The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1880-12-15
WHAT THEY SAY ABOUT US.

Il Il
(From the Presbyterian Banner, Pittsburgh
In an article published in the hide
,oendent of last week, Prof Alexander
b. Bruce, D. D., of Glasgow, Scotland,
who will be remembered as one of the
most latitudinarian in the Council, speak
inc of what he supposes to be two parties
IN the Presby terrain family of Churches
in this country, the strict adherents to
the Westminster Confession and those
whom he supposes to belong to class
which he represents says:
Between two parties so diverse in spirit and
tendency, struggle may be expected to arise,
and the struggle may be fatal to the existence
OF the Alliance. 1t is a natural inquiry, which
is likely to prevail. Judging from appearance
at the late meeting would say the conser
natives They seemed to be numerically the
larger party. They had much the larger share
IN the discussions and they evidently enjoyed
the sympathies of the audience. Strong state
.nents in support of Presbyterian orthodoxy in
Yariably provoked applause; discriminating,
balanced utterances, coming even from divines
of high standing and above suspicion were
listened to with respect, but not with approba
ton. The Presbyterian blood was up, and the
prevailing sentiment our side against all
corners"
He then takes it upon himself to des-
ignate the position in the Council of the
Southern Presbyterian Church and of
the former Old School and New School
elements of our own Church He says:
1t might be invidious to indicate partcu-
larly on which of the two sides individual
members of the Council ranged themselves; but
1t may be stated that in the conservative ranks
were found most, if not ALL of the deputies from
the Presbyterian Church ofthe Southern States of
America and not few of the deputies from the
Northern Church belonging to the Old School
section. On the other hand, the deputies belong
ing to the New School section of that Church
and the representatives of the various sections
of the Scottish Church were, without any i'm
portant exception, by comparison, modern and
liberal IN tendency. The men from the South
ern States, were, beyond ALL notable for the in
tensty, l had almost said fierceness of their
dogmatism. They seemed to be animated by
the pride and passion of orthodoxy, to be con-
sclous of their superiority in this respect to
their brethren in the North Their tone was
an echo of what Southern minister said to me
before the assembling of the Council: You will
find, sir he said, that we in the South are Or.
thodox. In the North they are not reliable
The remark was fitted to suggest the thought
that possibly doctrinal pharisaism quite as
much as politics or slavery, accounts for the un
willingness of the Southern Church to unite
with the Northern, containing such New School
men as DR.. Hitchcock of New York, and Dr.
Morris of Cincinnati. The effect of all heard
after coming to Philadelphia, both in public
and In private was to confirm this conjecture"
This is the very charge which when
made against the former New School
Presbyterian Church was so warmly and
successfully resented by the late Rev.
Henry B. Smith, D. D., Rev E. F. Hat
field, D. D.. and others. Dr. Morris has
probably himself to thank for the position
assigned him by DR.. Bruce as agreeing
with the less strict among the Scotch
delegates. But we do not believe that
DR.. Hitchcock, now President of Union
Theological Seminary. which requires its
Directors to declare by their signatures
their adhesion to the Westminster Con
fession once in every three years, and
makes failure to do thi REIMBURSEMENT
of the Office, will relish any such location
as the one assigned him in the article un-
der consideration by the Scotch Profess
sor. Nor will the Presbyterian Church
be willing to admit stricter orthodoxy
IN the Southern Church in proportion to
its numbers than is to be found in itself.