The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1876-11-01

sembly. DR.. Brown is not amenable to the
Synod. Q 10
DR.. Pxyor asked if DR.. Brown was moi
amenatiS co his own Pfesbytery. g
Mr.. Wood said yes; but not as to his judg.
ment. The kind Of control the Assembly
has over its Committee is not the came that
the Presbytery has over DR.. Brown. Again,
he thought the resolutions would fail to Sc
cure the end. 1t would be best for each pas
tor to commend it privately, and this would
do more good than all the resolutions. He
feared the passing of these resolutions would
make trouble.
Governor Marye said he knew nothing
about hints of trouble. As to "quibbleS, y
he did not like the word; but the distinc-
ton made by the brother who used it was
more like quibble. This is Virginia pa
per, by member of our own body, person
ally attending our own courts; aud is it an
offence against the Christian Observer that
we pass special recommendation of it with
out naming other papers one way or the
other?
Mr.. Woods interposed, and asked what
right have we to say that the Central Pres
6yterian is the organ of this Synod?
Mr.. Marye:: No one has said that, and
there is not an intimation to that effect in
anything here proposed.
Reu. j. d. Thomas arose in the spirit Of
compromise. He hoped that DR.. Pryor
would withdraw the whole paper, or the se-
cond part of it, at least. He had hoped that
all the old issues and jealouSies would be
buried, and buried forever. Twice on the
floor of this Synod have voted contrary to
my own preferences and those formerly cher
ished by the United Synod. Once on the
question of the examination of ministers, and
again in the election of moderator. The
secret of the trouble here is that if you en-
dorse one paper you practically declare that
the other is not worthy of the patronage OF
our people.
Mr.. Comfort again spoke against the pro-
posed action. He did not deny the power
of the Synod in this case, but questioned
the expediency of using it. He objected to
this mode of fostering and sustaining the
paper. More would be effected by pastors
and elders going home and doing all they
can to increase the subscription list.
Mr.. Comfort was afraid trouble would
arise. His judgment was usually controlled
by DR.. Brown, but the point was he feared
that trouble would come.
Rev. Mr.. Hopkins said if there was no
law of constitution the law of custom gave
US the power to pass these resolutions.
This recommendation is in exceedingly
general terms. We do not make ourselves
responsible for all that appears in its col
umns. 1t is merely to promote general re
ligious literature within our bounds. 1t is
said East Hanover Presbytery should en-
dorse this paper. Well, but cannot we unite
with this Presbytery in the endorSation, as
is done in their evangelistic and other Church
works! If the Synod of Kentucky should
endorse the Observer no man should feel ag-
grieved, neither should any one feel hurt if
we endorse the paper published within our
own Synod. The idea of opening old
wounds was never thought of by any who
favor this paper, and ought never to have
been suggested on this floor by any who op-
pose it, If the endorsement of the Central
Presbyterian hurts anybody, the sting must
be elsewhere than in this paper itself. 1t
has been repeatedly the case that other pa
pers in the Southern Presbyterian Church
have been endorsed by the Synods within
which they are published, whilst the Central
Presbyterian was never named or expected
to be named in any of them. Why should
this Synod give offence to any in pursuing
the same course?
Rev. j. L. Kirkpatrick, d. d., offered as
a substitute to Rev. DR.. Pryor's resolutions
the following which was adopted:
Whereas the Rev. William Brown, D. D., "a
member of this Synod who has for a long series
of years sustained to it relation of honor and use
fulness and enjoys in an eminent degree the conf-
dence and affections of his brethren, has for sixteen
years conducted within the bounds of the Synod
weekly journal, which has proved valuable agency
in promoting the interests of our Church and ex-
tending the influences of the gospel, the Synod do
herein tender to him an expression OF their sym
pathy with him in his arduous labors and the
varied and severe trials to which he has been sub
iected, and in behalf of the Church represented IN
u.s. and in the name of the Great Master whom We
serve, do bid him hearty Godspeed in his Chris.
tian work.
This resolution was passed by vote near
ly unanimous.
The opinion has been expressed that q
majority of the Synod preferred the origi
nal resolution, and that had it been voted on
it would have passed by nearly the same vote
as the substitute.
The thanks of Synod were returned to the
people of Norfolk, to the churches, and the
railroad and steamboat lines for courtesies.
The Synod then adjourned at II J o'clock.