"'';-; k;-., ¦?¦'.; : > f •>'>.-' -i: AS ; w-- YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY Z$t Qttnerican spirited Scottish Confession of 1562 was in the vain hope of attaining ecclesiastical uniformity with England. It had the effect of carrying the requirement of theological agreement to niceties not before prescribed. When the teaching of the Reformed Church, in the age before the Synod of Dort, was called Calvinism, the reference was not to its view of predestination, but to its teaching as to the sacraments. In that era there was a substantial agreement among the Protestant churches in -accepting the Augustinian view that man's will is in bond age through sin, and must be set free by divine grace. This is asserted against the more than half Pelagianism of the Church of Rome, by Luther in his controversy with Erasmus (1 524— 26), and by the Lutheran divines who com piled the "Formula of Concord" (1579), no less than by Calvin or' by Knox. Indeed, Knox probably would have shrunk from the extreme statements of the Lambeth Articles, drafted in 1579 by Archbishop Whitgift and four other Anglican divines, formally approved by Archbishop ' Hutton of York, and incorporated by Archbishop Ussher into the Articles of the Established Church of Ireland. It is therefore a mistake to give Calvin's name to teach ing he shared with Augustine and Aquinas, Luther and Andrea, Cranmer and Whitgift ; and the mistake has been possible only because the Reformed Church adhered to the Augustinian teaching, while the Lutheran and Anglican Churches, in spite of their own formulas, have approxi mated to that of the Church of Rome. With the exception of the school of Zwingli, which soon ceased to exert an appreciable influence, the Reformed theologians held to the objective reality of sacramental grace, but expressed this in terms which placed the asser tion of it on Protestant ground. They recognized a gift of 8 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. I. regenerating grace in baptism, bestowed even upon the unconscious child, while they maintained that his member ship in the church was his birthright as a child of Christian parentage. Following the Old Testament analogy, they taught that the children of Christians are " born within the covenant," and are baptized because this natural descent is accompanied by spiritual privilege. And when such children had come to years of discretion, and had been taught catechetically the " saving knowledge " of the gos pel, if their lives were free from reproach, the Reformed Church acknowledged their right to the sacrament of the Lord's Supper. In this also it saw no " bare and empty sign," but an appointed channel of grace, through the presence in it of the divine- human person of our Lord to the faith of those who worthily participate. This presence, however, is in the ordinance, and not "in, with, or under" the elements — a gift of grace received by faith, not by the mouth, and by the believing communicant alone. It is this which is Calvinism, in the historic sense of the term. In its forms of worship the Reformed Church was litur- gic, yet with a striving after simplicity and an indiffer ence to the older liturgic traditions, which distinguishes it from both the Lutheran and the Anglican. In Hesse it approached its sister-churches most nearly in these things, while in other parts of Germany, in Switzerland, France, Holland, Scotland, and Ulster, the divergence was wide. As we have seen, it was the attempt to force elaborate Anglican forms on the Scottish Kirk which proved " the last straw" in the burden the Stuarts were laying upon Scotland. By a natural tendency this Reformed love of simplicity, by force of opposition, became a Puritan indif ference to form; and the Westminster Assembly found no difficulty in setting aside all prescribed forms, includ ing John Knox's " Book of Common Order," and substi- THE REFORMED DISCIPLINE. g tuting the general directions of the Directory for Wor ship, with merely exemplary forms, which fell into desue tude. In contrast to this informality of the church's prayers was the strictness of prescription in the matter of praise. The Psalms in metrical versions were the handbook of every national church of the Reformed faith, from Warsaw to Rochelle, and from Geneva to Edinburgh, and through Puritan influence they attained the same use in the Angli can Church, while the Lutherans were the hymn-writers and hymn-singers of earlier Protestantism. As the Re formed psalters supplemented the Psalms with metrical ver sions of other passages of Scripture, and even with metrical doxologies and a few hymns, it cannot be said that the exclusive use of the Book of Psalms was a principle they accepted. The most characteristic element in the life of the Re formed Church, and that By which it influenced European history the most profoundly, was neither its polity, nor its type of doctrine, nor its forms of worship, but its ethical and social discipline. Under John Calvin's rule Geneva became one of the world's wonders — a city in which all that Savonarola had dreamed and hoped for Florence was actually realized. In Geneva Christian living was the first concern of laws and of magistracy. Offenses against the moral law of God were treated as crimes, and the Chris tian conception of duty was assumed as part of the public policy. The impression of Calvin's influence on the city was lasting as well as deep. Even Lutherans, like John Valentine Andrea (1614) and Philip Jakob Spener (1660), came back from a visit to Geneva with a lofty envy of the orderliness, the moral correctness, the show of reverence for sacred things, and the deference to authority, which still characterized the city by Lake Leman. IO THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. i. We now see the imperfection of Calvin's method, and therefore of his achievement. We draw the line of dis crimination between sins and crimes, as that age did not. We see in the Genevan administration an extension of legal methods into a province where they have no fitness, and which must provoke a reaction. Our Reformed fathers made nothing of such distinctions. They accepted, with hearty enthusiasm, the Genevan ideal of a community binding upon itself the law of God, entering into cove nant with him for the consecration of public and social life to his glory, and aiming at the immediate realization of his kingdom through the repression of all base and unchris tian habits and instincts by the whole weight of collec- * tive authority. It was this that fired the imaginations and strengthened the wills of the great reformers and states men of the Reformed faith: of William the Silent and Admiral Coligny, of Latimer and Knox, of Marnix de Aldegonde and Agrippa d'Aubigne. It was this purpose to establish the direct rule of God upon earth — a theocracy in the true sense — that found expression in the poetry of Edmund Spenser and John Milton, and that sent the Pil grims and the Puritans across the ocean to seek a freer field for its realization. It was this that plunged Presby terian Scotland and Puritan England into the struggle with the Stuarts, against whose low and demoralizing influence Milton directed the scorn of his " Comus." This theocratic x ideal played a primary part in the public life of Europe in the great struggle with the Counter- Reformation. In Scotland the Genevan ideal was embraced with a "- fervor that might have been expected from the mixture of Celtic and Scandinavian in the nation's make-up. In Wordsworth's phrase, The Scottish Church . . . had held The strong hand of her purity A COVENANTED NATION. II upon a nation in whom willfulness and lawlessness had been fostered by centuries, and whose worst vices had had the sanction of the example of the ecclesiastics high est in place. Through defeat and through victory, through periods of popular support and times of royal or aristo cratic antagonism, the Knoxes, the Melvilles, the Bruces, the Hendersons, the Guthries, and the Rutherfords of the Kirk labored to make their Scotland a holy nation, a peo ple in covenant with their God. The continuous pressure of session and presbytery, synod and assembly, was exerted for the extirpation of vice, and the elevation of social life to the level of their own spiritual vision. At times, indeed, this was employed against usages we have learned to regard as innocent ; at others it was intruded into a political sphere in which it had no proper exercise. On the whole, how ever, the Kirk's claim " to treat in an ecclesiastical way of greatest and smallest matters, from the king's throne, that should be established in righteousness, to the merchant's balance, that should be used in faithfulness," was not only recognized in fact, but was directed to the best interests of the nation. It was this discipline which created those cottage homes, which Burns has immortalized in his most gracious verse, and of which Wordsworth writes : A virtuous household, though exceeding poor! Pure livers were they all, austere and grave, And fearing God : the very children taught Stern self-respect, a reverence for God's Word, And an habitual piety, maintained With strictness scarely known on English ground. It is noteworthy that 'in later times if the people com plained of the Kirk, or withdrew from her communion, it always was because she fell short of the theocratic vigor and rigor they had learned to demand of her. In their hearts the nation knew that it was just their faithfulness 12 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. i. to the ideal of Knox and of Henderson which made them a great people — a people capable of binding on itself the yoke of service and of self-denial, and of foregoing the satisfactions and enjoyments of the present for some greater good. In the Reformed, as distinguished from the Anabaptist and Independent conception, the proper subjects of such a discipline are a whole nation embracing the faith and order of the gospel by their collective act. Accepting "the judgment of charity," they took for granted the Christian standing and character of all who had been born and brought up in such a nation, and taught the truths and subjected to the discipline of the gospel, and kept by God's grace from profaning the Christian name by any scandal. Such they accepted as entitled to the ordinances of the church, for both themselves and their children. In prac tice, however, they treated this as merely the minimum of a Christian profession, and urged upon all to "go on to perfection." The daughter-church in Ulster preserved in great meas ure the theological and theocratic character of the Scottish Kirk. Its social position, however, was very different, and its environment reacted upon its character. Its Presby terianism was not the creed and order of a whole people. It must recognize as in its membership only those who gave it their voluntary adherence, in the face of legal pro scriptions and of the attractions of the Anglican estab lishment, and even of Irish Romanism. This made it less theocratic in itself, and caused a less theocratic tone in the preponderant influence Ulster' exercised upon the Pres byterianism of America. CHAPTER II. THE DAY OF SMALL THINGS, 1629-1713. In view of the extensive acceptance of the Presbyterian theory of church order in the British Islands, it is surpris- ' ing that so long a period elapsed before it took root in any of the British colonies in America. Up to the time of Cromwell's accession to power, and even after that event, the central and probably the largest body of the English Puritans were Presbyterians, with moderate Episcopalians like Ussher and Reynolds forming the right wing, while Independents and Baptists were the left. While the Pil grim Fathers, who settled the Plymouth colony, were In dependents on principle, the Puritans of the Massachusetts Bay colony were largely Presbyterians in theory before their emigration. But the suppression of the attempts to set up the Genevan order in England in 1591 through the hostility of Archbishop Whitgift, and its partial suspen sion in Scotland by the Compromise of 1586, and by the Articles of Perth in 161 8, had prevented any practical application of Presbyterian principles within Great Britain. It was merely a theory, and in the case of the English Puri tans it was subject to the influence of that general tendency to pure individualism which dominated the whole Puritan movement. From Anglican to Presbyterian, from that to Independent, and from that to Baptist, ending often in Seekerism or Quakerism, is the gamut through which the active spirits of the time easily ran. 13 14 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. ii. In laying the foundations of church order in the absence of precedence and traditions, and not uninfluenced by the proximity of the pronounced Independents of Plymouth, the Puritans of New England drifted into arrangements which were midway between Presbyterianism and Inde pendency, with a strong leaning toward the latter. Not that there was no resistance to this. " The New England way," as it was called, excited some sharp criticism among the Puritan divines in England, and in 1637-39 there was a prolonged correspondence between them and their breth ren on the subject, not entirely to their satisfaction. But the two tendencies struggled for the mastery for nearly seventy years, the Presbyterian finding able supporters in John Eliot ("The Divine Ordinance of Councils," 1665) and the Mathers. Dr. H. M. Dexter felicitously describes " the New England way "as "a Congregationalized Pres byterianism " which " had its roots in one system and its branches in another," and says that the Massachusetts churches differed locally " from the almost Presbyterian ism of Hingham and Newbury[port] " to the pronounced Independency of Plymouth. But he is not so happy in his statement that the system was " essentially Genevan within the local congregation, and essentially other out side it." The absence of regularly constituted sessions for the administration of church discipline, and the refusal of baptism to the children of baptized persons who were not communicants, -marked the local congregation as un- Presbyterian. The latter rule was a rejection of the " judg ment of charity " accepted by all the Reformed churches. It was one of the moot-points between the two parties in the Westminster Assembly, and in 1662 the severer rule had to he relaxed even in New England by the Half- Way Covenant. On the other hand, the high authority claimed and exercised by synods called by the civil magistrate, of "THE NEW ENGLAND WAY." 1 5 which six met during the seventeenth century, shows that, even outside the local congregation, " the New England way " was not so entirely other than Genevan. We hear of no more such synods when the Congregational principle had attained supremacy in Massachusetts, and the church order had taken the shape indicated in the writings of Rev. John Wise •(" The Churches' Quarrell Espoused," 1710), who completed what John Cotton and his associates had begun. In the sister-colony of Connecticut the movement was in the opposite direction. The Saybrook Platform (1708) gave jurisdiction over the local churches to the consocia tions consisting of the ministers and the " messengers of the churches " in an assigned district. Under its opera tion the churches of Connecticut grew more conscious of their relation to the Presbyterianism of the Middle States than to the Congregationalism of Massachusetts, and they freely used the name Presbyterian as the briefest descrip tion of their ecclesiastical position. On the other hand, we shall see that the Congregation alism of Massachusetts and the States north of it proved itself strong enough to absorb and assimilate an Ulster immigration, which came with the purpose of establishing the Scottish order on New England soil. From 1 640- onward we find a certain amount of migra tion from' New England into the Dutch settlements on Long Island and the mainland. Mostly this was Congre- gationalist, but two of the ministers who made this trans fer — Francis Doughty to Long Island in 1642, and thence to New Amsterdam the next year, and Richard Denton to Long Island in 1643 — were distinctly Presbyterians. They both had trouble with their Congregationalist neigh bors as to the extent of the Abrahamic covenant in the matter of baptizing the children of those who were not 1 6 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap, ii communicants. Both were welcome to the Dutch, who adhered stoutly and somewhat intolerantly to their Re formed faith and order. And in New York the atmosphere tended to make the transformation of Puritan into Presby terian an easy one, as the subsequent history will show. The Scotch never have been a colonizing people, the settlement of the Irish province of Ulster in the reign of James I. being their only national achievement of that kind. Up to their ill-fated experiment at Darien (1698) they made no large effort at establishing a colony in the New . World. In South Carolina, Maryland, and East Jersey were small bodies of Scotch immigrants who sought a home in America during the religious troubles of the period between the Restoration and the Revolution, the first having been deported after the defeat at Bothwell Brig (1684) by way of punishment. Both their deportation and the Darien failure did so far contribute to the Presby terian element in the colonies, that in South Carolina Pres byterian churches grew up, and a Presbytery was organized in 1722-23, but partly of New England Puritans. The Scotch- Irish colony in Ulster far exceeded the mother-country in colonizing energy. Large sections of that province had been granted by James I. to royal favor ites in Scotland, who held out great inducements to their countrymen to become their tenants in Ireland. Unfortu nately, these pledges had not the force of a law, and were generally broken. Besides this, as the century advanced, and the prelatizing policy of the Stuarts became pro nounced, the religious difficulty became more acute. As v early as 1636 a ship-load of the Scotch of Ulster set sail for New England, having been invited by the authorities of that province to settle on the Merrimac River. The ministers on board were Robert Blair and John Livingston, who both were to play a prominent part in the impending PRESBYTERIANS IN MARYLAND. I J troubles in Scotland. The ship was driven back by con trary winds, and the undertaking abandoned. After the Restoration the Irish Presbyterians felt the weight of prelatic intolerance only less than did their Scotch brethren. Even Jeremy Taylor, now an Ulster bishop, retracted the bold arguments of his " Liberty of Prophesying" (1647), and both defended and practiced the persecution of the Scotch colonists for nonconformity to the established church. So before a decade elapsed emigration set in from Ulster to America, seeking the Barbadoes, Maryland, and Virginia as their new homes. To Maryland, indeed, Francis Doughty had come from New Amsterdam as early as 1659, his brother-in-law Cap tain William Stone having been made governor of the colony by the Calverts, as a safeguard against interfer ence on the part of the Commonwealth government at home. We hear of Doughty as preaching on both sides of the Potomac, but there is no record of his death, or of any permanent result of his labors. To Maryland also Fifeshire colonists had been brought by Captain Vivian Beale to escape the persecution in Scotland. With the first immigration of the Scotch-Irish it may be said that Presbyterianism had come to stay. Prelatic intolerance in Ireland had had the natural effect of intensi fying their attachment to their own church and its order. The tenacity of will for which they always have been famous came into play in planting the Presbyterian order and doctrine in a new environment. As but one minister, probably Richard Salwey by name, shared in the earlier migration, they were indebted to the ministrations of an English Presbyterian, Matthew Hill, who had been induced by Richard Baxter to make his home in Maryland. In 1 669 he writes to Baxter : " We have many of the Reformed religion, who have a long while lived as sheep without a 1 8 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. ii. shepherd, though last year brought in a young man from Ireland, who hath already had good success in his work. We have room for more ministers." In 1680 the Scotch- Irish in the colony applied to the Irish Presbytery of Lag- gan for another minister. The arrest and deportation of the members of that Presbytery for keeping a public fast prevented a response in the ordinary fashion, but prob ably was the means of sending to Maryland its former moderator, William Traill, in 1682, and Francis Makemie in 1683. It is to Francis Makemie rather than to Matthew Hill or William Traill that the American Presbyterian Church has been accustomed to look back as to her founder. The others preceded him and were men of ability. But Wil liam Traill returned to Scotland at the Revolution, and Makemie was the more energetic nature. His ordination seems to have been among the last acts of the Presbytery of Laggan before its dispersion by official violence. In America at first he went to and fro as an evangelist, rang ing from South Carolina to New York, combining com merce with preaching, and making Rehoboth, on the east ern shore of Maryland, the center of his labors at least as early as 1 69 1 . He came forward as the literary champion of his church when it was attacked by either Quakers or prelatists. In New York, on the ground preempted by Doughty and Denton, he suffered arrest and imprisonment in 1 706 for the offense of preaching without a license, as the Episcopal Church had been established in that colony by a legislative trick in 1693, and Governor Cornbury, the Queen's cousin, was ruling the people after the Stuart fashion in the matter of suppressing dissent. Makemie's vigorous defense and acquittal in the next year fixed atten tion on Cornbury's conduct, and thus contributed to his recall in 1 709. THE FIRST PRESBYTERY. 1 9 Altogether, Francis Makemie, although not a man of the first order, and unable to stand comparison with many of the later leaders of the church he " founded," was a per son of such vitality and energy, such excellent judgment and genuine piety, as made him greatly useful in his day, and entitles him to the gratitude of all who believe that Presbyterianism has been of eminent service in the religious life of the nation. Up to this time, while there had been separate congrega tions of Presbyterian structure, no Presbytery had ever met to exercise control over their governing sessions. Some kind of informal conference or council must have been held in 1701, when Jedediah Andrews was ordained to the pastorate in Philadelphia. " The Presbyterians," writes Rev. John Talbot, missionary of the S. P. G., " have come a great way to lay hands on each other." In 1705, pre sumably in the same young and growing city, a regular Presbytery met, and chose Francis Makemie to the mod- eratorship. Five other ministers were enrolled as members. Philadelphia was the most northern point represented, until the ordination of John Boyd as pastor at Freehold, in the year following. The other churches lay in Delaware and Maryland, Snow Hill in the latter State being probably the oldest in date of organization. From 1705 until 17 16 inclusive, the Presbytery of Phila delphia was the only judicature of the church, and in the twelve years it had increased from five to seventeen minis ters, chiefly by arrivals from New England and the BritT ish Islands. From Philadelphia northward to Long Island, the pastors were generally from Old or New England ; in Maryland, either Scotch or Irish ; while Delaware was the meeting- ground of the two elements. As the church of the new immigration it had great diffi culties to encounter. The people were extremely poor, 20 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. ii. and sparsely settled; and in their disheartening battle for the conquest of nature, they tended to sink into mere animalism through the neglect of spiritual interests. The supply of ministers was far below the need, and there was a temptation to accept as such men poorly fitted in point of learning or of character. But the Presbytery exacted adequate credentials and assurance of orthodoxy and good character from all applicants. When a young Welshman in 1 710 undertook to preach to the people of the Welsh Tract without a license, he was rebuked, and required to place himself under competent direction that he might be educated for the sacred office; and it was not until 1 715 that he was ordained. The number of cases of discipline for moral offenses was excessive among both ministers and people ; and to these were added disputes and uncertainties as to the degrees within which marriage was forbidden, as might be expected in small and isolated settlements, where the range of choice was very limited. The forms of Presbyterian government used in Scotland and Ireland were followed as far as possible. There was some difficulty in bringing the Welsh and English Con- gregationalists, who had united with Presbytery, to see the expediency of the authority exercised over the sev eral congregations. They generally acquiesced, however, in accepting the Presbyterian Church as the representative of the Puritan principle in the Middle States. The fervor of the earlier strife over the two methods of church gov ernment had died out on both sides, probably through exhaustion. They were united against prelacy, tolerant of each other. Nothing, indeed, could be more friendly than the rela tions of the Presbytery to the New England churches. It was in correspondence with the union of the Presbyterians and Congregationalists of London, asking for additional HARMONY WITH NEW ENGLAND. 21 ministers. It had a friend and adviser in the indefatigable Cotton Mather, who worked for its growth and prosperity, as he was working vainly for the establishment of a some what similar plan of government in Massachusetts. In the ministers and churches of Connecticut, newly reorganized on the Saybrook Platform, it had helpful and sympathetic neighbors. Indeed, there was no sharp line of sectarian severance between the two bodies until the present century. CHAPTER III. GROWTH AND DISSENSION, 1713-41. Of the Scotch colony planted in Ulster in the seven teenth century there are probably three descendants in America for one left at home. Disappointed in the ex pectations raised by the offers of the new landlords at the time of the plantation, and oppressed by the established Episcopal Church, they turned their eyes to America as a possible home. Of their first immigration, that to Mary land in the seventeenth century, I have spoken already. The second began in 171 3, and continued until the eve of the War for Independence. It entered the colonies on three lines. The first followed the course originally proposed by Robert Blair and John Livingston in 1636, and sought New England. It was spread over a large part of Maine and several districts of New Hampshire ; and it also found a home in the larger towns of Massachusetts, especially Boston, Worcester, and Pelham. Those who see nothing in the New England history but the doings. of Puritans and Pilgrims ignore a large indebtedness to this strenuous and vertebrate stock, from which sprang herWebsters, Greeleys, Greys, Starks, Andersons, and others who hold no mean place in her annals. At first the new immigrants were anything but wel come. They were "a parcel of Irish," and that of itself carried with it an idea of wildness. Their intense Presby terianism was supposed to imperil the " standing order " of the New England churches. In 17 18-19 we find the THE GREAT IMMIGRATION. 23 selectmen of Boston taking measures to clear the town of these " passengers lately arrived from Ireland," and warn ing them to depart. It was not until 1730 that they were able to gather a church, under the pastorate of John Moore- head. When those who had settled in Worcester, in 1 718, took measures to build themselves a church* the people " gathered by night, hewed down and demolished the structure," and " persons of consideration and respectabil ity aided in the riotous work," we are told in W. Lincoln's " History of Worcester " (1837). This intolerance caused the greater part to migrate to New York about 1 740 ; and in other instances the churches were weakened by removals for a like reason. They were compelled to pay taxes for the support of the Congregation alist churches, while they also maintained their own. Their position was much more favorable where, as in Londonderry and other newly established towns of New Hampshire or Maine, they themselves constituted the town, and levied the tax for the support of their own minister. Their first Presbytery was constituted before 1729, and was called the Presbytery of Londonderry, or, by their neighbors, " the Irish Presbytery." It had some sixteen ministerial members during this period, with a still larger number of feeble churches looking to it for supplies. The great body of the immigrants from Ulster sought the middle colonies, especially Pennsylvania, attracted by the reports of the toleration practiced in that colony and of its great natural wealth. The historian Proud esti mates that six thousand had arrived by 1726. The fail ure of the grain crops of Ulster in that and the following years increased the volume of immigration, so that Proud estimates it at twelve thousand a year until 1750. While mixed a good deal with the people of the older settlements, these newcomers naturally took the western frontier, which, 24 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. lit. exposed them to the brunt of Indian warfare, and led them to an estimate of the red man very different from that accepted by the Friends. On their obtaining control of the provincial legislature, therefore, they reversed Penn's policy of peaceful conciliation, and sought precedents for a new Indian policy in the Book of Joshua. It was this exposure to the French, and the Indians influenced by them, which turned their attention to more southern val leys of the Appalachian chain, and gave them a southward impetus which carried them as far as what is now north ern Alabama. Here they joined the third stream of Ulster immigration, which entered the Carolinas by Charleston: To the two it is due that West Virginia, North Carolina, eastern Kentucky and Tennessee, and adjacent parts of South Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama constitute, with Pennsylvania, an American Ulster, far more extensive and populous than King James's Irish "plantation." It is no longer thought sufficient to. enumerate Puritan, Cavalier, and Quaker as the elements which made up America in colonial times, and directed the struggle for independence. It is now recognized that even thus early the Scotch-Irish of Ulster contributed no less than any of these to the make-up of the young nation. If the Puritan might be regarded as the thinking brain and the Quaker as the sympathetic heart of the new nation, the Scotch- Irish have been the backbone of its nationality. Deficient alike in comprehensive philanthropy and in speculative intellect, they possess in their volitional energy a quality of not less importance, as it has made them the element of persistence and of conservatism. They thus recall the part played by the Aaronic priesthood in Jewish history, which was less brilliant and attractive than the prophetic order, but not less useful as the vertebral link which bound generation to generation, and secured the continuity of the CHURCH AND SCHOOL. 25 nation's life. " Grant that I may always be right, for Thou knowest I am hard to turn," is the recorded prayer of one old Presbyterian elder of this stock. His prayer might be adopted by the whole church — at any rate, by the whole Scotch- Irish stock. Especially they have served the country as educators of the Middle States, and of those which lie west of them. Their early ministers were generally graduates of Glasgow, and it was they who established the many academies of those States, in which young men were given an educa tion which would at least have fitted them to enter any American college. This threw the Presbyterian clergy into contact with others than their own people, enlarged their influence for good, and caused their church to be more highly esteemed. In view of the church's require ment that none but educated men should be regarded as candidates for the ministry, this combination of the school master with the pastor was regarded as natural and proper, as indeed their every seminary was a seed-plot for the ministry. They thus rendered a great service in maintain ing a high educational standard at a time when the poverty of the country, the general indifference to whatever was " unpractical," and the active hostility of many sects to literary culture, made this very much harder to do than it is to-day. At the time now under consideration the Scotch-Irish settlers were most numerous in Delaware and eastern Pennsylvania. It was through their coming that the Pres byterian Church outgrew the Presbytery and was obliged to establish a Synod with four subordinate Presbyteries, being one each in New York — which then included New Jersey — Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland. At its constitution in 1 7 1 7 the Synod consisted of all the minis ters, with one elder from each church. But in 1 724 this 26 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. iii. provisional arrangement was set aside, and the Presbyteries were directed to choose delegates equal to half their num ber, yet with the proviso that every third year all should attend. This arrangement for delegation, however, lasted for but two years, and then " the full Synod " was restored as a permanent institution. A more important- change in the constitution of the church was the Adopting Act of L72.&, by which its min isters and licentiates, present and future, were required to subscribe to the Westminster Confession and Catechisms, " as being, in all essential and necessary articles, good forms of sound words and systems of Christian doctrine." It had not been the purpose of_ the Westminster As sembly that subscription, should b_e__required_ to these " standards." Subscription never was introduced into the Presbyterian Church of England, as organized in various neighborhoods largely through the labors of members of the Assembly. Nor in Scotland was it required until it was enacted by Act of Assembly in 1690 to secure the ejection of the Episcopalian party from the parishes they still held in the northern shires. In Ireland the Synod of Ulster introduced it in 1698, but required it only of licentiates. It reenacted it in 1705, for all its ministers, as a safeguard against the growing tendency to Arianism. This in 1726 resulted in a division of the Irish Synod. In America the Presbytery of New Castle had exacted a subscription to the Confession as early as 1724, and it was John Thomson, of that Presbytery, who first memori alized the Synod of Philadelphia to do the same. In 1728 the Presbytery itself renewed the memorial. The proposal met with opposition from the New England and from the Welsh ministers. Jonathan Dickinson,' of Elizabethtown, pointed to the rupture of the Irish Church through requir ing it, and declared that while subscription might exclude SUBSCRIPTION ESTABLISHED. 2J those who were scrupulous as to what they signed, it would neither " detect hypocrites, nor keep concealed heretics out of the church." He and his friends suspected a design on the part of the Scotch and Irish ministers to get rid of the Welsh and the native American element. In the Synod of 1729, after the question had been fully handled in a committee containing the ablest men of both parties, an agreement was reached through mutual con cessions. The concession to the opponents of subscription was the freedom extended to ministers and licentiates to express to Presbytery or Synod the scruples they felt as to any article in the standards, leaving the body to judge whether ornot these scruples touched the " essential and necessary articles of faith." This followed the precedent set by the Irish Synod in its " Pacific Act " of 1 720. With this proviso, all the ministers of the church subscribed, "after proposing all the scruples that any of them had against any articles or expressions." As a matter of fact these scruples related only to " some clauses in the 20th and 24th chapters " of the Confession, which treated of the power of the civil magistrate in matters of religion. Yet " many persons were offended " at this qualification, and desired that the Synod should require unconditional sub scription ; and some petitioned the Associate (or Seceder) Synod of Scotland to establish their church in America on that basis. How well justified were Dickinson's apprehensions as to the futility of this safeguard against heretics was seen within a few years. Samuel Hemphill applied for mem bership in 1734, bringing credentials from the Irish Pres bytery of Strabane, and then, for the second time within a year, subscribed the standards without the statement of either " scruple " or objection. A year later we find him arraigned before the Synod for preaching something like 28 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. iii. Deism, and, in his contumacious absence, declared " un qualified for any future exercise of his ministry " within its bounds. This first heresy case led the Synod to pro test against the practice of Irish Presbyteries in " ordaining men to the ministry sine titulo, immediately before they come over hither, thereby depriving us of our just rights," and to suggest that in addition to " their Presbyterial cre dentials," they should be furnished with " private letters of recommendation," showing them to be " firmly attached to our good old principles and schemes." This implies the admission that subscription was not the safeguard its friends had supposed it. Of much graver import was the dissension which arose between the two elements of the Synod with regard to the religious movement known in American church history as the Great Awakening — a movement which made itself felt from Maine to Georgia, and gave a new direction to the religious life of the country. To appreciate fully its significance it must be remembered that one of the effects of emigration upon great bodies of men is almost invariably their spiritual declension. Just as plants hardly can be transplanted without the sacrifice of those fine fibrous roots on which so much of their vital ity depends, so the human transplantation involves the sacrifice of those fibers of sacred local and personal asso ciations upon which the life of the spirit depends so much. The old home, the traditional place of worship, the opinion of hereditary neighbors, the wholesome routine of religious usage, all are foregone ; and no one knows how much he is dependent on these until he has parted with them. Even in New England, with all the fervor of the piety of Pilgrim and Puritan settlers, the symptoms of spiritual decay were speedily felt, especially in the younger generation. The Half-Way Covenant, with its frank defiance of Congrega- "BARBARISM THE DANGER.' 29 tionalist principle, was a device to make it possible that the grandchildren of the first settlers should not be excluded from baptism and visible connection with the church. With each decade there was a palpable cooling of devo tional fervor ; and in spite of the Reforming Synods held in Boston in 1679 and 1680 to correct the growing laxity, it seemed probable that the sons of the Puritans would sink into shrewd money-getters, with little interest in either religion or the higher culture. In the words of Dr. Bushnell, " barbarism was the next danger." The Scotch- Irish immigration represented a class which had already lost some ground by migration to Ireland, and it undoubtedly suffered spiritually by its second migration to America, first of all through the want of a regular min istry and worship. Matthew Hill writes of them to Bax ter as scattered widely in Maryland, " as sheep without a shepherd." Where they made the attempt to gather into congregations they were generally too few and too poor to support a minister: and we find the Synod, in 1718, writing to the Presbytery of Dublin of their spiritual des titution, and of " a deplorable necessity of still continuing in the same circumstances of darkness, which may render both themselves and posterity miserable Pagans." Even where it was possible to obtain preachers, these in many cases were not of a character to weigh heavily on the side of a stricter life. The number of cases in which ministers were arraigned before the Presbytery and the Synod for grave moral offenses was very large in proportion ; and in some cases the penalties imposed were very inadequate to the offense proven or confessed. As the Presbyterian Church was not exceptional in any of these unhappy respects, an awakening to a larger measure of spiritual ' life was needed for the salvation of the whole country. It came almost parallel with the great 30 THE PRESBYTERIANS- [Chap. hi. Methodist awakening in the British Islands, and it was powerfully promoted by George Whitefield, the preacher of that movement. But it had a somewhat different char acter and originated independently of that, and even earlier, in the labors of Jacob Frelinghuysen, who, in 17 19, was settled as pastor of the Dutch Reformed Church in Rari- tan, N. J., where he remained until 1 746. He was a native of Holland, and there had been affected by that Pietist movement which was to influence so markedly Whitefield and the Wesleys. He preached " awakening " sermons, insisted on evidences of regeneration in those he admitted to the Lord's table, and saw much fruit of his labors. Four miles from Raritan lay New Brunswick, whose Presbyterian Church in 1 726 called to its pastorate young Gilbert Tennent, who soon came under the personal influ ence of Dominie Frelinghuysen. Gilbert Tennent's father, William Tennent, had emigrated from Ireland to America in 1 7 1 6. He was in Episcopal orders, but was of Scotch- Irish stock, and had "married Catherine Kennedy, the daughter of an eminent Presbyterian minister. In 171 8, possibly through her influence, he renounced the prelatic forms of government and worship, and was admitted with out reordination into the Synod. He established himself in 1726 on the Neshaminy, north of Philadelphia, and opened an academy, which its enemies nicknamed " the Log College." His son Gilbert he had already educated for the ministry, and from the Neshaminy academy went forth others — including three of the principal's younger sons, Samuel Blair, and John Rowland — whose eminent usefulness was proof of the spiritual energy of their teacher. At New Brunswick Gilbert Tennent at first had but a barren ministry. The gift of power came to him after a severe illness, and a loving letter from Dominie Freling huysen. He now preached the necessity of a conscious THE GREAT AWAKENING. 3 I conversion from sin to God, and dealt pungently with the barren professors he found in his charge. From 1728 onward there was a notable harvest of conversions in his own flock and the adjacent districts to which he extended his labors. Other ministers — such as Jonathan Dickinson at Elizabethtown, and William Tennent the younger at Freehold — had the same joyful experience of seeing the ice of indifference broken and the message of the gospel come home in fresh power to the hearts of their people. All this was much before the arrival of George White- field for his great evangelistic tour of November, 1739, to December, 1 740, and even before the Awakening in New England, which began in 1734 under the preaching of Jonathan Edwards. Indeed, to say nothing of Dominie P'relinghuysen, Gilbert Tennent's ingathering began at New Brunswick a year before the " Holy Club " was formed at Oxford, and had spent its force before the date assigned by John and Charles Wesley as that of their conversion. Yet the two movements were so much alike in character that Whitefield found himself entirely at home among the Tennents and their co-workers ; and in 1 740 he persuaded Gilbert Tennent to continue his own work in Boston, where he labored for months with great impression. From White- field's comments we may infer that Tennent's preaching was more severe and inculpatory than his own. " He is a son of thunder, whose preaching must either convert or enrage hypocrites." In this Tennent reflected the manner of the Pietists, without the alleviating tinge of cheerfulness which the Methodists got from the Moravians. But the treasure came in earthen vessels. Its presen tation was affected by the personal weaknesses and the mental limitations of those who bore it, and by the spirit of their age. Not content with speaking the truth it had been given him to see, Gilbert Tennent undertook to sit in 32 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. hi. judgment upon those who did not see as he did. He and his friends denounced ".unconverted ministers" as "blind leaders of the blind " ; they also preached within the bounds of the charges of the ministers so described, as they had opportunity, without leave asked, and refusing recognition of their ministerial character. In the Synod of 1740 Tennent and Blair presented papers which drew a black picture of the character of the ministry as a body, and, when challenged to substantiate their charges, they had to admit that they had not inves tigated the reports they accepted, nor had they spoken privately, as Christ requires, to these alleged offenders. At last, by a famous sermon, preached March 8, 1740, at Nottingham, Pa., on " An Unconverted Ministry," Gil bert Tennent brought matters to a head. It was such a public indictment of those who had stood aloof from the Awakening, that, even without the naming of names, it seemed to be meant to make it impossible for the minis ters described to remain in synodical communion with him and his friends. At the next meeting of the Synod a protest signed by twelve ministers and eight elders was presented by Robert Cross, of Philadelphia, which the majority of the Synod adopted as its own. This arraigned the party represented by Tennent and Blair for overthrowing the authority of Synod by confining its powers to advice ; for disorderly irruptions into other men's congregations ; for censorious judgments of those who did not walk with them, resulting in the disturbance and division of congregations ; for mak ing the call to the ministry a matter merely of personal feeling ; for preaching the terrors of the law " in such a manner and dialect as has no precedent in the Word of God " ; and for asserting that truly gracious persons are able to judge with certainty both of their own state and THE DIVISION OF 1741. 33 that of others. On these grounds they denied the right of the offenders to sit as members of that judicatory. As the Presbytery of New York was not represented, while the Southern Presbyteries were present in strength, that of New Brunswick had but small support. Only twenty- five out of the forty-seven ministers of the Synod were in attendance, and the measure was carried by a vote of twelve to ten, three not voting. The ministers and elders of the New Brunswick Presbytery, in great surprise at this result, accepted the decision and withdrew. The very next step of the majority was to alter the terms of subscription to the Westminster standards, mak ing it unconditional, with no liberty to state scruples and have Presbytery or Synod pass upon them as to whether they touched essential doctrines. Two of the Presbyteries, indeed, had already anticipated this action. CHAPTER IV. FROM THE SCHISM TO THE REUNION, 1741-58. The division of the Presbyterian Church in 1741, what ever elements of human weakness entered into it, was the result of forces working widely in the life of the colonies and of Great Britain. It was an indirect result of the Great Awakening which terminated the Puritan and inaugurated the Pietist or Methodist age of American church history. During the period of division it was the progressive or New Side of the church which made the greater prog ress. After a friendly attempt to effect a reconciliation in 1 742—43 the Presbytery of New York declined to sit in Synod on the ground that the New Brunswick Presbytery had as good right as themselves. They also desired the good-will of the Synod of Philadelphia in establishing a Synod of New York, and this was accorded with some re luctance. The body thus organized embraced the New Brunswick Presbytery, and increased from 22 members in 1745 to 72 in 1758, while the Synod of Philadelphia had fallen from 24 to 23. This was due to several causes, the first being the establishment in 1746 of the College of New Jersey, finally located at Princeton in 1757. The education question had been a matter of contro versy between the two parties until the Nottingham ser mon turned the waters of strife into a new channel. The conservative party, in their anxiety to maintain a high standard of ministerial culture, were disposed to insist that none but the graduates of British universities or New England colleges should be accepted as candidates. The 34 THE EDUCATION PROBLEM. 35 friends of the Awakening insisted on the right of Presby teries to license the graduates of such academies as Nesh aminy, in view of the urgent need of preachers and pas tors. And they insisted that the Presbyteries should lay less stress on college training and more on the evidence of the candidate being a regenerate man, called by the Holy Ghost to the ministry. To overcome the former difficulty the Synod of Philadelphia attempted to establish a college of its own, there being none at that time in the Middle Colonies. Failing in this, they voted, in 1739, to create a committee to examine the students and graduates of private , seminaries, and to give those whose proficiency merited it a certificate which would serve as a diploma in their application to Presbytery. To this the friends of Nesh aminy Academy objected for reasons told us only by their enemies, viz., " that it was to prevent that school from training gracious men for the ministry." After the division, the Synod of Philadelphia took under its care the academy at New London taught by Francis Alison, an Irish graduate of Glasgow, described as " the best Latin scholar in America"; and tried to make an arrangement with Yale College for the further training of its graduates. " As learning," they write, " is not in the same esteem in this government as in New England, we beg all the indulgence your constitution can allow us, lest parents grudge expenses if they run high." But this does not seem to have accomplished much, and in 1749 Alison removed to Philadelphia to accept a post in the academy newly established by Franklin's influence. The New York Synod did much better in applying for a charter for a college, and in placing it, in 1745, under the direction of Jonathan Dickinson, of Elizabethtown, the best scholar, the most effective writer, and the soundest judgment in the church. At his death, in 1747, Aaron 36 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. iv. Burr was chosen to succeed him, and the college removed accordingly to Newark, where he was pastor. In 1755 both it and Burr were transferred to Princeton ; and on his death, in 1757, he was succeeded by his father-in- law, Jonathan Edwards, who hardly lived to enter upon the office, and was followed in the year of the reunion by Samuel Davies. It was this young institution which poured into the Presbyterian ministry a stream of young men, imbued with sympathy with the Awakening and zealous for its objects. Next to. this, it was the sympathy of the Synod of New York, with the revival of religious interest, which aided its growth. The spirit of the time in the colonies was revival ist. Here and there resistance was offered : Harvard and Yale, after favoring Whitefield, turned against him ; Con necticut enacted arrest and expulsion for " vagrant preach ers," and applied the law to Samuel Finley, who had gone to New Haven to preach to a congregation of " Separates." But these were side-eddies, and the main current of the country's religious life flowed in the new channel, to the advantage of all the larger social interests. Even in a political sense the Great Awakening was a decisive influ ence. It broke the barriers of colonial reserve, as well as of sectarian isolation, and gave the American people, for the first time, a common intellectual interest in the move ment, and personal interest in its leaders. Whitefield, Edwards, and Tennent preceded Franklin and Washing ton as rallying names' for Americans, irrespective of local distinctions. All this, however, does not require us to regard the Awakening as an unmixed good, or to refuse a relative justification to those who opposed it. Nor need this rela tive justification be based upon the extravagance of men like James Davenport and Jonathan Barber, or the unchar- FAULTS OF THE AWAKENING. 37 itableness of Tennent and Blair. Indeed, these excesses were quickly sloughed off, and the Synod of New York, under the sober leadership of Jonathan Dickinson, was ani mated by a different spirit from that of its Presbytery of New Brunswick. Gilbert Tennent himself laid aside his asperity, labored for the reunion of the two bodies, aban doned his oddities in dress, and donned a wig. As pastor of the Second Church in Philadelphia, in avowed opposi tion to the view of Jonathan Edwards, he maintained that persons of blameless life, properly instructed in the prin ciples of Christianity, should be admitted to the Lord's table. Like Whitefield and Wesley, he lived to repent ' and retract the hasty and censorious judgments he had pronounced on his brethren in the ministry. The real faults of the Awakening lay deeper than these superficial matters. One of them is indicated by the very name Methodism, by which the movement has been so generally known. It set out with the assumption that there is one method of grace, by which all God's true people are made alive unto him through his Son ; and it exacted of all much the same evidences of this uniform Christian experience. Instantaneous, conscious conversion, preceded by an overwhelming sense of personal guilt, and followed by a joyful assurance of acceptance with God, was the only ordo salutis it recognized. Religion must thus come into the man like "a bolt from the blue," and with no' conceivable relation to the past providences of his life, the human relationships in which he had been placed by God, and the Christian nurture in divine things he had received from his childhood. Mankind were classi fied broadly into those who knew they were converted and those who were not. The " judgment of charity " of the Reformed churches was displaced by the Anabaptist demand for a church-membership giving " credible evi- 38 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. iv. dence" of regeneration; and the Christian nurture of the family, along with the catechetical instruction of the young by their pastors, came to be regarded as relatively unim portant. The resultant type of Christian experience was one iso lated from the relationships and relative duties of life in a very un-Protestant fashion ; and the energy of attention was concentrated upon the succession of inward emotions and feelings. An age of introspection and consequently of spiritual gloom was one result, while the direct appli cation of Christian principle to the whole life of Christian society, and the realization of God's kingdom in this pres ent world, were hardly contemplated as Christian duties. The theocratic element in the life of the Reformed Church, notably reflected in Makemie's New York sermon, gave way before an introspective pietism, which had much in common with the monasticism of the Church of Rome. But in the period we are considering Presbyterian pietism was in the heyday of youth, with all the charm of novelty and of earnestness. It was its internal vigor, and the zeal it was able to elicit in the young men it drew into the min istry, that made possible the rapid increase of the church within the New Side Synod. One sign of this vigor was the organization of the Pres bytery of Hanover, the mother-Presbytery of most of the churches and Presbyteries south of the Potomac. As early as 1719 the Scotch- Irish migration began to flow down the Shenandoah Valley, occupying fertile districts still un touched by the tobacco-planters of the eastern counties, and bearing the brunt of Indian hostility. In view of these services the intolerant ecclesiastical laws of the colony were allowed to remain a dead letter beyond the Blue Ridge, and the people were visited from time to time by Pres byterian preachers from the North, generally of the Old THE PRESBYTERY OF HANOVER. 39 Side. It was different when Presbyterianism struck root in Hanover County, built its meeting-houses in the par ishes of the Established Church, and sent zealous preach ers like William Robinson, Samuel Davies, John Rodgers, and John Todd to do the work neglected by the sleepy and worldly rectors of the Virginian establishment. They did not . come uncalled. The reading of a few religious works by some planters of the county had produced a religious awakening independent of church or clergy. At first they met only to hear such books read, and buildings had to be erected for the accommodation of the crowds who came. Hearing of William Robinson, who was travel ing toward North Carolina for his health and preaching as he went, they sent for him, satisfied themselves of his orthodoxy and piety, and put the direction of affairs into his hands. Through their labors and his, Presbyterianism struck root in a community English and Episcopalian by its traditions. Thanks to the eloquence and the administra tive ability of Davies, as well as to the favor of a Scotch governor, it was protected from the legalized intolerance of the established clergy, and had time and room to grow. On hearing of Jonathan Edwards's removal from North ampton in 1 749, Samuel Davies wrote to urge his coming to Virginia, but was too late, as he had consented to take charge of the Indian mission at Stockbridge. In 1755 the Synod of New York organized the Presbytery of Han over, which embraced all the ministers who were resident in Virginia and the Carolinas, except the Presbytery of Charleston, and one minister who adhered to the Synod of Philadelphia. The Awakening bore fruit also in the mission-work among the Northern Indians, begun in 1743 by David Brainerd. With the forks of the Delaware as his center, he extended his labors from Freehold on the east to the 40 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. iv. Susquehanna on the west. His saintly fervor, which made him willing to forego all the comforts of civilized life, touched the heart of the red man as it had not been since the days of John Eliot, if even then; and a large harvest of converts was gathered. After his early death, in 1 747, his brother John stepped into his place, and carried on the work with some interruptions until his death, in 1 781, but with less fruit of his labor. So in 1748-50 Elihu Spencer labored among the Oneidas of New York. In 1757 the Presbytery of Suffolk ordained a Connecticut Mohegan, Samson Occom, to labor among his own people, which he did until his death, in 1791. He and President Davies were the two first hymn-writers of the American Presby terian Church. It was during this time that two other types of British Presbyterianism found a home in America. The Revolu tion Settlement of 1688-90 had been accepted by all the surviving ministers, of whatever shade of Presbyterianism. Many, however, of the Cameronians, or Hill People, who formed the extreme right wing of the church and who had disowned all who had accepted the Indulgence of 1670, no less than the Scottish and Irish prelates and their " curates," objected to the settlement as dealing too gently with " the indulged," and as making no proper rec ognition of the binding obligation of the national Covenants of 1638 and 1643. They in fact continued to renounce allegiance to both church and state as established in Scot land. As they had no ministers, they sought to edify one another in " corresponding societies " until the accession of John Macmillan, a minister of the Scottish Kirk, in 1706, enabled them to obtain the sacraments in an orderly way. That of Mr. Nairn, a minister of the Seceder Church, in 1 743, made possible the constitution of a Reformed Pres bytery. COVENANTERS AND SECEDERS. 4 1 Three ministers of the American Synod — Alexander Craighead and David Alexander, both of Donegal Pres bytery, and John Cross, of New Brunswick Presbytery — were in agreement with the Reformed Presbyterians (or Covenanters) as to the perpetual obligation of the Cov enants, while the rest, in so far as they had any distinct opinion in the matter, were satisfied with the Revolution Settlement. In 1740 Craighead was suspended for mak ing the Covenants a term of communion in his congrega tion at Middle Octorara, Pa., and for other matters grow ing out of his zealous advocacy of the Awakening. After ' the exclusion of the Presbytery of New Brunswick from the Synod of Philadelphia he pleaded with them to renew the Covenants, and when they refused he turned to the Scottish Reformed Presbytery, and asked helpers for Amer ica. At Octorara in 1 743 he and his adherents solemnly renewed the Covenants, with swords pointed to the four quarters of the heavens, as though to defy opposition from whatever quarter it might come. In 1751 the Scotch Pres bytery sent John Cuthbertson, but two years before this Craighead had joined the Synod of New York. Some at least of his followers were more tenacious, and at Middle Octorara Cuthbertson made his home, ministering to the scattered societies of the Covenanters of Pennsylvania, until the union of 1782. It is said, but probably not correctly, that Craighead, when tired with waiting for a response. from the Reformed Presbytery, made application to the Associate (or Seceder) Synod of Scotland. This was the second body of conserv ative Presbyterians which declared their separation from the Kirk of Scotland, charging it with unfaithfulness to its own principles. It was in 1733 that Ebenezer Erskine and three other ministers of the Synod of Perth, who had been condemned for holding and teaching the doctrines of 42 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. iv. Edward Fisher's book, "The Marrow of Modern Divin ity " (1644), organized the first Associate Presbytery. In 1 746-47 they had divided as to the lawfulness of the oath exacted of burgesses in the Scottish burghs, into Burghers and Antiburghers. To them, as representing all that was pronounced in Calvinism and strict in Presbyterianism, and yet not breaking with the civil government over Scotland and America — as Craighead and the Covenanters did — an appeal was made by those Presbyterians in Pennsylvania who objected to the qualified subscription exacted in 1729 by the Synod of Pennsylvania. In 1753 the Antiburgher Synod responded by sending Alexander Gellatly and An drew Arnot to America, with authority to organize con gregations and to constitute a Presbytery. In the mean time the division of 1741 had enabled the Old Side to alter the terms of subscription in the Synod of Philadel phia to such as ought to have satisfied the most orthodox. On the other hand, the New Side Presbytery of Newcas tle issued "a judicial warning " against the newcomers, denouncing them as schismatics, and " the Marrow doc trines " as unsound. To this Messrs. Gellatly and Arnot naturally published a reply ; and the relations of the two wings of the Presbyterian host were involved in an atmos phere of unhappy and unprofitable controversy as to the obligation of the Covenants, the nature of faith, and the extent and manner of "the gospel offer." Each party naturally tended to lay stress on that which sundered it from the other. A fresh ground of difference showed itself in New York. Here a Presbyterian church had been organized in 1716, but as the Episcopalian influence defeated its repeated efforts to obtain a charter, it had been forced to vest its property in the Church of Scotland. The Scotch and Scotch- Irish element in the congregation always had had ROUS OR WATTS? 43 some friction with the Puritans from New England, and this came to a head in 1752, when the attempt was made to substitute Dr. Watts's paraphrastic version of the Book of Psalms for the less smooth but more faithful version based on that of Francis Rous (1643), and adopted after revision by the Westminster divines in 1645, and by the Scottish Assembly in 1649. This Scottish psalter was re pugnant to the tastes of the eighteenth century through its strong no less than its weak points ; and the Great Awak ening had affected the taste in psalmody as much as in anything else. The Synod of New York in 1756 refused to condemn the use of Watts, as it was orthodox, and " as no particular version is of divine authority." So in that year the disaffected withdrew and organized a " Scotch church," which next year was taken under the care of the Associate Presbytery. The Synod of Philadelphia had not sanctioned any innovation in psalmody; and in the Synod of New York we hear of it only in this one church, and even in that no hymns were sung. In this way, how ever, arose the great dispute as to the proper " matter of praise," which still divides the lesser and more conservative Presbyterian bodies from the greater. Throughout the whole period of the separation of the two Synods, that of New York had labored for reconcilia tion and reunion, with increasing weight as its numbers grew, and its management of its affairs gave evidence of its sobriety and orthodoxy. At first the personal irritation on the side of the Synod of Philadelphia was naturally very considerable, but only against the eight Irish minis ters of the Tennent group. For Dickinson and his New York associates, New England Puritans chiefly, they always avowed their high regard. ¦ At last, in 1 758, a plan of union was reached which both could adopt. As regards both subscription to the standards and the authority of Synod 44 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. iv. and the Presbyteries, the Old Side carried their point. Arrangements for stating scruples and leaving the church court to judge of their importance were dropped. Those who dissented from synodical or presbyterial action might withdraw or protest, but nothing more. Intrusion into other men's congregations and wholesale indictments of brother-ministers were forbidden as irregular. As to the questions growing out of the Awakening, a compromise was reached. It was provided that candidates for the ministry should be examined as to their " experimental acquaintance with religion," no less than their learning and orthodoxy. As to the Awakening itself, instead of pronouncing upon it, the basis defines in thesi what is " a work of grace," in terms far more natural to the new the ology than the old; and while repudiating the extrava gances of visionaries, it pledged the united Synod to work for the promotion of what was thus described. On this basis the reunited church entered upon a new . period of activity. The stricter view of Presbyterianism had prevailed over the looser in matters of church order. * The newer view had prevailed over the older in that of the perspective of doctrine and its practical application. The united church thus reached a comparatively stable equilibrium, which was to last for eighty years. CHAPTER V. REUNION AND GROWTH, 1 758-75. BY reason of the extent of the immigration from Ulster, and of the adhesion of Puritan migrants from New Eng land, the Presbyterian Church was now one of the three largest in the country. While the Congregationalists pre dominated in New England, and the Episcopal Church was established in New York and in the States south of Mason and Dixon's line, in the States between the Hud son and the Potomac there were more Presbyterians than anything else. At the beginning of the War of Inde pendence the thirteen colonies had 186 Presbyterian and 61 Reformed ministers. Taken along with the Congrega tionalists, who were in the friendliest relations with them, they constituted a controlling majority of the American people. In the Southern colonies the Presbyterian churches were increasing rapidly by immigration from Ulster. The advantages of a strong organization and of vigorous synodi cal authority were especially shown in enabling the Synod to meet the rapidly multiplying demand for ministerial service from unorganized communities and vacant churches in the Carolinas, Virginia, western Pennsylvania, and north ern New York. At least one session of each meeting of the Synod was occupied with no other business than arrang ing supplies, frequently by requiring the older churches to give up the services of their pastors for the time needed for a journey to the South or across the Alleghanies. Even 45 46 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. v. from Nova Scotia came an appeal for help, so widely dif fused was confidence in the Synod's ability to overtake the demands of a growing field. The correspondence of the time shows how much atten tion was aroused in New England by the effective disci pline over pastors, candidates, and people which the Synod exercised. As a consequence the Puritan churches and ministers within the bounds of the middle and Southern colonies gave their adhesion to the Synod very generally. Those which lay between the Hudson River and the Con necticut line had organized themselves into a Presbytery of Dutchess County in 1752, and were admitted to the Synod in 1763. The college at Princeton continued to surpass the hopes of its founders as a source of supply of the ministry. The presidency of Samuel Davies (1759—61), the most brilliant preacher thus far of the church, ended too quickly to real ize the expectations his election had roused. In 1753— 54 he and Gilbert Tennent had visited Great Britain and Ire land to secure an endowment fund from the Presbyterians and orthodox dissenters, and had met with marked suc cess. His successor, Samuel Finley, was one of the few survivors of the Sturm und Drang period of the Awaken ing, and his academy at Nottingham had been a fruitful nursery of ministers. In his presidency (1761—66) there was a notable revival in the college. In 1768 Princeton received one of its great presidents in Dr. John Wither- spoon, who had been elected in 1766. He already had made a name as the literary champion of earnest Calvin ism against the moderate party in the Kirk of Scotland. He now showed no less ability as an administrator and educator, the latter as filling the new chair of divinity. His position in church affairs in Scotland threw him into sympathetic relations with the Associate Presbytery THE AMERICAN SECEDERS. 47 in America ; and in 1 769, at their request, he moved for a committee of conference with a view to union. These negotiations continued until 1774, when it was manifest that the Associate brethren could not see their way to an agreement. Probably this final refusal was due to the stiffening received in the meantime from the Scottish As sociate Synod. In 1764-68 five ministers of the Burgher branch of the Associate body had arrived in America, and applied for admission into the Associate Presbytery. As the point of difference between the two Seceder churches had no pertinence to America, the Presbytery agreed to accept them on the footing of assent to the common prin ciples as defined in the Secession Testimony. But as the American Presbytery was subordinate to the Scotch Synod, this now felt itself compromised by being brought into fel lowship with ministers who approved of the Burgher oath. Two more ministers were sent out, with instructions not to take their seat in Presbytery until the Burgher members were expelled. This was done in 1 7 7 1 , and they were told that " it was very sinful " in Presbytery to have admitted them. During the period we are considering the Associate Pres bytery increased to thirteen ministers, resident in Penn sylvania and New York, and in 1776 it was divided into two Presbyteries, named from those colonies. As each was directly subject to the Synod in Scotland, they were related to each other only by way of correspondence — an arrangement which resulted in the development of two dis tinct types of American Seceders. The Reformed Presby tery, organized in 1774, had now three ministers laboring among small " societies " in Pennsylvania. Besides the Synod and these conservative Presbyteries there was a Presbytery of South Carolina, organized in 1723, or sooner, largely composed of Scotchmen, and 48 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. v. claiming to represent the Kirk of Scotland. Its members seem to have been in sympathy with the Moderate party in the Kirk, as we hear of Principal Robertson and Dr. Hugh Blair selecting a minister for their Charleston church. They were not, therefore, fraternal in their relations to the zealous revivalist preachers of the Synod. In New England the course of events had been not un like that in the Middle States. It is true that the question on which the Presbytery of Londonderry divided in 1736 was that of their relation to the Congregationalist churches and their discipline. But it is notable that the Presbytery of Boston, organized in 1 745 by the minority, threw itself with zeal into the measures of the Great Awakening, and rapidly outgrew its elder rival, which by 1 765 had become extinct by depletion. By 1 771 the new body began to consider the propriety of constituting a Synod, a step which was carried out in 1774, the fifteen or sixteen min isters of the Synod of New England being divided into four Presbyteries — Boston, Newburyport (afterward Salem), Londonderry, and Palmer. Nearly at the same time were organized two other Presbyteries : that of the Eastward and that of Grafton, or of the Connecticut River. The latter was composed of President Wheelock, of Dartmouth College, then newly founded; and other Congregationalist admirers of Presbyterian methods ; and it held itself strictly aloof from other Presbyterian bodies. The Presbytery of the Eastward was refused recognition by the Synod, on the ground that its founder and leading spirit, John Mur ray, of Boothbay, Me., had no ministerial standing, as the Presbytery of Philadelphia had deposed him from the min istry little more than a year after it had ordained him. He, however, was a man of much greater vitality than any in the new Synod, and the Presbytery of the East ward grew at its expense, the first secessions being those DISSENSIONS IN -THE SYNOD. 