, so that they were indifferent rather than appreciative. 
 
 There was no organized, active, certainly no open hostility, 
 but very little concern for the school and its success. 
 
 And no wonder ! When Carey, 100 years ago, started to evan- 
 gelize the people of India, the vast majority of the followers of 
 Christ in England did not believe that the Lord would counte- 
 nance such an expedition, if, indeed, they did not think that 
 Carey's mission was in direct opposition to the plans of the 
 Master. 
 
 The sixteenth century did not want Luther, nor the times want 
 Jesus, Paul, Wesley, or Philip William Otterbein. So the 
 Church forty-one years ago did not particularly want the Sem- 
 inary ; but it needed it and God supplied the need. 
 
 For two years, 1871-1873, it was under the control of the Board 
 of Education, consisting of ten members. This board, in its 
 annual session, August 1, 1871, had heard an ably prepared paper, 
 "The Schools of the Prophets," by Dr. H. A. Thompson, in the 
 First Church, Dayton, and met August 2 in the mission rooms 
 and elected the first theological faculty. Dr. Lewis Davis, eighteen 
 years president of Otterbein University, as senior professor, and 
 G. A. Funkhouser, a recent graduate of Western Theological 
 Seminary, as the second professor. It also* authorized the execu- 
 tive committee to secure the services of Rev. J. P. Landis, a re- 
 cent graduate of Lane Theological Seminary, to assist in the 
 teaching, the two professors to remunerate him by preaching for 
 him. 
 
 Dr. Davis was a polished Christian gentleman, of impressive 
 personality, force of character, fine social qualities, a strong 
 
 [13] 
 
preacher, with scholarly inclinations, which, from stress of cir- 
 cumstances in early life and from practical activities in later life, 
 he was never able to carry out as desired. Nevertheless, he com- 
 manded the respect and love of those who sat under him as 
 teacher of Systematic Theology. 
 
 For thirteen years he held the position as senior professor, 
 then he was made professor emeritus, and the writer was chosen 
 senior professor, continuing in that relation for the next twenty- 
 two years. 
 
 At the end of three years, 1874, Miami Conference having ap- 
 pointed Rev. J. P. Landis to another charge, Rev. R. Wahl was 
 elected professor of Hebrew and Church History for one year. 
 His successor was Rev. George Keister, a recent graduate from 
 Princeton Seminary, who, after serving four years, died, and Dr. 
 Landis was called in 1880 from a fruitful pastorate at German- 
 town to take the chair of Hebrew, which he has filled with ability 
 ever since, being made dean of the Faculty, May, 1907, and 
 president of the Seminary in 1910. From 1886 to 1891 he also 
 held the chair of Systematic Theology. 
 
 Upon the death of Prof. Keister in 1880, the Faculty was 
 strengthened by the election of Rev. A. W. Drury, of Iowa, a 
 graduate of the Seminary in 1877, a man peculiarly fitted by 
 nature and grace for Church history, then made a separate de- 
 partment. 
 
 In 1891, Rev. J. W. Etter, D.D., was elected to the chair of 
 Systematic Theology, but because of failing health was not per- 
 mitted to serve an entire year, and died March 28, 1905. 
 
 In 1893, Rev. Samuel D. Faust, of Pennsylvania Conference, 
 class of 1884, a man of keen intellect and strong convictions, was 
 elected to the chair of Church history, Professor Drury having 
 been in 1892 transferred to the chair of Systematic Theology. 
 
 Twelve years later, 1905, a new department was opened, that 
 of Religious Pedagogy, and Rev. Walter G. Clippinger, class of 
 1903, was elected to fill this chair, which he did with ability for 
 four years, when he was asked to take the presidency of Otter- 
 bein University. Rev. J. G. Huber, D.D., class of 1890. for nine- 
 teen years a successful pastor, was chosen to take the chair in 
 August, 1909, and two years ago, Rev. J. Balmer Showers, Erie 
 Conference, class of 1910, to this date on leave of absence (one 
 year abroad) in further preparation, and one year ago, while 
 studying in Germany, Rev. W. A. Weber, Ohio German Confer- 
 ence, class of 1909, were made members of the Faculty. Both 
 are men of ability and promise. In forty-one years there has 
 
 [14] 
 
been but one resignation to enter other work, and but one death 
 while in active service as teachers. 
 
 Be it recorded that there has always been the utmost harmony 
 in the Faculty, each member contributing his best to build up the 
 institution, much of this broad-minded courtesy coming from "the 
 father of higher education in the Church," the large-hearted, 
 courteous, dignified Dr. Lewis Davis, the first head of the Faculty, 
 a gentleman of the old school. 
 
 THE PHYSICAL LIFE OF THE SEMINARY. 
 
 Born in poverty, without a home, and with nothing to subsist 
 upon even for a day except faith in God, for eight years the 
 Seminary found shelter in five small rooms in the basement of 
 Summit Street Church. 
 
 Its first material possession^ the gift of Rev. John Kemp, of 
 Miami Conference, a man used of God, optimistic, in some re- 
 spects a promoter, living in advance of his day, was a donation 
 of four acres of ground, valued at $10,000, now at $30,000. The 
 circumstances in which this donation came were peculiar in this, 
 that, having purposed it when he was prosperous, he performed it 
 when he was poor. Like Jephthah he had opened his mouth to 
 the Lord, and he could not go back. Let the Church hold in 
 honor the name of John Kemp and Mrs. Ann Kemp, his wife, 
 whose generosity made this gift possible. 
 
 This man of God believed the word: "Pay that which thou hast 
 vowed. Better that thou shouldst not vow, than thou shouldst 
 vow and not pay." 
 
 Having now some ground, the mother of the Seminary, the 
 Church, loved it enough, deemed it large enough, useful enough, to 
 have a home all to itself, and so in the eighth year of its age, 
 1878, built this substantial, well adapted building, costing less 
 than $10,500, including furnishings, which, with a few changes, 
 has been its home ever since. 
 
 How glad Faculty and students were to leave those little 
 church rooms, one of which I know was always dark, dingy, 
 and damp, to get into the commodious, sunlit, airy rooms of the 
 new building! 
 
 It is safe to say that in the forty-one years, 100 different per- 
 sons, not counting the Bishops, who are ex-officio members of 
 the Board, have been called to minister to the physical well-being 
 of the institution, eight business managers, about 30 field agents, 
 80 men elected by General Conferences as directors, and still 
 others who served on executive committees. 
 
 [IS] 
 
General agents or business managers have been : 
 
 Rev. John Kemp 1871—1874 
 
 Rev. Samuel Hippard 1874—1879 
 
 Rev. W. J. Primer 1879—1881 
 
 S. L. Herr, Esq 1881—1885 
 
 Rev. D. R. Miller, D.D 1885—1897 
 
 Rev. W. J. Shuey, D.D 1897—1901 
 
 Rev. C. M. Brooke, D.D 1901—1909 
 
 Rev. J. E. Fout, D.D 1909— 
 
 Notwithstanding the long list of care-takers, chiefs of staff, 
 doctors, nurses, attendants, the child did not grow strong physi- 
 cally as desired, and as its years warranted ; indeed, its honor, if 
 not its very existence was in jeopardy in its twenty-fifth year by 
 reason of a cancerous debt (more than $60,000) long eating its 
 way towards the vital organs. 
 
 Under the Business Manager, Rev. D. R. Miller, the entire 
 Church was called in to witness and assist in the removal of the 
 monster growth. The successful, gratifying operation was cele- 
 brated in the silver jubilee, twenty-fifth anniversary, held in the 
 Seminary building, 1896. 
 
 The crucial period was now passed forever as was fondly hoped. 
 However, because of inability to collect some of the obligations 
 taken throughout the Church, and the depreciation of notes, in 
 five years again there was a debt of more than $30,000. Stronger 
 and more loving than ever, the anxious mother travailed in pain 
 the third time for the life and healthy growth of her offspring, 
 now past thirty years of age, and able to render more service 
 than ever. In a few months that debt was canceled, since which 
 time the policy of pay-as-you-go has been the watchword, and has 
 proved beneficial. 
 
 One thing that retarded rapid growth and was in part respon- 
 sible for threatening debts, was family dissension and alienation of 
 parental authority over the secrecy questiop, 1881-1889, so that 
 the institution did not get the proper care. 
 
 The celebration of the thirty-fifth anniversary of the founding 
 of the Union Biblical Seminary took place in Summit Street 
 United Brethren Church, Dayton, Ohio, October 9 and 10, at 
 7 : 30, 1906. The following program was rendered : 
 
 [16] 
 
program 
 
 October 9, 7 :30 p.m. 
 
 "Come, Thou, Almighty King" Congregation 
 
 Reading of the Word of God. 
 
 Prayer. 
 
 Music Quartet 
 
 "History of the Seminary," Rev. J. P. Landis, D.D., Ph.D., Sec- 
 retary of Faculty. 
 
