The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1890-03-05
~IHEQL0GICAL RELIG
(Continued from First PaQel

another document that shall explain the
first. This will result III confusion worse
COMPOUNDED.
MIR. Hathaway further declared thai
the report was ~palpably contradictory il
its statements. he quoted from ths
preamble of the report and compared the
stntement-s'your committee have beer
led TO the conviction that the interests OF
religion and Of our own church will be
advanced if the General Assembly will
prepare and issue an authoritative defin-
ition of the system of doctrine taught In
the Holy Scriptures as contained in the
Confession of Faith and an acceptance of
which is required by the terms OF sub
scription,' such definition expressed in
simple, popular language will meet the
requirements of subscription with au in
telliglble demand"-with the statement
further on-'granting that the confession
may be amended in points which do not
effect the system of doctrine, we can see
no actual necessity tor such amendment,
81 fan as subscription is concerned, mas
much as the terms of subscription bind
no mans conscience beyond the system
Of doctrine
4 FATAL ADMISSION.
The moment you admit the necessity
of a definition" continued Mr.. Hath
away, the necessity of sending an inter
prefer along with the confession to ex-
plain to the conscience of the world its
ambiguity of language, you do confess it
speaks with an unknown tongue, and
with a tongue not understood by the
faith of the church, and thus put a sword
into the hands of our enemies and those
of u Lord to be turned against the
Kingdom of God. BY such admission on
the part of the committee the whole case
of the non-reyisionists is given away"
"Pray." said Mr.. Hathaway in conclu-
sion, what is this document, framed by
uninspired men over two hundred and
fifty years ago III were as weak and
sinful INT ignorant as we are, that it
should be SO sacred In our eyes?
"As to the definition people would
point out the difference which must
necessarily exist between it and the old
Confession, and ask which is the Confess
sion of the great Presbyterian Church.
They could ~rightfully charge us with a
lack of courage Of our own conviction If
We refuse to revise the old, and by refus-
ing would thus open the door to heresies
and block the wheels of discipline.
"Let us reserve our Confession that it
may beautifully exhibit the historical
attitude of our church as it is today, and
not force it to exhibit a falsehood in pre-
tence of being what it wholly is not"
DIR. IMBRIE TO H DEFENCE.
DR.. Imbrie. on behalf of the committee,
make an able defence of the report. He
called MIR. H~athaway's attention to the
fact that it Was one thing to frame q new
doctrine, and an immensely different
thing to set aside what scholars had
chung to for twenty-five years so
that everybody would be pleased.
He expressed the fear hat shonld the
proposed changes which appear directly
opposed to the system of doctrine come
int vogue it might affect a great many
churches in the matter of endowments
should certain cases be carried into the
courts.
The Rev. Mr.. Haskell said the book
was framed in the controversial age and
had accomplished its work and he wanted
to know if it was proposed to have a new
doctrine into the face of the Christian
Church to exhaust its energies.
The Rev. Dr. McKelvey made one of
the biggest efforts possibly in his life in
favor of revision. He appeared Upon the
scene with a Confession OF Faith. Moore's
Digest and a magazine article.
REPRESENTATION.
The doctor unhesitatingly declared that
the report. Of the committee hardly
touched upon the issues at stake. The
system of doctrine, he said, had not been
complained Of. The Confession of Faith
contained q great many things which
were not founded directly Upon the Scrip
lures, and it was these things he COM
planned of. We have ~remodelled our
form of government, he SAID, but we have
not departed from @Presbyterianism.
There is no violation of faith in the pro-
posed revision. Those things in the Con-
fession which werenot taught directly in
the Scriptures were but ~scriptural
deductions and should be modified or re-
moved. The doctrine OF predestination,
he declared, vas not Enthusiastically plain
in the Scriptures and stood in direct OPP
position to other clear cut doctrines.
That God, who so loved the World that
he gave His only begotten Son" that
non might perish, should r~eprobate be-
ings before they tDere born did not har-
monte with the general tenor of the
Bible. Jesus said "Come unto Me all we
that are heavy laden. Whosoeuer will"
etc. He was not willing that any should
perish.
WHO FoRsooTH?
"Here are plain truths" said the doc
tor, THAT are at variance with some myS-
terious things taught in the Confession.
These mysterious things should be inter
preted by the plain ones. Some of these
deductions are unwarranted n illogi-
cal. They have been tackled on TO the
| Confession of Faith, Who can under
stand the divine works of eternity up
there? We do not understand the chemi-
cal forces of the elements. How can we
understand the workings of the divine
mind, n heart, and will? In the divine
| labratory of nature we nave the oil of
lemon, the spirit of turpentine and the
oil of juniper, OF the same substances in
the same proportion. the venom of the
rattlesnake and the white Of an egg.
w no GILL QuueISuduu JIG uiNluD kuQWl-
edge in the decree of election, predestina-
tion, REORGANIZATION? Who can iathom
the depth of HIS love for the lost? Put
these together in the divine laboratory of
grace, and who will define the resulJs?
II admit, from the human standpoint
the logic of the supra-lipsarianism of
these parts of our confession, but l believe
them to be contrary to the spirit of the
revelation which God has given us Of
Himself and of his ways, and that we
should be silent here. God has not spoken
upon these mysteries.
1.-THE word of God does not contain such
a phrase as Select infants" It's human.
The phrase should be stricken out"
The doctor also fired into the church's
attitude on the subject of divorce. The
attitude was utterly unscriptural.
Rev. Mr.. Herr moved that all remarks
be limited to fifteen minutes.
DIR. Clark thought all should have full
swing. Rev. Mr.. Mitchell seconded Mr..
Heirs motion.
The motion was defeated, but another
allowing each member five minutes to
explain his attitude on the final vote pre-
vailed.
The Stated Clerk, Dir. E. A. Buckley, OF
Rutherford, spoke in favor of revision
| and the adoption of the substitute which
| Mr.. Hathaway had offered. He did not
think it would do to shelve the comics
sion as a theological relic. Still it con
tanned statements and phraseology which
many of the ministers did not preach.
| He advocated amondmantS nv pTnieSi0n