49 of the church in Boston and that in Newburyport, where George Whitefield had been buried in 1 770. Its aged pas tor, Jonathan Parsons, in whose house the great preacher had died, took Murray's part; and in 1776 Murray became his successor, after refusing a call to Boston. The Psalm ody question also arose in New England, as in 1774 Moses Baldwin of Palmer made the first move toward a substitute for the Scotch psalter. This led some of the conservatives to turn their eyes toward the Associate Presbytery of New York. This was the period of greatest growth of New England Presbyterianism. In New Hampshire the five churches of 1760 had grown to twenty by 1778; and the number in Maine cannot have been less. That of ministers in all three bodies is estimated at thirty-two. The Synod of New York and Philadelphia, however, was by far the largest and most growing body. But it was not possessed of complete homogeneity and harmony. The Old Side and the New were united, but not quite reconciled, and three occasions for dissension were found : (1) The reconstruction of the Presbyteries was found easy, except in the districts covered by the two Presbyteries of Newcastle and the Old Side Presbytery of Donegal. This was the region in which the antagonisms of the old con troversies had been sharpest and most personal; and the Synod found it hard to effect such a reconstruction as was demanded by the interests of the church at large. At one time a part of the Presbytery of Donegal for three years actually declined the jurisdiction of Synod rather than sub mit to its arrangements ; and there was a constant transfer of ministers and churches from. Presbytery to Presbytery for the sake of peace. (2) The especial bone of conten tion within the Presbyteries was the examination of candi dates for the ministry. The Plan of Union forbade Pres- 50 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. v. byteries to license or ordain any one " until he give them competent satisfaction as to his learning and experimental acquaintance with religion, and skill in divinity and cases of conscience." The Old Side members contended that this meant nothing more than the requirement of the Westminster Directory, that the Presbytery shall " inquire touching the grace of God in the candidate, and if he be of such holiness of life as is requisite in a minister of the gospel." The New Side, however, would be content with nothing less than the rehearsal in Presbytery of his relig ious experiences, in the spirit of the Awakening. To this it was objected that beyond the profession of faith in the gospel no man or body of men had a right to inquire into the religious state of another ; and that the proper means to ascertain the presence of grace in a man is not his own testimony concerning himself, but the testimony of those who have best known his life and conversation. In 1761 the Synod was on the verge of a fresh division on this issue, each party contending that it stood for the true sense of the Plan of Union, and a large majority sustain ing the demand for a public rehearsal of experiences. To avoid a renewal of the schism it was agreed that the majority of each Presbytery should take whichever course it preferred ; and that if the minority could not acquiesce conscientiously, they should be organized as a separate Presbytery. This was a most un- Presbyterian solution of the difficulty, as it abandoned the principle of unity in pro cedure in a matter of vital importance. Thus the Second Presbytery of Philadelphia, organized under this author ity out of Old Side ministers and churches, had power to admit to the ministry men who in the view of the First Presbytery, and of the church at large, might be altogether unfit persons. The majority acted with more charity than prudence in thus setting what proved a fatal precedent, NEW SIDE RIGOR. ¦ 51 as Presbyteries of this structure were sure to perpetuate and intensify the differences they represented. As a rule, however, the majority in the united Synod acted with more rigor of authority than charitable con sideration for the scruples or sensibilities of the minority. Although it consisted largely of New England Puritans, who had entertained scruples as to the exercise of presby terial and synodical authority over the churches, and of the New Brunswick party, which had tried to minimize that authority into an advisory power, it now showed little hesitation in laying down with sharp precision the lines on which the order and discipline of the church must move. This was seen (3) in the dispute as to the power of Synod and Presbytery to deal with applicants from the Presby terian churches of Great Britain and Ireland. The Pres byterian churches of England, and a part of those of Ire land, had fallen into Arianism. Even in the Scottish Kirk a similar tendency had been shown ; and since the seces sion of the Erskines and their friends, the Moderates had obtained complete control in the Scottish Assembly. Their indifference to both the independence of the church and to theological doctrines was rooted in a carelessness to any deeper godliness than morality of outer life. It therefore behooved the American church to guard the entrance to its ministry from these quarters, and the New Side pro posed to effect this by reserving to the Synod the right to admit them finally. Before the division of 1741 it was they who had been sticklers for the rights of the Presby teries over against the Synod — a part now adopted by the Old Side brethren in repeated protests, which also pointed out the danger of causing ministers from abroad to set up separate Presbyteries. A compromise was reached in 1774, by which the Presbyteries were admonished to exer cise great care, and required to make a special report to 52 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. v. Synod of every case, and to transmit the credentials of the persons admitted, while Synod reserved the power to annul their admission. Less obtrusive, but of more lasting importance, was the growing difficulty as to the psalmody of the church, and that first in the congregations which had been connected with the Synod of New York, where the disposition to a change was greatest. It was especially in the Second Church of Philadelphia, organized of those who sympa thized with the Awakening, and long the pastoral charge of Gilbert Tennent, that the dissension was manifest, a minority appealing from Session to Presbytery, and from Presbytery to Synod, against " the introduction of Dr. Watts's imitation of the Psalms." The Synod had already sanctioned its use in churches which preferred it, and refused to recall that approval, while it sent Drs. Wither- spoon, Rodgers, and Macwhorter to talk the recalcitrant party into a different judgment. They reported, but not in terms which indicated their success. The difficulty was made more acute by the unwise language Dr. Watts had employed in the preface to his version, denying the fit ness of the Psalms for Christian use until they had been adapted to " the language of the New Testament." The proceedings of the Synod during this period are more barren than we should have expected of references to public affairs, as it was the time of those successive and acute struggles with Great Britain over the power of taxa tion which finally precipitated the War for Independence. In 1 766 the Synod, on motion of Dr. Alison, sent an ad dress to the king on the repeal of the Stamp Act. Under the surface of this apparent indifference, however, lay an in tense concern in the possible course of events as affecting the ecclesiastical as well as the civil status of the colonies. Thrice in the history of the colonies preparations had THE NEED OF A BISHOP. 53 been made for the consecration of a bishop for the British colonies of America; and thrice the plan had come to naught through what the anti-prelatists of America re garded as the interpositions of Providence, viz., the fall of Archbishop Laud in 1640, the disgrace of the Earl of Clarendon in 1667, and the sudden death of Queen Anne in 1 714. In George III. for the first time the new dynasty was represented by a king of English birth and sympathies, and withal a zealous churchman, while in Thomas Seeker, the primate of Canterbury, and Beilby Porteus, Bishop of Chester and the king's chaplain — himself a native of Vir ginia — the American Episcopal Church had two zealous friends at court. To prepare the way for the new step, Dr. T. B. Chandler, of Burlington, whose great abilities certainly designated him as the occupant of the proposed see, published " An Appeal to the Public in Behalf of the Church of England in America" (New York, 1767), show ing the hardships it endured for want of a bishop. No discipline was maintained over clergy or people ; the rite of confirmation could be enjoyed only by those who could make the journey to England ; the same journey must be undertaken by all candidates for holy orders, and by rea son of wars, pestilences, and shipwrecks one in five of these never returned. He declared that American Episcopalians desired no power over their brethren of other communions. Their bishop would be supported by their own gifts, not by compulsory tithes, and he would claim no such jurisdic tion as English bishops' courts (until 1857) exercised over marriages, divorces, wills, and other questions affected by canon law. In the controversy this provoked the hardships were admitted ; nor was it necessary to call into question the excellent intentions of American Episcopalians. But even they could give no security against the enactment of a 54 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. v. general tithe law and the establishment of prelatical juris diction by the British Parliament, either at once or at some early date. Point was given to these apprehensions by recollections of the stratagem practiced by Governor Fletcher to effect the establishment of episcopacy in New York. At a time when the chaplain of the forces was the only Episcopal minister in the colony, he induced the colonial legislature to pass an act (1693) for the employment of " able Protest ant ministers " for the different inhabited parishes. Then, acting on the principle Cujus regio, ejus religio, and in the face of the protest of the legislature, he interpreted this to mean exclusively clergymen of the Church of England, as no others were of the same communion with William III. ! He and his successors, and other zealous Episcopalians, aided by the English Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, hastened to provide episcopally ordained clergymen even for the thoroughly Puritan churches on Long Island, whose houses of worship they seized on the ground that these had been erected by a public tax, and were therefore the property of the Established Church. And in 1 703 the Episcopalian vestry of Philadelphia waited on Lord Corn- bury, governor of New York, and expressed their hopes that his cousin, Queen Anne, would extend the benefits of his government to Pennsylvania. These transactions emphasized to the Puritan and Pres byterian churches the dangers to religious equality attend ant on the connection with England. The Ulster immi grants naturally would recall the legal establishment of prelacy in their native province, with tithes and episcopal courts, at a time when four out of five of its Protestant inhabitants were Presbyterians ; and they remembered how their fathers had been summoned before those courts on the charge of living in fornication with their own wives, because A JOINT CONVENTION. 55 they had not been married with a ring by an Episcopalian rector. These experiences fitted them to welcome inde pendence as the final disappearance of a peril which had overhung them ever since the young king's accession. It is not without significance that Presbyterian Synod and the Connecticut Association held a joint convention by delegates from 1766 till 1776, and that the Synod of 1775 promptly accepted the leadership of the Continental Con gress, expressly leaving to " that august body " the choice of a fast-day to be held in view of " the alarming state of public affairs." To those who have looked below the sur face it is clear that ecclesiastical considerations were as active in promoting the revolt of the colonies as were the disputes over revenue. Connection with a " mother-coun try " in which church and state had a common head, and were controlled by the same legislature, carried with it other perils than those of fiscal exaction. CHAPTER VI. INDEPENDENCE AND REORGANIZATION, 1 776-89. THE period of the War of Independence is acknowledged on all hands to have been one of disaster to the spiritual condition of the country. In part this was due to the mix ture of ecclesiastical considerations in the motives of the contest. These did not raise it to the horrible dignity of a war of religion, but they brought strife into the sanctuary of .peace, and they prompted to willful injuries to church property. The fact that the Congregationalists, Presby terians, Reformed, Lutherans, and Baptists as a whole were on the patriotic side, while the Episcopalians and the Methodists in the main sided with the mother-country, which also possessed the sympathy and quiet cooperation of the majority of the Friends, was recognized in the conduct of hostilities. When the British troops entered an American town they were pretty sure to seize on the patriotic churches and convert them into barracks, hos pitals, or stables, leaving them in a state of wreck at their departure. The patriot troops naturally would retaliate on the Episcopal churches as they had opportunity. Only the Highlanders, who had settled at Cape Fear and some other places of North Carolina after the rebellion of 1745, broke the unanimity with which the Presbyterians of America — Scotch, Scotch- Irish, Welsh, and Puritan — supported the cause of independence. The Synod of 1 783 congratulates the church on " the general and almost uni versal attachment of the Presbyterian body to the cause 5° PRESBYTERIAN PATRIOTISM. 57 of liberty," as " confessed by the complaints and resent ment of the common enemy." It points to "our burnt and wasted churches, and our plundered dwellings" as "an earnest of what we must have suffered" had the issue of the war been different. Dr. Inglis, the Tory rec tor of Trinity Church, wrote in 1776: "I do not know one Presbyterian minister, nor have I been able, after strict inquiry, to hear of any, who did not, by preaching and every effort in their power, promote all the measures of the Continental Congress, however extravagant." There was, indeed, one minister in the Synod of New England who embraced the British side of the controversy, and joined the royal army. The Synod deposed him, and sus pended another of its members until he brought a certifi cate of his loyalty from the State of New Hampshire. Dr. Witherspoon, along with several other Presbyterians, sat in the Continental Congress, and voted for independ ence. Charles Thomson, an elder in the session of the First Church, was its trusted secretary, and by his pro verbial truthfulness gave additional weight to its proclama tions and gazettes. George Duffield shared with William White the duties and honors of the chaplaincy. The wife of James Caldwell, of Elizabeth — the minister who brought the patriot troops an armful of psalm-books when their wadding gave out — was assassinated by a Tory, and he himself was shot by a drunken sentinel while on chaplain's duty ; and John Rosbrugh, of Allentown, " was barbarously murdered by the enemy at Trenton," in cold blood after he had surrendered. George Duffield had at least one nar row escape, and on the head of John Murray, of Boothbay, was set a reward as great as on those of Samuel Adams and John Hancock. The Synod of 1778 met at Bedminster because Phila delphia was "in possession of the enemy." The Tories 58 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. vi. complained that the fast- days kept by Presbyterians and Puritans were used especially to keep alive the opposition to English policy. In the calls to observe these I find constant reference to the decay of piety, the gross immo ralities which so commonly attend a state of war, and the spread of irreligion. In the twenty years before the war there had been a perceptible decay of religious earnestness. The white-heat methods of the Awakening had been fol lowed by the usual reaction, which attests how much of the temporal and the human had been blended with what was of God in it, and therefore was found lasting. The disputes with the "mother-country" had diverted atten tion from eternal to temporal interests. The churches of. America were ill fit to stand the strain of a time of war, and the temptations it offered to the malevolent passions. Not all the patriotic ministers showed the calmness and good-will which marked Dr. John Rodgers, of New York, the friend and trusted adviser of Washington, who, in his years of exile from his own charge, subordinated every other consideration to his work in the ministry of recon ciliation. The peril was much increased by the alliance, which brought groups of French officers into contact with the people in every important seaport, and with the army at large. The frivolous and scoffing deism of the school of Voltaire was thus naturalized in America, and an irreligious tone began to pervade its society, especially its public life. Religion was valued, if at all, as a supplement to the jail and the police ; belief in a disclosure of God to his creatures was thought a jestworthy superstition. Besides these gravest losses in the character and temper of the people, the churches suffered much disorganization. Their buildings were torn down, or diverted for a time to other uses in a way which involved great loss. Princeton BEYOND THE ALLEGHANIES. 59 College was closed for years, thus interrupting the prep aration of young ministers. It was almost impossible for many pastors to obtain the means of supporting their families, especially in the districts reached by the war. Yet in the face of discouragements of all sorts, the rou tine of the church's work was kept up in the Presbyterian bodies, and in the Synod some forty candidates were ordained to the ministry. In the New England States, indeed, the year 1778 marks the highest point reached by Presbyterian growth, and the following decade the begin nings of decay, as but one new church was organized, while several were dissolved; and in 1782 the Synod of New England, in view of its " broken circumstances," was dissolved to form a Presbytery. In 1 781 the Synod of New York and Philadelphia organ ized the Presbytery of Redstone in western Pennsylvania. When the Treaty of Paris in 1 762 threw open this region to undisputed settlement, the Scotch-Irish had poured across the Alleghany ranges to and beyond what is now the Ohio line. In 1766 Charles Beatty — who as a young Irish peddler had startled William Tennent at Neshaminy by offering his wares in good Latin — and George Duffield had been sent by Synod to preach to the new settlements and report on their spiritual condition. But not until 1 774 was there a minister among them to stay ; and two years later John Macmillan accepted a call to this field. He was a man who knew how to convert such a population into a self-supporting community in church matters, by raising up laborers at home. Largely to him and his pupils is it due that this became the most Presbyterian region of the whole country, and the most conservative in its influence on the church at large. Yet by 1781 there were but four ministers in the Redstone Presbytery, which, like Hanover, was to be a mother of Presbyteries. Not until 1790 was 6o THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. vi. the first house of worship erected, congregations meeting in the woods in summer, and in private houses in winter. In 1782 Matthew Henderson, of the Associate Presbytery, settled in this region, and gathered several small congre gations, who were to share in the troubles which attended the union with the Covenanters. With the return of peace in 1 783 the ecclesiastical rela tions of America took a new aspect. The demand was now made for absolute religious equality, such as existed in Rhode Island and Pennsylvania ; and it was secured by degrees. The battle was hardest in Virginia, where the Presbytery of Hanover took the lead in demanding it, and was vigorously supported by the Baptists. The doctrine that religion needs nothing from the state but a general protection was now enunciated in terms which would have shocked the Westminster Assembly, who " did crie down " Thomas Goodwin's plea for a general toleration. The colonial system lasted longest in New England, where the "standing order" was abolished in Connecticut in 1816, and in Massachusetts in 1833. One effect of ecclesiastical independence was the ter mination of the monopoly of printing the English Bible, which had been vested in the king's printers in London. The Continental Congress first proposed to have an edi tion printed under its auspices, and failing in that for want of type, ordered the importation of a large quantity. In 1 782 Robert Aitken, of Philadelphia, an elder in the Asso ciate Church, brought out an edition, which both Congress and Synod commended to the public. As the ties were now severed which connected the Prot estant churches of America with those of Europe, we find a general movement toward their organization as national churches. The Episcopal Church, no longer especially favored by law and influence in high places, now obtained COVENANTERS AND SECEDERS UNITE. 6 1 bishops not only without opposition, but with the friendly cooperation of other Americans. The Dutch and Ger man Reformed churches established General Synods, and declared their independence of foreign judicatories. The Methodist societies in 1784 cast off the personal control still claimed by John Wesley over all who bore the name. The Congregationalist churches of New England began to draw together into General Associations for each State, after the Connecticut model. The Separate, the Free will and some other branches of the Baptists began to organize into general conferences. The Roman Catholics made their first approach to a national organization by the consecration of John Carroll as Bishop of Baltimore. The Presbyterians felt a similar impulse. It was shown first in the attempt to consolidate the two conservative bodies, the Covenanters and the Seceders. As the former promptly acknowledged the new government of the United States, and thus ceased to be " an anti-government party," it was felt that the chief obstacle to their fellowship with the Seceders had been removed. As early as 1777 a con ference on the subject was begun. The Covenanters, how ever, had embraced a theory of civil government and its direct dependence on Christ's mediatorial headship, which justified their previous attitude toward the government of Great Britain, and this they now showed no disposition to abandon. As one of them said : " You may agree to what propositions you please, but I will agree to none but with this interpretation — that all that power and ability civil rulers have are from Christ, the Prophet of the Covenant of grace, and that all that food and raiment mankind enjoy are from Christ, the Priest of the Covenant." To these positions the Associate Presbytery of Pennsylvania refused their assent ; but in 1 780 the much smaller Presbytery of New York came to terms of union. Through the influ- 62 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. vi. ence of one of its members, Robert Annan, of Wallkill, the question was called up again in the other Presbytery, and a union carried in the meeting of June, 1782, by the cast ing vote of the moderator, James Proudfit, thus constituting the Associate Reformed Church of America. The minority of two ministers and four elders protested, and appealed to the Scotch Associate Synod ; but the majority refused, with some reason, to admit an appeal to a foreign judi cature. The appeal, however, was carried to the Scotch Synod, which in 1785 recognized the protesters as the Associate Presbytery of Pennsylvania, and sent them, in Thomas Beveridge and James Anderson, able assistants, to rebuild the denomination. The latter, in 1 784, pre pared by direction of Presbytery their " Testimony for the Doctrine and Order of the Church of Christ," to which subscription was required. As the Scotch Reformed Pres bytery equally refused to recognize the union, and took steps in 1789 to reconstitute their American churches, the transaction resulted in adding another to the number of Presbyterian subdivisions, as indeed had been predicted by some who opposed it. It did, however, establish an intermediate body between the strict conservatives and the Presbyterian Synod, and thus helped to an approach from each side. The Associate Reformed Church, indeed, had been formed out of very conservative elements, but on the principle of distinguishing between lesser and greater, essentials and inessentials, in the matters which had been reasons for division. And this character it always retained. A complaint from the Reformed Dutch Classis of New Brunswick having opened the question of the mutual rela tion of the American churches of the Reformed faith and order, the Synod of New York and Philadelphia took advantage of it to secure a conference on " matters of gen eral utility and friendship." This was extended afterward THE NEW CONSTITUTION. 63 to include the Associate Reformed Synod in the confer ence, and to cover the suggestion of " a plan for some kind of union among them." The conference was held in October, 1785, and was free, full, and friendly, but led to nothing more than a plan for annual conferences by dele gates, like that with the Connecticut Association before the war. One obstacle to any immediate action was the prospect of an extensive change in the constitution of the Presbyte rian Church. It was felt that it had outgrown an arrange ment which required or assumed the attendance of the whole body of ministers at a single point, and that much was to be gained by the union of neighboring Presbyteries in subordinate synods. By erecting a delegated General Assembly, subdivided into Synods, as these were into Pres byteries, the American church would also more distinctly announce its new standing as a national church, ready to take under its care those who sought its communion in every part of the country. The first step was taken by the Synod of 1786, which adopted a plan for rearranging the bounds of the Presby teries. This increased their number from twelve to six teen, and grouped these into four Synods, with a proviso as to the number of ministers and of ruling elders each Presbytery should elect annually to the General Assem bly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America. This Synod also ordered the preparation of " a book of discipline and government . . . accommodated to the state of the Presbyterian Church in America " by a committee of which Witherspoon was chairman, and Macwhorter, Rodgers, Duffield, Sproat, Robert Smith, Alison, and Ewing were the clerical members. For nearly a century the method of transmitting grave constitutional questions " in 64 • THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. vi. overture " to the Presbyteries had been in use in the Kirk of Scotland, but had not been adopted by the American Synod, as it was not a delegated body. The committee, however, were instructed to distribute three hundred copies of their Plan among the Presbyteries, and every Presbytery was required to "report its observations in writing" to the Synod of 1787. In that Synod a session was assigned for hearing these " observations " : but the minutes have no record of their purport, or even of their being actually read, except that those of the Presbytery of Baltimore were presented and heard the next morning. We have no means, therefore, of ascertaining the degree of unanim ity with which the Plan was received by the Presbyteries, nor could their " observations " amount to a direct vote on its acceptance or rejection. The committee itself was not quite unanimous. Dr. Matthew Wilson, although of the Old Side by training and conviction, offered a substi tute which would have established congregational instead of " classical " Presbyteries. The Presbytery of Suffolk (Long Island) proposed to separate from the church, on the ground that the Plan was impracticable, and its churches would not comply with it ; but it was persuaded to withdraw the proposal. The Synod discussed the Plan in detail, made impor tant alterations, and ordered the distribution of a thousand copies, as amended, among the Presbyteries, " for their consideration, and the consideration of the churches under their care." In the next Synod we hear of three memorials from congregations, but none from Presbyteries. After a full discussion and further amendment, the whole Plan, — embracing the Confession of Faith (amended in the matter of the civil magistrate's relation to the church), the Longer Catechism (with an amendment as to toleration), the Shorter Catechism, the Directory for Worship (radically LAYING BONDS ON THE FUTURE. 65 * altered and not for the better), and a Form of Govern ment and Discipline, — was adopted and ratified finally, by what majority the minutes do not say. This final vote was taken in a Synod of thirty-five ministers and eight elders. One hundred and thirty-six ministers entitled and expected to be present were not so; and some four hun dred church sessions had no ruling elder to represent them. The language of the minutes, " as now altered and amended," indicates that what was finally voted upon differed from both the first draft sent to the Presbyteries in 1786, and the revised draft sent to the Presbyteries and churches in 1787. Dr. Ashbel Green says that "many articles of the constitution as finally sanctioned remained as then agreed upon." But even the name of the General Assembly was settled, in the Synod of 1788. Yet it was enacted not only that " the Form of Govern ment and Discipline and the Confession of Faith " should be that of the church, but that they should " continue to be our constitution and the confession of our faith and practice unalterable, unless two thirds of the Presbyteries under the care of the General Assembly shall propose alterations or amendments, and such alterations or amend ments shall be agreed to and enacted by the General As sembly." Attempts to lay bonds upon the future by constitutional enactment are a weakness characteristic of Americans. But never was the attempt made by a body possessed of less prescriptive right to do so; and in this case no more was forbidden than that a national church should freely give utterance to its actual faith in authori tative form ! It has been claimed that this Presbyterian form of gov ernment was the model after which that of the United States was formed. The same claim, I believe, has been put forward for every other form of church government 66 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. vi. then in existence in America. The Synod of 1787 cer tainly was debating and amending the report of Wither spoon and his associates, at the time when the Constitu tional Convention was discussing in the same city the best form for a new government of the country. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and James Wilson, the three leading debaters of the Convention, although none of them Presbyterians, may well have been familiar with the Scottish methods. And a certain vague resemblance exists between Congress, legislature, and county government on the one side, and Assembly, Synod, and Presbytery on the other. There, however, the likeness ends. These eccle siastical bodies are not legislatures, but only courts for the interpretation of law. The legal background, also, of Presbyterian procedure is the Scottish law, which in turn rests. on the Civil Law of Rome. That of the American constitution is the Common Law of England, which always was most jealous of any intrusion of the Civil Law. Each of the superior courts of the Presbyterian system possesses an authority over the lower, which the States never have conceded to the national Government. And, lastly, the democratic element in the American Constitution has no real correspondent in the Presbyterian system. Its per manent eldership, and its parochial bishops, with seats or representation in its church courts even when they have no pastoral charge, are aristocratic rather than democratic. This last practice, I may add, is unknown to the Reformed churches of Europe. The one feature in the Constitution of the United States, which suggests a Presbyterian influence, is the method of amendment by reference to and consent of the States. This, however, was not yet in use in the American church when the Constitution was drafted. If copied at all, it must have been directly from the constitution of the Kirk PRESBYTERIAN EXAMPLE FOLLOWED. 6"J of Scotland, into which it was introduced by the Barrier Act of 1695. It is not by any external copying of features that the two plans of government are related. It is through both being the fruit of the same great national impulse to give the social life its complete expression by a polity of national dimensions and spirit. It is not in the field of political but in that of ecclesias tical life that the Presbyterian method of synodical govern ment attains a significance far wider than the reach of the denomination. The Presbyterian Synod of colonial times stood entirely alone. It was the only instance in which the collective wisdom and discretion of the whole body was brought to bear continuously upon the affairs of an American church. The Congregationalist churches of Con necticut, indeed, had made an approach to synodical gov ernment, but this was confined to the State. If to-day the interests and affairs of every great Protestant denomination in the land are in the hands of conference, convention, or synod of. some sort, meeting periodically, and with mini sterial and lay members voting equally, it may fairly be claimed that all have walked in the footsteps of the Pres byterians whose Synod is the ancestor of all these no less than of the General Assembly itself. CHAPTER VII. REVIVAL AND DISSENSION, 1 789- 1 8 IO. Great as always has been the influence of the Presby terian Church on the religious life of the country, it prob ably at no time has been so dominant as in the closing years of the eighteenth century. The Puritan churches were localized in New England, with a growing consciousness of their distinctness, as a group of churches and of States, from the rest of the country. The Episcopal Church, which had gone into the War for Independence one of the strongest, had come out one of the weakest, through tak ing the wrong side. It had lost heavily by disendowment, by desertions, and by migration to the British colonies of Nova Scotia and Canada; and it was still struggling to bring opposing tendencies into cooperation, and to perfect its own organization. The Methodist Church was still in its feeble infancy, having with Asbury retired to private life during the progress of the struggle. The Baptist churches, although they had gained heavily in both New England and the South as a consequence of the Great Awakening, had achieved their growth mainly among the poor and uneducated classes ; and had accepted the ideal of a " lowly ministry " of uneducated men. The German churches were isolated from the rest of the nation by their persistence in the use of a foreign language. The newer sects, Free-Will Baptists, " Christians," Universalists, Uni tarians, and Shakers, were great only in their hopes. The Presbyterian Church was strong in a learned minis- 68 PRESBYTERIAN STRENGTH AND LOSSES. 69 try, graduates not only of Princeton but of the Scotch and the New England universities. Its members had borne the brunt of the struggle for independence from the Hud son to the Savannah. It had shared with the Baptists the honor of the struggle for religious equality against Episco palian privilege in the Southern States, and had 'sustained it alone in New York and New Jersey. It had the sup port of the large Scotch- Irish element in the Middle and Southern States, and of the New England overflow west ward across the Hudson. It was more homogeneous and harmonious than ever before, the Old Side men and their traditions having died out, and the methods of the Great Awakening having been heartily accepted. It had shown its staying power in maintaining a unique synodical author ity over its pastors and people, in holding up the standard of Calvinistic orthodoxy in an age far more alien to that mode of thought than our own, and in extending its mis sionary labors to newly settled districts. Not only did it flourish in the older States, but the new territories beyond the Appalachian ranges seemed especially its own. Had the church been able to maintain this position in the nation's religious life, and had it even been able to retain in its membership the children of the great Ulster immigration and to continue to assimilate the New Eng land overflow, it would now take rank, not as the third, but as the first, of the great Protestant communions of America. The ranks of the Baptists and the Methodists, of the Episcopalians and the Disciples, have been swollen at its expense. Of the descendants of the Ulster Presby terians in America probably not much above a third are to-day Presbyterian. However large the membership and extensive the influence of the church, therefore, it cannot be called successful even in holding its own, much less in aggressive power. 70 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. vii. It is in the period now under consideration that the signs of this partial failure are first 'beginning to show themselves, and at the same time its reasons. The first of these was the scholastic shape in which the doctrines of the church were presented in its confession and catechisms, and the influence of these upon preaching and teaching. Calvinism, as John Duncan well says, is " a sheep in wolf's clothing." It is sure to repel those who for the first time have their attention fixed on such questions, until further thought brings them to see that the difficulties which attend any and every view of God's relation to the moral universe are not to be got rid of by denying man's inmost depend ence upon God. There are no truths which require more judicious and guarded statement than these ; and while the Westminster divines were not quite unaware of this, they were far more concerned to guard against logical incom pleteness of statement than against the accumulation of what is mere inference of their own logic. In this respect the Scottish " Confession of Faith," drafted by John Knox in 1560, is so much superior, that its supersession by the more elaborate and less popular document was an histori cal calamity. A second difficulty in the church's way was the rigidity of her polity in the matter of ministerial education. She was right in setting up a high ideal, and has benefited all the churches of America by this. She was wrong in re fusing to recognize that there are times when a higher ex pediency demands a temporary relaxation of the rule. It was a just requirement for a fairly educated and fully intelligent community, which enjoyed the prosperity and the leisure of a country not newly settled. On the fron tier, however, and among those who were enduring the hardships and privations of a new settlement, with but few opportunities for even the simplest education, the rigid THE ' 'ASSOCI A TED PRESS YTER1ES." 7 I exaction of a collegiate education for every candidate for the ministry was a fatal embarrassment. It is true that the Assembly and its Synods maintained a missionary sys tem of some extent, and at times had from forty to fifty ministers and probationers at work in the outlying settle ments of the South and the West. But even these were unable to overtake the demand for preachers and pastors, and the Synod of 1 783 flatly refused to sanction the licen sure of less educated men, a precedent .followed by the General Assembly. It judged of the needs of the frontiers by the standard of Philadelphia, and insisted (the people said) on " making men gentlemen before it made them ministers." It thus left its natural adherents to the more adaptable ministrations of the Methodists and the Baptists. At the same time, at the other extremity, on the New England frontier, the growing rigor of Presbyterian law was tending to alienate the Puritan churches. Ten years even before the adoption of the constitution of 1 789 a movement was begun to effect a reorganization of these churches in New Jersey and New York, which should avoid equally the slackness of Congregationalism and the rigidity of Presbyterianism. Between 1780 and 1807 four " Asso ciated Presbyteries " were formed on this footing, with a confession of eighteen articles only, and claiming for Pres bytery no more than power to advise the churches under its care. But the movement shared the general fate of eclectic compromises. One principle or the other was sure to get the upper hand. By 1818-20 the Associated Pres byteries were broken up, leaving pastors and churches to find their proper place in either the Congregationalist or the Presbyterian bodies. The significance of the move ment was as an indication that there were limits to the cooperation of the Puritan and the Presbyterian elements in the States west of the Hudson, and that the day was 72 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. vii. coming when " the New England way " would be trans planted to every part of the country. Yet that day seemed far enough off when the General Assembly and the Connecticut Association adopted the famous Plan of Union in 1801. Its terms showed that the Assembly was not inclined to unreasonable rigidity on this side, possibly because it had taken warning from the estab lishment of the Associated Presbyteries. It practically made the constituent parts of the two systems interchange able. Churches of either body might call a pastor from the other, and when any dispute arose the appeal might be to either the Presbytery or a council chosen from both bodies. Presbyterian churches might be represented in Associations by ruling elders and Congregational churches in Presby teries by messengers chosen in church meeting. A prac tical test of the spirit in which the Plan was regarded by its authors occurred in 1808, when the Middle Association of Congregationalists in New York State was invited to become a subordinate division of the Synod of Albany, with the approval of the Assembly, and accepted the in vitation rather than unite with others to form a State As sociation. This " Presbygational " system, as it afterward was nick named, received the approval of the Vermont, New Hamp shire, and Massachusetts Associations, and had respect especially to the settlement of western New York from New England; but during the half-century that it lasted it was extended to Ohio, and to States still farther west. It brought into the Presbyterian Church a large num ber of pastors and churches which were more or less in touch with the doctrinal movements of New England, and thus helped to impart to American Presbyterianism that dual_ character which resulted in the division of 1837. The severest test to which the Presbyterian order and THE GREAT REVIVAL. 73 doctrine were subjected was associated with the happiest events of this period. From the close of the War for Inde pendence spiritual influences appeared to lose their hold on the popular mind. Unbelief became the fashion of the day. There was a decay of zeal in the churches, and in the eastern part of Massachusetts a rapid spread of Socin- ianism. The first signs of a change came in 1792, when extensive revivals occurred, especially in western New Eng land. Then the frontier settlements of the new States of Kentucky and Tennessee were deeply moved. Immorality, irreligion, and skepticism abounded in this region. In 1 793 the Kentucky legislature voted to dispense with prayers in its sessions. The churches and ministers were few, and fewer still those in whom was manifest " the power of an endless life." From 1798, when the revival began on the Red River, there hardly was a year unblessed ; but in 1801 the movement culminated in the Southwest, and reached nearly every part of the country, on a scale which recalls the Great Awakening. The movement overflowed the limits of the places of stated worship, and took an open- air character, which recalled the labors of Whitefield and his associates. To meet the needs of a scattered popula tion great " camp meetings " were held at central places — the first of their kind. At these the lasting conversions were many, but the infectious influence of excitements upon great multitudes found unhappy illustrations. Especially in the frontier communities of the Southwest, where the Scotch»Irish were the chief settlers, the tension of newly awakened feeling was so great as to lead to manifold ex travagances and nervous disturbances, resulting in con vulsive physical movements, the " falling exercise," " the jerks," and so forth. In some cases hundreds were flung prostrate, like a grain-field swept by a hurricane, or the ground was torn up by their convulsive stampings. 74 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. vii. While Presbyterians were in the majority among both preachers and people, the Methodists also were on the ground. The former generally labored to check and re strain these physical manifestations ; the latter are said to have encouraged them as a means of grace. The believers in predestination insisted on rational conviction as essential to a right conversion. The believers in freewill accepted as satisfactory conversions effected by processes which set both will and reason aside in trances or in physical convul sions. The hunger for preaching went far beyond the power of the ministers to meet it. Laymen, even children, were heard eagerly, and with powerful effect. In these circumstances the Presbytery of Transylvania, and then the Cumberland Presbytery, which in 1802 had been set off from it, took the step of licensing as preachers a number of zealous young men, who neither had obtained the required amount of academic training nor were able to give an entire assent to the teaching of the Westminster Confession, especially on the subjects of predestination and perseverance. Against this course a minority of the Cum berland Presbytery protested and appealed to the Synod of Kentucky, which took the unfortunate step of empower ing a commission to deal with the case. This body assumed to itself powers and performed acts which the General As sembly of 1807 declared to be "at least of questionable regularity." It suspended the majority of the Presbytery and all its licentiates. The Synod stood by its commission and went still further. But the Presbytery compromised its case by refusing" to a'ppeal in due form to the General Assembly, although this course was suggested twice by the Assembly itself, which disclaimed the possession of original jurisdiction. This, together with the manifest irregularities in its proceedings, so much weakened its friends in the Assembly of 1809 as to lead to an acceptance of the THE LESSER BODIES. 75 Synod's explanations as fully satisfactory. A year later the Presbytery had become a separate denomination, which grew rapidly in numbers, in sobriety of method, and in demand for an educated ministry. The Synod of Cumber land, organized in 181 3, the next year adopted a revision of the Westminster Confession, from which "fatalism," or what it judged such, was eliminated. Thus was constituted the left wing of American Presbyterianism, the Cumberland Presbyterian Church. The conservative bodies on the right wing were growing steadily in numbers and influence. (1) The Reformed Presbytery, reconstituted in 1798, obtained some notable accessions of the younger genera tion. One of these, Alexander McLeod, in 1800 declined a call to a New York church on the ground that some of its members were slave-holders. This at once fixed at tention upon the subject, and the Presbytery required that the members of the church should emancipate their slaves. This decision was conveyed to the churches in the South by James McKinney and Samuel B. Wylie, and with a single exception the membership complied with it. By 1809 the Presbytery had become a Synod, and the three local " committees " into which it had been divided became Presbyteries. As reorganized the body dissented from the Constitution of the United States on the ground that it contained no recognition of the mediatorial authority of Christ over the nations ; and its membership therefore abstained from voting. In exposition of these views they published a doctrinal and historical Testimony in 1806. (2) The Associate Presbytery (or Seceders) had grown by immigration in both the Middle and the Southern States, and in 1801 a Synod was organized in subordination to the General Synod in Scotland — a relation not terminated until 1818. In James Anderson, of western Pennsylvania, 76 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. vii. whom they elected professor of theology in 1792, they found an able and laborious, though somewhat tedious, trainer of their ministry. With them also the question of slavery was brought up in 1800, and again in 1808, by memorials. The Associate Synod, however, did not adopt the heroic remedy the Reformed Presbytery had applied. They, in 181 1, advised emancipation, but left open an al ternative, which deprived the act of much of its force. (3) The Associate Reformed Church, formed by the union of 1780-82, was growing more rapidly than either of these bodies. To the three Presbyteries the Synod embraced was added, in 1 794, the Presbytery of London derry, embracing most of the Presbyterian churches that were left in New England. But within a year after this union the Synod began to hear unsatisfactory reports of the behavior of these churches in the matter of their Psal mody, and their communion with other churches and Christians. As no satisfaction was obtained on this point, the Synod in 1801 "disclaimed all responsibility" for the New England Presbytery. The same year witnessed a secession in the other direction. The Synod had refused to publish a " subordinate Testimony," and had adopted the Westminster Confession and Catechisms with qualifying declarations as to the jurisdiction of the civil magistrate in matters of religion. On this and like accounts two minis ters withdrew, and organized in 1801 the Reformed Dis senting Presbytery, which perpetuated its existence for more than half a century. The body was called the War- wickites, from the more influential of the two. The next year the Synod made provision for the election of a Gen eral Synod, with four provincial Synods. This scheme proved too elaborate and cumbersome for the strength of the church, and had the further effect of isolating the sub divisions from each other. The eastern wing of the church, STATISTICS OF GROWTH. fj led by the eloquent John M. Mason, of New York, diverged from the West and the South, and approximated the posi tion of the General Assembly. It is only from the statistics the General Assembly be gan to append to its minutes that we are able to obtain an idea of the rate at which the main body of Presbyterians grew. Those of 1789 show a total of 419 churches with 177 ordained ministers and 11 probationers. The returns for the following years are all defective, until we reach 1 798 and 1 799. In the latter year we find the Presbyteries have grown from 17 to 25, with 449 churches, served by 266 ministers and 35 licentiates. The reports are again defective until 1803, when the ingatherings from the great revival are indicated in 31 Presbyteries and 511 churches, supplied by 322 ministers and 48 licentiates. It was after 1807 that the report of communicants is attempted, but always with from 2 to 9 Presbyteries marked as having made "no report." The minutes of 18 10, the last of the present period, show that 32 of the 36 Presbyteries re ported 28,901 communicants gathered in 772 churches, and supplied by 434 ordained ministers and 5 1 licentiates. The extent to which the churches outnumbered the ministers and licentiates suggested strenuous efforts, to which the Assembly called the Presbyteries, to increase the number of candidates. It was from the Presbytery of Philadelphia that the suggestion came for the establishment of a theological school. The work of circulating good books had been promoted even in colonial times. By a pamphlet called " Glad Tidings," describing the widespread revivals, and by establishing an " Assembly's Magazine," the church now entered the field of publication on its own account, while it formally approved of new editions of the Scriptures, and of the formation of Bible Societies. It declined to adopt the program of immediate, compulsory emancipation 78 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. vii. of the slaves held by its own members ; but it repeated its disapproval of slavery, and gladly welcomed to the ministry two colored men, who labored among their own people. It required its home missionaries not to neglect the Indians in their fields of labor, and found in Gideon Blackburn, of Tennessee, a worthy successor to the Brainards, in his labors among the Cherokees (1792— 1810). Besides the differences growing out of the revivals in the Southwest, the church had few matters of dispute to distract it. Adam Rankin came across the Alleghanies to convince the Assembly of 1 789 of the wrongfulness of al lowing Watts to supersede Rouse in the matter of Psal mody, and went back to cast in his lot with the Associate Reformed Church in Kentucky, and to give them also trouble enough. In 1802 Dr. Dwight's enlargement and revision of Watts, with an appendix of hymns, was adopted by the Assembly without resistance. The only doctrinal discussions of the time grew out of the influence of the views of theology put forward by Dr. Samuel Hopkins, of Newport, in 1793. In 1798 Hezekiah Balch, of Greenville, Tenn., was heard on appeal from the Synod of the Carolinas ; and while the Assembly, on hear ing his explanations, exonerated him from the charge of heresy, it yet had admonished him for making " disinter ested benevolence " the test of a gracious state, and for failing to trace our innate depravity to our membership in a fallen race. These well-known points of Hopkinsian teaching he had absorbed during a visit to New England, which he took to raise funds for Greenville College. He submitted himself to the admonition of the Assembly, but remained a Hopkinsian to his death, as was his associate and successor in the college's presidency, Dr. Charles Cof fin, and others. CHAPTER VIII. THE ERA OF NEW METHODS, 181O-3O. IT was not until some twenty years after the organiza tion of the General Assembly that the methods of practical administration were really adjusted. There were years of outreaching and of experiment in various directions, under the influence of a spirit which was at .work in every branch of the Presbyterian brotherhood, in the other Protestant churches of America, and in the churches, both established and free, of Great Britain. It was indeed in these last that the first steps in the new direction were taken, and from thence that the new methods of procedure made their way to America. The Great Awakening, which all these churches had shared, was characterized by a disposition to subordinate everything to immediate practical efficiency. It rearranged the theology of Protestantism in a new perspective of doc trines, with reference to the conversion of sinners, laying stress upon those points only which seemed to contribute to that end. Much more in the field of practical adminis tration it placed no value upon traditional methods or principles, when newer plans of action promised larger results. The authority of bishops, the independency of local churches, and the initiative of Synods and Presby teries alike must yield to this ; or else see those who once had accepted the new maxims form themselves into entirely new communions, in which the principle of immediate util ity dominated all methods. Those who clung to the older 79 80 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. viii. communions, but acquiesced in the new ideas, compromised by setting up a new order alongside the old, and working the two' in such harmony as was attainable. The Presbyterian Church had to give up less in yielding to the new demands than did either of the two rival sys tems. It placed its aggressive work, indeed, in the hands of boards chosen annually, and administered by permanent officials — the method with which we now are so familiar, but which seemed so novel a century ago. It allowed these to adopt the policy of big meetings, with eloquent speakers to enforce the claims of the annual report upon audiences heated by eloquence. But by keeping the selec tion of these boards in the hands of the church's courts, it avoided the evils of a nominally popular election, by which a few persons might perpetuate indefinitely their tenure of office. To this extent the stricter Presbyterians were right in their preference for boards thus created and controlled, to those created by voluntary societies — a preference which became one of the fighting issues of the approaching era of division. A thoroughly effective board, however, must take responsibilities of action which are not reconcilable with the authority of initiative which our theory of church government vests in the General Assembly. It was the inception of missions to the heathen, so long neglected by the Protestant churches, which introduced the new method. In America this began with the organi zation of the American Board of Commissioners of Foreign Missions in 1810, by the Congregationalists of Massachu setts, in response to the desire of certain candidates for the ministry, to be sent to the foreign field. The General Assembly- in 1812 commended the Board to the support of its churches, and afterward refused to establish a Foreign Mission Board of its own, although urged to do so by the American Board itself. Within the church, and in coop- THE NEW WEST. 8 I eration with the members of kindred churches, were formed local missionary societies. These, however, confined their labors to the pagan Indians of our own country ; and in 1826 even these were consolidated with the American Board. Parallel with this rise of foreign missions, there arose a " new interest in the work of home missions. The valley of the Mississippi was now open to white settlement, and the first settlers were giving painful illustration of the influence of such a migration on moral habits and feeble Christian character. In 181 3 Samuel J. Mills, who had held with two others the prayer- meeting under the haystack in the meadow near Williams College, which led to the formation of the American Board, and who had been debarred from the foreign field by ill-health, visited the new settlements, in company with John F. Schermerhorn, to investigate and report upon their condition. Their account of the profan ity, drunkenness, gambling, and indifference they witnessed was an eloquent and effective appeal to the Calvinistic churches, leading to the organization of home missionary societies, and to the transfer of the General Assembly's home mission work to a Board of Home Missions, with ampler powers, in 18 16. It was now seen that steps must be taken to occupy the home field more effectively than had been done by sending out a few itinerants, to spread their labors over a wide field, and to form small churches, which soon perished of neglect. Another department of home mission work was entered in 18 19 by the establishment of the Board of Education. This was the time of the rise of the great national societies : the American Bible Society, organized by delegates of local societies in 1816; the American Sunday-school Union in 1824, and the American Tract Society in 1825. In the smaller Presbyterian churches home missionary work was 82 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. viii. still conducted by purely synodical methods, and none of them engaged as yet in foreign missions; but individuals, such as Dr. Alexander Proudfit, gave support to the American Board. Hardly less important in its effects was the change now begun in the education of the church's ministry. In the colonial period such training as was given in addition to the academic course of study was generally obtained by the candidate's residence at the home of a working pastor of recognized theological .attainments. It was chiefly instruction in dogmatic theology by the preparation of prescribed essays and sermons, and practical training in pastoral work in the homes of the minister's people. In New England, pastors like Joseph Bellamy and Nathaniel Emmons were especially sought out. The next step in the. Presbyterian churches was to designate a fit man to exercise such oversight, and to pay him a small .salary in recognition of his additional toil, rather than in compensa tion for it. So the Reformed Dutch Church selected Dr. John Livingston, of New York, in 1784; the Associate Presbyterian Church in 1792 appointed Dr. John Ander son, of Beaver County, Pa. ; the Associate Reformed Church secured Dr. John M. Mason, of New York, in 1804, and gave him a colleague in 1809; and the Re formed Presbyterian Church appointed Dr. Samuel B. Wylie, of Philadelphia, in 1808. In the Presbyterian Church, study under pastors, especially those who, like Tennent and Blair, had founded classical academies, came first. After Witherspoon's acceptance of the presidency at Princeton in 1 768, the occupant of that office was ex pected and paid to give instruction in sacred literature and in theology. But men of eminence as pastors and teach ers, like Robert Smith, of Pequa, continued to attract students for preparation in theology. THEOLOGICAL SEMINARIES. 83 The insufficiency of both means to meet the rapidly increasing demand for ministers was felt especially after the great revivals of 1 799-1 804; and the notable success of the Congregationalist seminary recently established at Andover suggested a new step. The president of Prince ton College, it was found, could spare but two hours a week to carry his students of theology over the entire field. In 1809 the General Assembly submitted to the Presbyteries a plan to establish either one, two, or several theological schools. As many of the Presbyteries having voted generally for a single school, as for any other plan, steps were taken for its endowment, and in 1812 Dr. Archibald Alexander, a native of Virginia, who had first suggested the plan to the Assembly, and had left the presidency of Hampden-Sidney College for a Philadelphia pastorate, was called to be the first professor of theology, with nine students. Next year Dr. Samuel Miller was associated with him, as professor of ecclesiastical history and church government; and in 1820 Charles Hodge was employed to teach Hebrew and Greek, becoming professor of oriental and biblical literature in 1822. The seminary owed much, in its inception and early years, to the gifts and efforts of devout women in the church. As the Middle States were still comparatively poor, and as New England was occupied with the endowment of Andover Seminary and its struggling colleges, it was hard to get an endowment for Princeton. Devout women not a few gave and collected for this purpose. John Seargent gave a fortnight's fees, and others contributed up to the measure of their ability. The Assembly having left the Synods free to establish synodical seminaries, if they chose, the Synod of Virginia established Union Seminary at Hampden-Sidney, with one professor and an instructor; and in 1828 it obtained 84 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. viii. the support of the Synod of North Carolina. In 1821 Auburn Seminary was opened, under control of the Synod of Geneva, with its three professorships, filled by James Richards, M. L. R. Perrine, and Henry Mills. Rather on the old footing of the colonial academy was the South ern and Western Theological Seminary, set on foot by Isaac Anderson, at Maryville, Tenn., a man equally great as teacher and preacher, and Hopkinsian in his views of theology. The theological seminaries at Columbia in South Carolina (1828), and Alleghany in western Penn sylvania (1826), were synodical institutions. This new method of training ministers represented both a loss and a gain. It could not secure that direct familiar ity with the pastor's work among his people which was possible in what we may call the clerical apprenticeship of the older method. It also made it possible for the teach ers to become scholastic and abstract in their methods, as working pastors were not likely to be. And by concen trating the whole work of training the ministry in the hands of a few closely associated scholars, it 'created the opportunity to stamp the peculiarities of some single mind upon the teaching of the church at large, so as to narrow its range of theological thought to one or a few types, and exaggerate some points of doctrinal teaching far be yond their true importance. The gain was in the greater thoroughness with which the scientific parts of theology could be mastered and imparted by teachers set free from other labors, and with the field of theology shared be tween several. At the same time this opened vistas of grave possibilities as to the effect of the investigations of theological science upon minds pledged to teach the views formulated in the standards of the church. It was again the problem of clerical education that de veloped those differences between the two elements in the HOPKINSIANISM. 85 personal composition of the Presbyterian Church which afterward led to their disunion. The spiritual needs of the colored people had suggested in 1818 the establish ment of an " African School " to train preachers of their own color. The proposal to place its teachers under the same special pledge to the standards, as is given by pro fessors in Princeton Seminary, was resisted by the New England element which controlled the Synods adjacent to those States. And this disagreement probably caused its suspension in 1826. Parallel with the new departure in ministerial education was a general effort to increase the number of theological students. The General Assembly urged the Presbyteries to press the claims of the work upon gracious young men. To aid needy students two education societies were formed, one to cooperate with the American Education Society, centered in Boston, and the other to act under the authority of the General Assembly. The former proposed to assist young men during their academic career only, giving as a reason that the church was too much divided on doctrinal questions to allow of united action as regards theological training! This only could mean dissatisfaction with the theological character of Princeton, as representing a Cal vinism unaffected by the " improvements " which Edwards, Hopkins, and Emmons had introduced in ,New England. At this time the especial views of Dr. Samuel Hopkins, of Newport, enjoyed a great vogue in both New England and the adjacent States. Samuel Whelpley, of New York, defended them with great vigor and some acrimony in "The Triangle" (1816); Edward Dorr Griffin, at Newark (1801-09), Gardiner Spring of the Brick Church, in New York, Samuel Hanson Cox, a young convert from Quaker ism, and others, held them. James Richards, who suc ceeded Griffin in Newark, and was afterward professor of 86 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. viii. theology in the seminary at Auburn, erected in 1819 by those who thought Princeton too narrow, was rather an Edwardean than a Hopkinsian, and dissented strongly from the peculiar views of Dr. Emmons, which he found prevalent in western New York. Equally decided, but in different degrees, was the oppo sition to this Hopkinsian drift. Dr. Ezra Stiles Ely, a New Englander, but then a hospital chaplain in New York, made himself the spokesman of extreme opposition by his " Contrast between Calvinism and Hopkinsianism " (New York, 181 1), whose sharpness gave offense even in Phila delphia. . He was called in 18 13 to succeed Dr. Archibald Alexander in the Pine Street Church,, but his settlement was resisted by a strong minority, which after a time with drew to form a Sixth Church. In 18 1 7 the Synod of Pennsylvania, in a Pastoral Letter composed by Dr. Ely, congratulated the churches on the vigor shown by its Presbyteries in " resisting the introduc tion of Arian, -Socinian, Arminian, and Hopkinsian here sies, which are some of the means by which the enemy of souls would, if possible, deceive the very elect." The stigma thus affixed to a school whom Dr. Ashbel Green had described to Mr. Balch as " the most laborious stu dents, faithful pastors, successful preachers, and instructive writers in all New England," arrested the attention of the committee on the records of that Synod, and they re ported a commendation of its zeal with an expression of regret that it had been "manifested in such a manner as to be offensive to other denominations." This was due probably to the chairman of the committee, Dr. Samuel Miller, whose friendship for Dr. Griffin did not prevent his being a decided opponent of what Dr. Rice called " those Hopkinsian crudities." It is said that he had suggested to Dr. Ely the writing of the " Contrast," but regretted INDIVIDUALISM. 87 the tone he took. In his view, which time has justified, the Hopkinsian peculiarities were a temporary phase of thought, which at last would vanish into the limbo of for gotten theories. He believed that more was to be gained by courteous discussion and patience than by judicial con demnations. There were those who differed from this Gamaliel-like policy, and two protests against the report received the signatures of twelve of the one hundred and one members of that Assembly. As has been pointed out by Dr. Augustus Strong, the root of all the theological peculiarities of New England theology, from Hooker and Sheppard to our own times, may be traced to the extravagant individualism which has characterized her social and intellectual life. These short lived "improvements" of the Calvinistic theology were but so many attempts to bring Calvinism into harmony with a principle which found its final expression in Emer son's " supremacy of the individual conscience " over all law and all forms of institutions. In her opposition to congregational independency and her maintenance of synodical authority, the Presbyterian Church held to the principle of an organic social life in both the race and the church. And the instinct which led her to regard these "improvements" with repugnance was historically just and theologically sound. Here again, however, we must regret that the Westminster standards, as adopting the Covenant or " Federal " theology of the Cocceian school, presented the opposite principle in an inadequate and ex tremely artificial shape, and represented the primal unity of the race, and that of the redeemed with Christ, as a forensic fiction rather than a spiritual reality. Nor did the Princeton theology at any time rise to a perception of the difference between the form of statement found in the standards and the principle really at stake. Among the 88 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. viii. Covenanters, who cherished the older traditions of Scottish Calvinism, there was complaint that Princeton mistook theologic fact for forensic fiction, and laid no stress on the dignity of the Saviour as the living head of his redeemed people, in explaining the connection of his righteousness with their salvation.1 More easy and unresisted jwas the encroachment of Puritan individualism in the practical life of the church. The New England men among its ministry brought with them elements of the Independent conception of the church, which differed widely from historic Presbyterian ism, but which have nearly replaced it. Their demand for " a regenerate church-membership " not only set aside " the judgment of charity " of the Reformed churches,- but introduced the fashion of speaking of the adult communi cants as the only " members of the church," and of treat ing its baptized children as outside pagans, exempt even from its discipline. For the Presbyterian usage of baptiz ing the children of the baptized came in the Congregation alist rule that baptism should be confined to the children of communicants, i.e., of those who could give credible evidence of their conversion. Thus Dr. Gardiner Spring, on coming from New England to the pastorate of the Brick Church, set aside the usage established by Dr. Rod- gers, Dr.McKnight, and Dr. Samuel Miller, and confined baptism to " those children one of whose parents was a professed Christian."2 From the same root grew the 1 See Dr. S. B. Wylie in " The American Christian Expositor," vol. i., pp. 419-425, and pp. 445-453. One of Dr. Wylie's former students had been challenged for his views on this point on applying for admission to the Pres byterian ministry, but had been admitted after explanations. 