 Greeting from the Present Student Body, Rev. M. O. McLaugh- 
 lin, of Senior Class. 
 
 "The Seminary's Relation to the Young People of the Church," 
 Rev. J. G. Huber, D.D., President Y. P. C. U. 
 
 Music Quartet 
 
 "The Seminary's Relation to the Unevangelized," Rev. S. S. 
 Hough, D.D., Secretary Foreign Board. 
 
 "The Seminary and the Supply of Efficient Pastors," Bishop G. 
 M. Mathews, D.D., Chicago, Illinois. 
 
 Music Quartet 
 
 Benediction. 
 
 October 10, 7 : 30 p.m. 
 
 Music Congregation 
 
 Responsive Reading of the Word of God. 
 
 Prayer. 
 
 Music Quartet 
 
 "Immediate Material Demands," Rev. C. M. Brooke, D.D., Busi- 
 ness Manager. 
 
 "The College and Seminary," Rev. C. J. Kephart, D.D., Toledo, 
 Iowa, President Leander Clark College. 
 
 Music Quartet 
 
 "The Seminary as a Unifying and Impelling Spiritual Force," 
 Rev. G. D. Gossard, class 1896, Baltimore, Md. 
 
 "Responsibility of the Church to the Seminary of the Future," 
 Rev. H. H. Font, D.D.. Editor Sunday-School Literature. 
 
 Music Congregation 
 
 Benediction. 
 
 [17] 
 
The purpose of this celebration was to call attention to the in- 
 stitution in order that the Church might more fully appreciate it 
 and render the support its importance and needs demanded. It 
 was in this period that it was thought that a new building was 
 a possibility and that the erection of it — some new departure — 
 would inspire the denomination to give greater emphasis to a 
 prepared ministry. 
 
 The celebration had a good effect, but we are thankful that the 
 coveted building did not materialize, even though plans had been 
 drawn, and grateful that prayers were not answered in the way 
 we expected. The Lord had larger things in store. 
 
 One part Of the physical equipment, the smallest, the most fre- 
 quently heard, used every day, indeed, many times a day, moving 
 professors and students at will, yet seen by none, is the bell in 
 the tower ; that historic bell, the first bell brought across the 
 Allegheny Mountains for a United Brethren church, used many 
 years on the old church in Germantown, and secured by Dr. 
 Landis for the Seminary about the year 1882. 
 
 That bell! that bell (horribile dictu), for many years was rung 
 at five o'clock every morning for students to arise, and most of 
 them did arise to begin their studies, and again rung at nine 
 o'clock at night for students to cease work and go to bed, and 
 many obeyed its motherly admonitions. 
 
 For many years printed rules were put into the hands of every 
 student — printed on paper, not on erasable tablets of the mind, in- 
 dicating what was required in order to get most benefit out of his 
 stay in the Seminary. 
 
 Sentiment changed rapidly in churches fortunate enough to be 
 ministered to by men trained in college and seminary. Bishop 
 Kephart used to tell of lay delegates who came to conferences 
 and to the appointing power, saying, "Do not send us a college 
 or seminary man ;" delegates, who within a very short time, came 
 back, saying, "Send us no other than a man trained for his work." 
 
 In the Church there was not a strong sentiment like in older 
 denominations, as Presbyterian, Congregational, Lutheran, 
 prompting and bolstering this new needed institution, making it 
 easy to get persons to give liberally. Then, too, not many had 
 much to give, granting that they had the disposition. 
 
 Everything had to be made from the raw material — sentiment, 
 friends, money. Is it any wonder that physical prosperity came 
 slowly ? 
 
 San Francisco Seminary, Presbyterian, less than a month 
 younger than ours, in its first decade, received $100,000 and ten 
 
 [18] 
 
scholarships, and early in its second decade a check came for 
 $250,000. 
 
 Crozer Seminary was presented to the Baptists in 1866 fully 
 equipped, having in hand $275,000 in lands, buildings, and in- 
 vested funds, the gift of one family. 
 
 Two years ago, when McCormick Seminary celebrated its 
 eightieth anniversary, the fiftieth of its location in Chicago, 
 and the one hundredth of the birth of its generous patron, Cyrus 
 McCormick, it had changed its location three times, its name four 
 times, and had an equipment of two millions and more on call 
 when needed. 
 
 We had no Montgomerys, Crozers, McCormicks to give us a 
 start, and almost no atmosphere in which to produce such men, 
 but we are growing such now, a few have already ripened, others 
 will ripen soon, so that in the near future and in generations to 
 come, men and women will pour their accumulated treasures into 
 the institution to the honor of God, and to the saving of men in 
 all the world. 
 
 All honor to the memory of John M. Bonebrake, his noble wife 
 cooperating, that man of purpose and prayer, of prayer and pur- 
 pose, who by his gift of $83,000 changed the name of the Sem- 
 inary, January 20, 1909, to Bonebrake Theological Seminary, in 
 gratitude that God had led six of his uncles of that name into the 
 gospel ministry. Others will follow his example, naming needed 
 buildings, professorships, lectureships, scholarships. And equal 
 honor to the larger number not able to have their names on build- 
 ings, chairs or marble slabs, who out of hearts equally generous 
 and wills equally in accord with God's will, have quietly given 
 through the years and will be giving through generations to come 
 to the upbuilding of this school, and to the honor of Him, whom 
 not having seen they love. 
 
 THE INTELLECTUAL LIFE OF THE SEMINARY. 
 
 In the founding of the Seminary, the Church was entering a 
 new field, was taking its first steps on a path untrodden. It had 
 no models, and until May, 1871, there was only one man, Dr. 
 Henry Garst, who had taken a full theological course. The Fac- 
 ulty chosen was inexperienced in framing courses and setting 
 standards. Two courses were mapped out, the Regular, which 
 college graduates were allowed to finish in two years, and the 
 English, requiring three years. Beginning with 1886, for some 
 years a preparatory course was offered — Hebrew, Greek, Church 
 History, and Mental Science. In 1901, the Missionary Course was 
 
 r i9i 
 
added, and in 1907, the Deaconess Course, each requiring two 
 years. 
 
 To the Regular Course, new features have been added as the 
 requirements of the times demanded. First, special Sunday-school 
 work, then Sociology, Comparative Religion, Missions, Pedagogy, 
 Child Psychology, Music, and Elocution, the last two being re- 
 quired the past year, so that the course is now more complete than 
 ever, which, if well taken by the student, will do more to fit him 
 for efficiency as a minister in the United Brethren Church than 
 the course and instruction in any other seminary in the land. 
 
 Then, in addition to the direct work of training students in 
 the class room, which, by reason of the small Faculty, required of 
 each member double work for the first twenty-five years, the 
 Seminary, through its Faculty, has been an intellectual force for 
 the uplift of the denomination, in books published, in tracts, 
 papers, treatises on educational and theological subjects, many of 
 which have had wide circulation. 
 
 Moreover, the Seminary has been a force in promoting closer 
 study of books suggested, and by helping to turn the old methods 
 of holding institutes into inspiring Bible conferences, and by 
 teaching in them. 
 
 At one time the Seminary offered correspondence courses for 
 those not able to get to the institution, and yet were ambitions to 
 make preparation for more efficient service. 
 
 Furthermore, in response to an expressed wish, and in harmony 
 with the action of the General Conference, the Seminary proposed 
 a three years' "post-graduate theological course," naming books 
 and prices, for those who had had school training, and the "Itin- 
 erants' Course," for those who had not had the advantages of the 
 schools, in the hope of stimulating more ministers to persistent, 
 systematic, close study of subjects related to their work. The 
 Faculty also prepared lists of questions for the examination of 
 licentiates in all the conferences. 
 
 These are some of the ways in which the Seminary has been an 
 intellectual asset to the Church, working quietly, yet yielding a 
 valuable income, enriching lives in many ways and places by en- 
 larging the efficiency of ministers and members. It has put its 
 helpful touch upon many a person who has never been in Day- 
 ton and never will be. 
 
 " Like some tall palm the noiseless fabric sprang." 
 " But life did never to one man allow 
 
 Time to discover worlds and conquer, too." 
 
 Others in the future will build better than we have done in the 
 pioneer period of the past. 
 
 [20] 
 
Again, the Seminary's contribution to the intellectual energy 
 of the Church has taken concrete form in its graduates, holding 
 responsible positions, key men, as the Senior Bishop, G. M. Math- 
 ews, the Publishing Agent, W. R. Funk, the Secretary of Board 
 of Foreign Missions, S. S. Hough, its own five graduates in its 
 teaching force; in its efficient General Manager; three college 
 professors, four editors of the literature of the denomination, 
 three secretaries of branches of service, two evangelists, eleven 
 presiding elders, twenty-two missionaries beyond the seas, and 
 its hundreds of efficient pastors all contributing moral, intellectual, 
 and spiritual force in and from as many different centers. 
 
