The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1890-04-10
sends this to uu for IN opinion because
II WNnls ono.

l
Presbyterian Church Is not cupnble
expressing Its doctrine in langua
=. which is not ambiguous?
=. AnvlSa HOOK CONTAINING LIVING rnrrI
:. ut is an ancient document, but to II
1t ls living book containing liyi,
truths, for ! have said before God an
man that l believe the standards o
pressed IN TINT book. | mn charr,
with stating more clearly aud moi
explicitly the contents Of that book.
must rs 4 matter OF conscience mnk
that book expressive as 10 the prcser
iaith OF the church, not only in realit
bnt in form. for the form only is open (
criticism. 1t is the pressing duty I
give expression 10 our beliefs in sue
language as will not be misiakable h
any one. y
"lt Is said, ii permission is given l.
touch the book Mt NIL radical change
will be made Is that so? las In
rresbyteran church ever done such
thing? The Presbyterian church ha
always been, as Il body, conservative
hard to move, and once started har,
to gct it to 20 on to sufficient action.
have never feared that, because | knew
the tendency OF tho church has ulways
been very conservative.
ANOTHER CONTROVERSY RECALLED,
Remember the controversy over the
Rotary clderships; there were the sam,
alarms then, and some church leaders
invoked the aid Of Heaven to hinder it
but 1T carried aud the church is still
strong. Before an election the country j.
always going TO the dogs!f the other side
wins. So it is in all great debates. How
can we have fear that this will open q
great door to let in unlimited change
when 1t is stated in the report that the
system OF doctrines must be kept invio.
late: We only propose to take up those
sections which We have known to be
criticised and misunderstood and re.
write them so that no candid man can
say he misunderstands.
"Who has not been troubled with the
matter OF elect Infants? Who can under.
stand it? What do we say when preach.
ing funeral sermons overinfants and in
answer to questions in regard to the
matter? We simply say what the report
suggests be made part OF the Confession,
from the lnmost core OF my soul | want
this infant part changed. | want it
changed i'll my Confession OF Faith, 1t
alone Is worth the whole controversy,
We want that taken out so as to avoid
unnecessary trouble.
ut is said on all sides, III YOU give
them an inch they will take an ell,'
This is Il dangerous proposition. Ii ivou
touch the ark Of God do you destroy it
Was it ever SO? l am not talking to. or
OF, extremists. for they have no follow
ing in our church. The rank and file
OF the ministers and elders have never
been mlsied by them. The people in
the Presbyterian church are all conser-
vative."
DIR. ". F. HAMiLToS's VIEWS.
Dr. William F. Hamilton, OF Washing
ton, opposed revision. He said: GAS a
general thing have very little sympa-
thy with those who are in opposition.
! think that the best way for man to
Kill his Influence is for him to be
ultra.conservative. While it may be
a bad thing to cling to old things Just
because they are old, and to be old fogies
Just simply to be such, it is not always
best to change things. The former is
only negative evil while the other may
be a poaitive evil and may prove the ira
dltional bull in the china shop.
"IhIsls unprecedented, because itisal-
ways customary ioran overture to contain
some definite statement. The Supreme
Court will not allow the Legislature to
send back to the people for action any
thing which devolves upon the Legisla-
ture. The General Assembly has sent
back to the Presbyteries such matter
for an opinion.
This matter has been brought about at
an inopportune time, and has had bad
effects. The past six months have been
regular jubilee period to all the sore
heads, radicals and cranks in and out OF
the Church. And the daily papers, those
devout theologlans OF the daily press,
have had a great time ovcrit. Our good
book has been made n football and has
been kicked and cu.Ied, and our great
old Presbyterian flag has been dragcled
in the dust. "
Are we to expect that all idiots,
imbeciles, lunatics, etc, who NAV
have brought their maladies upon them.
selves by their secret or open sins will
go straight to heaven? That's not the
kind OF heaven I've been expecting to
go to. Are we jeopartlizing the uneVan-
gelized heather by preaching the gospel
to him, when il he has it not he is re.
generated and saved?
Presbyterian Church putting on kid
gloves when they handle Catholics.
They don't do it with us. They burned
our missionary and his church and in
Mexico, and in New York and other
places have reviled us. You vote for
revision and you are voting for you
know not what. 1.-THE General Assem-.
bly, had q charge ready to present We
could tell how 10 vote.
OTHER MEMBERS VIEWS.
Rev. Robert 4. Mcconnell, O
Waynesburg, made an impassioned ap.
peal III laNor VI revision ana explained
that be had been defending the Comics.
sion OF Faith forty years, and explaiuin,
it to the unlettered.
Elder John Aiken, OF Washington
made a forcible address in favor of tht
revision. He made some yer,
homcly illustrations, and his address
while concise and to the point, carried
great weight with it.
DR.. W. Fl. Lester OF Yves. Alexander
a member OF the committee appointe,
by the presbytery, and who votet
against revision, madc'a very quiet ant
careful address, in which he ackuowl
edged that he had for long time been il
favor OF few slight changes in the Ian
guage OF the Confession Of Faith, with
out allowing it to undergo a complet
and total revision, but that hc now be
lieved that it wound bo cxtremcl
dangerous to submit the matter to
committee OF no one knows who, 10
revision.
REV. DIR. MorfAT's views.
Rev. DR.. Moirat, OF Washington. eiIer
SOn COllpun mnda a ctro,u or,,napt :,