The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1872-06-12

is the ' case of party confessing." Direction is
given what shall be done in that case. Fourth,
the ease of an offence committed in court.
This omission was provided for Fifth, the case
of a suspended minister charge" -whether when
minister is suspended, it is imperative that the
Presbytery declare his church vacant The new
Book proposes to provide rule. That exhausts
all the Omissions supplied.
The third head is, Extension of privileges
One is that parties may testify Another is
that an accused person trial before the session
may have counsel and assistance ia conducting his
case from any member of the whole congregation
over which that that session pTesides. Another
is "Gross Irregularities can be brought to the
notice of the superior court by memorial as well
as rumors."
ask this Assembly to consider as | detail these
points, whether it is just to say, even on the high
est and most venerable authority amongst us, that
we are upturning everything and destroying the
fundamental principles of our Church Government,
and setting an aged father to the work, which he
cannot undertake, of restudying his Book to find
out what this new system Is. Moderator it is not
| So
The fourth head is, Removal of anomalies and
incongruities," The first specification is, "Defni
ton OF offence in old Book ask pardon;
have generally avoided using that language |
! have generally said present Book both on this
! floor and elsewhere. [ ask pardon of the Book
and of the brother. But, DR.. Plumer called it the
"old Book.
Dr. Pumer--I ask pardon too
Dr. Adga-" Another specification is that the
present Book does not use the Westminster stan
darls in defining offences, and the New Book says
that we ought to take.our standards as accepted
definitions. Another specification is that the pre-
sent book makes the inferior courts parties in every
case of appeal, and so sends up two issues, two
sets of parties and two Judgments and IL this way
eonfounds the higher courts. Another speclhca-
bon 5 that the Revised Book as reported by DR..
= lhorFssell undertook to settle the controversy
ahaGt original parties, and to make perfectly dis
tinct that which has been so much Vexed ques'
ton.
10 the fifth place. three other provisions are
classified by Dr. Thornwell. First, an omission is
supplied-an omission to provide for mans vol
UNFAIRLY withdrawing from the Church, who does
not feel that he has any right to be in the Church
that he made mistake in protesting religion; In
which mistake the session Joined with him. DIR.
Thornwel provided for his voluntarily withdraw
ing. You heard what the brother said on this
floor as to the form in which that matter now
stands in our report, which is very considerably
altered from the original proposition, but still the
same general idea Secondly, the exemptng
non communicating members-(thatis the baptized
children of the Church from judicial prosecution.
The last is In relation to the competency OF wit
tween competency and credbty. make bold ia
say that the present Book is somewhat confused
in its account of the difference between these.
The revised Book undertakes to clarity this matter
DR.. Thornwell said that the only serious defect 10
the Book prepared by himself and his distinguish
ed and able adjutors was that it did not conhne
appeals to the injured party who had submitted to
trial: and the only thing which he considered
doubtful in it was the question of admitting the
lower courts to a seat on the floor in the case oil
appeal He suggested another way In which the
matter might be arranged.
I will pause here to give an idea of what changes
the report of the present Committee has superin.
duced upon the report as presented by DIR. Thorn
well to the Assembly of 1852 In the first place
we have taken suggestion from his defence of the
Book and given two distinct senses to the term
discipline "a wide sense and a narrow sense
Ia the next place, following out that same idea
we have introduced chapter on the discipline oil
non-com muoicating members, showing in what
ways the Church may deal with them ln the
next place, we have introduced chapter on the
different kinds of censures, stating them with some
fullness of that abominable thing which Dr. Plumel
bates-defnition. Then we have another chapter
on the infection of censures, and another on the
removal. These are not new things. Most Of
them are found in the Directory of Worship Of oul
present Book. 1t appeared to the Committee thai
that was not the place for matters of Discipline
la the fourth place, we give original jurisdiction
exclusively to the lowest courts-that is, to the
, session exclusively over a church member; to tn,
Presbytery exclusively over minister-that ou
brethren.may not be ipS0 tdctoed by the Assembly
, La the next place, we leave out all reference Il
cen .. o. tas.,S, zss,a pTov.ue Tor the ACC
, ing always the church-the prosecutor being al
ways her representative-the Indictment being al
ways in her name And we undertake to poin
out in what form an indictment shall be drawn
In the next place, we arrange for testimony to b.
taken at distance, by commission, or by sste
, court This is not very terribly revolutionary
thing. Also, it is made the duty of court know
ing of an offence committed by immigrant in it
bounds to notify the court possessing jurisdiction
Again, we have brought the judicial Committee
out of the Directory into the Discipline where i
belongs. In the discussion of questions arising
during process, 1t Is provided that the discussion
shall first be between the parties, and that thel
shall then withdraw for the court to decide
There is no great harm in that, surely. [ thinl
DR. Plumer might stomach that. Another pro
vision is stating distinctly-or defining rather. i
he will allow me to say so-the order OF procedure
in court OF first resort; how a session shall take
up case, what they shall do first, and so on
Then there is definite provision for the record
what constitutes the record and how it is to b.
made up. The same change is made in the chap
ter on cases without process. The provisions Of
Dr. Thornwell's Book are simpli6ed, and, We
think, in sundry ways modified. And lastly, We
have confined appeal in every case to the party
aggrieved.
[ now resume the history of this matter. The
report presented in 1850 at indianapolis was re-
committed. In 1860, at Rochester, the matter
again came up; certain names were added to the
committee, and they were told to take up the
Form Of Government with the Discipline. Their
came on the war and the Church was divided
In 1861, at Augusta, new committee of our own
men was appointed, DR.. Thornwell being still
Chairman, and the Form of Government, Dsci
4 pine and Directory were all submitted. In 1862
Ito make the history full, the Assembly Of the
Northern Church at Peoria adopted seven chap
ters of the Book as reported by Thornwell's origi
nal committee; but subsequently that Church
dropped the whole matter. Whether that is an
argument Tor or against, leave it to the brethren
to decide; | merely state the fact. In 1868, after
DR.. Thornwell's death, the Assembly reorganizeC
the committee La 1864, the Assembly received
our report aud ordered copies to be printed for the
examination OF the brethren. In 1865, at Macon,
we reported giving the reasons why we had not
been able to print; we were then in the darkest
days of the history of our Southern land. In
1866, at Memphis, the Assembly deliberately ex-
amae3 he whole report on the Form of Govern
ment a Book OF Discipline. adopted then with
scarcely dissenting voice, aud sent them down to
the Presbyteries. In 1867 the answers of the
Presbyteres were received. A large majority was
found unwilling to adopt; objections were very va
rious and contradictory and it was very manifest
that the Church was not prepared to act either
negatively or affirmatively The Assembly laid
the matter by for reference and future use. In
1862 nothing was done, Now comes the Assem-
bly, at Mobile in 1869, whore the action taken was
not as l understood Dr. Wilson to say that it was.
Dr. Wilson, did not say anything about the
action of 1869; | am not in possession of what
was done at Mobile.
DR.. Adger.I do not know exactly what Dr.
Wilson referred 70 | understood him to say that