The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1876-02-16
For THE CENTRAL PRESBYTERIAN.
A NEEDED CHANGE.
No. /.
No. /.

ment, chap. X. sec. f., "When two or NOR
congregations are united under one pastor
all such congregations shall have but on
elder to represent them"
1t is doubtless the ruling idea of this pre-
vision, that such combination of churche
under one pastor constitutes one pastora
charge, and quoad hoe, is tantamount to
consolidation into one church organization
And from this point of view it seems emf
nently just. A large church, able to secur
the services of minister for the whole 0
his time, living, thriving, Influential, shoul
surely be entitled to equal voice with clus
ter of weak churches too feeble to stan,
alone, and almost too feeble to stand togeth
er even with the aid of Presbytery.
But however fair it seems, there is evi
IDENTIFY some restlesSneSs in the Church con
cerniDg the restriction. No one matter-o
as small comparative impOrtance-has beer
so often brought to the attention of th'
General Assembly. Since the close of thu
war, and the effort to rebuild the waste
places, the matter was first brought to thC
notice OF the Assembly, by Rev. S. G. Alex
ander (Of the Synod of North Cardinal by
Overture from several ministers" request
ing to have the section erased. Minutes Of
General Assembly, Vol. II. p. 267. The
overture was appropriately referred, and the
following action had: Ibid. p. 275.) "Re.
sOlved, That it is not advisable at present to
legislate on this subject, but that it be CON-
mended to the consideration of the Presby-
teries."
The next year at Mobile, committee, to
which were referred the answers of the
Presbyteries, reported, that ten Presbyteries
only reported, six in favor of striking out,
three opposed, and one for indefinite post
pOnement. The responses were insufficient
for decision, yet indicative of the sentiment
of the church so the matter was again re.
ferred to the Presbyteries and they were en-
joined to reply. Vol. II. p. 377.
In 1870, at the General Assembly at
Louisville, the Stated Clerk was directed to
digest the returns of the Presbyteries to the
Overture. From his report it does not ap.
pear whether the responses of the year be-
fore were regarded or not. In the report of
the committee of 1869, the names of the
Presbyteries with their votes are distinctly
noted. In this report only the results are
stated, which were: " that responses have
been received from only twenty-eight Pres
byteries, nineteen of which reply in the af-
frmatve and nine in the negative" Then
follows this comment "The whole number
of Presbyteries in connexion with this AS.
8embly is fifty FIVE. It would require the
consenting vote of twenty ight Presbyteries
in order to effect an alteration in the Form
of Government. The overture has therefore
failed, from the fact that majority of Pres
byteries have not responded atirmatively."
The report was adopted, and the appended
recommendation also, which is, "It is recon-
mended that, inasmuch as this overture has
in two successive years, been sent to the
Presbyteries by the Assembly, and, in both
instances, has failed from default on the
part of Pfesbyteries, this Assembly do now
dismiss the NATTER Vol. II. p. 531.
With reference to this action, it is proper
to say that it took place on Saturday, the
day before adjournment, when business is
usually rushed through without serious con-
and was brought to the attention
of the Assembly by the courteous and eff
cient Stated Clerk, whose endorsement upon
a matter doubtless regarded as of minor
moment) was sufficient for the Assembly
Again, the Synod of Kentucky appeared by
its representatives as constituent part of
the Assembly in 1869, and sick of changes
and interferences with the Constitution, or
not aware of the consideration of this change
by the Assembly doubtless either did not vote
or did not consider the overture. And fur
ther, inasmuch as the action of the Assembly
of 1869 Up. 377 recommended "thst the
question be again submitted to those Pres
byteries s0hich hare so ealpably failed to re-
spond, and that they be eDjoined to send
their reply to the next General Assembly, u
it may be that the ten Presbyteries report
ing in 1869 did not feel called on to answer
again in 187O-they were not required so to
do-and 80 may not have been counted in the
returns reported by the Stated Clerk. II
so, then thirty eight out of fifty-fve Presby.
teries took action on the overture, twenty.
FIVE in favor of striking out, twelve opposed
and one for indefinite pOStpOnement.
Notwithstanding this reversal, there ap
peared in the Assembly of 1871 an overture
from four ministers and eighteen ruling ell
ders of Wilmington PreSbytery, asking thai
measures be taken to have the obnoxious
section stricken out. This the Assembly de-
clined to have done, giving as reason there
fore, that action or rather failure of actor
of the Presbyteries in response to the over
ture sent down from the Assembly in 1868
and in 1869. Vol. III. Pp. 14-15.
Again, in 1874, at Columbus, similar
overture praying for relief, was offered by
the Presbytery of Augusta, to which tht
answer was given: "In certain cases, incOn
venienceS may arise from the operation o.
said rule, but in view of the more serious