The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1901-05-25

have misunderstood Dr. Johnsons words.
h, had received that Impression:
MS fo q M sSsnss s. McSd Tc
4 more even balance Of truth. "Thc con
fession. he. said, rs tnan-made consti-
tuition hit Is not the word Of God. And
we are not discussing the WORT of God.
y this question Is voted down Nv this us
scmhy IL viii come To the front again
rntu we give the church what Il demands.
truths.
First, the sovereignty Of God, ami above
al Ms election Of mon. aud, SECONDLY, thu
fNcuom CT man To choose. believe that
God has elected all Infants 10 salvation y
Dr, John De Witt OF Princeton univ6r.
SHY WAS next rccognHed BY the modeI-
ator There was a disposition by some
Of the commissioners to close the debate
As Mr.. De Witt took the platform there
we're cries of Question"
rhe Princeton professor pail a trihpte -
the high character of the deonte whct
has thus far hecn entirely G'en from acr,4
lnonN and sarcasm, Tie said there was no
danger. Of division IN the church and he
wanted II to gc out to the worid that M
matter how they max lffer on the West.
iGlnstcr confession, they stand united ON
The word OF God. lie spoke of the con,
sistency of the beliefs of the church. which
has stuck closer To the doctrines OF the
REFORMATION than any other church.
Unity he said, .is the fundamental
principle OF the church which stands like
2 nyramid pointing to the sky without n
nssure. without crack I"
Or. Ne Witt said he belonged 70 what a.
known as the fourth preshyterv. The first
nreSbNtcrr he said. emphasizes a rev sum.
mary of confessions the second emphasizes
amendments To- certain specific associations:
The third wants declaratory or evplann-
tory statements tho fourth emphasizes "our
noble deciaratnIy statement which is now
IN our possession. and which VIII solve the
entire question"
and unity Of action, pr De witt said,
wert never held In better balance than
~ Present In the new school. This was
done by throwing emphasis on the present
| tr0uelons terms OF subscription Dr he
Witt said he was not an ohstructionist
LIS proposition was that the assembly
I noble and liberal terms of subscription.
The speaker In referring 10 the proposed
credal statement said that he supposed
US what We ought to do In further in.
strnctlon from the church This he re-.
rArdeG rs the most monstrous proposition
eNtr propounded to Il reformed church
President j. n, Moffatt of Washington
and Jefferson university said he belonged
| he was opposed to Diminishing The entire
| matter while Or. De Witt was In favor OF
such action. He did not know whether
hr~-was a revislonlst or not, because there
! was no specific proposition before the as
scmhly. He advocated the acceptance Of
accommodation aud until the com
| that recommendation, he did not know
/ where he stood. The recommrndntlo he
| said asks that another committee be ap'
| pointed and that 1t be instructed 70 prepare
| a brief summary of the reformed falth. II
! would not he fair, he said, to the $50 pres
/ hyteries who had asked for some relief II
1 the subject was dismissed nv the assembly,
~ the conclusion nr Dlnsmorc OF san
! Jose, Cal. moved that vote on nr
bakcr's motion to dismiss ne whole matter
/ be taken, The motion was carried by Il
Dr Bakers motion to dismiss thG, Who'll
| iOnvnpI morning