The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1879-02-05
PRESBYTERIAN SUPERVISION II THE
0LDEN TIME.

We have more than once called attention
to the fact that 10 our Church, as c7mpared
with the Scottish and Irish Churches, the
PreSbyterial supervision of pastors and cor
gregations seems to nave lapsed altogether,
insomuch that even some who call themselves
Pfesbyterisna undertake to deny, that under
our Constitution there is any such thing as
an Episcopal power in Presbyteries. Hav-
ing occasion recently to look over Webster's
History of the Presbyterian Church in the
United States we happened to fad in chap
ter fourth picture Of the ecclesiastical
everyday life of the churches in carly Colo.
NAL times, which Interested us greatly
After describing the family religion of those
days-how the Shorter Catechism was learn
ed at home, and recited ct school; how the
Psalms in Metre were treasured 10 the men,
DRY, and became the lullaby of the babe, and
the song at the loom and the wheel, the his
torian presents this picture of congregational
and Presbyterial supervision
"The congregations were divided into
portions called "quartera," each of which
was committed to the charge Of an elder, and
the people in each quarter were gathered at
suitable and oft recurring seasons, at some
convenient point-it might be kitchen or
barn, to accommodate large numbers-and
old and young were solemnly, carefully, and
at length, catechised. The seed sown in the
sanctuary was narrowed in by the catechis-
ing. TIE minister knew the state of the
flock, and how they profted by the word
preached.
The Presbyteries (see Minutes of Donne-
gal Presbytery) visited the congregations,
taking first the minister by himself, and ask
ing him how he performed the duties of
preaching, visiting and catechising, how the
elders discharged their Office, and hoy the
people hearkened to the word, and submitted
to godly discipline.
He being put forth, the elders were called
in aud questioned concerning the minister's
doctrine, life, diligence and faithfulness; as
to the extent to which they labored in their
quarters, and how the people deported them
selves toward those who were over them in
the Lord. Lastly, the people were called in
to answer, by their epresentatives--who
we're strictly what their name imputed-rep-
resentatives. These we're chosen to act and
speak for the people, to sign their call and
be the responsible representative agents in
all secular matters. They we're asked how
the people were satisfied with their minister,
and with the elders, and how they performed
their atipulations for his support. Each of
the three parties was asked if any cause of
complaint existed, or of dissatisfaction, and
the Presbytery proceeded, "authoritatively"
to investigate the alleged matter, and to re-
move it or rebuke the offenders"
Such was the Presbyterian Church Order
in it's practical working among the fathers of
American Presbyterianism. 1t ia very man.
ifest that if theirs was the true conception of
Parockial aud Prts5y. t.iaii ~ 81: erv;sicn, thca
our present ideas and practices fall alarm
ingly short of the true standard. As COM
pared with the methods and practices of the
old DONEGAL Presbytery one hundred and
fifty years ago, the methods and practices of
our Presbyteries at this day are essentially
sort Of Congregational independency.-
When this exercise of Presbyterial authority
lapsed, we cannot say. Even within our re-
collection, Presbyteries called annually for
reciprocal reports from pastors and congre-
cations.
Those who are familiar with the state of
things, especially in such of cur Presbyteries
as are composed largely of feeble and vacant
churches, will unite with us in the wish that
the old.fashioned usages were restored among
as. Whether change in that direction is
now possible, We are not prepared to say
1t is always difficult to assume the exercise
of authority, which has long lapsed. But
the question is one which thoughtful men
should take into consideration.
Louisville Presbyterian.