The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1898-01-22
Is There a Presbyterian Church 2

The enthusiastic reception of the Rev. DIR.
SHIELDS at the Princeton alumni dinner
on Thursday evening was very significant.
DIR. SHIELDS IL the professor of that uni.
versity who signed the application for n
license Of the taproom OF tho Princeton
Inn, in contTaveption of n rule made by the
General Assembly prohibiting Presbyterian
ministers from assisting in the procure
ment of any liquor license. Because of
that rebellion against the highest authority
OF his Church he was arralgned for trial
by the New Brunswick Presbytery Of New
Jersey, aud only escaped from consequent
discipline by announcing formally his with
drawal from the Church.
1t was for that reason that DR.. SHIELDS
was made tho hero Of the dinner Of the
Princeton alumni, provoking so great and
so frequent applause as to lead the presid-
ing officer to suggest humorously that 1t
might be necessary to discipline him for
interrupting the proceedings. Incidentally
their applause was intended, probably, as
an expression of approval Of the provision
Of a semi-oficial taproom for the Princeton
Juniors and seniors; but that Is not a mat
ter which concerns us now. The significant
manifestation was the boisterous glori-
fication Of a Presbyterian minister for
withdrawing from his Church not on any
ground Of religious doctrine or principle,
but simply because he was determined TO
assert his personal liberty against the
authority of the General Assembly.
Princeton University, 1t Ia true, contains
among its alumni very many men who arc
not Presbyterians, but who follow other
systems of theology than the Westminster
Confession or have no religious belief at all.
The Rev. DR.. SHIELDS, however, was a
Presbyterian and a Presbyterian minister.
aud why? Was he In that Church simply
as a matter Of taste and ~perfunctorily, or
because he believed in its doctrine, that is,
as a matter of oonviction3 What reason is
there for the existence Of y Church. tho
Presbyterian or any other, &c It does not
present n distinctive body Of doctrine ap-
pealing to the convictions Of Its members2
II a minister can belong to it as a matter of
convenience or of ohanc merely, and can
leave it consistently at any time and pass
over to some other Church, rs his tickle
fancy may incline him, can it lave any
distinctive faith justifying its separate ex-
istencef
In other words, If DR.. SHIELDS deserved
the applause Of the alumni of Princeton at
their dinner on Thursday evening, has not
the time come when the Presbyterian
Church should disband and go out of ex-
~istence, as representing nothing which is
binding on any conscienceY If the rules of
conduct laid down by it's highest repre-
sentative authority conflict with a mans
inclinations, and he Is at liberty to leave it
for that reason simply, how can any relig-
ious authority remain to It'll
DIR. SHIELDS did not throw up the Pres
byterian Church because of any declared OBJ
lection to its doctrine or ecclesiastical
system. but simply to be free to sign
applications for liquor licenses when
ever IL pleased him so to do. On tho
same general ground any Presbyterian who
find his personal inclinations or appetites
restricted by the discipline of his Church is
justified In quitting it, nothing in its spe.
cial creed, theology, or order putting any
conscientious obligation on him. That
being SO, and the course of DIR. SHIELDS in
dicates that in his opinion 1t is so, what is
the excuse for maintaining longer the
merely nominal existence of the Presbyte-
rian Church? If it Is not the custodian of
auy body of faith and doctrine peculiar to
1t, 1t Is not a Church. and the labor of cen.
turtles expended in building it up as a dis.
tinct religious organization has been
wasted.