2 See his " Life and Times," New York, 1865, vol. i., pp. 124-126. Dr. Spring appeals to the language of the Confession and the Longer Catechism as justifying this restriction. But his eminent predecessors in the pastorate had interpreted the language of the standards in accordance with the historic sense ; he, in accordance with the language of the Great Awakening. Dr. Charles Hodge always stood by the older interpretation. CHURCH LIFE. 89 practice of establishing elaborate covenants and articles of belief in each congregation, to which every member was asked to give assent, instead of receiving them on a con fession of the simplest essentials of Christian faith. The requirement was natural enough among Congregational- ists, but manifestly out of harmony with Presbyterianism. Besides, these in the more public aspects of the church, there were important changes in the Congregational life of this time. The position of the ministry became less separate and formal. Even late in the eighteenth century they commonly appeared on the streets in their black gowns. In 1795, and probably later, they wore them on their way to church on Sundays. Dr. Milledoller speaks of passing Dr. Samuel Miller frequently on Sunday morn ings, " both dressed in full canonicals, not omitting the three-cornered hat," and says they were called " the boy ministers." With the new century the gown was laid aside on the street, and gradually disused even in the pulpit — a symbol of the abandonment of that position of factitious reverence which the ministry had occupied. In 1 80 1 Dr. Archibald Alexander, on a visit to New Eng land, knew he had crossed the Connecticut State line and had entered Rhode Island from the cessation of all public deference to his ministerial character. The manners of Rhode Island were now to become national. The labors of the ministry were arduous. Intolerance of read sermons compelled the practice of memorizing after writing, and public taste exacted a stately and elab orate style, such as John M. Mason and Edward Dorr Griffin especially exemplified, from the occupants of im portant pastoral charges. Long, even life-long pastorates were still the rule, and changes the exception, so that the preacher commonly spent his whole labor on a single flock, and had no opportunity to use old material in a new 90 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. viii. pulpit. Official visitation at least twice a year was ex pected of them. And while the general introduction of Sunday-schools during this period somewhat lightened their labofs among the young of their flock, where the older tradition lingered they were expected to meet and catechize the children of their charge every week on Wednesday or on Saturday, with the help of some of the elders, or, if she were a notable woman, of the pastor's wife. The Lord's Supper was administered four times a year; and the Edwardean test for communicants, once rejected even by Gilbert Tennent, now came into very general acceptance. People came not so much to get grace, as to profess that they had got it. At the same time the Zwinglian theory of a simple commemoration became more common, and reliance was placed simply upon " the hallowed associations " of the rite, and its adaptation for enforcing truth by a striking symbol. Between the General Assembly and the other Presby terian bodies, except the Cumberland Presbyterians, the breach was now complete in the matter of Psalmody. These others still clung to the use of the Scotch Psalter of 1649, and made the use of uninspired hymns a ground for refusing communion. In spite of repeated efforts toward a better collection, Dr. Dwight's " Psalms and Hymns " remained the only book the churches of the General Assembly were allowed to substitute for the Scotch Psalter until 1831. It contained the whole of Dr. Dwight's revision of Dr. Watts's Psalms. Of the smaller Presbyterian bodies, the Associate Re formed Church had the most memorable history during this time. From the first its origin, though a union on the principle of preferring essentials to lesser peculiarities, seemed to affect its position and tendencies. The leader ship of Dr. John M. Mason corresponded to this initiative. A HASTY UNION. 9 1 In 181 1 we find the General Synod treating Psalmody as a question for forbearance rather than strictness ; and five years later Dr. Mason's " Plea for Sacramental Union on Catholic Principles " showed how far he had advanced toward a comprehensive Presbyterianism. In 1820 the General Synod received overtures for a union from the General Assembly. This was accepted by a small major ity at the next session, although it had been voted down in the Presbyteries, and the union thus irregularly agreed to was consummated. Three Presbyteries only united with the General Assembly ; but among the ministers received were John M. Mason, Erskine Mason, George Junkin, and William Engles. In the meantime the stricter Presbyteries and churches of the West had withdrawn from the Gen eral Synod, and organized a Synod of the West, and even opened negotiations for union with the Associate Church ; and in 1821 the Presbyteries and churches of the South had seceded chiefly because of the hostility to slavery shown by the Northern part of the church. Even the Synod of New York perpetuated its organization, retain ing most of its churches and ministers, and finally, in 1836, recovering the library of the Newburg Seminary, which had been removed to Princeton after the union of 1822. The seminary itself was resuscitated in 1829, while the Western Synod had established another at Pittsburg in 1825. The Associate Church, which became independent of the Scottish Synod in 18 18, moved on more quietly, extending its membership South and West by home mission labors. Although slavery was declared "a moral evil" in 181 1, slave-holders were not debarred from communion until 1830. In 1825 it issued a special testimony against Uni- tarianism and Hopkinsianism, describing the latter as a revival of Pelagianism. It declined a union with even 92 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. viii. the stricter Associate Reformed Synod of the West, stand ing until 1840 by the unaltered Westminster Confession .and its doctrine of the civil magistrate, while rejecting the " political dissent " which the Covenanters had first adopted toward the government of Great Britain and now applied to that of America. Among the Covenanters themselves there was not entire harmony on this point, and what there was tended to diminish as time went on. During the War of 1812-15 Dr. Alexander MacLeod was the foremost among Ameri can preachers in vindication of the policy of the national government ; and this sympathetic attitude was reflected by the Synod of 1812, which proposed that its members should take what was virtually an oath of allegiance to the United States, but with no mention of the Constitution.1 The stricter view was represented by Dr. James R. Will- son, of Albany, who did not sympathize with Dr. MacLeod's purpose "to render our system less exclusive." He en joys the distinction of being the first American writer on the history of doctrine, through his " Historical Sketch of Opinions on the Atonement" (Philadelphia, 181 7). 2 The church grew steadily, if not rapidly, a General Synod with two subordinate Synods, taking the place of the Synod in 1 This oath ran : "I, A. B., do solemnly declare, in the name of the Most High God, the searcher of hearts, that I abjure all foreign allegiance what soever, and hold that these States and the United States are," and ought to be, sovereign and independent of all other nations and governments ; and that I will promote the best interests of this empire, maintain its independence, pre serve its peace, and support the integrity of the Union to the best of my power." The Synod declare their disapprobation of the constitution is " a matter of conscience, and wholly founded on the omission" of a recog nition of " the sovereignty of Messiah overall persons and things." Dr. MacLeod's sermons on " The Character, Causes, and Ends of the Present War," preached in 1814, and published the year following, made a stir lo cally, as New York City and most of its preachers were unfriendly to the war. They were praised by Jefferson, and Secretary Stanton is said to have read them once a year during the War for the Union. 2 Pages 123-215 are devoted to America, and contain some valuable notices. But the whole book is badly digested. AN ERA OF GROWTH. 93 1823. As their decided opposition to slavery made their continuance in the South uncomfortable, a general migra tion to the States north of the Ohio was planned, their first settlement being at Eden, in southern Illinois, on whose name Mr. Dickens fastened in his " Martin Chuz- zlewit." The population of the nation during this period increased from 7f to I2f millions, extending by isolated groups as far west as the Missouri River, but moving more abun dantly north of the Ohio River than south of it. But the growth of the American churches was far more rapid. This was due largely to a series of widespread revivals during the years of commercial depression and general distress, which followed the Peace of 18 16. By 1819,' it may be said, the skeptical tendencies which came in with the Revolution were finally overcome. The compact organization of the churches, the recognized ability of their leaders, and the efficiency of the new and centralized methods of religious work had created a new prestige for positive religion, while skepticism, under the name of free thought, became a sect whose feebleness and purposeless- ness were advertised by its attempts at organization- and agitation. So the churches grew and multiplied, now by the fervor of revivals, now by the steady weekly ministra tions of the gospel. The General Assembly began to re port its statistics of membership in 1807, when it had 598 churches and 365 pastors and licentiates on its rolls. In 1820 the returns showed a communicant roll of 72,096 in over 1299 churches, supplied by 741 pastors and 108 licen tiates — three Presbyteries sending no report. In 1830 the communicant membership was 173,329 in 2158 churches, ministered to by 1491 ministers and 220 licentiates. The most rapid growth had been in the new settlements in western New York and in Ohio. It had been a saying 94 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. vnr. ,that the Sabbath was unknown west of the Genesee River. But the Synod of Genesee and the two adjacent now con tained more members of the church than the whole Gen eral Assembly could have claimed at the opening of the century. All this cost heroic toil on the part of devoted men, who generally gave up the comforts of life in the older States, that they might save the newer for Christ and his church. They rode on long circuits through the pathless forests or over unbroken prairies, where the bending of the stalks of grass showed the "trail." They slept at night under a tree, beside a fire kept alight to scare off beasts of prey; or they shared the rude shelter and rough fare of the settler. If they found homes for their families it was in rude shanties of two rooms, where they eked out existence far from schools, physicians, and stores, often laboring with their own hands. They met every form of resistance, from stolid indifference to avowed infidelity. They encountered drunkenness, lewdness, horse-racing, gambling, and Sabbath-breaking in the newer settlements. But nothing disheartened them or broke down their faith in God and the gospel, and bit by bit they saw better in fluences becoming pervasive, and the order of a Christian civilization replacing the wild lawlessness of an earlier day. CHAPTER IX. THE NEW AGE. With the opening of the fourth decade of the nine teenth century — as of the eighteenth — there dawns a new age for the churches of America. As the date of the Great Awakening marks the transition from the Puritan to the Methodist or " Evangelical " period, so the new date stands for the transition to a period we might call the his torical or the churchly, or by half a .dozen related names. In this case the new influence reaches America from Great Britain, pervading different portions of our Christian com munity with different degrees of rapidity. It was the Protestant Episcopal Church here which, like its mother- church abroad, was the first to recognize what was con genial to its own spirit in the new atmosphere of thought and feeling. The characteristic note of the new era is its apprehen sion of Christianity, not especially as doctrinal truth or de vout emotion, but as historical fact. It turns away from systems to the Scriptures, especially to the Gospels. It1 takes up Lessing's challenge — to show how historical fact) can be religious truth — and meets it by placing the Incar-/ nation in the forefront of Christian teaching. It values all the ties of office and sacrament and worship which in any way bind our own time to that wonderful Life, and to the church which first grew out of it. ft finds in these the manifestation, in forms essentially beautiful) of that which 95 96 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. ix. is the core of Christianity-^the personal presence of Christ with his church, as her king and the source of her united life. This new age is especially the social age. Puritanism, by its excessive individualism, broke up society into its constituent elements, leaving each "face to face with God in the wilderness." By its stress on the nice points of doctrinal distinction on which men more easily differ than agree, it tended to sunder them into antagonistic parties and sects, rather than bring them into unity and brother hood. Methodism did not overcome this Puritan tend ency, but rather adopted it, as it set before the church as its goal the salvation of the largest number of individ ual souls rather than the establishment of God's kingdom through the redemption of society. It went even further than did Puritanism in ignoring the historic continuity of the church and sweeping aside whatever was not seen to be directly useful to the ends it recognized. The new age is characterized throughout by the social stress. Beginning with the questions, " What is the church ? Where is it ? What are the essentials of its organization ? What is the proper expression of its life in worship, in organization ? " it has gone on to investigate the relation of the church to social problems of every kind. Moral reforms, the study of the poor, the demands of social revolutionists, the ideal of a truer human brotherhood among men, are but the newer phases of the questions put by the leaders of the Oxford Movement. In America they were first propounded to the church by Stephen Colwell in his " New Themes for the Protestant Clergy " (Philadelphia, 185 1), a book which now would cause hardly a ripple of interest, but was then received almost as a proposal of apostasy from the pure gospel. They now are pressed with the vehemence and exaggeration which char- THEOCRATIC IDEALS. 97 acterize all reactions, and which frequently hide the old truth by the obtrusion of the new into the foreground. To the Presbyterian churches, with their theocratic tra ditions inherited from their founders, this reaction to a more social view of religious problems should be especially welcome. The individualism of both Puritanism and Methodism is alien to their oldest and best traditions, which call for the realization of God's kingdorp in this present world through the influence of Christian discipline and teaching. The Geneva of John Calvin corresponds more nearly to the new aspirations which are stirring in the churches of America than does anything else in mod ern history. The great Scottish kirkmen from Knox to Henderson give us suggestions for the problems of to-day. While the past cannot be restored, and its methods are no longer in place, its ideals have a lasting value for us. Yet the first attitude of these churches toward the new tendency was one of indifference and even hostility. This was partly because it presented itself in shapes less con genial to Presbyterian tradition, and partly because Pres byterians were dominated by the ideals of the Awakening. It is true that it was two Presbyterians, Edward Irving and Sir Walter Scott, who first gave expression to the new spirit, as Dr. Newman points out in one of his Oxford pamphlets. But the seed they sowed fell into an. Anglican glebe, where it brought forth a harvest of ecclesiasticism and aestheticism mainly. Not that both were not akin to the new spirit. The idea of the church needed to be im pressed upon a generation which had grown indifferent to it ; and the more receptive minds among "us, such as James W. Alexander, did not fail to discern the significance of the truth which underlay' the Tractarian extravagances. Equally necessary was the restoration of the beautiful to its place in the service of God and the order of his house. 98 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. ix. As M. Lanfrey says, our age is one which is characterized by imagination rather than reason. Men feel the force of historical associations, or the subtle attraction of form, as they did not for centuries past. Powers no less human than reason and emotion have been called into a new activity, and demand satisfaction. To give them a noble direction, to effect their consecration to a divine service, is one of the problems of our time. It is not a question between recognition of the beautiful and indifference to it. It is whether the new recognition of the beautiful shall be Christian or pagan. Certainly there was sore need of an aesthetic reform in the churches of sixty years ago. Methodism, with its rough-and-ready utilitarianism and directness, had swept away the last vestige of care for a fitting environment of the congregation's worship and life. The churches of that era were as ugly and cheerless as they were uncomfort able. Only the imposing mass of the pulpit symbolized the absorption of all other functions in that of the preacher. There was an angularity and a stiffness about every line, within and without, which stood in sharpest contrast to any glimpses of natural form within reach of the eye. The interlacing of the branches of a tree outside a window must have suggested to any sensitive mind the difference between the constructive methods of our Maker and those of the builders of houses for his worship. God had filled the world with beauty of form and color ; but those who professed to know his mind best, to have acquired that knowledge from a book as full of beautiful form as it was of deep meanings, showed an entire indifference to any thing but a practical utility conceived in the narrowest way. Most unfortunately the new message came to Christians generally in association with narrow ecclesiastical preten- "THE BEAUTY OF HOLINESS." 99 sions, fitly symbolized by the chill and mechanical copies of medieval Gothic, which commonly — not always — consti tuted their outer expression of it. To Mr. Ruskin, who confesses his great obligations to Presbyterian training, we owe the emancipation of imaginative truth from the mo nopoly of a party. As of the church edifices, so of the worship seen in them. There was no doubt a vast amount of living conviction as to the great realities on which the church is built, and an intense earnestness of personal feeling in the. approach to God. The barest place of worship was often glorified to the worshiper by a beatific vision of the High and Holy One. The baldest forms were found to be an access into the holiest of all. The most prosaic songs of praise lifted the heart on wings of thanksgiving. But in all this, if the Bible be our guide in such matters, there was a lack of adaptation of the outer to the inner which was not, indeed, vital, yet unfit and unnatural. Holiness has its own beauty, and the worship which is to meet man's need must embrace the aroused activities of his whole nature. One reason for this sordidness was found in the low ideas of the Christian sacraments which generally pre vailed. Puritanism always tended to the Zwinglian view of the Lord's Supper, as seeing no need for this social fellowship in communion with Christ ; and to Anabaptism, as failing to conceive of the organic tie which binds gener ation to generation. John Wesley's churchmanship did not save Methodism from the same conclusions, especially as the historic " means of grace " were replaced by the " more efficient " anxious bench and class- meeting. So both tendencies cooperated to diminish the importance of the great transactions of congregational life. In some quarters, among the older-fashioned Presby- IOO THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. ix. terian bodies, the venerable ceremonial which came down from the times of the Covenanters still sustained the sense of a solemn spiritual mystery and an awful presence in the communion. The element of awe, indeed, was" excessive and oppressive, surpassing that of Roman or Anglican ritual in its effect upon sensitive minds. By a reaction from this the churches generally had passed to a sordid " simplicity," in which the presence of the sacramental elements seemed an incongruity. The long white communion-tables had vanished from the aisles. The season of preparation had been minimized. The "fencing of the tables" had been replaced by an address, solemn or cheerful, as the mood of the minister might be. No doubt the great end of the sacrament was attained in innumerable instances, but it often was rather by what the single worshiper brought to the rite, than by any help beyond the most meager which was offered him in the manner of the service. And at best there was the great fault of the Awakening — private and individual devoutness without the life of social com munion. In all these things we have changed much in the last sixty years, as have all the American churches. Nor are we at the end of the change. Presbyterians, as the most conservative of American churches, naturally do not move rapidly in such cases, nor is it desirable that they should. But as an historic church, with roots in centuries past, it is not for them to accept the brief and narrow traditions of a recent date as limiting their action : John Calvin and John Knox were born before John Wesley. The same duty of progress in the light of their own history arises in view of the social problems of the eco nomic and political field. In dealing with social reforms the utilitarian spirit of the Awakening is a constant dan ger. The shortest, quickest, readiest means are preferred " THE SPIRIT OF ALL AGES." ioi to every other, often to the sacrifice of interests not less important than those we are seeking to promote. At the same time the reaction against the excessive individualism of the Awakening plunges men into excesses of feeling and statement which obscure the valuable truths in Puritanism and Methodism. Soon we may come to the extravagances of the French theorist, who declared that society is the only concrete moral reality, that the individual is an ab straction merely, and that conscience is a purely social function. "Now whatever else the doctrine of election may stand for, it is the assertion of the permanent worth of the individual before the greatest of all standards, the judgment of God. Our fathers prized it as a truth which, counteracted the mere corporate religiousness of Rome, as that proffered a certain assurance of salvation on condition of complying with the terms laid down by the corporation. They thus brought into view the great truth which Puritanism exag gerated, and yet they laid equal emphasis on the organic character of Christian society in family, state, and church. The problem of to-day is the reconciliation of these two tendencies — the social and the individual. The spirit of an age that is passing away laid excessive stress on the individual life. That of the age on which we have entered is exaggerating equally the social life. It is our problem to rise above the Spirit of the age, and, as Jean Paul says, to enter into "the Spirif of all ages," and speak his lan guage of sobriety and reconciliation. CHAPTER X. YEARS OF STRIFE, 1831-36. The opening of the new age upon American Presbyte^ rianism was 'not peaceful. It found elements of fermenta tion and discord at work which precipitated division. The years 1 830-50, indeed, were a time of controversies through out the churches of America. Public debates and heated newspaper discussions were heard on all sides, and the ef fective controversialist was a man of weight and influence in the councils of his denomination. Both within and be tween the several churches lines of division were sharply drawn, and a large share of personal energy was given to border warfare along them. The first sundering of church bonds came about among the Covenanters. For many years two tendencies had been manifest as regards the attitude of political dissent from the American government. Some were disposed to sharpen it; others to return to the attitude of 1777, when the Covenanters acknowledged the new American govern ment as entitled to their allegiance, in view of the strongly Christian language of the public papers of the Continental Congress. The absence of any expression of Christian loyalty in the national Constitution of 1787, and the rati fication by the Senate and the President of a treaty in which a Moslem power was assured that " the United States is not a Christian nation," naturally strengthened the hands of the conservatives. At last the matter came to open debate in the General Synod of 1831, and at its DIVISION AMONG COVENANTERS. 103 next meeting, two years later, resulted in a division. The cause was found largely in the altered political situation of the country. The extension of the suffrage without regard to property qualification had gone on simultane ously with the rise of political issues, such as antislavery and antimasonry, in which Covenanters felt an intense interest. Then, as now, conservative Covenanters worked to influence the votes of others, while refusing to vote themselves. The party of movement felt this to be an inconsistency, and several of them were naturalized and cast their votes in the presidential election of 1832. At a special meeting of the Eastern Sub-Synod, in which the conservatives had control, five ministers were suspended for subscribing and publishing a paper which declared that " since the commencement of Christianity, no government on earth has had fairer claims to recognition as the ordi nance of God than that of the United States." The min isters thus suspended refused to recognize the sentence, as a piece of party strategy, since it was inflicted less than a month before the meeting of the General Synod in Phila delphia. One of them, Rev. S. W. Crawford, was the retiring moderator, and as he insisted on preaching the sermon the conservatives withdrew and constituted the General Synod in another church. The division thus consummated was in part one between town and country, the conservatives predominating in the latter. The com parative strength of the two parties was matter of dispute, but it seems probable that the conservatives were slightly the more numerous. In a lawsuit for the property of the church in Pittsburg they were mnsuccessful, a result due in great measure to the able defense made by a young lawyer named Edwin M. Stanton. Besides the objections to the Constitution and the treaty with Algiers, the strict Covenanters complained that the 104 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. national government " gives a legal security to gross her esy, blasphemy, and idolatry, under the notion of liberty of conscience," and " makes no provision for the interest of true religion," while " the major part of the States recognize the principle of slavery." Yet a few among them thought them not sufficiently loyal to the Covenanter principle. After petitioning for several years, in 1840 Rev. Robert Lusk and David Steele withdrew, and with three elders constituted the Reformed Presbytery of North America. This small body, the extreme right wing of Presbyterianism, required its members to abstain from association with others for any moral purpose, besides in sisting on the maintenance of several old usages, such as " lining out the Psalms " before singing and proclaiming the banns in marriage. At this time all Covenanters, as well as the Associate Church, were strict in enforcing the rule against " occasional hearing," i.e., participation in any act of public worship with persons of another communion than their own. Dr. John Black, of Pittsburg, belonged to the progressive party, yet two members of his church were placed under discipline for pausing on the sidewalk on their way from church to hear what a Seceder minister was saying in a communion address. Up to about 1828 there was comparative quiet in the /Presbyterian Church. The alarm over Hopkinsianism Ihad died away, and never had been very extensive. The dispute as to the African Theological School had come to an end with the dissolution of the school. The policy of cooperation with the American Board in foreign and In dian missions had gained ground rather than lost it. There was a general acquiescence in the Plan of Union, even among those who misliked its blending of Presbyterian and Congregationalist elements in the new churches of the West. Differences as to the strictness with which the ALBERT BARNES'S SERMON. 105 Westminster standards were- accepted were tolerated with in the church. ( The rift between conservatives and progressives began in New England itself. In 1828 Dr. Nathaniel W. Taylor, professor of didactic theology in the theological school of Yale College, delivered a concio ad dentin in connection with the commencement exercises, which ran a new line of division among the ministry of the Connecticut churches. Hopkinsians like Dr. Strong, Dr. Griffin, and Dr. Richards repudiated the new improvements upon Calvinism no less than did the old-fashioned Calvinists like Dr. Woods, and indeed with reason, as in some respects Dr. Taylor was in agreement with the latter against Dr. Hopkins. Next year Albert Barnes, a young graduate of Princeton Seminary, and pastor of the church in Morristown, N. J., preached a sermon on "The Way of Salvation," in which he was said to agree substantially with Dr. Taylor, as in^ denying " that the sinner is held to be personally responsi ble for the transgressions of Adam, or of any other man; or that God has given a law which man has no power to obey"; yet he affirmed "that in connection with the sin of Adam, or as a result, all moral agents in this world will sin — and, sinning, will die." He admitted that "this lan guage . . . does not accord with that used in the Confes sion of Faith," but challenged those who rejected it to produce from the standards a warrant for the ordinary statement that the sin of Adam is imputed to his poster ity. In his view, the Westminster divines like President Edwards were realists, holding that " a personal identity was constituted between Adam and his posterity." A minority of the Presbytery of Philadelphia, led by Dr. Ashbel Green, regarded the sermon as justifying a refusal to install him as pastor of the First Church, to which he was called in 1830, to succeed Dr. James P. Wil- IQ6 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. x. son. They contended that the church never had heard him preach, and seemed to have, called him on the merits of this sermon, so that it was fairly before them. They also pleaded their right to examine him on his doctrinal soundness, instead of admitting him to a seat in Presby tery on his papers of dismission from the Presbytery of Elizabethtown. Mr. Barnes submitted a written state ment of his views, and Presbytery, by a two-thirds vote, proceeded to install him. * The minority protested and appealed to the Synod of Philadelphia, which sustained their appeal, and ordered Presbytery to " hear and decide upon the objections " made to Mr. Barnes's orthodoxy, and " take such order as is required by a regard to the purity of the church and its acknowledged doctrines and order." The Presbytery, which now had an old-school majority, might either have condemned the sermon with out asserting the authorship, as the Assembly had done in a similar case in 1810, or it might have put Mr. Barnes on trial for heresy at the instance of some responsible prose cutor, and proved, among other things, his authorship of the sermon. It took neither course, but adopted a minute assuming the authorship, and condemning the sermon as " highly objectionable, and manifestly, in some of its lead ing points, opposed to the doctrines of the Confession of Faith." It appointed a committee, with Dr. Green as chairman, to wait on Mr. Barnes and persuade him to re tract. He very properly refused to submit to this uncon stitutional mode of procedure. The case came before the Assembly of 1831, the largest that had ever met, and Dr. Green alleges that no stone had been left unturned to secure a new-school majority. It expressed its disapprobation of " a number of unguarded and objectionable passages " in the sermon, but declared that the Presbytery ought tp have been satisfied with the " MISADELPHIA. IO7 informal explanations given by its author when the matter first came before it. Philadelphia was now become a center of theological disturbance which affected the whole church. The meet ing-place of the Assembly, which regularly held its ses sions in the very church of which Mr. Barnes was pastor, it was able to affect and influence the whole church as was no other city. Dr. Green, Dr. Junkin, Mr. McCalla, Mr. Engles, made up a force on the old-school side, which Dr. Ely — now more liberal than in the days of his " Con trast " — Dr. Potts, Dr. Skinner, and Mr. Barnes hardly balanced, especially as the last was constitutionally indis posed to polemics and gentle in temper. New York was hardly more quiet. Between them lay Princeton, where the party of moderation, conservative and yet irenic, had its headquarters, with Dr. Miller and the Alexanders as its leaders. While decidedly old school in their theology, they deprecated the polemic spirit in which Mr. McCalla and some others had entered upon the matter. James W. Alexander proposed to change Philadelphia to Misadel- phia, and compared some of his brethren, " who have com mitted themselves as partisans much in advance of their own convictions," to the Irishman in Judge Brackenridge's "Modern Chivalry," "who cast himself from his coach into a row, crying, ' Heaven direct me to the right side! ' " This party was especially strong in the South, where it was represented by the saintly Dr. John H. Rice, of Union Theological Seminary. He pleaded that " the church is not to be purified by controversy, but by holy love." Twenty years before this he had done much to assuage the sharpness of party feeling by an irenic sermon at the opening of the General Assembly. But in his last visit to the North, in 1830, he wrote : "lam not gratified by any thing I see in the state of the Presbyterian Church, from io8 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. x. Richmond to New York. Everything is cold and dead except the spirit of controversy. In Philadelphia and New- York things are in a dismal condition." He labored to countervail the rage of partisan and even sectarian feeling by rousing the church to a fresh zeal for missions, and yearned for " a larger increase of holiness among minis ters." As the decade advanced, there was an increase chiefly of controversial eagerness. One symptom of this was the frequency of prosecutions for heresy. George Duffield, a grandson of the Revolutionary chaplain, was tried before the Presbytery of Carlisle in 1832, for the teachings of his book on " Regeneration " (Carlisle, Pa., 1832), in which the new-school positions were affirmed. Presbytery found against him in eight out of ten charges, but earned the censure of the Synod of Philadelphia by refusing to go further than to " warn him to guard against such specula tions as may impugn the doctrines of our church." Ed ward Beecher, J. M. Sturdevant, and William Kirby, all of Illinois College, were arraigned before the Presbytery of Illinois in 1833, for teaching the New Haven doctrines; but Presbytery declared that they " do not teach doctrines materially or essentially at variance with the standards." Lyman Beecher, of Lane Seminary, who had originated the temperance reform, broken the power of Unitarianism in Boston, and routed eastern Christians to the spiritual needs of the western States, was prosecuted before the Presbytery and then the Synod of Cincinnati in 1835, for heresy, slander, and hypocrisy, by Dr. Joshua L. Wilson. He was acquitted even by the Synod, which was old school, by a good majority ; yet they found fault with his " dis position to philosophize " in the treatment of important doctrines, and censured his use of " terms and phrases calculated to convey ideas" not orthodox, and requested MR. BARNES'S SECOND TRIAL. 1 09 him to publish the explanations which had satisfied them. Dr. Wilson appealed to the Assembly, but the accidental loss of his papers prevented further proceedings. It is surprising that Dr. N. S. S. Beman, of Troy (N. Y.), escaped a prosecution, as his " Four Sermons on the Doctrine of the Atonement" (Troy, 1825) must have been more offensive to old-school men than anything Mr. Barnes wrote. '' Barnes, Beman, and Duffield " were constantly named to gether in the controversies of that and a later time.1 But, as might have been expected, the church was far more agitated by the prosecution of Albert Barnes at the instance of Dr. George Junkin before the Second Presby tery of Philadelphia, the Synod of Philadelphia, and the General Assembly of 1836. This was based on doctrinal statements contained in Mr. Barnes's " Notes, Explanatory and Practical, on the Epistle to the Romans " (Philadel phia, 1835), the second of the long series by which he placed the results of exegetical scholarship within reach of the people, and especially of Sunday-school teachers. The Second Presbytery had been constituted of Mr. Barnes's friends, on the principle of " elective affinity." This imi tation of the bad precedent of 1762 had just been antici pated in the erection of a Third Presbytery of New York. The Synod of Philadelphia in 1831 had refused to take this step, even when ordered by the General Assembly; the Assembly of 1832 had to effect the erection over the Synod's head — another bad precedent. A Synod of Dela ware was constituted in 1834 on the same vicious prin ciple, and the Second Presbytery was conjoined with it. In 1835 Dr. George Junkin, now the president of La- 1 Dr. Beman was a speaker well to the front in the great field-days of the Assembly. He also was an ardent Jacksonian in politics. After one Assem bly he went to Washington to condole with the President as to his political troubles. "To tell you the truth, Dr. Beman, these fellows don't bother me half so much as do the dissensions in the Presbyterian Church." HO THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. x. fayette College, appeared before the Second Presbytery to present charges against Mr. Barnes of teachings contrary to the standards. Dr. Junkin had entered the church in 1822, with the majority of the General Synod of the As sociate Reformed Church. He united to the Seceder interest in nice points of doctrine, a clear head and a re markable power of self-control. He never condescended to the asperities of controversialists like Mr. McCalla, while he clung to the matter in hand with Scotch- Irish tenacity. Like Dr. Wilson, he accepted frankly the responsibilities of the prosecutor, which the old- school men generally shrank from, trying to secure the condemnation of new-school teachers without taking the legal steps, which exposed them to formal censure if they failed to secure a convic tion. To avoid the odium of its use, however, he omitted the term " heresy " from the charges, but showed some impatience on finding Mr. Barnes and the Presbytery not as ready as himself for the precipitation of a new struggle of this kind. The counts of the indictment were much the same as in the previous arraignment of Mr. Barnes's sermon, but they were based on a publication in which his views had been stated more fully, and Dr. Junkin urged them with an acuteness Dr. Green did not possess. Yet the Presbytery, as was expected, acquitted him upon each and all of them, asserting that he had not taught the errors Dr. Junkin imputed to him. The appeal now lay to Synod, but was complicated by the action of the Assembly of that year. In the Assembly of 1834 the new-school party had still held the majority, as in every Assembly since 1831. But the old-school minority had presented a Memorial expressing alarm at " the prevalence of unsound doctrine and laxity in disci pline," and enumerating grievances, one of which was the introduction of the principle of elective affinity in the con- THE "ACT AND TESTIMONY." Ill stitutipn of Synods and Presbyteries. When the Assembly refused to accede to the requests of the memorialists, these embodied them in an " Act and Testimony " against prev alent " errors," which they issued to the church with their signatures. The emphasis and definiteness of this protest greatly strengthened the old-school party, especially in the South, which was practically the arbiter between Penn sylvania and New England, and resulted in an old-school majority in the Assembly of 1835. This adopted in the main the prayers of the memorialists, and called the attention of the Presbyteries to the list of errors alleged. It also enacted that' the Synod of Delaware should form a part of the Synod of Pennsylvania at and after the first meet ing of the latter, but did not touch the Presbyteries which had been formed on the same principle. When the Synod of Philadelphia met, and Dr. Junkin's appeal came up for action, Dr. Ely challenged its right to entertain the appear, as the Presbytery and Mr. Barnes had not been subject to its jurisdiction at the time of his trial ; and on this ground the Second Presbytery refused to trans mit to Synod the books and papers necessary for the con tinuance of the process. The Synod, however, acted on what it believed to be the intention of the Assembly, entertained and sustained the appeal, and declared that the errors charged were some of them fundamental, and all of them contrary to the standards, and that they contravened " the system of truth therein taught, and set forth in the Word of God." Then, without passing upon Mr. Barnes's denial that he had taught these errors, they proceeded to suspend him from the ministry until he should retract them. For a year he sat, in submission to this sentence, a hearer in his own church, awaiting the decision of the next Assembly upon his appeal. The feeling now spread widely that the conservatives had abused their opportu- 112 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. x. nity, and sympathy both inside and outside the church ral lied to the scholar and pastor who had been subjected to this harsh sentence. It was felt that anything less than heresy could not j ustif y it, and the word ' ' heresy ' ' his prose cutors had avoided expressly because of the odium attach ing to its use. The Assembly of 1836 reflected the re action of feeling. Although Dr. Witherspoon, of South . Carolina, was chosen moderator by the old school, over Dr. Absalom Peters, the leader of the new-school men on the floor of the Assembly and the great champion of the Plan of Union, yet the full Assembly a few days later was found to. have a new-school majority. The protest and appeal of Mr. Barnes was sustained, and the action of the Synod reversed, but with a resolution deprecating any ap proval of the errors charged upon him. On the contrary, they declared their adoption of the Confession " ex animo on the points of doctrine in question, according to the obvious and most prevalent interpretation." If the new-school party had stopped with this they would have strengthened their own cause. But they also proceeded to abuse their victory by taking counsel with extremists to the alienation of moderate men. The As sembly of 1836 had made arrangements to adopt the Western Foreign Missionary Society, established in Pitts burg in 183 1, as the organ of the church for the conduct of its work for the conversion of the heathen. The friends of the American Board now rallied to maintain what they called the Assembly's compact with that board, and repu diated that with the Pittsburg society by a small majority. An attempt was made, and only just defeated, to place the Boards of Education and of Domestic Missions in the hands of those who desired to have them also merged in voluntary and undenominational societies. Worst of all, the elective-affinity principle, as applied to the organiza- THE POLICY OF SEPARATION. 113 tion of Presbyteries, which the Assembly of 1835 had set aside, was restored on appeals from the action of the Synod of Philadelphia. The old-school men were brought into such a state of agitation by these measures that, with little delay, they began to take steps for the division of the church. No. doc trinal action of the Assembly either called for or justified this procedure. While acquitting Mr. Barnes on ground of fact — on which the Synod of Philadelphia had not passed — it had condemned hi thesi the errors charged upon him. But the other measures of the Assembly of 1836 were such as tended to undermine the constitution of the church; and even new-school men showed by their actions a dec ade later that they did not care to vindicate them. While much was said of doctrinal differences in the subsequent protests, the strength of the old-school policy lay in the purpose to maintain the constitutional character of the church ; and many gave their support to the old school who were not made uncomfortable by the removal of Mr. Barnes's suspension. One of the first steps taken was to seek a union of forces with the moderate party, especially as represented by Princeton Seminary. Dr. Charles Hodge, indeed, had furnished Mr. Robert J. Breckinridge with all but one of the series of " new-school errors" specified in the Act and Testimony of 1835. Yet the organ of the seminary had treated that document and the policy it represented with contemptuous disfavor. In the autumn of 1836 Drs. Cuy ler, Junkin, and others met the professors in Dr. Hodge's study, to offer reasons why Princeton should make a change of front. Among the considerations employed were the perils the seminary ran of being transferred to new-school control, and the likelihood that Mr. Robert Lenox and other laymen would take steps at once to establish a dis- 114 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. x. ^tinctly old-school seminary, unless Princeton abandoned its opposition to the old- school policy. The conference did not seem to attain its end, yet from that time the ven erable senior professors, Alexander and Miller, are found in hearty cooperation with the old-school party of action. It cannot be said that the new-school men showed much desire to aid Dr. Miller and the rest in the efforts they had made to maintain Princeton in an attitude of conciliation. In January, 1836, they had founded Union Theological Seminary in New York, in a distinctly new-school and Plan-of-Union spirit, and . independent of the control of the Assembly. It seemed as if they purposed to drive Princeton into the arms of the other party, where, indeed, we next find it. CHAPTER XI. THE DIVISION OF 1 837-38. The old-school leaders had now resolved to divide the church, either by a voluntary secession and the organiza tion of a True Presbyterian Church, or by the excision of those whom they regarded as un-Presbyterian in doctrine and practice. The extreme measures of the Assembly of 1836 placed the initiative in their hands, and they hastened to make use of it. The meeting of the Assembly of 1837, in Philadelphia, was preceded by that of an old-school convention, which met a week earlier with a view to " effectual measures for putting an end to the contentions which for years had agitated the church." The South was represented largely, and moderate men like Dr. Miller took part in the prepa ration of a " Testimony and Memorial " to the General Assembly, exhibiting the doctrinal errors and lapses in discipline which they believed were defacing the church. The list of the former, which Dr. Miller revised, was now much longer than in the " Act and Testimony," and in cluded even points of Hopkinsian teaching which the new school, and also New Haven, decidedly rejected. From the first the old-school men "had a decided major ity in the Assembly, and the only question left was the best way to use it. To their great credit it must be said that they strove to avoid a violent disruption, by coming to terms of peaceful separation with the minority. The "5 I ]6 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xi. first step taken was to abrogate the Plan of Union of 1801, which had added much to the numerical strength of the church, while detracting greatly from its homogeneity. The Assembly of 1835, out of deference to Dr. Miller's statement that the Plan was a compact which the Assem bly had proposed, had asked the General Association of Connecticut to agree to its annulment, so far as concerned churches yet to be formed. But this resolution was never transmitted to the Association. The Assembly of 1837 now voted its abrogation in a resolution which carried with it no qualifications. After adopting the Memorial of the convention, and citing to the bar of the next Assem bly any Presbyteries or Synods charged with the disorders enumerated, the Assembly took up the chief question. A committee of both parties was appointed to arrange a plan for a voluntary division. They found no difficulty in agree ing as to the division of funds and institutions of the church, and the disposal of its archives, and the style and title of the proposed new-school Assembly. But the new-school men would not assent to an immediate division by the action of the Assembly then in session, and with the old-school -body recognized as the historic successor of the undivided church. They required-that the plan should be overtured to the Presbyteries for their approval. In this, as in other cases, they stood on the letter of Presbyterian law. But ordinary law, in the old- school view, was not adequate to the occasion. While proposing to summon to the next Assembly Synods and Presbyteries charged with irregu larities in procedure, they now resolved to set all rules of procedure at defiance" rather than leave their policy to the chances of an overture. For a time the old-school men were at a loss how to proceed, but Dr. Baxter, the successor of Dr. Rice at the head of Union Seminary (Virginia), struck out the sug- THE EXSCINDING ACTS. 117 gestion that the abrogation of the Plan of Union was re troactive, and that the Synods and Presbyteries organized under that arrangement had ceased to form a part of the church. Rev. W. S. Plumer, of Richmond, moved a dec laration to this effect with regard to the Synod of the West ern Reserve. After an animated discussion it was carried by a strict party vote — 132 to 105. The Synods of Utica, Geneva, and Genesee, all in western New York, were then exscinded in the same fashion, but by smaller majorities, as a number of the moderate party would have preferred a gentle course with them. Five other Synods were di rected to take order with certain of their Presbyteries which were charged with tolerating errors in doctrine or disorders in practice. Ministers and churches within the bounds of these Synods who were Presbyterian in order and doctrine were directed to seek membership in which ever Presbytery of the church they found most convenient ; and orderly Presbyteries to report to the next Assembly for direction. The next step was to conform the methods of the church" to what the old-school men regarded as strict Presbyteri anism, although it really was one of the most questionable results of the Awakening. The Western Missionary So ciety was erected into the Assembly's Board of Foreign Missions. The American Education and Home Mission ary Societies were invited to cease their operations within the bounds of the church, leaving the field to the Boards of Education and of Domestic Missions. Thus was consummated the division of 1837, which re sulted in cutting off 533 churches and over a hundred thousand communicants — a larger number than the whole church body contained in 1801, when the Plan of Union was set on foot. The surprise and indignation with which it was received showed that the old-school leaders had Il8 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xi. been far-sighted in refusing to risk their policy upon a reference to the Presbyteries by overture. If they had gone to the church with such a proposal there would have been a reaction greater than that of 1836. But most men easily come to accept accomplished facts, however they may dislike the manner of their accomplishment. Even the organ of Princeton, in vindicating the abstract right of the Assembly to do what it had done, declined to pass upon the wisdom of its action. Everywhere the party of action found itself thrown upon the defensive and forced to adopt an apologetic tone. Eventually, in the interest of peace in its own fold, the old-school Assembly had to declare that public disapproval of the exscinding acts was no bar to ministerial fellowship. After the excision of the four Synods, the new-school men naturally took measures to vindicate themselves be fore the Christian public, and to assert their legal and con stitutional rights. In August they met in convention at Auburn, N. Y., and outlined their policy. The four Syn ods and their Presbyteries were neither to abandon the Plan of Union and the churches formed under it, nor to recognize the action of the Assembly as having any valid ity. They were to send their delegations to the Assembly of 1838, and claim their seats by constitutional right. Equally important was the preparation of the Auburn Declaration, in which the charges of doctrinal unsoundness made by the old-school convention were contrasted point by point with the actual teachings of new-school men. In accordance with this program, and acting on legal advice, the delegations from the exscinded Presbyteries presented their credentials to the Assembly of 1838, but the clerks of that body acted in accordance with a decla ration they had made the year before, in refusing to place their names on the roll. Before the reading of the clerks' THE NEW SCHOOL ORGANIZE. 119 report on the roll, Dr. William Patton, a new-school man, whose name was on the roll, tried to offer a motion that the roll be completed by adding the names of these dele gates. The retiring moderator, Dr. David Elliott, refused either to entertain the motion or to recognize an appeal from his own ruling. The clerks then reported the roll of the Assembly, and the retiring moderator made the cus tomary call for members whose credentials had not yet been presented. Dr. Erskine Mason now rose, holding in his hand the commissions of delegates from the Presby teries of the four Synods, which the clerks had rejected, and moved that the roll be completed by adding these. Dr. Elliott again declared out of order the motion, and also an appeal from his decision. Rev. Miles P. Squier, representing an exscinded Presbytery, made a personal demand that his name be added to the roll, but was de clared to have no standing in the court. Rev. John P. Cleveland then moved that Dr. Beman, of Troy, act as tem porary moderator, as Dr. Elliott had refused to discharge his constitutional duty, and took the vote on his own motion after it was seconded. The new-school delegates voted for it, the old-school mostly remaining silent. Dr. Beman did not attempt to take possession of the chair, but, standing in the aisle of the church, he entertained motions to organize the Assembly by the choice of a moderator and clerks, and to adjourn its meetings to the First Church. On these motions the new-school men alone voted, and they alone rhet at the place thus designated. They pro ceeded to/declare the repeal of the exscinding acts, and they elected six trustees of the General Assembly to dis place old-school men then in office. These six brought suit before the courts of the com monwealth of Pennsylvania for possession of the property held by the Assembly's trustees, since the charter of in- 120 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xi. corporation had been granted by it. The general doctrine of the American state is that an ecclesiastical body is a voluntary association, and that its constitution partakes of the nature of a civil contract between the body at large and each of its members. In case of a violation of this contract the civil courts will grant redress upon proper complaint. This view, however, made its way more slowly into the practice of Pennsylvania than that of the sister- commonwealths, probably because of the long and con tinuous control of its supreme bench by Presbyterian eld ers of Scotch-Irish stock. These were so strong in their conviction of the right of a church to manage its own affairs, independently even of constitutional restrictions, that they inclined to regard the highest court of the church as possessing an authority coordinate with their own, even where civil rights were in question. In the former view of the law the new-school case was a very strong one, and Chancellor Kent, of New York, told Dr. Gardiner Spring that if the case had been tried in his own commonwealth it would have been decided in their favor. As it was, the verdict of a Supreme Court jury, under instructions from Judge Rogers, spread dismay among the old-school men, as it was against them ; but the court in banc set aside the verdict on grounds which made a fresh trial useless. It was ruled by Chief-Justice Gibson, supported by Judges Huston and' Kennedy (Rogers dissenting), that the Plan of Union "was evidently not intended to be permanent," and as it had been enacted, so it might be " repealed, by an ordinary act of legislation " ; and that "those who built up Presbyteries and Synods on the basis of it had no reason to expect that their structures would survive it." This may be law — it is not history. When the separation was complete it was found that the new school embraced about four ninths of the minis- THE MODERATES. 121 try and membership of the church, mostly lying in the Northern States. It coincided in the main with the lines of discrimination between Scotch- Irish and New England elements, as it grew largely out of the incompatibility of their tempers. In the three exscinded Synods of New York, only six churches and about four hundred members went over to the old school. The new-school Assembly had the adhesion also of the Synods of Michigan and eastern Tennessee, and of majorities in the Synods of New York, Albany, and Illinois, as well as half the Synods of New jersey and Indiana, and strong minorities in those of Ohio and Cincinnati. Elsewhere the line of severance ran sharply through Presbyteries and even congregations. The moderate men in some cases went with the old school from theological sympathy, yet under protest ; and in others they sided with the new school from a sense of the injustice that had been done them. Their greatest strength appeared in the Synod of New York, which di vided between new and old school at its session of 1838 in Newburg. Forty-nine protested against any division, claiming to be the undivided Synod, and got the name of the High School, from their place of meeting. Finally the new school as a body united with them on this foot ing, and the Synod adhered to the new-school Assembly. The Synod of Ohio, while adhering to the old school, recorded upon their minutes that the exscinded Synods were still constitutionally a part of the church. Gardiner Spring, Ichabod Spencer, and Daniel Lord protested form ally against the excision before their old-school Presby tery. The division was effected most slowly in the South, out side the area in which Hezekiah Balch and his disciples had diffused Hopkinsian ideas. Elsewhere the interest in the controversies had been limited to a few,. and many I22 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xi. had to take time to make up their minds. The suggestion to withdraw from both parties and organize a Southern Presbyterian Church was made in South Carolina, and probably was an echo of the nullification excitement of a few years before. In a similar way the repugnance of the South to the centralization of authority in the national government suggested an opposition to the assumption of authority by the national Assembly of the church. But altogether less than a fourth cast in their lot with the new school. It was alleged as early as 1838 1 that the prev alence of antislavery sentiments among the new-school men, as in New England, was one of the reasons for the cooperation of the South in the policy of division. This is not borne out by the facts. It is true, as Dr. Miller said in 1823, that the South had become "very sensitive, extremely, perhaps excessively sensitive on this subject " long before this. As far back as 1796 we find the Pres bytery and the Synod of South Carolina enjoining upon James Gililand, pastor of Broadaway, that he abstain from preaching in favor of emancipation. We see prominent ministers like Thomas D. Baird and David Nelson leaving the South to find a home in the free States, out of dislike for an institution for whose abolition they were not free to plead. We find William Maxwell, of Norfolk, the friend and biographer of Dr. Rice, threatened in 1827 with a coat of tar and feathers for publishing a very temperate plea for emancipation. But we also find him and Mr. Baird, in the Assembly of 1837, among the most zealous on the old-school side. It is possible that Dr. Baxter, as a de- 1 By Rev. Zebulon Crocker, in " The Catastrophe of the Presbyterian Church " (New Haven, 1838). He was the delegate from the Connecticut Association to the Assembly of 1837, and his work has value as an account of the contemporary controversy in Connecticut. He says slavery was not a principal cause of the division, but a secondary one, and he points to the fact that Dr. Baxter, who presided over the old-school convention, had writ ten in defense of slavery as a Scriptural institution. ¦ DELIVERANCES ON SLAVERY. 123 fender of slavery, may have felt more comfortable in a church which had fewer Northern men in it; and he cer tainly used language in 1837 which showed that the aboli tion problem to his own mind was part of the reasons for a division. But even he knew, or ought to have known, that the Scotch-Irish of the Middle States were furnishing many of the most determined enemies of human bondage, and that the church, by the action of 1818, had declared slavery " inconsistent with the law of God, and totally irreconcilable with the gospel of Christ." He must have known that in 1833, when the Synod of Kentucky refused, to declare against slavery, Robert J. Breckinridge rose and left the church, exclaiming, " Since God has forsaken the Synod of Kentucky, Robert J. Breckinridge will desert it too!" Also that a year later the Synod came to a better mind, condemned slavery as a source of degradation, ignorance, cruelty, and licentiousness, and urged gradual emancipation of the slave. Of the committee which re ported that action, Dr. Ashbel Green had been chairman, and Dr. Baxter a member. The question had come up again in 1835, through memorials asking the Assembly to act in accordance with its previous deliverances in work ing for emancipation. It had been referred to a committee of five, of whom two were from the South, with Dr. Miller as chairman. The majority report to the Assembly of 1836, in which the new-school men had control, depre cated action. A minority report by Rev. James H. Dickey — afterward the founder of Ashmun Institute, now Lincoln University — was in harmony with the deliverance of 1 8 1 8. The subject was indefinitely postponed after an excited discussion. If antislavery had been a distinctive feature of the new school they would have secured action on this as on other questions they cared for. In that case there would have been no new-school church in the South. 124 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xi. Theologically the division of 1837 grew out of panic and alarm, rather than any more solid reason. There was no evidence that the New Haven theology had extensively pervaded, or was likely to pervade, the church. Its pecul iarities were nothing but a temporary phase in the theo logical speculation of New England, and in some respects a distinct approach to Calvinistic orthodoxy, as compared with Hopkinsianism. It might have been treated with the wise patience which the earlier Assemblies had shown to ward that form of speculation, without real prejudice to any theological or spiritual interest. Even to prove " Tay- lorism " upon men like Mr. Barnes and Mr. Duffield, it was necessary to hold them responsible not only for what they actually said, but for what their critics held to be neces sary inferences from their words. And in some cases what was alleged to be essential to the Calvinistic orthodoxy of the Confession had never been heard of until the seven teenth century. Thus "the federal headship of Adam," and " the covenant of works " made with him, which Dr. Junkin exalted into a shibboleth, were nothing but Dutch " improvements upon Calvinism," designed to break some what the force of the conception of irresponsible sovereignty. In truth the heated atmosphere of church controversy was shown to be the worst possible for weighing the exact sig nificance of a disputed formula. Nor were even the min istry of that time so well equipped in a knowledge of his torical theology as to be able to distinguish between the original and essential features of Calvinistic teaching and the later accretions. In Princeton Seminary, indeed, the subject of church history, to say nothing of the history of doctrine, never was treated as an important theological dis cipline until our own time. It was on the ecclesiastical side that the old-school pol icy was most capable of defense. Yet even here, as the BOARDS, OR SOCIETIES? ' 1 25 subsequent developments showed, a little patience would have secured all that was sought and fought for. The very drift of thought and feeling, which had made men like Drs. Green and Miller far more Presbyterian in their old age than in their youth, was to affect the new-school men just as decidedly. " High-church " sentiment was developing rapidly in the Presbyterian Church as in the- others, in this new age of churchliness. The right of the church to create and control its own agencies was obtain ing a strong and instinctive recognition. It was also felt that under the operation of the Plan of Union the church was becoming a dual body, with two sets of agencies for its work, two conceptions of ecclesiastical order. The tone taken by the friends of the Plan, especially by Dr. Absalom Peters in his " Plea for Union in the West," was most of fensive to all decided Presbyterians, and soon became so to the new-school men themselves. On the other hand, the success of the Board of Domestic Missions, created in 1 8 16 out of the Standing Committee of 1802, and vested with enlarged powers in 1827, was such as to awaken a desire for a similar independence and energy in other fields, especially the foreign. Dr. Rice, from his death bed, wrote to ask the Assembly of 183 1 to declare that " the Presbyterian Church in the United States is a mis sionary society, and every member of the church is a life- member of said society." His last visit to the North had satisfied him that the two denominations were drawing farther apart, and that Presbyterians as a body could not be brought " to unite under what is thought to be a Congre gational Board." The Assembly took no action on his sug gestion, but it led to the organization of the Pittsburg society. As might be expected, this decade of strife was not characterized by extensive growth of the church. The 1 26 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xi. undivided church reports 182,017 in its communion in 1831. Its old-school in 1840 reports 126,583; the new school, 102,060. This was the more remarkable as the opening years of the decade had been a time of intense revival excitement under the use of the new measure, and it is estimated that between 1826 and 1832 not less than two hundred thousand had thus been added to the evan gelical churches. It also was noteworthy that the business depression of 1837 and the years following had been at tended by the usual awakening of religious interest in the centers of population, where the depression was most se verely felt. Up to 1835 Rev. Charles G. Finney was in full career as a new-measure revivalist, and much of his work was among the Presbyterians of central New York. In fact, what John Howe calls " the carnality of religious contention" was abroad in the church, and furnished an obstacle to the movement of the spiritual life. It was all the more a snare because the- baser self in us loves to be busy about the surface of spiritual things, and to show great fervor for religion when no immediate demand for the life of faith is pressed upon it. " Set Jehu to pulling down idols, and see how zealous he can be," writes an old Puritan. It was a poor compensation for these losses that the great debates in Presbytery, Synod, and Assembly at tracted attention as never before, and familiarized a large part of the outside community with niceties of Presbyterian doctrine and law. Henry Clay pronounced the oratorical display in the Assemblies finer than anything Congress had to show. The power of Calvinistic training to develop strong men found ample illustration, even though the strength was not given the highest direction. The old school were happy in the support of representatives of the church's past in the much-loved and kindly Archibald THE LEADERS IN DEBATE. 127 Alexander, the courtly and diplomatic Samuel Miller, the masterful Ashbel Green. Of the younger generation, the South furnished the two Breckinridges — John a saint of unsurpassed eloquence, Robert a type of Kentuckian chiv alry ; George Addison Baxter, lucid in exposition, resource ful in council; John Witherspoon the younger; and Wil liam S. Plumer, a most impressive speaker even to the latest years of a long life. The North furnished in George Junkin a representative of the Scotch-Irish strength and tenacity ; in John McDowell a well-rounded, practical nat ure; in Charles Hodge a Johannine character, yet, like John, capable of an intense theological fervor ; and in Wil liam L. McCalla a rough tongue, which lent itself to telling epigram and kept its owner all his life in hot water. The new-school men, like progressive parties generally, impress us rather more by their intellectual quality than by strength of character, although in Thomas H. Skinner we find a singularly simple and unworldly character. Samuel Hanson Cox, a convert from Quakerism, possessed an eloquence which would have found no superior if it had been better sustained. George Potts ill spared for debate the time taken from an exceptionally devoted pastorate. Nathaniel S. S. Beman had a restless intellect and an aggressive temper, which earned him the title of the " War-horse of the New School," but is now best remem bered for his services to hymnology. Erskine Mason, with far less than his great father's eloquence, acquired a wonderful influence over his people, and left a fragrant memory of personal holiness and good works. Thomas McAuley, the first president of the (new) Union Semi nary, carried his Irish wit and pathos to the support of a party which embraced few of his countrymen. Judge Jes- sup, the father of the eminent missionaries, brought great forensic abilities to the same side, his defense of Mr. Barnes 128 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xi. in the Assembly of 1836 being reckoned his greatest tri umph as a speaker. This unhappy decade was to witness yet another divis ion among Presbyterians, and the most unmeaning yet. Simply through disaffection to an act of discipline three Presbyteries of the Associate Church in New York and Vermont withdrew in 1838 from the Associate Synod, under the leadership of Drs. Peter Bullions and Andrew Stark. Thus the Seceder family, like the Presbyterians and the Covenanters, found it a day of strife and of division. CHAPTER XII. FROM WAR TO WAR, 184O-60. THE twenty years which preceded the war for the Union were years of great agitation and ferment in the intellect ual, social, and spiritual life of America. The new age began to declare itself and its character by a thousand signs. The spirit of the nation found expression as never before in literature and art, in social- reform movements and political agitation. A new criticism, a new philoso- ' phy, a new scholarship arose to multiply the objects of public interest, and to add to the complexity of existence. No longer content with reproducing English and Scottish thought, America flung herself boldly into contact with the culture of the civilized world, and was reinforced in this by the more varied immigration from all the countries of northern Europe. These agitations reached the spiritual life of the country largely through new sects or agitations within the existing churches. Millerism, and its offspring, Adventism, might be traced, along with sober Premillenarianism, to the inter est in Scripture prophecy which first awoke in the group of which Edward Irving was the center. Connected with the same interest in the future were the various theories of annihilation or conditional mortality, which now com peted with the older Univerealism as substitutes for the orthodox eschatology. Spiritualism owed its strength to an instinctive desire to pierce the veil which sunders the dead from the living, and know more definitely " the to- 129 130 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xii. morrow of death." Campbellism stood for a. revolt from the Methodism of the Great Awakening, which had per vaded all the churches more or less largely. Socialism, in various phases, especially Fourierism in 1842-49, sought a reconstruction of society as the cure for the evils attend ing the industrial revolution which was in progress. The broad-church tendency, in the writings first of Coleridge and then of Thomas Erskine, of Linlathen, sought a deeper Scriptural and spiritual basis for the essential truths of Christianity ; while Tractarianism, affecting chiefly the Epis copal Church, but challenging all, insisted that that foun dation must be sought in Christian tradition, by going back to the church of the first centuries. Perfectionism, a tend ency no longer confined to the Quaker and Methodist bodies, urged the perfecting of holiness as the central prin ciple and first duty of Christianity. Along with these ran the great social agitations which are characteristic of our age. That for the abolition of war had taken its start just after the Peace of 181 5, and was no longer a Quaker peculiarity. The temperance agitation may fairly be dated from Dr. Lyman Beecher's "Six Sermons on Intemperance," preached in 1825 at Litchfield, Conn., and published the next year. About the same time Albert Barnes formed at Morristown, N. J., the first temperance society, whose members were pledged to limit their consumption of " apple-jack " to a pint a day, the usual allowance being a quart. The demand of the movement rose rapidly to total abstinence from intoxicants by 1836, and even to the legal suppression of the traffic in them, and such laws had been enacted in fourteen States between 1850 and 1856. Among many others, Rev.