The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1882-09-27
Action of East Hanover Pres
bytery on "Fraternal Rela-
tionS -

The following paper was prepared by com
mittee consisting of Rev. William Brown, D. D.,
Rev. T. Pryor, D. D., and Hon. c. F. Collier,
and was adopted by the Presbytery unani-
mously.
The committee appointed to examine the
Minutes of the General Assembly, and to whom
was referred paper offered by the Rev. DR..
Pryor the subject of fraternal relations" with
the Northern Presbyterian Assembly, beg leave
to submit the following report in part.
lnasmuch as important action was taken by
our last General Assembly, and also by the
Northern General Assembly, for establishing
fully what are called fraternal relations" be .
tween these two ecclesiastical bodies, and in
asmuch different opinions exist as to the sense
in which the action referred to is to be under
stood, the PIesbytery of East Hanover deem
it suitable to adopt the following paper as ex
pressing their views in the premises. We notice,
l. The position of oar Church on this subject.
The position taken in the Baltimore Conference
required of the Northern Assembly the retrac-
ton of all accusations whatsoever impugning the
Christian honor of our assembly,. In regard to
certain political declarations" of the other As
sembly our position was this that if the ques-
ton were as to organic union they would be an
" insuperable obstacle" but as this was case
simply as to general amicable relations while
such declarations constituted " a serious hin
drance," it was not an insuperable one, and
we did not refuse fraternal relations for these
causes" Considered as purely political opin
ions, they might, however improper for court
of Christ, be disregarded. If, however, they con
tanned offensive imputations upon the character
of our Assembly, this aspect of them must be
disavowed, since In the nature Of the case there
could be no reason why we should allow an as
persion in this particular to remain upon us any
more than as touching heresy, schism, and
blasphemy."
This position taken in the Baltimore Confer
ence was sanctioned with great unanimity by
our Assemblies of 1875. 1876, 1877, 1881.
Another fact is specially significant as to this
point. The Northern Assembly at Brooklyn In
1875, adopted paper professedly of reciprocal
concurrence with, and in response to, paper
transmitted to them By our Assembly in session
the same year at Savannah. 1t was unsatis
factory to 1s because it entirely omitted any re
ference to the most material part of our paper
But they expressly declared that. while con-
demning certain acts and deliverances of the
Southern General Assembly, no acts or declara
tons Of the Northern General Assembly, or Of
the historical body or bodies of which the pre-
sent Assembly Is the successor, is to be CON
strued or admitted as impugAing in any way
the Christian character of the Southern General
Assembly, or of the historical body or bodies of
which it is the successor"
These statements show conclusively not onlv
what the position Of our Church really has been
but also how the matter was understood by the
other party, viz, that it required, as was meet
and proper, and as indispensable for establish
ing full fraternal correspondence, the unequivo.
cal retraction of all offensive imputations with
out any exception whatsoever.
! 2. The position Of Our assembly in Atantq.
! ~ The first paper adopted and transmitted to
the Assembly at Springfield declared "our re
| greet and withdrawal Of all expressions of our
Assembly which may be regarded as rejecting
upon or offensive to, the Northern Assembly. Is
! ~ Their official paper in response completely
reciprocated our language (3) At the same
time we received, unoficially another paper
adopted by said Assembly in which they dis
claim any reference" (n the official paper to
the actions OF preceding Assemblies CONCERNING
loyalty and rebellion, but refer only to those
concerning schism hertsy, and blasphemy.
10 To this we answered, If the action of your
Assembly telegraphed by your Moderator to our
Moderator, does not modify the concurrent res
olution adopted by your Assembly and ours, we
are prepared to send delegates forthwith" (5)
To this came their reply, The action referred
TO does not modify but il explains the concur
rent resolution, and the explanation is on the
face Of the action" (6) To this our Assembly