IS IT ORTHODOX?

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 274, 12 August 1908, Page 9

IS IT ORTHODOX?

REV. J. GIBSON SMITH'S NEW BOOK. OVERTURE BEFORE PRESBYTERY. AN INTERESTING DISCUSSION. The question of the orthodoxy of tho theory of the Atonement propounded in tho Rov. J. Gibson Smith's recent, book was brought up in, the Presbytery, yesterday. Notice of motion, to overture tho General Assembly to. "reaffirm and anew declare the church's adherence to the doctrine of her standards" was submitted by the Rev. J. Kennedy Elliott. . The .Rev. J. Paterson thought that it would be more kindly and brotherly to discuss '■ the matter first with" Mr. Gibson Smith' at a private conference.' An'.interest,ing discussion and tho Presbytery will decide its course of action at another meeting/ to be held on September 1. PROPOSED OVERTURE. Immediately after the minutes had been read; the Rov. J!. Kennedy Elliott gave notieo to move his overture motion as follows: — "Whereas the whole of Christendom holds and teaches that Christ by His obedience and suffering satisfied' Divine justice, thi3 doctrine being set forth in the Decrees of tho Council of Trent, in the Augsburg Confession,, and in all the confessions of the different branches, of the Reformed Church, and . "Whereas this Presbyterian Church holds and proclaims this same doctrine as set forth in our Standards as follows:— " 'The Lord Jesus, by His perfect obedience " and sacrifice of Himself, which! He through tho Eternal Spirit once offered up unto God, hath fully t satisfied the justice of His Father.' (Confession VIII: 5.) " 'Christ, by His-obedience and death, did fully discharge tho debt of all thoso that' arc thus justified, and did make a proper, real, and full satisfaction to His Fsither's justico in their behalf.'—(Confession xr: 5.) ' ' ".'Christ, by-His obedience and death, did make a proper, real, and full satisfaction to God's: justice .'in the behalf of them that are justified.'—(Larger Catechism 71.) , "''Christ - 'oxecuteth'the office,of a

priest, in His once offering up of Himself a sacrifice to satisfy Divine justice, and reconcile us to 'God.'—(Shorter , Catechism'. 25.) ".Whereas every minister and elder of this Church before he enters upon office acknowledges, in tha most solemn manner, that tho said doctrine expresses the sense in which be understands the Holy Scriptures, and that lie will constantly maintain and defend the same. And:. ;.' . . V Whereas a minister : of this Church- has published a book entitled ' The Christ of tho Crosslin which he emphatically and. with scorn denies the truth of the.said doctrine as .follows:— . . . " ' The expiatory theory, let it now be said with perfect plainness, is not the truo explanation of the Cross of Christ. It 'is-tnat-repulsive-semblance of the truth which has prevented many a sensitive and earnest soul from finding the truth,'and-to'assert with loud protestations or, to try to prove with laborious, painstaking zeal;that it is tho beautiful and worthy setting of the. truth', detracts not a jot from, its " inherent repulsiveness.'—(Page 63.) ; - "' According to the expiatory theory, God's retributive justice was satisfied on • the Cross. According to the: Scriptures, it would appear that God's retnbutivo justice has never, as yet, been satisfied in human history at all.'—(Page 74.) " 'It (the expiatory theory) makes Godj and the Son of God, and tho Apostles of Christ, arid the Scriptpre3 responsible for contradictions, fictions, 4 " and" 1 absurdities, ; with' .which they have in reality nothing whoever t0,.d0, and for-,whichjthe 11 expia- " tory theory,' because of'it's fundamental, error in describing the work of redemp- , tiori'as all iichievement of impossibilities, ... is .wholly andjsolely responsible;'—(Pago".

" 'But so far lias the theology of tho expiatory theory been from coinciding with the Holy Spirit's teaching,, that it haa almost'evaporated the horror.of sin-out of,the ; Croas.and encouraged.men to imagine that' the greatest, most dreadful, .and impious defiance of God that the world has ever known, or will know, was something well-pleasing to God and a complete satisfaction to His retributive justice.' It is simply inevitable that the. horror of sin should die out .in the hearts of men when they 'are -taught to believe .and..persuade, themselves that it is really true that the crowning sin of the world was, not an. outrage.; upon God at all } . but something through which God's justice was satisfied.' .: (Page 193.) -, " 'God never needed that His retributive justice. should be satisfied as a preliminary condition of the forgiveness of sins.' (fage. 296.) 1 ■ "This Presbytery hereby resolves to overture the General Assembly of the Church indicted to meet at Dunedm on Tuesday, November 10, 1908, that, in the circumstances above narrated, for the upholding of tho testimony of the Church, for the stability of the ■■ saints in their faith, and for the maintenance of the Church's position before tho State, it is highly expedient to reaffirm and anew declare this Church's adherenco to tho doctrine of her, standards; in such terms as to tho wisdom of the General Assembly may seem meet." The. Moderator (Rev. J. Gibson Smith): I have no objection to that notice of overturo being received. ' The Rev. J. K. Elliott: Of course not. The Rev. W. Shirer (Presbytery clerk) wished to know. when the motion would be discussed. Mr. Elliotti The church is anxiously waiting until we discuss.it reasonably as we can. -,

