The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1906-04-11

tlonal' and "ndubltably unlawful See Pres. and
Reformed Review July 1892 PIP. 534 535
n more recent example of this disregard of estab
lished forms and obligations is to be in the
that after the terms of union with the Cumberland
Church had been agreed to- which terms involved the
acceptance of the constitution of the Northern Church
as basis of union, that Church proceeded to change
its constitution in several particulars. So that if
the union is to be effected the basis of the const
tuition as it is, the Cumberland Presbyteries
must adopt these changes 1t is easy to say that this
remarkable complication is due to heedessness. The
only reasonable Interpretation of this action is that
heedlessness IN such matters constitutional
provisions and covenant engagements to
Northern brethren of small Importance when great
moral and ecclesiastical objects to be sought and
obtained Hence it is that they construe the con-
stiution to warrant the right to determine DO
tcal and other extra constitutional questions when
ever they desire to do In other words whenever
such questions rise into the sphere of morals they
claim right to take the matter in hand; all the
while forgetting that such questions habually rise
into the moral sphere.
This liberal Interpretation of the constitution will
now be evinced in several particulars.
l. federation of departures from the Calvinstic
System of doctrine in the of individual officers
who are sworn to accept that system
In proof, | cite the history of the union between
the Old and New School churches. The significance
of this proof is to be found in the following crcun-
stances:
l. The rejection of certain clauses originally in
doctrine.
,. The acceptance of the "Auburn Declaration" as
an authoritative exposition of New School views while
declarations made by New School utterly incon-
sistent with the Auburn Declaration. were ignored
Again cite the terms of union which the Cum
berland Church is to be united with the Northern
Church. 1t is admitted that the doctrnar symbols
OF neither has been materially altered. Yet the
Northern Church has said that the two creeds are
sufficiently harmonious to warrant union. The
reasonably of ie +bot
it is proposed to allow latitude of Interpretation of
the doctrnal symbols which the Southern Church
would regard ntolerable
Many instances of this liberation in the case of in
dividual officers could be cited if the limits of this
article would admit
II. The Northern Church holds a different view
of the teaching of the New Testament as to the Pres
byterate.
I'm proof cite the symbolic teachings of the two
Churches this subject and the discussions which
led to the adoption of the position of the Southern
Church.
III. The Northern Church has different view as
to the functions of the Church.
This is said III full view of the Omaha declarations
made in 1887. The proof as to their practical in
depreciation of their constitution and their own
declarations concerning it are superabundant This
Interpretation on the part of numerous individuals
began long before 1861. The events after 1861 fos-
tered Its growth | now cite action which is com
paratively recent
For example that of their Assembly in 1887 on
the Temperance Question. This action is significant
and important for three reasons:
l. judicial was involved
2 The Assembly committed itself to prohibition,
political measure
B. AT the same time it formally accepted the prin
cIple OF the Declaration and Testimony paper Yet
any well informed and unprecedented observer can sec
that actions numbered and 3 are hopelesslv moon
sistent with each other
In 1883 the Assembly adopted resolution exclud
ing from church membership those who manufactured
or sold intoxicating liquors This was done "tumult
uousy." DR.. Howard Crosby alone was oTordod an
opportunity to object though Others ATTEMPTED TO do