The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1877-02-07

? late solemn engagements, 10 our General AS
sembly, which represents in one body, al
t the particular churches of the denomina'
tion." II is in obedience to its directions
that all our Pfeabyteries are now examining
the New Book and if DR.. Plumer'S censure
is Just, let it fall where it belonga-on the
General Assembly.
But what is there in the Assembly's action
that is so bIameworthy 1t has been thought
that in some particulars, our present Book
is obscure; that in some, it is not as perfectly
in accordance with our fundamental princi-
pies of government as it might be; hence
successive General Assemblies at intervals
during the last eighteen years have been en-
deavoring, with great labor on the part OF
many of our most excellent ministers and
elders, to make it clearer and every way
more perfect. Surely there is nothing wrong
in this. Surely DR.. Plumer is wrong in his
harsh denuneiations, There is nothing in
the Assembly's action that ought to tend
even incidentally to disturb the peace of the
Church. Is it not possible without anger to
try to remedy evils or supply defects which
experience and long continued investigation
have brought to light? There ought to be
nothing in such efforts to cauue any one to
lose temper" or otherwise commit Sin"
Let the examination go on then, each one in
the fear of God seeking to discover the
truth; and DR.. Pumer's censure will be seen
to have been undeserved, and his fears with
out foundation.
In his reiterated statement that the Church
desires no change, DR.. Plumer has manifestly
been misled. Respecting question of fact,
it is always best to go to original sources, and
not to depend on hesrsay evidence. How far
he is in error may be seen by comparing his
assertions with the statement made by the
General Assembly of 1873: That, out of
forty.seven Presbyteries from which reports
have been received, thirty approve of the
work of revision and of the revised Rules of
Discipline. f. It is therefore evident
that majority of the Presbyteries are in
favor of revision of this portion Of our
standards; and substantially approve Of the
changes proposed in the revised Rules Of
Discipline. (Min. Vol. 3, p. 329.) And
when that Assembly stated that a majority
of the Presbyteries "were in favor of dis
continuing the work" it was only =" for the
present. thus manifesting becoming for.
bearance towards the minority; and post
ponipg the further consideration of the sub.
ject until all had under more favorable
circumstances examined the whole matter
by no means intimating that the work was to
be abandoned, but rather showing by the
words" for the present"-that it was re-
gArded as merely temporarily suspended.
We do not think that DR.. Plumer's argu-
ment from the course of the Northern Church
is entitled to very great weight. We agree
with him in thinking that there are many
good, wise, and able men in that Church !;
but, after all, We are not anxious to choose
them as our guides; We wonld prefer decid-
ing question after investigating it for our
selves, instead of blindly following them
Especially in the matter of church govern
ment would we be unwilling to copy after the
North; for it is well known that before the
separation, the views Of the two sections on
such subjects were widely different.
But it may be added, for the sake Of those
who agree with DR.. Plumer in thinking We
should be influenced by the example of the
Northern Church, that it has recently adopted
several constitutional amendments-as, for
example, change in the section defining q
quorum of Presbytery, and the introduction
of rotary eldership. 1t does not seem to
have occurred to any one in that Church that
they were hereby requiring ofice-bearers to
"violate solemn engagements.
Nor ought anything said in Section 6 tc
be allowed to affect the question, where it is
intimated that the advocates of the New
Book are actuated by sinister motives. Tht
writer well says: "We are always in danger
of evil aurmisings. We should never indulge
them" The question of "organic union
with the Northern Church ought not to b
suffered to intrude itself into the present ex
animation. Besides, if what DR.. Plumel
calls a "better state of things" is to b.
brought about, he himself asserts that it vii
be neither retarded nor hasteued by an
| changes in the Book. Let all such consider
ations, therefore, be excluded.
F.; Dr.. Plumer's argument in Section s, ifi
: is worth anything, is conclusive against al
t amendments of the Constitution for all time
e He says that in as much as he has Solemnl
g subscribed our present standards, he canno
t be bound by the New Book, even if approve
e by majority of the Pfe0byteries. He ha
IS evidently overlooked the fact that he has a
solemnly subscribed Chapter XII, SectiO
e 6, of the Form of Government, as any Otbe
e part-and this Section provides method q
it introducing changes into the Constitution
e which, when introduced, shall be "obliga
Y tory" The Constitution itself thus guard
Q the liberty and the rights Of those who see
is to bring the Book into more perfect confOl
n nifty with the Sacred Scriptures. Is Dl
|, Plumer acting in accordance with his solem
., anrac acamant To ohserua this section. when