SIR,--Gillian Hawtin, I think, is still labouring under a misapprehension.
People who have left money for Church purposes have done so primarily for the Glory of God, not for national purposes, though the nation has often benefited indirectly through such gifts for the foundation of schools, hospitals, etc. In fact, donors in past centuries probably never thought in terms of a 'nation,' but merely of the immediate needs of their local church and Christian corn- in unity.
Their primary object was not to benefit mankind, but to use their money, Or some of it, to God's glory. Although the nation collars a large part of the estate of a deceased person, we are still allowed a little individuality. Even Bernard Shaw, an agnostic,. left money with 'strings attached.' so why may not Christians do the same? Charity is certainly not a Christian monopoly, though doubtless Christians. by virtue of their calling, ought to be more charitable both in temper and cash than non-Christians.
With regard to baptism, there are black sheep in every fold. Some may bring children from social or superstitious motives, but far more do so from conviction.
Previous page
