USA > South Carolina > History of the Presbyterian Church in South Carolina, Vol. II pt 2 > Part 19
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41
In an evil day, says Dr. Palmer, the Presbyterian Church paused, and formed an alliance with New England Congrega- tionalism. And yet the first settlers in New England were largely Presbyterian. But the two systems, identical in doc- trinal belief, are never found to prosper equally on the same soil. The early Congregationalism of New England was largely molded in form by Presbyterian influence. The Cam- bridge platform acknowledged in doctrine the Westminster Confessions and Catechisms, recognized the eldership and the difference between the ruling and teaching elder, and defines exactly the office of the Deacon. The consociationism of Connecticut is a nearer approach to the Presbyterian form of government. The Old Hartford North Association, in 1799,
565
£
PLAN OF UNION.
30-1840.]
ves notice to all whom it may concern, that the constitu- on of the churches in the State of Connecticut, is not Con- egational, but contains the essentials of the Church of Scot- id, or the Presbyterian Church in America, particularly in ving decisive power to ecclesiastical councils. The church- therefore, in Connecticut, are not now, and never were, ongregational Churches, according to the forms of the Cam- idge Platform. Without pursuing these statements further, e add that the way was thus gradually opened for what is hown as the " Plan of Union," formed in ISO1, which ought, says Dr. Palmer, upon the Presbyterian Church an Iliad of woes."
The tide of emigration setting in to the State of New York. pecially in the western portion of it, from the Atlantic ast and elsewhere, brought in a mixed population. Congre- tionalist and Presbyterian, each too weak to enforce the urch organization which each preferred, and a " Plan of ion " was adopted, in which congregations might select eir pastors, cach from the communion of the other. If dif- ulties should arise between the pastor and his charge, these fficulties should be referred to the Presbytery, or to the As- ciation to which this minister belonged. And as to private embers, there should be a Standing Committee chosen by id church from its communicants, who should call to ac- unt offending members, from whose decision one who was Presbyterian might appeal to the Presbytery, and if a Con- egationalist, to the body of the male communicants, and e members of this standing committee might be deputed to in Presbytery, in case of an appeal, the same as a Ruling der of the Presbyterian Church. This plan of union went to effect in the Synod of Albany, the Synod of Geneva, e Synod of Genessee, the Synod of Utica, in west- n New York, and the Synod of the Western Re- rve, in Ohio, being of this mixed character in which th the principles of Congregationalism and of Pres- terianism were commingled. These synods were dis- vned by the General Assembly of 1837. The Congre- tionalists of New England had also their own troubles. e semipelagianism of the Theological Seminary of New aven, called forth the active opposition of Drs. Leonard oods and Bennet Tyler, the latter, if not the founder, e active Professor of the Theological Seminary at East
566
ACT AND TESTIMONY
[1830-1840,
Windsor, since removed to Hartford, where it still exists, in 1882.
In reference to " The Act and Testimony," a paper which attracted great attention, the Synod of South Carolina and Georgia took the following action :
The committee to whom was referred Overture No. 3, touching the Act and Testimony, presented their report, which was considered and adopted, and is as follows :
A paper was introduced to the notice of the Synod, styled "the Act and Testimony," drawn up at Philadelphia, during the meeting of the last General Assembly, with the signatures of a number of the ministers and elders of the Presbyterian Church, and addressed to the ministers, elders and private members of the Presbyterian Church in the United States.
This document brings to the view of the churches a number of radi- cal errors in doctrine, and errors in discipline-which this Synod believes every friend to the truth and order of our Church is bound, not only to condemn, but, also, to use his influence to remove from the Church. And this Synod does now, as expressive of their views and feelings in regard to this matter, most cordially adopt as their own, this Act and Testimony, viz :
AS REGARDS DOCTRINE.
1. We do bear our solemn testimony against the right claimed by some, of interpreting the doctrines of our standards in a sense different from the general sense of the Church for years past, while they still continue in our communion ; on the contrary, we aver that they who adopt our standards are bound, by candour and the simplest integrity, to hold them in their obvious accepted sense.
2. We testify against the unchristian subterfuge to which some have recourse, when they avow a general adherence to our standards as a system, while they deny doctrines essential to the system, or hold doc- trines at complete variance with the system.
3. We testify against the reprehensible conduct of those in our com- munion who hold, and preach, and pablish Arminian and Pelagian heresies, professing, at the same time, to embrace our creed, and pre- tending that these errors do consist therewith.
4. We testify against the condnet of those who, while they profess to approve and adopt our doctrine and order, do, nevertheless, speak and publish in terms, or by necessary implication, that which is derogatory to both, and which tends to bring both into disrepute.
