, 1874-05-24

Rev. Doctor or Professor JudEln, who WAS then
at tho head OF somo theological institution, took
exceptions, and brought Dr. Barnes pe1ore me
presbytery- for preaching here1,cal aoclr1nes ea !;
1}r. Harnes had his trixl in the Presbytery, md
he failipc party appealed to the Synod. and
agafn tIa iosfng party-1 do not rccouect winch
anre,ied to the great General Assembly OF the
Presbyterian Church, next to sit in Pittsburgh,
p.
In NAV, 1886, this General Assembly met, Just
th;,tv-ajcht years ago this month. There was
great excitement throughout the P1osbyteE teEan
Church. Each PresbyreIy was as ea1ne6t IN
clocting delegates to that Assembly who repre-,
scented the views OF the body upon this doctrlnal
point as my political party is III selecting ITS
representative. II recollect right, nearly
every Prcsbytery IN tho United States
sent representatives to that body. I think not
moro than ono OF two worry remote ones fa1led
OF representation. There we're 4oo delegates
pree~at-eyery one in earnest for his alde.
nine specifications to debate. My recouec:ion
is TINT this one point made the issue. Possibly
there vere some collateral points. 1 heard Tue
prosecution Or. Judkins) for several oays'
with his Scriptura proofs 10 1aYoT OF ne "o pona,
ton. Then 1 heard Dr.. Barnes In reply some
DAYS, With his Scipturd proofs !n LIE aefense.
thiuk It occupied about eight days: Or. ) ua-
E;na represented tho OLD School and tue slave
I1nldinr ecptimcut of the churches u.. oaInee
represented the New School sentiment. nng
H.
OF about thirty votes was giTen tor III. oa'nes
ncouittal from heretcal teaching
Hlt this was not the cnd.-1t was only be-
ginning. For the next year, when there was no
general question Of importance appfenS,nateu y "
rallied their forces. and at that Assembly, held
in Philadelphia, had majority OF Old-school
delegates, and they voted all the Ner-sehool
Prcsbyterians out, thus fairly kicking Dr.. Barnes
aud the Neg School ont Of TIE orghnzsa h1Ioh en"
This uss ia 1887. thi,ty-seyen years ago tlts
Nav. Tho Now-School Proshyterlans accepted
tl,e aituation, and organized theiz own bynods
and General Assembly. They continued seph1a1o
thirsy-tuo years, and iu 1869, to tno estonlsn-
men; of ali parties who knew the cause, and the
f1li history OF the singular and degrading treat
ment OF the Old School towards the Now oohool'
they reunited
prosbytsrians out from the boeom and conh-
dsnce of the, Old, and from the Genera assem- na
lily, wnsbased upon the idea Of original sin, anu
ras practical condemnation Of the doctrines
held by Dr.. Barnes and his edheronts. HON.
ever, tho question OF slavery FaTo force enc l
courrgo to tho faith and feelings OF the oia
School The Old School was pfo-slavery, and
tho New School was profeGaedly anti-slavcry IN
sentiment, although ct the Time not very pro-
fcient in action.
Each school lived in peace and quiet, IN tho
freedom OF it's own faith aud discipline, thirty
two yoars. The New School prospered exceed
inely.- but tho seluecr came, and blinded tho
mind mind Of tho New school:to the degrading insults
OF the Old School in turning outdoors IN 1887,
and To- lis 1ogmntic doctrinar e1actions.
Nevertheless, the NeT School. forget1ul OF lta
rude freshness by the Old School in 1887, anu
forgetful OF its own dignity and integrity as g
strong and popular religious body, aud Of the
doctrines it mad been tried for holding, in tho
person Of DR.. Barnes, yielded Up it's sclfhood
aud manhood, and went back into the arms and
embrace OF the Old School accepting and adopt
ing the exact articles OF faish .ad formulated
doctrine from which it had AbEolred itself in the
caac Of DR.. Btrncs' trial, thus submitting to 3
wonderful humiliation, in the eyes OF othnr re-
ngiuua bodies, sud Of the outside world -. =
The caueo Of this separation had its source in
trial for hercsy in 1886, that OF Or. Barnes, and
almost the first Important thing that transplred
after tho union il another tltal for hersey in the
person OF Prof. Swing. The first vent through
eli tho judicatories in the Presbyterian Church
to the highest. The latter promises to do the
same. Then, Prof. Judsin represented tue old
ton represents tho Old School and Prof. Swing
represents the Now. III both cases the Old
School has been tho prosecutor. Prot Swing,
and every Presbyterian minister, at his ord,ns~
tion affirmed thur belof Of the doctrines es for
mulatod and set forth by DR.. Patton, and thcy
promised fidelity to them, else they could not
have been ordained to the ministry.
Would it :. not be more appropriate
for Prof. Swing and his learned cosclontlous CO.
adjutors in the ministry, called NaT School, TO
adopt new Articles Of Faith, in simple language,
converting exactly their faith without equivoca-
ton or double meaning. that could not be mlH,
construed This would s2ve much duplicity+ and
greatly enlighten aud ralieTo the minds OF the
laity in your churches.
IL suggest again to,this ministry, whether tney
can tako the Westminster Cstcchlsm N tne!r M
nght hama Into thelf pulpi!s DeloIe tnea' @
congregations and, IN IN language con
sonant~ WITH and llustratise Oh tno
e1aot articles therein o1;9u found .,,n urge q
and defend every point called the hVe
points, to their congregation II not, Why con-
fuse yourselves ana your hoarers In Gircn11ous
evaslons? l have attended this trial OF Prof.
Swing. I have heard the arguments and proofs.
Articles o. a1th ana tno Nestnalnstel LAleenlei4,
as 1ornulated. hnu as Known ana tauSlE N 1no
historic Church " tho lev. Jonathan Ed"sros
and Dr. Emnons OF New England henc1y.
sfea. Aeu!a n tne CnuIcu, ~"Apse heluous "a
concentrated CalE1nlsm are now exsant.
Dr.. Patton is true, legitimata ohid and &
living. loyAI representative of the creed OF tho