The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1868-11-11
Central 4resbptfrla11.
Richmond, Va, Wednesday, Nov. II, 1858.
REV. WILLIAM BROWN, D. D., Editor.
LAID UPON THE TABLE.

The question of dividing the Synod of Vir-
GINA into two or three separate Synods, was
laid upon the table at Harrisonburg, by the
vote of very large majority. This majority,
however, included a very large portion of
those who are favorable to division in some
form, and at sometime soon.
The full sketch of the debate given this
week, will put brethren and others not present
in possession of the arguments urged for and
against the measure. The discussion was G
very earnest one, and was conducted through
out in an excellent spirit. As there was no
test vote on the merits of the main question,
it is not easy to say how the opinion of the
Synod stood Many who favored the idea Of
dividing, were not satisfied about the lines for
effecting it, and for that reason preferred to
have the subject laid over for while; others
because they considered the present not a
suitable time for step so important. Upon
the question: purely and simply, of the desire
ableness of some division, it would be difficult
to say on which side the majority would be.
We heard opinions confidently expressed both
ways. OF the brethren who were absent
many OF them because they were unable to
bear the expense of trave-it is not unlikely
majority desire a division. One thing is
evident, that there is now very large and in
creasing number whose decided convictions
are in favor Of some measure OF this kind,
either now or at no distant day. This indi.
Gates great change of opinion from former
times. When this proposal was brought be.
fore the Synod in lS4l at Charlottesville, and
in 1S43 at Lexington, it could hardly enlist a
"Corporals guard" 1t now finds host OF
earnest advocates.
We think the Synod at Harrisonburg made
judicious disposal of the matter for the pre-
sent time. Some who would have preferred a
reference to the Presbyteries, or to committee
who should report next year, were still entirely
willing to have the question laid upon the
table. If on the one hand there were few who
seemed impatiently unwilling it should be en-.
tertained or considered at all, or if on the
other any one may have been impatient Of
delay, these were extremes to neither of which
the venerable body was disposed to commit it.
self. 1t must now be apparent to all that this
is subject which begins to approach our door
for decision, and one whose magnitude de-
mands the most ample examination. 1t is
equally apparent that it does not require a
hasty determination Give time for all con
cerned to look at in all its bearings, to discuss
it wherever discussion is proper, or would be
profitable 1t has not been the manner of our
Synod to press things rashly, or carry meas
ure one way or the other amid murmurings
and disputings. A decision of such ques
ton at this time by bare majority, would not
be for edifcation After full and patient
consideration, we shall hardly fail OF coming
to such conclusion as will bring us to pleas
ing agreement in regard to whatever is deter
mined-that it was wisely and we'll done. To
such all will bow in cheerful acquiescence.
Attention is now awakened-the ear Of the
Church is open to hear This is then pro-
per time, while the papers offered lie upon the
table of the Synod, to discuss the subject in
the religious newspaper. Under this view it
is our purpose to use the Central Presbyterian
for presenting at an early day some facts and
arguments that seem in our judgment to have
weight. We have decided convictions in favor
of division, and shall express them freely.
At the same time the paper is, of course,
equally open to others. The only thing re
quested is that no single article shall exceed a
column and haf-and if only column or
less, the more acceptable is it likely to be to
all. Experience proves that such brevity is
best for the writer, the reader, and certainly
for the paper.