5. We testify against the following as a part of the errors which are held and taught by sonie persons in our Church :
ERRORS.
1. OUR RELATION TO ADAM .- That we have no more to do with the first sin of Adam, than with the sins of any o her parent.
2. NATIVE DEPRAVITY. - That there is no such thing as original sin ; that infants come into the world as perfectly free from corraption of nature as Adam was when he was created ; that by original sin nothing
567
OPINIONS VARIOUS.
)-1840.]
e is meant than the fact that all the posterity of Adam. though born rely free from moral defilement, will always begin to sin when they in to exercise moral agency, and that this fact is somehow connected the fall of Adam.
IMPUTATION .- That the doctrine of imputed sin and imputed ttoousness is a novelty and is nonsense.
ABMATY -That the impenitent sinner is by nature, and inde- dently of the aid of the Holy Spirit, in full possession of all the ers necessary to a compliance with the commands of God ; and that, . e labored under any kind of inability, natural or moral, which he Id not remove himself, he would be excusable for not complying h God's will.
REGENERATION .- That man's regeneration is his own act; that it sists merely in the change of our governing purpose, which change must ourselves produce.
DIVINE INFLUENCE .- Thrt God cannot exert suen an influence on minds of men as shall make it certain that they will choose an act particular manner without destroying their moral agency ; and t, in a moral system, God could not prevent the existence of sin, or present amount of sin, however much He might desire it.
ATONEMENT .- That Christ's sufferings were not truly and properly rious.
s regards Discipline and Church Order, this Synod do most cordially te with their brethren in other portions of our Zion, in condemning departure from the excellent order of our Church. They believe t the form of government of the Presbyterian Church in the United tes, is, in all essential features, in full accordance with the revealed I of God; Hence, therefore, whatever impairs its purity or changes essential character. is repugnant to the will of our Master. They eve that every minister and officer in the Presbyterian Church is nd. by his own voluntary subscription to our standards, to sustain order of the Church as well as to maintain her doctrines. They therefore, utterly condemn all acts which have a tendency to iken or destroy this excellent order, and testify against all departures n the true principle of our constitution.
nd they unite in their testimony against the formation of new Synods Presbyteries, otherwise than upon the established rules of our Church, or other purposes than for the edification and enlargement of the irch of Christ. As, also, against the exercise by the General Assembly, iny other ecclesiastical body in our Church, of powers not given to body by the Constitution of the Church.
he Synod have heard, too-not without alarm-of certain measures ich have recently been adopted in some portions of our much be- ed Zion-measures calculated to fill our Churches with professors of btful character, and, in our view, eminently calculated to mar the 'ity and subvert the order of God's house. Against all such measures do bear our most unequivocal testimony, and we hereby do give our Age to each other, and to the Church, that we will use our best efforts maintain the purity and discipline of the Church, according to our ellent and much valued standards.
Various were the opinions entertained of the divisive acts ich were inaugurated by the authors of The Act and Testimo-
The Biblical Repertory, the organ of Princeton, spoke
568
DR. ALEXANDER.
[1830-1840.
of the Act and Testimony as a new League and Covenant, and as an act of great injustice to multitudes of our soundest and best men. Although themselves condemning the errors al- leged, the editors declare their incredulity as to the extent of their prevalence in the bounds of the Presbyterian Church. "After making diligent inquiries for several years past," say they, "nine-tenths of our ministry are in a great measure free from the unsound opinions in question." Repertory, 1835, p. 764. " We do not believe that the errors quoted above from this document are held or approved by one- tenth of the Presbyterian Church." " We can hardly persuade ourselves that reflecting men can consider this matter, viewed as an ab- stract constitutional point, as of sufficient importance to jus- tify schism." " We must declare our utter incredulity as to any prospect of relief to our divided, struggling Church by the measures prospectively proposed by our respected breth- ren of the Act and Testimony." And yet, feeling the pres- sure that was bearing against those who doubted the wisdom of these measures, they say, " There is often much more cour- age in not acting, than in acting, and still more frequently. in moderation than in violence." Biblical Repertory, 1834, 1835. It was only gradually that the opinions and feelings of Prince- ton, in reference to the division of the Church, underwent a change. Dr. Alexander " took no leading part in the imme- diate causes of the division, which eventually took place in 1838. It is well known that he never gave his assent to the Act and Testimony. As a member of the Assembly of 1837, he advocated the abrogation of "the Plan of Union ;" he voted for the act disowning the Western Reserve Synod ; but did not vote for the act dissolving the connection of the Synods of Utica, Geneva and Genessee. He was, moreover, with Drs. Baxter and Leland, in preparing the Pastoral letter addressed to the Churches by the General Assembly." Life of Archibald Alexander, D. D., by James W. Alexander, D. D., P. 478. As Dr. Leland's name is here mentioned, we notice that his name occurs as voting with the majority on the abrogation of the Plan of Union. on the declaring the Synod of the Western Reerve "not to be a part of the Presbyterian Church," "and that the Synods of Utica, Geneva and Genessee, are declared to be out of the ecclesiastical connection of the Presbyterian Church of the United States of America, and that they are not in form or fact an integral portion of said Church."
