The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1867-05-08

reached in numbers, even during the
most prosperous period,-as many students
as the latter did in the third year of its
existence. 'si"I557i' .i&f 1'9
But it is conceded that post hoe is not
always propter hoe, and no special reli-
ance is to be placed on these experiences.
Neither prosperity nor depression is to
be ascribed properly to any one cause.
The matter has been noticed, solely to
show the invalidity of an objection rest
ing on such facts as have been presented
by your correspondent, ,relating to the
Seminaries.
| "a. A more fundamental objection to
the whole scheme of a transfer is found
in the appreAemsions Of too great central
igation Of poa0er n, the Assembly.
Mems political views insensibly affect
their ecclesiastical opinions That there
are resemblances in the Structure of our
Church government and that of our Fed
eral government, is true, because, in both
theresare the leading fsfsdFes OLA Repre-
sentative Republicanism. AS Synods
and the Assembly grow out of Presby-
terry, the unit of the Presbyterian form,
they are bodies whose powers are settled
by constitutional regulations. Accord
ingly, in one form, the Assembly has
been invested with general oversight of
all the Synods, Presbyteries and churches,
one supreme Judicial, Legislative, and
Executive authority. The management
of Seminary belongs to the legislative
and executive functions Of such body,
and can be conducted by the Assembly,
under the general provisions of the con-
stitution, just as the management of the
various schemes Of benevolence are con-
ducted.3 . If there is any special danger
of Capitalization, it does not arise from
the nature of the business, but from
causes which Will operate to produce such
misChievods result in amy other matter,
to whatever function of the Assembly it
may pertain The objection is as valid
against committing to that body the su-
pervision of matters in its judicial capac-
ity, and in short, if logically carried out,
must destroy the very existence of such
body, or reduce it to the dimensions
and operations of a mere advisory council.
When we are warned by the late sad
events in the Church North, of the
danger of Capitalization, we may remind
the alarmist of the fact, that the corrup-
ton complained of existed in the churches
and Presbyteries, and was but represent
ed in the Assembly. So has it been with
our political relations. But there is less
danger in ecclesiastical matters than in
political. Aggrieved portions Of the
Church can can withdraw from the aggriev-
ing body. In the proposed transfer pro-
vision is made for the security Of the
funds. And there seems to be no reason
to apprehend perversion of the trust, for
the Synods, as contracting parties, may,
Gf it be not already done, provide for
withdrawing rhe cUnnc oor the Seminary
from the Assembly. Indeed, unless the
Church becomes corrupt in its smaller
courts, there is no ground of serious ap-
prehension as to the larger; and when
the first takes place there would be as
little safety in one mode of control as in
another. o'' ''''
1t only remains to notice two subordi-
nate matters in this connexion. 1t is
said, rather in criticising manner, that
already the Seminary is spoken of as
"belongi'sg to the Assembly" And does
it not, in the sense in which Synods,
Presbyteries and churches do?
1t may be suggested that if the pro-
posed relation does not subject the Insti-
tuition to the authority of the Assembly,
more than the existing, can we hope for
any special benefit But it is not to
give the, Assembly more oposoep but a
different mode of exercising the power
conceded, by which the Seminary shall
be brought into more direct relations
with all parts of the Church. Thus all
the Synods, not committed specially to
Columbia, might be represented in the
Board, and the Institution be brought
into such relations, extending over a
wider field its claims for sympathy, sup
port and patronage. u -. b. T.
" h9il on [To BE CONCLUDED. ''a
| -T,ALlELLEl L--- ..