 The impact of these intellectual forces on the Church ! Who will 
 measure it for us ? What progress has the denomination made in 
 this city since the Seminary came ? Three churches then and one 
 mission. Now fourteen churches and three missions, every one 
 helped by students of the Seminary. What adjustments of de- 
 nominations to one another, and to the open doors of the world 
 since 1871, until now we see a nation, as China, born in a day. 
 
 Who will dare predict the changes in the near and remote 
 future — changes even greater than in the past? Yet in all these 
 changes the Seminary will have its part, will be a contributing 
 agency, through its graduates increasing in number, quality, and 
 efficiency. "Then shall thy light rise in darkness, and thine ob- 
 scurity be as the noonday; and the Lord shall guide thee con- 
 tinually, and satisfy thy soul in dry places, and make strong thy 
 bones ; and thou shalt be like a watered garden and like a spring 
 of water whose waters fail not. And they that shall be of thee 
 shall build the old waste places ; thou shalt raise up the founda- 
 tions of many generations ; and thou shalt be called The repairer 
 of the breach, The restorer of paths to dwell in." 
 
 So that our fathers builded better than they knew. All hail to 
 them this hour. Do they look down over the battlements and re- 
 joice in the work being done which they helped to start so well? 
 
 THE SPIRITUAL LIFE OF THE SEMINARY. 
 
 /. In its doctrinal standards. 
 
 Its teaching has always been loyal to God as Father, to Jesus 
 Christ as Savior of all men, by his spotless life and his atoning 
 death, to the Holy Spirit as abiding, teaching, witnessing, con- 
 vincing of sin, righteousness, and judgment, and guiding into all 
 the truth. 
 
 It has been true to all the fundamental doctrines growing out of 
 belief in the Holy Trinity, as sin, depravity, regeneration, sancti- 
 on 
 
fication, the future bliss of the righteousness, and the doom of 
 the unrepentant wicked. 
 
 On the commission appointed by the General Conference, 1885, 
 to restate the creed the Seminary had one member who wrote the 
 articles on Regeneration and Sanctification. 
 
 There has always been fidelity to the Bible as the Word of 
 God, the all-sufficient rule of faith and practice. That "God is 
 the starting point, his word is preeminent," as stated by Dr. Davis 
 in the opening address forty-one years ago, has been held and em- 
 phasized ever since, and never more so than now ; for out of 
 him as the source, through him as the agent, and unto him as the 
 end are all things, to whom be the glory unto the ages of ages. 
 
 77. The Seminary in its prayer life. 
 
 Beginning as we did, it was recognized, "Except the Lord 
 build the house they labor in vain that build it." That Paul 
 planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase. So then 
 neither is he that planteth anything, neither he that watereth, but 
 God that giveth the increase", that "of God we are the fellow- 
 workers, of God we were the field, of God we were the building." 
 God being recognized as first in all things, prayer was early em- 
 phasized in the lives of teachers, students, committees, chapel ex- 
 ercises, and special meetings. Quite early, too, requests for 
 prayer began to come from pastors in the field. Then, as gradu- 
 ates went forth, they in turn kept sending back requests for 
 prayer, which served to keep those inside in close sympathy with 
 those on the outside. Soon persons not so directly related, mis- 
 sionaries, secretaries, organizations interdenominational and en- 
 terprises in remote regions sent, and are still sending, to ask the 
 Seminary to pray, and often have the next mails brought thrilling 
 reports of the gracious manifestations of the Spirit of God to in- 
 dividuals, churches, and communities. It may be gratefully 
 acknowledged to the praise of his name, that through this agency 
 God has turned currents of power on lives at home and abroad, 
 and that it is the desire and effort to increase this dynamic power 
 as the years go by. 
 
 The fear often expressed in earlier years that men might "lose 
 their religion by attending the Seminary," "backslide," "grow 
 cold," has long been dispelled, and the Seminary has been and is 
 the best place on earth in which to acquire a strong, consecrated 
 personality by three years of close contact with the truth, and 
 through the truth, intimate fellowship with the God of truth. 
 
 III. Another way in which God has owned the spiritual 
 agency of the Seminary is through its eight Bible conferences, 
 which were great in the numbers attending, in the instruction 
 
 [22] 
 
given, in spiritual uplift, great in the inspiration carried away, 
 beneficial in the closer acquaintance of alumni who had never 
 seen each other, in the fellowship of ministers and laity, great in 
 their influence on city and surrounding territory, great in results 
 to the Church through addresses reported and published. 
 
 The first was in 1899, under Dr. Chapman, the next, 1900, under 
 Dr. Carson, the third, 1901, under the Bishops, the fourth, fifth, 
 and sixth under G. Campbell Morgan, in the Third Street Luth- 
 eran Church, at that time the largest auditorium in the city, which 
 was quickly filled by several thousand persons, crowding, jam- 
 ming, literally climbing over one another, leaving hundreds out- 
 side to go slowly away disappointed. The next, 1905, under F. 
 B. Meyer, the best known spiritual power in England ; the next, 
 1906, under J. Campbell White, which many thought the best 
 of all for definite instruction and results. 
 
 In some of these conferences, ministers of all denominations 
 from Ohio and adjoining States to the number of more than 400, 
 gathered to share in the study of the Word with a view to the 
 deepening of the spiritual life, as stated in the circulars sent out 
 announcing the first conference. 
 
 The city, the Seminary, the denomination, were brought under 
 the spell of these great devotional gatherings, much like the Pass- 
 over Feast, held also in the spring of the year, a new conserva- 
 tion, the waiving of the first sheaf, a pledge of the greater har- 
 vest to be. Students compared the benefits derived to a year's 
 study in the Seminary. Individual citizens stopped on the streets 
 to thank the Seminary for bringing such men and such benefits 
 within their reach ; pastors were revived and currents of religious 
 awakening were started. See Seminary Bulletin of July, 1906. 
 
 But I should not be fair did I not say that the wives of the pro- 
 fessors, from the first, have done well their part in making the 
 Seminary what it is, by opening their homes, and hearts as well, 
 day and night, to the incoming students, giving warm welcome, 
 cheering the homesick by motherly solicitude and motherly del- 
 icacies when too ill to leave their rooms ; by afternoon receptions 
 for the wives of the students, often burdened with inconveniences 
 unknown to them before, in order that their husbands might pre- 
 pare for larger usefulness. Then, after graduation, professors' 
 wives have put up appetizing lunches for the journey back home 
 after an absence of three years, for some to cross the continent 
 west, and for others to New York with their faces toward the 
 foreign field. 
 
 [23] 
 
IV. The Seminary as a missionary center. 
 
 The early graduates went as pioneers to open new fields in the 
 homeland. When in 1886 the Student Volunteer Movement for 
 Foreign Missions was organized, it found responses among our 
 students, and almost ever since a Volunteer Band has existed, by 
 which, with frequent emphasis by each teacher, a good missionary 
 spirit has been maintained, and is on the increase. Two of the 
 professors have daughters in the foreign field. 
 
 More and more returned missionaries (four this year) are 
 spending their furloughs in taking studies in the Seminary. They 
 give much while they get much. By their presence and purposeful 
 living, they help to keep the heart of the Seminary near to the 
 heart of the greatest missionary, Jesus Christ, and confront each 
 student with the question, "How can I make my short span of 
 life tell most for Jesus Christ?" Of the present class, one-third 
 will serve abroad, and one-third in missions at home. 
 
 Two of the alumni, Rev. and Mrs. L. A. McGrew, class of 1890, 
 wear the martyr's crown received while serving in Africa, May, 
 1898. 
 
 In conclusion, from this hasty review did the Church do 
 well to open the Seminary more than forty years ago? Has it 
 done well to have only one Seminary, thereby unifying the Church 
 in its doctrinal standards, in its method of administration, in pro- 
 moting fellowship, in practical cooperation for definite ends till 
 we all come unto the unity of the faith? 
 
 Will it do well for the next forty-one years to have only one 
 Seminary, concentrating all its energies, financial, intellectual, 
 spiritual, toward making this one center strong, a mighty fortress 
 out of which shall go soldiers, brave, heroic, equipped to help take 
 the world for our glorious Lord and to crown him King and 
 Lord of all ? 
 
 Is not one Seminary the next forty-one years the dictate of 
 wisdom even if this Church must pay part of the expense of 
 students, coming from the coast, which, in all fairness, it ought 
 to be doing now, for of all the students, those from the coast are 
 examples of extraordinary church loyalty, shown by their coming 
 so far at such expense and inconvenience— men of talent, devo- 
 tion, sacrifice, which spell success for the cause of Christ in that 
 rapidly growing coast empire. Somehow their burden ought to 
 be made lighter now, because of what they are and because of 
 what they will be and what they will do. 
 
 And, finally, what? If in forty-one years this Seminary has 
 come from nothing to what it is, from two professors to seven, 
 from 11 students to 70, the largest attendance in its history, from 
 
 [24] 
 
not one book to a library of 3,700, from not one dollar to net 
 assets amounting to $381,600, an increase of $200,000 in three 
 years under the optimistic, energetic manager, Dr. J. E. Fout, from 
 not a spoonful of ground for a home to 274 acres for a location 
 which leaves nothing to be desired, but which will furnish accom- 
 modations for the next four or five hundred years. What, 
 brethren, shall we say to these things ? If God be for us, who can 
 be against us? 
 
