The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1900-05-20

I and in!rinitieS n man. j +. NJ.
| NV NOHK, May II.
The Revision OF the wcstmins ter Confession.
TorHEEpITOR or 1HESrN-Sir. The lresby-
terrain NciC York Obstrr'r Of MAY Il prints a
paper on the question Are Articles of Peace
Worth KeepiAr?" and it is a paper 10 make
some strong breathrrS gasp. Its a defence of
the Presbyterian creed not u specific defence
of this or thai doctrine, but rather of the entire
body of doctrine IL contains or implies II is a
desperate cry to stand away and touch not,
because to touch viii mean war.
Since when was the church afraid Of war?
r. III" clergy may fight, why may not the laity?
! Ard are the clergy To have it a their own way
forever, and say what shall and what shall not
be the basis OF belief; l. the Church an ariS-
tocracy? one might iudg" from this article
that the accepted tci"ricaD opinion is that it
/ ought TO he, for We ar" here told that changes
now forced into the Confession, or a new creed
framed aire-h, will represent AZ best a majority
of the Church; will need 10 be tyrannically
forced hy the mere majority upon an unwilling
minority" Think of that, Mr.. Editor think
what horror such n stat" of things must cause
to n ieoplr brought ny under democratic ideas,
| Think too though this is aside from the ar
, gumem at present what kind Of people COM
! pose that "mer" majority"
Are there not signs hopeful ones too that
| the Democratic principle i. making Roadway in
/ the Church as it has already long since done in
! the secular Natter OF the world? The world
! has gone forward u hi in general Intelligence
! since the days when crecds were formed.
In the Obserrsr article some curious state
meuts and arguments are offered to snbstan-
! "a, -, IL, ,,-.t,,. ..,,Aal "a, ,l,, ..,lt..
but calamity 90 the Church, could follow a
change in the creed Why a rev creed, when
n We are asked the Presbyterian Church
! already has a creed which is cor ought 10 be-
acceptable to the whole body of its Office
bearer-, without a single exception" | know
one exception nj least, aud if there is one there
are likely enough others
In my own church a man. a friend of mine.
on examination for the plderShip told the ex-
aiming board plainly that he did not feel him
self iii for the place since he could not accept
! the Confession, The pastor n Princetonian,
by the way took him aside and showed him
how to take it, somewhat. ! should Judge,
n, King William ". used 10 show his table
guests how to eat asparagus down to the bitter
ends of them. Whercupon the doubling candi-
date, who wished TO be honest. opened his
mouth and swallowed the "~nxed-lp" theo-
logical dish. plate and all, and * at the present
writing Il respected and. doubtless, self respect
ing officer.
In all seriousness. Mr. Editor, il this sort Of
thing right? l. it fair? Is 1t honest? IL il
necessary? Is Tint Church well rounded which
rests upon a hNcd-up acceptance of its stand
ards? And even granting that every Presby-
terrain minister and elder accepts these stand
ards heartily, is this really a reason for forcing
them upon the Church al large2
1t viii be answered that they are not so
forced; that one may join the Church without
subscribing TO them But what should We think
of a government in which the rulers we're re-
CURED TO subscribe to principles not binding
upon the people? suppose the Governors of
our States had to swear TO an approval Of the
theory of torture in capital punishment. though
the custom and sentiment OF the land should be
fiat against torture in practice. Should we not
call II absurd? Why keep an instrument" like
the Confession of Faith when nobody but the
clergy and the church officers are obliged to
subscribe 10 IL? They are human souls like the
rest of us; If they must take this dose, why not
WEI II we do not need il. why should they? |
have asked this question many, many times.
II has never. to my knowledge. been answered.
Another argument put forward in favor of
retaining the Confession untouched Is th1t the
presently existing doCtrinal standards .
are our fundamental pledge of peace" Does
this me1n that the only way for the Church to
nav" peace Is never. never to change anything,
but always. always 10 20 on in the same anti
quated rutsE Besides. there IL some question
begging here that can hardly pass unchal-
lenged Who ever said that the Lords cause
prospered best in times of peace? Who was il
that promised. nay threatened. 70 send not
peace. but a sword into the world as conse-
Guent upon the spread Of truth? And.
strangely, but wonderfully. truth has always
emerged brightest from under the darkest
clouds Of persecution and dispute. II is the
s%ceptical. not the credulous age that brings
most knowledge TO mankind and this is the
merest truisn
The renal ming arguments Of the Observer
article appeGp for the most part to procaed
upon the general assumption that. right or
wrong. the Presbyterian Church Is commi,,ed
10 a certain fbrm of doctrine, and come wha,
will, this form of doctrine must no, co M
course, IL is not acknowledged that the Church
may be wrong- oh. no! although the admission
has been ma'ie-as referred to above thu,
there may possibly be a majority who hold this
view and who VIII insist that the Church strive TO
right iiseu me worst Tear expressed IL Of m
alteratohlh the 'huroh II the creed is altered.
or n destruction Of it. II the creed is DESTROYED
In reply 10 this there would seem TO be univ
two thinI's TO say; If the creed is not right mr.
let US say, If a majority OF the intelligent RELIC,
ious persons in the Presbyterian Church 10
day believe that it ia not true expression ~
doctrine, what matter what hapnens 70 |
Presbyterian ism so that the higher. more ad-
vanced faith of the Church is established, 7,
on the other hand, 1t is right, il it does truly or,
press the pure doctrine that Chris, taught t.nd
what have we to do with any otherO. wbv tban
there's nothing for the Church to do e,cen,
ence more to ,bucklsOn Its srmor. fall to. and