The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1881-07-27
For the Central Presbyterian
The General Assembly. of 1881.

No. 4.
Do we want Prayer Book? Do we
want much revision Of our DIRECTORY
for Worship" / think few simple
changes in our Directory to adapt. it to
the changes in our Form of Government
and Rules of Discipline, is all that we
need.
One of the important things claiming
the attention of our Church, is the pres
ent effort at revision of our Directory for
Worship. The Committee seems Jealous
to go forward and complete their work.
They reported last year, and again this
year. The chairman read the report to
the Assembly, and it was ordered to be
printed and sent down again to the
Presbyteries for criticism. The friends
of revision were unwilling to pause long
enough to submit the question to the
Presbyteries, whether they wanted it
at ALL
A distinct motion was made by Rev.
A. G. Hopkins that the subject be sent
down to the Presbyteries to vote fairly
and squarely on the question whether
they wanted this revision or not.
This was voted down in the Assembly.
DR.. Adger (who in the discussion on r.
and r. was the champion of the rights of
the Presbyteries), opposed the submission
Of the matter to the vote of the Presby-
teries.
If a majority of the Presbyteries
wanted revision, all would have &C
quiesced cheerfully and the work would
have gone forward towards it's compile
ton.
One of the Committee made a speech
giving the origin and history of this
the third act i'll "the Revision" He
said that in 1878 large Presbytery
overturned the Assembly to revise the
Directory for Worship. This the Assem-
bly, of 1878 rejected. That, again, in
1879, several Presbyteries overturned for
the same object. and then the Assembly
ordered the Committee to prepare a re-
vision of the Directory for the Assembly
of 1880. This was done and reported
and the Assembly ordered it to be
printed and sent down to the Presbyte-
ries for criticism; and now the Assembly
OF 1881 have the results of their criticism
etc. That only six Presbyteries had op-
posed revision and the balance favored
it and sent up their criticisms.
Mr.. Hopkins expressed the belief that
majority of the churches were opposed
to any considerable revision. But the
Assembly of 1881 hearkened to the ad-
vice of the revisers and ordered this
year S report to be printed and sent down
to the Presbyteries for criticism. So it
goes onl
But I really believe that if the true
history of the thing had been exhibited
at the right juncture, the Assembly
would have made pause, and Mr.. Hop
kins motion would have prevailed.
Let me now give my understanding OF
the history of this movement. In the
Richn ond Assembly, Qs69) there was
an overture from good and prominent
Elder, of Lexina ton Presbytery, who was
Commissioner to that Assembly, pray
ing the Assembly to al point committee
to prepare Prayer Book" for our
Church. And though he foua hit long
and hard, his project was fatty put down
by an almost unanimous vote. In 1878
the Presbytery of Lexington (of which
this good and prominent Elder is an i'm
portant element) sent up an overture to
the Assembly to get up some forms Of
prayer for the Presbyterian Church
This overture was likewise squelchedl
There was no overture in 1879 from
any Presbytery or person to revise our
Directory tor Worship. But in that AS
sembly (on whose motion I cannot know
the Committee on Revision was enlarged
by adding the name of Rev. DR.. lie.
fevre, of Baltimore. Now the old Re-
vision Committee was not done. The
Rules Of Discipline were finally disposed
of in this Assembly. The Committee
was not yet discharged.
Now, this enlargement OF the Commit
tee, by the addition of DIR. Lefevre, is
put forth in a subsequent paper, to
which the Assembly yielded an assent
as the a0ish of the assembly, for the Com.
mittee to go forward with revision of our
Directory.
Thus, according to my reading of the
minutes of the Assemblies of 1878. 1879
and 1880, this movement for revision o.
our Directory has commenced and ha:
gone forward thus far without the regues,
Of any PreSbytery or of any person. Dc
we want this revision done? Who saws
so? Let us hear
Instead of there being this large de-
mand from number of Presbyteries
there was no overture from any quarter
on the subject. The thing originated in