 Does history tell us that the leaders in religious thought for 
 hundreds of years, as Luther and Melanchthon, Bucer and Calvin. 
 Tyndale and Bilney, Latimer and Knox, Wesley and Otterbein, 
 and others, were men trained in the schools ? Then does history 
 also tell us that the future leaders must be trained in the univer- 
 sities and seminaries for the work God has yet to do. 
 
 Shall we rise and build for God and for generations and ages 
 coming? Shall we pray as Jesus did, not alone for these present 
 to-day, but also for those in all time who shall believe on him 
 through the agency of this Seminary, that they may all be one 
 with him, just as he was one with the Father, until they are per- 
 fected into one with him, to the end that by this perfect oneness 
 in spirit, in love, in service, the world, the whole world, the un- 
 evangelized in all places and ages, may know, may certainly know, 
 experimentally know, that the Father sent his Son to save, and 
 that he loves every creature just as he loved his Son who never 
 sinned ? 
 
 Why, I ask, why should not our praying be more like our Lord's 
 in the extent of time covered by his prayers ; our prayers reaching 
 down through coming generations of students, teachers, managers, 
 patrons of this school ? Why not our praying more like his pray- 
 ing for spiritual attainments such as would compel the world 
 to know? 
 
 Why, I ask, shall we not by work and by prayer, by unceasing 
 prayer and unceasing work, make this Seminary a city set on a 
 hill that cannot be hid, a fountain, deep and wide and strong on 
 a high hill, flowing down into the desert making it to bud and 
 blossom as the rose ? Why not make this Seminary a great tree, 
 whose fruit shall shake like Lebanon, and whose every leaf shall 
 be for the healing of the nations ; yea, make it a sun in the un- 
 clouded sky, a brightly shining sun, whose life-giving rays shall 
 fall on every life, giving it the beauty of holiness, to the great end 
 that nozv unto the principalities and powers in the heavenlies may 
 be made known by the church the manifold, many-sided wisdom of 
 God, all looking toward and hastening that glorious consummation 
 when the four living creatures, which are before the throne, shall 
 
 [25] 
 
be heard saying, and the four and twenty elders, which are before 
 the throne, shall be heard saying, and the many angels round 
 about the throne and the number of them is ten thousand times 
 ten thousand, and thousands of thousands shall be heard saying, 
 and every created thing which is in heaven, and on the earth, 
 and under the earth, and on the sea, and all things that are in 
 them shall be heard saying, "Unto Him that sitteth on the throne, 
 and unto the Lamb be the Blessing and the Honor, and the 
 Glory, and the Dominion, forever and forever and forever." 
 
 26 
 
annttoeraarp 2U>Dres# 
 
 2Ddtbmb bv 
 
 TBibJjop George ££. 8©atbeto0, 3D.3D. 
 
 Chicago, Mimig. 
 
 I 28 | 
 
Bishop George M. Mathews, D.D. 
 
Relation of the Seminary to the Church 
 
 History has its place and value. It is both a revelation and an 
 inspiration. It has its philosophy and its lessons. It sets forth 
 the achievements of the past and the forces that led to them. It 
 recounts the struggles and experiences of pioneer life, whether of 
 an individual, institution, or nation, and this revelation of the 
 past serves as an inspiration for the future. High statesmanship 
 halts to glance over the yesterday, so that it may have a better 
 vision for the to-morrow. Only in this way do anniversaries 
 reach their highest service. 
 
 This fortieth anniversary will prove helpful to the Seminary 
 and the Church, if we discover that this institution has reached 
 a period in its history and in the thought of the denomination, 
 when 
 
 CERTAIN THINGS ARE TO BE TAKEN FOR GRANTED. 
 
 1. The purpose and mission of the Seminary. 
 
 Primarily, the Seminary was not founded to make profound 
 scholars, linguistic experts, and masters in theology. We have 
 great scholars and intellectual masters, of whom we are proud as 
 a denomination. We appreciate these giants. But this is not the 
 main purpose of the Seminary. It stands for such ministerial 
 education and training as shall make efficient preachers and pas- 
 tors. Its supreme mission is to advance the kingdom of God, by 
 making mighty expounders of the Word, and leaders capable of 
 meeting the intellectual and spiritual needs of the people to whom 
 thev minister. In a word, the mission of the Seminary is to give 
 vision, enrichment, strength, and prestige to our denomination by 
 training its ministry into religious leadership that shall give 
 sane, intelligent direction to our denominational thought and 
 activities. 
 
 May I emphasize that ministerial education in this institution 
 stands for the training of men for spiritual work by processes 
 that shall increase their efficiency and power. 
 
 Furthermore, I feel sure that the high claim of this school for 
 existence and generous support, at this crucial time, rests solely 
 
 -;29] 
 
upon the faithful and courageous execution of this worthy 
 purpose. 
 
 2. The divine call to the ministry. 
 
 Another thing to be taken for granted is the scripture doctrine 
 and experience of a divine call to the ministry. This is the dom- 
 inant sentiment of our Church to-day. Our Church has ever 
 held to this fundamental truth, that God, in his eternal purpose 
 and plan of redemption, has included his gracious choice of human 
 personality to cooperate with him in the salvation of the world. 
 "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you," said Jesus to 
 his disciples. We believe that God himself puts men into the 
 ministry and gives them the consciousness of his endorsement, 
 according to their individual aptitude and temperaments. 
 
 We dare not recede from this fundamental fact of the divine 
 call to the ministry. Nor do we stop with the fact of this call. 
 We are coming to see more clearly that this call includes an 
 obligation to strive for the best possible educational equipment 
 in this high vocation. 
 
 3. A good foundation for preaching possibility. 
 
 Another demand of the Seminary to be taken for granted, and 
 about which there should be no question, especially at this period 
 of our Church's life and testing, is that matriculation in the in- 
 stitution should be granted only to those who have the native gift 
 of expression and fair ability to teach divine truth. Have we 
 not reached the period when our ministerial needs demand that 
 no person shall be admitted into, or be permitted to remain in 
 this school of the prophets who does not possess fair preaching 
 possibilities and elements that can be trained into commanding 
 leadership? 
 
 It is admitted that the apostolic college was composed of men 
 who possessed different capabilities and characteristics. Our 
 Lord evidently understood this diversity in his selection of the 
 twelve. Each apostle differed from the other in his gifts. Each 
 also possessed the gift best for his own work. But in no case did 
 Jesus choose men without rich mental soil, and talents capable of 
 being developed into spiritual gianthood and intellectual leader- 
 ship. Schools are to make giants ; and we need them these days. 
 But the school cannot develop a giant from a dwarf, and may I 
 say that the church that encourages those to enter this sacred 
 calling who are devoid of such capabilities and possibilities to 
 which I have alluded, and, moreover, authorizes its theological 
 school to issue a diploma certifying to what its possessor is ex- 
 pected to possess, but does not always possess, deserves the public 
 
 [30] 
 
censure with which it is sure to be rewarded. Why should we 
 disappoint the rightful expectations of the people who are always 
 the final judges of the output of our schools? 
 
 THE SUPREME QUESTION. 
 
 With the above-named things taken for granted, I pass to the 
 consideration of the supreme question before our denomination 
 at this time ; namely, the kind of ministerial equipment suited 
 to meet the demand of the times and the needs of our Church. 
 The fact is patent to all, that the vast changes in modern life 
 during the last half century have greatly affected the ministry as 
 well as the other two honored professions of medicine and law. 
 So great has been the advance in all the departments of the 
 modern world in technical knowledge, in the science of govern- 
 ment, and the philosophy of religion, that all professions are 
 under the scrutiny and demand for higher ideals, wider scope of 
 equipment, and increased efficiency. This is not only true in re- 
 gard to law and medicine, but it is conspicuously true with ref- 
 erence to the Christian ministry. 
 
 The public expects the finished product of the theological 
 school to be far above what it was a half century ago. In view 
 of present day intelligence and advancement, it has a right to 
 make such demand upon those who present themselves as spirit- 
 ual teachers and leaders. Commandership is more than ever ex- 
 pected of the minister who presides over a city or country parish, 
 be it large or small. 
 
 Should not this fortieth anniversary mark a distinct advance in 
 our denomination for a higher educational ideal of the ministry? 
 Have we not reached a period in the history of our Church 
 when such an educational ideal should be maintained in order to 
 the larger life and influence of our denomination ? Have we not 
 come to the time when both a college and seminary education is 
 indispensable? Not, mark you, a collegiate education without a 
 theological training; not a seminary equipment without a college 
 preparation ; but both together as essential to enable the preacher 
 to do his best work and reach the highest degree of success. 
 
