Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1889-12-01
NUMBER 20.

less grace of God. But He never ignored
Divine holiness and justice, and the pun
lshment of sin in the life to come. The
nineteenth century exhibits no ability to
improve upon the methods of the Great
Teacher, who is the light as we'll as the
life of men. 1t would be tremendous
mistake, and in the end would prove
fatal one, to make light of human deprav-
lty IN creed. There is a drift in that di-
rection. 1t is not Scriptural 1t does not
represent the New Testament teachings,
neither those of the Gospels, nor those of
the Epistles and the Apocalypse"
The Examiner (Baptist) says: "The ex-
lstence Of doubt of the moral purity of 3
minister is almost as fatal as conviction of
States prison otiense. If there is one
person whom the average church does not
wish as pastor, it is the man whose repu-
tatlon IS cloudy, the man whom many be-
lleve to be unworthy Of place in the
ministry. This is a cTael position in
which to place an innocent man, bEt it is
one IN which any minister mig hL be placed
tomorrow by slanderous charges That
Is to say, he is liable to be so placed in the
present state Of public opinion, which is
ever ready to believe the worst in such a
case 1t is this haste of the general pub
lie to infer guilt without sufficient proof
that constitutes the minister's danger.
We hope, for the credit of human nature
in general, that the public does not real
lze its unconscious cruelty. The necessary
result of such conduct cannot, one must
think, be comprehended. One of our
greatest moralists has said, BE thou as
chaste as ice, as pure as snow thou shalt
nor escape calumny,' and experience con-
firms the saying. Now, if the people are
resolved to treat the unfortunate as if they
were guilty, to regard ealuLny as fatal to
mans good name as proved wrong-doing,
they are right to believe greedily every
story of ministerial fraility that is blazoned
In the newspapers. But if there is a dis
tinction between innocence and guilt-if
to be falsely accused is different thing
from being justly charged with sin-the
Christian public must use more circum-
spection in making up its judgments. The
naughty Roman justified his putting away
of his wife, not on the ground that she had
done actual wrong, but because 'C;esar's
wife must be above suspicion We must
have juster standard of judgment for our
ministry"
The Independent says: sour esteemed
contemporary, the Evangelist, publishes the
following from Theodore L. Cuyler, DID,,
which states not only his own views, but
concisely the views of those in the Presby-
terian Church who are now favoring the
revision of its Confession: There is no de-
mand, as far as l can learn, for any general
revision of our excellent and venerable
Confession of Faith. The whole contro-
verSy IS waged in regard to three points:
Q.) There is a clause of the Confession
which asserts the salvation of elect in
fants.' This clearly implies that there are
'non-elect infants who may be sent to per-
dition. Who breaches that doctrince, or
believes it? q. There is another clause
which declares that God for His own good
pleasure has foreordained some of His
creatures to eternal death What is still
worse, our Confession asserts that our
Heavenly Father passes by' these unhappy
souls whom he has created | would cut
my right hand off before | would preach
such doctrine before an audience of un-
converted sinners. (3) There is a most
lamentable lack in our Confession of any
clear and cordial declaration of Gods in
finite love in sending His Son into the
world to die for sinners, and that whose
ever believeth on Him shall be saved.
The Confession emphasizes what nobody
breaches, and is almost silent in regard to
the greatest truth that everybody breaches.
Brethren, these are not merely blemishes
on our venerable Confession-they are ter
rible and damaging faults. Thousands of
us loyal Presbyterians-who were trained
n a IF ,Io1l A l.
Charles Hodge and James Richards-have
lamented the existence of those offensive
clauses, but We were powerless to remove
them. Now our General Assembly sub
mlts to our whole Church the question,
Shall we retain those clauses, or shall we
revise them? If majority vote to retain
them, then our beloved Church will re-
affirm before this land and the world its
belief OF those offensive clauses And that
would drop bowlder across the track of
Presbyterianism, which would impede its
progress more than our noble Home Miss
lon Board can advance it. Those unhappy
clauses have done us immense damage in
the future. While these offensive articles
so wound the conscience of tens of thou
sands of us loyal and orthodox Presbyte-
rians, is it right, is it fraternal. that our
brethren should continue to force them
upon us? And is it honest to ask our can
didates for ordination to subscribe to what
ninety nine hundredths of them do not be-
lieve? We believe and hope that the
special changes named by Dr. Cuyler will
soon be made. Probably not one in a thou
sand of the members of that great denomi-
nation would stand up and publicly say,
We believe etc, in the unscriptural affir-
nation of the so-called doctrines specified
in the present creed. If not believed, it is
simply wicked to say so. Let the revision
be made-not to ignore Bible teachings,
but to conform to them"