The Indianapolis journal., 1892-05-01
PRESBYTERIAN QUESTIONS
Problems Which the 104th General As.
sembly Will Have to Consider.
Revision and Church Unity Will Figure Prom
ineutly, but Dr. Briggs and His Views
Will Be the Chief Bone of Contention.

meeting of the Presby terian Church In the
United States of America will be held in
the First Church In this city. beginning
be opened with q sermon by the retiring
moderator. DR.. William Henry Green.
of Princeton Theological Seminary. In
the afternoon of that day. May 19.
o new moderator will be chosen and
the work of the assembly will begin.
Morning and afternoon sessions will be
held for ten days. the afternoons being re-
served for popular meetings in the inter
ests of the several boards of the church.
As Portland is on home missionary ground.
or was so short time ago. it IS intended to
make it. as far as possible q missionary as
sembly. although it will be impossible to
sink the two or three great questions that
are to come up this year.
Chief among them is the revision of the
Confession of Faith, and the
position OF DR.. Briggs and tho Union Theo-
logical Seminary in New York. There are
many who think that the report of the re-
vision committee. admirable though it
is. prepared though it has been by some of
the ablest scholars of the Presbyterian
Church, including DR.. Green aud President
Patton. of Princeton; DR.. Herrick johnson
%stsSs% s Rdds R Norris of sS6sny htns D
Dr. Willis ]. Beecher: of Auburn;
Francisco; DR.. w. G. Roberts. of Lake
Forest. University; DR.. w. E. Moore. of
DR.. Niccolls. of St Louis, and Dr. Van
Dyke. of Brooklyn. and several of the
most prominent laymen in the eldership of
the church. will not satisfy the great body
OF Presby terianism. The result Is too rad
ical for the conservatives, and too con-
greater number of the ministers and elders
are in one of these two classes. IL is diff
yised .i creed which will satisfy
is vigorous movement on foot for new
creed. which shall be short. practical and
scriptural. emphasizing the love of God
rather than His justice. A greater number
of presbyterlcs now unite in demanding
the new creed than agreed 10 ask for re-
as it was impossible for the Westminster
divines, nearly three hundred years ago, to
revise the Thirty nine Articles. SO IL is
thought that the present undertaking will
fail and another committee will be ap.
pointed to begin the new work.
There is q committee now which is dis
cussing new creed. but not one to take
the place of the Westminster Confession.
but a consensus creed which shall be used
by oil the reformed churches throughout
the world holding the Presbyserian sys-
tenn. This committee was appointed in
Saratoga in 1890. and last year it reported
that 1t had been engaged during the year
in the preparation of O draft of q consensus
creed to be submitted as mere suggestion
or basis for the exchange of opinion. In
70 fn6 afn nj
the reformed churches. request was made
that each one would ut its next meeting ap-
point q committee to enter into corre-
spOndence with the committee sending the
letter. with o view to the consideration and
preparation "of short creed. containing
the essential articles of the Westminster
Confession. to be used as common creed
of these churches. not as a substitute for
the creed of any denomination. but to sup
plement it In the common work Of the
DR.. Moore. the permanent clerk
of the assembly. is chairman of the con-
sensus creed committee. and DR.. w. IL.
Roberts, the stated clerk, is it's secretary.
Several meetings have been held during
the year since the last assembly adjourned.
and q report is expected at the coming
A spirited debate occurred at Detroit
when the committee on church unity made
its report, and the subject is likely to come
up next spring. but in new form. The
assembly last year. by rising vote-yeas.
240: nays, 1s6-decIded to discharge it's COM
mittee from further consideration of inter-
oomity and church unity.
a1d to change it's name to tho committee
on the federation OF the Protestant deDom-
nations of tho United States.
THE UNION SEMINARY CASE.
Among the committees appointed by the
Detroit assembly mono is of greater impor-
tance than the one named to consider the
of Union Seminary to the assem-
bly,. Its appointment was called for in the
report of DR.. PattOn's committee. which
the veto of DE-. Briggs. re-
Gently transferred to q new chair especially
for HIM at Union. The conference
committee was made up as follows: DR.. +.
III. Worcester. jr., OF Chicago, who resigned
when be became a professor in
Union Seminary, succeeding DR.. Shedd;
DR.. w. h. Moore. permanent clerk OF the
assembly. who voted for Dr.. Worcesters
recommending the appointment
of q committee of conference bntobjecting
to the veto of DR.. BrIggs's appointment.
and later voted for Dr. PattOn's
resolution; DR.. w. II. Roberts. stated
OF fhe ohio SYNOD snd es OF na1e
Seminary. who voted In his presbytcry for
the overture against DR.. Briggs when it
was sent 20 the assembly; DR.. s. j. Niccolls,
of st. Louis, the pastor of Judge Breckin-
ridge. who fell dead on the assembly plat
form as he closed a speech favoring the
veto OF the Union professor: DIR. Herrick
johnson. professor of Mccormick Semi
nary. In Chicago, O member OF the re-
vision committee and conservative man.
though an advocate of DR.: Briggs in the
tosh, of Philadelphia: Dr.. George Alex
ander. of New York. who made the motion
in the New York Presbytery that the
heresy trial Of DR.. Briggs should be
stopped; elders George Junkin. of Philadel-
phia' conservative OF the conservatives; I,I
DR.. John Halls church IN New York
and o member of the Briggs prOsecu-
ting committee: DR.. Russell Mnrdock, of
Baltimore; George Ii. Ely, 5. j. Broadwell.
r. P.Durant and u. w. ketcham. The con-
ference committee met twice dur l9g the
winter. The first time the direc ctorH recog-
niZed as binding the agreement OF 1870. by
which Union, Lane and Aubnrn came un-
der assembly control. and under which the
appointments of DR.. Briggs was vetoed.
The question then turned upon the con-
struction of the agreement. the seminary
claiming that tranferring professor from
one department to another was not COW
cred by the agreement. and that
the vosc OF disapproval of Dr..
Rsssss transfer illegal S tie the
proposed that the directors. by resolution,
accept tho veto under protest. il necessary.
and then proceed TO elect professor In
place of DR.. Briggs. thereby throwing the
question of the Interpretation of the agree
ment of 1870 before the next assembly.
The question was raised informally, If,
after such resolution. 1t would be illegal
OF discourteous to re-elect professor W no
had been vetoed once by the assembly.
This question and Others were discussed
~tnc hntA f,