 OTHER ELEMENTS NOT TO BE IGNORED. 
 
 Do not misunderstand me in this emphasis of an advanced 
 educational ideal for the present ministry. 
 
 I do not depreciate other necessary qualifications for an efficient 
 ministry. I simply give special emphasis to this educational phase 
 of a complete ministerial furnishing. 
 
 [31] 
 
Surely one of the greatest needs of Christendom is a spiritual 
 ministry. Evidently the entire Church needs spiritual fertilization, 
 not excepting the preachers. A careful study of our denomina- 
 tional situation reveals this need. It is clear to see that the 
 deepening and quickening of the spiritual life of the ministry, 
 together with the consecration of all their powers and talents to 
 the one work of preaching salvation, is absolutely essential in these 
 days of ministerial sidetracking. 
 
 I would not depreciate, nay, I would exalt, the value of a 
 strong faith in God, a rich inner life in Christ, and the divine flame 
 of love that burns, constrains, and impels to service and sacrifice. 
 The dynamic power of this Christ life in the preacher is an im- 
 perative need. 
 
 But my plea is not for the minimum, but the maximum qualifi- 
 cation of the preacher, including all sides of his equipment. Not 
 less piety, but more knowledge ; not less spirituality, but more in- 
 tellectual force. These things united will enable the preacher to 
 present Christ and his truth with impressive, persuasive power. 
 Dr. Francis W. Bakeman, in insisting that the ideal of seminary 
 life should be homiletic, puts it as follows : 
 
 "Must the preacher not know Greek and have a working knowl- 
 edge of Hebrew ? Surely, but only that he may be a better, more 
 accurate, and resourceful preacher. Must he not understand 
 systematic theology? Unquestionably, but only that his preach- 
 ing may be more truthful and weighty. Ought he not be versed 
 in Church history and archeology? Certainly, but only in order 
 that he may preach more impressively and convincingly." Then 
 he adds : "The supreme work, the dominant aim of a theological 
 seminary should be to make preachers and pastors of the highest 
 possible kind out of the material given. . . . The highest am- 
 bition of any school of sacred learning should be to produce well 
 equipped and effective ministers, who can win the favor of the 
 hearers of the average congregation." 
 
 WHY SUCH EDUCATIONAL IDEAL FOR OUR CHURCH? 
 
 1. The superlative dignity of the Christian ministry requires it. 
 
 It is the high calling of God, the most exalted and sacred 
 vocation in the universe. It is a higher position than that of any 
 ruler that ever sat upon an earthly throne. The preacher is the 
 representative of the court of heaven. He is in partnership with 
 the Lord Jesus Christ for the redemption of a lost world. He is 
 charged with the greatest message that was ever committed to 
 
 [32] 
 
men. His ambassadorial character lifts him to the highest plane 
 of relationship and service. 
 
 This ineffable dignity carries with it an obligation to discharge 
 his duties efficiently as the representative of the most high God 
 in the affairs of his kingdom. His qualifications should therefore 
 be worthy of the greatness of the Person he represents, and 
 commensurate with the conspicuous position he occupies. 
 
 The minister has also a high function as the prophet of God. 
 He must interpret the thoughts of God in their widest possible 
 scope, and in their manifold relations. He should understand the 
 deep mysteries of God. He must communicate revealed truth 
 to men in terms and phraseology that will best impress, instruct, 
 and inspire. To do this he must have a commanding knowledge 
 of the Bible, and be familiar with it in the tongues in which it was 
 originally written. He must know the Bible exegetically and 
 thoroughly, so as to have a system of truth, and that at first hand, 
 so that when he speaks it is with the authority and freshness of 
 originality. Otherwise he will suffer the weakness of superficial- 
 ity and uncertainty. He should be such a critical student of the 
 Word of God as to become a master of Biblical knowledge. He 
 must know well what he professes to know, in order to give tone 
 to the sentiments and convictions of his people. Nothing short 
 of this high conception of preparation will drive him to hard 
 study and accurate thinking as a prophet of God. 
 
 2. The greatness of the message. 
 
 The preacher's message is the Word of God, the revelation of 
 his thoughts and purpose to men. It contains great fundamental, 
 pivotal, eternal truths, which underlie all progress, reform, and 
 civilization. Its literature, its poetry, its democracy, its moral 
 and spiritual worth are its glory. Says Dr. Stalker : "The Word 
 of God is the thought of God. It is more ancient than the stars, 
 and lies more deeply imbedded in the constitution of things than 
 the roots of the mountain. God's Word is before all things." 
 The minister is bound to deliver this message of redeeming love 
 in such a way that neither its truth nor its glory will suffer in 
 his hands. He is, therefore, responsible for the mastery of the 
 glorious message which it is his privilege to communicate. 
 
 Then, there are two fields of conflict with the Bible and its 
 message. The one relates to its authority, and the other relates 
 to its meaning. The preacher must be able to defend successfully 
 its authority and make clear its meaning. This requires accurate 
 knowledge and careful thinking and training. 
 
 The gospel has not always had a fair chance in the hands of 
 men. Piety and consecration are all important qualifications ; but 
 
 [33] 
 
these will not make up for inadequate preparation and illiteracy. 
 The Word of God is a sharp two-edged weapon, and the hands 
 that wield it should be skilled and trained. 
 
 Surely the ineffable greatness and glory of the message which 
 men are charged to deliver demand the specialization of the 
 schools. 
 
 3. The influence of preaching upon the age. 
 
 This gospel which Christ has committed to his representatives 
 has universal adaptation. It is suited to all peoples, ages, and 
 conditions. It has vital relation to all the institutions and agencies 
 that build up a strong civilization. It is the power of God unto 
 the salvation of every individual and nation that accepts Jesus 
 Christ. Hence, wherever it is ably and faithfully proclaimed, the 
 gospel exerts a powerful influence upon that age. 
 
 The conversion of the Roman world was chiefly due to the 
 preaching of the gospel. While the general disuse of preaching 
 in the apostolic times led to formality and corruption. It is well 
 known by every student of church history that those who went 
 forth as ambassadors of Christ, proclaiming with intelligence 
 and ability the great doctrines of the Word of God, made deep 
 impressions upon their age. 
 
 Those preachers who were the great expositors of the Bible, 
 who presented its truths with thorough exegetical knowledge, and 
 held them with the power of intellectual and spiritual grip, made 
 their pulpit a throne, from which proceeded a strange influence 
 which awakened the moral sense of men and made them mighty 
 factors for morality, righteousness, and good government. There 
 never was a greater demand and opportunity than now for the 
 Christian pulpit to exert a powerful influence in determining what 
 shall be the prevailing characteristics of our present civilization 
 in respect to moral ideals, national honor, and religious conduct. 
 It is interesting to study the great reformers and spiritual build- 
 ers of Christian history. Who were they? Such educated, 
 mighty preachers of the Word as Luther, Knox, Whitefield, 
 Wesley, Otterbein, Finney, Chalmers, Beecher, Spurgeon, and 
 others. They were able custodians and expounders of revealed 
 truth and leaders of the religious thought of their age. 
 
 4. Adequate leadership. 
 
 This leads me to speak of the present demand for an adequate 
 leadership. Never in the history of our Church and the world has 
 there been such need of sane, intelligent, vigorous leadership as 
 to-day. 
 
 The call is for educated, trained men and women who know 
 more than others, who have moral leadership, who champion great 
 
 [34] 
 
world enterprises and guide the forward movements of the king- 
 dom in channels of power and blessing. The call is for men of 
 thoroughness, breadth, culture, and training, who fall neither into 
 despair nor fanaticism. 
 
 These are the men who may lay claim to moral leadership in 
 giving wise direction and tone to denominational thought and 
 activity. Dr. Herschel Johnson has well said that "thoroughness 
 makes a man stand before kings." 
 
 It is significant that the religious leaders of to-day are looking 
 to consecrated graduates of our colleges and seminaries who are 
 specially trained to be key men in both the home and foreign 
 field. No other class of men and women can measure up to the 
 demands of the hour and conduct an administration of command- 
 ing influence and prestige, whether in home or foreign missions. 
 
 Dr. G. A. Gordon declares that it was the leadership of Paul 
 and John that held the religion of Jesus to its proper place and 
 channel in the early century. "They changed the character of 
 the Christian centuries." 
 
 Luther and Calvin and Zwingli and Knox so guided the Ref- 
 ormation that it bore the very best fruits. The lesson of all 
 church history reveals the importance of adequate leadership. 
 The prophet of God as a leader and teacher must get this power 
 through the touch and training of the schools. 
 