- Thomas P. Hunt, a brilliant and eccentric preacher, gave both wit and eloquence to the cause. Dr. Robert Baird carried the propaganda to Europe. The immigration of A GITA TION AND WORK. 1 3 1 Irish and German Romanists produced a violent agitation against that church, resulting in riot and arson in several cities. Dr. Thomas Brainerd, of Philadelphia, was one of those who offered a courageous opposition to the extrava gances of this excitement,1 while Robert J. Breckinridge and Nicholas Murray (" Kirwan ") were especially promi nent in antagonizing the pretensions of American Ro manism. More quiet were the labors for the extension of the Sunday-school system to the neglected portions of the country, and for the universal diffusion of the Scriptures. To both Presbyterians gave large support. John McCul lagh in the South and Benjamin W. Chidlaw in the North will live forever in the history of the American Sunday- school. To the Bible Society Presbyterians have given of men and means beyond any other American church. The care of the poor, especially in the great cities, took a fresh impulse toward wisdom and kindliness from the visit of a Scotchman who had studied Dr. Chalmers's work in Glas gow and described it to Americans. He was reinforced in this by Dr. Alexander Duff during his memorable visit of 1854, which did so much, in Dr. Tyng's words, "to awaken enlarged desires and views in reference to the propagation of the gospel among the unevangelized na tions of the earth." The care for the young men of our great cities through the Young Men's Christian Associa tions, begun in London in 1844, reached America seven years later. In this work Presbyterians were amply rep resented by William E. Dodge, George H. Stuart, John Wanamaker, and a host of others. But it was especially the antislavery agitation which 1 " Our Country Safe from Romanism. A Sermon delivered at the Opening of the Third Presbytery of Philadelphia, April, 1841," Philadel phia, 1 84 1. 132 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xii. affected the churches. That had originated with the Christian people of both North and South, and among Presbyterians as much as any. A type of these was James G. Birnie, of Alabama, who emancipated his slaves, came North, and devoted his life to the cause of emancipation, becoming in 1840 and 1844 the first antislavery candidate for the Presidency. Another was Dr. David Nelson, of Tennessee, who emancipated his own slaves, denounced slave-holding as a sin, and refused to commune with those who practiced it. On one occasion his friends had to hide him from a Missouri mob for proposing to his congrega tion a subscription to buy and colonize slaves. Two years later, in 1837, Rev. Elijah P. Lovejoy was murdered in Alton, 111., by another Missouri mob for the offense of publishing in his paper moderate articles against slavery. He was a graduate of Princeton Seminary, and a member of the Presbytery of Illinois. The indifference or hostility of many ministers and Chris tians to the cause of emancipation had the effect of alien ating some badly based opponents of slavery from the churches, and of leading to the association of abolition with infidelity and come-outer-ism. Those who yielded to this drift naturally lost influence with the people at large ; and while the noisiest in talk and the extremest in their de mands, they actually contributed little to the final result. They denounced both church and state, copying the " po litical dissent " of the Covenanters, and carrying it to an extreme. As Albert Barnes said of them, " If a just cause could have been killed by the folly of its friends, the cause of African liberty would have been so by the spirit and methods of the abolitionists." These words are the weight ier as coming from one who fearlessly followed his own convictions of duty in this matter. " His book on Ameri can slavery," says Professor Phelps, " was a thesaurus to PRESBYTERIANS AND SLAVERY. 133 the abolitionists for twenty years. ... He preached the substance of his book to his people at a time when millions of property sat along the aisles of his church, coined out of slave-labor on cotton and rice plantations. He did it with the air of one who did not for a moment conceive it possible to do anything else. His more timid friends trembled for the result, but not he." Among the Presbyterian churches there was a great difference of attitude toward slavery, and this formed one of the obstacles to their union. The smaller and stricter bodies, with the exception of the Associate Reformed Synod of the South, now occupied the ground taken by the Covenanters at the opening of the century, in exclud ing slave-holders from their communion. And those who passed over from them to the old-school church naturally carried with them a strong repugnance to human bondage. Neither of the two Assemblies which grew out of the division of 1837—38 was ready to take any decided ground, as might be inferred from the fiasco of 1836. Both, in-, deed, had inherited from the Assembly of 1818 an author itative denunciation of slavery, which plainly involved the duty of slave-holders in the membership of the church to take steps toward emancipation, or of rigorous discipline in that of the church's judicatories, even although the Assembly proceeded, in that deliverance, to pronounce against immediate emancipation, as " adding a second in jury to the first," since it added that this consideration should not be made " a cover for the love and practice of slavery, or a pretense for not using efforts that are lawful and practicable to extinguish the evil." The deliverance, however, remained a dead letter as re gards the practice of the church. It was even defied form ally and openly. The Presbytery of Harmony, S. C, in 1836 resolved, in flat contradiction to the General Assem- 134 THE PRESBYTERIANS. • [Chap. xii. bly, that " the existence of slavery is not opposed to the will of God"; and the Synod of Virginia declared that " the General Assembly had no right to declare that re lation sinful which Christ and his apostles teach to be con sistent with the most unquestionable piety." In the meantime the legal status of the slave and his social condition grew worse instead of better. The eman cipation societies, founded by the Quaker, Benjamin Lun- dy, in 1815-26, which had been counted by the score in the South, passed out of existence ; and the policy of silence as to the licentiousness and cruelties attendant on the system was enforced upon all. The slave States passed laws of constantly increasing severity, declaring the slave to be a chattel and not a person, and forbidding even his owner to have him taught to read. For religious instruction he was shut up to oral teaching at white mouths, and some colored preachers did manage to acquire in this way a moderate acquaintance with the Scriptures. A domestic slave-trade sprang up between the border States and the States farther South, where the cotton, rice, and sugar plantations furnished a market. Hus bands and wives, parents and young children, were thus severed for life, and the abomination of temporary mar riage was actually sanctioned by some Christian ministers. Here certainly was a large field for reformatory action on the part of conservative men. Those who disbelieved in immediate emancipation, or even in emancipation at any date, might have united to demand the removal of these gross iniquities. Those who sought in the Old Testa ment for a Scriptural justification of slavery might very well have insisted that the merciful provisions of the Mosaic legislation should find something like a counter part in that of free America. The church both North and South might have been a unit in insisting that its mem- NEW-SCHOOL FAITHFULNESS. I 35 bers should keep themselves unspotted from these evils, and that the Word of God should be made accessible to black as well as white. Strong and united action even within these limits — as Dr. Charles Hodge pointed out — would have taken the sting out of the abolitionist argu ment, and prepared the way for peaceful and gradual emancipation. It was the unfaithfulness of the American churches, and not least of the Presbyterian churches, to the plain requirements of duty, which suffered the evil to grow and gather head, until its end came in a deluge of human blood. Of the two Assemblies, the new-school naturally was the ! more faithful to the deliverance of 1 8 1 8, which it repeated in substance in 1846 and 1849. Yet not until 1850 did it take the first step toward reducing doctrine to practice, declaring slave-holding a matter of discipline when not excusable by special circumstances. In 1853 the Assem bly called upon its Southern Presbyteries to report what had been done to purge the church of this evil. The Pres bytery of Lexington responded that ministers and mem bers of its churches were slave-holders by choice and on principle. As the Assembly met this deliverance by a de cided condemnation, the Southern part of the new-school church, numbering six Synods, twenty -one Presbyteries, fifteen thousand communicants, seceded and formed the United Synod of the Presbyterian Church. It at once made overtures of union to the old- school Assembly, meeting in New Orleans; but as these required a con demnation of the exscinding acts of 1837, and would have plunged the church afresh into the controversy over slav ery,- they were declined. This was the last of a series of ecclesiastical divisions over slavery, which presaged the secession of the slave States. The Associate Reformed Presbyterians had divided on this line in 1821 ; the Meth- T36 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xii. odists and Baptists in 1844; the "Christian" Connection in 1866. The old- school Assembly preserved its unity until' the eve of the war by moving in the other direction. There is a wide gap between the deliverance of 18 18 and those of 1845 an that a child brought up under Christian influence should never know a time when love to God is not an active principle in its life — is displacing the old assumption that even the offspring of the godly are the born enemies of God and must await the crisis of conversion. In this respect the church no longer presents the unity it once did in its practical theology. In some quarters the assumptions of the Awakening still control her action. In others the newer view, which is also the older, has obtained prac tical recognition, and the demand for conscious conversion is no longer made of the children of the church. Another grace bestowed on the modern church, and one closely connected with this new sense of direct relation to Christ, is the spirit of helpfulness. The neighborhood of the Master is found to be no place for idlers in the vine yard. So there has been a development of spontaneous activity in the churches, which, as has been shown, finds itself badly suited with room in the church as popularly understood an,d organized. The new wine, in many in stances, has burst the old bottles. With this also has come a peril of doing and overdoing, without the vocation and the leading which must come before right spontaneous action. Unfortunate, too, has been the growing disposition to propose that the church shall take the whole social burden on her shoulders, and 240 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xvii. hold herself responsible for the right conduct of affairs which belong properly to the state. Into the sphere of state action — the sphere of rights and of law — the church may not enter, except as announcing the great principles of social duty. She is not made a judge or a divider be tween rich and poor or between labor and capital. Nor is it hers to decide by what methods the state is to deal with the problems of slavery or intemperance or the social evil, although she has the right to insist that they shall not be ignored. She can undertake these things only at the sacrifice of far higher interests, at the peril of forfeit ing her proper spiritual influence. The institutional church, which has grown up in our great cities as the result of this new interest in social prob lems, is a sign of good. It is a return to apostolic ideals in many respects, especially in getting rid of that severance of the spiritual from the material in ministering to human needs which stands in such contrast to all the precedents of the New Testament. It may result in a restoration of the manifold activities of the churches of the first days, and thus reclaim for the gospel the gracious activities to which it gave the first impulse. No doubt it will make many mistakes in the process, and learn by its mistakes. The discipline of the modern church over its own mem bers has become a matter of some difficulty, in view of the church's divisions, and the readiness of many of these to open their arms to persons whose stay in the others has become uncomfortable. In some of our religious bodies there is hardly a pretense of exercising discipline over their lay members. In others it is abandoned to the judg ment of each congregation, and can rise no higher than the local and temporary sense of propriety in each. The Presbyterian churches always have confessed their respon sibility, both local and collective, for seeing that the walk CHURCH DISCIPLINE AND UNITY. 24 1 and conversation of their people is according to godliness. The scope of this responsibility has been narrowed and its efficiency weakened by the notion that none but the com-' municants in the church are its members ; and even when there has been a disposition to enlarge the conception, it has been too generally by including merely " the children of the church " Who, through youth or indecision, have not yet become communicants. In this respect the Con gregationalist conception of the church has displaced that which is distinctively Presbyterian, to the diminution of the church's social influence, and to the injury of her non- communicant members. The present tendency to assert for the church a firmer and broader influence will help to correct this, and will bring even our Independent brethren to see that the demand for a church-membership individu ally assured of their conversion does not place the church in a position fitted to meet the social need, and is not in harmony with the teachings of the New Testament. Soci ology promises to play havoc with ecclesiology of that type. In view of these openings toward a new development we cannot regard the American church, either as mean ing a congregation or embracing a "denomination," as an accomplished fact. Thus far, indeed, there has been little that is distinctly American in our religious life, and that little not the most laudable. All our sects, except a few to which we refuse the Christian name, are of European origin. We have been singularly barren in ecclesiastical originality, while original in nearly all other fields of national life. The national instinct, indeed, has hardly touched the churches, as yet, with its unifying power. We are still in the colonial stage, abounding in European elements of all sorts, but not yet American. The manner in which the political unity of the nation 242 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xvii. came about probably foreshadows the solution of the problem of Christian unity, which already presses upon our Protestant churches. It will not be by sacrificing the wealth of variety in the present order (or seeming chaos) of our ecclesiastical life, but by some elastic method, like our federal Union, which will leave room for variety in the types of worship and of life, and yet prevent or avoid the breach of unity. We shall not leave behind us all the past has bestowed, and attain to unity by the process of sim plification in creed and worship, but by finding room and use in mutual help for all that God has given us. And when that day comes, soon or late, there is no church that will have more to bring than our own, and none that will be welcomed more heartily into the new fellowship by' its sister-churches. CHAPTER XVIII. THE REVISION CONTROVERSY. HALF a century ago the great controversies were waged between our religious households. It was church against church, or sect against sect. When a collision of opinion arose within a church, it generally resulted in a division, or in the formation of a new sect to represent the worsted principle. Our ecclesiastical politics had the simplicity and directness seen in an ancient Greek city, where the victori ous party generally expelled the minority, and thus secured an effective unanimity. It was a common plea with those who expressed their dissent from the position taken by their own church, that they should leave it in peace, and either seek fellowship in some body which agreed with them, or form a new one for themselves. This breaking up religious communions " with a light heart " is become less the habit of our American Christians. It begins to be recognized that doctrinal uniformity is not the most precious possession a church can claim, and may be bought at too high a price. What once would have been separate sects begin to be parties within the churches, and the discussions which would have been waged across sec tarian lines are now carried on in a more brotherly fashion within the same body. It is noticeable that the questions which perplex one church are those which are pressing for an answer in some shape in the others also. All the churches are feeling the 243 244 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap, xviii. strain of readjusting their theological formulas to the new conclusions of history and criticism, sociology and biology. All have to decide how far the new scholarship demands a new attitude toward the Scriptures ; how far the Develop ment theory may be accepted as explaining the origin of man and of society, without imperiling positions essential to the Christian conception of human spirituality and divine Providence. All have to say how far the newer ethics oblige us to reconsider our ethical ideals, and thus to modify our conception of God. And even when the shape taken by the discussion is one which is peculiar to the individual church, the wide sympathy excited in other churches with one or both of the parties to the controversy shows that the real issue is one which is common to the churches. This was eminently true of the discussion as to the re vision of the Westminster standards, which was sprung upon the church by the General Assembly of 1889. It can hardly be said to have been foreshadowed by any previous action on any one's part on this side of the ocean. The interest in the question of subscription, which had been fanned into life by the discussions previous to the re union of 1869-70, had fairly died out. None of the trials for heresy, except for a brief moment that of Professor Swing, had caused it to revive. No liberal was asserting the need of larger liberty of construction ; no conservative was urging greater strictness. There seemed to be, in fact, a distinct languor in reference to all such matters ; and Dr. Archibald A. Hodge's course of popular lectures on theological themes had given unusual satisfaction even to those who differed from the Princeton type of doctrine. The agitation as to the " Higher Criticism," which had been going on in the pages of the " Presbyterian Review," was quite another affair, and stood in no vital relation to the question now raised. SCOTTISH RELAXATION. 245 It was in the British churches that the alteration of the church's relation to the Westminster standards was pro posed. First the United Presbyterian Church of Scotland — the church which had sent its missionaries to America be cause unconditional subscription to the Confession of Faith was not required by the Synod of Philadelphia — adopted in 1879, after prolonged debate, a " Declaratory Act as to the Sense in which the Confession is to be Understood," which shifted the emphasis from the points peculiar to Cal vinism to those in which Calvinists are in agreement with other Christians. Next the Free Church, which refused recognition to the new-school church of America as un sound in its Calvinism, was planning a similar declaration as to the sense in which it required subscription to the standards. Lastly the newly vigorous Presbyterian Church of England was adopting in 1889 briefer Articles of Faith, twenty-four in number, as a summary of the Westminster Confession of Faith, to which ministers and elders might assent at their ordination. These examples acted the more directly upon the Ameri can church because of the closer relations which had been fostered by the Reformed Alliance, and through the vigor ous theological literature created by the young Free Church ministry. For years there was a silent observation of what was happening abroad, and a feeling that the same problem must be solved in America also. Sound, but not ultra, con servatives, like Dr. Archibald A. Hodge, did not hesitate to express a willingness to go as far, at least, as the British churches were going for the relief of troubled consciences. He reprinted the Declaratory Act of the United Presby terian Synod in his " Commentary on the Confession of Faith" (Philadelphia, 1885), and he told me that he saw no objection to the same step being taken by the American church. 246 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap, xviii. The air, indeed, was growing electric, but the shock which brought down the avalanche came from the conserv ative Presbytery of Philadelphia. It sent a memorial to the General Assembly asking it to revise the proof-texts printed with the Shorter Catechism, which a sounder exe gesis had shown to be not always the best for the purpose. To this there was no great objection from any quarter, and the work has since been done. But the memorial, by its very success, suggested a bolder step. In the General Assembly of 1889 memorials were presented from fifteen Presbyteries asking it to take steps toward a revision of the Westminster Confession. The Assembly, without a division, resolved to transmit an overture to the Presby teries asking their sense of the propriety of attempting a revision, and what changes they thought necessary. The constitutionality of the overture was challenged, especially by the lawyers in the conservative wing of the church. The Adopting Act of 1789 (p. 65) had declared that the Confession should be " unalterable, unless two thirds of the Presbyteries shall propose alterations or amendments, and [these] shall be agreed to and enacted by the General Assembly." It was claimed that this re served the initiative to the Presbyteries, and that the Gen eral Assembly could not move in the matter until two thirds of the Presbyteries invited it to do so. The action, how ever, of the Synod of 1787 did not vitiate the overture of 1889, which proposed and sanctioned no alteration in the Confession, but merely suggested to the Presbyteries that now was the time to do it unitedly if they desired to. A much bolder course, indeed, had been taken by the As sembly of 1803, which had directed one of its committees "to consider whether any, and, if any, what, alterations ought to be made in the Confession of Faith." The response to the overture from the Presbyteries of FRIENDS AND FOES OF REVISION. 247 the church was surprising both in the extent of tlje desire for a change it elicited and the emphasis with which it was expressed. Up to the opening of the question there must have been a steady growth of dissatisfaction which had found no utterance. Not only among-new-school men and among the younger ministers was this shown, but in all classes. Dr. Henry J. van Dyke, who had made no secret of his sympathy with the " Declaration and Testimony " movement, Drs. James McCosh and J. T. Duffield of Princeton College, Dr. Theodore L. Cuyler, Dr. Henry C. McCook, Dr. William O. Campbell, and other old-school men, were as emphatic as Drs. Philip Schaff, Howard Crosby, E. R. Craven, Herrick Johnson, Stephen W. Dana, Charles L. Thompson, and others on the new- school side. The opposition, however, was strong, able, and resolute. The faculty of Princeton Seminary (Drs. Green, Warfield, C. W. Hodge, etc.) were a unit in opposition, and with them stood Dr. Patton, now the president of the college. They were reinforced by Dr. Shedd, of Union Seminary, and Dr. John de Witt, of the Chicago Seminary. On the same side stood Drs. John Hall, Samuel T. Lowrie, and George P. Hays, with Judge Drake of Missouri, and a host of lawyers among the elders. Professor C. A. Briggs occupied a rather ambiguous position, as fearing that the Confession if revised might leave him less sailing-room than he then enjoyed. His pamphlet, "Whither?" cer tainly throws cold water on the proposal to revise, although he finally voted for the New York Presbytery's resolution for " revision, understanding the word to be used broadly as comprehending any Confessional changes." The direction in which this last expression points was taken by twenty- one of the Presbyteries, beginning with that of Albany, which overtured the General Assembly for an entirely new 248 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap, xviii. Confession of Faith. Others expressed their desire for a brief statement of the church's essential doctrine, which should not supersede, but stand beside, the Confession, after the fashion of the Scotch Declaratory Act. The reasons given for revision were very various, but some were so generally expressed as to permit of their being stated as the mind of the church. It was said that the Confession was both defective and excessive in statement. The church had undergone great changes since the West minster divines had been in session. It had been led into a deeper sense of the love of God to mankind, of the work of the Spirit in the hearts of men, and of the church's voca tion as a missionary agency. The Confession contained no explicit recognition of the love of God to men, and no con fession of the church's duty toward the nations that sit in darkness. It was explicit enough as to controversial points which were of interest to the seventeenth century. It had nothing to say of the issues of modern debate — of the great conflict, for instance, between materialistic science and spir itual religion. On the other hand, it went beyond the teachings of Scripture in explicitly asserting the reprobation of the wicked, in refining as to the number of the elect being inca pable of increase or decrease, in speaking of " elect infants " with the evident implication that some are reprobate, and in declaring the Bishop of Rome to be the Antichrist. The third chapter of the Confession, which treats " Of God's Eternal Decree," was the center of the whole de bate, the conservatives insisting that every part of it was either a primary statement of the Calvinistic principle or a necessary inference from it, while the revisionists declined to regard logically necessary inferences as necessarily true. This, indeed, the conservatives conceded in refusing to admit that if there be " elect infants " there must also be OBJECTIONS TO REVISION. 249 " reprobate infants." The Westminster divines, as Dr. C. P. Krauth showed in his reply to Dr. Charles Hodge on this point, would not have shrunk from the inference. It shows how great the change which has taken place in our conception of God's character, that not a single opponent of revision would subscribe to the opinion which the au thors of the Confession actually held and meant to express. Many of them even refused to believe that the dogma of infant damnation had ever been held by Calvinists. The opponents of revision argued (1) that it was dan gerous, as likely to lead to changes which would impair " the integrity of the Reformed or Calvinistic system " — Professor H. B. Smith's phrase, of which conservatives were now less afraid than when they voted it out of the Basis of Union. It is true that the leading advocates of revision were pledged to resist such changes, and were ready to have the Committee on Revision instructed to reject them if proposed. To many, however, reprobation or preterition belonged to that integrity, and they were alarmed by the urgency for its excision. They also were alarmed, and with some reason, by the wild and loose criti cisms of the Confession in which some of the advocates of revision — not the leaders, however — indulged themselves. They also (2) objected to revision as needless, since " the elastic formula of subscription " employed by the American church bound its office-bearers only to " sincerely receive and adopt the Confession, ... as containing the System of Doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures." This, they insisted, meant simply the Reformed or Calvinistic system in it's integrity, apart from the special peculiarities of state ment employed by the framers of the Confession. Sub scription did not carry with it unqualified and unlimited ac ceptance of the Confession, but only of its essential articles. This plea, as Dr. Craven showed, was not in accordance 250 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap, xviii. with the history of the church and the expression of its mind by several General Assemblies. These identified the Confession itself with " the system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures." The right to even public exception to any statement in the Confession was abolished by the Old Side at the division of 1741, and was not reasserted by the New Side at the reunion of 1758, with the express exception of " so much of the xxiiid Chapter as gives au thority to the civil magistrate in matters of religion." That chapter was changed in 1786—87, thus eliminating the ex ception. The same Synod originated the formula of assent at ordination still in use : " Do you sincerely receive and adopt the Confession of Faith of this Church, as containing the System of Doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures ? " The Synod also declared the books which made up its con stitution to be " the standard of our doctrine, government, discipline, and worship." Neither it nor the earlier As semblies regarded it as being " the system of doctrine " or " the standard of doctrine " mixed up with other matters. The Assembly of 1824 described the doctrinal standards of the church as " a summary of those divine truths which are diffused throughout the sacred volume," and added: " They as a system of doctrine, therefore, cannot be aban doned, in our opinion, without an abandonment of the Word of God." They again speak of them as "the system of doctrine which men of sound learning, full of the Holy Ghost and mighty in the Scriptures, have devised from the oracles of the living God." In a word, the Confession is the system to which the church requires its ministers, elders, and deacons to subscribe. . That system is contained in it in the sense in which " the Word of God is contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments," as ortho dox men understand that formula and rationalists do not. The liberty to except whatever is not essential to the THE "ELASTIC FORMULA." 25 I integrity of the Reformed or Calvinistic system no more exists legally than does the liberty to except whatever is not essential to the evangelical system held by Calvinists and Arminians alike. The church has no more drawn the one line than the other. The attempt to draw the former line was defeated in 1869 by the conservatives of the old- school church. Those ministers of the church, therefore, who betrayed their lack of sympathy with the essentials of Calvinism during the debate on revision had just the same rights in the church as those who avowed their Cal vinism but expressed their dissent from any of the state ments of the Confession. Both were there on toleration simply — a toleration growing out of the impossibility Dr. Charles Hodge confessed (p. 140) of requiring subscription to an elaborate Confession, but never officially defined as to its limits. The debate should have opened the eyes of the conservatives to the doctrinal uncertainty of the church's position. The church's creed should be one to which the ministry could subscribe as unreservedly as the bridegroom answers in a marriage. This was what was required of her ministers and elders in the earlier period of her history. When this ceased to be possible with regard to the Con fession of Faith, the remedy should have been found in an alteration of the document, and not in treating the language of the act of subscription as an " elastic formula," when the terms bear no such sense. ' Much stress was laid upon the fact (3) that nobody but ministers and elders had to subscribe the Confession, as persons were received to the membership of the church upon the confession simply of their faith in Jesus Christ. This had not been the practice of the new- school churches, in which Congregationalist influences had led to the adop tion of extended articles of belief and covenants as terms of communion. But it was the law of the reunited church, 252 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap, xviii. and there had been a general conformity of local practice to its requirements. When, therefore, the members of the church complained of any statement in the Confession, and urged a revision, it was answered that they need not trouble themselves about it, as they were not required to assent to it. This, however, was not the whole truth of the matter. The Confession is officially described as that of the Pres byterian Church, not of its ministry and eldership. And in our country distinctions between clergy and people do not count for much. Every man is expected to stand up for the creed of his church as he does for the platform of his party. The Roman Catholic workmen in our shops and factories must have an answer ready when they are challenged as to the dogma of papal infallibility or the immaculate conception ; the. Baptist must have his reasons for immersion and close communion; and so along the whole line of denominational peculiarities. The debate on revision brought the extreme statements of the Westminster standards into strong light, and threw the members of the church everywhere upon the defen sive. Reprobation and infant damnation became topics of common conversation. Presbyterians had to declare where they stood on these points, without the least reference to the fact that they never had subscribed the Confession. It was felt that the whole membership of the church had a vital interest in its authoritative statements of doctrine, and that a normal confession must be one which is both intelligible and credible to the people at large. It also was said (4) that the alleged defects of the Con fession were not serious matters, as no Confession of Faith could be expected to state the whole faith of the church, but only to establish the lines of definition and defense PRESBYTERIAN LOSSES. 253 which are essential to its doctrinal integrity. It was an swered that this was true enough, and that the divines at Westminster would have done their work much better if they had borne the principle in mind. But the things to be omitted must not be such fundamental truths as the love of God to mankind, which is nowhere stated with explicit- ness. Neither should the operation of the Spirit in men's hearts, apart from his comforting and sanctifying believers, have been left to inference. In truth, since the days of Jonathan Edwards, and starting, indeed, from his later theological development, there had been a shifting of the theological center from the sovereignty to the love of God. This had been the root of the larger activity of the church in the mission field and in works of charity at home. This had supplied a new theological perspective to the preach ing even of Dr. Shedd and Dr. Hall. But the Confession was out of harmony with all this. It was argued also (5) that in spite of its alleged omis sions and excesses the Confession had served the church for nearly two centuries and a half of splendid growth and achievement. This argument was generally allowed to pass, but it had the least foundation of any. American Presbyterianism, in all its eleven branches, did not contain one third of the descendants of the Presbyterian immigra tion to America. This fact and the division and subdivis ion of the church were directly traceable to the scholastic and one-sidedly intellectual character, and the resulting tendency to doctrinal niceties and polemics, which the Westminster standards have imparted to Presbyterianism. As the voting proceeded the conservatives at first were disposed to insist that nothing less than a two-thirds ma jority would warrant the Assembly in proceeding further. But this claim was generally abandoned, as the overture 2 54 THE PRESS YTERLANS. [Chap, xviii. made no specific proposal for revision, and its adoption would effect none. The vote finally stood 134 Presby teries for revision explicitly, and 4 substantially so, a two- thirds majority of all being 142. When the Assembly of 1890 met, a prolongation of the struggle was expected. The conservatives, however, ac cepted the decision and proffered their assistance in effect ing the revision. Princeton took the lead in this, much to the indignation of extreme conservatives, who forgot that a sort of opportunism is one of its fixed traditions. It sug gested Dr. Warfield as its representative ; but his declara tion that the Confession unrevised " suited him down to the ground " had created a prejudice against him as a reviser. Dr. Green was appointed instead, and a committee was created out of both parties, which distinctly did not repre sent the state of feeling in the church on the subject. The result was a great disappointment, as its report, while con ceding much that had been asked, did not make that on which the revision movement hinged. The offensive state ments as to preterition were touched so slightly as to leave that matter much where it had stood before. The Assembly of 1891 sent down the report to the Presbyteries for further suggestions, which were forwarded to the committee. The conclusions finally reached were laid before the Assembly of 1892 in twenty- eight over tures, and these were sent to the Presbyteries for their final action. These overtures certainly contained some of the changes ardently desired by the majority of the church. The statement as to the unalterable number of the elect was to disappear; the operation of God's grace and of his Holy Spirit in the lives and hearts of the unregenerate was enun ciated ; the limitation of the work of creation to six days was changed so 'as to leave the question of time an open HALF A LOAF, OR NONE? 255 one ; the salvation of. the heathen by God's grace, without the preached Word, was admitted as possible ; that of all infants dying in infancy was clearly stated ; the pope was not to be pilloried as Antichrist, nor marriage with Roman Catholics explicitly forbidden ; and the power of ministers to retain and remit sins was pronounced to be " ministerial and declarative " only. But the doctrine of reprobation or preterition was not eliminated, as Had been asked by over a hundred Presbyteries. On this point, it is said, Princeton was most determined and most persuasive. Six of the twenty-four members of the Committee of Revi sion 1 recorded their dissent from the result in the case of Chapter III. It now fell to the advocates of revision to decide whether half a loaf was better than none, or the contrary. A large number of them must have concluded that it was better to lay the whole subject on the shelf for the time than adopt a truncated revision, which might stand in the way of one more perfect. At the same time there was a decided feel ing among many that the church had taken the wrong course, as revision would necessarily prove more irritating to one half the church and less satisfactory to the other than would the preparation of a new creed, less scholastic and more practical in characterv The report of the com mittee offered nothing but sundry patches of new cloth on an old garment, and the whole effect was incongruous in the extreme. A sixteenth-century document blistered 1 The committee consisted of Dr. William E. Roberts, chairman ; Dr. William E. Moore, secretary ; Dr. William Henry Green, Dr. Matthew B. Riddle, Dr. Willis J. Beecher, Dr. Edward D. Morris, Dr. Herrick John son, Dr. William Alexander, Dr. Ebenezer Erskine, Dr. James T. Leftwich, Dr. Samuel J. Niccolls, Dr. Edward R. Burkhalter, Dr. Robert R. Booth ; Elders Hon. William Strong, Hon. Samuel J. R. Macmillan, Hon. Alfred Hand, Hon. Emerson E. White, Hon. Henry B. Sayler ; and Messrs. Win- throp S. Gilman, Barker Gummere, William Evarts, George Junkin, and Charles M. Charnley. 256 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap, xviii. over with nineteenth-century amendments could not form a homogeneous whole. This state of feeling was indicated in the final vote. The vote of 147 Presbyteries was needed to adopt any of the overtures. The highest number received by any was 1 14, and this number was given for four. The rest, with four exceptions, ranged from 105 to 113, while the explicit vote in the negative ranged from 6 1 to 68. But the latter were reinforced by fifteen Presbyteries (mostly on the mission field) which made no report; thirteen others (two on the mission field) which reported no action on the overtures; and seventeen which refused to act on them as doubting their constitutionality. Fifteen out of these three groups had voted for revision in 1890. The support of the overtures did not come by any means from those Presbyteries alone which had supported the original proposal. The twenty-four Presbyteries of the Cherokee nation, Chillicothe, Dubuque, Ebenezer, Hunt ingdon, Kingston, La Crosse, North Laos, North Texas, Palmyra, Peoria, Platte, Portsmouth, Redstone, Rock River, Sacramento, St. Louis, San Francisco, Shenango, Spring field, Trinity, Washington, Wooster, and Zanesville, all had voted with the minority in 1 890. They now voted for all or nearly all the overtures — as did Pittsburg for sixteen of them, Philadelphia for nineteen, and New Brunswick for twenty-one — and would have carried them if the revision ists had kept their ranks. But in addition to the fifteen abstentionists already referred to, the thirty-one Presby teries of Albany, Chemung, Chippewa, East Oregon, Free- port, Grand Rapids, Indianapolis, Iowa City, Jersey City, Larned, Logansport, Mahoning, Mankato, Maumee, Mil waukee, Montana, New York, North River, Otsego, Pe- toskey, Puget Sound, Rochester, St. Clairsville, St. Law rence, Solomon, Southern Oregon, South Florida, Stockton, THE VOTE ON REVISION. 2$ J Syracuse, West Jersey, and Whitewater, all of which had voted for revision in 1 890, now voted against the overtures about as evenly as the conservative Presbyteries above mentioned voted for them. This in a few cases may have been the result of a shift of control of the Presbytery from one party to another, but it cannot have been true in most cases. These Presbyteries wanted revision, or something like it, as much as ever, but not after this fashion. The four overtures which fell below the average of sup port were the first, third, fourth, and the second half of the fifteenth. The first proposed to insert into the list of the things which " move US' to a high and reverend estimate of the Scriptures " a statement of the external evidences. This belated bit of apologetics received but 97 votes. The third was the restatement of the doctrine of reprobation, which represented Princeton's ultimatum. It was rejected by 107 votes against it to 67 in its favor. The fourth eliminated the " six days' " limit out of the statement of creation, and it received 100 votes to 74 in the negative. The second half of the fifteenth, on which a separate vote was asked, was offensive to the conservatives. Drs. Green, Patton, Alexander, and Leftwich, and Messrs. Junkin and Stratton had appended an expression of their dissent from it to their signatures to the report. It enlarged the state ment of the Confession as to the regeneration of elect per sons in the absence of the ordinary means from " all other elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word," to " all other elect persons, who are not outwardly called by the Word." It also was in the minority by 92 negative to 81 affirmative votes. The overture just preceding, which would have struck out the language as to " elect infants," received but 105 votes to 68. The Assembly of 1893 received over sixty memorials 2 5 8 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap, xviii. asking the preparation of a new and shorter creed, but voted to lay the matter aside. In this decision there was a general acquiescence. The church was weary of the dis cussion. It was felt that the whole subject had been taken up by the wrong handle, with the result of obtaining the maximum of irritation and the minimum of relief. Here the matter has rested, but cannot continue to do so for many years. The discussion placed the church per manently in such a relation to its own Confession as makes it impossible for it to retain the place it had held before 1889. The work of the Westminster divines has been challenged as inadequate in its statement of the gospel of divine grace, and as presumptuous in its handling of divine mysteries. This has been done not by some obscure and isolated group of theologians, but by men of the largest influence in every part of the church. Its statements on matters of vital importance have been declared unsatisfac tory by more than a majority of the Presbyteries, and the substitution of other statements has been approved. In this the church has gone much too far to stop, but the delay will not be wasted if some attention be given to as certaining a better mode of procedure than was adopted in 1889. The preparation of a new Confession of Faith for the Presbyterian Church of America, with the cooperation of any of the sister-churches which can be induced to partici pate in it, seems the most feasible method of solving the problem. The right, even the duty, of each national church to express its own faith in its own words was recognized among the earlier Calvinists. That they had as many con fessions as churches was one of the characteristics which distinguished them from the Lutherans with their Augs burg Confession, for which they claimed an ecumenical character. Holland did not copy France, nor did the NATIONAL COAFESSIONS. 259 Huguenot Church of France repeat the Swiss. The church of the Pfalz drafted its own Heidelberg Catechism as its confession. The Scottish Kirk in Knox's day was well acquainted with the confessions of the continental churches, but it prepared a confession of its own, a document full of the spirit and the flavor of Scotland. No church thought of playing the role of theological parasite, in the fashion of the hermit-crab, as Professor Drummond describes it. It was felt that the weight and force of the collective testi mony of these churches was greatly increased through each testifying, "in its own tongue" and its own terms, " the wonderful works of God." It is to this freedom of individual utterance that the British churches are now re turning, for the Scottish Declaratory Acts cannot but lead to the step already taken by the Presbyterian Church of England. It will be in accord with the oldest traditions of the Reformed churches if their American representa tives, laying aside the. helmet of brass and the coat of mail devised by the divines of Westminster for a scholastic- polemic age, should. go forth to the world with an expres sion of their own insight into Scriptural truth, their own statement of those great doctrines of grace which exalt God and humble man. It is true that we are tdld — and Dr. Briggs seems to agree in the statement — that the modern church has not the ability to do anything half so good in that line as the Westminster divines did. That statement is extremely doubtful. They were not men of the first order of their own time. The great names which most adorn the Puri tan age, with the exception of Samuel Rutherford, are all wanting from the list of the Assembly. James Ussher, Stephen Charnock, Thomas Brookes, John Owen, John -Howe, Richard Baxter, Robert Leighton, were all absent. William Twiss, Herbert Palmer, Stephen Marshall, An- 260 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap, xviii. thony Tuckney, and John Lightfoot were the best theolo gians among them, and not one of them but the last sur vived his age in any production of his pen. Their attempt to supplement their work as an Assembly by a commen tary on the Scriptures proved a failure. Even their col lective repute failed to float their sapless " Annotations " into favor. The theologians of our American church may have less scholastic training, and less faith in the adequacy of logic to meet every emergency, than had the body which met in Westminster Abbey. They may make but little of the nice distinctions and discriminations which seemed so pre cious to the divines who debated across that green-baize table in the Jerusalem Chamber. But they have had the advantage of two centuries of deepening knowledge of God's Word and deepening experience of his guidance of his church. And what they would offer for the service of God in the assertion of his truth, and for the upbuilding of his kingdom, would be their own, and not the borrowed offering, which was always rejected from sacrifice. CHAPTER XIX. THE BRIGGS AND SMITH TRIALS. A CIRCUMSTANCE which tended to strengthen the hands of the conservatives in the final vote on revision was the precipitation of a new controversy upon the church, and one even more exciting in its character. The Assembly of 1 89 1, to which the report on revision was made, was the first which had the case of Professor Charles A. Briggs, of Union Theological Seminary, before it. This case raised the question of the church's attitude to what lay behind and above the Confession — to the Bible itself. Two questions, frequently confounded, were involved in this case and in that of Professor Henry Preserved Smith, of Lane Seminary, which came after it. The first is that of the inerrancy of the Scriptures ; the second that of the composite character of the first six books of the Old Testa ment and the prophecies of Isaiah. They are entirely in dependent questions-, as any one may take the negative side on either while holding the positive on the other. It was long contended by Christian scholars that the Bible as it stands in the original text is altogether free from errors and contradictions. Immense ingenuity was expended in showing that the figures and dates of the Old Testament in Hebrew were mathematically exact, and that the apparent discrepancies of the several Gospels presented no real contradictions. Of late years, however, this kind of harmonizing seems to have been abandoned by scholars 261 262 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xix. of the most orthodox type as regards some of these alleged discrepancies, while they limit the concession to a much smaller number of instances than the negative critics allege. It is admitted that the Hebrew and Greek texts contain some errors of statement, and the problem is how these are to be accounted for without giving up the Bible as an in spired guide of human life. The two ways which have been suggested are (i) to ascribe the errors and inaccuracies to the copyists' lack of care in transcription, or (2) to modify the conception of divine inspiration so as to leave room for human error in the inspired man with regard to matters which do not pertain to " teaching, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness." To minds of the conservative type the former solution of the difficulty very naturally commends itself, as apparently the safer, and as involving no modifi cation of the usual conceptions of the divine dealings with men. It is not, however, one which finds any warrant in the Westminster Confession, which declares that " the Old Testament in Hebrew and the New Testament in Greek being immediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages,' are therefore authentical ; so as, in all controversies of religion, the church is finally to appeal to them." The authors of this statement certainly did not regard the divine efficiency as less enlisted in the preservation of the Scriptures from error during their transmission to us than in their first origina tion by the inbreathing of the Holy Spirit. And when they appeal in the same chapter to " the consent of all the parts " as an evidence of the " infallible truth and divine authority thereof," they leave no room to suppose that they have reference only to original copies, while the present texts have fallen from this " consent of the parts " into in consistencies, or from this " infallible truth " into errancy ERRANCY AND INERRANCY 263 through lapse of that "singular care and providence." Such a supposition they distinctly reject — more distinctly, indeed, than a theory of inspiration which leaves room for the presence of mistaken judgments in the inspired man as regards other and lesser matters than " the goodness, wisdom, and power of God," " the comfort of the church against the corruption of the flesh and the malice of Satan and the world," "the full discovery of the way of man's salvation," " the whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man's salvation, faith, and life," and authoritative guidance "in all controversies of religion," which things the Confession defines, as the content of the Bible. Yet this theory of the inerrancy of the original texts, along with the admitted errancy of the texts we have, not only has obtained recognition as a permissible solution, in the face of the Confession's teaching to the contrary, but has been exalted to serve as a new test of orthodoxy, to the condemnation of those who prefer the other solution, which finds nothing like an explicit condemnation in the Confession. ¦ In this way the divine providence, which our Lord declares to extend to the numbering of the hairs of our head, is confessed inadequate to preserving the Bible in that state of perfection in which it was first given to the church, and which, we are told, we must believe it once possessed if we are to believe that its human authors were really inspired by God. The other question as to the origin of certain parts of the Bible is of lesser* importance. Inspiration may use editors as well as authors, and did so in the case of the third evangelist, -who knew nothing at first-hand of the story he tells. It is, indeed, another affair when the books of the Mosaic law are represented as a series of inventions of late date, with no root in the nation's legal traditions, 264 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xix. so that " The Lord spake unto Moses, saying, ..." be comes a mere mode of speech with no historic warrant. No such significance, however, can be attached to the question of the double authorship of the Book of Isaiah, except that the notion of prophecy as prediction out of historic relation to the prophet's environment rests largely on the assumption that one Isaiah wrote the whole book. In this case, also, the contact with the churches of Great Britain, and especially with the Free Church of Scotland, had much to do with the origination of the controversy. In 1 88 1 Professor W. Robertson Smith had been removed from his professorship of Hebrew in the Free Church Col lege, Aberdeen, by the Free Church Assembly, his offense being the views he presented of the origin of the Old Testament Scriptures in articles contributed to the Ency clopaedia Britannica, and in his book, " The Old Testa ment in the Jewish Church " (Edinburgh and New York, 1 881). The case attracted general attention on both sides of the Atlantic, and raised the question whether the church was likely to confirm the faith of her own members, or to exert the right influence upon the world, if she decided to expel her Thomases from the apostolate, as her Master did not. The case was complicated by the peculiarly unconcilia- tory temper of Professor Smith, who combined a great deal of the fortiter. in re with very little of the suaviter in modo. It was to be regretted that these difficult and delicate ques tions should be first pressed on the attention of the church by one who, whatever his learning,°had so little reverence for opinions long cherished by his countrymen, and identi fied by them, rightly or wrongly, with their grasp upon the Word of God. Much the same embarrassment at tended the appearance of the same problems in the Amer ican church. Professor Charles Augustus Briggs shares DR. BRIGGS' S INAUGURAL. 265 Professor Robertson Smith's temper as well as his critical opinions, and goes beyond the Scotchman in his enjoyment of a spirited controversy. If we may judge from the way in which he is said to have received the remonstrances of those friends to whom he showed his Inaugural before its delivery, he prefers to say the thing which will shock his hearers, rather than to give it a shape less offensive. In none of his works is there shown that faculty of reverence which is as needful for the critic as for the pastor. He never gave the church the impression that, in his view, the great work of a professor in training the ministry to a knowledge of the Scriptures is to show them what are the elements of power which have given those books their hold on the faith, the affections, and the conscience of mankind. On the other hand, it is beyond question that he knew how to win the enthusiastic affection of his pupils, and that in some cases he had been the means of rescuing young men from a profound skepticism as regards the Bible to a prac tical faith in its authority. But it was the former side of his work which was most in evidence before the church when in 1 89 1 he was trans ferred from the chair of Hebrew and cognate languages in Union Seminary to the newly founded chair of biblical theology, and delivered (January 20th) his inaugural ad dress. As early as 1870 he had repudiated publicly the traditional theory of inspiration. In his articles in the " Reformed and Presbyterian Review " and in his " Bibli cal Study" (1883) and "Messianic Prophecy" (1886) he had shown himself affected by the school of critics to which Professor Robertson Smith belongs, but always with reser vations which kept him within the bounds of toleration. In the Inaugural he showed that he had reached a point which, conservatives thought, made it impossible to pass it over in silence. His case first came before the General 266 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xix. Assembly of 1891, under the agreement of Union and other seminaries to submit the election of professors to the Assembly for confirmation. His friends contended that his transfer from one chair to another did not require the Assembly's approval; but the Assembly overruled this, and by 449 to 60 votes formally refused to confirm his appointment. His Presbytery therefore appointed a committee to con sider the propriety of trying him upon charges of unsound doctrine. This committee reported charges, which the Presbytery ordered him to answer. On November 4, 1 89 1, the Presbytery heard his answer, and by 94 votes to 39 decided to dismiss the case " in view of the declara tions made by Dr. Briggs touching his loyalty to the Holy Scriptures and the Westminster standards, and of his dis claimers of interpretations put on some of his words." The prosecuting committee then took the unusual step of ap pealing directly to the General Assembly, while thirty-four members of the Presbytery complained in the ordinary way to the Synod of New York. The Assembly of 1892, meeting at Portland, Ore, entertained the Protest and or dered the Presbytery to try the case on its merits. The Presbytery, meeting in November, 1892, cited Professor Briggs to appear before it a month later, and to answer the list of charges, with specifications, which the Committee of Prosecution had laid before it. When the trial actually occurred, it was a matter of more than national interest. The prosecution was conducted with distinguished ability and legal acumen, though not with great exegetical learn ing, by Drs. G. W. F. Birch and Joseph J. Lampe, and Elder John J. McCook. The charges were that he taught (1) that men may be enlightened unto salvation by reason or through the church, apart from the Bible ; (2) that the inspiration of the Bible was not such as to exclude errors A QUESTIONABLE APPEAL. 267 as to matters of fact even from the original documents; (3) that he denied the "Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch and of the unity of authorship of the Book of Isaiah ; and (4) asserted the continuance of sanctification after death. The second point was really the essential one, and cannot be said to have been handled fully and frankly by the prosecution. Appeal was made to a great number of authorities, who really held to the inerrancy of the He brew and Greek texts as we have them, and who would have repudiated Dr. Green's concessions as emphatically as those of Dr. Briggs. In his reply Professor Briggs showed his superiority in a professional familiarity with the subjects under discussion, and was unhappy only in the tone which characterized every reference to the prosecution and the Assembly. The Presbytery, by a somewhat diminished majority, acquitted Dr. Briggs on all the charges. The Committee of Prosecution now appealed a second time to the General Assembly, both on the ground of ex ceptions taken to the Presbytery's conduct of the trial, and of the wrongfulness of the verdict reached. To this course it was objected that a committee of Presbytery could not appeal against the Presbytery, and that no appeal could be taken from a verdict of acquittal by a public prosecutor. It was pointed out that no such appeal had ever been en tertained in the American church, that it was forbidden to the national courts by an amendment to the Constitution, that it was a violation of the common law inherited from England, and that it was contrary to the universal prin ciples of equity. That such appeals had been taken by private prosecutors in the cases of Mr. Barnes and Dr. Beecher established no precedent for this case, as the public prosecutor incurs none of the personal risks which Presbyterian law attaches to the failure of the private prosecutor to make good his charges. The revised Book 268 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xix. of Discipline, however, allowed of an appeal being taken by " either of the original parties," where the old book had limited this to "a party aggrieved" by the decision. On this point mainly the conservatives rested their case. In the selection of members of the Assembly of 1893, as in the case of its predecessor, pains were taken to send up delegations whose sympathies coincided with those of the majority in each Presbytery. This worked badly for Professor Briggs's friends, who were the majority in very few Presbyteries, and secured an Assembly much more conservative than the church at large, and one whose scholarship was not as ample as would have been obtained with less party management. It is not always those who have given most attention to a complex question who are the most positive about it. Next to the report on the vote of the Presbyteries on the twenty-eight overtures for the revision of the Confession, the Briggs case was the most important matter of business, and in point of popular interest it almost wholly eclipsed that. The Assembly, by a vote of 410 to 145, decided to entertain the appeal, Dr. Nicholls, of St. Louis, and four other members of the Judicial Committee objecting to this course. The trial of the appeal then proceeded, Messrs. Lampe and McCook stating the case for the prosecution, and Dr. Briggs reply ing. After hearing other members of the Presbytery and members of the Assembly, the vote was reached, and 295 voted to sustain the appeal as a whole and 84 to sustain in part, while 1 16 voted not to sustain. Before the sentence was pronounced a subcommittee of the special committee appointed to draft it waited on Dr. Briggs in the hope that he would make some retraction, which might render a stay of proceedings short of suspen sion possible. He replied first verbally, and then in writ ing, that he had nothing to retract, as he " adhered to all A QUESTIONABLE SENTENCE. 269 the positions taken before the General Assembly." The Assembly therefore went on to declare the decision of the Presbytery of New York erroneous and its proceeding faulty, and to pronounce Professor Briggs guilty of all the charges on which he had been tried — of having " uttered, taught, and propagated views, doctrines, and teachings contrary to the essential doctrines of Holy Scripture and the standards of the Presbyterian Church, and in violation of [his] ordination vow, which said erroneous teachings, views, and doctrines strike at the vitals of religion, and have been industriously spread." On this ground it sus pended him " from the office of a minister in the Presby terian Church, until such time as he shall give satisfactory evidence of repentance to the General Assembly for the violation by him of said ordination vow." This decision lacks the calm of the judicial temper. It is pervaded by a personal animus, which finds an outlet in many of its phrases, and especially in the conversion of the charge of unsound teaching into One of personal immoral ity, and in making the restoration of the offender depend ent riot upon the retraction of his alleged errors, but upon his " repentance " for his sin. It thus affixes a stigma to the accused, which was not warranted by any evidence before the Assembly, nor embodied in any of the charges on which he was tried. It bases this sin of unfaithfulness on each and all of the charges, thus declaring that who ever holds that there were two Isaiahs and not one, or that Moses did not write the books of the Pentateuch — a point on which the Confession of Faith has nothing. to say — is guilty of a breach of his ordination vow, if he be a minister of the church. In truth, there is no such thing as an " ordination vow " with regard to doctrine. The candidate for the ministry is admitted on the declaration of his present assent to the 270 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xix. teachings of the Confession of Faith. He gives no prom ise that he will continue that assent. His utmost implied obligation is to state fully and frankly his divergences from the Confession and leave the church to judge whether they are such as require that his place in the ministry shall be abandoned. Even on the supposition that Dr. Briggs was conscious of an essential diverg.ence of his views from those of the Confession — a supposition he denies, and no man has the right to say the denial is dishonest — he had done all that honesty and manliness required of him. It is to be regretted that in neither of the two protests, signed respectively by 97 and 62 members of the Assem bly, was this point insisted upon. The second, indeed, complained of the injustice which the Assembly had done to a " Christian scholar of acknowledged high char acter." The first confined itself to a protest against the new theory of an inerrant and infallible Bible whieh* no body had seen, but in which all must believe from this time forward. As the sentence runs the General Assem bly pronounced every signer of this protest guilty of vio lating his ordination vow. Among them were Drs. Her- rick Johnson, Samuel J. Niccolls, Charles L. Thompson, George Alexander, Charles A. Dickey, Francis Brown, Henry M. Storrs, Edward P. Sprague, William R. Taylor, J. Garland Hamner, Henry H. Stebbins, and Revs. Thomas C. Hall, Robert A. Carnahan, and C. P. H. Nason. The case of Professor Henry Preserved Smith, of Lane Seminary, came before the Assembly in regular order through his appeal from the adverse decision of the Synod of Ohio. In March, 1891, he had read a paper on Inspi ration before the Presbyterian Ministerial Association of Cincinnati, and this was printed along with a similar paper by Professor Llewellyn J. Evans, also of Lane Seminary. It was eighteen months later that the Presbytery of Cin- DR. SMITH'S APPEAL. 2fl cinnati referred the matter to a committee, which drafted three charges, of two of which the Presbytery found Dr. Smith guilty, and suspended him from the ministry until he should renounce the errors alleged. On this he ap pealed to the Synod of Ohio, complaining both of the procedure and the verdict of the Presbytery. The Synod entertained the appeal, but, after hearing the case, voted not to sustain any of its twelve specifications. The high est vote on any was 51 to 78. On all twelve Dr. Smith now appealed to the General Assembly. The case was not complicated with any of the personal considerations or side issues which complicated that of Professor Briggs. The appellant's manner of stating his opinions and of conducting his case was open to no excep tion. He commanded the esteem even of those who had united in condemning him. The issue simply was whether the original manuscripts, as they came from the hands of the inspired writers, did or did not possess an inerrancy which they have lost in the process of transmission. But this issue had been prejudged in the sentence on Professor Briggs, and Dr. Smith's appeal was rejected by a vote of 396 not to sustain, against 55 to sustain and 47 to sustain in part, the appeal. In this case the Assembly remembered its duty to confer with the accused, but its Committee of Conference found him unprepared to make any statement which would modify the result. As sentence had been pronounced already, in terms which corresponded to the charges, by the Presbytery of Cincinnati, there was no room for the blunder of converting a suspension for alleged heresy into one for immoral conduct. With these decisions the matter has rested for the pres ent. The majority, very naturally, hold them to be final and to constitute an interpretation of the Confession which js binding upon all. The minority reply that this is to 272 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap, xix. fall into the second of the two heresies charged upon Dr. Briggs, and to treat the church as an independent source of divine illumination. Not content with the protests tabled in the Assembly of 1893, they met in convention that year at Cleveland to reiterate their refusal to accept a new dogma at the hands of the General Assembly. In taking this course of dissent and protest against even judi cial decisions, they have on their side the authority of Dr. Charles Hodge, who wrote, in 1866, "The right of pro test, as it has always been exercised, includes the right of dissenting from the deliverances and judgments of church courts, on the ground of their being unwise, unjust, un- scriptural. . . . The Assembly [of 1866] recognizes the principle that adhesion to its deliverances cannot be made a condition of Christian or ministerial communion." But whatever may be thought of the manner of the de cision, it was not possible that any other could be reached under the circumstances. The traditional respect for the Bible as a perfect book, the general acceptance of the most absolute and mechanical theories of its inspiration, have been common features of our American churches of every name. These have been so long associated with the reverence for the Bible's spiritual greatness, and recogni tion of its actual worth as a guide for life and a disclosure of God, that the scholar who first broached a different view in any quarter was certain to be regarded as " strik ing at the vitals of religion." Especially must this be expected of the most conservative and most theological of the American churches. Men felt as if Professor Briggs were cutting the very ground from beneath their feet. They were in no mpod to judge calmly as to which theory of inspiration best fitted the facts. They were the less so in this case, because it was presented to them in associa tion with doubtful opinions as to the origin and composi- CONSERVATIVE CONCESSIONS. 2JT, tion of some of the books of Scripture, and other matters of the higher criticism, and because the champion of the new views was a man whose statements were often so un guarded as to convey an entirely false notion of his mean ing. At times he seemed anxious to intensify the shock which must attend his enunciation of his views even in their mildest expression. The judgment excited a general dissent, but a still more general assent, in the other churches-. In all quarters the progressives regretted or ridiculed, and the conservadves rejoiced. As America is the most conservative of Prot estant countries, the satisfaction predominated. It was said that one of the most learned of American churches had given her decision on the side of orthodoxy, and that with an emphasis which must help to stem the tide of loose opinion about the Bible. It was not noticed that the form of the decision did not place the church on that West minster platform on which all the churches stood as late as thirty years ago. It admitted, by unmistakable implication, the presence of errors in the Hebrew and Greek texts. It admitted the errancy of the Bible as we have it. It only pronounced against one way of accounting for these, and gave its sanction to the other. How the theory it sanc tioned may be used in the interest of negative criticism remains to be seen. CHAPTER XX. THE SEMINARY QUESTION, AND OTHER MATTERS. As the Union Theological Seminary refused to accept the decision of the Assembly of 1891 with regard to Pro fessor Briggs's professorship, there was at once a straining of the relations created by the voluntary compact of 1870 between the Assembly and the theological seminaries in a shape suggested by Union Seminary itself. After some hesitation the directors of the seminary applied to the Assembly for an abandonment of the compact by mutual agreement, on the ground that the directors of the semi nary had exceeded their powers in entering into it. To this the Assembly refused to assent, but it proposed to refer the matter to arbitration, and appointed its own rep resentatives on the proposed board of arbitration. When these met in November, in New York, and opened a cor respondence with the directors of the seminary, they were told that the board, by a vote of 19 to 1, had decided to terminate the compact with the Assembly ; so there was no use for the service of arbitrators. The Assembly of 1893 placed on record its protest against this action, and instructed its Committee on Theological Seminaries to re ceive no reports from Union Seminary while its directors maintained this attitude, disclaimed responsibility for its teachings, and directed the Board of Education to give aid only to students in the seminaries approved by the Assembly. 274 STATUS OF THE SEMINARIES. 