The herald., 1896-06-17
The prssbyteri.n Church Lit,p.t,o,

1NAsNA AASA aAas ~ 10 a ctttiSA0VtAoAA
that Presbyterian controversies, like
our civil controversies. have an end. The
losing contestants may not like the re-
suit, SO contrary to their views and ex-
pectattons. but recognize the necessity
Of law. and its final arbiter.
Presbyterians especially bow with
loyal. and loving and reverent respect
to the decisions of their venerable and
highest court, the general assembly.
What has this high and venerable
court determined and settled in regard
to the dispute between the old First
Presbyterian church and PresbyteryP
l. That the division Of the old First
church into two separate churches was
legal and proper. and binding upon all
the members and officers and pastors of
the two new churches so organized, and
that these two churches thus constitu-
ted out of the membership of the old
First church exist in the place ana
stead of that church, which no longer
has distinct and separate being by
tself, but Is swallowed up in the two new
churches, of which 1t forms the compo-
nent parts.
2. That Presbytery had the right to
name one church the Westminster
Presbyterian church and the other the
Central Presbyterian church, and
neither can have any other name until
Presbytery authorizes the change. The
so long as each is respectively IN the
Presbyterian system, until the change
Is made, which can and will be done on
application at any time after settlement
Of the property question.
3. That the pastor and session desig-
mated by Presbytery as the pastor ana
session of the Westminster PreSbyter-
ian church, were lawfully so designated.
All these points were stoutly ana
forcibly and most earnestly contested
before the Presbytery by the opponents
Of the change. They were honestly ana
sincerely convinced, and with pro-
found conviction, that Presbytery We're
in gross error, and they appealed 10 that
body with fervid and pathetic elo-
Quence against it. But their appeal and
action throughout was as loyal Presoy-
terians, and even when things We're at
fever heat and the discussion red not,
the answer Of pastor and session 10 the
question, DO you recognize the autnor-
ity Of Presbytery under the constitution
and rules of the Presbyterian chulch!
was, to a man, Yes" and OF one EN-
phatically yes,' and doubtless that was
the sentiment of every one OF those
Christian gentlemen; their bearing ana
declarations during the Whole conIfo-
versy were responsive TO tnal seAl1-
ment. and to their empnauc answer
above must be referred the many Quer-
ture course. The great bouy ot thelr
church, represented by their general as
sembly, has spoken and ltS voice VIA We
listened to with profound respect.
But the property OF the old FIRST
church. What becomes Oh tnas! Ooes
it follow the division? II was lAe sAI
OF a benevolent lazy to the cnurch Aor
Presbyterian use. Or course IL eanAos
be honoraply diverted 1roin tha1 use'
Let us look INTO the environment.
l, The FIRST Presbyterian enufen was
a religious BODY, crealeu " etai 60
by PreSpytery, Whlcn mas Id" "a
ken away its cnarter and chartered Two
other churches in its place anu sleao, 81
that now TWO churches exist "Aeie o4iiS
one was before, ana the oiu oAie A1'S
gone out of being. This was the Aeces-
sary result OF the distant removal oA lie
church home from It's old locallty, anu q
beneficial one as an additional vigorous
churcn replaces the one leAio'eo' CIV
the old church home and ltS sacieo ao
SoclationS are retained 1of 4ls AoNAAAs
members. oaI,ad
2. There was also another pooy, calAea
The First Presbyterian cnuIch,
boov corporate, created by the state
and amenable to 1t. separate anu us
tinct from the religious uooy, ailo i11aa
aged by entirely QlIereHt luiSs Gu
principles. The former was ieAslous'
spiritual in its nature, cAiu %
bytery; the latter was Oh d CIV va I'D III {.
the child of the state, whose sole opJect
Was to hold and manage the property OIL
the church. This body corporate anu us
corporate members We're trustees LOT
the religious body and It's meinpeIs.
They held the church property IN trust
for the church members ana the couit %
will hold them strictly 10 that lrusi.
None of the church members can De ue-
prived by them OF tnelf 1aleie9' al 'i'0
trust property. >,
This corporate body has not been di-
yided by Presbytery 1t remains intact,
lust as it was before the DIVISION OIL
the religious body called the FIRST Pres-
byterian church. Presbytery mace no
attempt to divide it, and could not divide
it, if it would-all agree to TINS Inc
original trust still remains in the pody
corporate and its trustees.
& For whom does this original trust
exist? Evidently for the 79l members OF
the old First church before the DIVISION.
and now for the same. composing the
members of the two new churches Great
ed out of the old one that is to say, for
the 1863 members of the Central Presby-
terian church. and the Az members or
the Westminster Presbyterian church.
The division into two churches MADE no
change in the trust, or It's benehclarles.
1t merely placed them in two separate
by two names in place of one.
How is 1t possible, then, for one or
these bodies-either the 1863 members OF
the Central Presbyterian church or the
422 members of the Westminster Pres
byterian church to claim the whole prop
erty, in which all the 791 members are
equal beneficiaries?
AS well might one of two partners, on
the partnership being divided into two
firms, claim the whole partnership prop
erty belonging equally to- both.
The name-WeStminSter preSbyter-
ian church-given to the 422 members OF
the old First church, was intended to be
temporary, and to last only until the
settlement of the property question. 1t
was the duty of Presbytery to be i'm
partial as between the two bodies, and
it would not have been So II 1t gave to
either the prestige and vantage ground
of the old name, which was also the
name Of the body corporate. 1t would
misead and breed confusion. 1t has
already done so in the minds of many.
Clearly both should be on an equal foot
ing, and that was the object and duty
of Presbytery.
The way is now open for an honorable
Christian settlement of this unhappy dis
pute. The principles of settlement are
established by competent authority; but
in making It, the fact should be well
considered that the cost of church lot
to the Central Presbyterian church will
be some three times the cost of the
church lot 10 the other church, say SOL
900 instead Of $1,000. Both parties should
now see eve to eve and agree. What are