 Dr. Faunce, in speaking of the demand for ethical leadership 
 upon the part of the preacher, says : "He is to interpret the Gal- 
 ilean teaching in terms of present life. He is to explain what in 
 the gospel narrative is transient custom, and what is external law. 
 He is to point out impartially and fearlessly the ethical dangers 
 which inhere in all groupings of labor or capital, and in all new 
 movements, social or civic, fraternal or religious. He is to make 
 all men see that the kingdom he represents is no insubstantial 
 pageant, but the deepest, divinest of realities, and that every man 
 in the community may find in the service of that kingdom a task 
 big enough and arduous enough to employ forever his highest 
 powers. . . A man with this conception of his calling can 
 never become a mere functionary of ecclesiastical routine. He is 
 prophet of God's great to-morrow and educator of the conscience 
 of humanity." 
 
 President Faunce here presents the most serious problem that 
 confronts the Christian thinkers and educators of to-day; namely, 
 how to meet the demand for adequate moral and religious lead- 
 ership in the great forward movements of God's kingdom, as 
 well as in the worthy ordinary activities of modern life. I know 
 of no other way except that which I have tried to point out. 
 
 [35] 
 
RELATION OF THE SEMINARY TO THE CHURCH. 
 
 This discussion of the present educational ideal of the ministry 
 of our Church naturally leads to the emphasis that should be 
 placed upon the relation between the Seminary and the Church. 
 It is clear that this relationship is fundamental and vital. 
 
 If what has already been stated in favor of an educational ideal 
 for the ministry of our Church is accepted, then this relationship 
 demands that the Seminary should specialize its work and edu- 
 cate men for the special purpose for which it was founded, that 
 they should become efficient preachers and pastors. Specialization 
 is the watchword of to-day. If the medical school is necessary 
 to the profession of medicine, if the law school is essential to the 
 legal profession, then I claim that the theological school should 
 also keep in the line of specialization, with, of course, a broadened 
 curriculum suited to the changes and demands of modern life. 
 
 The work of the Seminary is to give such equipment as our 
 Church needs and demands in this growing age. 
 
 Since special and definite ministerial training best fits men to 
 deal with the variety of problems of modern society with com- 
 manding success, then the value of the relation of the Seminary to 
 our denomination is accentuated many fold. 
 
 The importance of Christian education in our Church is now 
 receiving commendable attention. I believe it will receive in- 
 creasing attention in the future ; for we must support denomina- 
 tional colleges for the sake of our self-preservation and denomin- 
 ational prestige. And these colleges must be positively and in- 
 tensely Christian. A semi-Christian college in a Christian de- 
 nomination is both a misnomer and a misfit. We must educate our 
 youth, or suffer denominational decadence. We are under the 
 law of the survival of the fittest, and no church can ignore this 
 law and survive the exactions of the present rigid and more ele- 
 vated standards of modern society. The Church will come and 
 must come to this standard, and insist upon it, if she would ex- 
 pand and grow with the growth of the throbbing complex life of 
 this wonderful century. 
 
 I make this statement in regard to the importance and value of 
 the Christian college, in view of another statement I am con- 
 strained to make with reference to the value of our theological 
 school. It is this : I look upon our Seminary at this time in our 
 denominational life as having overshadowing importance. The 
 word "overshadowing" may seem extravagant. But I use it 
 thoughtfully because of the value of the Seminary as a special 
 school for the preparation of our young ministers to become the 
 
 [36] 
 
future leaders and teachers in our denomination. To me, this 
 emphasis is our imperative need. To ignore this need or to treat 
 it trivially, is to suffer immeasurable loss of efficiency and power. 
 
 SOURCES OF SUPPLY. 
 
 There ought to be 100 students or more in this Seminary under 
 special training. Why should not this Church, with the constitu- 
 ency of 300,000 members, supply this number each year ? If it can 
 be done then it ought to be done. It will be done if the proper 
 proportion of students shall come from the three natural sources 
 of supply. 
 
 1. The Christian home. 
 
 The home is a divine institution with the most sacred relation- 
 ships and associations. God has set the solitary in the family. He 
 intends that he should be worshiped daily at its altar. Here is 
 where family religion exerts a profound influence upon its mem- 
 bers, during the impressionable period of their unfolding life. 
 There is tremendous need now of emphasizing family religion. 
 We need to get back to the New England idea of home life. In 
 early days the face of the family was always set towards the min- 
 istry. Parents felt especially honored in having one or more of 
 their sons in the ministry. This was their greatest pride and joy. 
 Now a change has taken place in this respect. In many cases the 
 atmosphere of family life is discouraging, if not antagonistic to 
 this high calling. There are thousands of excellent homes in the 
 church. And yet in very many of these homes, numerous worthy 
 secular influences attract their attention and drown the voice of 
 God. Nevertheless, I am convinced that the Christian home is the 
 recruiting ground for the ministry. The great living preachers of 
 to-day trace their impressions of a call to the ministry to the 
 religious life of the home, where the songs and prayers and sweet 
 lives of their fathers and mothers were a rich benediction. I 
 could wish that the sentiment in all the Christian homes of our 
 Church would be so positive that the glory of the Christian min- 
 istry would appeal to the ambition of more of our young men of 
 strong personality and talent, to serve well their generation in 
 the highest, and most honorable vocation of earth. 
 
 2. Annual conferences. 
 
 It is within the power of the annual conference to make or 
 unmake preachers. Everything depends upon the ideals of the 
 conference leaders. If their ideals are high and insistent, they 
 will turn the young preachers to the Seminary for special train- 
 ing. Better have fewer men in the active workers than to thrust 
 
 [37] 
 
them forth unprepared and unfitted for their high task, and thus 
 subject them to the irritating limitations of a conscious lack of 
 equipment. The place for young men unprepared to preach and 
 teach divine truth, and to administer the affairs of the kingdom, 
 is not the pastorate, but the school. Leaders owe this interest 
 to the licentiate as well as to the conference which looks for better 
 leadership and ministration. Mark you, I would not put the 
 blame upon young men who have not the means to take advantage 
 of the school ; but surely there are hundreds of young men in 
 active work who should be in the Seminary. Many of them are 
 waiting and anxious to take advantage of that school ; but they 
 have not the means. What an appeal this situation is for well-to- 
 do laymen in our Church to found scholarships for the benefit of 
 our worthy poor young ministers, and thereby make their influ- 
 ence immortal and abiding. 
 
 3. Our colleges. 
 
 Another source of Seminary supply is the denominational col- 
 lege. Without discussing the broader scope and mission of Chris- 
 tian education, except to commend it, I raise the question of the 
 relation of our Church colleges to the Seminary, and through it 
 to the educational ideal of our ministry. 
 
 What does a church college stand for, if it does not exist for the 
 special benefit of the denomination with which it is identified? 
 
 If the present demand of modern life insists upon this high 
 standard of equipment, including both college and theological 
 training for the minister, then the Seminary and Church have a 
 right to look to that source for its recruits ; especially, a fair per- 
 centage of young men and women of strong personality and power 
 of leadership. 
 
 It is not enough to state that the atmosphere and drift of the 
 college is away from that sacred calling to other more pleasant 
 and lucrative Christian work. The fact still remains that we 
 must have more largely an educated ministry in order to meet 
 the needs of our Church and the demand of the times. Where 
 will these future leaders come from if our colleges do not supply 
 them to the Seminary for further special training? 
 
 There are conspicuous examples of self-made men in the min- 
 istry of our Church, who possess fine preaching ability and power- 
 ful leadership. Let us not discourage them, but honor them. 
 Neither should we discourage those who are facing the ministry. 
 It is possible to be radically conservative or conservatively pro- 
 gressive ; but is it not time that some one should be radically 
 progressive in this contention for an educational ideal ministry? 
 
 However, we must be sure that the maintenance of this minis- 
 
 [38] 
 
terial standard shall be consistent with our denominational use- 
 fulness and efficiency, during the period of advance toward this 
 ideal. 
 
 We dare not break with the people. It would be wisdom to 
 persuade them to work to better ideals as the years move on. But 
 by all means let this ideal be maintained. 
 
 PROBLEM OF ENLARGEMENT. 
 
 With the maintenance of this ministerial standard, there 
 comes a problem of material enlargement and increased facil- 
 ities for instruction and accommodation. At this fortieth anni- 
 versary we are confronted with the necessity of building for 
 the future. We must plan for larger things. Nothing less 
 than expansion will command the generous support of our 
 moneyed men, and the pride of our college graduates. Large 
 contributions and bequests will be required and should be 
 expected. The challenge of a great objective is necessary to 
 command the sympathetic attention of our Christian laymen. 
 They will then respond with princely gifts. It is my deep con- 
 viction that Christian education in our denomination is of 
 supreme importance. And, moreover, I feel sure that a com- 
 plete ministerial equipment, including both academic and theo- 
 logical training, will do more to increase our denominational 
 efficiency and prestige than all the other factors of our Church 
 life, as worthy and important as they are; recognizing, of 
 course, that the crowning element of a complete ministerial 
 preparation is the enduement of the Holy Spirit. 
 
 Much is now said about the decadence of the Christian 
 church and the loss of the Christian pulpit ; but I cannot accept 
 this assertion and insinuation. This age furnishes a magnificent 
 opportunity for the Christian pulpit, if it is really made the throne 
 of power and influence. 
 
