The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1877-06-13


Of committee. This committee was ap-
pointed, and statement of the wrongs cone
US, and which required rectifcation, was
put into their hands. We were called upon
therefore by them to make statement.-
Wholly unlike this was it on the other side.
The offence was perfectly gratuitOus. What
had our Assembly ever done to provoke
them? 1t had never uttered word concern
ing that body to give rise to such wrongs.
o. More than this, it had positively,
once and again declared it had no i0tent'0"
to offend in this way.
First, When the Synod Of Kentucky was
united with our Church, in 1867, 1t came
with very extended and able declaration Of
principles for which it had been in conflict
with the Northern Church. In the action
taken by our Assembly we find the following
sentence-' That this General Assembly de-
clines now, as therefore,, to make any utter
ance concerning the acts of the body against
which the Synod protests.
Second. In 1870 we fad the following:
"The Southern Presbyterian Church can
confidently appeal to all the acts and deOlsi
rations ofyall their Assemblies, that no atti'
tude of aggression or hostility has been, or
is now, assumed by it towards the Northern
Church. And this General Assembly dis
tinctly avows, Gas it has always believed and
declared, that no grievances experienced by
US, however real, would justify US in acts Of
aggression or a spirit of malice or retaliation
against any branch of Chsist's visible king
DOM"
Now it is a most suggestive fact that al
this was known to DR.. Van Dyke, for it if
contained in the paragraph Immediately pre-
ceding the one from which he quotes. When
therefore, he held that pamphlet, to which he
refers, Distinctive Principles) in his hand
it would not in the least have damaged hit
reputation for candor aud common fairness
if he had quoted this also; but it would have
destroyed the effect of the part he did recite
and thus more than damaged his speech.
Here then we have two instances (snc
there are mOre) in which our Assembly sol
emily disclaims all intention of ever casting
offensive imputations upon the Northern
We pause to ask if the Northern can say al
much as that to US? And if not, why not
(8.) 1t is fact that the Northern Assem-
bly,, though for six years full of bitter accu
Stations against ours, has never once ventureC
to assert, in any specific way, that we have
cast offensive imputations upon them. lie
that fact be pOndered.
a. In 1869, we find the following Ian
guage used in protest against the union o
the Old and New School Presbyserians.
"Thig plan requires US to ignore docsriua
and other differences between the two branch
es of our Church, which our General Assem-
blies have recognized and condemned"
What is this bus the same allegation mad
by our Assembly, AT another time whel
we can lay our hand upon the Protest of Drs
Hodge, BaokuS and others in 1868-thei
language will be found as outright and ener
getic as any used by our Assembly. Now i
is required by our rules of the Church con
corning protests, as an indispensable cOndi
ton of admitting them to record, that the.
shall contain no improper reflections upor
the iudicatory. How then does it come tt
pass that the paper of our Assembly is 81
offensive, when precisely the same thing ii
found on their minutes from their own mem
bers?
As to the political part-taking the crown
from Christ and placing it upon CeJar-le
DIR. Van Dyke turn to the protest of DR.
Hodge and many others in 1861. Do they
not solemnly declare that in the political &C
ton then taken land this was mild compared
with what was done in this line afterwards
the Assembly had " uiozated the Constitution
of the Church and usurpsa the prerogative O
the Divine Master"
What more did our Assembly say than
this Yet that protest was admitted to re-
cord as entirely respectful and free from any
offensive imputations Will Dr.. Van Dyke
explain the process by which the one is free
from offense and the other becomes so full Of
it?
Therefore it does not belong to the North
ern Assembly to raise an objection to the
language used by ours on this subject. But
more still
81 We have now under our eye ten long
elaborate and able letters written by DR.. Van
Dyke in 1860-publiShed in the Philadelphia
Presbyterian, and copied into this paper
They are an earnest, vehement protest
against the proposal to unite with the New
School, and declare that the result must ne
cessarily be an abandonment Of Old School
doctrine on fundamental points, and sub.
stitution for it of complete Broad Churcdtsm.
The terms in which this is done are SO strong
as to make positively ludicrous for the same
gentleman to rise in the United Assembly
and make this kind of objection.
And as to the other part--taking the crown
from the head of Christ and putting it upon
the head of Caesar, every one who knows any
thing of that brother in those days, knows
that this was faVorite theme with him; that
ne charged that very thing upon successive
Assemblies of his own Church in the most