The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1868-02-19
From the Philadelphia Presbyterian.
Presbyterian Reunion. No. I.
Treasurer Of Sus'entation

pe,to,y, seems to meet with very general APP
probation. 1t is to be devoutly hoped, by
every lover of true Christian union, that the
expressions of satisfaction with which it is
hailed on ali sides will prove to be not only
sincere, but intelligent. The article is both
kindly and skilfully written We have rarely
read any thing which seemed so beautifully to-
illustrate the Saviour's precept, BE We there
fore wise as serpents. and harmless as doves.
1t is kind, and at the same time cool; avoiding
every thing that can give just ground for of.
fence, and yet stating the truth explicitly, and
without reserve We sincerely hope that all
who read it, and especially that all who express
themselves satisfied with the positions it as
sumes will duly considerably Its statements
of the principles upon which re union should
be based; r.. J Its discriminating exposition OF
the strict and the lax rules of subscription;
81 Its clear proof that the New School body
have hitherto acted upon and defended the
lax rule; "A. Its luminous and comprehensive
summary of the New Haven divinity, which,
under this lax rule, has been tolerated, and to
some extent protected, by the New School
Church; and (5.) Its unaffected expressions
of desire that now, as an essential preliminary
to re-tnion this liberation ,oiu be authontatice-
In renounced and ,oithdraacn This last feature
of the article seems to have been entirely over
looked by some who have expressed their sat-
isfaction with it as whole 1t is proclaimed
in some of the papers of 1.-THE other branch,
that DR.. Hodge has declared the doctrinal basis
of reunion satisfactorily settled by the Phila-
delphia Convention. This certainly is Sin
advance of the mails" 1t is one of those
honest, but hasty kilograms, the pleasant ef-
fects of which must which be modified and
toned down by subsequent consideration of the
facts upon which it is based. What Dr. Hodge
says on this point is very plain, and very far
reaching in its meaning. At the same time,
it is no more than fidelity to the truth, and
to the vital interests at stake, justify and de.
mand. 1t is kind, because it is frank and ex
plict.
After clearly defining the sense in which he
understood DR.. Fisher and other New School
ton of The Confession of Faith, and showing
that this sense is nothing less than the strict
rule of subscription for which the Old School
have contended both before and since the d.
vision, in opposition to the lax rule practically
and officially tolerated by the New School, he
proceeds 70 make the following statements,
which ought to be weighed by every reader as
carefully as it. was weighed by the writer
1t would seem, therefore, that in the good
providence of God, the Convention has ena-
bed us to understand each other on this impor-
tant point. There is no doubt that the Old
School ask this, and nothing more than this.
And if the Ne,6 School assembly and PresJy-
teriies wiU sanction what their representatives
did on the floor of the Convention, the doc
trinai basis of union may be considered as salts
factorily adjusted Should the effort at re-
union fail because the Neo School authorities
decline to rotJy what was done by their dele.
gates in this matter, the responsibility of the
failure ,oM rest on them, and not upon the Old
school,"
We have italicised parts of the above quota
ton with view to direct the readers atten-
ton to their import DR.. Hodge does not say
that the doctrinal basis of the proposed re-
union is satisfactorily adjusted; but he says if
the New School authorities will do certain
things, then after that. it may be considered
adjusted This is flank move
ment which, for the sake of real union, and of
that faith which must underlie it, we hope the
body which DR.. Henry B, Smith so eloquently
undertook to represent in bis recent article on
this subject, will be able to meet promptly and
with complete success 1t throws the onus,
and if they fail to meet it, it will throw the
odium on them. 1t is a solemn and weighty
onuS. DR.. Smith is not competent, even if he
is strong enough to bear it. He has never
been commissioned to speak for the New
School branch and though the testimony of
orthodoxy OF his brethren is very valuable and
gratifying, it does not meet the requirements
of the case This union, if it is consummated
at all, is to be arranged and ratified by the
authorities of the two denominations which
it is proposed to consolidate and, therefore,
the essential prelminaries and conditions
ought, in the very nature Of the case, to be
settled by the same authorities. We cannot
allow irdividua men, however eminent for
learning and piety, nor voluntary conventions,
however distinguished for the ability of their
members and the kindness of their spirit, to
great questions, which, accordingt to
The teaching Of our standards, are committed
BY divine appointment to the regularly organ
zed courts of the Church of Christ. We want
70 know what the Assembly and Presbyteries
who alone are authorized to speak for and to
bind the New School body think about this
natter of subscription to the standards. This |
demand, to which we think every sound Pres
oyterian in both bodies will at once accede, as
constitutional, scriptural and right in itself, is
'endered still more necessary by the fact
which Dr.. Hodge so clearly demonstrates, that
he New School Assembly has oficiaLy ssac- !
ioned rule of subscription utterly inconsis-
ent with the statements over which he and |
Or. Fisher so cordially shook hands in the
Philadelphia Convention. Pending these ne
rotations for re. union one New School Pres
,ytery, at least, has officially declared that min
sters holding the views of DR.. Taylor and DR..
Park are to be regarded as Of unquestioned
in the reunited Church. Moreover,
minent ministers in the New School body not
My hold to the lax or liberal rule Of subscrip.