 Dr. J. Wilbur Chapman has well said, "Never was there 
 such an age as this for the preacher." Never in all the centur- 
 ies has the prophet of God had such an opportunity to give 
 tone and direction to religious thought and activity as at 
 this time. Never has he had such a chance to influence the 
 age and lift it to higher moral ideals and more heroic move- 
 ment for the advancement of Christian truth and obligation. 
 The glory of the Christian ministry appeals to the noblest 
 gifts of men. It is sufficient to satisfy the ambition of the 
 strongest and brightest young men of to-day to serve well 
 their generation. 
 
 [39] 
 
Its glory is beyond comparison. Words cannot fully express 
 the privilege of bearing God's message to men. The glory 
 of the ministry does not rest essentially in the office bearer, 
 but rather in the office itself, the dignity of which both in- 
 spires and humbles him, who is privileged to preach the "un- 
 searchable riches of Christ." This high task and privilege 
 means a magnificent opportunity. 
 
 Must not the minister preach Christ? Surely. Christ is his 
 central theme. It is his preeminent business to preach it with 
 all of its eternal sanctions and issues. 
 
 For Christianity is Christ. They are inseparable. All prog- 
 ress lies in Christ. All hope of success rests in him. The 
 mission of the preacher is to present Christ in all his beauty, 
 attraction, and glory. 
 
 But let us not forget that the privilege and opportunity of 
 the prophet of God, is to present Christ with gifts, developed 
 and trained in the Christian schools. 
 
 WHAT OF THE FUTURE? 
 
 We halt to-day, to celebrate the fortieth anniversary of 
 Bonebrake Theological Seminary. The purpose is not so 
 much to rejoice, as it is to take our bearings for the future. 
 
 We have reason to be proud of this institution. The per- 
 sonnel of the Faculty, Manager, alumni, and patrons are de- 
 serving of the highest praise. 
 
 The output of this school is worthy of the fullest commen- 
 dation. Everything about it shows signs of virility and ag- 
 gressive life. 
 
 But we dare not rest satisfied with either the record of the 
 past, or the achievements of the present. The spirit of satis- 
 faction would be both our peril and our weakness. 
 
 To-day, we stand upon vantage ground for larger and better 
 things. From now on, our denomination will lose or gain 
 according to the measure of our vision, and our courage to 
 press toward its realization. 
 
 We have a great future before us. The outlook is inspiring. 
 We are not ashamed of our Church. Her spirituality, her 
 evangelistic passion, her splendid history, her intelligent life, 
 her heroic sacrifices, her intense aggressiveness, appeal to 
 our loyalty and our pride. Her expanding life, her broadened 
 and broadening vision, her larger plans to carry the banner of 
 the Cross into the inviting fields of the homeland and into the 
 
 [40] 
 
far-away ripening harvests beyond the sea, are sufficient to 
 inspire and charm the heart of every child of Otterbein. 
 
 And, if we do our best within the range of our possibility 
 and opportunity ; if in the fuller discovery of our Church 
 consciousness, we turn our eyes away from the past, and 
 face the challenging appeals of the future with a new pride 
 and courage to do the greater things before us ; if we shall plan 
 to help and encourage more of our noble, promising young men 
 and women, to proclaim with ability and impressiveness, the 
 message of God, the message of life, of love, of power, of 
 immortality, then we may be sure that our beloved Zion will 
 rise and shine with increasing luster, and march forth from 
 conquering to conquest, as an army with banners. 
 
 [41 
 
Ct)e jFacultp in tt)e Ortier 
 of t\)tiv election 
 
Rev. Lewis Davis, D.D. 
 
Rev. G. A. Funkhouser. D.D. 
 
Rev. Josiah P. Landis, D.D., Ph.D. 
 
Rev. George Keister. A.M. 
 
Rev. Augustus W. Drury, U.D. 
 
Rev. John W. Etter, D.D. 
 
Rev. Samuel D. Faust, D.D. 
 
Rev. Walter G. Clippinger, B.D. 
 
Rkv. John G. Huber, D.D. 
 
Rev. T. Balmkr Showers, B.D. 
 
Rev. William A. Weber, B.D. 
 
Ci)e Bu£tne#£ &E)anager£ in fyt 
 £>rDer of tljetr election 
 
Rf.v. John Kemp 
 
Rev. Samuel M. Hippard 
 
Rev. William J. Pruner 
 
Samuel L. Herr, Esq. 
 
Daniel R. Miller, D.D. 
 
William J. Shuey, D.D. 
 
Charles M. Brooke, D.D. 
 
Julius E. Fout, D.D. 
 
Alumni iRegteter 
 
 TBonefcrake etiological ^eminatp 
 
 1874 
 Edward Hamilton Caylor 
 William Adair Dickson 
 William Dillon 
 Robert William Fryer 
 Jerome D. Holtzinger 
 Samuel L. Livingston 
 William Jasper Pruner 
 Jacob H. Sentman 
 
 1875 
 
 Jacob W. Bovey 
 William Henry Clay 
 Isaac W. dinger 
 Marion R. Drury 
 William S. Hayes 
 Archibald C. Rice 
 
 1877 
 Byron Beall 
 Clark B. Beatty 
 Watson H. Chandler 
 Augustus W. Drury 
 Parvin M. France 
 
 1878 
 A. W. Bishop 
 J. Weston DeLong 
 Thomas H. D. Harrold 
 Horace D. Herr 
 Cyrus J. Kephart 
 John W. Kilbourn 
 Garret S. Lake 
 Sherman W. McCorkle 
 Richard F. Powell 
 John I. L. Ressler 
 Andrew K. Root 
 Franklin P. Sanders 
 John Simons 
 Joseph A. Weller 
 
 1879 
 Jonathon C. Crider 
 Darius A. Mobley 
 
 1880 
 
 James W. Hicks 
 David N. Howe 
 Adam Rodabaugh 
 John G. Steiner 
 
 1881 
 Simon A. Corl 
 Joseph Kirk 
 John W. Lower 
 Thomas J. Tone 
 Chas. B. Whittaker 
 
 1882 
 Francis Marion Hartman 
 George Peter Hott 
 George Martin Mathews 
 Joseph H. Mayne 
 William H. Prentice 
 
 1883 
 S. S. Aikman 
 Addison Edwards Davis 
 J. L. Goshert 
 Isaac T. Hott 
 Charles H. Lemmon 
 William Henry Mingle 
 E. D. Price 
 William Sanford Sage 
 Mrs. Esther Balmer Sage 
 Henry A. Sechrist 
 William A. Shuey 
 
 1884 
 Michael Stein Bovey 
 Edgar William Bowers 
 John S. Brown 
 Samuel D. Faust 
 William Otterbein Fries 
 Benjamin F. Fritz 
 John B. Hawkins 
 John G. Hofacre 
 J. Oliver 
 Fremont Spain 
 James Turner 
 L. E. Wilson 
 
 [43] 
 
1885 
 
 J. M. Bolton 
 
 Samuel Churchill Coblentz 
 
 Allen Dunkelberger 
 
 Daniel Miller 
 
 Mrs. Eliza M. Miller 
 
 James H. Richards 
 
 Mrs. Celina S. Richards 
 
 Elmer E. Saul 
 
 Henry Fox Shupe 
 
 G. W. Taylor 
 
 Zur Abner Weidler 
 
 1886 
 William S. Blackburn 
 John W. Flory 
 William Ross Funk 
 J. W. Izor 
 H. C. Keezel 
 Harry D. Lehman 
 Winfield C. Niswonger 
 Wilson C. Rebok 
 T. H. Simons 
 William Williamson 
 
 1887 
 Lewis Bookwalter 
 S. E. Glandon 
 William Benjamin Hartzog 
 Ella Niswonger 
 R. L. Swain 
 Charles Andrew Thorn 
 Charles Weyer 
 John H. Whistler 
 William Henry Wright 
 
 1888 
 Luther Olin Burtner 
 Horatio S. Cooper 
 D. G. Davidson 
 T. J. Gardener 
 William S. Gilbert 
 Paul Heiligman 
 Jacob Wesley Houseman 
 Miss Cassie Niswonger 
 John F. Shepherd 
 Henry B. Spayd 
 
 1889 
 
 William L. Byers 
 Henry Doty 
 J. F. Leffler 
 Benjamin A. Sutton 
 
 1890 
 Eathan G. Bossier 
 A. L. Brokaw 
 Henry Harness Fout 
 Abraham S. Hammack 
 Alexander N. Horn 
 John G. Huber 
 Lowry A. McGrew 
 James W. Sheperd 
 Mrs. L. A. McGrew 
 William M. VanSickle 
 Joseph K. Wagner 
 Samuel S. Wagner 
 Mrs. Alice B. Wagner 
 
