The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1906-04-11
THE REAL OBSTACLE PRESENTED
AND PROVED
By REV. E. c. GORDON, d. ID.
Lucy c. DdJney.
Gum Spring, Va.

by REV T. e. GORDON, ID. ID.
The real obstacle in the way of Organic Union he
tween the Northern and Southern PRESBYTERIAN
Churches is to be found in the fact that they nterpret
their common constitution differently 1t is proposed
in this article to give in outline some proofs of this
TACT. Details can be had by those who want them
1t should be borne in mind that the alleged fact has
regard to the historic position of the Southern Church.
l have no means of knowing how many of our people
have adopted the Northern mode of interpretations
1T may be that many more than have any idea of
have done this. If so, let the fact be evinced
by the phrase common constitution" is meant the
Bible and the dOctrinal and ordinal symbols of the
two Churches. The symbols are not exactly alike
but are substantially the same, except rs to the doe
trlne OF the Presbyterate, in which there is consd-
cradle differences all the important because the
Southern view carried to its logical and scriptural
conclusion Is radically different from that of the
Northern Church
Two views OF the Bible, authoritative rule
for the government of the Church. have obtained ac-
ceptance since the Reformation of the Sixteenth Cen
fury One is that the Bible, so regarded is TO he
strictly construed and Obeyed. The Church can do
only what the Bible commands it to do What is NOT
commanded explicitly or by necessary inference is
forbidden. The other view is that the Bible was NOT
intended to be an al-suficent rule of conduct for
the Church. and such to be strictly construed and
oDeyed. Hence the Church do any thing which
the Bible does not forbid In this respect it is like
individual members, acting in their private capacity
inns difference of view to the Bible obtains in
the case OF the other Standards of the Church \
glance at church history will show that it was very
natural for the two views to find acceptance in tie
United States, and for the Northern peope to take
the liberal view and the Southern people the strict
view. John Calvin, the English and continental re-
formers took generally the liberal view John Knox
ana the Scotch with some important inconsistencies
held the strict view. Our Northern brethren ana nd
noe have been influenced more by the ENGLISH and
continental views the Southern people by the Scotch
view Our national development. civil and ecclesias-
ucal, tostered the difference The same two views
came to be held as to National Constitution;
the liberal by the Northern and the strict bv fine
southern people. How natural for the difference to
be transferred to the ecclesiastical sphere Let us
now consider the proof of the fact that it was so
transferred
In general the Northern Church tolerates a disrc.
CARA OF the express provisions of its constitution
winch would be inolerable in the Southern Church
Abundant examples of this be found i'm it,. history
from IS6I-lS66. These familiar Some of them
were III the form of judicial proceedings and remain
as precedents I'm the same line was the action of
the General Assembly in 1892 when it rejected mo-
tor to refer the report of a committee on revision
OF the Confession of Faith to special committee
provided for in the Constitution. Of this action DIR
.. b. Warfeld says that it was "a grave error" and
that al that has been hitherto done with reference
TO the revision of the Confession is extraconstitu