569
30-1840.]
SYNOD OF S. C. AND GA.
These acts of the General Assembly, of 1837, were cor- ally concurred in by the Presbyteries of South Carolina, armony and Bethel. It was otherwise with Charleston Union esbytery, [which ] had been formed in November, 1822, by e Synod of South Carolina and Georgia, out of a portion of e Presbytery of Harmony and the former members of the ongregational Association of South Carolina. It was far ore likely that opposition to the action of the Assembly 1837 should arise here than elsewhere. Accordingly when e Presbytery met in November of that year, the Rev. Mr. Thite who had been a recusant member of the Assembly, oting against the action of that body in relation to the ex- inded Synods, introduced a paper declaring the action to be hconstitutional, unjust, and oppressive, and affirming that, nless a change could be effected, they would, as a last resort, nite in forming an Independent Southern Presbyterian Synod Assembly. The paper was adopted by Presbytery. Mr. ildersleeve gave notice that he would, in behalf of himself hd others, offer a protest against these resolutions. This rotest was presented the next day, and signed by B. Gilder- eeve. Thos. Smyth, A. Gilchrist, and S. Clark, with this ad- ition, " We who thus protest, would, in conclusion, say, that e do not wish to pledge ourselves to the entire expediency f the whole acts of the Assembly, but merely to their con- titutionality." Messrs. Dann, White and Glover were ap- ointed to answer the protest. But our space allows us to ive an outline only of this history.
At the meeting of the Synod of South Carolina and Geor- gia, in Columbia, S. C., Novomber 8, 1838, the following pa- er, offered by Dr. Thornwell, intended to be a testimony gainst doctrinal errors, and at the same time, a test of the orthodoxy of the members of that body, was adopted by yeas ind nays.
WHEREAS, disputes and contentions which have existed among the members of the Presbyterian Church, have resulted in a division of our communion into two denominations, differing from each other, as ve suppose, on topies of falth, involving essential elements of the gos- bel plan. And whereas, it is the duty of all the courts of the Church to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints, we, as a Synod. feel called upon, in the present crisis of our ecclesiastical affairs, to bear this our solemn testimony for the truth as it is in Jesus, in op- position to the errors and heresies which are now abroad in the land.
1. It is a fundamental article of the Christian faith, that the guilt of Adam's first sin, is imputed to all his posterity, descended from him by
570
DISSENT OF W. C. DANA AND OTHERS.
[1830-1840.
ordinary generation, so that they are born in a state of condemnation and depravity ; that this imputation is immediate and dire t having no reference to their s ibsequent concurrence in his sin by voluntary trans- gression, bat founded solely upon the fact that he was constituted by the sovereign appointment of God, their federal head and represen- tative.
2 It is a fundamental doctrine of the Gospel that Jesus Christ was actua ly the substitute of a chosen seed ; that he assumed their legal responsibilities and rendered a trae and proper satisfaction to-Divine justice on their behalf, by enduring the penalty of the law in their name and stead ; that the obedience and death of Christ, constitute the alone ground of a sinner's acceptance before God, and that "toall those for whom Christ purchased redemption, he doth certainly and effect- nally apply and communicate the same."
3. The inability of the sinner to comply with the demands of the Divine law, to believe the Gospel, or to exercise any holy affection, is absolute and en ire ; so that regeneration is effected alone by the direct and immediate agency and power of God the Spirit; the subject of this work of grace being passive, in respect to the vital operation of renew- ing the heart. We believe, moreover, that the saving grace of God is always efficacious and invincible, and its final triumph snre.
4. We believe that the form of doctrine, usually called Hopkinsian- ism, though a milder form of error than Taylorism, or Pelagianism, is inconsistent with the Presbyterian standards, and if fully carried out in its consequences and results is utterly destructive of the funda- mental principles of the Gospel.