 1891 
 
 Vivian Albert Carlton 
 Benjamin F. Cokely 
 Benjamin F. Daugherty 
 Joseph Daugherty 
 George F. Downey 
 J. Allen Gilbert 
 Olin Bascom Guiley 
 Joseph Kerr 
 John Edward Kleffman 
 Aaron Albion Long 
 Charles G. Murphy 
 Frederick Powell 
 A. E. Slesser 
 
 1892 
 Squire T. Beatty 
 P. O. Bonebrake 
 William Clarke 
 William Cleaver 
 Emory Wilson Curtis 
 James Andrew Groves 
 Thomas J. Halstead 
 Elmer U. Hoenshel 
 S. S. Hough 
 H. J. Litzenberger 
 Joseph W. Patton 
 John D. Reiniger 
 James Milburn Replogle 
 
 1893 
 Adoniram J. Benton 
 Peter Monroe Camp 
 Martha Flexer Camp 
 Schuyler Colfax Enck 
 Elmer E. Fix 
 Mrs. Fannie Hiestand Fix 
 Julius E. Fout 
 
 [44] 
 
George T. Griscel 
 S. Ellsworth Hoffman 
 Joel B. Mathias 
 Frederic P. Rosselot 
 Grant L. Shaeffer 
 John M. Walters 
 Edwin S. Weimer 
 
 1894 
 
 Cyrus Newton Crabbs 
 Mrs. Jennie Crabbs 
 John Q. Dickensheets 
 John C. Gardner 
 Theodore Henry Harman 
 Edwin H. Hummelbaugh 
 Levi Orville Oyler 
 George T. Powell 
 James E. B. Rice 
 John T. Roberts 
 James T. Spangler 
 W. L. Waldo 
 T. A. Waltrip 
 
 1895 
 L. O. Blake 
 
 John Adam Glossbrenner 
 Robert Reuben Butterwick 
 Alfred L. Colwell 
 John A. Eby 
 Charles W. Kurtz 
 Jacob Miller 
 Mrs. Ella Norris Miller 
 Charles W. Recard 
 Oscar M. Wilson 
 
 1896 
 Charles W. Brewbaker 
 E. O. Burtner 
 George D. Gossard 
 J. B. Kirsch 
 J. C. H. Light 
 Joseph Martin Phillippi 
 John M. Prickett 
 M. M. Rader 
 William W. Rymer 
 Maurice B..Spayd 
 Andrew J. Wagner 
 Jacob Ward 
 
 1897 
 David S. Eshleman 
 W. G. Fisher 
 Charles E. Fultz 
 Jacob A. Gohn 
 
 Katie Koons Prickett 
 George E. Luke 
 Jacob H. Sipe 
 
 1898 
 Grant D. Batdorf 
 Charles Bisset 
 Warren L. Bunger 
 William T. Frank 
 Silas Speincer Kirtz 
 Nelson H. May 
 Thomas W. Perks 
 Homer K. Pitman 
 L. C. Smiley 
 George A. Wahl 
 Albert Barnes Wilson 
 
 1899 
 D. F. Dickensheets 
 Harry Henry Haller 
 Nathan Harlan Huffman 
 Minnie L. M. Huffman 
 Charles W. Jameson 
 Joseph Robert Knipe 
 Ulyssa Knipe 
 Ephraim C. Petrie 
 Wilbert C. Shupp 
 
 1900 
 James A. Circle 
 Grace Clendenen Knipe 
 Merritt I. Comfort 
 John Edgar Knipp 
 John D. Nisewonder 
 Sidney Rasey 
 William G. Stiverson 
 Charles B. Wingerd 
 
 1901 
 William Stahl Baker 
 Thomas Ambro Barton 
 Ethel Bookwalter Burtner 
 Henry A. Buffington 
 Otto Whitmore Burtner 
 Arthur W. Denlinger 
 Philo Walker Drury 
 N. P. France 
 Sheridan Garman 
 Frank H. Linville 
 LaFayette Rexrode 
 Mrs. Mattie Rexrode 
 Clinton H. Snyder 
 Clarence E. Spore 
 
 45] 
 
1902 
 Edwin J. Blackburn 
 J. F. Boyd 
 B. H. Callin 
 G. I. Comfort 
 L. B. Cotterman 
 Berton E. Emrick 
 Charles Ebenezer Heisel 
 William Otterbein Jones 
 O. E. Knepp 
 Thomas V. Newell 
 Judson F. Pritchard 
 Samuel Edwin Shull 
 S. S. Smick 
 Henry Lee Snyder 
 Mrs. Minnie B. Spore 
 Ira S. Swezey 
 William Sherman White 
 S. May Whitehead 
 Ivory Zimmerman 
 
 1903 
 
 E. H. Barnhart 
 Charles N. Broughman 
 Walter Gillan Clippinger 
 Joseph Hastings Harris 
 Enoch Pendleton Huddle 
 Arthur F. Knepp 
 Harry Edwin Miller 
 George Mahlon Miller 
 John Wilson Owen 
 Ulysses S. Grant Renn 
 Irvin Eugene Runk 
 Alvin Edgar Shroyer 
 Charles E. Snoke 
 Josiah F. Snyder 
 Eugene Ellis Williams 
 
 1904 
 Frank B. Church 
 Alexander F. Davis 
 Robert Head 
 A. R. Hendrickson 
 K. M. Karnegie 
 Charles J. Roberts 
 Ulysses McPherson Roby 
 Paul A. Miller 
 
 1905 
 Francis M. Davis 
 Darius C. DeFoe 
 Edgar Green 
 David Heinlen 
 Charles F. Meyer 
 
 Frank Bartram Parker 
 James B. Parsons 
 Clarence Alvin Schlotterbeck 
 Nina Young Sprecher 
 
 1906 
 
 Phineas H. Aldrich 
 John G. Breden 
 C. O. Callender 
 Monroe Crecelius 
 Benjamin F. Cunningham 
 Samuel F. Daugherty 
 John Harmon Dutton 
 Raymond L. Fletcher 
 William D. Good 
 Harry H. Heberly 
 I. Moyer Hershey 
 Estell A. Lilly 
 J. Ernest Paddock 
 H. D. Southard 
 A. K. Wier 
 
 1907 
 George W. Bonebrake 
 Daniel D. Brandt 
 Otterbein T. Deever 
 John O. Emrick 
 John H. Graybill 
 Logan Harter 
 Melvin O. McLaughlin 
 Walter C. May 
 Mrs. J. M. Phillippi 
 Benjamin F. Shively 
 W. S. Wilson 
 J. C. Wimmer 
 
 1908 
 
 Charles E. Ashcraft 
 John W. Borkert 
 Elmer E. Bundy 
 William Luther Duncan 
 Benjamin F. P'arris 
 Charles W. Hendrickson 
 Walter M. Jones 
 George W. Kitzmiller 
 Flora C. Kitzmiller 
 George William Self 
 Ernest A. Sharp 
 Hannah B. Sharp 
 Walter Smith 
 John W. Sprecher 
 George L. Stine 
 William E. Ward 
 Ray G. Upson 
 
 [46 
 
Charles A. Weaver 
 Osa D. Wellbaum 
 
 1909 
 Hugh A. Dierdorff 
 Mabel Drury 
 Glen Wilford Emerson 
 Lewis M. Hahn 
 Maud E. Hoyle. 
 Jasper A. Huffman 
 Alden E. Landis 
 Adda D. May 
 R. Etta Odle 
 M. K. Richardson 
 Benjamin D. Rojahn 
 John W. Shock 
 Ralph A. Smith 
 Charles W. Snyder 
 William A. Weber 
 James A. White 
 
 1910 
 Lizzie Chappelle 
 Raymond P. Dougherty 
 Aerie Valley Fetters 
 Clarence R. Fralick 
 John Caldwell Goodrich 
 Arthur S. Lehman 
 George Edward McDonald 
 James Anderson Robinson 
 John Balmer Showers 
 Nora May Vesper 
 Matilda Caroline Weber 
 
 1911 
 Eliza D. Barton 
 Maud Billman 
 Arthur E. Bittner 
 Susan S. Borger 
 LaFayette Pence Cooper 
 Mrs. L. P. Cooper 
 Harley W. Franklin 
 Miss Geneva Harper 
 Taylor A. Garriott 
 Clayton Judy 
 Edgar M. Leach 
 Mrs. Edgar M. Leach 
 E. Burton Learish 
 George L. McClanathan 
 William O. Montague 
 Charles E. Plack 
 Margaret E. Propst 
 Miss Fanny Shunk 
 John W. Thomas 
 Dudley Reed Wilson 
 
 1912 
 
 William G. Beamis 
 William C. DeMuth 
 Norman L. Linebaugh 
 Oliver Mease 
 Charles V. Priddle 
 George M. Richter 
 Charles W. Shoop 
 Mrs. Charles W. Shoop 
 Ethel Amy Walker 
 Charles L. Williams 
 
 47 
 
BX9878.7 .B718 
 
 Souvenir : Fortieth anniversary of the 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer Library 
 
 1 1012 00045 7798 
 
 The Otterbein Press 
 Dayton, Ohio