The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-05-25
Yesterdays Debate Spirited at Times,
but Unmarked by Bitterness or
Display Of HI Temper.
ADDRESS BY DR.. w. H. ROBERTS
STATED CLERK IN FAVOR OF A DE-
CLARAToRY STATEMENT.
Position of Rev. DIR. Dicl<ey-Action OF
Southern Presbyterians ON the
Elect Infants" Clause.

| PHILADELPHIA, May 24.-The Presby-
| terian General Assembly by a vote which
showed conclusively that revision of the
| Confession of Faith is desired by the
| church. to-day defeated the amendment
dismissing the whole subject offered yes
| terday by DR.. George ID. Baker, OF Phtla-
| delphia. The assembly decided by an over
| whelming majority TO continue considera-
| ton of the great question after two days
| of debate, during which leading exponents
| of the presbyterian doctrine throughout the
| country thoroughly analyzed the creed and
gave their reasons for their positions re-
| garding the subject. At the opening OF the
| afternoon session the Assembly decided TO
| vote on the amendment at 4:30 o'clock and
| speeches were limited TO ten minutes. The
| time, however, was extended in order TO
| give a number OF commissioners who
| wished to be heard an opportunity OF
| speaking.
The principal addresses OF the day were
made by Rev. DR.. John DE Witt, In the
morning. and Rev DR.. Charles A. Dickey,
who closed the debate. DR.. De Witt favor
| ed dismissal. declaring that though there
| might be slight divergence OF opinion on
the Confession. the church was united on
the word of God. DR.. Dickey took a de-
cided stand against dismissal. He said as
the question of revision was not before the
Assembly no evil could result from a fur
| ther consideration of the committees re-
| port. DIR. w. ii. Roberts made a plea for
declarative statement asserting the su-
premacy of Holy Scripture the only
| source of doctrine; that the system OF the
| Confession is the same as Holy Scripture
teaches, and that infants are saved by
Gods electing grace. The discussion at
times was lively, but without bitterness.
JUDGE HUMPHREYS VIEWS.
When the discussion was resumed this
morning Rev. DR.. David S. Kennedy, OF
Allegheny, Pa, yielded the floor to Judge Z.
W. c. Humphrey. OF Louisville. who signed
| the minority report with DIR. McKibben.
| Judge Humphrey urged the elimination
| from the committees report Of the clause
| recommending brief summary Of the re-
formed faith bearing the same relation to
| the Confession which the shorter catechism
| bears to the larger catechism and formed
on the general model OF the consensus
| creed. He declared IL meant practically a
new creed and should not be concurred in
| as the presbyteries do not desire a new
| Confession.
DR.. Kennedy followed with a forceful
argument against revision. The way TO
break down the Confession finally, he said.
| is TO go on making holes in 1t. I'VE stand
united on the Confession" continued DIR.
Kennedy. 1T Is constructed from begin
| ming to end 10 be used for scientific pur-
poses. Ii is the constitution OF our church
| organization We are not considering a
| popular creed, but the fundamental prin-
| ciple of our organization. The Confession
| has been charged with failing to truthfully
present the belief Of the church. No one
| forced US TO sign that Confession. We did
Ignorance i
| one of US signed IL dishonesty. repudiate
| the statement that the Confession does not
| set forth the man side and personality OF
| the holy spirit
This brought Rev. DR.. Herrick Johnson
| to his feet Il beg your pardon" he said.
| but il you refer to me. / did not say
| that"
Or. Kennedy replied that while he might
! have misunderstood DR.. Johnsons words
| he had received that impression. In con-
| clusion Dr. Kennedy said: 'Our plea is that
now is not the time for changes while the
| constitutions making age. After a fair, de-
| liberate and free discussion we find our
| selves all divided up. Let US walt until God.
| in His providence, brings us 10 the time
when we can agree on the questions at is
| sue"
Rev Dr. J. E Moffatt OF Cumberland.
| Md, became eloquent in his appeal TO the
assembly for a change in the Confession
| that would give more even balance OF
| truth. 1.-The Confession he said. lis a man
made constitution. but is not the word OF
| God. And we are not discussing the word OF
| God. II this question Is voted down by this
| assembly IL will come 10 the front again
until we give the church what IL demands
/ want TO see side by side two great truths
first the sovereignty OF God, and above
| all His election OF men. and, secondly the
| freedom of man 20 choose. I believe that
God has elected all infants 10 salvation"
A PRINCETONIANS REMARKS.
DIR. John De Witt. OF Princeton Univer-
sity, was next recognized by the moderator.
There was a disposition by some OF the
commissioners to close the debate. AS DIR.
De Witt took the platform there were cries
Of Question: The Princeton professor
paid tribute TO the high character OF the
debate. which has thus far been entirely
free from acrimony or sarcasm. He said
| there was no danger Of a division in the
church. and he wanted it TO 20 out 10 the
world that. no matter how they may differ
| on the Westminster Confession. they stand
united on the Word OF God. He spoke OF
the consistency OF the beliefs OF the church,
which has stuck closer TO the doctrines OF
| the reformation than any other church
| Unity" he said. lis the fundamental prin-
| ciple of the church which stands as pyra-
mid pointing TO the sky without a assure
without a crack" Dr. De Witt said he be-
| longed TO what is known the fourth par
~. The first party. he said. emphasizes a
new summary OF the Confession. the second
emphasizes amendments 10 contain specific
sections, the third wants a declaratOry or
explanatory statement: the fourth empha-
sizes "our noble declaratory statement
which is now in our possession. and which
will solve the entire question.
The three elements-orthOdoxy liberty
and unity of actiOn-Dr. De Witt said. were
never held I'm better balance than at the
present I'm the new school. This was done
by throwing emphasis on the present lib-
eral terms OF subscription. DIR. De Witt
said he was not an ObstructiOnist. His
proposition was that the assembly stand
on its rights and assert the great. noble
liberal terms OF subscription. The speaker.
in referring TO the proposed creedal state
J ment. said the committee proposed that