5. This is our solemn testimony of the truths of the Gospel. And for the satisfaction of those brethren who have been perplexed with anx- iety and doubt in regard to the Theological instruction which is given in our Seminary, we, the members of this Synod, including the Profess- ors of the Theological Seminary, do pledge ourselves that no contrary doctrines shall be taught in that seminary, or in our pulpits, and that, as Professors and ministers, we will endeavor to guard our pupils and hearers against all the heresies condemned in this testimony.
Ayes-Dickson, S B. Lewers, Ketchnm, Cater, Chambers, Cassels, Da- vis. Tenney, English, Howe, Witherspoon, R. W. James, Petrie, Reid, McQueen, Donnelly Coit, Campbell, Dubose, Aiken, Snowden, W. James, A. White. Prince, Perry, Leland, McDowell. Gildersleeve, Smyth, J. Lewers, Ardis, J. B Davies, Johnston, J. L. R. Davies, W. B. Davies, Thornwell, Douglass, S. B. O Wil-on. Bishop Miller, MeJunkin. Givins, Simril, Stringfellow, Dunlap, Chamberlain, J. S. Wilson, Montgomery, Save-49.
Nays-Dwight, Bartlett, E. White, I. S. K. Legare, Yates, Dana, Ma- grnder, T. H. Legare-8.
The following protest to the report of the Committee on Mr. Thorn- well's and Coit's papers, which Synod has adopted, was then offered and ordered to be put on the Minutes.
" We, the undersigned, respectfully enter our Protest against the adoption by Synod of the paper presented by Mr Thornwell, on the ground that said paper seems intended to be not an ordinary expression of the views of those who vote for it, but as a test of orthodoxy to the individual members of the Synod. Having reason to regard it as so
571
EXPLANATIVE.
.0-1840.
gned, we feel ourselves bound to oppose its adoption, because we tot sanction the introduction of any creed other than the Confes- of Faith of our Church, which we sincerely receive and adopt-or ¡imposition of any new test of orthodoxy unknown to our standards. e wish it distinctly understood that in voting against the adoption aid paper, we refer not at all to the exhibition of doctrine which it ains, bat solely to the fact that, in the present position of this Synod, paper seems, as already stated, to be designed by the mover as a of orthodoxy, if not of adhesion to the Presbyterian Church. WILLIAM C. DANA, T. M. DWIGHT, J. L. BARTLETT, WM B. YATES, T. MAGRUDER."
Ir. [now Dr. Dana], states, in the Southern Christian Sen- [, Charleston, March 29, 1839 (which was the organ of the senting brethren), that it was not because of doctrinal dis- t that the protest was offered. He thus explains his views
I
the three doctrinal articles of Dr. Thornwell's paper,
inst which he uttered his protest because that paper was bosed as a test.
Ie accords with the first. " it being understood that this does imply the dogma of infant damnation, or imply that God siders Adani's posterity to have committed his sin in cating forbidden fruit."
He agrees with the second, with the addition, it being also c that Christ " gave himself a ransom for all, and that he is propitiation for the sin of the whole world. I Tim. ii. 6. I. hn, ii. 2, and that by " the penalty of the law" is not meant rlasting punishment, which Christ surely did not endure.
He agrees with the third with the addition, " It being un- stood that the sinner's inability arises from the fact that his trt was not right in the sight of God.
The Synod also appointed a committee, consisting of Dr. itherspoon and Messrs. Thornwell and Coit, to draft a let- to the Churches under its care, expressive of their un- ated confidence in, and affection for those men of God, the ofessors in their theological seminary, who are sedulously gaged in training up our pious young men for the office of e sacred ministry, in our Southern church and the world at
ge. This office the committee faithfully performed.
The Synod, too, expressed its approbation of the organiza- n by the general assembly of the various benevolent enter- ses of the day, upon the ecclesiastical principles of our
572
COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE.
[1830-1840.
church, and recommended to all its Presbyteries and churches to unite with that boily in akling and sustaining their various Boards of Education, of Foreign and Domestic Mission of the Tract Causes and of Sunday Schools, now placed upon the approved basis of Presbyterianism.
The Southern Board of Missions was also directed to enjoin upon all its Missionaries now in foreign lands, both in the or- ganization of churches and in the formation of ecclesiastical relations, to conform, as much as possible to the Presbyterian standards.
In pursuance of the Acts of the Assembly, both The Cen - tral Board of Foreign Missions and the Southern Board be- came auxilliary to the Assembly's Board, expressing at the same time the highest regard for the A. B. C. F. M., with which they formerly acted.