275 The same Assembly received the first report from a special committee which had been directed by the Assem bly of 1892 to consider the relations of the seminaries to the Assembly, and to report what changes were necessary to secure the Assembly's authority over them. It re hearsed a part of the facts connected with the establish ment of Princeton Seminary, and declared that since the creation of a separate board of trustees for that seminary in 1822 the church had abandoned its earlier and proper policy in the establishment and control of these institu tions. It found the fourteen seminaries of the church, with 880 students taught by 93 teachers, in possession of over $8,000,000 in property (Union, $2,100,000; Prince ton, $1,500,000; McCormick, $1,400,000; Auburn, $800,- 000; Alleghany, $750,000; Lane, $560,000; San Fran cisco, $500,000; Danville, $260,000; Omaha, $25,000; Newark, $67,000; Dubuque, $50,000), which the com mittee assumed to have been given by members of the church to secure such teaching as the General Assembly approved, but which the donors had seen fit to vest in self- perpetuating bodies or in bodies controlled by Synods or Presbyteries only. It was not until 1894, however, that the committee felt free to report a plan to establish the control of the General Assembly. It was to request the seminaries to so amend their charters as to secure that their funds shall be held in trust for the church at large, for the purpose of theological education according to its standards ; and also to secure to the Assembly a veto upon the election of directors and trustees, and upon the elec tion, appointment, and transfer of all professors and teach ers; and to vest in the Assembly the power to proceed legally against seminaries which violate any of these pro visions. After a discussion which occupied parts of three mornings, the report was adopted by a vote of 441 to 1 1 7, 276 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xx. the seminary professors in the Assembly voting with the majority. The Assembly had not long adjourned when it began to be seen that the action taken was hasty and ill consid ered. The especial advocates of a reunion with the South ern Assembly discovered that the action was distasteful in that quarter, and that its success would furnish one more of the obstacles to that policy. The Southern church deprecates centralization, and always has kept seminaries under synodical control. It also became evident that the obstacles to the changes of charter the Assembly asked were as good as insurmountable. Some of the States could give no legal recognition to a body constituted, as is the General Assembly, from citizens of all the States of the Union, and changed in its composition with every year. Nor are State legislatures so fond of ecclesiastical centralization as to place property held within their limits under control of a body meeting outside them, and thus to be invested with the control of millions of propeity. Probably the Alleghany Seminary would have had the least difficulty in obtaining a modification of its charter, but for a reason which would have made the change emi nently undesirable. Any chartered institution which ac cepts fresh legislation from the legislature, since the adop tion of the present Constitution of Pennsylvania, is brought thereby under the supervision and control of the State to an extent which deprives it of the autonomy it previously possessed. It is probable that this is not the only State in which such consequences would have resulted. It also was found that the existing boards of trustees or directors could not be brought to see the matter from the Assembly's point of view. The experiences of 1830-36, and the terror of action on the part of the Assemblies then felt by the friends of Princeton Seminary, were recalled, and PLAN OF FEDERATION. 2f] went to prove that the General Assembly was not always and necessarily the best safeguard of a conservative ortho doxy. Certainly Alleghany, under the exclusive control of the Synod of Pittsburg, at that time felt much more secure in its position. At this writing the majority of the seminaries have had the Assembly's proposal under consideration, and every one of these has refused to accede to it. The proposal would not have secured the object aimed at. What the Assembly needs for the purpose in view is the power of summary removal, not of veto upon appoint ments. It was this that enabled the Free Church of Scot land to get rid of Professor Robertson Smith, to whose "election it made not the smallest objection. But the lack of this, as also of the powers it asked, is not distressing the church to anything like the degree that the majority of 1 894 seemed to suppose. While the Assembly is in session, its members, collectively and individually, are tempted to think it the great power which moves the church, when in truth it is but the balance-wheel of the machine. Another subject which came before the Assembly of 1894 was the plan for a federal council of the Reformed churches of America. This might be described as an at tempt to form a more perfect union, within national limits, than the International Alliance of the Reformed Churches offered, and to take away the reproach of antagonism be tween bodies whose differences are far too trifling to justify rivalry. In another sense it is a reflex of the unifying action taken in the mission fields of Japan and Brazil and contemplated in other missionary lands. The o"bject of the plan is to include all the Reformed churches of America which hold the Presbyterian polity. The churches which acted by their commissioners in draft ing the plan are the Presbyterian, the United Presbyterian, 278 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xx. the Reformed Presbyterian (0. S. and N. S.), the Cumber land Presbyterian, the Associate Reformed Presbyterian, South, and the two Reformed churches formerly known as the Dutch and the German. This includes all but the Southern Presbyterian Church and the fragments left out in the formation of the United Presbyterian Church. The object of the plan is too good to admit of question. Whether the specific plan is the best for the object is doubted by some. As the proposed federal council is to consist of four ministers and four elders from each of the churches, the smaller bodies would have an undue weight in influencing its decisions. The representatives of their 125,000 communicants would all but balance those of the 1,400,000 in .the larger bodies. It is true that the scope of the powers conferred is limited, but it extends to dec larations and definitions of a common policy in regard to questions of national magnitude, such as temperance, pub lic schools, and the amendment of the national Constitution in a Christian sense. It also is to be constituted an eccle siastical board of arbitration in all cases of dispute between the churches embraced in the federation. The problem which the proposal really raises is whether this plan would serve to hasten a still closer union or to retard it. In some cases these half-way measures stand in the way of something better. In others they give such a foretaste of its advantages as strengthens the desire for it. This was notably true of the national Articles of Con federation under which the American people managed their affairs until the adoption of the Constitution. The resemblance of the Plan to those Articles is so close as to suggest conscious imitation. They also created a single deliberative body, with vaguely defined and greatly limited powers, in which each of the contracting parties had an equal vote ; they also conferred power in relation to exter- POLITICAL DISSENT. 279 nal affairs, while jealously reserving the control of domestic matters; and they also constituted the central body an umpire in disputes between the parties to the agreement. The best service the Articles of Confederation rendered was to tide over a period of excessive colonial jealousies, and to prepare the country for " a more perfect union " on a national basis. We might well put up with the faults found with the plan under discussion if we had reasonable ground for the expectation that it would do its work equally well. The favor with which it has been received seems to promise its final adoption by the churches con cerned. One of the lesser Presbyterian bodies had its share of agitation and distress during these last years. The disso lution of the Reformed Presbytery of North America, by the death of Rev. David Steel, Sr., gives the Synod of the Reformed Presbyterian (or Covenanter) Church (O. S.) the hegemony of the extreme right wing of the Presbyterian host. It has stood for old-fashioned, theocratic Presby terianism with a vigor and an ability which remind one of John Stuart Mill's saying that if the most capable men are found leading the van, the next so will be seen bringing up the rear. Their attitude of requiring political dissent as a term of communion, which they inherited from the Hillmen of the western Lowlands, they have maintained for two hundred years. In that time they never have sworn an oath of al legiance to any government on earth, or held communion with any who did so. So long as slavery was tolerated within the national area this position was maintained with out much difficulty. Its abolition both created a difficulty and presented an opportunity. The difficulty was that of keeping their membership apart from a political system. which, in their opinion, had purged off its worst stain. The 280 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xx. opportunity was that of enlisting the deepened national seriousness in securing such an amendment to the national Constitution as would give the government a distinctly Christian character, and thus put an end to the necessity for their political dissent. It was with this purpose that the National Reform Asso ciation was organized in the city of Pittsburg in the year 1864, after preliminary conventions in different parts of the country. The aim to secure support outside the Cov enanter Church for the Covenanter principle has had con siderable success. Bishops Mcllvaine, Kerfoot, Eastburn, Huntingdon, Beckwith, Bedell, Jaggar and Kip of the Protestant Episcopal Church, Bishop Nicholson of the Reformed Episcopal Church, Bishops Haven and Simpson of the Methodist Church, Bishops Weaver, Wright, and Dickson of the United Brethren Church, and both Bishops Escher and Dubs of the Evangelical Association, gave their adherence, to the platform of the association, showing that the children of the Covenant are no longer afraid of prelates. Drs. - Charles and Archibald Hodge, Cuyler, Mcllvaine, Craven, Herrick Johnson, and George P. Hays of the Presbyterian Church, Drs. Pressly, Cooper, and Barr of the United Presbyterian Church, Dr. Boyce of the As sociate Reformed ChurCh, South, and Dr. Tayler Lewis of the Reformed Church, came to its support from a less distance. Among the Congregationalists President Julius H. Seelye, Joseph Cook, and Dr. George B. Cheever stepped upon its platform. Three ex-governors, nine judges, nineteen college presidents, and twelve professors were found among its officers in 1891. The contention of the association has been that our efforts for political and social reform are ineffective and sporadic because they lack a central theocratic aim. Just as we. would bid an individual sinner, who was making THEOCRATIC REFORM. 28 1 efforts to cast off his sins one by one, to start right by sur rendering himself to God and invoking his grace, so the. nation needs to make the same sort of right start. And as in the individual case the open confession of his new attitude is required equally by God's law, and by the reason of things as committing him to the right side, so should the nation make public and formal confession of its having entered into covenant with God to serve him in the keep ing of his law. The monetary support of the association has come chiefly from the Covenanter body and has developed a high degree of liberality in giving. On the other hand, it has thrown them into close relations with the champions of social re forms of all kinds, especially that of temperance, and has led them to give these a hearty support. The incongruity, however, of urging others to vote for measures for which they would not vote themselves came to be felt among them, especially when the commonwealth of Pennsylvania invited a vote on an amendment to the Constitution which would have prohibited the manufacture and sale of intoxicants within its boundaries. The year before this the Synod had ruled that political dissent did not forbid service on juries. Following the lead of the Presbytery of Pittsburg, it now decided that dissent would not be impaired by Covenanters having themselves placed on the registration list and voting, when no explicit approval of the Constitution was required. To many both of the younger and progressive men, and of the older and conservative, this seemed an abandonment of political dissent. The members of the church were no longer required to hold themselves aloof from the political system. They were even permitted to incorporate them selves into it, provided they abstained from any express approval of an objectionable document. The former con- ' 282 THE PRESS Y7ERIANS. [Chap. xx. tended that the Synod could not stop with this, but must .go farther. A conference was held in a church in the East End of Pittsburg, at which some score of the younger ministers were present, the immediate object being advice to one of their number who found himself in an embarrass ing position. Quite as an after- thought they drew up and signed a declaration of their views — called the East End Platform — in which they treated the matter of political dissent as now an open question, and published this. The Presbytery of Pittsburg responded by suspending from the exercise of their ministry those of the signers who belonged to its jurisdiction.- This was done on the ground that they denied the binding force of die covenant which the church had adopted in 1871, and which pledged its members not to " incorporate " themselves with any political system until they had obtained from that a recognition of Christ's headship over the nations. The suspended min isters appealed to the Synod, which sustained the action of the Presbytery and proceeded to exercise the same rigorous discipline upon the other signers, with the excep tion of two, against whom the Presbytery of New York was proceeding. That Presbytery, however, showed less vigor than did the Pittsburg Presbytery, and the two were allowed to withdraw from the church without formal censure. Most of the signers sought an ecclesiastical home in the nearest denomination, the United Presbyterian Church. Several of them were accompanied by large sections of their congregations, and in two instances the church prop erty was taken with them. As after the division of 1833, the adherents of the Synod sued for its possession, invok ing in defense of property rights the State to which they refuse allegiance. One effect of this rigorous discipline has been an altered STRIFE BEFORE STAGNATION. 283 spirit in the affairs of the National Reform Association. The part of its membership which lies outside the Cove nanter Church shows some indisposition to accept the leadership of a body with whose ecclesiastical proceedings they cannot sympathize. The closing pages of the story of American Presbyte rianism are a tale of agitation and of friction. Better this, however, than stagnation and dull acquiescence in tradi tional beliefs and usages. Even this evidences life and looks to a future in which . . . Generations yet unborn Shall bless and magnify the Lord. CHAPTER XXI. RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT, 1705-1895. Nearly two centuries have elapsed since the meeting of the first American Presbytery announced the establish ment of the synodical method of church government in the English colonies of America. There had been, previ ously to that, ministers and congregations whose ecclesi astical character had been determined by their opposition to the prelatic claims of the Anglican system on the one hand and the independency of " the New England way " on the other. Newbury[port] in Massachusetts (1635), Jamaica on Long Island (1677), Newark in New Jersey (1667), Snow Hill in Maryland (1682), Rehoboth in Vir ginia (1684), Port Royal in South Carolina (1684), and Philadelphia (1698) stand for the earliest congregational beginnings of this character in each of those colonies. The names of Francis Doughty, Richard Denton, Abra ham Pierson, Matthew Hill, Samuel Davis, Francis Make mie, and William Durilop and Archibald Stobo stand for the personal leaders of this antagonism to " the falsehood of extremes." But until the Presbyterian theory of church government found its expression in the organization of a Presbytery it could not be said to have really taken root. The vine thus planted has come to overshadow the whole land. Not only has the little handful of Presby terians, gathered on soil preempted for many years by prelacy and independency, grown to. a great host, with 284 THE PRESBYTERIAN IDEA. 285 1,278,000 communicants in 1890, representing more than four millions of the American people, but the Presbyterian method of government has had a marked attraction for both the antagonistic forms. The prelacy of earlier An glicanism has given way, in America, to a distinctly Pres byterian type of Episcopal government ; the power of the bishop has yielded to that of the Convention and its Stand ing Committee to an extent which has caused some strict canonists to doubt if the Protestant Episcopal Church can be said to be episcopally governed. Modern Congrega tionalism is a manifest compromise between the Independ ent and the Presbyterian way ; and since the organization of the National Council there has been a marked growth in the disposition to look to it as the authoritative arbiter in disputed matters. The Lutherans of America, laying aside the consistorial methods of their European churches, have adopted synodical government as the best suited to their needs, and associated the representatives of the peo ple with their pastors in their local and national councils. The Methodists have been obliged to modify their highly efficient but never popular system of clerical government by the admission of lay delegates to their conferences ; at the same time the " preacher " of earlier days has been converted by a like attraction into the " pastor," and obliged to assume the duties once assigned to the class-leaders. Even the Baptists, who have been the stanchest represent atives of independency, have come to intrust the real man agement of denominational affairs to local and national associations, the former treating churches which walk dis orderly as liable to the discipline of exclusion from the association. As a whole the Protestantism of America has become Presbyterian in substance, though not in name. A hun dred years ago there were no churches, outside the. Re- 286 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xxi. formed household, which controlled their affairs by repre sentative councils of pastors and people. Now this is true of nearly every important church in the Protestant family. It cannot be said that this is because Presbyterianism adheres more strictly and literally to the letter of the Scriptures than did its rivals in method. The idea of representation on which it is based was unknown to the ancient political world, and was not anticipated in the New Testament. It was developed in the rise of the Teutonic nationalities on the ruins of the Roman empire, making possible governments at once freer and more authoritative than antiquity had known.1 It was the great merit of Cal vin, A Lasco, and Knox to have perceived that this prin ciple of representation had been providentially developed for the benefit of the church no less than of the state, so that provincial, .national, and ecumenical unity could be attained without prelates, primates, and popes ; and the liberties of the Christian people secured without the sever ance of the church into independent local churches. It is in America, where action is least trammeled by tradition, that the common approximation to this type is most freely illustrated. The meeting of the first Presby tery in Philadelphia was therefore the beginning of a new era for the American churches, in that the modern prin ciple of representative government there and then found its first expression as regards the Christian church of the New World. The Presbyterian Church, as the accredited historic rep resentative of this great principle, which has brought the collective wisdom of each religious communion to bear upon its affairs, has not discredited it by the manner in which it has applied it. It always has been a body whose 1 See my " Divine Order of Human Society" (Philadelphia, 1891), pp. I 16-120. A DUAL CHURCH. 287 weight was greater than its numbers seemed to justify. While it has not escaped the peril of hasty decisions, espe cially through the action of theological panics on the minds of its people, these have been exceptional in its history, and with the return of calmer moods there has been a virtual confession and a practical correction of the mistake. The great moments of this church's history have been those reunions of divided forces, when the faults and bit ternesses of the past have been swallowed up in fraternal joy. Nextto these have been those of noble self-restraint, when the national Synod or Assembly has calmed the local or personal agitation by a wise patience, a serene temper, a discriminating decision which helped men to distinguish a difference over words from a difference in the great things of the gospel. This wiser and more Christian role has been the harder to play because of the church's dual composition. Scotch-Irish and New Englander, from the very outset of her history, have been blended in her min istry and her membership. The two elements have much in common, and yet also much that marks them as diverse. Both are keenly interested in doctrinal teaching, and as such they have always inclined to those conceptions of the relation of God to man which lie out of the range of super ficial thought, but commend themselves to men of pro- founder reflection. Both incline to construe those rela tions not from the point of view of what is pleasing to man, but what is honoring to God. Both, therefore, are instinctive Calvinists, regarding the glory of God as the end of man's creation and of his spiritual history. And both assign to right conceptions of these great realities an influence upon character and destiny which many regard as excessive. The contrast of the two elements is found in the active and discursive intellect of the New Englander and the 288 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xxi. solid conservatism of the Scotch-Irish. The one has tried to "improve" all previous statements of Calvinism; the other to appreciate them. The one tends to a restless spirit of change, in which the largest truths are supposed to need a constant overhauling ; the other to a dull ac quiescence, in which whatever the past has given us is ac cepted for that very reason. These are their perils. The fusion cf the two tendencies into a spirit at once wisely conservative and wisely progressive has been the problem of the Presbyterian Church more than of any other in America. It cannot be said to have been solved; our very divisions into eleven communions of varying degrees of liberality and conservatism are evidence to the con trary. But nothing will more help us to the right attitude for reaching the solution than the study of our own his tory. That furnishes evidence enough of the grand ser vice rendered to the religious life of the nation by Pres byterian conservatism. It stood by the most unpopular and decried doctrines of the Bible through periods when the public mind was least fitted for their reception, until soberer and more profound thinking came to their vindi cation. It thus saved to the general religious conscious ness some of the greatest principles, which otherwise it might have taken centuries to recover. It asserted the principle of loyalty to the whole scope of inspired teaching, in the face of tendencies to choose and pick what was the more pleasing to human nature, or what an English writer calls "the pleasanter parts of Christianity." Thus the Presbyterian Church has played the part of a check upon change which was not progress, and has vindicated the integrity of the gospel of God's grace, with both its good ness and its severity. It never has cut its garment ac cording to the fashions set by the spirit of the age, which, indeed, Richter says, is what our fathers called Antichrist. THE LESSONS OF HISTORY. 289 On the other hand, history is no mere eulogist of con servatism. It exhibits everywhere the necessity of change in human conceptions and statements of divine truths, and the reality of a deeper and more vital apprehension of them under the Spirit's leading of the church. It shows that not the most conservative of to-day are able to think in the limits and find utterance in the phrases of a cent ury ago. Whatever lives must change ; only the dead perpetuates itself from age to age unaltered. The Bible itself furnishes illustrations of this on every page. Our Lord pointed to them when he said that certain things had been allowed to their fathers because they were bound by mental limitations which had passed away, and when he censured the spirit in which they asked him to repeat the act of Elijah. He thus recognized the pro- gressiveness of revelation within the period of canonic Scripture. Nor can we fail to recognize the continuance of this progress in the Spirit's guidance of the church. Luther sees farther than Augustine ; men of our age see farther than Luther did. History alike forbids us to de spise the past and to rest in the past. It discredits alike the change which proceeds from the positive to mere ne gation, and the stolidity which excludes all change what ever. It condemns mere liberalism and mere inaction. No history illustrates this more distinctly than does the history of the ecclesiastical life of America, and the Pres-: byterian Church supplies as good a point of view as any other from which to consider it. As has been indicated already, that history falls into three great periods, whose spirit has affected all the American churches, though in varying ways and different degrees. The first was that of Puritan influence, which had three notes: intellectual interest in doctrine, Scriptural literal ism, and practical individualism. In that age Christianity 2 go THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xxi. was so exclusively regarded as a doctrinal system that the boundary-line between the church and the school of the ology was practically obliterated, and the distinction be tween theology and faith lost sight of. Of this the Westminster Confession is the best monument. Men had the sublimest confidence in the adequacy of logical pro cesses to deal with divine mysteries, but lacked that ele ment of reverence which should furnish the atmosphere of such discussion. Milton's deficiency in awe is that of his age; and Spurgeon, who best represented the Puritan thought in our own century, confessed to an equal want in himself. This orthodox rationalism needed but to cool to become negative and unorthodox; and the cooling was seen in all the British churches, especially the Presbyte rian churches of England and of Ireland. In both stages it stands convicted of want of respect for the historical, which also is seen in its Scriptural literalism. It looked into the New Testament for a Book of Leviticus, and tried to construct one out of isolated passages and incidental notices. It demanded an express warrant of Scripture for every arrangement and institution, and turned its back upon the whole experience of the church since the days of the apostles. It was this feature of Puritanism which elicited Hooker's great treatise, " The Laws of the Eccle siastical Polity " (1594-97) ! hut the extreme advocates of the principle drove even the Westminster divines to de clare that " there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God and the government of the church, com mon to human actions and societies, which are to be or dered by the light of nature and Christian prudence." Even this, it will be noticed, contains no concession to history. And in the same weakness of perception of the worth of the historical, and of the blessing of being our selves embraced and molded by historic forms of society, THE STRENGTH OF PURITANISM. 29 1 is to be found the reason for the excessive individualism of Puritanism. It always tended to the purest independ ency, first of the local church and then of the individual member within that church. It had an instinctive repug nance to synodical authority, and to the inclusion of in fants among the baptized members of the church, as im plying some religious solidarity of the family, and point ing to the organic character of the church. When most logical it became Baptist ; in its less logical forms it denied that baptism admitted to actual membership in the church, and therefore refused baptism to the children of any but those who had become communicants upon giving credi ble evidence of their regeneration. It would be ungracious to dwell only on these negative sides of the Puritan spirit, to the neglect of those ele ments of positive strength which had root in the Calvin istic theology. Its greatness lay in an ethical strenuous- ness which has worked itself into the fiber of Scotch and American character, though in different ways, and which is reflected in the literature, the social ideals, and the finest personal types of both countries. Next to this may be put its loyalty to the cause of human freedom, in op position to dynastic and oligarchic rule in both church and state. The theology which was charged with under mining human responsibility was in effect the most stren uous asserter of that principle. " There is no system which equals Calvinism," says Beecher, " in intensifying to the' last degree ideas of moral excellence and purity of char acter. There never was a system since the world began which puts upon man such motives to holiness, or which builds batteries which sweep the whole ground of sin with such horrible artillery." The view of our human nature which has been charged with humbling man below his deserts has stimulated him to the most resolute assertion 292 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xxi. of his human dignity and personal rights against the en croachments of kings and nobles, popes and prelates. " It would be hard," says John Fiske, "to overrate the debt of civil liberty which mankind owes to John Calvin." These two paradoxes find ample illustration in the his tory of Presbyterianism on both sides -of the ocean. The latter has been amply recognized since Macaulay first fixed attention on the facts by his essay on Milton. The former has been obscured by a good deal of unfair histor ical writing, in which Robert Chambers, Henry Thomas Buckle, Mr. Craig-Brown, and others have represented the disciplinary work of the Scotch Presbytery and Ses sion as consisting mainly of witch-hunting and the sup pression of popular sports. Bishop Creighton, in review ing the last writer's work, says : " Mr. Craig-Brown is revolted by the stern aspect of Calvinism, and denounces the discipline of the Kirk Ses sion as little better than that of the Inquisition. Yet that discipline, repugnant as it is to modern ways of thinking, did much toward forming the strong character of the Scottish people. Without it the wild borderfolk would never have been changed into the sterling, upright people with whom we are familiar. If the idea of righteousness which was enforced by Presbyterianism was narrow and not altogether lively, it still upheld a high idea of recti tude, and the Kirk did a civilizing work which there was no other agency to undertake. There can be no doubt that its discipline retained all the strength of character which had been generated in the unquiet times of border warfare; there can be little doubt that. only a stern and Vigorous system could have given a moral direction to that strength. The records of the Kirk Session tell us more of the process of the purification of national charac ter than they do of religious fanaticism." THE KIRK'S DISCIPLINE. 293 Another English writer, of Episcopalian sympathies, Mr. Richard Heath, testifies to the excellent influence of the Presbyterian discipline where it has crossed the border and established itself in the northern shires of England : " The Northumbrian peasant is largely influenced by a form of Christianity that not only recognizes that he is a man, but that, without ceasing to be a laboring man, tending the sheep or following the plow, he can be chosen, and is chosen, and found worthy to be an elder of the church." He goes on to speak of " the superior educative power of the Presbyterian to the Church of England sys tem, as seen in the higher form of manhood and woman hood of the people under its control. The reason is clear : the one is a democratic religion, the other the most aris tocratic in the world. It is this characteristic of the Church of England which is mainly responsible for the degraded condition of the English rural poor." In our own country the task of Presbyterian discipline among the unrestrained frontiersmen of the New World was quite as difficult as along the Scottish border. For reasons already indicated, the immigrant population of the new settlements had to be followed up most energetically with church and school agencies, to rnaintain what was saved and retrieve what was lost of good influences in the land of their birth. Between Puritan and anti-Puritan the Presbyterian Church held a middle position. It set its face against congregational independency by asserting the existence, visibility, and lawful authority of the larger church and its synodical government. It found in baptism the rite of admission to membership in the church, with all its privi leges, including the baptism of the children of baptized persons. Acting on the judgment of charity, it admitted to the Lord's table all such as had been brought up as 294 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xxi. Christians and were free from scandal of life. It sought thus to embrace the whole people of a Christian country within the scope of church influences and in personal con tact with the means of grace. Yet it conceded to Puritan ism the necessity of vindicating the polity of the church by proof-texts from the Scriptures, and it adopted a sys tematic theology built up by logical inference. To Puri tanism, also, it conceded the relinquishment of liturgic worship. Its. losses to Puritanism were very great on both sides of the Atlantic. Its English churches became merely Independent, and afterward Arian. In America the Presbyterian colonists from England rapidly fell away from Presbyterianism into the unstable compromise with Inde pendency called Congregationalism. The literalism which demanded an express Scriptural sanction for every feature of the church's polity was pressed with so much zeal, and reinforced so well by the example of the Plymouth sepa ratists, that the efforts of John Eliot, the Mathers, and other opponents of Independency came to nothing. Even the later Presbyterian emigration from Ulster to New Eng land was unable to maintain its ecclesiastical character in surroundings hostile to the Presbyterian idea, and under laws enacted in the interest of Independency. It is only in our own days, and chiefly through immigration from the seaboard provinces of Canada, that Presbyterianism has again raised its head in New England, after being long confined to a handful of feeble and imperfectly organized congregations. The final establishment of Presbyterian order in the Middle States was like the settlement of Pennsylvania in the political sphere. As the one supplied the keystone of the arch, a community committed to neither Cavalier nor Puritan ideals of society, so the other supplied the miss- THE GREAT AWAKENING. 295 ing link in the ecclesiastical order. It drew to itself dissat isfied elements of both the extreme systems, Puritans from New England and Episcopalians of Virginia. It at once began the fusion of the intense Presbyterians of Ulster with the New Englanders, who thus in the Middle States under went what biologists call "reversion to type." It even threatened to extend this reversion to New England itself, as when the Connecticut churches made a marked approach to Presbyterianism in the Saybrook Platform (1708), and came to describe themselves as Presbyterians even in official documents. Thus from the first the Presbyterian Church may be said to have assumed a central position among the churches of America. The sec6nd period opens with the Great Awakening, which began in the Dutch Reformed Church, and then spread to the Presbyterian, before the rise of English Methodism. The excessive intellectualism of Puritanism had begun to avenge itself in a chilled and chilling atmos phere around the religious life. Its disregard of history bore fruit in a weaker grasp on the great realities of the historic revelation. The Calvinistic churches seemed likely to run a downward course through the successive stages of Arminianism, Arianism, deism, and naturalism. This was more felt in America even than in the British Islands, because colonists are more likely to drift from their moor ings than are the people of long-settled countries, where the conservative influence of institution and of custom is more constant. From this fate the nation was saved by the pietistic movement of 1728-44, which brought back warmth and fervency into religion, and lighted anew the fires of spiritual zeal. In all its earlier stages it was so dis tinctly a Calvinistic movement that its friends hailed it as the check to the drift into Arminian laxity, and Edwards challenged the Arminians of New England to reconcile 296 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xxi. such a visible display of sovereign grace with their theory that man turns himself to God. Yet in the Calvinistic camp it bred sore divisions, of which the rending of the Presbyterian Synod in 1741 was the most striking, though not the most irreparable. The Ulster famine of 1726 had greatly increased the immigrants in that and the follow ing years. These viewed with distrust a movement to which their native province offered no parallel, and they strengthened the hands of those ministers who regarded the new stress on religious emotion as likely to undermine the interest in doctrinal soundness. And their distrust was not removed by the attitude the friends of the Awakening assumed toward those who distrusted it. The church was rent* not along the line of cleavage between Scotch-Irish and New Englander — for the most zealous revivalists were Scotch-Irish — and yet in such a way as threatened a prac tical severance of the two elements into two communions. It was an indication of God's good purpose for the future of the church that the two were brought together after seventeen years of separation. The Methodism of the Awakening was no more historic than the Puritanism of the previous period had been. It by no means sufficed to heal all the breaches of Zion. It offered no substantial check to the Puritan individualism, but rather lent it a new sanction by making true religion a matter chiefly of isolated personal emotion, which reaches a man by a channel which has nothing to do with human kinship, social relations, or early nurture. It thus severed it from public and social duties to an extent which threat ened a return to monastic asceticism, and made a conscious conversion from enmity to friendship with God the only way of entrance into the kingdom. It therefore could lay but little stress on the influences of the Christian home, or of the providential leading in the individual life. House- FAULTS AND MERITS. 297 hold training and catechetical instruction of the young by their pastor were both thrust into the background, or even disused, as of little value. If infant baptism were still continued — and the "Separate " churches of New England which grew out of the Awakening commonly became Bap tist churches, while the converts in the Southern colonies went the same way mostly — it was rather through instinct or custom than by force of logic. The baptized child was too generally given to understand that he could be nothing but a child of Satan until a revival came to convert him, and that his chance of eternal life depended on his embrac ing that favored moment. This rigid " Methodism " of the Awakening, which stands in such contrast to the mani- foldness of the spiritual life as exemplified in the Script ures and the past history of the church, together with the habits of anxious introspection it fostered, tended to im part a monotony to Christian experience, and a dreariness to the literature which records it, for which a parallel must be sought among the German Pietists and the ascetic lit erature of the later Jesuits. It would again be ungracious to dwell only on these weaker sides of the Awakening. In the good providence of God it saved America from irreligion and barbarism. It lifted the spiritual life of the churches out of a dull and fruitless moderation into an inspired and aggressive energy. It set the Christian people free to exhort and supplicate as in apostolic times, by supplementing the Sunday ser vice with the prayer-meeting. It gave a distinctly Chris tian character to the church's praises by supplementing the Book of Psalms with Christian hymns. It carried the message of divine love into dark and neglected places of the country, and awakened the voice of thankful song along the frontier settlements and among the Indian tribes. It aroused the church to a sense of its duty to the heathen 298 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xxi. world, and thus laid the foundation of the missionary enterprise. In its later stages it adopted the Sunday- school and similar agencies into the service of the church, and created the machinery of wholesale agitation for the support of religious enterprises and moral reforms. It put down the slave-trade, prepared the way for the aboli tion of slavery, and set itself to the work of dealing with intemperance and other social evils. It wrought, in fact, a social revolution, whose extent is hid from us by the fact that we have always lived among its results and do not know with what a price they were bought for us. " Other men labored, and ye are entered into their labors." Of the American churches some simply antagonized the Awakening; others gave themselves up to it completely, or even took their rise from its activity. The Presbyte rian Church again fulfilled its mission by doing neither. It labored successfully to keep alive the interest in pure theology, as did also the Puritan churches of New Eng land and the Reformed churches of the Middle States, thus counteracting the Methodist tendency to undervalue doctrine where it was not seen to be directly available for edification. It yielded much — some might say too much ^-to the practical theology of the movement, in accepting the revival meeting while seeking to abate its excitements, and in coming to regard a conscious conversion as the pre requisite to full communion with the church. It retained infant baptism on the ground that the Abrahamic covenant embraced the children of God's covenant people in the New Testament no less than the Old. But its ministers tacitly and very generally went over to the Congregation alist position, in confining baptism to the children of com municants. It allowed the pastor's catechetical instruction to be displaced by the labors of the Sunday-school teacher, A MEDIATING CHURCH. 299 because it had ceased to regard that instruction as leading on to communion. Yet it sought to maintain household religion and family -worship, as well as the instruction of children by their parents in Bible and catechism. It also labored to support Christian schools, in which instruction in natural and historical science should not be divorced from recognition of the Creator and the Ruler of man kind. And in its attitude toward the public life of the nation it still stood for the principle that the state is the creature of God, accountable to him, obliged by his laws. It thus practically refused to accept the Methodist theory that mankind at large is to be regarded as " the world " at enmity with God, from which individuals may be brought over by conversion into churches, whose membership can give reasonable evidence of regeneration. The old " judg ment of charity" lingered on as a tradition when it had fallen into oblivion as a doctrine. Into the good works which grew out of the Methodist movement the Presbyterian Church entered with as much alacrity as was consistent with its conservative character. Without accepting the Methodist view that the expedi ency of immediate success is the only test of right method, it took up the new methods so far as these commended themselves to its judgment. It became a church of Sun day-schools, prayer-meetings, missionary societies, and voluntary associations for the promotion of all kinds of good works. It gave support to the great moral reforms, without losing its head over any of them, or expecting from the success of any the immediate arrival of the mil lennium. It felt too deeply the corruption of our human nature to share in the hopes of those who expected lightly to bring it to perfection by changes of environment or of method ; and yet it worked for both with the stolid perse- 300 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xxi. verance befitting a service done to God. It got the bless ing which rewards such a service, as did the sister-churches. Its foreign-missionary enterprise lifted it out of a narrow and self-satisfied occupation with its own affairs and be longings, into a work so large and absorbing as to keep all its energies on the strain. Its home-mission labor, to keep the newer States and the Territories from falling to a level of intellectual and spiritual life below that of the older States, was blessed to both. This saved the West from barbarism and the East from miserly selfishness. It identified religion with generosity, and showed ways in which the very power of accumulation might.be turned to the service of God and of the country. Yet the Awakening also cost the Presbyterian Church heavy losses of its natural adherents, especially in the Southwest. In its maintenance of the interest in Chris tian doctrine it was heavily handicapped by its adherence to a Confession of Faith unsuited to the needs of the country and the time. The precise, scholastic statements of the Westminster divines, and their wire-drawn distinc tions, were naturally out of harmony with the revivalist spirit, and those who preached them found no access ex cept to congregations trained to appreciate such preach ing. The masses wanted a preacher to show warmth of feeling, simplicity in dbctrine, insight into the perplexities and sorrows of the human heart. These found rather a help than a check in Puritan doctrinalism, and the major ity of the children of the Ulster immigration fell away from the church of their fathers. The more moderate organized a church of their own, Presbyterian in order, and less drastic in doctrine than the Westminster stand ards, exhibiting a futile attempt at compromise between popular Arminianism and traditional Calvinism. A far greater number found a spiritual home among the Method- THE CHURCHLY AGE. 301 ists, the Baptists, the Disciples, the Christians, or even the Shakers. And all this from Calvinism " putting its worst foot foremost." The third period in American church history began about sixty years ago. It is that in which the historical side of Christianity is more highly appreciated than at any earlier time. Puritanism appreciated strongly the intellectual side of Christianity; Methodism, the emotional. In neither did the historical element come to its rights. Yet Christianity is as distinctly history as it is doctrine and emotion. To do justice to this third element is the problem of our own age. To this end we must attain a truer recognition of our vital relation to the historic fact of the Incarnation. The years of that wonderful ministry are no part of a dead and gone past ; nor are they related to us merely through some change in our legal status before the divine law that was then accomplished. They are nearer to us than our own yesterdays, and form a substantial part of every Christian's life. Hence all that comes to us from that past on the lines of history acquires a high significance to us. The church is the witness of the gathering of all under the one Head ('avaxsipaXau«>csaa$-at, Eph. i. 10) of all the elect of God. The sacraments speak of his perpetual presence with the church, to purify and nourish her life and that of her members. They are not symbols of an absent, but wit nesses of a present Christ. We are to come to them with the faith that the heavenly element behind them is not less real and operative than the earthly element present to our senses. And this involves no confusion of the two elements, as though the earthly were made divine or the heavenly bound to the earthly. Baptismal grace and the real presence in the sacrament were the common teaching 3°2 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xxi. of all the churches of the Reformation. These ordinances they declared to be the means of grace — not mere witnesses to the possibility of grace, nor mere helps, through the law of mental association, to lift our thoughts to profit able meditation and resolution. In this view, also, the whole course of church history becomes instructive to us. Whatever the sins, ignorances, and negligences in it that require forgiveness, Christ was in it all. ft did not cease to be his church with the death of the apostles or of Augustine of Hippo, and begin to be such again with Martin Luther. Nor is the connection between the two points to be sought in the Waldenses, whatever their merits, but in the great central current where we find the marks of Christ in such men as Ber nard of Clairvaux, Francis of Assisi, Thomas Aquinas, John Tauler, John Gerson, Thomas a Kempis, Nicholas of Cusa, Savonarola, and the other great witnesses by life and doctrine to the living presence of Christ in the world. So the Reformers taught, having no more will to give up the church's history to Rome than to give up the Bible. Yet when Philip Schaff, then freshly arrived from Switzer land, enunciated this more generous view of the past, he was assailed as a Romanizer by Dr. Berg and others. His heresy has become almost a commonplace now, and the theory of Waldensian continuity has given way partly before its honest refutation by their own historical scholars. And the result is seen in the free use of the medieval hymns in our hymnaries, and in the high esteem in which the " Imitation of Christ " stands. Closely connected with this new respect for the historic past is the appreciation of the beautiful in its spiritual significance. We grow impatient with the ugly, the un seemly, and the sordid, when we find these connected with the church and its worship. We acquire sympathy THE SOCIAL SPIRIT. 303 with the men of the past, who spent toil and wealth on grand and graceful edifices for the divine worship. In this we enter into sympathy with the divine purpose which has molded our world, our bodies, and God's own Word with reference to beauty as well as use, and into whose temple there is a Gate Beautiful, no less than approaches through truth and emotion. Another note of this present age is its socialism, using that term in its broadest sense, in antithesis to individual ism. Our widened outlook upon the past, and our deep ened sense of the social forces which have shaped the present out of it, have weakened faith in the capacity of the individual to deal satisfactorily with all questions. This feeling has combined with the reformatory and phil anthropic energy transmitted from the previous period, and with the new scientific stress upon environment as molding the life of individual and species, to give a social ist character to our thought and the methods which it orig inates. And this has been stimulated by reaction against the more than Puritan individualism of the English political economists, until, we run the risk of sacrificing the precious fruits of liberty in the pursuit of collectivist ideals. In this new age the Presbyterian Church still holds a central position in the religious life of the nation. She is a historic church, prizing her own past, and reverencing the great historic names in her annals, without refusing that reverence to names as great, whose work was done outside her communion. As a conservative church she has helped to counteract the sudden breaks with history which each new tendency has threatened to accomplish. She moderated the extravagance of Puritanism by holding fast to elements of earlier date and historic value. She modified the urgency of the Awakening, when it would cast aside the heritage Puritanism had bequeathed, and 3°4 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xxi. would have disparaged every doctrine and institution which could not be proved directly useful for the conversion of sinners. So in our own time she has to modify and re strain the tendency which would put church and sacrament and historic tradition not only beside, but above, or in place of, Christian truth and feeling. She has to oppose those who in the name of the historic would turn their backs on all history but what suits their own tastes and likings, would cry down the Reformers and their work, treat Puritanism as an apostasy and the Awakening as an aberration, and find nothing to their liking that is not medieval or Romanist. There are those who cannot love the Bernards and the Gregories without hating Luther and Knox, or who think that theological development came to an end with the seventh ecumenical council. But " God wastes no history," as Phillips Brooks has well said. He no more ceased to guide his church when the middle ages ended than when they began. To doubt this, and to seek the connecting-link with that age in Laud and a handful of High-church Anglicans, is an exact parallel to the Wal densian theory as to the medieval period. He knows not the history of the church who does not recognize the spiritual necessity for the change which sundered the Teutonic from the Romance church in the sixteenth cent ury, or the Latin Church from the Greek in the eleventh ; who does not recognize the sobriety and conservatism with which it was effected, and does not find in its leaders the equals at least of any men God has given his church since Athanasius and Augustine. Equally necessary is a moderating and conservative in fluence in the case of another tendency of our age. As every extreme carries in it the causes of an equal reaction, so the extremes of individualism are producing the ex tremes of socialism. Personal responsibility for poverty, SOCIALIST EXAGGERATIONS. 305 wretchedness, and even vice is boldly questioned in these days. Society, and especially the church, is held to answer for the whole burden of human misery, which is put into such light as to fill the entire sky of social vision from horizon to horizon. All the problems of society are laid at the feet of the church, and she is required to turn aside from the ministry of the Word to serve the tables, at which the whole mass of the hungry and the thriftless are to be fed. In the past the conversion of sinners was made too exclusively the church's work. She is now to give it over, to turn to the conversion of millionaires into social ist philanthropists. She was too often characterized by an other-worldliness, which gave up the life of this time for a better life in the hereafter. She is now to drop the question of a hereafter, and to devote herself to improv ing the physical no less than the moral well-being of the human mass, taken in the mass. There is both truth and justice in these charges and these demands, but there also is mischievous exaggeration. To oppose it we need a revival of the Puritan sense of personal responsibility and the Methodist sense of the adequacy of God's grace to reach and reform men in any surroundings. We need to rid our minds of the worship of environment and heredity which materialistic science has been teaching us, and to worship the living God, who says, " All souls are mine : . . . the soul that sinneth, it shall die." He is the greatest fact in the environment of any human spirit, and -his quickening power is more than all the forces of heredity. The Presbyterian Church, as heir to theocratic principle which was distinctive of the Reformed Church in its most illustrious era, has never sunk to mere pietistic individual ism. She always has recognized her social responsibilities, and has spoken her mind on all social problems. She is 306 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xxi. therefore less liable than the Puritan and Methodist bodies to these violent reactions, while she responds to the new impulse to deal with spiritual problems on their social no less than their individual side. The man of to-day is not to be contented with the Methodist teaching of yesterday. He longs for a new order of life more even than for the good of his own soul. He so longs because God is quick ening in him desires for that social order which our Lord called the kingdom of heaven. But he still needs to have the old truth pressed upon him, that he cannot enter the kingdom until he is born from above and puts on the childlike nature of the newly born. The last note of the present age is the yearning for Christian union which is awakening in the severed parts of Christ's church. The desire of a universal brother hood of men simply as such, from which no man shall be excluded except he will to be, finds expression in many shapes, some of* them fantastic enough. The church was founded to satisfy that yearning. The closer we get to its Founder, and the more we study its history, the less content we are with a Christendom broken into fragments by strife over secondary matters, and the more painful be comes the contrast between Christ's ideal and its imperfect realization. Here, I fear, it would be hard to assert any peculiar merit for the Presbyterian bodies. Up to the Revolution settlement of 1690, indeed, the Kirk kept its unity un broken. The custom was for those who regarded any thing in its practice as wrong and burdensome to their consciences to " declare their separation from " that thing, without breaking the unify of the church. Thus the sharp dissensions between the Engagers and the Resolutioners in 1649-50 were got over without any breach of com munion. THE BEGINNINGS OF SCHISM. 307 At the Revolution all the ministers who had preached in the fields, in defiance of Stuart persecution, and had escaped the scaffold for this faithfulness, united with the Scottish church as reestablished, claiming that Cargill, Cameron, Renwick, and the rest of the martyrs had de clared against any separation " if the Lord should send deliverance to his church, and give them access to present their grievances to its judicatories with personal safety."1 That is, however much they might dissent from the action taken on their grievances, they would no more than declare their dissent, without leaving the church. Unhappily this view did not commend itself to a part of the elders and members who had waited upon the ministry of the perse cuted preachers and had shared in the perils of the killing- time. Because the Revolution settlement provided for no acknowledgment of the lasting obligation of the Covenants, they would have none of it; and through the accession of ministers who took the same view, they, after a long wait, in 1743 were able to organize themselves as a Cove nanter Church. The same course was taken by the Er- skines and their friends in withdrawing from the Kirk in 1 733 ; by Gillespie and his friends in withdrawing to form the Relief Church in 1752; and by the majority in the American Synod, in 1 741, in casting out the Tennents and their friends. Then came divisions within divisions, the Covenanters in Scotland dividing, in 175 1, as to the soundness of a treatise by Mr. Frazer, of Brea, one of the persecuted preachers, in which he taught that Christ died for all men; and the Seceders, in 1747, on the ques tion of the Burgher oath. Thus the Presbyterian Church, through neglect of her established principle of ecclesiasti- 1 See " An Inquiry into Church-Communion ; or, A Treatise Against Sep aration from the- Revolution Settlement of this National Church, as it was Settled Anno 1689 and 1690." By Mr. Alexander Shields, Minister of the Gospel at St. Andrews. Edinburgh, 1706; 2d ed., 1747. 308 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xxi. cal communion and dissent, was launched on a career of division and schism which has been the scandal of the Presbyterian name. In America we have had, first and last, twenty- eight Presbyterian bodies, most of them extended over the national field, and many of them claiming to be the only true representatives of Presbyterian principles. Of these ten are still in existence, unless, indeed, the eleventh still perpetuates its organization after the death of its last minister.. If we except the two Cumberland Presbyterian churches the differences between the other eight are sim ply infinitesimal when compared with their agreements in doctrine, polity, and character. Should they plant them selves on the ground occupied by the church in its most heroic period they could find room for all within one fold, with freedom for each to " declare its separation " from what it regards as the shortcomings of the whole body. And as regards even the Cumberland churches, there is reason to believe that if this reunited church were to de clare its Calvinistic faith in its own words, there would be less difficulty in a reunion with them than is supposed. Even that difficulty would not be in the way of a union with the two Reformed churches, and this might be ef fected without requiring them to give up their older and more historic name. But to effect all this the church needs more of the Spirit of wisdom, unity, and a sound mind than she yet possesses. It seems, indeed, as though through her very divisions God were holding her back from the temptations which come with increase of num bers and of strength until she is fitted to bear them. This is still more true of the outlook for Christian unity, of which Presbyterian and Reformed unity is but a lesser branch. It would bring great perils to the nation if all our Protestant churches were to be united into a single THE PERILS AND THE HOPE OF UNION. 309 effectively organized church, without their rising to a higher plane of practical wisdom and true spirituality than they have yet reached separately. The hasty and drastic fashion in which many of them have undertaken to deal with social problems, their assumption to decide not only the ends of moral reform, but the political means by which these are to be reached, are foreshadowings of these perils. The sad chapters in the earlier history of the established churches of Europe and America, before Protestant dis sent and division curbed their strength, show that human nature works in much the same fashion in Protestant as in Romanist ecclesiastics, with the exception that a married clergy is less likely to devise fantastic and excessive sever ities than is a celibate. We therefore seem to be wisely compelled to wait for Christian union until we are fit to use it without abusing it. Yet to wait is not to despair of it, or to give up yearn ing for it, or even to abandon the assurance that it is com ing at no distant date. Our ecclesiastical life as a people is still in the colonial stage. It hardly has felt the touch of the great nationalizing instinct which played so great a part in the crises of our political history in 1775, in 1787, in 1832, and in 1861-65. We have inherited from Europe a state of ecclesiastical division not unlike nor unrelated to the divisions which kept colony apart from colony in the age of colonial dependence. In those earlier decades of American history it seemed as though the differences of race, of creed, and of social ideal would keep the colonies apart forever — at least it seemed impossible to bring them together in less than three confederacies, the South ern and the New England States standing apart from the others. But the good providence cf God was building up a nation out of these alien elements long before the work ing of his hand appeared on the surface of things. By 310 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xxi. community of peril and of toil, by the friendly interchanges of commerce, by the spreading enthusiasms of the Great Awakening, by the common interest in men of national magnitude, like Franklin and Washington, by the foolish and ill-timed exactions of the British government, and by the manifest perils to religious liberty which attended the connection with England, the colonies were drawn out of their isolation, and began to be conscious of being Ameri can. When independence was achieved under an imper fect form of union, then commercial distress, industrial decay, popular turbulence, and bitter disputes between the States forced on the adoption of the Constitution. The crisis of Nullification brought the national sentiment into more lively activity, under the very rule of a party least disposed to cherish it. That of Secession finally settled the question of the permanence of the Union, by discover ing to the American people, both North and South, how precious it had become to them. All this has taken place in a sphere where no larger union is sought than that of a single people within their national boundaries. But in the sphere where the union of all men into one human brotherhood under the headship of Jesus Christ is the goal, we have accomplished as good as nothing as yet. We are not even national. Here we have to move between two extremes. The first offers us unity in the footing of an abandonment of the past, and a reconstruction of the church out of New Testament texts, in the spirit of Puritan literalism. We have had more than one attempt of this kind, the most notable being the body called the Disciples, whose found ers, Isaac and Alexander Campbell, came to America from the Associate Presbyterian Church of Ireland, and first joined the Baptists before reaching the conclusions on which they based their new organization. In this view UNHISTORIC UNIONISM. 3" the history of the church since the days of the apostles has been little more than a series of sins and blunders, of which the less said or remembered the better. They frankly apply to the history of the Protestant churches the judgments which many Protestants still apply to the middle ages: they admit the relief of the ecclesiastical darkness by some shining names, but assert that the whole story is a tissue of mere usurpation and wrong-doing — creeds, polity, methods of work, all being out of the line of what the New Testament forbids and requires. Such a theory of the church could have originated only in a period when historic studies were but little cultivated, and the popular interest in the church's history as good as absent. It was associated, however, with a disposition to reject the subjectivity of the Awakening, and to assert for Christianity a strongly objective character; and this commended it to many. The history of the body shows that the plan does not solve the problem. Divisions and disputes have arisen within it, Which have rent the bond of charity, because this New Testament literalism does not remove all grounds of difference in judgment.1 Nor is the church called upon to sacrifice her whole history to regain her unity. These ages have not been lost, whatever their mistakes. The other extreme is that which proposes Christian 1 The Disciples may be said to be the American representatives of the Haklane movement in Scotland, by which the younger Campbell was greatly influenced during his attendance at Glasgow University. In the Ahorey Presbyterian congregation, where I spent a part of my boyhood, Isaac Camp bell was still 'remembered for the strictness of the Seceder discipline he ex ercised when its pastor. Professor Whitsett, of the Southern Baptists, traces the origin of Mormonism as a working-system to the literalism of the Dis ciples. Orson Pratt was a preacher among the Disciples, and became the theologian of the Latter-day Saints. And the claim of the Saints is that they alone offer a church which literally corresponds throughout to that of the New Testament, being persecuted by the Gentiles, speaking with tongues, working miracles, laying on hands for the bestowal of the Spirit, anointing the sick, etc. 312 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xxi. union on the historical basis presented by a single church, which claims to possess the only true church order or doc trine, or both. This is a form of ecclesiastical assumption confined to no particular church. All have made this claim at times, especially in the days of their early progress, when they thought themselves Aaron's rod, predestined to swallow up the others. The Friends, the Methodists, the Baptists, the Lutherans, the Presbyterians — all have had their jure divino claims at times, when they were ready to unchurch everybody else. At present it is the Church of Rome and the Protestant Episcopal Church which maintain exclusive claims in America. The latter did not assume this attitude in the era of Bishop White, when it put itself more on a level with the other churches by speaking of " other denominations. ' ' But all the changes in the legislation of the last half-century look in this direc tion and grow out of the dominant spirit of the church. It is now distinctly High-church of the Oxford pattern. Nor is this position abandoned at all in the action of the House of Bishops which looks toward Christian union. The notable feature of that action was that it was ad dressed to other bodies of American Christians, and not simply to the individuals who compose them. It thus marks a great advance in Christian courtesy upon the style in which the High-church claim has been pressed in most cases. But it still assumes that the elements of Christian reunion are to be sought entirely in the Epis copal Church, while it minimizes as far as possible the number of the prerequisites. It asks of no other church for any contribution to the problem, while it proposes to open negotiations with any upon the basis it has laid down itself. On this basis Protestants may be reunited by be coming Episcopalians to an extent there defined, while the Episcopal Church accepts and learns nothing from them. A TRIA'ITARIAX CHURCH. 313 Here again there is need of a central and moderating influence between opposed extremes, which the Presby terian Church might very well exercise. She has more affinity with all the diverse elements of our ecclesiastical life than has any other church. She has been a Puritan church in the Puritan age, and a Methodist church in the age of the Awakening ; and she is returning to what she was before the Puritan influence touched her, in adapting herself to the churchly tendencies of the present age. It would not be to the exclusion of any of these principles that she would offer herself as a mediator between them all ; nor need Christian union be achieved by leaving be hind the attainments of any in the past, and all becoming Presbyterians. Such a reunion, indeed, would bring all the elements of our rich and varied spiritual life into harmony and cooperation, giving us a church practically Trinitarian and at the same time more complex than is the life of any existing body. In his address at the celebration of his semi-centenary Dr. Charles Hodge pointed to the clew furnished by the doctrine of the Trinity to the variety of spiritual life in the churches of Christ : " There are different types of religion even among true believers. The religion of St. Bernard and of John Wesley, of Jeremy Taylor and of Jonathan Edwards, although essentially the same, had in each case its peculiar character. Every great historic church has its own type of piety. As there are three Persons in the Trinity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, so there appear to be three general forms of religion among evan gelical Christians. There are some whose religious experi ence is determined mainly by what is taught in the Script ures concerning the Holy Spirit. They dwell upon his inward work on the heart, on his indwelling, his illumina tion, on his life-giving power ; they yield themselves pas- 314 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xxi. sively to his influence to exalt them into fellowship with God. Such men are disposed more or less to mysticism. There are others whose religious life is determined more by their relation to the Father, to God as God ; who look upon him as a sovereign or lawgiver; who dwell upon the grounds of obligation, upon responsibility and ability, and upon the subjective change bywhich the sinner passes from a state of rebellion to that of obedience. Then there are those in whom the form of religion, as Dr. Boardman has said, is distinctly Christological. I see around me alumni whose heads are gray as my own. They will unite with me in testifying that this is the form of religion in which we were trained. While our teachers did not dissuade us from looking within and searching for evidences of the Spirit's work in the heart, they constantly directed us to look only unto Jesus — Jehovah-Jesus — him in whom are united all that is infinite and awful, indicated by the name of Jehovah ; and all that is human and tender and sympa thetic, forbearing and loving, implied in the name Jesus. If any student went to Dr. Alexander in a state of de spondence the venerable man was sure to tell him, ' Look not so much within. Look to Christ. Dwell on his per son, on his work, on his promises, and devote yourself to his service, and you will soon find peace.' " This remarkable passage might be alleged in refutation of Dr. Hodge's famous statement in the same address : " I am not afraid to say that a new idea never originated in this seminary." It coincides in the main with the results reached by the present writer in thirty years' study of the religious life and history of America. The point at which the coincidence is not. perfect will be indicated. Our ecclesiastical life looks like a chaos of mere dissen sion and unreasonable divisions, but it is not so. Under the seeming chaos lies an unseen order, with the promise THE THREE TYPES. 