THE DISCUSSION. At'the conclusion of the other business of tho Presbytery, tlio Rev. W. Shiror raisod tho point whether this ovorture should bo considered at the noxt regular meeting,- or at a special meeting. Ho thought that it could not bo dealt with till tho regular.meeting, two months hence. The Rev. J. Kennedy Elliott said that ho had no wish to bo precipitate.' but it was drawing near to the time of.the Assembly, when tnoy would have a lot of other business to transact. Mr. Shirer read from the Book of Orders to show that tho matter could be dealt with by a special meeting, only if it was the unanimous wish of the Prosbytory. s ' , A Friendly, Confercnco Proposed. The Rev. J. Paterson, who had not been present when the overturo was brought forward, said that he had moant, when this matter came beforo the Presbytery, to make a suggestion, which he would still venture to make if it was not too late. This was to have a friendly, brotherly confcrenco with their friend Mr. Gibson Smith, of a private character. ' Elliott pointed out that Mr. Paterson had .taken- tho responsibility of mentioning names.';. The overture had not mentioned any name. Mr. Paterson said that lie mado tho proposal for throe reasons. First, ho thought that it would bo rnoro brotherly and kindly, if, instead of going direct to tho Assembly in the first instance, they should meet thoir brother privately and talk the matter over with him in all its bearings. Secondly, ho thought that it was only justice to thorn-' solves as brethren together that, when a serious matter of this kind came up, they should, take, in the first instanco at any rate, the most brotherly course. Thirdly, he knew that it was always a most serious matter to brins: a thin;' like this beforo tho courts of the Church. He could foresee a good deal of distress of men's minds and hearts if this matter wore discussed in tho courts. The overture would go up to tho Assembly, whence it would be sent back, very likely, to tho Presbytery. They would have to report to the Assembly again, and it would be before tlio Church with all the vexations, heartburnings, and troubles, connected with it for perhaps a couple of years or more. Ho was not sanguine as to what might result from it, but if by private explanations and discussion they could avoid all that, it would be an unspeakable gain, he was certain, to

tho Church. Possibly there would bo nothing for it in the end, but to send up tho matter to the Assembly, but they should first exhaust every legitimate means to avoid that course. ■ Question of Procedure. . The Rev. J. Gibson Smith (Moderator of tho Presbytery) said he did not think tliey should commence, on that occasion, a discussion of Mr. Paterson's remarks. The matter had already been before tho Presbytery, and they had given, their decision. All Mr. Paterson's suggestions could be considered when the Presbytory met to consider tho overture. The only question which had boon left indefinite was the date of the meeting at which tho overture was to be' discussed, and ho thought that that should be considered then. : Tho Rev. W. J. Comrie submitted that Mr. Paterson was perfectly in order in moving for a private inquiry. Tliero could bo no discussion on 1 a noticc-of motion, but'tho Pj'esbytery was ill order in moving for a committeo to deal with tho questifin, and such a committee was assumed to be a necessary step in the procedure of the Church courts.' The Moderator thought that if Mr. Paterson had moved his motion when the notieo of motion was brought forward tho Presbytery could have proceeded with the matter, but no one had proposed a motion, and tho opportunity was now past for that meeting. Mr. Comrie 'urged that a notice of motion did not bring the matter up at all. Tho matter had not been discussed or decided in any shapo or form, and could not be without a resolution of the Presbytery, which resolution Mr. Paterson was quite in order to move. ' Tho Moderator: You can't consider Mr. Paterson's suggestion without going back on the motion to accept this notice of . motion for discussion at next meeting. . Mr. Conirie submitted that there could.be ho v question of accepting or rejecting a notice of motion. The Rev. J. Kennedy Elliott agreed, but pointed put that if the matter was brouirht up, they could not prevent a discussion. The Presbytery wbuld get themselves into a very serious difficulty if they'listened to what Mr. Paterson had said. If tho subject was to be discussed, ho would have to express his opinion on it. ' Tho Moderator: Mr. Paterson's motion assumes that notice has been given to nie about a matter affecting me personally. That is the first notice I have had, and I distinctly object to have a matter of this kind brought up at a meeting without any previous notice to.me at all.

