The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-10-08

lowed in support Of the report The duty upon
the committee was a very delicate and response
ole one, from which they would gladly have
shruuk The committee we're in session six
hours giving patient hearing to al who wished
to be heard on the great question OF sustaining
the action Of the prudential board. As regards
the selection of missionaries, he spoke with
much feeling and impressiveness, hoping tnas
only harmony and peace would prevail.
Rev. DIR. Nose, of Providence, X. l., who signed
the report with qualification came forward to
explain the reason of it, While agreeing ia gem
eral with the committee in approving the spirit
and principle with which the home secretary
DIR. Alden had acted, he would dissent il the
resolution of Endorsement was intended to APP
prove the idea that the prudential committee
or the board was theological court or had any
authority TO pass upon minor matters of doc
trine. The applause which greeted the reading
of the resolution would, in his judgment sug-
gest that such was the case; if So he would
empnatlcally dissent He saw no reason why
now, contrary to the accepted and traditional
policy of the board, attempts should be made to
give authority over theological questions to the
nome committee in passing upon the fitness OF
candidates for mission work. He wanted to say
that only properly constituted council could
pass on theological questions Long and con-
tinued applause
DR.. Hopkins asked If any others wished to
speak on the resolutions, and Prof Egbert Z.
Smith, of Andover made his way to the front
OF the stage. His appearance was loudly
cheered, and he spoke with deliberation, partly
rearing from manuscript, with much suppressed
feeling His remarks were often applauded.
He said he approved the effort of the committee
to frame reply in which all could unite that
the true position to take vas that taken by the
business committee in 1881, namely: That
neither board nor prudential committee is q
theological court. The manual of the church,
in prescribing questions for candidates to preach
to answer, does not impose tests upon mere dog
mas, mere secondary matters; it does not require
candidates speculations concerning future life,
matters which at best-are only matters of propht
ecy. The manual guards very carefully
against compelling missionaries to subscribe to
anything but the generally accepted truths Of
Christianity. Several persons, to my knowl-
edge, would have applied to be sent out mis-
sionaries had it not been that they were required
to subscribe to important dogmas introduced by
assured authority of the committee 1t is said
we rlcst settle this question at the West for the
East is honeycombed with infdeity |
deny It. The churches of New Rngland are
sound to-day in the faith of Christ Jesus. Not
one Of these persons who have been rejected as
missionaries but s in full fellowship with the
church. Some fear if the board should allow
these men to hold their minor dogmas the result
would be falling off in the receipts of money.
No matter. In the words Of one of the largest
contributors, 1.-THE American board is not for
sale" We need men in our missions. Why will
you reject them when they believe in Christ and
want to preach him2 / have spoken simply from
love of Christ and not from any desire to bring
forward new departure or to advocate new
doctrine
DIR. Bartlett then asked that the home secre-
rotary, DR.. Alden. should be requested to ex-
plain his position, as he was directly involved
in the report that had been given.
DR.. Alden, accordingly, took the floor, and was
greeted with loud cheers from the conservative
element in the audience. He then read state
ment giving his position and his reasons for il.
He held that inquiry as to the doctrinal views or
candidates of the duties imposed
upon the boards secretary. He held, as
his own views, that the only time of probation
was during life. He claimed that until recently
all of the officers of the board and instructors in
theological schools would have held it as proper
Interpretation of Scriptures that it was the doc
trine of Andover from 1903 to 1881, at the re-
| trement Of President Parks. No one, years ago,
would have thought of applying for appointment
to mission work who did not entertain this doc
trine. On this the speaker relied and took it as
his authority He said a large number OF
| letters had been received from prominent men
| in the church, protesting against admitting the
doctrine of probation after death.
Mr.. Roland Hazard, of Rhode Island, moved,
in view of the conflict, that council of nine be
| appointed by the board-the latter acting with
them-to take under advisement the whole case,
and report at the next annual meeting or at kss
called meeting sooner If desired.
DR.. Lynn Abbott, editor Of the Christian
Union came forward, and received with
cheers While paying mis- tribute of respect to
to Boston, he must say the country is too large
and the Congregational Church too broad for
ono single city or one set of men, influenced by
local surroundings to determine the aualiica-
tions of men to preach the gospel abroad.
The audience was dismissed, but hundreds re-
manned, and the corporate body contn-
ued in session on the pending sub
iect of adopting the resolutions read by
DR.. Bartlett, referring the whole matter to q
special council of nine Several points of order
were raised and Mr.. Hazards resolution of ref
erence voted down. The question then
required on DIR. Bartletts resolutions The first
resolution of general nature, on which there
was no controversy, was adopted unanimously
The second resolution, approving the action Of
DR.. Alden and the prudential committee was
then called up
DIR. Noble of Chicago, introduced an amend
ment to the effect that the board was squareIy
opposed to what is known as the doctrine OF
future probation.
DR.. Vose pressed the point of order that this
amendment was substitute for the resolution,
and should go back to the original committee. or
to the business committee.
DR.. Withrow, of Boston, wanted to add to the
amendment strict directions to the prudential
committee tc accept no candidates for missions
aries who held the doctrine of future
probation At this point adjournment
debate was resumed. Ex-President
Chaplin, of Beoit College, thought the board
should not take position ex cathedra on aques-
ton outside of its province He offered
amendment to the amendment offered BY DR..
Noble, to the effect that the board looked with
apprehension upon the tendency of the age
toward the perversive influence upon churches
at home and abroad of the doctrine of probation,
and approvinDthe acton@of the home commit
tee In carefully guarding the board and recon-
mending that the same caution be exercised in
the future
After further debate, DR.. Hopkins called for
vote on the original resolutions amended by
DIR. Chaplin. which was carried by viva yoce
vote of about two-thrds
1t was also voted that the prudential commit
mittee be not called upon to decide theological
questions.
The evening session Of the board was devoted
to routine business, reports from different mis-
sion fields being given. The old officers of the
board were reelected without exception The
resignation OF Hon Alpheus Pardy Of Boston,
who had resigned from the prudential commit
tee WAS lot accantad and hn sr,-o t.a