The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1871-06-07
CONTINUED FROM 4ru PAGE


business. | am not competent to make the
motion but | express the strong wish that
this report be laid over.
The further consideration of the report
was then on motion postponed.
On motion of Dr.. Porter, the Assembly
agreed to hold meeting on Wednesday
evening to hear addresses in behalf Of this
cause; and the standing committee were au-
thorized TO make the arrangements therefor.
On motion of Mr.. Berry, the Assembly
received the Rev. R. P Faris, D. D., and
Edward Bredell, Esq, additional delegates
bearing the Christian salutations of the
"Old School Synod of Missouri" Their
addresses and the Moderators response will
be published at another time.
THE EXAMINATION RULE.
DR.. DABNEY presented the following re-
port, which was read:
The Committee of Bills and Oyertures would re-
specttully report 20 the Assembly.
Overture No. l. from the Presbytery of Augusta
praying the Assembly TO rescind the " Examination
Rule Of the Assembly Of 1857
Your Committee recommend the following answer
IN the words of the Assembly Of 1910. " That mas
much as the General Assembly must have power to
eul0ln upon Pressyteries the performance OF any
duty which they cOntessedly competent to do by
the provisions OF the Constitution and In requiring
which no right is violated, and nothing constrained
bit the discretion they the PreSbyteries) had in
binary circumstances; and insSmuch as the general
utility Of that resolution is not yet called IN qUeS
lon, even by the respected memorialiSs themselves
therefore the Assembly declines acceding to this
request at present.
At the request Of Judge Mitchell, the
argument of the Presbytery accompanying
the overture was read. This argument was
published a few weeks ago in the Central
Presbyterian.
DIR. JOSEPH r. WILSON, will state as
a member of this Presbytery, that this over
ture was not adopted unanimously.
W. L. MITCHELL-As a representative of
this Presbytery, wish to say just one word
in vindication of the argument of the me-
mOrialists. l was not present at the meet
ing of the Presbytery, but understand, as
has been stated by DR.. Wilson, that their
action was not exactly unanimous; but it
was very nearly so. The argument just
read seems to me to be fair and sensible
argument. Without at all impugning the
wisdom Of the original adoption to this rule,
l think there is no longer a necessity for it.
As an elder, l do feel mortified when | see
the examination of ministerial brother in
whom have every confidence. And in all
these States occupied by this Assembly there
is not one ambassador Of Jesus Christ in
whom | have not the most unbOunded conf
dence Therefore, l do feel that there is
something wrong when my Presbytery calls
upon one Of these brethren to know whether
he is soundin the faith-whether they can
trust him and give him the right hand of
Fellowship The report of the committee
virtually admits that the tine may come
when this rule ought TO be rescinded. Its
last words are, decline to rescind it for the
present Now if there ever can be a time
when it ought to be reseinded, this is the
time, because we are now united people
and perfectly homogeneous.
This rule is an anomaly-utterly unknown
in any other department of government
When the judgment of a Presbyteryis passed
upon a minister, and he is ordained, that
judgment is binding upon the entire Church ;
he becomes a minister Of Christ in the Pres
byterian Church, and is TO be recognized as
such. How can you vaeate that: There is
but one way, and that is by trial. But IN
der the operation of this rule, any Presbyte.
~ can virtually and practically vacate the
Judgment by virtue Of which the minister
was ordained and received amongst the min
listers Of Christ. Is that right? Is it pro
per! Is not judgment to be respected?
Does it not bind every other Court Of the
Lord Jesus? And the strong and unanswer-
able argument Of this Presbytery is that
these very brethren who are thus to be In
terrOgated when they pass from one Presby
terry to another, are received without ques-
ton into the Synod and into the General
Assembly. l do hope that this memorial
will be granted.
Dr.. Hill should be extremely sorry if the
views Just expressed by my venerable friend should
influence the Assembly. You, sir, know how this
subject was discussed when | was a boy, and you
were a young clergyman, Just entering the General
Assembly. You remember how the Secretary OF
an irresponsible association, desiring to control the
action Of Presbyteries that were doubtful upon
questions then agitating the Church, sent the
Young men whom he had under his control to Ger.
tain Presbyteries 20 be ordained, and then dis
missed 70 turn the balance In those doubtful Pres
byteries so as to send up his delegates to the As
sembly. Wherever those young men sought ad-
mission, they said We have clean papers: you
have no right to examine US you are bound to re-
ceive Us as members. l remember very well that
that gentleman. who Is now dead and was good
man in many respects, controlled the action of a
large number Of PreSbyteres reversing the dele
cations from one year 20 the next by throwing in
these men, and by that process deciding the cleo
ton. This Is a fact very very well known to the
older members Of this body.
Now let me suggest case to this Assembly
Suppose our good brethren OF the Northern As.
Sembly wished TO control the action Of this body
We are thrown into daily contact with them along
the border we are in much more direct and con-
slant contact with them than you In this part
of the Church are. Que OF them Is within four miles
Of me his church is beside mine; his members
associate with my members; he and | associate
daily. He Is now a delegate to the Northern As
Sembly in Chicago. Suppose that IN our constant
associations We should get up a scheme for uniting
the two bodies and such a case is certainly sup
possible. I hardly ever meet with those brethren
that they do not put the question to me; You
arc moderate man, cannotyOu suggest some way
By which we can be brought together again. l
believe that Is the first question put TO me every
time / meet them. Suppose now that our Pres.
bytery should become DESTROYS Of uniting with the
Northern Assembly. They have very ample funds
at their command, and could have much more If
they desired Ii for such purpose Many of their
men there, especially the Cd School portion, are
very anxious for a union with our body. Suppose
they should find your Presbyteries in this part Of
the Church divided on that question; suppose we
are in favor Of union they put a large fund into
ny hand and say; Wherever you ind Pres
bytery down South nearly equally divided, we viii
send four or FIVE young men into your body, and
YOU can send them down 20 some of the churches
in that Presbytery to turn the scale and say to
every church in that Presbytery Gust as they are
saying in our Synod, &" We will give you $500 TO
support them. Do you not see that according to