The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1867-11-27


He asked if we could not delegate to man or
body Of men under our control that which we
have a right to do ourselves. This Is all we
proposed to do. We want pastor for vacant
spaces like the chairman proposed in the pa
per. Mr.. Miller was opposed to putting I'M
ger upon thoese churches where the pastors
are regularly paid
Rev. +. Il. BoWmdn had read the resolu.
ton, and considered that the powers conferred
upon the proposed chairman constituted new
office.
Reu. Mr.. Leps advocated the resolution as
desirable to promote the efficiency of the
Church.
Rer. Mr.. Hooper said his Presbytery had all
the usual committees, butt did not object to
this. He explained its operation, and believed
it necessary to promote the highest efficiency
of the Church. 1t was no new exercise OF
power, but a systematizingof the labors OF
Presbyteries
Rer. Mr.. Rtzer said the proposed chairman
was Presbyteral spy.
DIR. Moore said no minister would make an
offensive use of the Office.
DIR. Dabney argued that the Office was strict
" within constitutional bounds, and said that
while it is shown to be what we all want
presto we have made a prelate The pres
ence of our beloved brother here (Dr. Wilson,
as the representative of the General Assembly
is living instance of the sort of medium
which we require between the higher and the
lower BODY. What is everybody's business is
nobody's business. The whole meaning of the
resolution is to make certain duties the spe-
cialtv of some one. The chairman is only a
committee. He has no authority to 60 about
nosing into the dissatisfactions that may exist
in congregations towards pastors. Ii the min
lister is paid, the people have a right to exact
the tale of service. This is corollary of the
power conferred in the plan.
Rer. r. L. Preston wished to make such al.
terations in the paper as to strip 1t OF It's OBJ
jcctionable features and then it would not be
acceptable to its friends, and would fall to the
ground which was what he desired. He con-
tended that if the gift of sum of money from
the Central Committee of Sustentation at Co.
lumbia gave to this Presbyterial chairman, as
the representative Of that committee, the right
to inquire into the affairs of church, then the
church was made responsible to tribunal out
side of its own Presbytery. The matter OF its
efficiency or ineficiency rests ultimately at Co
lumbia We do not intend to let our churches
be thus responsible. In Lexington Presbytery
the responsibility of the church proceeds from,
stops in, and rests with the Presbytery. We
do all that this paper proposes. 1t is Presby,
terial action, and we do not wish it to proceed
from South Carolina. Mr.. Preston spoke OF
the committees recommendations as 1.-The
General Assembly's paper. -
At this stage OF the discussion Synod took
recess to o'clock.
After recess Synod met in the lecture-room,
while the congregation in the. upper part OF
the church listened to sermon from Rev. John
w. Pugh, of Warrenton.
Synod resumed the consideration of the fifth
resolution of the Committee on Ministerial
Support:
Reu. e. McIlcaine made an earnest appeal
in favor of the resolution. mainly with refer
ence to the fifth section. He thought brethren
too sensitive and too prone to regard any In
vestigation into their manner OF performing
their duties as implying moral derilectlon
For his own part, he would welcome a WISH
| from the officer proposed and permit the frees'
inquiry.
DR.. Atkinson said he was not pastor, but
objected to the resolution as conterrlng upon
the chairman the Objectionable features OF a
bishops power
Rev. r. r. Berry thought there should be
no discrimination, and that the visitatlons OF
the chairman and the inquiries of his commit
tee should be extended to the sef-supporting
churches as well as to those that received aid.
The Presbytery is our bishop, and this COM
mittee is the Presbyterys agent. There is
malign tendency to indiuiduaEsna and congre
gationalism. If you aInuchurch, assert YOU o.
rights of PresbytefieS i was not put down
the Church would be broken to fragments Ii
is not proposed to divest the Presbytery of its
| legitimate power We must do something, OF
the Church is gone.
DR.. Broton was satisfied as to the power Of
the Presbytery in this matter, but had doubts
as to the expediency of using it in the manner
proposed. He preferred the plan that had
been in use in Lexington Presbytery for fifty
years. The Presbytery required reports from
the Church Session on reciprocal duties, ano
these were made directly to the Presbytery
without the Intervention Of any third party.
Mr.. r. j. Kirkpatrick (elder) agreed with
Mr.. Berry, as to existing tendencies towards
congregatonalism. The sessions did not at
tend properly to reports on reciprocal duties
He regarded the chairman proposed as mere
collector of the statistics of the Presbytery
He said there was case in point in his Pres
bytery in which this plan would effect what the
Presbytery had for years endeavored to do. A
venerable minister was inadequately supported
but was always dumb, though Presbytery ques
toned and cross questioned him on the subject
His reply was that he was fed as his horse was
The horse could not carry him to his appoint
ments without food, and for similar reason
they gave him something to eat and something
to put on his back. want to get hold Of thai
church, and to make our system Presbyterian
system.
Rep. F. IL BoUn,nn wanted no interme
date organ. Mr. Kirkpatrck's Presbytery
had already the power to send committee to
inquire whether that church paid their pastor.
WHY had they not done SOP They talk about
Congregationalism while they show that they
do not understand Presbyterianism.
Rer. Mr.. Pizer said Presbytery had no right
to such an organ-a man to 60 round and re-
ceive complaints. If it had, he had not so
learned Presbyterianism.- 1t had no warmer
friend than he, but it was not of its essence to
20 about and receive complaints from Tom,
Dick, and Harry.
The 5th section of the 5th resolution was
stricken out.
| The resolution recommending that feeble
churches unite under one pastor being under
consideration, DR.. Wilson said that the Sus-
| tentation Committee would break down if it
were required to sustain so many separate
pastors. DR.. Brown considered this resolution
most important. 1t was adopted, as also was
the resolution which requires pastors to sup
ply vacant churches in their neighborhood.
The question being now on the adoption Of
the paper as a whole, DR.. Armstrong moved
that the original paper, as well as the amend
ed one, be sent down to the Presbyteries. In
our hurried consideration we may have left
out something which, on more mature consid-
Grafton, we would wish, in our Presbyteries,
to adopt
Mr.. Miller said this would spoil our blow.
He wanted Presbyteries to see what we had
done. Mr.. Miller then proceeded to inquire
whether anybody had practically met with any