Doctrines; Not Tho Individual. Mr. Elliott said he would deeply regret that the Presbytery should hold anything like a conference, - beca-uso they would then be dealing with an individual. ' Ho proposed, and he hoped that the Presbytery would do the same, to deal simply with doctrines, and not to prosecute or persectite. any individual; •but he thought he had the right to say that the doctrine of the Church was so and so when circumstances had arisen that had led them to beliove that thero were other doctrines, and to call on the Assembly, which resorved to • itself . tho ■ right' to say what the doctrine of tho Church was. Ho was not attempting to prosecute, persecute, libel, or malign any individual,. Ho took his- stand purely on tho ground of doctrine. If they held a conference they-would always remo'mber that they were a court'/ 'and dealing with an individual. Suppose the person in question agreed to their representations, and retracted all ho had said, how would-that affect the action of tho Presbytery in going up to the Assembly and asking it to say what tho doctrine was' that had-been brought into discussion? Again, suppose he said, as the speaker understood was probable, that he held firmly to his opinion, th'At he had got'fuller light on the subject', arid would not surrender his belief, they would Wb'dund, as self-respecting men, to say that they must put him'on'--his'.trial, arid that, if ho,.would hot assent to the ohurch's''d6cti : me "lie must go before the Assembly. What would the • man himself think of it if tljey not do this ? Suppose, Tori tEST other-h'arid',' he* expressed regret for,having.disturbed the peaco .of the Church, but expressed, iwregret that he-had'struck-at a doctrine which many ofthem, and the Church itself, considered vital,: and said that he would not preach that doctrine in future, would the Churoh be satisfied with a repentance of that kiiulP A private conference might have been held to deal with a matter that was still private, but this matter liad been published to the whole world, and tho law of Christ and of commorisenso did not require that it should'bo dealt with in a manner private and brotherly .'. : They did not know that the Assembly would 1 send back tho question to tho Presbytery. Tho Assembly might deal firmly with the and the writer of the work might say: "Men and brethren led by tho Holy Spirit, I bow to your opinion." What was tho'good 'of a Presbytery if it did hot do its duty, even when unpopular ? He "would not be a party to a conference, he would not be present at it. He thought that it was a wrong way of dealing with tho difficulty.

" Anxiety and Perplexity."

I Mr. Paterson said he had made the proposal because ho thought that it would bo a' kindly and brotherly thing to meet their brother in conference before they rushed into the Church courts. They could not shut their eyes to what would bo the result of that. It would mean anxiety and perploxity throughout tho Church. He thought that they should take any other courso whatevor, oven though nothing might como out of it, As, however, his proposal did not seem to be acceptable, he would not press his motion, though ho still thought that what he suggested would have been the wisest courso to tako in the first instance. -

The Rev. R. Inglis submitted that Mr. Elliott should not tell- the Presbytery that ho would not attend the conference if held. Mr. Elliott: You aro putting him in tho position of a prqs'ecuted man. I will only deal with doctrine.

Mr. Inglis: Mr. Kennedy Elliott is a loyal Presbyterian, and whatever this Presbytery decides Mr. Kennedy Elliott will oboy. , Mr. Elliott: I'll not attend any conferonce. -. Ho said that this matter had caused him sleepless nights and much anxioty and prayer, and he was not acting rashly in refusing to join a conference. ' Mr. Elliott' then left the mooting.

Effect oi a Notico of Motion. In the .course of further discussion, tho Moderator said that tho notice of motion could havo been .refused. Suppose a member of the Presbytery became demented, and gave in an. uttorly nonsensical notico of motion! Mr. J. G. W. Aitken, M.P.: Tho Moderator could refuse it, but tho Presbytery could not. (Hear, hear.) The Moderator: Thin I think you'should consider whether, if it affects a particular individual in this Presbytory, any notice has been to that individual. The Rev. \V. J. Comrio urged that notico could not be given to a person boforehand. They must go step by step. This was not a motion for a libel, and ho hoped that they would never como to the length of having a motion for a libel. : Mr. Inglis said he rathor thought that Mr. Paterson would do better to defer his motion till noxt meeting of tho Presbytory, when no legal exception could bo takon to it. Ho agreed that they should exhaust every pacifio moans of settlement beforo they accepted anything harsh or in the naturo of the overture submitted by Mr. Elliott. It was stated that tlio speaker must not discuss tho overture. Tho Rev. A. Thomson said ho did not think that harsh was a proper torm to apply to it. The Moaorator said that tho question for consideration was whether they should deal with tho matter at the next regular mooting, or at a special meeting. Mr. Paterson: I can givo notico that when tho mdttor comes up I will inovo that wo have a preliminary confercnco beforo the overture is sent up to tho Assembly. Membors: Thoro is no need to givo notico. The Rev. W. J. Comrio thought that the Moderator should receive Mr. Paterson's' iioticc of motion, to prevent my subsequent misunderstanding. After further discussion it was decided that the matter be considered at an ordinary meeting of tlio Presbytory, to be held oil September 1.