St. Paul daily globe., 1890-10-10
Harsh Words From the Com
mittee Of Nine for the
Home Secretary.
He Made a Caustie Reply to-
Dr.. Walker and Then Wept
Copiously.
Action Taken Upon the One
Leading Question Of This
Years Session.

hard language. A politician or a congress
man would settle his opponent with few
ribcracklng statements in language more
vigorous than polite; the minister must use
houeyed words, hence he has to use more Of
them to convey his meaning. So it was in
the American board session yesterday. There
so smoothlyl However, one thing was ac-
complished-the matter which was expect
ed to create warm debate came up and was
settled. 1t was not probation after death.
That question was settled by the board long
ago. The real issue, which came up in the
guise Of doctrinal requirements was
fight on Home Secretary Alden,
who. many of the board think, is little too
severe upon the young and earnest candi-
dates for missionary work. The debate at
times approached savageness, but was amic-
ably closed
In the morning the report Of the commit
tee OF nine had been presented and In the
afternoon some resolutions appended to 1t,
not the report were taken up for passage.
which did not occur until three hours and
twenty minutes had been given over to de-
bate. The report Of the committee OF nine
was unanimous. Its most important feature
was the opinion OF the committee on the
method of appointing missionaries Refer
ring to this subject the report states that the
legitimate object of an inquiry by officers of
the board into the theological opinions of
applicants for missionary service is to ascer-
tain whether they are conformed essentially,
to the doctrines commonly received by the
churches. The report was accepted, not
adopted, and laid over tor further consider
alton. A part of it came up in the afternoon
Beginning of the Row.
While waiting for the report Of the COM
mittee of fifteen DR.. Taylor moved that the
resolutions appended to the report of the
committee of nine be taken up and passed
The first three resolutions relate solely to
minor matters of business. and were prompt
ly adopted, but the fourth, relating to creed
and to questions asked candidates for mis-
Slonary POSITIONS, embodied the question
which has been awaited with interest. mas
much as, in the discussion of that question.
the matter of probation after death and
change in method of examination would
come up. Well, 1t came up and 1t was de-
bated until after dark. The. resolution
which caused all the debate, reads thus:
That questions and ?, section o., of the
Manual for Missionary Candidates, be
amended so that they shall read as follows:
Question /. What are your views respect
ing each of the leading doctrines of Script
ure commonly held by the churches sustain
ing this board? III answering this question
you may use your own language or refer to
any creeds of acknowledged weight
Question q Have you any views at vari-
ance with these doctrines or any views OF
church government which would prevent
Your cordial cooperation with the mission
aries of this board?
These questions being so amended, all ap-
plications for missionary appointment shall
be made as now to the corresponding secre-
tarles of the board. Without further cores
pondence on doctrinal matters the communi-
cations thus received by the secretaries shall
be presented forthwith to the prudential
committee. In case the committee desire
further scrutiny into the theological opinions
of the candidate this shall be had through an
interview with the committee as body; or
III case this, in any special instance, is not
practicable with subcommittee appointed
by them from their own number and con-
sisting in part of laymen. At such theologi-
cal examination by the committee or sub
committee the doors shall be open for the
presence of any members OF the board or
personal friends of the candidate.
The debate started on the matter Of pro-
baton after death but soon drifted else
where, to the change of method.
DR.. Boardman, of the Chicago Theological
seminary. proposed an amendment making
the explanation of question 1 read: In
answering this question you may use your
own language or refer to any creeds of
acknowledged weight as to the doctrines con-
tained in such creeds.' Prof. Boardman
desired to make that matter more explicit,
because he thought some creeds defective in
not stating all that should be stated. DR..
George L. Walker, of Boston, spoke in favor
of the amendment, and was followed by the
only Joseph Cook, of Boston. Joseph is not
a member OF the corporate board but he had
right to speak, SO he mounted the platform.
Alternately gazing at the roof and studying
the patterns of the carpet, he denounced that
resolution. He didn't want to antagonize any
one, but he thought the Gospel, and not it's
counterfeits should be preached.
1T is the opinion of the board" said he,
that the doctrine of probation after death
should not be preached. If this resolution is
adopted, there will be no power left the home
secretary for preventing the admission
of candidates who believe in this
doctrine of prbation after death.
| 1t seems to me that we are taking down the
| barriers which we took so much pains to put
up at Des Moines at Springfield and at New
York.
DIR. Alden Attacked.
Dr. A II. Quint, of Boston, went after his
fellow Bostonian, Cook, and effectuaIly an
| swered him Cook. DR.. Quint didn't believe
| that these resolutions meant much; if any
| thing, they strengthened. and not weakened
| the manual and the position of the board on
| doctrinal questions member of the board
| here requested that DR.. Thompson, of Bos-
| ton, who has been member of the pru-
| dental committee for forty-o years be
| asked TO give some information on this
| troublesome question of prudential COM
mittee work. He read long communica
| ton on the complaints against the pru-
| dental committee and the home secretary
| with reference to the rejection of candidates
| His statement showed that the prudential
| committee believed itself to have been un-
| justly treated by the committee.
Rev. DR.. George Leon Walker, OF Boston,
chairman of the committee of nine, arose to
| take nand in this discussion. DR.. Walker
was out tor blood, and he had documents to
back up his arguments. He went over the
| doctrinal differences between the two wings
! of the board, then, coming down to the ques-
! ton before the board, declared that theolog-
lcal questions are not alluded to in these res
olutions. He asseverated that all the trouble
over the rejection of candidates arose from
the interminable correspondence between
the home secretary ard csndidates-to the
| interference of the home secretary, an en-
! ploye of the board. he read letters concern
| ing the rejection OF candidates in every way
satisfactory, because of the interference of
! the secretary He scored, not only the home
secretary, but the prudential committee; de-
clared that there had already been too much
turmoil over this question, ana asked that
| the resolutions as presented should be
adopted since any other action would evis-
| cerate the whole report and render void the
| entire work of the committee of nine.
DR.. Thompson thought that DR.. Walker had
| fatty contradicted some of his statements,
and accused the committee of nine of want
| of faith in net communicating to the pru-
! dental committee any charges against that
| body. There were no charges against the
| prudential committee, said DR.. Walker Dr.
| Thompson was satisfied Prof Boardman's s
| amendment. and Question No. j, as SO
amended, were adopted. More bitterness
| followed.