The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1867-03-13
rev. DIR. Boardman on the State of tn

CQuTcu. ---lnlS - lHe tlIlc Ou lHc outSluC VI
the pamphlet to which we referred last week.
On the inside page the title is, "The General
Assembly of 1866" 1t may as well be added
Just here, that it is volume (rather than
pamphlet) of l24 pages, Svo., published in
the usual excellent style of Lippincott Il Co.,
Philadelphia, and can be had by mail, postage
paid, at the very low price of 35 cents. This
is probably less than cost.
We express the deliberate judgment that the
question presented in this production Of DIR.
Boardman is the most momentous question Of
constitutional law and Presbyterian Church
government that has ever been discussed by
that Church in this country. The General As
sembly which met at st. Louis in 1866 differed
in very important respect from the five As
semblies Immediately preceding. They were
justly chargeable with many acts and express
sions which another generation, surveying them
from higher point, and through clearer at
mosphere, will pronounce reckless, unjust, and
wicked. But the stretch of power taken by
the last Assembly which deliberately claims a
right under the constitution to reach its hand
over the Synods, and even the Presbyteries
and Church Sessions, and take original juriS-
diction over any and everything it may please,
is enough to awaken alarm in every mind.
This it actually did in the case Of the Louis
vile Presbytery, and in tn, most revolving
form of despotic authority, as DR.. Boardman
shows
We had always believed that the General
Assembly had just the power distributed to it
by the constitution, and no more But we are
now asked to accept the monstrous proposition
that, as it represents the entire Church, it has
all the power which inheres in the Church,
and may do, not merely what by the constitu-
ton is permitted, but anything which the con-
stitution does not forbid. A more completely
consolidated despotism never was invented.
1t lays the liberties of the Church helpless
captive at the feet of mere majority in any
General Assembly, and opens the door for the
widest anarchy.
DR.. Boardman has never done greater SER
vice to the cause of truth than in coming for
ward to defend it when assailed in vital part.
He has done his work nobly, and in truly
moderate, Christian spirit, especially consider
ing the manner in which he was treated by the
Assembly, and still more recently by the Phil
adelphia Presbyterian. He has subjected this
theory to a most searching examination, has
tracked his opponents through the history Of
the whole matter, and has given this newly in
vented doctrine, as we'll as its application to
the Louisville Presbytery, such an effectual ex'
posure in its utter deformity, as does not often
happen in any controversy.
Of course it will be out of our power to at
tempt even the outline of an argument so ex.
tensive and thorough We do earnestly adj
wise our brethren, scarce as cash may be with
them, to send on to Lippincott of Philadelphia,
and procure the work. 1t has an interest fal
beyond the mere incidents, however exciting,
which gave rise to it. 1t will take rank among
the most important discussions in the history
of the Presbyterian Church in America, and
no one who would keep himself well informed
of the precise state of the controversy alluded
to, will be without copy of this mastery ar
gument We shall endeavor at suitable times
to give extracts as specimens Of the way DIR.
Boardman disposes of this monstrous heresy,
which was utterly repudiated as such by the
Old School Presbyterian Church, especially by
Drs. r. j. Breckenridge, Archibald Alexan-
der, Green, Winchester, emphatically by DR.
Enges in the Philadelphia Presbyterian, and
by the whole Old School party in the Synod Of
Philadelphia. as well as by the express declar-
alton of the Assembly of 1887. What they
are proved to have repudiated as rank heresy
then, many of those same men embrace now,
and can hardly tolerate those who prefer to
walk in the old paths. Such is poor human
nature.
1t may be of interest to state that after six
of these letters had been published in the Phil
adelphia Presbyterian, the MS. of No. was
returned to the author with the following note,
which with DR.. Boardman just comments will
serve to give some idea to the uninitiated, as
to the views OF fair dealing which rule some
Journals in the land.
OFFICE OF THE PRESBYTERIAN.
Reu. DR.. Boardman.
Dear Sir,-We must respectfully decline
publishing the enclosed. The controversy in
this has changed into defence of the men Of
the Declaration and Testimony, and this we
cannot admit into our columns. They have
an organ of their own for their defence. Fur
Their, the animadversions upon the animus of
the General Assembly are not such as we think
we ought to publish; discussion OF its acts
we are willing to admit.
Yours sincerely,
EDITORS OF THE PRESBYTERIAN.
November oath, 1866.
The author is happy to believe that this note
will invite special attention to the rejected Es,
saw. If he is not mistaken, just men will find
in its analysis of the Assembly's measures,
matter for grave reflection. AS regards the
structures contained in the above note. ~ 1t
will he clearly seen that the Essay in question