315 of its ultimate visibility. The great American churches are Trinitarian in theory — they recognize in the God head an essential unity, and yet a threefoldness of life so distinct that the Son speaks to the Father as " thou " and of the Spirit as " he " — but in their actual life they tend to be, in some sense, Unitarians, singling out some one of the three as the object of trust and confidence. Some, as Dr. Hodge says, have their thoughts centered upon the Father, the fans deitatis, " God as God," as the sovereign will which puts forth energy in creation, provi dence, redemption, and judgment. Here the Puritan, Cal vinistic, and Reformed churches naturally belong. They regard the work of Christ mainly as putting an obstacle out of the way of the Father's will. In that will every thing is embraced. This type of thought dominates the Westminster standards and all the Reformed confessions. Dr. Hodge evidently finds its truest representatives among the theologians of New England. But whatever modifica tions of it might come of Dr. Archibald Alexander's type of piety, and his own contact with the mediation school during his stay in Germany, this in the long run is that of Presbyterian theology. The second type in the historic order we find in Amer ica is that of the worship of the Holy Spirit, as the Method ist era succeeds the Puritan. Here feeling counts for more than doctrine, and the inner life is accounted the greatest of all interests. Here stand our Methodists, Moravians, Friends, and other pietistic or mystical sects. The third type is Christocentric. It regards the Incar nation as the world's redemption, and lays its stress not on the work of Christ to reconcile the Father to man, but on his very person, in which our humanity is lifted into fellowship with God. Its stress falls on the social rather than the intellectual and the emotional life, and on the 3i6 THE PRESBYTERIANS. [Chap. xxi. sacraments around which that social life centers. The most perfect type of this is the Catholic and Apostolic Church, which was organized chiefly out of English and Scotch Presbyterians, and is now represented at some seven or eight centers in America. Next to it comes the Protest ant Episcopal Church, especially since it has been perme ated by the spirit of the Oxford revival. And these three are one. Each tendency in its turn has been dominant for a time in the religious life of America. Shall not the next age be that of their unity in the mani fold life of a national (and ecumenical) Trinitarian church, in which, as in our federal system of government, there shall be room for the largest variety of type in connection with an essential unity ? To such a result the Presbyte rian Church can contribute at least as largely as any in the land, through its friendly relations with all, through its hospitality in the past and the present to all these forms of the spiritual life. At any rate, the last word on the subject is one of hope and of outlook. In the seeming welter of sects and parties, the hand of God is at work. Out of it, he will show forth his glory. APPENDIX OF THE MOST IMPORTANT DOCU MENTS ILLUSTRATIVE OF THE HISTORY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. I. THE SCOTTISH NATIONAL COVENANT OF 1 58 1, RENEWED IN 1638. Wee all and every one of us underwritten, Protest, That, after long and due examination of our owne Con sciences in matters of true and false Religion, [we] are now thoroughly resolved of the Truth, by the Word ancj Spirit of God, and, therefore, we beleeve with our hearts, con- fesse with our mouths, subscribe with our hands, and con stantly affirm, before God and the whole World, that this only is the true Christian Faith and Religion, pleasing God, and bringing Salvation to man, which now is, by the mercy of God, revealed to the world by the preaching of the blessed Evangel. And received, beleeved, and defended by many and sundry notable Kirks and Realmes, but chiefly by the Kirk of Scotland, the King's Majestie, and by three Estates of this Realme, as God's eternall Truth, and onely ground of our salvation ; as more particularly is expressed in the Confession of our Faith, stablished and publikely confirmed by sundry Acts of Parlaments, and now, of a long time, hath been openly professed by the King's Majestie, and whole body of this Realme, both in Burgh and Land. To the which Confession and forme of Re ligion wee willingly agree in our consciences in all points, ' 317 3i8 APPENDIX. as unto God's undoubted Truth and Verity, grounded onely upon his written Word. And, therefore, We ab- horre and detest all contrarie Religion and Doctrine ; but chiefly all kinde of Papistrie in generall and particular heads, even as they are now damned and confuted by the Word of God and Kirk of Scotland; but, in speciall, we detest and refuse the usurped authoritie of that Roman Antichrist upon the Scriptures of God, upon the Kirk, the civill Magistrate, and Consciences of men; all his tyran nous lawes made upon indifferent things against our Chris tian libertie ; his erroneous Doctrine against the sufficiencie of the written Word, the perfection of the Law, the office of Christ and his blessed Evangel ; his corrupted Doctrine concerning originall sinne, our natural inabilitie and rebel lion to God's law, our justification by faith onely, our im perfect sanctification and obedience to the law, the nature, number, and use of the holy Sacraments ; his five bastard Sacraments, with all his Rites, Ceremonies, and false Doc trine, added to. the ministration of the true Sacraments without the Word of God ; his cruell judgement against In fants departing without the sacrament; his absolute neces- sitie of Baptisme ; his blasphemous opinion of Transubstan- tiation, or real presence of Christ's body in the Elements, and receiving of the same by the wicked, or bodies of men; his dispensations with solemn oaths, perjuries, arid degrees of Marriage forbidden in the Word; his crueltie against the innocent divorced ; his divellish Masse ; his blasphemous Priesthood ; his profane Sacrifice for the sins of the dead and the quick ; his Canonization of men, calling upon Angels or Saints departed, worshipping of Imagerie, Relicks, and Crosses, dedicating of Kirks, Altars, Daies, Vowes to creatures ; his Purgatorie, praiers for the dead ; praying or speaking in a strange language, with his Proces sions, and blasphemous Letanie, and multitude of Advo cates or Mediators ; his manifold Orders, Auricular Confes sion ; his desperate and uncertaine repentence ; his generall and doubtsome faith.; his satisfactions of men for their sins; his justification by works, opus operatum, works of THE NATIONAL COVENANT. 319 supererogation, Merits, Pardons, Peregrinations, and Sta tions ; his holy Water, baptizing of Bels, conjuring of spirits, crossing, saning, anointing, conjuring, hallowing of God's good creatures, with the superstitious opinion joyned there with; his worldly Monarchy, and wicked Hierarchie; his three solemne vowes, with all his shavelings of sundry sorts ; his erroneous and bloudie decrees made at Trent, with all the subscribers and approvers of that cruell and bloudie Band conjured against the Kirk of God ; and, finally, we detest all his vain Allegories, Rites, Signs, and Traditions brought in the Kirk, without or against the Word of God, and Doctrine of this true reformed Kirk ; to the which we joyne ourselves willingly, in Doctrine, Faith, Religion, Dis cipline, and use of the Holy Sacraments, as lively members of the same in Christ our Head ; promising and swearing, by the Great Name of the LORD our GOD, that we shall continue in the obedience of the Doctrine and Disci pline of this Kirk, and shall defend the same, according to our vocation and power, all the dayes of our lives, under the paines contained in the Law, and danger both of body and soule in the day of God's fearfull Judgement ; and see ing that many are stirred up by Satan and that Romane Antichrist, to promise, sweare, subscribe, and, for a time, use the Holy Sacraments in the Kirk deceitfully, against their owne consciences, minding thereby, first, under the externall cloake of Religion, to corrupt and subvert secretly God's true Religion within the Kirk, and afterward, when time may serve, to become open enemies and persecutors of the same, under vaine hope of the Pope's dispensation, devised against the Word of God, to his greater confusion, and their double condemnation in the day of the LORD JESUS. We, therefore, willing to take away all suspition of hypocrisie, and of such double dealing with God and his Kirk, Protest, and call The Searcher of all Hearts for wit- nesse, that our minds and hearts do fully agree with this our Confession, Promise, Oath, and Subscription, so that we are not moved for any worldly respect, but are perswaded 320 APPENDIX. onely in our Consciences, through the knowledge and love of God's true Religion, printed in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, as we shall answer to Him in the day when the secrets of all hearts shall be disclosed; and because we perceive, that the quietnesse and stability of our Religion and Kirk doth depend upon the safety and good behaviour of the King's Majestie, as upon a comfortable instrument of God's mercy granted to this Country, for the maintain ing of his Kirk, and ministration of Justice amongst us; we protest and promise with our hearts, under the same Oath, Hand-writ, and paines, that we shall defend his Per son and Authority with our goods, bodies, and lives, in the defence of Christ his Evangel, Liberties of our Countrey, ministration of Justice, and punishment of iniquity, against all enemies within this Realme or without, as we desire our God to be a strong and mercifull Defender to us in the day of our death, and comming of our LORD JESUS CHRIST; to whom, with the Father, and the Holy Spirit, be all honour and glorie eternally. [In the renewal of 1638 there is added a rehearsal of the Acts of the Scottish Parliament for the Confirmation and Maintenance of the Reformed Religion, concluding with that which prescribed the coronation oath taken by Charles I. in 1633. It then proceeds:] In obedience to the commandment of God, conform to the practice of the godly in former times, and according to the laudable example of our worthy and religious Pro genitors, and of many yet living amongst us, which was warranted also by Act of Councell, commanding a gen erall Band to bee made and subscribed by his Majestie's subjects of all ranks, for two causes : One was, for de fending the true Religion, as it was then reformed, and is expressed in the Confession of Faith above written, and a former large Confession established by sundrie Acts of lawfull Generall Assemblies and of Parlament, unto which it hath relation set downe in publicke Catheehismes, and which had beene for many yeeres, with a blessing from heaven, preached and professed in this Kirk and King- THE NATIONAL COVENANT. 32 1 dome, as God's undoubted truth, grounded onely upon his written Word ; The other cause was, for maintaining the King's Majestie his Person and Estate ; the true worship of God, and the King's authoritie being so straightly joyned, as that they had the same friends and common enemies, and did stand and fall together. And, finally, being con vinced in our minds, and confessing with our mouthes, that the present and succeeding generations in this Land are bound to keep the foresaid nationall Oath and subscription inviolable, Wee Noblemen, Barons, Gentlemen, Burgesses, Ministers and Commons under subscribing, considering divers times before, and especially at this time, the dan ger of the true reformed Religion, of the King's honour, and of the publicke peace of the Kingdome, by the mani fold innovations and evils generally contained and particu larly mentioned in our late supplications, complaints, and protestations, doe hereby professe, and, before God, his Angels, and the World, solemnely declare, That, with our whole hearts wee agree and resolve all the daies of our life constantly to adhere unto, and to defend the foresaid true Religion, and forbearing the practice of all novations al ready introduced in the matters of the worship of God, or 'approbation of the corruptions of the publick Government of the Kirk, or civill places and power of Kirkmen, till they bee tryed and allowed in free Assemblies, and in Parlaments, to labour by all meanes lawfull to recover the purity and libertie of the Gospel, as it was established and professed before the foresaid novations: And because, after due examination, we. plainly perceive, and undoubtedly beleeve, that the Innovations and evils contained in our Supplications, Complaints, and Protestations have no war rant of the Word of God, are contrary to the Articles of the foresaid Confessions, to the intention and meaning of the blessed Reformers of Religion in this Land, to the above written Acts of Parlament, and doe sensibly tend to the re-establishing of the Popish Religion and tyranny, and to the subversion and ruine of the true Reformed Re ligion, and of our Liberties, Lawes, and Estates. We also 322 APPENDIX. declare, that the foresaid Confessions are to bee inter preted, and ought to be understood of the foresaid nova tions and evils, no lesse then if everie one of them had beene expressed in the foresaid Confessions ; and that wee are obliged to detest and abhorre them, amongst other particular heads of Papistrie abjured therein. And, there fore, from the knowledge and conscience of our dutie to God, to our King and countrey, without any worldly re spect or inducement, so farre as humane infirmitie will suffer, wishing a further measure of the grace of God for this effect, We promise and sweare, by the Great Name OF THE LORD OUR GOD, to continue in the Profession and Obedience of the foresaid Religion : That we shall defend the same, and resist all these contrarie errours and corruptions, according to our vocation, and to the utter most of that power that God hath put in our hands, all the dayes of our life : And, in like manner, with the same heart, we declare before God and Men, That wee have no intention nor desire to attempt anything that may turne to the dishonour of God, or to the diminution of the King's Greatnesse and authoritie : But, on the contrarie, wee promise and sweare, that wee shall, to the uttermost of our power, with our meanes and lives, stand to the de fence of our dread Soveraign, the King's Majestie, his person and authoritie, in the defence and preservation of the foresaid true Religion, Liberties, and Lawes of the Kingdome : As, also, to the mutuall defence and assist ance, everie one of us of another in the same cause of maintaining the true Religion, and his Majestie's author itie, with our best counsell, our bodies, meanes, and whole power, against all sorts of persons whatsoever. So that, whatsoever shall be done to the least of us for that cause, shall be taken as done to us all in generall, and to everie one of us in particular. And that wee shall neither directly nor indirectly suffer ourselves to be divided or withdrawn by whatsoever suggestion, combination, allurement, or ter- rour, from this blessed and loyall conjunction, nor shall cast in any let or impediment that may stay or hinder THE NATIONAL COVENANT. 323 any such resolution, as by common consent shall be found to conduce for so good ends. But, on the contrarie, shall, by all lawfull meanes, labour to further and promove the same ; and if any such dangerous and divisive motion be made to us by word or writ, wee, and everie one of us, shall either suppresse it, or, if need be, shall incontinent make the same known, that it may bee timeously obvi ated ; neither do we feare the foule aspersions of rebel lion, combination, or what else our adversaries, from their craft and malice would put upon us, seeing what we do is so well warranted, and ariseth from an unfained desire to maintaine the true worship of God, the majestie of our King, and the peace of the Kingdome, for the common happiness of ourselves and posteritie. And because we cannot look for a blessing from God upon our proceedings, except with our profession and subscription we joyne such a life and conversation, as beseemeth Christians, who have renewed their Covenant with God ; Wee therefore faith fully promise, for ourselves, our followers, and all others under us, both in publicke, in our particular families and personall carriage, to endevour to keep ourselves within the bounds- of Christian libertie, and to be good examples to others of all Godlinesse, Sobernesse, and Righteousness, and of everie dutie we owe to God and Man. And that this our Union and Conjunction may be observed with out violation, we call the living God, the Searcher of our Hearts, to witnesse, who knoweth this to be our sincere Desire, and unfained Resolution, as wee shall answer to JESUS CHRIST in the great day, and under the paine of God's everlasting wrath, and of infamie, and of losse of all honour and respect in this World. Most humblie be seeching the LORD, to strengthen us by his Holy Spirit for this end, and to bless our desires and proceedings with- a happie success, that Religion and Righteousnesse may flourish in the land, to the glorie of God, the honour of our King, and peace and comfort of us all. In witnesse whereof we have subscribed with our hands all the prem isses, &c. 324 APPENDIX. II. A SOLEMNE LEAGUE AND COVENANT FOR REFORMA TION AND DEFENCE OF RELIGION, THE HONOR AND HAPPINESSE OF THE KING, AND THE PEACE AND SAFETY OF THE THREE KINGDOMES OF SCOTLAND, ENGLAND, AND IRELAND. [ADOPTED 1 643.] Wee, Noblemen, Barons, Knights, Gentlemen, Citizens, Burgesses, Ministers of the Gospel, and Commons of all sorts, in the kingdomes of Scotland, England, and Ire land, by the providence of GOD, living under one King, and being of one reformed religion, having before our eyes the glory of GOD, and the advancement of the king- dome of our Lord and Saviour JESUS CHRIST, the honour and happinesse of the Kings Majesty and his posterity, and the true publick liberty, safety, and peace of the king- domes, wherein every ones private condition is included : And calling to minde the treacherous and bloudy plots, conspiracies, attempts, and practices of the enemies of GOD, against the true religion and professours thereof in all places, especially in these three kingdomes, ever since the reformation of religion ; and how much their rage, power, and presumption are of late, and at this time, in creased and exercised; whereof the deplorable estate of the church and kingdome of Ireland, the distressed estate of the church and kingdome of England, and the danger ous estate of the church and kingdome of Scotland, are present and publick testimonies; We have now at last, (after other means of supplication, remonstrance, protesta tions, and sufferings,) for the preservation of ourselves and our religion from utter ruin and destruction, according to the commendable practice of these kingdomes in former times, and the example of GODS people in other nations, after mature deliberation, resolved and determined to enter into a mutuall and Solemne League and Covenant, wherein we all subscribe, and each one of us for himself, with our hands lifted up to the most High GOD, do swear, 1 . That we shall sincerely, really, and constantly, through SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT. 325 the grace of GOD, endeavour, in our several places and callings, the preservation of the reformed religion in the Church of Scotland, in doctrine, worship, discipline, and government, against our common enemies ; the reforma tion of religion in the kingdomes of England and Ireland, in doctrine, worship, discipline, and government, according to the word of GOD, and the example of the best reformed Churches ; and shall endeavour to bring the Churches of GOD in the three kingdomes to the nearest conjunction and uniformity in religion, confession of faith, form of church government, directory for worship and catechis ing ; that we, and our posterity after us, may as brethren live in faith and love, and the Lord may delight to dwell in the midst of us. 2. That we shall, in like manner, without respect of persons, endeavour the extirpation of Popery, Prelacy, (that is, church-government by Archbishops, Bishops, their Chancellors, and Commissaries, Deans, Deans and Chap ters, Archdeacons, and all other ecclesiasticall Officers, de pending on that hierarchy,) superstition, heresie, schisme, profanenesse, and whatsoever shall be found to be con trary to sound doctrine and the power of godlinesse ; lest we partake in other mens sins, and thereby be in danger to receive of their plagues ; and that, the Lord may be one, and his name one in the three kingdomes. 3. We shall, with the same sincerity, reality, and con- stancie, in our several vocations, endeavour, with our estates and lives, mutually to preserve the rights and privileges of the Parliaments, and the liberties of the kingdomes; and -to preserve and defend the Kings Majesties person and authoritie, in the preservation and defence of the true re ligion, and liberties of the kingdomes ; that the world may bear witnesse with our consciences of our loyalty, and that wee have no thoughts or intensions to diminish his Majesties just power and greatnesse. 4. We shall also, with all faithfulnesse, endeavour the discovery of such as have been, or shall be incendiaries, malignants, or evil instruments, by hindering the reforma- 326 * APPENDIX. tion of religion, dividing the King from his people, or one of the kingdomes from another, or making any faction or parties among the people, contrary to this League and Covenant ; that they may be brought to publick triall, and receive condigne punishment, as the degree of their offences shall require or deserve, or the supreame judicatories of both kingdomes respectively, or others, having power from them for that effect, shall judge convenient. 5. And whereas, the happinesse of a blessed peace be tween these kingdomes, denyed in former times to our progenitors, is, by the good providence of GOD, granted unto us, and hath been lately concluded and settled by both Parliaments; we shall each one of us, according to o'ur place and interest, endeavour that they may remaine conjoined in a firme peace and union to all posterity ; and that justice may be done upon the wilfull opposers thereof, in manner expressed in the precedent article. 6. Wee shall also, according to our places and callings, in this common cause of religion, liberty, and peace of the kingdomes, assist and defend all those that enter into this League and Covenant, in the maintaining and pursuing thereof; and shall not suffer ourselves, directly or in directly, by whatsoever combination, persuasion, or ter- rour, to be divided and withdrawn from this blessed union and conjunction, whether to make defection to the con trary part, or to give ourselves to a detestable indifferency or neutrality in this cause, which so much concerneth the glory of GOD, the good of the kingdomes, and honour of the King; but shall, all the days of our lives, zealously and constantly continue therein against all opposition, and promote the same according to our power, against all lets and impediments whatsoever; and, what we are not able ourselves to suppresse or overcome, we shall reveal and make known, that it may be timely prevented or removed : All which we shall do as in the sight of GOD : And, because these kingdomes are guilty of many sins and provocations against GOD, and his Son JESUS CHRIST, as is too manifest by our present distresses and dangers, ADOPTLVG ACTS, 1647. 327 the fruits thereof ; we profess and declare, before GOD and the world, our unfeigned desire to be humbled for our own sins, and for the sins of these kingdomes : especially, that we have not as we ought, valued the inestimable benefit of the gospel; that we have not laboured for the purity and power thereof ; and that we have not endeavoured to receive CHRIST in our hearts, nor to walk worthy of him in our lives, which are the causes of other sins and trans gressions so much abounding amongst us; and our true and unfeigned purpose, desire, and endeavour for our selves, and all others under our power and charge, both in publick and private, in all duties we owe to GOD and man, to amend our lives, and each one to go before another in the example of a reall reformation ; that the Lord may turn away his wrath and heavy indignation, and establish these churches and kingdomes in truth and peace. And this Covenant we make in the presence of ALMIGHTY GOD, the Searcher of all hearts, with a true intention to performe the same, as we shall answer at that great day, when the secrets of all hearts shall bee disclosed ; most humbly beseeching the Lord to strengthen us by his HOLY SPIRIT for this end, and to blesse our desires and proceedings with such successe, as may be deliverance and safety to his people, and encouragement to other Christian churches, groaning under, or in danger of, the yoke of anti- christian tyrannie, to joyn in the same or like association and covenant, to the glory of GOD, the enlargement of the kingdome of JESUS CHRIST, and the peace and tran quillity of Christian kingdomes and commonwealths. III. THE ADOPTING ACTS OF 1 647. (a) Approbation of the Confession of Faith. A Confession of Faith for the Kirks of God in the three Kingdomes, being the chiefest part of that Uniformity in Religion which by the Solemne League and Covenant we 328 APPENDIX. are bound to endeavour; An'd there being accordingly a Confession of Faith agreed upon by the Assembly of Divines sitting at Westminster, with the assistance of Commissioners from the Kirk of Scotland ; Which Confes sion was sent from our Commissioners at London to the Commissioners of the Kirk met at Edinburgh in January last, and hath been in this Assembly twice publikely read over, examined, and considered ; Copies thereof being also Printed, that it might be particularly perused by all the Members of this Assembly, unto whom frequent intimation was publikely made, to put in their doubts and objections if they had any ; And the said Confession being upon due examination thereof found by the Assembly to bee most agreeable to the Word of God, and in nothing contrary to the received Doctrine, Worship, Discipline, and Govern ment of this Kirk: And lastly, it being so necessary and so much longed for, That the said Confession be with all possible diligence and expedition approved and established in both Kingdomes, as a principall part of the intended Uniformity in Religion, and as a speciall means for the more effectuall suppressing of the many dangerous errours and heresies of these times ; The Generall Assembly doth therefore after mature diliberation Agree unto and Ap prove the said Confession as to the truth of the matter (judging it to be most orthodox and grounded upon the Word of God) and also as to the point of Uniformity, Agreeing for our part that it be a common Confession of Faith for the three Kingdomes. The Assembly doth also blesse the Lord, and thankfully acknowledge his- great mercy, in that so excellent a Confession of Faith is pre^ pared, and thus far agreed upon in both Kingdomes; which we look upon as a great strengthening of the true Reformed Religion against the common enemies thereof. But lest our intention and meaning be in some particulars misunderstood, It is hereby expressly Declared and Pro vided, that the not mentioning in this Confession the sev- erall sorts of Ecclesiasticall Officers and Assemblies, shall be no prejudice to the Truth of Christ in these particulars ADOPTING ACTS, 1647. 329 to be expressed fully in the Directory of Government. It is further Declared, that the Assembly understandeth some parts of the second Article of the thirty one Chap ter, only of Kirks not settled or constituted in point of Government; And that although in such Kirks, a Synod of Ministers and other fit persons may be called by the Magistrates authority and nomination without any other Call, to consult and advise with about matters of Re ligion; And although likewise the Ministers of Christ without delegation from their Churches, may of them selves and by vertue of their Office meet together Synod- ically in such Kirks not yet constituted; Yet neither of these ought to be done in Kirks constituted and setled: It being alwayes free to the Magistrate to advise with Synods of Ministers and ruling Elders meeting upon dele gation from their Churches, either ordinarily, or being in dicted by his Authority occasionally and pro re nata; It being also free to assemble together Synodically, as well pro re nata, as at the ordinary times upon delegation from the Churches, by the intrinsicall power received from Christ, as often as it is necessary for the good of the Church so to assemble, in case the Magistrate to the det riment of the Church withhold or deny his consent, the necessity of occasionall Assemblies being first remonstrate unto him by humble supplication. (b) The Psalm-Book. The Generall Assembly, having considered the report of the Committee, concerning the Paraphrase of the Psalmes sent from England : And finding that it is very necessary, that the said Paraphrase be yet revised; Therefore doth appoint Master John Adamson to examine the first fourty Psalmes, Master Thomas Craufurd the second fourty, Mas ter John Row the third fourty, and Master John Nevey the last thirty Psalms of that Paraphrase; and in their Examination they shall not only observe what they think needs to be amended, but also to set downe their own 33° APPENDIX. essay for correcting thereof : And for this purpose recom mends to them, to make use of the travels of Rowallen, Master Zachary Boyd, or of any other on that subject, but especially of our own Paraphrase, that what they finde better in any of these Works may be chosen : and likewise they shall make use of the animadversions sent from Pres byteries, who for this cause are hereby desired to hasten their observations unto them : And they are to make report of their labours herein to the Commission of the Assembly for publike affaires against their first meeting in February next: And the Commission after revising thereof, shall send the same to Provinciall Assemblies, to bee transmitted to Presbyteries, that by their further con sideration, the matter may be fully prepared to the next Assembly: And because some Psalmes in that Paraphrase sent from England are composed in verses which do not agree with the Common-tunes, Therefore it is also recom mended that these Psalms be likewise turned in other verses which may agree to the Common-tunes, that is, having the first line of eight syllabs, and the second line of six, that so both versions being together, use may bee made of either of them in Congregations as shall be found convenient : And the Assembly doth further recommend, That M. Zachary Boyd be at the paines to translate the other Scripturall Songs in meeter, and to report his travels also to the Commission of Assembly, that after their Ex amination thereof, they may send the same to Presbyteries to be there considered untill the next Generall Assembly. IV. THE ADOPTING ACT OF THE SYNOD OF PHILA DELPHIA, 1729. • Although the Synod do not claim or pretend to any authority of imposing our faith upon other men's con sciences, but do profess our just dissatisfaction with, and abhorrence of such impositions, and do utterly disclaim all legislative power and authority in the Church, being will- ADOPTING ACTS, 1729. 33 1 ing to receive one another as Christ has received us to the glory of God, and admit to fellowship in sacred ordinances, all such as we have grounds to believe Christ will at last admit to the kingdom of heaven, yet we are undoubtedly obliged to take care that the faith once delivered to the saints be kept pure and uncorrupt among us, and so handed down to our posterity ; and do therefore agree that all the ministers of this Synod, or that shall hereafter be admitted into this Synod, shall declare their agreement in, and approbation of, the Confession of Faith, with the Larger and Shorter Catechisms of the Assembly of Divines at Westminster, as being in all the essential and necessary articles, good forms of sound words and systems of Chris tian doctrine, and do also adopt the said Confession and Catechisms as the confession of our faith. And we do also agree, that all the Presbyteries within our bounds shall always take care not to admit any candidate of the ministry into the exercise of the sacred function but what declares his agreement in opinion with all the essential and necessary articles of said Confession, either by subscrib ing the said Confession of, Faith and Catechisms, or by a verbal declaration of their assent thereto, as such minister or candidate shall think best. And in case any minister of this Synod, or any candidate for the ministry, shall have any scruple with respect to any article or articles of said Confession or Catechisms, he shall at the time of his making said declaration declare his sentiments to the Pres bytery or Synod, who shall, notwithstanding, admit him to the exercise of the ministry within our bounds, and to ministerial communion, if the Synod or Presbytery shall judge his scruple or mistake to be only about articles not essential and necessary in doctrine, worship, or govern ment. But if the Synod or Presbytery shall judge such ministers or candidates erroneous in essential and neces sary articles of faith, the Synod or Presbytery shall de clare them uncapable of communion with them. And the Synod do solemnly agree, that none of us will traduce or use any opprobrious terms of those that differ from us in 332 APPENDIX. these extra-essential and not necessary points of doctrine, but treat them with the same friendship, kindness, and brotherly love, as if they had not differed from us in such sentiments. All the ministers of this Synod now present, except one that declared himself not prepared, viz. Masters Jedi- diah Andrews, Thomas Craighead, John Thomson, James Anderson, John Pierson, Samuel Gelston, Joseph Houston, Gilbert Tennent, Adam Boyd, Jonathan Dickinson, John Bradner, Alexander Hutchinson, Thomas Evans, Hugh Stevenson, William Tennent, Hugh Conn, George Gilles pie, and John Willson, after proposing all the scruples that any of them had to make against any articles and expres sions in the Confession of Faith and Larger and Shorter Catechisms of the Assembly of Divines at Westminster, have unanimously agreed in the solution of those scruples, and in declaring the said Confession and Catechisms to be the confession of their faith, excepting only some clauses in the twentieth and twenty-third chapters, concerning which clauses the Synod do unanimously declare, that they do not receive those articles in any such sense as to suppose the civil magistrate hath a controlling power over Synods with respect to the exercise of their ministerial authority ; or power to persecute any for their religion, or in any sense contrary to the Protestant succession to the throne of Great Britain. The Synod observing that unanimity, peace, and unity, which appeared in all their consultations and determina tions relating to the affair of the Confession, did unani mously agree in giving thanks to God in solemn prayer and praises. V. THE SYNOD OF PHILADELPHIA'S EXPLANATORY ACT OF 1736. An overture of the committee upon the supplication of the people of Paxton and Derry, was brought in and is as followeth. That the Synod do declare, that inasmuch as EXPLANATORY ACT, 1736. 333 we understand that many persons of our persuasion, both more lately and formerly, have been offended with some expressions or distinctions in the first or preliminary act of our Synod, contained in the printed paper, relating to our receiving or adopting the Westminster Confession and Catechisms, &c : That in order to remove said offence, and all jealousies that have arisen or may arise in any of our people's minds, on occasion of said distinctions and ex pressions, the Synod doth declare, that the Synod have adopted and still do adhere to the Westminster Confession, Catechisms, and Directory, without the least variation or alteration, and without any regard to said distinctions. And we do further declare, that this was our meaning and true intent in our first adopting of said Confession, as may particularly appear by our adopting act which is as followeth : All the ministers of the Synod now present (which were eighteen in number, except one that declared himself not prepared,) after proposing all the scruples any of them had to make against any articles and expressions in the Confession of Faith, and Larger and Shorter Cate chisms of the Assembly of Divines at Westminster, have unanimously agreed in the solution of these scruples, and in declaring the said Confession and Catechisms to be the confession of their faith, except only some clauses in the twentieth and twenty-third chapters, concerning which clauses the Synod do unanimously declare, that they do not receive these articles in any such sense as to suppose the civil magistrate hath a controlling power over Synods with respect to the exercise of their ministerial authority, or power to persecute any for their religion, or in any sense contrary to the Protestant succession to the throne of Great Britain. And we hope and desire, that this our Synodical dec laration and explication may satisfy all our people, as to our firm attachment to our good old received doctrines contained in said Confession, without the least variation or alteration, and that they will lay aside their jealousies that have been entertained through occasion of the above 334 APPENDLX. hinted expressions and declarations as groundless. This overture approved nemine contradicente. VI. THE PROTESTATION OF 1 74 1, WHICH OCCASIONED THE DIVISION OF THE SYNOD OF PHILADELPHIA. Reverend Fathers and Brethren, We, the ministers of Jesus Christ, and members of the Synod of Philadelphia, being wounded and grieved at our very hearts, at the dreadful divisions, distractions, and convulsions, which all of a sudden have seized this infant church to such a degree, that unless He, who is King in Zion, do graciously and seasonably interpose for our re lief, she is in nojBmall danger of expiring outright, and that quickly, as to the form, order, and constitution, of an organized church, which hath subsisted for above these thirty years past, in a very great degree of comely order and sweet harmony, until of late — we say, we being deeply afflicted with these things which lie heavy on our spirits, and being sensible that it is our indispensable duty to do what lies in our power, in a lawful way, according to the light and direction of the inspired oracles, to preserve this swooning church from a total expiration : and after the deliberate and unprejudiced inquiry into the causes of these confusions which rage so among us, both ministers and people, we evidently seeing, and being fully persuaded in our judgments, that besides our misimprovement of, and unfruitfulness under, gospel light, liberty, and privi lege, that great decay of practical godliness in the life and power of it, and many abounding immoralities : we say, besides these, our sins, which we judge to be the merito rious cause of our present doleful distractions, the awful judgment we at present groan under, we evidently see that our protesting brethren and their adherents were the direct and proper cause thereof, by their unwearied, un- scriptural, antipresbyterial, uncharitable, divisive practices, which they have been pursuing, with all the industry they THE PROTESTATION, 1741. 335 were capable of, with any probability of success, for above these twelve months past especially, besides too much of the like practices for some years before, though not with such barefaced arrogance and boldness : And being fully convinced in our judgments, that it is our duty to bear testimony against these disorderly pro ceedings, according to our stations, capacity, and trust reposed in us by our exalted Lord, as watchmen on the walls of his Zion, we having endeavoured sincerely to seek counsel and direction from God, who hath promised to give wisdom to those that ask him in faith, yea, hath promised his Holy Spirit to lead his people and servants into all truth, and being clearly convinced in our con sciences, that it is a duty called unto in this present junc ture of affairs : Reverend Fathers and Brethren, we hereby humbly and solemnly protest, in the presence of the great and eternal God, and his elect angels, as well as. in the presence of all here present, and particularly to you, Reverend Brethren, in our own names, and in the names of all, both ministers and people, who shall adhere to us, as follows : 1. We protest that it is the indispensable duty of this Synod, to maintain and stand by the principles of doc trine, worship, and government, of the Church of Christ, as the same are summed up in the Confession of Faith, Catechisms, and Directory, composed by the Westminster Assembly, as being agreeable to the word of God, and which this Synod have owned, acknowledged, and adopted, as may appear by our synodical records of the years 1729, 1736, which we desire to be read publicly. 2. We protest that no person, minister or elder, should be allowed to sit and vote in this Synod, who hath not received, adopted, or subscribed, the said Confession, Cate chisms, and Directory, as our Presbyteries respectively do, according to our last explication of the adopting act ; or who is either accused or convicted, or may be convicted before this Synod, or any of our Presbyteries, of holding or maintaining any doctrine, or who act and persist in any 336 APPENDIX. practice, contrary to any of those doctrines, or rules con tained in said Directory, or contrary to any of the known rights of Presbytery, or orders made or agreed to by this Synod, and which stand yet unrepealed, unless, or until he renounce such doctrine, and being found guilty, acknowl edge, confess, and profess his sorrow for such sinful dis order, to the satisfaction of this Synod, .or such inferior judicatory as the Synod shall appoint or empower for that purpose. 3. We protest that all our protesting brethren have at present no right to sit and vote as members of this Synod, having forfeited their right of being accounted members of it for many reasons, a few of which we shall mention afterwards. 4. We protest that, if, notwithstanding of this our pro testation, these brethren be allowed to sit and vote in this Synod, without giving suitable satisfaction to the Synod, and particularly to us, who now enter this protestation, and those who adhere to us in it, that whatsoever shall be done, voted, or transacted by them, contrary to our judg ment, shall be of no force or obligation to us, being done and acted by a judicatory consisting in part of members who have no authority to act with us in ecclesiastical matters. 5. We protest that, if, notwithstanding this our protes tation, and contrary to the true intent and meaning of it, these protesting brethren, and such as adhere to them, or support and countenance them in their antipresbyterial practices, shall continue to act as they have done this last year, in that case we, and as many as have clearness to join with us, and maintain the rights of this judicatory, shall be accounted in nowise disorderly, but the true Pres byterian Church in this province ; and they shall be looked upon as guilty of schism, and the breach of the rules of Presbyterial government, which Christ has established in his church, which we are ready at all times to demonstrate to the world. Reverend and dear Brethren, we beseech you to hear THE PROTESTATION, 17 41. 337 us with patience, while we lay before you as briefly as we can, some of the reasons that move us thus to protest, and more particularly, why we protest against our protesting brethren's being allowed to sit as members of this Synod. 1. Their heterodox and anarchical principles expressed in their Apology, pages twenty-eight and thirty-nine, where they expressly deny that Presbyteries have author ity to oblige their dissenting members, and that Synods should go any further, in judging of appeals or references, &c, than to give their best advice, which is plainly to divest the officers and judicatories of Christ's kingdom of all authority, (and plainly contradicts the thirty-first arti cle of our Confession of Faith, section three, which these brethren pretend to adopt,) agreeable to which is the whole superstructure of arguments which they advance and maintain against not only our synodical acts, but also all authority to make any acts or orders that shall bind their dissenting members, throughout their whole Apology. 2. Their protesting against the Synod's act in relation to the examination of candidates, together with their pro ceeding to license and ordain men to the ministry of the gospel, in opposition to, and in contempt of said act of Synod. 3. Their making irregular irruptions upon the congrega tions to which they have no immediate relation, without order, concurrence, or allowance of the Presbyteries or ministers to which congregations belong, thereby sowing the seeds of division among people, and doing what they can to alienate and fill their minds with unjust prejudices against their lawfully called pastors. 4. Their principles and practices of rash judging and condemning all who do not fall in with their measures, both ministers and people, as carnal, graceless, and enemies to the work of God, and what not, as appears in Mr. Gil bert Tennent's sermon against unconverted ministers, and his and Mr. Blair's papers of May last, which were read in open Synod ; which rash judging has been the constant practice of our protesting brethren, and their irregular pro- 338 APPENDIX. bationers, for above these twelve months past, in their dis orderly itinerations and preaching through our congrega tions, by which, (alas! for it,) most of our congregations, through weakness and credulity, are so shattered and divided, and shaken in their principles, that few or none of us can say we enjoy the comfort, or have the success among our people, which otherwise we might, and which we enjoyed heretofore. 5. Their industriously persuading people to believe that the call of God whereby he calls men to the ministry, does not consist in their being regularly ordained and set apart to that work, according to the institution and rules of the Word ; but in some invisible motions and workings of the Spirit, which none can be conscious or sensible of but the person himself, and with respect to which he is liable to be deceived, or play the hypocrite ; that the gospel preached in truth by unconverted ministers, can be of ho saving benefit to souls; and their pointing out such ministers, whom they condemn as graceless by their rash judging spirit, they effectually carry the point with the poor credu lous people, who, in imitation of their example, and under their patrociny, judge their ministers to be graceless, and forsake their ministry as hurtful rather than profitable. 6. Their preaching the terrors of the law in such a man ner and dialect as has no precedent in the word of God, but rather appears to be borrowed from a worse dialect; and so industriously working on the passions and affections of weak minds, as to Cause them to cry out in a hideous manner, and fall down in convulsion-like fits, to the mar ring of the profiting both of themselves and others, who are so taken up in seeing and hearing these odd symptoms, that they cannot attend to or hear what the preacher says ; and then, after all, boasting of these things as the work of God, which we are persuaded do proceed from an inferior or worse cause. 7. Their, or some of them, preaching and maintaining that all true converts are as certain of their gracious state as a person can be of what he knows by his outward THE PROTESTATION, 1741. 339 senses; and are able to give a narrative of the time and manner of their conversion, or else they conclude them to be in a natural or graceless state, and that a gracious per son can judge of another's gracious state otherwise than by his profession and life. That people are under no sacred tie or relation to their own pastors lawfully called, but may leave them when they please, and ought to go where they think they get most good. For these and many other reasons, we protest, before the Eternal God, his holy angels, and you, Reverend Brethren, and before all here present, that these brethren have no right to be acknowledged as members of this judicatory of Christ, whose principles and practices are so diametrically opposite to our cloctrine, and principles of government and order, which the great King of the Church hath laid down in his Word. How absurd and monstrous must that union be, where one part of the members own themselves obliged, in con science, to the judicial determinations of the whole, founded on the Word of God, or else relinquish membership ; and another part declare, they are not obliged and will not submit, unless the determination be according to their minds, and consequently will submit to no rule, in mak ing of which they are in the negative. Again, how monstrously absurd is it, that they should so much as desire to join with us, or we with them, as a judicatory, made up of authoritative officers of Jesus Christ, while they openly condemn us wholesale ; and, when they please, apply their condemnatory sentences to particular brethren by name, without judicial process, or proving them guilty of heresy or immorality, and at the same time will not hold Christian communion with them. Again, how absurd is the union, while some of the members of the same body, which meet once a year, and join as a judicatory of Christ, do all the rest of the year what they can, openly and above board, to persuade the people and flocks of their brethren and fellow members, to separate from their own pastors, as graceless hypocrites, 340 APPENDIX. and yet they do not separate from them themselves, but join with them once every year, as members of the same judicatory of Christ, and oftener, when Presbyteries are mixed. Is it not most unreasonable, stupid indolence in us, to join with such as are avowedly tearing us in pieces like beasts of prey ? Again, is not the continuance of union with our protest ing brethren very absurd, when it is so notorious that both their doctrine and practice are so directly contrary to the adopting act, whereby both they and we have adopted the Confession of Faith, Catechisms and Directory, composed by the Westminster Assembly ? Finally, is not continuance of union absurd with those who would arrogate to themselves a right and power to palm and obtrude members on our Synod, contrary to the minds and judgment of the body? In fine, a continued union, in our' judgment, is most absurd and inconsistent, when it is so notorious, that our doctrine and principles of church government, in many points, are not only diverse, but directly opposite. For how can two walk together, except they be agreed ? Reverend Fathers and Brethren, these are a part, and but a part, of our reasons why we protest as above, and which we have only hinted at, but have forborne to en large on them, as we might, the matter and substance of them are so well known to you all, and the whole world about us, that we judged this hint sufficient at present, to declare our serious and deliberate judgment in the mat ter; and as we profess ourselves to be resolvedly against principles and practice of both anarchy and schism, so we hope that God, whom we desire to serve and obey, the Lord Jesus Christ, whose ministers we are, will both direct and enable us to conduct ourselves, in these trying times, so as our consciences shall not reproach us as long as we live. Let God arise, and let his enemies be scattered, and let them that hate him fly before him, but let the righteous be glad, yea, let them exceedingly rejoice. And may the Spirit of life and comfort revive and comfort this poor THE PROTESTATION, 1741. 341 swooning and fainting church, quicken her to spiritual life, and restore her to the exercise of true charity, peace, and order. Although we can freely, and from the bottom of our hearts, justify the Divine proceedings against us, in suffer ing us to fall into these confusions for our sins, and par ticularly for the great decay of the life and power of god liness among all ranks, both ministers and people, yet we think it to be our present duty to bear testimony against these prevailing disorders, judging that to give way to the breaking down the hedge of discipline and government from about Christ's vineyard, is far from being the proper method of causing his tender plants to grow in grace and fruitfulness. As it is our duty in our station, without delay, to set about a reformation of the evils whereby we have pro voked God against ourselves, so we judge the strict obser vation of his laws of government and order, and not the breaking of them, to be one necessary mean and method of this necessary and much to be desired reformation. And we doubt not, but when our God sees us duly hum bled and penitent for our sins, he will yet return to us in mercy, and cause us to flourish in spiritual life, love, unity, and order, though perhaps we may not live to see it, yet this testimony that we now bear, may be of some good use to our children yet unborn, when God shall arise and have mercy on Zion. Ministers : Robert Cross, John Thomson, Francis Alison, Robert Cathcart, Richard Zanchy, John Elder, John Craig, Samuel Caven, Samuel Thomson, Adam Boyd, James Mar tin, Robert Jamison. Elders: Robert Porter, Robert McKnight, William McCulloch, John McEuen, Robert Rowland, Robert Craig, James Kerr, Alexander McKnight. 342 APPENDIX. VII. THE PLAN OF UNION OF 1 758. The Synods of New York and Philadelphia, taking into serious consideration the present divided state of the Pres byterian church in this land, and being deeply sensible that the division of the church tends to weaken its inter ests, to dishonour religion, and consequently its glorious Author; to render government and discipline ineffectual, and finally to dissolve its very frame ; and being desirous to pursue such, measures as may most tend to the glory of God and the establishment and edification of his peo ple, do judge it to be our indispensable duty to study the things that make for peace, and to endeavour the healing of that breach which has for some time subsisted amongst us, that so its hurtful consequences may not extend to posterity; that all occasion of reproach upon our society may be removed, and that we may carry on the great de signs of religion to better advantage than we can do in a divided state ; and since both Synods continue to profess the same principles of faith, and adhere to the same form of worship, government, and discipline, there is the greater reason to endeavour the compromising those differences, which were agitated many years ago with too great warmth and animosity, and unite in one body. For which end, and that no jealousies or grounds of alienation may remain, and also to prevent future breaches of like nature, we agree to unite and do unite in one body, under the name of the Synod of New York and Phila delphia, on the following plan. I. Both Synods having always approved and received the Westminster Confession of Faith, and Larger and Shorter Catechisms, as an orthodox and excellent system of Christian doctrine, founded on the word of God, we do still receive the same as the confession of our faith, and also adhere to the plan of worship, government, and dis cipline, contained in the Westminster Directory, strictly enjoining it on all our members and probationers for the THE PLAN OF UNION, 1758. 343 ministry, that they preach and teach according to the form of sound words in said Confession and Catechisms, and avoid and oppose all errors contrary thereto. II. That when any matter is determined by a major vote, every member shall either actively concur with, or passively submit to such determination ; or, if his con science permit him to do neither, he shall, after sufficient liberty modestly to reason and remonstrate, peaceably withdraw from our communion without attempting to make any schism. Provided always, that this shall be understood to extend only to such determinations as the body shall judge indispensable in doctrine or Presbyterian government. III. That any member or members, for the exonera tion of his or their conscience before God, have a right to protest against any act or procedure of our highest judi cature, because there is no further appeal to another for redress ; and to require that such protestation be recorded in their minutes. And as such a protest is a solemn ap peal from the bar of said judicature, no member is liable to prosecution on the account of his protesting. Provided always, that it shall be deemed irregular and unlawful, to enter a protestation against any member or members, or to protest facts or accusations instead of proving them, unless a fair trial be refused, even by the highest judica ture. And it is agreed, that protestations are only to be entered against the public acts, judgments, or determina tions of the judicature with which the protester's con science is offended. IV. As the Protestation entered in the Synod of Phila delphia, Ann. Dom. 1 741, has been apprehended to have been approved and received by an act of said Synod, and on that account was judged a sufficient obstacle to an union ; the said Synod declare, that they never judicially adopted the said Protestation, nor do account it a Synod ical act, but that it is to be considered as the act of those only who subscribed it ; and therefore cannot in its nature be a valid objection to the union of the two Synods, espe- 344 APPENDIX. cially considering that a very great majority of both Synods have become members, since the said Protestation was entered. V. That it shall be esteemed and treated as a censurable evil, to accuse any member of heterodoxy, insufficiency, or immorality, in a calumniating manner, or otherwise than by private brotherly admonition, or by a regular process according to our known rules of judicial trial in cases of scandal. And it shall be considered in the same view, if any Presbytery appoint supplies within the bounds of another Presbytery without their concurrence ; or if any member officiate irl another's congregation, without ask ing and obtaining his. consent, or the session's in case the minister be absent; yet it shall be esteemed unbrotherly for any one, in ordinary circumstances, to refuse his con sent to a regular member when it is requested. VI. That no Presbytery shall license or ordain to the work of the ministry, any candidate, until he give them competent satisfaction as to his learning, and experimental acquaintance with religion, and skill in divinity and cases of conscience; and declare his acceptance of the West minster Confession and Catechisms as the confession of his faith, and promise subjection to the Presbyterian plan of government in the Westminster Directory. VII. The Synods declare it is their earnest desire, that a complete union may be obtained as soon as possible, and agree that the united Synod shall model the several Pres byteries in such manner as shall appear to them most ex pedient. Provided nevertheless, that Presbyteries, where an alteration does not appear to be for edification, continue in their present form. As to divided congregations it is agreed, that such as have settled ministers on both sides be allowed to continue as they are; that where those of one side have a settled minister, the other being vacant, may join with the settled minister, if a majority choose so to do ; that when both sides are vacant they shall be at liberty to unite together. VIII. As the late religious appearances occasioned much THE PLAN OF UNION, 1758. 345 speculation and debate, the members of the New York Synod, in order to prevent any misapprehensions, declare their adherence to their former sentiments in favour of them, that a blessed work of God's Holy Spirit in the conversion of numbers was then carried on; and for the satisfaction of all concerned, this united Synod agree in declaring, that as all mankind are naturally dead in tres passes and sins an entire change of heart and life is neces sary to make them meet for the service and enjoyment of God; that such a change can be only effected by the powerful operations of the Divine Spirit; that when sin ners are made sensible of their lost condition and abso lute inability to recover themselves, are enlightened in the knowledge of Christ and convinced of his ability and willingness to save, and upon gospel encouragements do choose him for their Saviour, and renouncing their own righteousness in point of merit, depend upon his imputed righteousness for their justification before God, and on his wisdom and strength for guidance and support ; when upon these apprehensions and exercises their souls are comforted, notwithstanding all their past guilt, and re joice in God through Jesus Christ ; when they hate and bewail their sins of heart and life, delight in the laws of God without exception, reverently and diligently attend his ordinances, become humble and self denied, and make it the business of their lives to please and glorify God and to do good to their fellow men; this is to be acknowl edged as a gracious work of God, even though it should be attended with unusual bodily commotions or some more exceptionable circumstances, by means of infirmity, temptations, or remaining corruptions ; and wherever re ligious appearances are attended with the good effects above mentioned, we desire to rejoice in and thank God for them. But on the other hand, when persons seeming to be under a religious concern, imagine that they have visions of the human nature of Jesus Christ, or hear voices, or see external lights, or have fainting and convulsion-like fits, 346 APPENDIX. and on the account of these judge themselves to be truly converted, though they have not the Scriptural characters of a work of God above described, we believe such persons are under a dangerous delusion. And we testify our utter disapprobation of such a delusion, wherever it attends any religious appearances, in any church or time. Now as both Synods are agreed in their sentiments con cerning the nature of a work of grace, and declare their desire and purpose to promote it, different judgments re specting particular matters of fact, ought not to prevent their union ; especially as many of the present members have entered into the ministry since the time of the afore said religious appearances. Upon the whole, as the design of our union is the ad vancement of the Mediator's kingdom ; and as the wise and faithful discharge of the ministerial function is the principal appointed mean for that glorious end, we judge, that this is a proper occasion to manifest our sincere in tention, unitedly to exert ourselves to fulfil the ministry we have received of the Lord Jesus. Accordingly, we unanimously declare our serious and fixed resolution, by divine aid, to take heed to ourselves that our hearts be upright, our discourse edifying, and our lives exemplary for purity and godliness ; to take heed to our doctrine, that it be not only orthodox but evangelical and spiritual, tending to awaken the secure to a suitable concern for their salvation, and to instruct and encourage sincere Christians ; thus commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God ; to cultivate peace and harmony among ourselves, and strengthen each other's hands in promoting the knowledge of divine truth, and diffusing the savour of piety among our people. Finally we earnestly recommend it to all under our care, that instead of indulging a contentious disposition, they would love each other with a pure heart fervently, as brethren who profess subjection to the same Lord, adhere to the same faith, worship, and government, and entertain the same hope of glory. And we desire that they would THE BASIS OF UNION, 1782. 347 improve the present union for their mutual edification, combine to strengthen the common interests of religion, and go hand in hand in the path of life; which we pray the God of all grace would please to effect, for Christ's sake. Amen. The Synod agree, that all former differences and dis putes are laid aside and buried ; and that no future inquiry or vote shall be proposed in this Synod concerning these things; but if any member seek a Synodical inquiry, or declaration about any of the matters of our past differences, it shall be deemed a censurable breach of this agreement, and be refused, and he be rebuked accordingly. VIII. THE BASIS OF UNION OF 1 782, ON WHICH THE ASSOCIATE REFORMED CHURCH WAS FORMED. Article 1. Election, redemption, and the application thereof, are of equal extent, and for the elect only. Art. 2. Magistracy is derived from God as the Almighty Creator and Governor of the world, and not from Christ as Mediator. Art. 3. Whereas magistracy proceeds from God as the Creator and Governor of the world, and the profession of the true religion is not essential to the being of civil mag istrates : and whereas protection and allegiance are recip rocal, and as the United States of America, while they protect us in life and property, at the same time do not impose any thing sinful on us, we therefore judge it our duty to acknowledge the government of these states, in all lawful commands, that we may lead quiet and peace able lives in all godliness and honesty. Art. 4. The above proposition is not to be understood in an opposite sense to that proposition relative to civil government, on which the union between the Associate Presbytery of New York and the Reformed Presbytery have agreed ; but only as a plain and undisguised explica tion of one point of truth, in which we have the best rea son to believe the whole body are united. 348 APPENDIX. Art. 5. As no opposition of. sentiment, relative to the important duty of covenanting, appears on either side ; it is mutually agreed, that the consideration of it be referred to the councils and deliberations of the whole body. Art. 6. Though no real or practical subordination to the Associate Synod of Edinburgh, in a consistency with Presbyterian principles, can be pled, yet from the most wise and important considerations, the former connections, whatever they have been, shall remain as before, notwith standing of this coalescence. IX. THE ADOPTING ACTS OF 1 788. (1) The Synod having fully considered the draught of the form of government and discipline, did, on a review of the whole, and hereby do ratify and adopt the same, as now altered and amended, as the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church in America, and order the same to be considered and strictly observed as the rule of their proceedings, by all the inferior judicatories, belonging to the body. And they order that a correct copy be printed, and that the Westminster Confession of Faith, as now altered, be printed in full along with it, as making a part of the Constitution. RESOLVED, That the true intent and meaning of the above ratification by the Synod, is, that the Form of Gov ernment and Discipline and the Confession of Faith, as now ratified, is to continue to be our Constitution and the con fession of our faith and practice unalterable, unless two- thirds of the Presbyteries under the care of the General Assembly shall propose alterations or amendments, and such alterations or amendments shall be agreed to and enacted by the General Assembly. (2) The Synod having now revised and corrected the draught of a Directory for worship, did approve and ratify the same, and do hereby appoint the said Directory, as now amended, to be the Directory for the worship of God in the Presbyterian Church in the United States of Amer- THE ADOPTING ACT, 1788. 349 ica. They also took into consideration the Westminster Larger and Shorter Catechisms, and having made a small amendment of the Larger, did approve, and do hereby ap prove and ratify the said Catechisms, as now agreed on, as the Catechisms of the Presbyterian Church in the said United States. And the Synod order, that the said Direc tory and Catechisms be printed and bound up in the same volume with the Confession of Faith and the Form of Government and Discipline, and that the whole be con sidered as the standard of our doctrine, government, dis cipline, and worship, agreeably to the resolutions of the Synod at their present sessions. ORDERED, That Dr. Duffield, Mr. Armstrong and Mr. Green, be a committee to superintend the printing and publishing the above said Confession of Faith and Cate chisms, with the Form of Government and Discipline, and the Directory for the Worship of God, as now adopted and ratified by the Synod, as the Constitution of the Presby terian Church in the United States of America, and that they divide the several parts into chapters and sections properly numbered. [A different and somewhat fuller version of the two first paragraphs of the Adopting Act was found by Judge Drake, in 1870, in a pamphlet entitled " Acts and Pro ceedings of the Synod of New York and Philadelphia, A.D. 1787 and 1788 " (Philadelphia, 1788), viz. : "The Synod took into consideration the Draught of the Form of Government and Discipline of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America — And having gone through the same, did, on a review of the whole, ratify and adopt the said Form of Government and Discipline, as now altered and amended, as the Constitution of the Gov ernment and Discipline of the Presbyterian Church in America. And recommend to all their inferior judicatures, strictly to observe the rules laid down therein, in all eccle siastical proceedings. And they order, that a correct copy be printed ; and that the Westminster Confession of Faith, 3SO APPENDIX. as now altered, be printed in full along with it, as making part of the Constitution. " Resolved that the true meaning of the above ratification by the Synod, is, that the Form of Government and Disci pline, and Confession of Faith, as now ratified, is to continue to be our Constitution, and the Confession of our Faith and Practice, unalterably ; unless two thirds of the Presby teries, under the care of the General Assembly, shall pro pose alterations or amendments ; and such alterations and amendments shall be agreed to, and enacted by the Gen eral Assembly."] X. THE DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES OF 1 788. The Presbyterian Church in the United States of Amer ica, in presenting to the Christian public the system of union and the form of government and discipline which they have adopted, have thought proper to state, by way of introduction, a few of the general principles by which they have been governed in the formation of the plan. This, it is hoped, will, in some measure, prevent those rash misconstructions and uncandid reflections which usually proceed from an imperfect view of any subject, as well as make the several parts of the system plain and the whole perspicuous and fully understood. They are unanimously of opinion : I. That " God alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men, which are in any thing contrary to his word, or beside it in matters of faith or worship": therefore they consider the right of private judgment, in all matters that respect religion, as universal and unalienable; they do not even wish to see any religious constitution aided by the civil power, further than may be necessary for protection and security, and, at the same time, be equal and common to all others. II. That, in perfect consistency with the above prin ciple of common right, every Christian church, or union, DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES, 1788. 351 or association of particular churches, is entitled to declare the terms of admission into its communion, and the qualifi cations of its ministers and members, as well as the whole system of its internal government which Christ hath ap pointed ; that in the exercise of this right, they may, not withstanding, err in making the terms of communion either too lax or too narrow ; yet even in this case they do not infringe upon the liberty or the rights of others, but only make an improper use of their own. III. That our blessed Saviour, for the edification of the visible Church, which is his body, hath appointed officers, not only to preach the Gospel and administer tlte sacra ments, but also to exercise discipline for the preservation both of truth and duty ; and that it is incumbent upon these officers and upon the whole Church in whose names they act, to censure or cast out the erroneous and scandal ous ; observing in all cases the rules contained in the word of God. IV. That truth is in order to goodness, and the great touchstone of truth, its tendency to promote holiness ; according to our Saviour's rule, " by their fruits ye shall know them." And that no opinion can be either more pernicious or absurd than that which brings truth and falsehood upon a level, and represents it as of no conse quence what a man's opinions are. On the contrary, they are persuaded that there is an inseparable connection be tween faith and practice, truth and duty. Otherwise it would be of no-consequence either to discover truth or to embrace it. V. That while, under the conviction of the above prin ciple, they think it necessary to make effectual provisions that all who are admitted as teachers be sound in the faith, they also believe that there are truths and forms with re spect to which men of good characters and principles may differ. And, in all these, they think it the duty, both of private Christians and societies, to exercise mutual for bearance toward each other. VI. That though the character, qualifications and 352 APPENDIX. * authority, of church officers are laid down in the Holy Scriptures, as well as the proper method of their investi ture and institution, yet the election of the persons to the exercise of this authority, in any particular society, is in that society. VII. That all church-power, whether exercised by the body in general, or in the way of representation by dele gated authority, is only ministerial and declarative : that is to say, that the Holy Scriptures are the only rule of faith and manners; that no church judicatory ought to pretend to make laws to bind the conscience in virtue of their own authority, and that all their decisions should be founded upon the revealed will of God. Now, though it will easily be admitted that all synods and councils may err, through the frailty inseparable from humanity, yet there is much greater danger from the usurped claim of making laws than from the right of judging upon laws already made and common to all who profess the Gospel, although this right, as necessity requires in the present state, be lodged with fallible man. VIII. Lastly, That if the preceding scriptural and ra tional principles be steadfastly adhered to, the vigor and strictness of its discipline will contribute' to the glory and happiness of any Church. Since ecclesiastical discipline must be purely moral or spiritual in its object, and not at tended with any civil effects, it can derive no force what ever, but from its own justice, the approbation of an impartial public, and the countenance and,blessing of the Great Head of the Church Universal. XL THE TERMS OF SUBSCRIPTION REQUIRED OF CAN DIDATES FOR ORDINATION IN THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH SINCE 1 788. 