At the meeting of Synod in Augusta, Ga., in November, 1839, it was resolved in reference to the Charleston Union Presbytery, " that the body which was represented in the last General Assembly be considered the true Charleston Union Presbytery-that the remaining members of the C. U. Pres- bytery, as constituted at the last meeting of Synod, are not considered as the Presbytery-not because they have not fully approved the Acts of the Assemblies of 1837 and 1838, but, because they have not, in Presbytery, expressed their ad- lierence to the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, upon the basis of these Acts."
" Resolved, That the Charleston Union Presbytery, as ac- knowledged in the above resolution, be directed to receive any of the members of C. U. Presbytery, as constituted at the last meeting of the Synod, as members of their body, provid- ed they were willing at its next meeting to express their ad- herence on the basis of 1837 and 1838."
Professor Howe, Dr. Leland and Mr.Cassels were appoint- ed a committee to confer with those who were particularly affected by the decision just made, and see how far a recon- ciliation can be effected."
The conference was held, and at the commencement of the interview, the following paper was put into the committee's hands as their ultimatum :
" The undersigned, members of the Charleston Union Pres- bytery, in relation to whom a committee of reference has been appointed by the Synod of South Carolina and Georgia,
573
PROPOSED UNION OF SEMINARIES.
40,1
distinctly to inform the Synod, that the recognition of esbytery of which they are members, as the Charleston Presbytery, is the only basis on which they can re- any overtures from the Synod.
WILLIAM C. DANA. WILLIAM B. YATES, THOMAS MAGRUDER.
gusta, Dec. 3, 1839."
us the parties separated, not without tearful eyes and gs of sadness.
e District or County of Richland was set off by Synod the Presbytery of Harmony, and added to the Charles- Jnion Presbytery, and the name of the last mentioned ytery was changed to that of THE PRESBYTERY OF LESTON.
this Synod, Rev. M. Atkinson, of the Synod of Vir- and the Rev. D. McNeill Turner, of the Synod of North lina, were present as delegates from those Synods, with ositions respecting the union of the Theological Semina- Columbia with the Theological Seminary in Virginia. tter was received and read, also, from the Synod of Ala- , in answer to one which had been addressed to them on ubject of our Theological Seminary. The delegates Virginia were heard at length. There was a general ment that there should be a union of the seminaries, if ticable. The question was as to its location. The pro- lion was, that the Seminary at Columbia should be merged that in Virginia, at its existing location. The impression e Board and Synol was, that if the current of travel from Southwest to the North were considered, students would by Prince Edward and resort to Princeton, the great re of attraction, situated between the two cities of New k and Philadelphia, the great centres of trade for the st and South. A committee was appointed to correspond further with the Synod of Alabama, and the Synods of zinia and North Carolina were invited to consider wheth- would not be expedient to remove the condition which r beloved delegates had regarded indispensable.
Doubtless there had been great changes as to the policy of Church, if not as to its doctrine, during this decade. In 2, Dr. Alexander had proposed in the Biblical Repertory,
574
FOREIGN MISSIONS.
[1830-1840.
of Princeton, in an article on the present condition and pros- pects of the Presbyterian Church, a plan, on which the Gen- eral Assembly might be remodelled. That this ought to be done, he argued, (1.) from its unwieldly size ; (2.) the tax on Philadelphia, where it met, which he estimated at not less than $2000 per annum ; (3.) the hundreds of pulpits left va- cant by the absence of pastors in attendance. To these were added the difference of views on the subject of slavery, and between the New and Old Schools of Theology. He pro- posed, as a possible remedy, the dissolution of the Synods, as then existing, and the formation of six new ones, each to have the superintending and judicial power of the Assembly, all appeals to them to be final. The Assembly to be a bond of union, and an advisory council, and to have the control of the invested funds. The first Synod might embrace all the Synods then existing in New York, and such in New Jersey as might choose to join it. The second, the principal part of the Synod of New Jersey, those of Philadelphia and Pittsburg, except the Presbytery of Lewes, Baltimore, and the District of Columbia. Third, those of Ohio, Illinois, and the Terri- tories north of Ohio. Fourth. those of Kentucky, Missouri, Tennessee, and Arkansas. Fifth, those of Mississippi, Lou -. isiana, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and Florida Sixth, North Carolina, Virginia, District of Columbia, Mary- land, and the Presbytery of Lewes, in Delaware. Some por- tion of this plan seems to have occurred to some of our dis- senting brethren of the C. U. Presbytery, as appears by arti- cles in the Christian Sentinel, published in Charleston, of which T. Magruder was editor, and which was the organ of these brethren. This idea of Dr. Alexander seemed not to have attracted attention elsewhere, or to have been specially adhered to by himself. Events moved on, and brought about the results we have described.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.