The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1884-02-13
For the Central Presbyterian.
One Order"

We at the North used to laugh AT
| Virginians for their wonderful "strict
construction" though it has always
been trifie funnier among clerics than
amongpoliticians South Carolina and
her Old Mother seem always to have
been little finer in their thinking than
we of the rougher latitude.
For example, we never could discern
between "class" and an "order." A
genus and species is sanctiied by scien-
tific use, but we usually get our Church
titles from the Bible. Listening to DIR.
Witherspoon's rhetoric, which is always
excellent, we are imposed upon by the
imagination that he must be getting his
grave terms from Scripture. But if his
old grandfather were present. and were
to pull down his concordance, as | have
done, think he would behave as he
did in Congress. King was a fine
speaker. He had been so accustome ed
to impose upon everybody by his easy
eloquence, that he bet Morris a basket
of champagne that he could speak five
minutes by the watch without an atom
of sense, and not be called to order by
the House. He tried it, and would un-
doubtedly have won, when the old
Paisley divine began to stir in his seat,
and at last broke out upon Congress
with the challenge, "Maisthur Spaker
whats the quaistion"
[ may be pardoned for the word
funny" but think debate partakes
of that nature when the parties are
agreed about the facts, but are differ
ing about terms which, like the cash
boxes in our Northern stores, roll along,
and depend, when they reach the clerk,
for their cash value, exactly upon the
coin that has been put inside.
The great question about Presbyte-
rian polity is whether that polity is
found in Scripture. That / would be
this Thornwellian offshoot from it.
Wherein does anybody differ? We all
agree in presbyters or elders. We all
agree that they are alike; and we all
agree that they differ We all agree
that they are alike and differ in very
much the same set of appointed pecu-
liarities. We all agree that they are
alike as rulers qu0dd this, that they
have equal votes. We all agree that
they differ as to moderating the Ses-
sion, and as to other functional work
that is expressly prescribed to them
There are of course some boundary
questions as between them, but that
they differ DR.. Witherspoon himself
agrees, for he insists that they belong
to different classes" and his account
Of the difference would agree almost
entirely with that Of the Central Pres
bytertdn.
But even if this were not the case
DIR. Witherspoon does not launch him
self upon a worthwhile debate as to
the functions of presbyters, but seats
himself fast upon certain terms as
though they had algebraic value
There exudes from his processes of
thinking the evident belief that if the
Central could be forced to say that
presbyters were of one "Order." he NAV
give-in that they are of different
"cloSS," and be brought to the exact
right result.
Now precisely here the northern
mind fails of nicely of touch.
Dr. Thornwell owned some thousand
books of logic. He divides with a GER
tain pastor of New Orleans, the reputa-
tion in my mind of being the grandest
preacher on the continent. He must
have meant something. But Prince
ton, who am beginning to suspect "is
not a there" or, as a black man ex-
pressed it yesterday, "hasn't all it
ought to have" will never reach, am
persuaded, the real inwardness Of that
dialectic. Why did not the combatants
say that elders were of the same class?
What makes "cldss' more specific
term than the other2 Where did the
@ 10Th century" if light first broke out
there, get either? class" is not in
the Bible and "order" scarcely occurs
twice o. VI in the same word, either
Greek or Hebrew Tdris may come
nearer to it than any other; but where |
is there any algebra in tdris, if the word |
g cld&s' is not in the book but comes in. |
like DIR. Witherspoon's tract in a later
age?
When Paul said fdris. have no
dream he meant to fix it as a term i'm n |
polity for us. Otherwise he would not |
have thrown it away in immediate
texts q Cor. xiv 40 Col. ii: 3: see
also Luke i 8) There would not have
been used seven words which we trans
late ordain" (E. W, and scarce one of
them ever twice, if he meant " 0rdatn"
to lie in our mind exactly as it has al
ways done by force of our English.
Ministers ought to be " "0rd0ined" and