1. Do you believe the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be the word of God, the only infallible rule of faith and practice ? THE PLAN OF UNION, 1801. 353 2. Do you sincerely receive and adopt the Confession of Faith of this Church as containing the system of doc trine taught in the Holy Scriptures? 3. Do you approve of the government and discipline of the Presbyterian Church in these United States? 4. Do you promise subjection to your brethren in the Lord? 5. Have you been induced, as far as you know your own heart, to seek the office of the holy ministry from love to God, and a sincere desire to promote his glory in the gospel of his Son? 6. Do you promise to be zealous and faithful in main taining the truths of the gospel and the purity and peace of the Church, whatever persecution or opposition may arise unto you on that account? 7. Do you engage to be faithful and diligent in the exercise of all private and personal duties which become you as a Christian and a minister of the gospel, as well as in all relative duties and the public duties of your office, endeavoring to adorn the profession of the gospel by your conversation, and walking with exemplary piety be fore the flock over which God shall make you overseer? 8. Are you now willing to take the charge of this con gregation, agreeably to your declaration at accepting their call? And do you promise to discharge the duties of a pastor to them as God shall give you strength ? XII. THE PLAN OF UNION OF 180I. Regulations adopted by the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America, and by the General As sociation of the State of Connecticut with a viewto pre vent alienation and promote union and harmony, in those new settlements which are composed of inhabitants from those bodies. 1st. It is strictly enjoined on all their missionaries to the new settlements, to endeavor by all proper means, to 354 APPENDIX. promote mutual forbearance and accommodation, between those inhabitants of the new settlements who hold the Presbyterian, and those who hold the Congregational form of Church government. 2d. If in the new settlements, any Church of the Con gregational order, shall settle a minister of the Presbyte rian order, that Church may, if they choose, still conduct their discipline according to Congregational principles, set tling their difficulties among themselves, or by a council mutually agreed upon for that purpose. But if any diffi culty shall exist between the minister and the Church or any member of it, it shall be referred to the Presbytery to which the minister shall belong, provided both parties agree to it ; if not, to a council consisting of an equal number of Presbyterians and Congregationalists, agreed upon by both parties. 3d. If a Presbyterian Church shall settle a minister of Congregational principles, that Church may still conduct their discipline according to Presbyterian principles; ex cepting that if a difficulty arise between him and his Church, or any member of it, the cause shall be tried by the Association to which the said minister shall belong, provided both parties agree to it; otherwise by a council, one half Congregationalists and the other half Presbyte rians, mutually agreed on by the parties. 4th. If any congregation consist partly of those who hold the Congregational form of discipline, and partly of those who hold the Presbyterian form, we recommend to both parties, that this be no obstruction to their uniting in one church and settling a minister ; and that, in this case, the Church choose a standing committee from the com municants of said church, whose business it shall be, to call to account every member of the church, who shall conduct himself inconsistently with the laws of Christian ity, and to give judgment on such conduct ; and if the person condemned by their judgment be a Presbyterian, he shall have liberty to appeal to the Presbytery ; if a Congregationalist, he shall have liberty to appeal to the THE EXSCINDING ACTS, 1837. 355 body of the male communicants of the church; in the former case, the determination of the Presbytery shall be final, unless the Church consent to a further appeal to the Synod, or to the General Assembly ; and in the latter case, if the party condemned shall wish for a trial by a mutual council, the cause shall be referred to such council. And provided the said standing committee of any church shall depute one of themselves to attend the Presbytery, he may have the same right to sit and act in the Presbytery, as a ruling elder of the Presbyterian Church. On motion, RESOLVED, That an attested copy of the above Plan be made by the stated clerk, and put into the hands of the delegates of this Assembly to the General Association, to be by them laid before that body for their consideration ; and that if it should be approved by them, it go into immediate operation. XIII. THE EXSCINDING ACTS OF 1 83 7. (a) Resolutions as to Relations existing between the Pres byterian and Congregational Churches. 1. "That between these two branches of the American Church, there ought, in the judgment of this Assembly, to be maintained sentiments of mutual respect and esteem, and for that purpose no reasonable efforts should be omitted to preserve a perfectly good understanding be tween these branches of the Church of Christ. 2. " That it is expedient to continue the plan of friendly intercourse between this Church and the Congregational Churches of New England, as it now exists. 3. " But as the ' Plan of Union ' adopted for the new settlements, in 1801, was originally an unconstitutional act on the part of that Assembly — these important stand ing rules having never been submitted to the Presbyteries — and as they were totally destitute of authority as pro ceeding from the General Association of Connecticut, which 356 APPENDIX. is invested with no power to legislate in such cases, and especially to enact laws to regulate churches not within her limits; and as much confusion and irregularity have arisen from this unnatural and unconstitutional system of union, therefore, it is resolved, that the Act of the Assem bly of 1 80 1, entitled a ' Plan of Union,' be, and the same is hereby abrogated." (b) Excision of the Plan-of- Union Synods. " Resolved, That by the operation of the abrogation of the Plan of Union of 1801, the Synod of the Western Reserve is, and is hereby declared to be, no longer a part of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America." "(1) Resolved, That in consequence of the abrogation by this Assembly of the Plan of Union of 1801, between it and the General Association of Connecticut, as utterly unconstitutional, and therefore null and void from the beginning, the Synods of Utica, Geneva, and Genesee, which were formed and attached to this body under and in execution of said ' Plan of Union,' be, and are hereby declared to be out of the ecclesiastical connection of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, and that they are not in form and in fact an integral portion of said Church. " (2) That the solicitude of this Assembly on the whole subject, and its urgency for the immediate decision of it, are greatly increased by reason of the gross disorders which are ascertained to have prevailed in those Synods, (as well as that of the Western Reserve, against which a declarative resolution, similar to the first of these, has been passed during our present sessions,) it being made clear to us, that even the Plan of Union itself was never consistently carried into effect by those professing to act under it. THE AUBURN DECLARATION, 1837. i,tf " (3) That the General Assembly has no intention, by these resolutions, or by that passed in the case of the Synod of the Western Reserve, to affect in any way the ministerial standing of any members of either of said Synods; nor to disturb the pastoral relation in any Church ; nor to interfere with the duties or relations of private Christians in their respective congregations; but only to declare and determine, according to the truth and necessity of the case, and by virtue of the full authority existing in it for that purpose, the relation of all said Synods, and all their constituent parts to this body, and to the Presbyterian Church in the United States. " (4) That inasmuch as there are reported to be several churches and ministers, if not one or two Presbyteries, now in connection with one or more of said Synods, which are strictly Presbyterian in doctrine and order, be it, there fore, further resolved that all such churches and ministers as wish to unite with us, are hereby directed to apply for admission into those Presbyteries belonging to our connec tion which are most convenient to their respective loca tions; and that any such Presbytery as aforesaid, being strictly Presbyterian in doctrine and order, and now in connection with either of said Synods, as may desire to unite with us, are hereby directed to make application, with a full statement of their cases, to the next General Assembly, which will take proper order thereon." XIV. THE AUBURN DECLARATION OF 1 83 7, STATING THE " TRUE DOCTRINES " OF THE NEW-SCHOOL MEN OVER AGAINST THE " ERRORS " CHARGED ON THEM IN THE OLD-SCHOOL MEMORIAL OF THAT YEAR. FIRST ERROR. "That God would have prevented the existence of sin in our world, but was not able, with out destroying the moral agency of man; or, that for aught that appears in the Bible to the contrary, sin is in cidental to any wise moral system." 358 APPENDIX. TRUE DOCTRINE. God permitted the introduction of sin, not because he was unable to prevent it, consistently with the moral freedom of his creatures, but for wise and benevolent reasons which he has not revealed. SECOND ERROR. "That election to eternal life is founded on a foresight of faith and obedience." TRUE DOCTRINE. Election to eternal life is not founded on a foresight of faith and obedience, but is a sovereign act of God's mercy, whereby, according to the counsel of his own will, he has chosen some to salvation ; " yet so as thereby neither is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of secpnd causes taken away, but rather established;" nor does this gracious purpose ever take effect independently of faith and a holy life. THIRD ERROR. "That we have no more to do with the first sin of Adam than with the sins of any other parent." TRUE DOCTRINE. By a divine constitution, Adam was so the head and representative of the race, that, as a consequence of his transgression, all mankind become morally corrupt, and liable to death, temporal and eternal. FOURTH ERROR. " That infants come into the world as free from moral defilement as was Adam when he was created." TRUE DOCTRINE. Adam was created in the image of God, endowed with knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness. Infants come into the world, not only destitute of these, but with a nature inclined to evil and only evil. FIFTH ERROR. " That infants sustain the same re lation to the moral government of God, in this world, as brute animals, and that their sufferings and death are to be accounted for on the same principles as those of brutes, and not by any means to be considered as penal." TRUE DOCTRINE. Brute animals sustain no such relation to the moral government of God as does the THE AUBURN DECLARATION, 1837. 359 human family. Infants are a part of the human family ; and their sufferings and death are to be accounted for on the ground of their being involved in the general moral ruin of the race induced by the apostacy. SIXTH ERROR. " That there is no other original sin than the fact, that all the posterity of Adam, though by nature innocent, will always begin to sin when they begin to exercise moral agency ; that original sin does not in clude a sinful bias of the human mind, and a just exposure to penal suffering ; and that there is no evidence in Script ure, that infants, in order to salvation, do need redemp tion by the blood of Christ, and regeneration by the Holy Ghost." TRUE DOCTRINE. Original sin is a natural bias to evil, resulting from the first apostacy, leading invariably and certainly to actual transgression. And all infants, as well as adults, in order to be saved, need redemption by the blood of Christ, and regeneration by the Holy Ghost. SEVENTH ERROR. " That the doctrine of imputa tion, whether of the guilt of Adam's sin, or of the right eousness of Christ, has no foundation in the Word of God, and is both unjust and absurd." TRUE DOCTRINE. The sin of Adam is not imputed to his posterity in the sense of a literal transfer of per sonal qualities, acts, and demerit ; but by reason of the sin of Adam, in his peculiar relation, the race are treated as if they had sinned. Nor is the righteousness of Christ imputed to his people in the sense of a literal transfer of personal qualities, acts, and merit ; but by reason of his righteousness, in his peculiar relation, they are treated as if they were righteous. EIGHTH- ERROR. " That the sufferings and death of Christ were not truly vicarious and penal, but symbolical, governmental, and instructive only." TRUE DOCTRINE. The sufferings and death of Christ were not symbolical, governmental, and instructive only, 360 APPENDIX. but were truly vicarious, i.e. a substitute for the punish ment due to transgressors. And while Christ did not suffer the literal penalty of the law, involving remorse of conscience and the pains of hell, he did offer a sacrifice, which infinite wisdom saw to be a full equivalent. And by virtue of this atonement, overtures of mercy are sin cerely made to the race, and salvation secured to all who believe. NINTH ERROR. " That the impenitent sinner is by nature, and independently of the renewing influence or almighty energy of the Holy Spirit, in full possession of all the ability necessary to a full compliance with all the commands of God." TRUE DOCTRINE. While sinners have all the fac ulties necessary to a perfect moral agency and a just ac countability, such is their love of sin and opposition to God and his law, that, independently of the renewing in fluence or almighty energy of the Holy Spirit, they never will comply with the commands of God. TENTH ERROR. " That Christ does not intercede for the elect until after their regeneration." TRUE DOCTRINE. The intercession of Christ for the elect is previous as well as subsequent to their regenera tion, as appears from the following Scripture, viz. " I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me, for they are thine. Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word." ELEVENTH ERROR. " That saving faith is not an effect of the operations of the Holy Spirit, but a mere rational belief of the truth or assent to the word of God." TRUE- DOCTRINE. Saving faith is an intelligent and cOrdial assent to the testimony of God concerning his Son, implying reliance on Christ alone for pardon and eternal life ; and in all cases it is an effect of the special operations of the Holy Spirit.. THE AUBURN DECLARATION, 1837. 36 1 TWELFTH ERROR. " That regeneration is the act of the sinner himself, and that it consists in change of his governing purpose, which he himself must produce, and which is the result, not of any direct influence of the Holy Spirit on the heart, but chiefly of a persuasive exhibition of the truth, analogous to the influence which one man exerts over the mind of another; or that regeneration is not an instantaneous act, but a progressive work." TRUE DOCTRINE. Regeneration is a radical change of heart, produced by the special operations of the Holy Spirit, " determining the sinner to that which is good," and is in all cases instantaneous. THIRTEENTH ERROR. "That God has done all that he can do for the salvation of all men, and that man himself must do the rest." TRUE DOCTRINE. While repentance for sin and faith in Christ are indispensable to salvation, all who are saved are indebted from first to last to the grace and Spirit of God. And the reason that God does not save all, is not that he wants the power to do it, but that in his wisdom he does not see fit to exert that power further than he actually does. FOURTEENTH ERROR. "That God cannot exert such influence on the minds of men, as shall make it cer tain that they will choose and act in a particular manner, without impairing their moral agency." TRUE DOCTRINE. While the liberty of the will is not impaired, nor the established connexion betwixt means and end broken by any action of God on the mind, he can influence it according to his pleasure, and does effectually determine it to good in all cases of true conversion. FIFTEENTH ERROR. "That the righteousness of Christ is not the sole ground of the sinner's acceptance with God ; and that in no sense does the righteousness of Christ become ours." TRUE DOCTRINE. All believers are justified, not on 362 APPENDIX. the ground of personal merit, but solely on the ground of the obedience and death, or, in other words, the righteous ness of Christ. And while that righteousness does not become theirs, in the sense of a literal transfer of personal qualities and merit; yet, from respect to it, God can and does treat them as if they were righteous. SIXTEENTH ERROR. " That the reason why some differ from others in regard to their reception of the Gos pel is, that they make themselves to differ." TRUE DOCTRINE. While all such as reject the Gos pel of Christ do it, not by coercion but freely — and all who embrace it do it, not by coercion but freely^ — the reason why some differ from others is, that God has made them to differ. XV. DELIVERANCES ON SLAVERY. (1) The Synod of New York and Philadelphia in 1787. The Synod of New York and Philadelphia do highly approve of the general principles in favour of universal liberty, that prevail in America, and the interest which many of the states have taken in promoting the abolition of slavery ; yet, inasmuch as men introduced from a servile state to a participation of all the privileges of civil society, without a proper education, and without previous habits of industry, may be, in many respects, dangerous to the community, therefore they earnestly recommend it to all the members belonging to their communion, to give those persons who are at present held in servitude, such good education as to prepare them for the better enjoyment of freedom; and they moreover recommend that masters, wherever they find servants disposed to make a just im provement of the privilege, would give them a peculium, or grant them sufficient time and sufficient means of pro curing their own liberty at a moderate rate, that there by they may be brought into society with those habits of DELIVERANCES ON SLAVERY, 1811. 363 industry that may render them useful citizens; and, fin ally, they recommend it to all their people to use the most prudent measures, consistent with the interest and the state of civil society, in the counties where they live, to procure eventually the final abolition of slavery in America. (2) The Reformed Presbytery in 1800. [This I have not been able to procure, but its terms made the abandonment of slave-holding a prerequisite to church communion.] (3) The Associate Synod in 181 1. 1. That it is a moral evil to hold negroes or their chil dren in perpetual slavery ; or to claim the right of buying and selling, or bequeathing them as transferable property. 2. That in those States where the liberation of slaves is rendered impracticable by the' existing laws, it is the duty of the holders of slaves to treat them with as much justice as if they were liberated ; to give them suitable food and clothing ; to have them taught to read, and in structed in the principles of religion ; and when their ser vices may justly deserve it, to give them additional com pensation. 3. That those slave-holders who refuse to renounce the above claim and to treat their slaves in the manner now specified, are unworthy of being admitted into or retained in the fellowship of the Church of Christ. . . . 5. That it is the special duty of sessions to see that the above regulations be faithfully acted upon. That it is lawful for persons in our communion to purchase negroes from those who- are holding them in absolute and perpetual slavery, with a view to retain them in their service until they are recompensed for the money laid out in the purchase of said slaves, provided it be done with the consent of the negroes themselves, and that, in 364 APPENDIX. the meantime, they be treated according to the second resolution. But before they be acted upon by any session, care shall be taken in every congregation where the application of them is requisite, not only to have the people apprized, but instructed in the moral evil of slave-holding here con templated. (4) The General Assembly in 181 8. The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church hav ing taken into consideration the subject of SLAVERY, think proper to make known their sentiments upon it to the churches and people under their care. We consider the voluntary enslaving of one part of the human race by another, as a gross violation of the most precious and sacred rights of human nature; as utterly inconsistent with the law of God, which requires us to love our neighbour as ourselves ; and as totally irreconcil able with the spirit and principles of the Gospel of Christ, which enjoin that, " all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them." Slavery creates a paradox in the moral system — it exhibits rational, accountable, and immortal beings, in such circumstances as scarcely to leave them the power of moral action. It exhibits them as dependent on the will of others, whether they shall receive religious instruction ; whether they shall know and worship the true God ; whether they shall enjoy the ordinances of the Gospel ; whether they shall perform the duties and cherish the endearments of husbands and wives, parents and children, neighbours and friends; whether they shall preserve their chastity and purity, or regard the dictates of justice and humanity. Such are some of the consequences of Slavery, — consequences not imaginary — but which connect themselves with its very existence. The evils to which the slave is always ex posed, often take place in fact, and in their very worst degree and form; and where all of them do not take DELIVERANCES ON SLAVERY, 1818. 365 place, as we rejoice to say that in many instances, through the influence of the principles of humanity and religion on the minds of masters, they do not — still the slave is deprived of his natural right, degraded as a human being, and exposed to the danger of passing into the hands of a master who may inflict upon him all the hardships and injuries which inhumanity and avarice may suggest. From this view of the consequences resulting from the practice into which christian people have most inconsist ently fallen, of enslaving a portion of their brethren of mankind — for " God hath made of one blood all nations of men to dwell on the face of the earth " — it is manifestly the duty of all christians who enjoy the light of the pres ent day, when the inconsistency of slavery, both with the dictates of humanity and religion, has been demonstrated, and is generally seen and acknowledged, to use their honest, earnest, and unwearied endeavors, to correct the errors of former times, and as speedily as possible to efface this blot on our holy religion, and to obtain the complete abolition of slavery throughout Christendom, and if possi ble throughout the world. We rejoice that the church to which we belong com menced, as early as any other in this country, the good work of endeavouring to put an end to slavery, and that in the same work many of its members have ever since been, and now are, among the most active, vigorous, and efficient labourers. We do, indeed, tenderly sympathize with those portions of our church and our country, where the evil of slavery has been entailed upon them ; where a great, and the most virtuous part of the community abhor slavery, and wish its extermination, as sincerely as any others — but where the number of slaves, their ignorance, and their vicious habits generally, render an immediate and universal emancipation inconsistent, alike, with the safety and happiness of the master and the slave. With those who are thus circumstanced, we repeat that we ten derly sympathize. — At the same time, we earnestly ex hort them to continue, and, if possible, to increase their 366 APPENDIX. exertions to effect a total abolition of slavery. — We ex hort them to suffer no greater delay to take place in this most interesting concern, than a regard to the public wel fare truly and indispensably demands. As our country has inflicted a most grievous injury on the unhappy Africans, by bringing them into slavery, we cannot, indeed, urge that we should add a second injury to the first, by emancipating them in such manner as that they will be likely to destroy themselves or others. But we do think, that our country ought to be governed in this matter, by no other consideration than an honest and impartial regard to the happiness of the injured party ; uninfluenced by the expense or inconvenience which such a regard may involve. We therefore warn all who be long to our denomination of christians, against unduly ex tending this plea of necessity ; against making it a cover for the love and practice of slavery, or a pretence for not using efforts that are lawful and practicable, to extinguish the evil. And we, at the same time, exhort others to forbear harsh censures, and uncharitable reflections on their brethren, who unhappily live among slaves, whom they cannot im mediately set free; but who, at the same time, are really using all their influence, and all their endeavours, to bring them into a state of freedom, as soon as a door for it can be safely opened. Having thus expressed our views of slavery, and of the duty indispensably incumbent on all christians to labour for its complete extinction, we proceed to recommend — (and. we do it with all the earnestness and solemnity which this momentous subject demands) — a particular attention to the following points. I. We recommend to all our people to patronize and encourage the Society, lately formed, for colonizing in Africa, the land of their ancestors, the free people of colour in our country. We hope that much good may result from the plans and efforts of this Society. And while we exceedingly rejoice to have witnessed its origin and organ- DELIVERANCES ON SLAVERY, 1818. 367 ization among the holders of slaves, as giving an unequiv ocal pledge of their desire to deliver themselves and their country from the calamity of slavery ; we hope that those portions of the American Union, whose inhabitants are, by a gracious Providence, more favorably circumstanced, will cordially, and liberally, and earnestly co-operate with their brethren, in bringing about the great end contemplated. 2. We recommend to all the members of our religious denomination, not only to perrnit, but to facilitate and encourage the instruction of their slaves, in the principles and duties of the christian religion ; by granting them liberty to attend on the preaching of the gospel, when they have the opportunity ; by favouring the instruction of them in Sabbath Schools, wherever those Schools can be formed ; and by giving them all other proper advan tages for acquiring the knowledge of their duty both to God and man. We are perfectly satisfied, that as it is in cumbent on all christians to communicate religious instruc tion to those who are under their authority, so thai the doing of this in the case before us, so far from operating, as some have apprehended that it might, as an excitement tp__iasubordination and insurrection, would, on the con trary, operate as the most powerful means for the preven tion of those evils. 3. We enjoin it on all Church Sessions and Presbyte ries, under the care of this Assembly, to discountenance, and, as far as possible, to prevent, all cruelty of whatever kind in the treatment of slaves ; especially the cruelty of separating husband and wife, parents and children, and that which consists in selling slaves to those who will either themselves deprive these unhappy people of the blessings of the Gospel, or who will transport them to places where the Gospel is not proclaimed, or where it is forbidden to slaves to attend upon its institutions. — The manifest violation or disregard of the injunction here given, in its true spirit and intention, ought to be consid ered as just ground for the discipline and censures of the church. — And if it shall ever happen that a christian pro- 368 APPENDIX. fessor, in our communion, shall sell a slave who is also in communion and good standing with our church, contrary to his or her will, and inclination, it ought immediately to claim the particular attention of the proper church judica ture ; and unless there be such peculiar circumstances attending the case as can but seldom happen, it ought to be followed, without delay, by a suspension of the offender from all the privileges of the church, till he repent, and make all the reparation in his power, to the injured party. (5) The Associate Reformed Synod in 1830. RESOLVED, 1. That the religion of Christ Jesus re quires that involuntary slavery should be removed from the Church, as soon as an opportunity, in the providence of God, is offered to slave-owners for the liberation of their slaves. 2. That when there are no regulations of the State to prohibit it ; when provision can be made for the support of the freedmen ; when they can be placed in circumstances to support the rank, enjoy the rights and discharge the duties of freedmen, it shall be considered that such an opportunity is afforded in the providence of God. 3. That Synod will, as it hereby does, recommend it to all its members to aid in placing the slaves that are within the jurisdiction of this Synod in the possession of their rights as freedmen ; and that it be recommended to them especially to take up annual collections, to aid the funds of the American society for colonizing the free people of color of the United States., 4. That the practice of buying or selling of slaves for gain, by any member of this Church, be disapproved, and that slave-owners under the jurisdiction of this Synod, be, as they hereby are, forbidden all aggravations of the evils of slavery, by violating the ties of nature, in the separa tion of husband and wife, parents and children, or by cruel or unkind treatment ; and that they shall not only treat them well; but also instruct them in useful knowl- DELIVERANCES ON SLAVERY, 1845. 369 edge and the principles of the Christian religion, and in all respects treat them as enjoined upon masters towards their servants by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ. (6) The Synod' of Associate Church in 183 1. RESOLVED, 1. That as slavery is clearly condemned by the law of God, and has been long since judicially declared to be a moral evil by this Church, no member thereof shall, from and after this date, be allowed to hold a human being in the character or condition of a slave. 2. That this Synod do hereby order all its subordinate judicatories to proceed forthwith to carry into execution the intention of the foregoing resolution, by requiring those church members under their immediate inspection, who may be possessed of slaves, to relinquish their unjust claims, and release those whom they may have heretofore consid ered as their property. 3. That if any member or members of this Church, in order to evade this act, shall sell any of their slaves, or make a transfer of them, so as to retain the proceeds of their services, or the price of their sale, or in any other way evade the provisions of this act, they shall be subject to the censures of the Church. 4. Further, that where an individual is found, who has spent so much of his or her strength in the service of an other, as to be disqualified from providing for his or her own support, the master, in such a case, is to be held responsible for the comfortable maintenance of said ser vants. (7) The General Assembly (0. S.) in 1845. The question which is now unhappily agitating and dividing other branches of the church, and which is pressed upon the attention of the Assembly is, whether the holding of slaves is, under all circumstances, a heinous sin, calling for the discipline of the church. The church of Christ is a spiritual body, whose jurisdic- 37° APPENDIX. tion extends only to the religious faith, and moral conduct of her members. She cannot legislate where Christ has not legislated, nor make terms of membership which he has not made. The question, therefore, which this As sembly is called upon to decide, is this : Do the Scriptures teach that the holding of slaves, without regard to circum stances, is a sin, the renunciation of which should be made a condition of membership in the church of Christ. It is impossible to answer this question in the affirma tive, without contradicting some of the plainest declara tions of the word of God. That slavery existed in the days of Christ and his Apostles is an admitted fact. That they did not denounce the relation itself as sinful, as in consistent with Christianity ; that slaveholders were ad mitted to membership in the churches organized by the Apostles; that whilst they were required to treat their slaves with kindness, and as rational, accountable, immor tal beings, and if Christians, as brethren in the Lord, they were not commanded to emancipate them ; that slaves were required to be " obedient to their masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, with singleness of heart as unto Christ," are facts which meet the eye of every reader of the New Testament. This Assembly cannot, therefore, denounce the holding of slaves as neces sarily a heinous and scandalous sin, calculated to bring upon the Church the curse of God, without charging the Apostles of Christ with conniving at such sin, introducing into the Church such sinners, and thus bringing upon them the curse of the Almighty. In so saying, however, the Assembly are not to be understood as denying that there is evil connected with slavery. Much less do they approve those defective and oppressive laws by which, in some of the States, it is reg ulated. Nor would they by any means countenance the traffic in slaves for the sake of gain ; the separation of husbands and wives, parents and children, for the sake of "filthy lucre" or for the convenience of the master; or cruel treatment of slaves in any respect. Every Christian DELIVERANCES ON SLAVERY, 1845. 37 I and philanthropist certainly should seek by all peaceable and lawful means the repeal of unjust and oppressive laws, and the amendment of such as are defective, so as to protect the slaves from cruel treatment by wicked men, and secure to them the right to receive religious instruction. Nor is this Assembly to be understood as countenancing the idea that masters may regard their servants as mere property, and not as human beings, rational, accountable, immortal. The Scriptures prescribe not only the duties of servants, but of masters also, warning the latter to dis charge those duties, " knowing that their Master is in heaven, neither is there respect of persons with him." The Assembly intend simply to say, that since Christ and his inspired Apostles did not make the holding of slaves a bar to communion, we, as a court of Christ, have no authority to do so ; since they did not attempt to re move it from the Church by legislation, we have no au thority to legislate on the subject. We feel constrained, further, to say, that however desirable it may be to ameli orate the condition of the slaves in the Southern and Western States, or to remove slavery from our country, these objects we are fully persuaded can never be secured by ecclesiastical legislation. Much less can they be at tained by those indiscriminate denunciations against slave holders, without regard to their character or circumstances, which have, to so great an extent, characterized the move ments of modern abolitionists, which, so far from remov ing the evils complained of, tend only to perpetuate and aggravate them. The Apostles of Christ sought to ameliorate the condi tion of slaves, not by denouncing and excommunicating their masters, but by teaching both masters and slaves the glorious doctrines of the gospel, and enjoining upon each the discharge of their relative duties. Thus only can the church of Christ, as such, now improve the condition of the slaves in our country. As to the extent of the evils involved in slavery and the best methods of removing them, various opinions prevail, 372 APPENDIX. and neither Scriptures nor our constitution authorize this body to prescribe any particular course to be pursued by the churches under our care. The Assembly cannot but rejoice, however, to learn that the ministers and churches in the slave-holding States are awaking to a deeper sense of their obligation to extend to the slave population gen erally the means of grace, and many slave-holders not professedly religious favour this object. We earnestly exhort them to abound more and more in this good work. We would exhort every believing master to remember that his Master is also in heaven, and in view of all the circum stances in which he is placed, to act in the spirit of the golden rule : " Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even the same to them." In view of the above stated principles and facts — RESOLVED, ist. That the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States was originally organized, and has since continued the bond of union in the Church upon the conceded principle that the existence of domestic slavery, under the circumstances in which it is found in the southern portion of the country, is no bar to Christian communion. 2d. That the petitions that ask the Assembly to make the holding of slaves in itself a matter of discipline, do virtually require this judicatory to dissolve itself, and abandon the organization under which, by the Divine blessing, it has so long prospered. The tendency is evi dently to separate the northern from the southern portion of the Church ; a result which every good citizen must deplore as tending to the dissolution of the union of our beloved country, and which every enlightened Christian will oppose as bringing about a ruinous and unnecessary schism between brethren who maintain a common faith. (8) The General Assembly (N. S.) in 1850. We exceedingly deplore the working of the whole sys tem of slavery as it exists in our country and is inter- DELIVERANCES ON SLAVERY, 1853. .373 woven with the political institutions of the slave-holding States, as fraught with many and great evils to the civil, political, and moral interests of those regions where it exists. The holding of our fellow-men in the condition of slav ery, except in those cases where it is unavoidable, by the laws of the State, the obligations of guardianship, or the demands of humanity, is an offence in the proper import of that term, as used in the Book of Discipline, chap. i. sec. 3, and should be regarded and treated in the same manner as other offences. The sessions and presbyteries are, by the Constitution of our church, the courts of primary jurisdiction for the trial of offences. That, after this declaration of sentiment, the whole sub ject of slavery, as it exists in the church, be referred to the sessions and presbyteries, to take such action thereon as in their judgment the laws of Christianity require. (9) The General Assembly (N. S.) in 1853. 1. That this body reaffirm the doctrine of the 2d reso lution adopted by the Assembly in its action at Detroit in 1850. 2. That we do earnestly exhort and beseech all those who are happily free from any personal connection with the institution of slavery, to exercise patience and forbear ance toward their brethren less favoured in this respect than themselves, remembering the embarrassments of their position ; and to cherish for them that fraternal confidence and love which they the more need in consequence of the peculiar trials by which they are surrounded. 3. To correct misapprehensions which may exist in many Northern minds, and allay causeless irritation, by having the real facts in relation to this subject spread before the whole church, it is recommended earnestly to request the presbyteries in each of the slave-holding States to take such measures as may seem to them most expe- 374- APPENDIX. dient and proper, for laying before the next Assembly, in its sessions at Philadelphia, distinct and full statements touching the following points: — (i) The number of slave-holders in connection with the churches under their jurisdiction, and the number of slaves held by them. (2) The extent to which slaves are held by an unavoid able necessity " imposed by the laws of the States, the obligations of -guardianship, and the demands of human- ity." (3) Whether a practical regard, such as the word of God requires, is evinced by the Southern churches for the sacredness of the conjugal and parental relations as they exist among slaves ; whether baptism is duly administered to the children of slaves professing Christianity ; whether slaves are admitted to equal privileges and powers in the church courts ; and, in general, to what extent and in what manner provision is made for the religious well-being of the enslaved. XVI. DOCTRINAL BASIS OF THE UNION OF 1 858, FORM ING THE UNITED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. I. We declare, That God has not only in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments made a revelation of his will to man, as the only rule of faith and practice, but that these Scriptures, viewed as a revelation from God, are in every part the inspired word of God, and that this inspira tion extends to the language, as well as to the sentiments which they express. II. We declare, That our Lord Jesus Christ is not only true and Supreme God, being one in essence with the Father, but also the Son of God, in respect of his natural, necessary, and eternal relation to the Father. III. We declare, That God having created man in a state of perfect holiness, and in possession of a perfect ability to obey him in all things, did enter into a covenant BASIS OF UNION, 1858. 375- with him, in which covenant Adam was the representative of all his natural posterity, so that in him they were to stand or fall, as he stood or fell. IV. We declare, That our first parents did, by their breach of covenant with God, subject themselves to his eternal wrath, and bring themselves into such a state of depravity as to be wholly inclined to sin, and altogether unable, by their own power, to perform a single act of acceptable obedience to God; and that all their natural posterity, in virtue of their representation in the covenant, are born into the world in the same state of guilt, deprav ity, and inability, and in this state will continue until de livered therefrom by the grace and righteousness of the Lord Jesus Christ. V. We declare, That our Lord Jesus Christ did, by the appointment of the Father, and by his own gracious and voluntary act, place himself in the room of a definite num ber, who were chosen in him before the foundation of the world ; so that he was their true and proper legal surety ; and as such, did, in their behalf, satisfy the justice of God, and answer all the demands which the law had against them, and thereby infallibly obtain for them eternal re demption. VI. We declare, That in justification there is an impu tation to the believer of that righteousness, or satisfaction and obedience, which the Lord Jesus Christ, as the surety of his people, rendered to the law ; and that it is only on the ground of this imputed righteousness that his sins are pardoned, and his person accepted in the sight of God. VII. We declare, That the gospel, taken in its strict and proper sense, as distinguished from the law, is a revelation of grace to sinners as such ; and that it contains a free and unconditional offer and grant of salvation through Christ, to all who hear it, whatever may be their character or con dition. VIII. We declare, That in true and saving faith there is not merely an assent of the mind to the proposition that the Lord Jesus Christ is the Saviour of sinners; but also 376 APPENDIX. a cordial reception and appropriation of him by the sinner as his Saviour, with an accompanying persuasion or assur ance corresponding to the degree or strength of his faith, that he shall be saved by him ; which appropriation and persuasion are founded, solely, upon the free, and uncon ditional, and unlimited offer of Christ and salvation in him, which God makes in the gospel to sinners of mankind. IX. We declare, That the repentance which is a saving grace, is one of the fruits of a justifying faith; and, of course, cannot be regarded as a ground of the sinner's pardon, or as necessary to qualify him for coming to Christ. X. We declare, That although the moral law is of per petual obligation, and consequently does and ever will bind the believer as a rule of life, yet as a covenant, he is, by his justification through Christ, completely and forever set free from it, both, as to its commanding and condemn ing power, and consequently not required to yield obedi ence to it as a condition of life and salvation. XI. We declare, That the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Trinity, does, by a direct operation accompanying the Word, so act upon the soul as to quicken, regenerate, and sanctify it ; and that without this direct operation, the soul would have no ability to perceive, in a saving manner, the truths of God's word, or yield to the motives which it presents. XII. We declare, That our Lord Jesus Christ, besides the dominion which belongs to him as God, has, as our God-man Mediator, a twofold dominion, with which he has been invested by the Father as the reward of his suf ferings. These are a dominion over the Church, of which he is the living Head and Lawgiver, and the source of all that Divine influence and authority by which she is sus tained and governed ; and also a dominion over all created persons and things, which is exercised by him in subserv iency to the manifestations of God's glory in the system of redemption, and the interests of his Church. XIII. We declare, That the law of God, as wricten upon BASIS OF UNION, 1858. 377 the heart of man, and as set forth in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, is supreme in its authority and obligations ; and that where the commands of the Church or State are in conflict with the commands of this law, we are to obey God rather than man. XIV. We declare, That slaveholding — that is, the hold ing of unoffending human beings in involuntary bondage, and considering and treating them as property, and subject to be bought and sold — is a violation of the law of God, and contrary both to the letter and spirit of Christianity. XV. We declare, That all associations, whether formed for political or benevolent purposes, which impose upon their members an oath of secrecy, or an obligation to obey a code of unknown laws, are inconsistent with the genius and spirit of Christianity, and Church members ought not to have fellowship with such associations. XVI. We declare, That the Church should not extend communion, in sealing ordinances, to those who refuse adherence to her profession, or subjection to her govern ment and discipline, or who refuse to forsake a communion which is inconsistent with the profession that she makes ; nor should communion in any ordinance of worship be held under such circumstances as would be inconsistent with the keeping of these ordinances pure and entire, or so as to give countenance to any corruption of the doc trines and institutions of Christ. XVII. We declare, That public social covenanting is a moral duty, the observance of which is not required at stated times, but on extraordinary occasions, as the provi dence of God and the circumstances of the Church may indicate. It is seasonable in times of great danger to the Church — in times of exposure to backsliding — or in times of reformation, when the Church is returning to God from a state of backsliding. When the Church has entered into such covenant transactions, they continue to bind poster ity faithfully to adhere to and prosecute the grand object for which such engagements have been entered into. XVIII. We declare, That it is the will of God that the 378 APPENDIX. songs contained in the Book of Psalms be sung in his wor ship, both public and private, to the end of the world ; and in singing God's praise, these songs should be employed to the exclusion of the devotional compositions of unin spired men. XVII. ADOPTING ACT OF THE UNION OF 1 858. WHEREAS, it is understood that the Testimony sub mitted to the General Synod of the Associate Reformed Church by the Associate Synod, was proposed and ac cepted as a term of communion, on the adoption of which the union of the two Churches was to be consummated ; and, whereas, it is agreed between the two Churches that the forbearance in love, which is required by the law of God, will be exercised towards any brethren who may not be able fully to subscribe the Standards of the united Church, while they do not determinedly oppose them, but follow the things which make for peace, and things where with one may edify another: — 1. Resolved, That these Churches, when united, shall be called the " United Presbyterian Church of North America." ' 2. Resolved, That the respective Presbyteries of these Churches shall remain as at present constituted until other wise ordered, as convenience shall suggest. 3. Resolved, That the Supreme Court of this Church shall be a General Assembly, to meet annually, to be composed of delegates from the respective Presbyteries, the number of delegates to be according to the proportion of the members constituting each Presbytery, as now fixed by the rules of the Associate Reformed Church, until a change shall be found expedient. 4. Resolved, That there shall be subordinate Synods, and these shall be the same as those now existing in the Associate Reformed Church, to which Synods the differ ent Presbyteries in the Associate Church shall attach themselves for the present according to their location, THE SPRING RESOLUTIONS, 1861. 379", provided that the separate Synods and Presbyteries of the said Associate Reformed and Associate Churches shall also continue as at present constituted until otherwise directed. 5. Resolved, That the General Assembly and subordi nate Synods shall be regulated according to the rules pres ently in force in the Associate Reformed Church, until the united Church shall see fit to alter such rules. 6. Resolved, That the different Boards and Institutions of the respective Churches shall not be affected by this union, but shall have the control of their funds, and retain all their corporate, or other rights and privileges, until the ' interests of the Church shall require a change. 7. Resolved, That these and other regulations found necessary, being agreed upon by the respective Synods at the present meeting in the city of Allegheny, the two Synods shall meet at such a place as shall mutually be agreed upon, and be constituted with prayer by the Senior Moderator, after which a Moderator and Clerk shall be chosen by the united Church. XVIII. THE ACTION OF THE OLD-SCHOOL ASSEMBLY ON LOYALTY, IN 1 86 1. (a) The Gardiner Spring Resolutions. Gratefully acknowledging the distinguished bounty and care of Almighty God toward this favored land, and also recognizing our obligations to submit to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake, this General Assembly adopt the following resolutions : Resolved, 1. That in view of the present agitated and unhappy condition of this country, the first day of July next be hereby set apart as a day of prayer throughout our bounds ; and that on that day ministers and people are called on humbly to confess and bewail our national sins; to offer our thanks to the Father of light for his abundant 380 APPENDIX. and undeserved goodness toward us as a nation; to seek his guidance and blessing upon our rulers, and their coun sels, as well as on the Congress of the United States about to assemble ; and to implore him, in the name of Jesus Christ, the Great High Priest of the Christian profession, to turn away his anger from us, and speedily restore to us the blessings of an honorable peace. Resolved, 2. That this General Assembly, in the spirit of that Christian patriotism which the Scriptures enjoin, and which has always characterized this Church, do hereby acknowledge and declare our obligation to promote and perpetuate, so far as in us lies, the integrity of these United States, and to strengthen, uphold, and encourage the Federal Government in the exercise of all its functions under our noble Constitution; and to this Constitution, in all its provisions, requirements, and principles, we profess our unabated loyalty. And to avoid all misconception, the Assembly declare that by the terms " Federal Government," as here used, is not meant any particular administration, or the peculiar opinions of any particular party, but that central administra tion, which being at any time inaugurated according to the forms prescribed in the Constitution of the United States, is the visible representative of our national existence. (b) Protest of Dr. Hodge and Others. We, the undersigned, respectfully protest against the action of the General Assembly in adopting the minority report of the Committee on the State of the Country. We make this protest, not because we do not acknowl edge loyalty to our country to be a moral and religious duty, according to the word of God, which requires us to be subject to the powers that be ; nor because we deny the right of the Assembly to enjoin that, and all other like duties, on the ministers and churches under its care ; but because we deny the right of the General Assembly to decide the political question, to what government the THE SPRING RESOLUTIONS, 1861. 38 1 allegiance of Presbyterians as citizens is due, and its right to make that decision a condition of membership in our Church. That the paper adopted by the Assembly does decide the political question just stated, is in our judgment unde niable. It asserts not only the loyalty of this body to the Constitution and the Union, but it promises in the name of all the churches and ministers whom it represents, to do all that in them lies to " strengthen, uphold, and encour age the Federal Government." It is, however, a notori ous fact, that many of our ministers and members con scientiously believe that the allegiance of the citizens of this country is primarily due to the States to which they respectively belong; and, therefore, that when any State renounces its connection with the United States, and its allegiance to the Constitution, the citizens of that State are bound by the laws of God to continue loyal to their State, and obedient to its laws. The paper adopted by the Gen eral Assembly virtually declares, on the other hand, that the allegiance of the citizens is due to the United States; anything in the Constitution, or ordinances, or laws of the several States, to the contrary notwithstanding. It is not the loyalty of the members constituting this Assembly, nor of our churches and ministers in any one portion of our country, that is thus asserted, but the loyalty of the whole Presbyterian Church, North and South, East and West. Allegiance to the Federal Government is recognized or declared to be the duty of all the churches and ministers represented in this body. In adopting this paper, there fore, the Assembly does decide the great political question which agitates and divides the country. The question is whether the allegiance of our citizens is primarily to the State or to the Union. However clear our own convic tions of the correctness of this decision may be, or however ¦deeply we may be impressed with its importance, yet it is not a question which this Assembly has the right to decide. A man may conscientiously believe that he owes alle- 382 APPENDIX. giance to one government or another, and yet possess ai. the qualifications which the word of God or the standards of the Church authorize us to demand of in our members or ministers. As this General Assembly represents the whole Church, the acts and deliverances of this Assembly become the acts and deliverances of the Church. It is this consideration that gives to the action of this Assembly in this case all its importance, either in our own view or in the view of others. It is the allegiance of the Old-school Presbyterian Church to the Constitution, the Union, and the Federal Government, which this paper is intended to profess and proclaim. It does, therefore, of necessity, decide the political question which agitates the country. It pro nounces or assumes a particular interpretation of the Con stitution. This is a matter beyond the jurisdiction of the Assembly. That the action of the Assembly in the premises does not only decide the political question referred to, but makes that decision a term of membership in the Church, is no less clear. It is not analogous to the recommen dation of a religious or benevolent institution, which our members may regard or not at pleasure; but it puts into the mouths of all represented in this body, a declaration of loyalty and allegiance to the Union and to the Federal Government. But such a declaration, made by our mem bers residing in what are called the seceding States, is treasonable. Presbyterians under the jurisdiction of those States, cannot, therefore, make that declaration. They are consequently forced to choose between allegiance to their States and allegiance to the Church. The General Assembly in thus deciding a political question, and in making that decision practically a condition of member ship to the Church, has, in our judgment, violated the Con stitution of the Church, and usurped the prerogative of its Divine Master. We protest loudly against the action of the Assembly, because it is a departure from all its previous actions. THE SPRING RESOLUTIONS, 1861. 383 The General Assembly has always acted on the princi ple that the Church has no right to make anything a. con dition of Christian or ministerial fellowship, which is not enjoined or required in the Scriptures and the Standards of the Church. We have, at one time, resisted the popular demand to make total abstinence from intoxicating liquors a term of membership. At another time, the holding of slaves. In firmly resisting these unscriptural demands, we have pre served the -integrity and unity of the Church, made it the great conservative body of truth, moderation, and liberty of conscience in our country. The Assembly have now descended from this high position, in making a political opinion, a particular theory of the Constitution, however correct and important that theory may be, the condition of membership in our body, and thus, we fear, endangered the unity of the Church. In the third place we protest, because we regard the action of the Assembly as altogether unnecessary and un called for. It was required neither to instruct nor excite our brethren in the Northern States. It was not needed as a vindication of the loyalty'of the North. Old-school Presbyterians everywhere out of the so- called seceding States, have openly avowed and conspicu ously displayed their allegiance to the Constitution and the Government, and that in many cases at great cost and peril. Nor was such action required by our duty to the country. We are fully persuaded that we best promote the interests of the country by preserving the integrity and unity of the Church. We regard this action of the Assembly, therefore, as a great national calamity, as well as the most disastrous to the interests of our Church which has marked its history. We protest, fourthly, because we regard the action of the Assembly as unjust and cruel in its bearing on our Southern brethren. It was, in our judgment, unfair to entertain and decide such a momentous question when the great majority of our Southern Presbyteries were, from 384 APPENDIX. necessity, unrepresented in this body. And it is, in our judgment, a violation of the law of love to adopt an act which must expose the Southern churches that remain in connection with our Church, to suspicion, to loss of prop erty, to personal danger, and which tends to destroy their usefulness in their appointed fields of labor. And finally we protest, because we believe the act of the Assembly will not only diminish the resources of the Church, but greatly weaken its power for good, and expose it to the danger of being carried away more and more from its true principles by a worldly or fanatical spirit. (c) The Answer to this and Other Protests, Adopted by the Assembly. The action of the General Assembly, in reference to which these Protests are offered, embraces two resolutions, against the former of which no objection is alleged. The whole stress of the protestation is directed upon the fol lowing sentence in the second Resolution : " Resolved, That this General Assembly, in the spirit of that Christian patriotism which the Scriptures enjoin, and which has always characterized this Church, do hereby acknowledge and declare our obligation to promote and perpetuate, so far as in us lies, the integrity of these United States, and to strengthen, uphold, and encourage the Federal Government in the exercise of all its functions under our noble Constitution; and to this Constitution, in all its provisions, requirements, and principles, we profess our unabated loyalty." The first and main ground of a protest against the adoption of this resolution, is, that the General Assembly has no right to decide purely political questions ; that the question whether the allegiance of American citizens is due -primarily and eminently to the State, or to the Union, is purely political, of the gravest character, dependent upon constitutional theories and interpretations, respecting which various opinions prevail in different sections of our coun- THE SPRING RESOLUTIONS, 1861. 385 try ; that the action of the Assembly virtually determines this vexed question, decides to what Government the alle giance of Presbyterians, as citizens, is due, and makes that decision a term of communion. That the action of the Assembly has political as well as moral bearings, is readily admitted. So had the decision of our Divine Master, when he said to the Pharisees and Herodians, " Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's," Mark xii. 1 7 ; a decision still binding upon all men, and underlying this very act of the Assembly. The payment of the required tax was both a moral and a political duty. " There are occasions," says the author of an able arti cle on " The State of the Country," in the January num ber of the Princeton Review, " there are occasions when political questions rise into the sphere of morals and re ligion; when the rule of political action is to be sought, not in considerations of State policy, but in the law of God. . . . When the question to be decided turns upon moral principles ; when reason, conscience, and the religious sentiment are to be addressed, it is the privilege and duty of all who have access in any way to the public ear, to en deavour to allay unholy feeling, and to bring truth to bear on the minds of their fellow-citizens." The General As sembly -heartily approve these principles, and doubt not that if ever there was an occasion when political questions rose into the sphere of morals and religion, the present cir cumstances of our beloved country are of that character. The protestants " deny the right of the General Assem bly to decide to what Government the allegiance of Presby terians, as citizens, is due." Strictly speaking, the Assem bly has made no such decision. They have said nothing respecting the allegiance of the subjects of any foreign power, or that of the members of our mission churches in India, China, or elsewhere, who may hold connection with our denomination. The action complained of relates solely to American Presbyterians, citizens of these United States. Even with regard to them, the Assembly has not de termined, as between conflicting governments, to which 386 APPENDIX. our allegiance is due. We are the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of Amer ica. Such is the distinctive name, ecclesiastical and legal, under which we have been chosen to be known by our sis ter churches and by the world. In the seventy-four years of our existence, Presbyterians have known but onesupreme government, one nationality, within our wide-spread ter ritory. We know no other now. History tells of none. The Federal Government acknowledges none. No nation on earth recognizes the existence of two independent sovereignties within these United States. What Divine Providence may intend for us hereafter — what curse of rival and hostile sovereignties within this broad heritage of our fathers — we presume not to determine. Do these protestants, who so anxiously avoid political entanglements, desire the General Assembly to anticipate the dread deci sion of impending battle, the action of our own Govern ment, the determination of foreign powers, and even the ultimate arbitration of Heaven? Would they have us recognize, as good Presbyterians, men whom our own Government, with the approval of Christendom, may soon execute as traitors? May not the highest Court of our Church, speaking as the interpreter of the holy law which says, "Ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience' sake," Rom. xiii. 5, warn- her com municants against " resisting the ordinance of God " ? Rom. xiii. 2. In the language of the learned Reviewer above cited, "Is disunion morally right? Does it not involve a breach of faith, and a violation of the oaths by which that faith was confirmed ? We believe, under exist ing circumstances, that it does, and therefore it is as dread ful a blow to the Church as it is to the State. If a crime at all, it is one the heinousness of which can only be im perfectly estimated." In the judgment of this Assembly, "this saying is true ;" and therefore the admission, on the part of the Assembly, that Presbyterians may take up arms against the Federal Government, or aid and comfort its enemies, and yet be THE SPRING RESOLUTIONS, 1861. 387 guiltless, would exhibit that " practical recognition of the right of secession," which, says the Reviewer, would " de stroy our national life." But we deny that this deliverance of the Assembly estab lishes any new term of communion. The terms of Chris tian fellowship are laid down in the word of God, and are embodied in our standards. It is competent to this Court to interpret and apply the doctrines of the word ; to warn men against prevailing sins ; and to urge the performance of neglected duties. We regard the action, against which these protests are levelled, simply as a faithful declaration, by the Assembly, of Christian duty toward those in author ity over us ; which adds nothing to the terms of communion already recognized. Surely the idea of the obligation of loyalty to our Federal Government is no new thing to Presbyterians. And this is a sufficient reply, also, to the second article of this Protest. Having established no new term of mem bership, this Assembly is not liable to the charge of hav ing departed from the old paths. A third ground of protest is the allegation that this action of the Assembly is uncalled for, and unnecessary. Yet, on the admission of these protestants themselves, it is " a notorious fact," that many of our ministers and members believe themselves absolved from all obligations of loyalty to our National Government — believe, in con tradiction to the Princeton Reviewer, that disunion is morally right; and some are already in arms to vindicate these opinions. What, when " a crime, the heinousness of which can only be imperfectly estimated " — " striking as dreadful a blow at the Church as at the State," is already committed ; when thousands of Presbyterians are likely to be seduced from their allegiance by the machinations of wicked men ; when our national prosperity is overclouded ; when every material interest is in jeopardy, and every spiritual energy paralyzed ; when armed rebellion joins issue with armed authority on battle-fields, where tens of thousands must perish; when it remains a question, 388 APPENDIX. whether our national life survives the conflict, or whether our sun sets in anarchy and blood — is it uncalled for, un necessary, for this Christian Assembly to renew, in the memories and hearts of a Christian people, respect for the majesty of law, and a sense of the obligation of loyalty? Let posterity decide between us. That this decision of the Assembly is unjust to a portion of our Church, not now fully represented in this body, is a fourth reason of protest. We need only reply that the roll of this Assembly shows delegates from Virginia, Ken tucky, Missouri, Tennessee, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas. All might have been as easily represented. Be sides, the action has no local or sectional character. The subject is of national relations, as well as of such pressing urgency, that to have waited for a full Southern represen tation, in a future Assembly, would have been to lose for ever the critical moment when action would be productive of good. As to the final ground of protest, it is enough to record our simple denial of the opinions expressed. We sincerely believe that this action of the General Assembly will in crease the power of the Church for good ; securing, as we humbly trust it will, the favour of her exalted Head, in behalf of those who testify for a suffering truth. XIX. ADDRESS OF THE SOUTHERN GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO ALL THE CHURCHES OF JESUS CHRIST, ADOPTED l86l. The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the Confederate States of America, to all the Churches of Jesus Christ throughout the earth, greeting : Grace, mercy, and peace be multiplied upon you : DEARLY BELOVED BRETHREN : It is probably known to you that the Presbyteries and Synods in the Confederate States, which were formerly in connection with the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in THE SOUTHERN ADDRESS, 1861. 389 the United States of America, have renounced the juris diction of that body ; and dissolved the ties which bound them ecclesiastically with their brethren of the North. This act of separation left them without any formal union among themselves. But as they were one in faith and order, and still adhered to their old standards, measures were promptly adopted for giving expression to their unity, by the organization of a Supreme Court, upon the model of the one whose authority they had just relin quished. Commissioners duly appointed, from all the Presbyteries -of these Confederate States, met accordingly, in the City of Augusta, on the fourth day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty one, and then and there proceeded to constitute the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the Confederate States of America. The Constitution of the Presbyterian Church in the United States — that is to say, the Westminster Confession of Faith, the Larger and Shorter Catechisms, the Form of Government, the Book of Discipline, and the Directory for Worship — were unani mously and solemnly declared to be the Constitution of the Church in the Confederate States, with no other change than the substitution of "Confederate " for " United " wherever the country is mentioned in the stand ards. The Church, therefore, in these seceded States, presents now the spectacle of a separate, and independent, and complete organization, under the style and title of The Presbyterian Church in the Confederate States of America. In thus taking its place among sister Churches of this and other countries, it seems proper that it should set forth the causes which have impelled it to separate from the Church of the North, and to indicate a general view of the course which it feels it incumbent upon it to pursue in the new circumstances in which it is placed. We should be sorry to be regarded by our brethren in any part of the world as guilty of schism. We are not conscious of any purpose to rend the body of Christ. On the contrary, our aim has been to promote the unity of 39° APPENDIX. the Spirit in the bonds of peace. If we know our own hearts, and can form any just estimate of the motives which have governed us, we have been prompted by a sincere desire to promote the glory of God, and the effi ciency, energy, harmony, and zeal of his visible kingdom in the earth. We have separated from our brethren of the North as Abraham separated from Lot — because we are persuaded that the interests of true religion will be more effectually subserved by two independent Churches, under the circumstances in which the two countries are placed, than by one united body. i. In the first place, the course of the last Assembly, at Philadelphia, conclusively shows that if we should remain together, the political questions which divide us as citizens, will be obtruded on our Church Courts, and discussed by Christian Ministers and Elders with all the acrimony, bit terness, and rancor with which such questions are usually discussed by men of the world. Our Assembly would present a mournful spectacle of strife and Sebate. Com missioners from the Northern would meet with Commis sioners from the Southern Confederacy, to wrangle over the questions which have split them into two confedera cies, and involved them in furious and bloody war. They would denounce each other, on the one hand, as tyrants and oppressors, and on the other, as traitors and rebels. The Spirit of God would take his departure from these scenes of confusion, and leave the Church lifeless and powerless, an easy prey to the sectional divisions and angry passions of its members. Two nations, under any circumstances, except those of perfect homogeneousness, cannot be united in one Church, without the rigid exclu sion of all civil and secular questions from its halls. Where the countries differ in their customs and institutions, and view each other with an eye of jealousy and rivalry, if national feelings are permitted to enter the Church Courts, there must be an end of harmony and peace. The preju dices of the man and the citizen will prove stronger than the charity of the Christian. When they have allowed THE SOUTHERN ADDRESS, 186i. 39 1 themselves to denounce each other for their national pecul iarities, it will be hard to join in cordial fellowship as members of the same spiritual family. Much more must this be the case where the nations are not simply rivals, but enemies — when they hate each other with a cruel hatred — when they are engaged in a ferocious and bloody war, and when the worst passions of human nature are stirred to their very depths. An Assembly composed of representatives from two such countries, could have no security for peace except in a steady, uncompromising ad herence to the Scriptural principle, that it would know no man after the flesh ; that it would abolish the distinctions of Barbarian, Scythian, bond and free, and recognize noth ing but the new creature in Christ Jesus. The moment it permits itself to know the Confederate or the United States, the moment its members meet as citizens of these countries our political differences will be transferred to the house of God, and the passions of the forum will expel the Spirit of Holy Love and of Christian communion. We cannot condemn a man, in one breath, as unfaithful to the most solemn earthly interests — his country and his race — and commend him in the next as a loyal and faith ful servant of his God. If we distrust his patriotism, our confidence is apt to be very measured in his piety. The old adage will hold here as in other things, falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus. The only conceivable condition, therefore, upon which the Church of the North and the South could remain to gether as one body, with any prospect of success, is the rigorous exclusion of the questions and passions of the forum from its halls of debate. This is what always ought to be done. The provinces of Church and State are per fectly distinct, and the one has no right to usurp the juris diction of the other. The State is a natural institute, founded in the constitution of man as moral and social, and designed to realize the idea of justice. It is the so? ciety of rights. The Church is a supernatural institute, founded in the facts of redemption, and is designed to 392 APPENDIX. realize the idea of grace. It is the society of the re deemed. The State aims at social order, the Church at spiritual holiness. The State looks to the visible and out ward, the Church is concerned for the invisible and in ward. The badge of the State's authority is the sword, by which it becomes a terror to evil doers, and a praise to them that do well. The badge of the Church's authority is the keys, by which it opens and shuts the Kingdom of Heaven according as men are believing or impenitent. The power of the Church is exclusively spiritual, that of the State includes the exercise of force. The Constitu tion of the Church is a Divine revelation — the Constitu tion of the State must be determined by human reason and the course of Providential events. The Church has no right to construct or modify a government for the State, and the State has no right to frame a creed or pol ity for the Church. They are as planets moving in differ ent orbits, and unless each is confined to its own tract, the consequences may be as disastrous in the moral world as the collision of different spheres in the world of matter. It is true that there is a point at which their respective jurisdictions seem to meet — in the idea of duty. But even duty is viewed by each in very different lights. The Church enjoins it as obedience to God, and the State en forces it as the safeguard of order. But there can be no collision, unless one or the other blunders as to the things that are materially right. When the State makes wicked laws, contradicting the eternal principles of rectitude, the Church is at liberty to testify against them, and humbly to petition that they may be repealed. In like manner, if the Church become seditious and a disturber of the peace, the State has a right to abate the nuisance. In ordinary cases, however, there is not likely to be a colli sion. Among a Christian people, there is little difference . of opinion as to the radical distinctions of right and wrong. The only serious danger is where moral duty is condi tioned upon a political question. Under the pretext of inculcating duty, the Church may usurp the power to de- THE SOUTHERN ADDRESS, 1861. 393 termine the question which conditions it, and that is pre cisely what she is debarred from doing. The condition must be given. She must accept it from the State, and then her own course is clear. If Cassar is your master, then pay tribute to him; but whether the "if" holds whether Caesar is your master or not, whether he ever had any just authority, whether he now retains it, or has forfeited it, these are points which the Church has no commission to adjudicate. Hari-these principles been steadily maintained by the Assembly at Philadelphia, it is possible that the ecclesi astical separation of the North and the South might have been deferred for years to come. Our Presbyteries, many of them, clung with tenderness to the recollections of the past. Sacred memories gathered around that venerable Church which had breasted many a storm and trained our fathers for glory. It had always been distinguished for its conservative influence, and many fondly hoped that, even in the present emergency, it would raise its placid and serene head above the tumults of popular passion, and bid defiance to the angry billows which rolled at its feet. We expected it to bow in reverence only at the name of Jesus. Many dreamed that it would utterly refuse to know either Confederates or Federalists, and utterly refuse to give any authoritative decree without a "Thus saith the Lord." It was ardently desired that the sublime spectacle might be presented of one Church upon earth combining in cordial fellowship and in holy love — the disciples of Jesus in different and even in hostile lands. But, alas! for the weakness of man, these golden visions were soon dispelled. The first thing which roused our Presbyteries to look the question of separation seriously in the face, was the course of the Assembly in venturing to determine, as a Court of Jesus Christ, which it did by necessary implication, the true interpretation of the Con stitution of the United States as to the kind of govern ment it intended to form. A political theory was, to all intents and purposes, propounded, which made secession 394 Appendix. a crime, the seceding States rebellious, and the citizens who obeyed them traitors. We say nothing here as to the righteousness or unrighteousness of these decrees. What we maintain is, that, whether right or wrong, the Church had no right to make them — she transcended her sphere, and usurped the duties of the State. The discussion of these questions, we are sorry to add, was in the spirit and temper of partizan declaimers. The Assembly, driven from its ancient moorings, was tossed to and fro by. the waves of popular passion. Like Pilate, it obeyed the clamor of the multitude, and though acting in the name of Jesus, it kissed the sceptre and bowed the knee to the mandates of Northern phrenzy. The Church was con verted into the forum, and the Assembly was henceforward to become the arena of sectional divisions and national animosities. We frankly admit that the mere unconstitutionality of the proceedings of the last Assembly is not, in itself con sidered, a sufficient ground of separation. It is the conse quences of these proceedings which make them so offen sive. It is the door which they open for the introduction of the worst passions of human nature into the delibera tions of Church Courts. The spirit of these proceedings, if allowed to prevail, would forever banish peace from the Church, and there is no reason to hope that the tide which has begun to flow can soon be arrested. The two con federacies hate each other more intensely. now than they did in May, and if their citizens should come together upon the same floor, whatever might be the errand that brought them there, they could not be restrained from smiting each other with the fist of wickedness. For the sake of peace, therefore, for Christian charity, for the honor of the Church, and for the glory of God, we have been constrained, as much as in us lies, to remove all oc casion of offence. We have quietly separated, and we are grateful to God that, while leaving for the sake of peace, we leave it with the humble consciousness that we, our selves, have never given occasion to break the peace. We THE SOUTHERN ADDRESS, 1861. 395 have never confounded Cassar and Christ, and we have never mixed the issues of this world with the weighty matters that properly belong to us as citizens of the King dom of God. 2. Though the immediate occasion of separation was the course of the General Assembly at Philadelphia in relation to the Federal Government and the war, yet there is another ground on which the independent organ ization of the Southern Church can be amply and script- urally maintained. The unity of the Church does not re quire a formal bond of union among all the congregations of believers throughout the earth. It does not demand a vast imperial monarchy like that of Rome, nor a strictly universal council, like that to which the complete develop ment of Presbyterianism would naturally give rise. The Church Catholic is one in Christ, but it is not necessarily one visible, all-absorbing organization upon earth. There is no schism where there is no breach of charity. Churches may be perfectly at one in every principle of faith and 'order, and yet geographically distinct, and mutually inde pendent. As the unity of the human race is not disturbed by its division into countries and nations, so the unity of the spiritual seed of Christ is neither broken nor impaired by separation and division into various Church constitu tions. Accordingly, in the Protestant countries, Church organizations have followed national lines. The Calvin istic Churches of Switzerland are distinct from the Re formed Church of France. The Presbyterians of Ireland belong to a different Church from the Presbyterians of Scotland, and the Presbyterians of this country constitute a Church, in like manner, distinct from all other Churches on the globe. That the division into national Churches, that is, Churches bounded by national lines, is, in the present condition of human nature, a benefit, seems to us too obvious for proof. It realizes to the Church Catholic all the advantages of a division of labor. It makes a Church organization homogeneous and compact — it stim ulates holy rivalry and zeal — it removes all grounds of 396 APPENDIX. suspicion and jealousy on the part of the State. What is lost in expansion is gained in energy. The Church Cath olic, as thus divided, and yet spiritually one, divided, but not rent, is a beautiful illustration of the great philosoph ical principle which pervades all nature- — the co-existence of the one with the many. If it is desirable that each nation should contain a sepa rate and an independent Church, the Presbyteries of these Confederate States need no apology for bowing to the decree of Providence, which, in withdrawing their country from the government of the United States, has, at the same time, determined that they should withdraw from the Church of their fathers. It is not that they have ceased to love it — not that they have abjured its ancient principles, or forgotten its glorious history. It is to give these same principles a richer, freer, fuller development among ourselves than they possibly could receive under foreign culture. It is precisely because we love that Church as it was, and that Church as it should be, that we have resolved as far as in us lies, to realize its grand idea in the country, and under the Government where God has cast our lot. With the supreme control of . ecclesiastical affairs in our hands, we may be able, in some competent measure, to consummate this result. In subjection to a foreign power, we could no more accomplish it than the Church in the United States could have been developed in dependence upon the Presbyterian Church of Scotland. The difficulty there would have been, not the distance of Edinburgh from New York, Philadelphia, or Charleston, but the difference in the manners, habits, customs, and ways of thinking, the social, civil, and political institutions of the people. These same difficulties exist in relation to the Confederate and United States, and render it emi nently proper that the Church in each should be as sepa rate and independent as the Governments. In addition to this, there is one difference which so radically and fundamentally distinguishes the North and the South, that it is becoming every day more and more THE SOUTHERN ADDRESS, 1861. 397 apparent that the religious, as well as the secular, interests of both will be more effectually promoted by a complete and lasting separation. The antagonism of Northern and Southern sentiment on the subject of slavery lies at the root of all the difficulties which have resulted in the dis memberment of the Federal Union, and involved us in the horrors of an unnatural war. The Presbyterian Church in the United States has been enabled by Divine grace to pursue, for the most part, an eminently conservative, be cause a thoroughly Scriptural, policy in relation to this delicate question. It has planted itself upon the Word of God, and utterly refused to make slaveholding a sin, or non-slaveholding a term of communion. But though both sections are agreed as to this general principle, it is not to be disguised that the North exercises a deep and settled antipathy to slavery itself, while the South is equally zealous in its defence. Recent events can have no other effect than to confirm the antipathy on the one hand and strengthen the attachment on the other. The Northern section of the Church stands in the awkward predicament of maintaining, in one breath, that slavery is an evil which ought to be abolished, and of asserting in the next, that it is not a sin to be visited by exclusion from communion of the saints. The consequence is, that it plays partly into the hands of abolitionists and partly into the hands of slaveholders, and weakens its influence with both. It occupies the position of a prevaricating witness whom neither party will trust. It would be bet ter, therefore, for the moral power of the Northern section of the Church to get entirely quit of the subject. At the same time, it is intuitively obvious that the Southern sec tion of the Church, while even partially under the control of those who are hostile to slavery, can never have free and unimpeded access to the slave population. Its min isters and elders will always be liable to some degree of suspicion. In the present circumstances, Northern alliance would be absolutely fatal. It would utterly preclude the Church from a wide and commanding field of usefulness. 398 APPENDIX. This is too dear a price to be paid for a nominal union. We cannot afford to give up these millions of souls and consign them, so far as our efforts are concerned, to hope less perdition, for the sake of preserving an outward unity which, after all, is an empty shadow. If we would gird ourselves heartily and in earnest, for the work which God has set before us, we must have the control of our eccle siastical affairs, and declare ourselves separate and inde pendent. And here we may venture to lay before the Christian world our views as a Church, upon the subject of slavery. We beg a candid hearing. In the first place, we would have it distinctly under stood that, in our ecclesiastical capacity, we are neither the friends nor the foes of slavery ; that is to say, we have. no commission either to propagate or abolish it. The policy of its existence or non-existence is a question which exclusively belongs to the State. We have no right, as a Church, to enjoin it as a duty, or to condemn it as a sin. Our business is with the duties which spring from the re lation; the duties of the masters on the one hand, and of their slaves on the other. These duties we are to pro claim and enforce with spiritual sanctions. The social, civil, political problems connected with this great subject transcend our sphere, as God has not entrusted to his Church the organization of society, the construction of Government, nor the allotment of individuals to their various stations. The Church has as much right to preach to the monarchies of Europe, and the despotism of Asia, the doctrines of republican equality, as to preach to the Governments of the South the. extirpation of slavery. This position is impregnable, unless it can be shown that slavery is a sin. Upon every other hypothesis, it is so clearly a question for the State, that the proposition would never for a moment have been doubted, had there not been a foregone conclusion in relation to its moral character. Is slavery, then, a sin ? In answering this question, as a Church, let it be dis- THE SOUTHERN ADDRESS, 1861. 399 tinctly borne in mind that the only rule of judgment is the written Word of God. The Church knows nothing of the intuitions of reason or the deductions of philosophy, except those reproduced in the Sacred Canon. She has a positive constitution in the Holy Scriptures, and has no right to utter a single syllable upon any subject, except as the Lord puts words in her mouth. She is founded, in other words, upon express revelation. Her creed is an authoritative testimony of God, and not a speculation, and what she proclaims, she must proclaim with the infallible certitude of faith, and not with the hesitating assent of an opinion. The question, then, is brought within a narrow compass : Do the Scriptures directly or indirectly condemn slavery as a sin ? If they do not, the dispute is ended, for the Church, without forfeiting her character, dares not go beyond them. Now, we venture to assert that if men had drawn their conclusions upon this subject only from the Bible, it would no more have entered into any human head to denounce slavery as a sin, than to denounce monarchy, aristocracy, or poverty. The truth is, men have listened to what they falsely considered as primitive intuitions, or as necessary deductions from primitive cognitions, and then have gone to the Bible to confirm the crotchets of their vain philoso phy. They have gone there determined to find a partic ular result, and the consequence is, that they leave with having made, instead of having interpreted, Scripture. Slavery is no new thing. It has not only existed for ages in the world, but it has existed, under every dispensation of the covenant of grace, in the Church of God. Indeed, the first organization of the Church as a visible society, separate and distinct from the unbelieving world, was in augurated in the family of a slaveholder. Among the very first persons to whom the seal of circumcision was affixed, were the slaves of the father of the faithful, some born in his house, and others bought with his money. Slavery again re-appears under the Law. God sanctions it in the first table of the Decalogue, and Moses treats it as an in- •400 APPENDIX. stitution to be regulated, not abolished; legitimated, and not condemned. We come down to the age of the New Testament, and we find it again in the Churches founded by the Apostles under the plenary inspiration of the Holy Ghost. These facts are utterly amazing, if slavery is the enormous sin which its enemies represent it to be. It will not do to say that the Scriptures have treated it only iii a general, incidental way, without any clear implication as to its moral character. Moses surely made it the subject of express and positive legislation, and the Apostles are equally explicit in inculcating the duties which spring from both sides of the relation. They treat slaves as bound to obey, and inculcate obedience as an office of re ligion — a thing wholly self-contradictory, if the authority exercised over them were unlawful and iniquitous. But what puts this subject in a still clearer light is the manner in which it is sought to extort from the Scriptures a contrary testimony. The notion of direct and explicit condemnation is given up. The attempt is to show that the genius and spirit of Christianity are opposed to it — that its great cardinal principles of virtue are utterly against it. Much stress is laid upon the Golden Rule and upon the general denunciations of tyranny and oppres sion. To all this we reply, that no principle is clearer than that a case positively excepted cannot be included under a general rule. Let us concede, for a moment, that the law of love, and the condemnation of tyranny and oppression, seem logically to involve, as a result, the con demnation of slavery ; yet, if slavery is afterwards ex pressly mentioned and treated as a lawful relation, it ob viously follows, unless Scripture is to be interpreted as inconsistent with itself, that slavery is, by necessary impli cation, excepted. The Jewish law forbade, as a general rule, the marriage of a man with his brother's wife. The same law expressly enjoined the same marriage in a given case. The given case was, therefore, an exception, and not to be treated as a violation of the general rule. The law of love has always been the law of God. It was THE SOUTHERN ADDRESS, 1861. 40 1 enunciated by Moses almost as clearly as it was enunciated by Jesus Christ. Yet, notwithstanding this law, Moses and the Apostles alike sanctioned the relation of slavery. The conclusion is inevitable, either that the law is not opposed to it, or that slavery is an excepted case. To say that the prohibition of tyranny and oppression include slavery, is to beg the whole question. Tyranny and op pression involve either the unjust usurpation or the un lawful exercise of power. It is the unlawfulness, either in its principle or measure, which constitutes the core of the sin. Slavery must, therefore, be proved to be unlawful, before it can be referred to any such category. The master may, indeed, abuse his power, but he oppresses not simply as a master, but as a wicked master. But, apart from all this, the law of love is simply the inculcation of universal equity. It implies nothing as to the existence of various ranks and gradations in society. The interpretation which makes it repudiate slavery would make it equally repudiate all social, civil, and political in equalities. Its meaning is, not that we should conform ourselves to the arbitrary expectations of others, but that we should render unto them precisely the same measure which, if we were in their circumstance, it would be rea sonable and just in us to demand at their hands. It con demns slavery, therefore, only upon the supposition that slavery is a sinful relation — that is, he who extracts the prohibition of slavery from the Golden Rule, begs the very point in dispute. We cannot prosecute the argument in detail, but we have said enough, we think, to vindicate the position of the Southern Church. We have assumed no new attitude. We stand exactly where the Church of God has always stood — from Abraham to Moses, from Moses to Christ, from Christ to the Reformers, and from the Reformers to ourselves. We stand upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, Jesus Christ himself being the Chief corner stone. Shall we be excluded from the fellowship of our brethren in other lands, because we dare not depart from 402 APPENDIX. the charter of our faith? Shall we be branded with the stigma of reproach, because we cannot consent to corrupt the Word of God to suit the intuitions of an infidel philos ophy ? Shall our names be cast out as evil, and the finger of scorn pointed at us, because we utterly refuse to break our communion with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, with Moses, David, and Isaiah, with Apostles, Prophets, and Martyrs, with all the noble army of confessors who have gone to glory from slaveholding countries and from a slaveholding Church, without ever having dreamed that they were living in mortal sin, by conniving at slavery in the midst of them? If so, we shall take consolation in the cheering consciousness that the Master has' accepted us. We may be denounced, despised, and cast out of the Synagogues of our brethren. But while they are wran gling about the distinctions of men according to the flesh, we shall go forward in our Divine work, and confidently anticipate that, in the great day, as the consequence of our humble labors, we shall meet millions of glorified spirits, who have come up from the bondage of earth to a nobler freedom than human philosophy ever dreamed of. Others, if they please, may spend their time in declaim ing on the tyranny of earthly masters ; it will be our aim to resist the real tyrants which oppress the soul — Sin and Satan. These are the foes against whom we shall find it employment enough to wage a successful war. And to this holy war it is the purpose of our Church to devote itself with redoubled energy. We feel that the souls of our slaves are a solemn trust, and we shall strive to present them faultless and complete before the presence of God. Indeed, as we contemplate their condition in the South ern States, and contrast it with that of their fathers before them, and that of their brethren in the present day in their native land, we cannot but accept it as a gracious Providence that they have been brought in such numbers to our shores, and redeemed from the bondage of barba rism and sin. Slavery to them has certainly been over ruled for the greatest good. It has been a link in the THE SOUTHERN ADDRESS, 1861. 403 wondrous chain of Providence, through which many sons and daughters have been made heirs of the heavenly in heritance. The Providential result is, of course, no justi fication, if the thing is intrinsically wrong; but it is cer tainly a matter of devout thanksgiving, and no obscure intimation of the will and purpose of God, and of the con sequent duty of the Church. We cannot forbear to say, however, that the general operation of the system is kindly and benevolent; it is a real and effective discipline, and without it we are profoundly persuaded that the African race in the midst of us can never be elevated in the scale of being. As long as that race, in its comparative degra dation, co-exists, side by side, with the white, bondage is its normal condition. As to the endless declamation about human rights, we have only to say that human rights are not a fixed, but a fluctuating quantity. Their sum is not the same in any two nations on the globe. The rights of Englishmen are one thing, the rights of Frenchmen another. There is a minimum without which a man cannot be responsible; there is a maximum which expresses the highest degree of civilization and of Christian culture. The education of the species consists in its ascent along this line. As you go up, the number of rights increases, but the number of individuals who possess them diminishes. As you come down the line, rights are diminished, but the individuals are multiplied. It is just the opposite of the predicamental scale of the logicians. There comprehension diminishes as you ascend and extension increases, and comprehension increases as you descend and extension diminishes. Now, when it is said that slavery is inconsistent with human rights, we crave to understand what point in this line is the slave conceived to occupy. There are, no doubt, many rights which belong to other men — to Englishmen, to Frenchmen, to his master, for example — which are denied to him. But is he fit to possess them? Has God qualified him to meet the responsibilities which their pos session necessarily implies ? His place in the' scale is de- 4°4 APPENDIX. termined by his competency to fulfil its duties. There are other rights which he certainly possesses, without which he could neither be human nor accountable. Before slavery can be charged with doing him injustice, it must be shown that the minimum which falls to his lot at the bottom of the line is out of proportion to his capacity and culture — a thing which can never be done by abstract speculation. The truth is, the education of the human race for liberty and virtue, is a vast Providential scheme, and God assigns to every man, by a wise and holy decree, the precise place he is to occupy in the great moral school of human ity. The scholars are distributed into classes, according to their competency and progress. For God is in history. To avoid the suspicion of a conscious weakness of our cause, when contemplated from the side of pure specula tion, we may advert for a moment to those pretended in tuitions which stamp the reprobation of humanity upon this ancient and hoary institution. We admit that there are primitive principles in morals which lie at the root of human consciousness. But the question is, how are we to distinguish them? The subjective feeling of certainty is no adequate criterion, as that is equally felt in reference to crotchets and hereditary prejudices. The very point is to know when this certainty indicates a primitive cogni tion, and when it does not. There must, therefore, be some eternal test, and whatever cannot abide that test has no authority as a primary truth. That test is an inward necessity of thought, which, in all minds at the proper stage of maturity, is absolutely universal. Whatever is universal is natural. We are willing that slavery should be tried by this standard. We are willing to abide by the testimony of the race, and if man, as man, has every where condemned it — if all human laws have prohibited it as crime — if it stands in the same category with malice, murder, and theft; then we are willing, in the name of humanity, to renounce it, and to renounce it forever. But what if the overwhelming majority of mankind have approved it? what if philosophers and statesmen have jus- THE SOUTHERN ADDRESS, 1861. 405 tified it, and the laws of all nations acknowledged it ? what then becomes of these luminous intuitions ? They are an ignis fatuas, mistaken for a star. We have now, brethren, in a brief compass, for the nature of this address admits only of an outline, opened to you our whole hearts upon this delicate and vexed sub ject. We have concealed nothing. We have sought to conciliate no sympathy by appeals to your charity. We have tried our cause by the word of God; and though protesting against its authority to judge in a question concerning the duty of the Church, we have not refused to appear at the tribunal of reason. Are we not right, in view of all the preceding considerations, in remitting the social, civil, and political problems connected with slavery to the State? Is it not a subject, save in the moral duties which spring from it, which lies beyond the province of the Church? Have we any right to make it an element in judging of Christian character? Are we not treading in the footsteps of the flock ? Are we not acting as Christ and his Apostles have acted before us? Is it not enough for us to pray and labor, in our lot, that all men may be saved, without meddling as a Church with the technical distinction of their civil life? We leave the matter with you. We offer you the right hand of fellowship. It is for you to accept it or reject it. We have done our duty. We can do no more. Truth is more precious than union, and if you cast us out as sinners, the breach of charity is not with us, as long as we walk according to the light of the written Word. The ends which we propose to accomplish as a Church are the same as those which are proposed by every other church. To proclaim God's truth as a witness to the nations ; to gather his elect from the four corners of the earth, and through the Word, Ministries, and Ordinances, to train them for eternal life, is the great business of His people. The only thing that will be at all peculiar to us, is the manner in which we shall attempt to discharge our duty. In almost every department of labor, except the 406 APPENDIX. pastoral care of congregations, it has been usual for the Church to resort to societies more or less closely connected with itself, and yet logically and really distinct. It is our purpose to rely upon the regular organs of our gov ernment, and executive agencies directly and immediately responsible to them. We wish to make the Church not merely a superintendent, but an agent. We wish to de- velope the idea that the congregation of believers, as vis ibly organized, is the very society or corporation which is divinely called to do the work of the Lord. We shall, therefore, endeavor to do what has never yet been ade quately done — bring out the energies of our Presbyterian system of government. From the Session to the Assembly we shall strive to enlist all our courts, as courts, in every department of Christian effort. We are not ashamed to confess that we are intensely Presbyterian. We embrace all other denominations in the arms of Christian fellowship and love, but our own scheme of government we humbly believe to be according to the pattern shown in the Mount, and, by God's grace, we propose to put its efficiency to the test. Brethren, we have done. We have told you who we are, and what we are. We greet you in the ties of Chris tian brotherhood. We desire to cultivate peace and charity with all our fellow Christians throughout the world. We invite to ecclesiastical .communion all who maintain our principles of faith and order. And now we commend you to God and the word of his grace. We devoutly pray that the whole Catholic Church may be afresh baptized with the Holy Ghost, and that she may speedily be stirred up to give the Lord no rest until he establish and make Jeru salem a praise in the earth. XX. DOCTRINAL BASIS OF UNION OF THE UNITED SYNOD OF THE SOUTH (N. S.) TO THE SOUTHERN PRESBY TERIAN CHURCH (O. S ). The General Assembly and the United Synod of the Presbyterian Churches in the Confederate States of Amer- BASIS OF REUNION, 1869. 407 ica, holding the same system of doctrine and church order, and believing that their union will glorify God by promot ing peace and increasing their ability for the edification of the Body of Christ, do agree to unite under the name of the Presbyterian Church in the Confederate States of Amer ica, and under the existing charter of the Trustees of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the Con federate States of America, on the following basis, viz. : Article I. The General Assembly and the United Synod declare that they continue sincerely to receive and adopt the Confession of Faith and Catechisms of the Presbyte rian Church, as containing the system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures, and approve of its government and discipline. XXI. THE DOCTRINAL BASIS OF THE REUNION OF THE OLD- AND NEW-SCHOOL CHURCHES IN 1 869. (1) The Doctrinal Article Proposed by the Joint Com mittee in 1867. The Reunion shall be effected on the doctrinal and ecclesiastical basis of our common standards; the Confes sion of Faith shall continue to be sincerely received and adopted " as containing the system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures" ; and its fair, historical sense, as it is accepted by the two bodies in opposition to Antinomianism and Fatalism on the one hand, and to Arminianism and Pelagianism on the other, shall be regarded as the sense in which it is received and adopted ; and the Government and Discipline of the Presbyterian Church in the United States shall continue to be approved as containing the principles and rule of our polity. (2) The Article Proposed in the Presbyterian Reunion Con vention of 1867, with Dr. Henry B. Smith's Proviso. . The Reunion shall be effected on the doctrinal and eccle siastical basis of our common standards ; the Scriptures of 408 APPENDIX. the Old and New Testaments shall be acknowledged to be the inspired Word of God, and the only infallible rule of faith and practice ; the Confession of Faith shall continue to be sincerely received and adopted " as containing the system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures" ; it being understood, that this Confession is received in its proper, historical — that is, the Calvinistic or Reformed, — sense. (3) The Gurley Amendment, added to tfte above by the Joint Committee in 1868. It is also understood that various methods of viewing, stating, explaining and illustrating, the doctrines of the Confession, which do not impair the integrity of the Re formed or Calvinistic system, are to be freely allowed in the united Church, as they have hitherto been allowed in the separate Churches ; and the Government and Discipline of the Presbyterian Church in the United States shall be approved as containing the principles and rule of our polity. (4) The Basis Finally Adopted in 1 869. Believing that the interests of the Redeemer's kingdom would be promoted by the healing of our divisions, and that the two bodies bearing the same names, having the same Constitution, and each recognizing the other as a sound and orthodox body according to the principles of the Confession common to both, cannot be justified by any but the most imperative reasons in maintaining sepa rate and, in some respects, rival organizations ; we are now clearly of the opinion that the reunion of those bodies ought, as soon as the necessary steps can be taken, to be accomplished, upon the basis hereinafter set forth. 1. The Presbyterian Churches in the United States of America, namely, that whose General Assembly convened in the Brick Church in the city of New York, on the 20th day of May, 1869, and that whose General Assembly met CONCURRENT DECLARATIONS, 1869. 409 in the Church of the Covenant in the said city on the same day, shall be reunited as one Church, under the name and style of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, possessing all the legal and corporate rights and powers pertaining to the Church previous to the division in 1838, and all the legal and corporate rights and powers which the separate churches now possess. 2. The reunion shall be effected on the doctrinal and ecclesiastical basis of our common standards ; the Script ures of the Old and New Testaments shall be acknowl edged to be the inspired Word of God, and the only infal lible rule of faith and practice; the Confession of Faith shall continue to be sincerely received and adopted as containing the system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures ; and the government and discipline of the Pres byterian Church in the United States shall be approved as containing the principles and rules of our polity. XXII. THE CONCURRENT DECLARATIONS OF 1 869. As there are matters pertaining to the interests of the Church, when it shall have become reunited, which will manifestly require adjustment on the coming together of two bodies which have so long acted separately, and con cerning some of which matters it is highly desirable that there should be a previous good understanding, the two Assemblies agree to adopt the following declarations, not as articles of compact or covenant, but as in their judg ment proper and equitable arrangements, to wit : 1. All the ministers and churches embraced in the two bodies should be admitted to the same standing in the united body, which they may have held in their respect ive connections, up to the consummation of the union. 2. Imperfectly organized churches are counselled and expected to become thoroughly Presbyterian, as early within the period of five years as may be permitted by the highest interests to be consulted ; and no other such churches shall be hereafter received. 410 APPENDIX. 3. The boundaries of the several Presbyteries and Synods should be adjusted by the General Assembly of the united church. 4. The official records of the two branches of the church for the period of separation should be preserved and held as making up the one history of the church ; and no rule or precedent which does not stand approved by both the bodies, should be of any authority until re-established in the united body, except in so far as such rule or precedent may affect the rights of property founded thereon. 5. The corporate rights now held by the two General Assemblies, and by their Boards and Committees, should, as far as practicable, be consolidated, and applied for their several objects, as defined by law. 6. There should be one set of Committees or Boards for Home and Foreign Missions, and the other religious enterprises of the church ; which the churches should be encouraged to sustain, though free to cast their contribu tions into other channels if they desire to do so. 7. As soon as practicable after the union shall have been effected, the General Assembly should reconstruct and consolidate the several Permanent Committees and Boards which now belong to the two Assemblies, so as to repre sent, as far as possible with impartiality, the views and wishes of the two bodies constituting the united church. 8. The publications cf the -Board of Publication and of the Publication Committee should continue to be issued as at present, leaving it to the Board of Publication of the united church to revise these issues and perfect a catalogue for the united church so as to exclude invidious references to past controversies. 9. In order to a uniform system of ecclesiastical super vision, those Theological Seminaries that are now under Assembly control may, if their Boards of Direction so elect, be transferred to the watch and care of one or more of the adjacent Synods ; and the other Seminaries are advised to introduce, as far as may be, into their Constitutions, the principle of Synodical or Assembly supervision; in which THE CHARGE AGAINST DR. BRIGGS. 41 1 case they shall be entitled to an official recognition and approbation on the part of the General Assembly. 10. It should be regarded as the duty of all our judica tories, ministers and people in the united church, to study the things which make for peace, and to guard against all needless and offensive references to the causes that have divided us ; and in order to avoid the revival of past issues by the continuance of any usage in either branch of the church, that has grown out of former conflicts, it is ear nestly recommended to the lower judicatories of the church that they conform their practice in relation to all such usages, as far as is consistent with their convictions of duty, to the general custom of the church prior to the controversies that resulted in the separation. XXIII. THE CHARGES ON WHICH PROFESSOR BRIGGS WAS TRIED, AND THE SENTENCE PRONOUNCED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. (a) The Charge against Dr. Briggs. (1) Teaching that the Reason is a fountain of divine authority to such an extent that it may and does savingly enlighten men, even such men as reject the Scriptures as the authoritative proclamation of the will of God and re ject also the way of salvation through the mediation and sacrifice of the Son of God as revealed therein ; all of which is contrary to the essential doctrine of the Holy Scripture, and of the Standards of the said Church, that the Holy Scripture is most necessary, and the rule of faith and practice. (2) Teaching that the Church is a fountain of divine authority which, apart from the Holy Scripture, may and does savingly enlighten men; which is contrary to the essential doctrine of the Holy Scripture and of the Stand ards of the said Church, that the Holy Scripture is most necessary, and the rule of faith and oractice. 412 APPENDIX. (3) Teaching that errors may have existed in the original text of the Holy Scripture, as it came from its authors; which is contrary to the essential doctrine taught in the Holy Scripture and in the Standards of the said Church, that the Holy Scripture is the Word of God written, imme diately inspired, and the rule of faith and practice. (4) Teaching that Moses is not the author of the Pen tateuch, which is contrary to direct statements of Holy Scripture, and to the essential doctrines of the Standards of the said Church, that the Holy Scripture evidences itself to be the Word of God by the consent of all the parts, and that the infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself. (5) Teaching that Isaiah is not the author of half of the book that bears his name, which is contrary to direct statements of Holy Scripture and to the essential doctrines of the Standards of the said Church, that the Holy Script ure evidences itself to be the Word of God by the consent of all the parts, and that the infallible rule of interpreta tion of Scripture is the Scripture itself. (6) Teaching that Sanctification is not complete at death, which is contrary to the essential doctrine of Holy Scripture and of the Standards of the said Church, that the souls of believers are at their death at once made perfect in holiness. (b) The Sentence Jnflicted by the General Assembly of. 1893. This appeal being regularly issued, and coming on to be heard on the judgment, the notice of appeal, the appeal, and the specifications of errors alleged, and the record in the case from the beginning, and the reading of said record having been omitted by consent, and the parties hereto having been heard before the judicatory in argument, and the opportunity having been given to the members of the judicatory appealed from to be heard, and they having been heard, and opportunity having been given to the members of this judicatory to be heard, and they having THE CHARGE AGAINST DR. BRIGGS. 413 been heard as provided by the Book of Discipline, and the General Assembly, as a judicatory sitting in said cause on appeal, having sustained the following specifications of error, to wit : All of said specifications of errors set forth in said five grounds of appeal, save and except the first and fifth under the fourth ground of appeal, on consideration thereof, this judicatory finds said Appeal should be and is hereby sustained, and that said Presbytery of New York, the judi catory appealed from, erred in striking out said amended charges four and seven, and erred in not sustaining, on the law and the evidence, said amended charges, one, two, three, five, six and eight; on consideration whereof this judicatory finds that said final judgment of the Presbytery of New York is erroneous, and should be and is hereby reversed; and this General Assembly sitting as a judica tory in said cause coming now to enter judgment on said amended charges, one, two, three, five, six and eight, finds the appellee, the said Charles A. Briggs, has uttered, taught and propagated views, doctrines and teachings, as set forth in said charges, contrary to the essential doctrine of Holy Scripture and the Standards of said Presbyterian church in the United States of America, and in violation of the ordination vows of said appellee, which said erro neous teachings, views and doctrines strike at the vitals of religion, and have been industriously spread; wherefore, this General Assembly of the Presbyterian church in the United States of America, sitting as a judicatory in this cause on appeal, does hereby suspend Charles A. Briggs, the said appellee, from the office of a minister in the Pres byterian church in the United States of America, until such time as he shall give satisfactory evidence of repent ance to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian church in the United States of America, for the violation by him of said ordination vows as herein and heretofore found. And it is ordered that the Stated Clerk of this General Assembly transmit a certified copy of this judgment to the Presbytery of New York, to be made a part of the record 414 APPENDIX. in this case. It is also ordered that a copy be furnished to the appellee, the Rev. Charles A. Briggs, D.D. XXIV. PROPOSED PLAN FOR THE FEDERATION OF THE REFORMED CHURCHES OF AMERICA, 1 894. For the glory of God, and for the greater unity and ad vancement of the church of which the Lord Jesus Christ is the Head, the Reformed churches in the United States holding to the Presbyterian system adopt the following Articles of Federal Union : 1. Every denomination entering into this Union shall retain its distinct individuality, as well as every power, jurisdiction, and right which is not by this Constitution expressly delegated to the body hereby constituted. 2. The acts, proceedings, and records of the duly consti tuted authorities of each of the denominations shall be re ceived in all the other denominations, and in the Federal Council, as of full credit and with proper respect. 3. For the prosecution of work that can be better done in union than separately, an Ecclesiastical Assembly is hereby constituted, which shall be known by the name and style of The Federal Council of the Reformed churches in the United States of America holding the Presbyterian system. 4. The Federal Council shall consist of four ministers and four elders from each of the constituent denomina tions, who shall be chosen, with alternates, under the direction of their respective supreme judicatories, in such manner as those judicatories shall respectively determine. 5. The Federal Council shall promote the co-operation of the federated denominations in their Home and Foreign Missionary work, and shall keep watch on current religious, moral, and social movements, and take such action as may concentrate the influence of all the churches in the main tenance of the truth that our nation is a Protestant Chris tian nation, and of all that is therein involved. PROPOSED PLAN FOR FEDERATION. 415 6. The Federal Council may advise and recommend in all matters pertaining to the general welfare of the King dom of Christ, but shall not exercise authority except such as is conferred upon it by this instrument, 'or such as may be conferred upon it by the federated bodies. It shall not interfere with the creed, worship, or government of the federated denominations. In the conduct of its meetings it shall respect their conscientious views. All matters of discipline shall be left to the exclusive and final judgment of the ecclesiastical authorities of the de nomination in which the same may arise. . 7. The Federal Council shall have the power of opening and maintaining a friendly correspondence with the high est Assemblies of other religious denominations, for the purpose of promoting union and concert of action in gen eral or common interests. 8. All differences which may arise among the federated bodies, or any of them, in regard to matters within the jurisdiction of the Federal Council shall be determined by such executive agencies as may be created by the Federal Council, with the right of appeal to the Federal Council for final adjudication. 9. The officers of the Federal Council shall be a Presi dent, Vice-President, Clerk, and Treasurer. 10. The Federal Council shall meet annually, and on its own adjournment, at such time and place as may be deter mined. Special meetings may be called by a unanimous vote of the officers of the Council on thirty days' notice. 11. The expenses of the Council shall be met by a contingent fund to be provided by a pro rata apportion ment on the basis of the number of communicants in each denomination ; and the expenses of the delegates to the Council shall be paid from this fund. 12. Amendments to these Articles may be proposed by the Federal Council, or by any of the supreme judicatories of the churches in the Federation; but the approval of all those judicatories shall be necessary for their adoption. INDEX "Act and Testimony " of 1835, in, "3- Adams, William, 184. Adopting Act of 1729, 26, 27, 330- 334, 340. Adopting Act of 1788, 63-65, 246, 348-350- African School, 85, 104. Aiken, Charles, 213. Aitken Bible, 60. Albany, Synod of, 72. Alexander, Archibald, 83, 86, 89, 1 14, 127, 143, 145, 172, 314, 315. Alexander, David, 41. Alexander, James Waddell, 97, 107, 143, 146. Alexander, Joseph Addison, 144, 219. Alexander, Samuel D., 218. Alison, Francis, 35, 51, 83, 341. Alleghany Seminary, 84, 275, 276, 277. Alliance of the Reformed Churches, 202, 245, 264, 277. Allison, James, 178. American Board, 80, 104, 112, 138, 182, 201. Anderson, Isaac, 84. Anderson, James, 62, 75-78, 82. Anderson, William C, 153, 156. Andrews, Jedediah, 19, 332. Annan, Robert, 62. Armour, John M., 211. Armstrong, Samuel Chapman, 195, 196. Army, 161. Arnot, Andrew, 42. Ashmun Institute, 123. Associate Presbytery, 42, 46-57, 60, 61, 62, 75. Associate Reformed Church, 61, 62, 63» 76, 77. 78, 9°> 91. no. 133, 135. M7. 148, 171, 201, 278, 347, 348, 368, 369, 378, 379. Associate Synod, 75, 76, 91, 92, 128, 147, 148, 201, 303, 364, 369, 378, 379- Associated Presbyteries, 71. Auburn Declaration of 1837, 118, 138, 159. 177. 357-362. Auburn Seminary, 84, 85, 86, 275. Augustine of Hippo, 7, 289, 302, 304. Awakenings tne Great, 295—301, 310, 337-339. 344-346. Backus, John C, 152, 156. Baird, Charles W., 217, 233. Baird, E. Thompson, 151. Baird,. Henry M., 217. Baird, Robert, 130, 145. Baird, Samuel J., 145, 211. Baker, Daniel, 172. Balch, Hezekiah, 78, 86, 121, 188. Baldwin, Moses, 49. Baptism, 8, 12, 14, 15, 88, 99, 293, 297, 298, 301, 302, 318. Barber, Jonathan, 36. Barnes, Albertj" : io5-ro7,- 1 09-1 12; 113, 124, "I28, 130, 132, 133, 140,. 144, 146, 178,179, 180,183,212, 230,' 267.*' ' '¦ Barrier Act, 63; 64, 66, 67, 226. Baxter',' George Addison, 116, 119,' 123," 1 27. Baxter,- Richard, 17, 18, 234, 237, 259. Beale, Vivian, 17. Beatty, Charles, 59. Beautiful, the, 98, 302, 303. Beecher, Edward, 108. Beecher, Henry Ward, 108, 291. '7 4i8 INDEX. Beecher, Lyman, 108, 109, 130, 267. Beecher, Willis J., 214, 215, 255, note. Beman, Nathaniel S. S., 55, 109, 119, 127, 146. Beveridge, Thomas, 62. Bible Society, 81, 131, 143, 144. Birch, G. W. F., 266. Birney, James G., 132. Bishops, diocesan, 5> 6, 17, 52~55> 207, 208, 325. Bishops, Scriptural, 2, 226. Black, John, 104. Blackburn, Gideon, 78. Blackburn, William M., 217. Blair, Samuel, 30, 32, 37, 82, 337. Board of Aid for Colleges, 198. Board of Domestic Missions, 81, 112, 125, 167. Board of Education, 112, 113, 274. Board of Foreign Missions, 112. Board of Publication, 199, 200, 410, Boardman, Henry Augustus, 169, 314. Boards of the church, 80, 125, 138, 159, 181-183, 410. Boston, 22, 23, 29, 31, 48, 49. Bowen, George, 182. Brainerd, David, 39, 40, 78. Brainerd, John, 40, 78. Brainerd, Thomas, 131. Breckinridge, John, 127, 143. Breckinridge, Robert J., 112, 123, 127, 131, 140, 144, 145, 164, 168. Briggs, Charles Augustus, 208, 213, 214, 218, 247, 259, 261-270, 271, 411-414. Brown, Francis, 215, 217, 270. Bullions, Peter, 128, 147. Burr, Aaron, 35, 36. Bush, George, 144. Bushnell, Albert, 182. Bushnell, Horace, 29, 239. Caldwell, James, 57. Calvin, John, 3, 6, 9, 97, 100, 139, 154, 238, 239, 286, 292. Calvinism, 7, 8, 9, 10, 69, 70, 85, 87, 124, 126, 174, 177, 211, 237, 249, 251, 287, 288, 291, 295, 296. Campbell, William O., 247. Camp-meetings, 73. Candidates, examination of, 35, 44, 49, 50. 56, 337. 344- Carlisle, Presbytery of, 108. Carolinas, 24, 45, 78- Cartwright, Thomas, 3. Catechetical instruction, 297, 298. Chalmers, Thomas, 131. Charity, judgment of, 12, 14, 37, 293, 294. Charleston, 24. Chidlaw, Benjamin W., 131, 162. Chinese, 196. Christian Commission, 161, 162. Christlieb, Theodore, 191, note. Churchly era, 95, 96, 125, 138, 301- 306. Cincin/iati, Presbytery of, 108, 109, 270, 271. Cleland, Thomas, 145. Cleveland, John P., 119. Cleveland Convention of 1893, 272. Coffin, Charles, 78. Colleges, 197, 198. Columbia Seminary, 84, 141. Colwell, Stephen, 96, 162. Concurrent Declarations of 1869, 179, 180-184, 409-411. Confederate States, Presbyterian Church in the, 155-159. Congregation, the, 89, 90, 227—229. Congregationalists 14, 15, 20, 21, 22, 23, 28, 29, 45, 48, 61, 68, 71, 72, 82, 83, 142, 182, 190, 196, 241, 251, 280, 284, 285, 353-356. Connecticut, 15, 21, 36, 55, 60, 63, 71, 89, 295, 353-356. Conversion, 32, 296, 339, 345. Cooper, Thomas P., 131, 280. Covenant, the Half-Way, 14, 28. Covenanters, 4, 5, 40, 41, 60, 61, 62, 88, 100, 102-104, 233, 307. (See Reformed Presbyterians. ) Covenants, the Scottish, 40, 41, 42, 317-327- Cox, Samuel Hanson, 85, 127. Craighead, Alexander, 41, 42, 332. Craven, Elias R., 213, 247, 249, 250, 280. Crawford, Samuel Wylie, 103, 160. Crosby, Howard, 213, 216, 247. Cross, John, 41. Cross, Robert, 32, 341. Culdees, 2. Cumberland Presbyterians, 74, 75, '75. *93, 278, 300, 308. IAWEX. 419 Cuthbertson, John, 41. Cuyler, Theodore, 113. Cuyler, Theodore Ledyard, 219, 247, 280. Dabney, Robert L., 211. Dana, Stephen W., 247. Dai»ville Seminary, 275. Davenport, James, 36. Davidson, Robert, 146. Davies, Samuel, 36, 39, 46, 143, 146. Davis, William C, 159. Deacons and deaconesses, 190, 228, 229. Declaration and Testimony «of 1865, 168-171, 183, 184. Delaware, 19, 25. Denton, Richard, .15, 284. De Witt, 219, 247. Dickey, James H., 123. Dickinson, Jonathan, 26, 27, 31, 35, 43. r43. 334- Disciples, 310, 311. Discipline, 9-1 1, 29, 141, 142, 240, 241, 292, 293. Dodge, William E., 131, 162. Donegal, Presbytery of, 49. Doolittle, Justus, 182. Doughty, Francis, 15, 17, 284. Drake, Charles D., 247, 349. Dubuque Seminary (German), 195, 275. Duff, Alexander, 131, 138. Duffield, George (1), 57, 59, 63, 349- Duffield, George (2), 108, 124, 178. Duffield, George (3), 146. Duffield, John T., 247. Duffield, Samuel Willoughby, 220. Dunlop, William, 284. Dunn, Robinson P., 222. Duryea, Joseph T., 222. Dwight, Theodore, 78, 90. Eastward, Presbytery of the, 48. Education, 25, 34-36, 68, 69, 70, 71, 82-85, I97-T99. 299- Edwards, Jonathan (1), 31, 36, 37-, 39, 9°. i°5. 139. *°te> 253, 295. Edwards, Jonathan (2), 154. Eldership, the, 66, 90, 141, 229, 251, 252, 293. " Elect infants," 248, 249, 252, 255, 257. " Elective affinity," 50, 109, no, m, "3- Eliot, John, 14, 294. Elizabethtown, 26, 35. Elliott, Charles, 213, 214. Elliott, David, 119. Ely, Ezra Stiles, 86, 107, in. Emigration, spiritual perils of, 20, 28, 29. 293, 295, 300. Engles, William M., 91, 107. English Presbyterians, 4, 245, 259, 294. Episcopacy. (See Bishops.) Episcopalians, 5, 7, 45, 52-54, 56, 60, 61, 68, 69, 95, 157, 161, 172, 175, 181, 192, 206-208, 231, 280, 285, 312, 316. Episcopate, the historic, 207, 312. Evans, Llewellyn J., 213, 270. Ewing, John, 63. Exscinding Acts of 1837, 117, 119, 141, 17°. 183, 355-357- " Falling exercise," 73. Farris, Robert P., 167, 168. Federal theology, 87, 88, 105, 124, 138, 139. 358, 359. 375- Federation, Plan of, 277-279, 414-415. Finley, Samuel, 36, 46. Finney, Charles Grandison, 126. Foote, William Henry, 146. Form of Government and Discipline, 63-65. Fowler, Henry, 181, 196. Free Church of Scotland, 137, 245, 259, 264, 277. Free Presbyterian Church, 137. Free PreShytery of Miami, 147. Freedmen's missions, 190, 191-194. Frelinghuysen, Jacob, 30. Ganse, Hervey D., 221. Gellatly, Alexander, 42. General Assembly of 1801, 353-355 ; 1807, 74, 75; 1810, 106; 1818, 133, 135. 364-368; 1824, 250; 1831, 106, 107,109, no; 1832, 109; 1833, 159; 1834, 109; 1835, in, 116; 1837, 115-118,355-362; 1838,118, 119; 1844 (O. S.), 198; 1842-44 (O. S.), 141 ; 1845 (O. S.), 136, 168, 369- 372 ; 1846(0. S.), 136 ; 1849 (O. S.), 136; 1851 (N. S.), 135. 372, 373! 1853 (N. S.), 135, 373. 374! 1854 420 INDEX. (O. S.), 141; 1859 (N. S.), 182; i860 (O. S.), 141; 1861 (O. S.), 150-155. 379-388; (South'), 155, 156, 388-406; 1862 (O. S.), 164, 173; (South), 158; 1864 (O. S.), 106, 168, 173; (South), 158, 159; 1865 (6. S.), 167, 168; 1866 (O. and N. S.), 169, 173, 174, 272; 1868 (O. and N.S.), 177, 407; 1869 (O. and N. S.), 179, 180, 408-411 ; 1870, 180-185, r99> 204! (South), 184; 1887, 200; 1888, 204, 205; (South), 204, 205 ; 1889,246; 1890, 254; 1891, 229, 254, 265, 266, 274; 1892, 254, 266, 275 ; 1893, 268-270, 272, 274; 1894, 275, 276, 277; (South), 205. Genesee, Synod of, 94, 114, 356. Geneva, 3, 9, 10, 97. Georgia, 24. G'ililand, James, 122. Gillette, Ezra H., 183, 217, Grafton, Presbytery of, 48. Grasty, John S. , 219. Green, Ashbel, 65, 86, 105, 107, no, 123, 125, 127, 143, 145, 233, 349. Green, William Henry, 213, 214, 247, 254, 255, note, 257, 267. Greenville College', 78, 188. Gregory, Caspar Ren£, 215. Gregory, Daniel S., 2 1 6. Griffin, Edward Dorr, 85, 86, 89, 104, 143- Gurley, Phineas H., 169, 170, 176, 179, 408. Hageman, John Frelinghuysen, 218. Hall, Charles Cuthbert, 221, Hall, Isaac H., 215. Hall, John, 266, 219, 247, 253. Hanover, Presbytery of, 39, 59, 60. Hastings, Thomas S., 146, 236. Hatfie'd, Edwin F., 146, 221. Hays, George P., 218, 247, 280. Hemphill, Samuel, 27, 28. Henderson, Alexander, 11, 12, 97. Henderson, Matthew, 60. Hicock, Laurens P., 212. Hill, Matthew, 17, 18, 29, 284. Hill, William', 146. Hodge, Archibald Alexander, 139, 178,- 187, 198, 210, 214, 219, 233, 244. 245, -28Q. - ¦ . Hodge, Caspar Wistar, '210, 247. Hodge, Charles, 83, 88, note, 113, 127,' 135,: 140, 141. 144. 145. 146, 154. 157. 162, 174, 177, 180, 183, 209, 210, 214, 2J5, 219, 229, 233, 234, 249, 25,1, 272, 280, 313, 314, 315, 380-388. Hopkins, S. M., 234, 235, note. Hopkinsianism, 78, 84, 91, 104, 115, 121, 139, note. Hornblower, William Henry, 213. Howe, George, 218. Huguenots, 3, 10. Hunt, Thbmas P., 130. Hymn-writers, 40, 78, 146, 220-222, ; 237. Immigration-, 17, 19, 22-24, 28, 29, 45. 194, 195- Incarnation, the, 95, 96, 237, 238, 301- - Independency, 1, 14, 15, 284, 291, 294. Indepehdent Presbyterian Church (S. C), 159. Indians, 24, 39, 40, 78, 81, 159, 182, 191, 195, 196, 297. Individualism, 13, 87, 88, 96, 100, 238, -291, 296, 297, 303. Inerrancy of the Scriptures, 261-263, 266,. 267, 271, 272, 273, 411, 412. Institutional church, 240. Irving, Edward, 97, 129, 204, 232, 316. Jackson, Samuel Macauley, 217. Jackson,' Sheldon, 196, 213. Jackson, Thomas A., 211. Jacobus, Melanchthon W., 144, 178, 181. Jamaica, L. I., 284. Jerks, the, 73. Jessup, Henry H., 182, 212, 213. Jessup, William, 127, 128. Johnson; Herrick, 219, 247, 255, note, 270, 280. Johnson, Katherine, 222. Junkin, George, 91, 107, 109-m, 124, 127, 140, 166, 219. Kellogg, Alfred H., 215. Kellogg, S. H., 212, 215. Kentucky, 73-75. Kentucky, Synod of, 74, 75, 123, 169, 170, 171. INDEX. 421 Knox, John, 3, 7, 8, IO, 11, 70, 97, 100, 154, 181, 196, 234, 259, 286, 304. * •"' 3y' Kollock, Shepherd K., 143. Krebs, John M., 233. Lambeth Articles, 7. Lampe, Joseph J., 266, 268. Lane Seminary, 108, 270, 275. Lanier, Sidney, 220. Lamed, Sylvester, 143. Lasco, John a, .3, 286. Lillie, John, 213, 216. Lincoln University, 123. Liturgies, Presbyterian, 3, 8, 208, 233- 235, 294- ,';' Log College," 30. Londonderry, N. H., 23, 48, 76. Long Island,. 15, 19, 40, 64, 284. Loomis, A. W., 213. Lord, Daniel, 121. Lord's Supper, 8, 12, 37, 90, 99, 100, 232, 233, 301, 302, 318. Lovejoy, Elijah P., 132. Lowrie, John C, 213. Lowrie, Samuel, T., 213, 216, 247, Lusk, Robert, 104, 147. .Macmillan, John (1), 4, 40. Macmillan, John (2), 59. Maine, 22. Makemie, Francis, 18, 19, 38, 284. March, Francis A., 220. Martin, W. A. P., 213. Maryland, 17, 19, 25, 29, 284. Mary ville Seminary, 84. Mason, Erskine, 91, 119, 127, 146. Mason, John M., 77, 82, 89, 90, 91, H3- Mason, Lowell, 236. Mather, Cotton, 14, 21, 294. Maxwell, William, 122. McAuley, Thomas, 127. McBeth, Sue, 191. McCalla, William L, 107, no, 127. McCook, Henry C, 247. McCook, John J., 266, 268. McCormick, Cyrus, 151. McCosh, James, 189, 202, 212, 247. McCullagh, John, 13 1. McCune, William, 205. McDowell, John, 1,27. McFarland, Amanda R>, 191. Mcllvaine, j. H., 216, 280. McKinney, James, 75. McKnight, John, 88. McLeod, Alexander, 75, 92. McPheeters, Samuel B., 164-166, 168, 218. McWhorter, Alexander, 52, 63. Melville, Andrew, 3, 11. Memorial of 1837, 115, 116, 177, 357- 362. Methodism, 30, 31, 37, 61, 68, 69, 71, 96, 99, 285, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 3°5. 306. 312. Miller, John, 225. Miller, J. R., 219. Miller, Samuel, 83, 86, 87, 88, 89, 114, 115, 122, 123, 125, 127, 141, 143, 145. 233- Mills, Henry, 84, 146. Mills, Samuel J., 81. " Misadelphia," 107. Missions, foreign, 80, 138, 181, 182, 190, 297, 298, 300. Missions, home, 45, 46, 81, 93, 94, 188, 190, 194-196, 300. Mississippi Valley, 81, 93. Missouri, Synod of, 167, 169, 170, 171. Moderates, Scottish, 46, 48, 51. Moffat, J. C, 217. Moore, Dunlop, 213. Moore, W. W., 220. Morris, Edward ,D., 211, 255, note. Murphy, Thomas, 218. Murray, John, 48, 49, 57. Music, 202, 203, 235, 236. National Reform Association, 280- 283. Nelson, David, 122, 132,' 146. Neshaminy Academy, 30, 35, 59. Nevin, Alfred, 218. New Brunswick, 30, 33, 34, 41. New England, 10, 13, 16, 20, 22, 28, 29. 45. 48. 49. 57. 59. 60, 76, 83, 85-89, 142, 143, 160, 187, 287, 288, ¦ 294. New Hampshire, 22, 49, 57, 72. New Haven theology, 124. New Jersey, 25. New Jersey, College of, 34, 35, 36, 46,:j8, 59,182, 83, 189. New London Academy, 35. " New Side," 34-40, 43, 44, 250. 1 422 INDEX. New York, 15, 16, 18, 23, 25, 38, 42, 43. 45, 54, 72, 109, 179, 183, I96- New York, Presbytery of, 109, 121, 266-209, 411-414. New York, Synod of, 34, 36, 43, 121, 199. New. York and Philadelphia, Synod of, 43, 44, 45, 46, 49-52. 55. 56, 57, 63-65, 71, 342-347, 348-353, 362, 363. Newark Theological Seminary, 195, 275. Newburg Theological Seminary, 91. Newburyport, Mass., 14, 48, 49, 284. Niccolls, Samuel J., 255, note, 268, 270. Norton, Augustus Theodore, 218. Nottingham sermon, 32, 34, 337. Occom, Samson, 40. Octorara, 41. Ohio, 72, 121. Ohio, Synod of, 108, 109, 121. Omaha Theological Seminary, 275. Palmer, Benjamin M., 156, 157, 219, 220. Parkhurst, Charles H., 219. Parsons, Jonathan, 49. Pastorate, the, 89, 90, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232. Patrick, 2. Patterson, Joseph, 162. Patton, Francis L., 212, 219, 220, 223-225, 247, 257. Patton, William, 119. Paxson, John R., 188. Paxton, William M., 178. Pelham, Mass., 22. Pennsylvania, 19, 23, 45, 59, 60, 120, 276, 294, 295. Pennsylvania, Synod of, 225. Perrine, M. L. R., 84. Peters, Absalom, 112, 125. Phelps, Austin, 132, 133. Philadelphia, 19, 35, 71, 105, 106, 107, 108. Philadelphia, Presbytery of, 19, 25, '48, 50, 246, 256, 286. Philadelphia, Synod of, 25, 26, 27, 32, 33, 34, 35. 296. 307, 330-341- Philadelphia Reunion Convention of 1867, 407, 408. Pierson, Abraham, 284. Pierson, Arthur T., 213, 222. Pittsburg Circular of 1869, 178. Pitzer, A. W., 212. Plan of Union of 1758, 43, 44, 49, 50, 250, 342-347- Plan of Union of 1801, 72, 104, 112, 114, 116, 117, 118, 125, 142, 144, note, 183, 353-357, 409. Plumer, William S., 117, 127, 215, 216, 219. Poor, Daniel W., 213. Post, George E., 212. Potts, George, 107, 127. Pratt, R. H., 195, 196. Prayer-meetings, 228, 297. Predestination, 7, 101, 248, 249, 254, 287, 288, 358. Prentiss, Elizabeth, 220. Prentiss, George L., 218. " Presbygational churches," 72, 183. Presbytery, the, 226, 227. Preston, Margaret Junkin, 220. Prime, S. Irenaeus, 219, 220. Princeton Seminary, 83, 85, 86, 87, 88, 113, 114, 124, 210, 244, 254, 255>'257, 275, 276, 314, 315. Protestation of 1 741, 32, 33, 334-341, 343, 344- Proudfit, Alexander, 82. Proudfit, James, 62. Psalmody, 8, 43, 49, 52, 78, 90, 104, 185, 202, 203, 204, 222, 297, 329, 330, 377, 378. Publication work and boards, 77, '99, 200. Puritans, 3, 10, 13-16, 20, 96, 99, 289-292, 305. Randolph, Anson D. F., 222. Rankin, Adam, 78- Redstone, Presbytery of, 59, 256. Reformed Church, 2-12. Reformed Presbyterians, 92, 93, 147— 149, 162, 163, 174, 175, 183-186, 188, 190, 201, 211, 212, 278, 279- 283. Reformed Presbytery, 40, 41, 47, 75, 279, 363. Reformers, 2, 238, 239, 304. Reid, W. R., 216. Reprobation, 248, 249, 252, 255, 257. Reunion of 1869-70, 175-186, 407- 411. INDEX. 423 Revision of the standards, 64, 65, 148, 243-260. ' t> 3) t > Revival, the great, of 1801, 73, 74, 238. Revivals 3c s 31. 37, 126,' H'2,%7. Rice, John Holt, 86, 107, 108, 116, 122, 125, 188. p-^fV*™65' 84' 8S> 86' 104, 177. Riddle, Matthew B., 213, 214, 216 255, note. Riggs, Elias, 212. Robinson, Charles S., 220, 221. Robinson, Edward, 143. Robinson, William, 39. Rodgers, John, 39, 52, 58, 63, 88, 145. Rosbrugh, John, 57. Rotary eldership, 230. Rous, Francis, 43, 78. Rowland, John, 30. Ruskin, John, 99. Salwey, Richard, 17. San Francisco Theological Seminary, 275- Saybrook Platform, 15, 21, 295. Schaff, Philip, 145, 202, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 220, 221, 247, 302. Schermerhorn, John F., 81. Scotch-Irish, 6, 16-18, 22-25, 29> 38, 45, 56, 59, 69, 121, 123, 160, 188, 287, 288, 295, 296. Scotland, 3, 10, 16, 26, 306-308, 317- 334- Scouller, James B., 218. Seceders, 4, 5, 27, 41, 42, 43, 51. Seminaries, theological, 83-85, 181, 195. 274-277. 4io, 411. " Separates," 36, 297. Seward, M. H., 222. Shedd, William G.' T., 177, 211, 213, 216, 247, 252. Shields, Charles W., 208, 212, 234, 235, note. Skinner, Thomas H., 107, 127, 146. Slater, George, 217. Slavery, 75, .76, 77, 78, 91, 93, 122, 123, 131-137, 148, 151, 152, 158, 159, 162, 163, 167, 279, 298, 362- 374, 377- 383, 397-405- Sloan, D. H., 218. Sloane, James Renwick Willson, 219. Smith, Henry B., 139, 145, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 209, 213, 217, 219, 249, 407, 408. Smith, Henry Preserved, 261, 270, 271. Smith, Robert, 63, 82. Smith, W. Robertson, 264, 265, 277. Smyth, Thomas, 211. Social spirit, 96, 238, 239, 240, 303- 306. South Carolina, 47, 48. Southern " Presbyterian Church in the Confederate States," 155-159, 388-407. Southern " Presbyterian Church in the United States," 163, 170, 171, 183, 184, 276. Spencer, Elihu, 40. Spencer, Ichabod, 121, 146. Sprague, William B., 145. Spring, Gardiner, 85, 88, 120, 121, 152-154, 156, 157, 158, 219. Spring Resolutions of 1861, 152-158, 379-388. Sproat, James, 63. Sproull, Thomas, 212. Squier, Miles P., 119. Statistics of growth, 77, 93, 94, 117, 120, 121, 125, 126, 184, 185, 197, 198, 278, 284, 285. Stearns, Jonathan F., 139, 173, 179. Steele, David, 104, 149, 283. Stobo, Archibald, 284. Stryker, Melanchthon Woolsey, 221. Stuart, George Hay, 131, 162, 174, 185, 186, 219. Stuarts, the, 3, 155. Subscription, 26, 33, 43, 44, 104, 105, 139, 140, 174, 249-252, 269, 270, 330-334, 335, 336, 344, 352, 353- Suffolk Presbytery, 40, 64. Sunday-schools, 90, 131, 200, 228, 236, 298. Sustentation Fund, 189. Swing, David, 223-225, 244. Switzerland, 2, 3. Synodical government, I, 14, 15, 18, 67. 79. 8°, 226, 227, 285-287, 337, 343. Talmage, T. De Witt, 219. Taylor, Nathaniel W., 105, 124, 138. Temperance reformation, 108, 130, 281, 383. Tennent, Gilbert, 30-33, 36, 37, 46, L 52, 90, 143, 307, 334, 337. 42.4 INDEX. Tennent, William, 36, 59, 82, Tennent, William, Jr., 30, 31, .334. Tennessee, 73^75. Testimony and Memorial of 1837, 1 15, 116: Theocracy,. 10, 38, 97, 154, 155, 161, 279-281, 299, 305, 306. Thompson, Charles L., 247, 270. Thomson, Charles, 57. Thomson, John, 26, 332, 341. Thomson, William M., 143, 182. Thornwell, James Henry, 141, 145; I . . 157, 158, note, 159, 183, 209, 219,! 388-406. Todd, John, 39. Traill, William, 18. Turner, D..K., 218. XuScaldosa Institute, 193. Ulster, '5, 6, 12, 15-18, 22, 23, 26, 29, . 45. 54. 69, 294, 295, 296, 30a Union Theological Seminary, N. Y., 114, 271, 274, 275, 276. Union Theological Seminary, Va., 83, 84, 116. United Church of Christ, Japan, 201, , 277. ... United Presbyterian Church, 147, 148, 185, 190, 201, 202-204, 205, 218, "277, 282, 374-378. United Synod of the South, 135, 156, 159. 406, 407- Unity of the church, 172, 241, 242, 306-316. Utica, Synod of, 117. Van Dyke, Henry, 219. Van Dyke, Henry J., 247. Van Rensselaer, Cortlandt, 198. Vincent, Marvin R., 215, 216. Virginia, 38, 39. 45. 284, 295. Wadsworth, Charles, 219. Waldenses, 2, 302, 304. Wanamaker, John, 131. Warfield, Benjamin B., 214, 247, 254. " Warwickites. " (See Reformed Dis senting Presbytery.) Watts, Isaac, 43, 52, 78, $0. Webster, Richard, 146. ." Websterites," 147. Welch, Ransom B., 211. Welsh, 20, 27, 56. West Virginia, 24. Western Missionary Society," I r2, 117, , 125. . - . Westminster Assembly, 4, 14, 26, 60, 105, 154. 253, 259, 260. Westminster' Confession, 6, 7, 26, 27, 33, 64, 75, 76, 147, 155. 159. "74, 175, 245, 246-260, 262, 263, 296, 300, 3'5,. 327-329, 330-334. 335, 336, 337, 340, 342, 343, 348, 349, 350- Westminster Directory, 9, 64, 65; 235, 335, 336, 340, 342, 343. 348, 349- Westminster Shorter Catechism, 235, 246, 331-334. 335. 336, 340, 342i * . -343, 349- Wheelock, Eleazar, 48. Whelpley, Samuel, 85. : Whitaker, Epher, 221. White, J. W., 225. Whitefield, George, 30, 31, 36, 37, 4$: Wilder, Royal G., 138, 182. Willson, James Renwick, 92* Wilson, James P., 105. Wilson, Joshua L., 108, 109, no. Wilson, Matthew, 64. Wilson, Samuel R., 168. Witherspoon, John, 46, 47, 52, 57, 82. Witherspoon, John, Jr., 127. Wing, Conway P., 213, 218. Wodrow, James, 223. Wolfe, Aaron R., 221, 222. Women, 83, 190, 191. Worcester, Mass., 22, 23. Wordsworth, William, 10, II. Wylie, Samuel Brown, 75, 82, 88, . note. Yeomans, Edward D., 213. Yeomans, John William, 152, 156. / Zwingli, Huldrich, 7, 90, 99. XTbe Hmencan Cburcb Ibfstorg Series. By Subscription, .... in Twelve Volumes, at 82.50 per Volumb The Religious Forces of the United States H. K. Carroll, LL.D., Editor of The Independent, Supt. Church Statistics, U. S. Census, etc. Vol. I. Vol. II. Vol. III. Vol. IV. Vol. V. Vol. VI. Vol. VII. Vol. VIII.- Baptists, Congregationalists, Lutherans,Methodists,Presbyterians, . Protestant Episcopal, Reformed Church, Dutch Moravian, Vol.. IX. Roman Catholics Vol. X.- Vol. XI, Vol. XII, Rtv. A. H. Newman D.D LL.D., Professor of Church History, McMaster University of Toronto. Ont. Rev. Williston Walker, Ph.D., Professor of Modern Church History, Theological Seminary, Hartford, Conn. Rev. H. E. Jacobs, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Systematic Theology in the Ev. Lutheran Seminary, Phila., Pa. Rev. J. M. Buckley D.D., LL.D., Editor of the New York Christian Advocate. Rev. Robert Ellis Thompson, D.D., Philadelphia. Pa. Rev. C. C. Tiffany, D.D., New York. Rev. E. T. Corwin, D.D., Rector Hertzog Hall, New Brunswick, NJ. Reformed Church, German, Rev. J. H. Dubbs, D.D., Prof essor of History. Franklyn and Marshall College, Lancaster, Pa. Rev. J. T. Hamilton, D.D., Professor of Church History, Theological Seminary, Bethlehem, Pa. Rev. T. O'Gorman, D.D., Professor of Church History, Catholic .University, Washington, D. C. Rev. J. H. Allen, D.D., , Late Lecturer on Ecclesiastical History, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. Rev. Richard Eddy, D.D., Providence, R. I. Rev. Gross Alexander, D.D., Professor Greek and N. T. Exegesis, Nashville, Tenn. Rev. Thomas C. Johnson, D.D., Professor Ecclesiastical History and Polity, Hampden-Sidney, Va. Rev. James B. Scouller, D.D., Newville, Pa. Rev. R. V. Foster, D.D., Professor Biblical Exegesis, Cumberland University, Lebanon, Tenn. Rev. R. B. Tyler, D.D., New York. Prof. A. C. Thomas, M.A., Haverford College, Haverford, Pa. R. H. Thomas, M.D., Baltimore, Md. Rev. D. Berger, D.D., Dayton, Ohio. Rev. S. P. Spreng, Editor Evangelical Messenger, Cleve land, Ohio. Rev. Samuel Macauley Jackson, New York. Unitarians, Universalists, . M. E. Church, So., Presbyterians, So., . United Presbyterians, Cumb. Presbyterians, Disciples, . Friends, United Brethren, . Ev. Association, Bibliography, . 7150 *