The future of Presbyterianism in the United States

^ PRINCETON, N. J. *gj

Presented b^Pro^ :B~B.\>^^<7\A\ Ad ,-S).X,

Division
Section

NORTH AMERICAN REVIEW.

No. CCCCXL.

JULY , 1893.

THE FUTURE OF PliESBYTERIANISM IN THE
UNITED STATES.

BY THE REV. CHARLES A. BRIGGS, D. D.

Presbyterian-ism in the United States of America derived
its life and its principles from the Presbyterian churches of Great
Britain. England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales each contributed
important factors. The home of Presbyterianism is Scotland,
where the national church has been Presbyterian, with the ex-
ception of a few decades, since the Protestant Reformation.
Presbyterianism in Ulster was of Scottish origin, but it soon
assumed a provincial type which it has retained with great
tenacity and which the Ulster contingent in America has
maintained as if it were tlie genuine original Presbyterianism.
English Presbyterianism had an independent origin through
Cartwright, Travers and their associates in the Puritan struggle
within the Church of England. The English type of Presby-
terianism influenced Wales, Dublin and the south of Ireland.

Presbyterianism derived its name from the ecclesiastical polity
and discipline which it advocated over against Prelacy on the one
hand and Independency on the other. In the sixteenth century
doctrinal differences did not emerge, for the Presbyterians were
no more rigid Calvinists than were the Prelatists and the Inde-
pendents. In the seventeenth century a considerable portion of
the Prelatical party became Arminian, but Calvinism always re-
mained a potent factor in tlie Church of England, entrenched in
the Thirty-nine Articles. The Independents in the seventeenth
and eighteenth centuries were more rigid Calvinists than the
Presbyterians. The conflicts of Presbyterianism with its foes and
the internal conflicts of Presbyterianism itself in Scotland have

VOL. CLVII. — NO. 440. 1

Copyright, 1898, by Llovd Brvor. All rights reserved.

2 THE NORTH AMERICAN REVIEW.

been chiefly ecclesiastical. Few doctrinal conflicts have taken
place in Scotland, and these have never wrought division. All
of the divisions in Scottish Presbyterianism have resulted from
differences in opinion on ecclesiastical questions. Presbyterian-
ism in England gradually wasted away. Under the policy of
comprehension, which was maintained by many of the English
bishops in the last half of the seventeenth century and in the
early part of the eighteenth century, large numbers of Presby-
terians returned to the Church of England. The subscription
controversy still farther weakened them. They maintained Puri-
tan liberty and refused subscription. But this gave the more
radical type of Presbyterianism such an advantage that in the
course of time the whole English Presbyterian body became Uni-
tarian, so that in England Presbyterianism and Unitarianism are
synonymous terms. In Ireland the Anglo-Irish and the Scoto-
Irish types came into conflict in the subscription controversy and
Presbyterianism was divided. As a resultant of the subscription
controversy English Presbyterianism became too broad and Scoto-
Irish Presbyterianism too narrow.

Presbyterianism in America resulted from a mingling of all
the British types, with the addition of elements from the Re-
formed churches of France and Switzerland, and a numerous
body of New England Cougregationalists who, on migrating to
the Middle colonies, became Presbyterians in accordance with a
policy of non-intrusion, agreed upon by Cougregationalists and
Presbyterians at that time. Presbyterianism was organized in
Philadelphia in the spring of 1706 by Francis Makemie, John
Hampton and Samuel Davis, Irishmen ; George McMsh, a
Scotchman, and Jedediah Andrew, John Wilson, and Nathaniel
Taylor, New England Puritans. In ten years they increased to
eight Scotchmen, seven Irishmen, three Welshmen, and seven New
Englanders. -

The two great types of Presbyterianism came into conflict
upon the question of subscription in 1728. John Thomson, an
Ulsterman, introduced an overture in favor of strict subscription
to the Westminster standards. This was opposed by New Eng-
landers. But a compromise was effected by the genius of Jona-
than Dickinson, who devised a plan of subscription to ''all the
essential and necessary articles " of the Westminster standards ;
end to the Presbyterian government and discipline as '' agreeable

THE FUTURE OF PRESBYTERIANISM IN AMERICA. 3

in substance to the Word of God," to be observed " as near as
circumstances will allow and Christian prudence direct."

This fundamental agreement in the act of adoption of the
Westminster system lies at the basis of the constitution of the
American Presbyterian Church and is the pivot of its history.
The strict subscriptionists were not satisfied. They agitated in
several of the presbyteries for a narrow interpretation of the
Adopting Act. At last they accomplished their purpose in 1741,
by taking advantage of an accidental majority, which they ob-
tained by the absence of an unusual number of ministers, espec-
ially from the large Presbytery of New York. A synod of forty-
seven ministers was broken up by a majority of two in a total
vote of twenty-two, and twelve ministers succeeded in casting out
eleven. After several years of earnest effort for harmony the
Presbytery of New York united with those who had been cast
out and organized the Synod of New York, which became known
as the New Side over against the Synod of Philadelphia, which
was called the Old Side. On the New Side were liberal subscrip-
tion, considerate discipline, vital piety and aggressive evangeliza-
tion ; on the Old Side were strict discipline, ecclesiastical
domination, conformity to rigid types of doctrine and traditional
methods of work. The Presbyterian Church at that time was
about to unite with the Reformed churches from Holland and
Germany, in accordance with the advice of the mother synod.
But John Thomson and his eleven associates frustrated a union
which might have been of immense advantage to American
Christianity, and wrought an unhappy division which disorgan-
ized for some years the work of evangelization on the frontiers
and among the American Indians.

During the period of separation the Old Side did not prosper ;
they gained only four ministers, wliile the New Side grew from
20 to 72 ministers. The reunion in 1758 was accomplished by
falling back on the Adopting Act of 1729. It was agreed that
the synod should determine only such things as were " indispen-
sable in doctrine and Presbyterian government ;" and subscrip-
tion was limited to the " system of Christian doctrine " of the
Westminster standards. The Presbyterian Church thrived from
1758 until 1788 when the General Assembly was organized, the
Westminster symbols revised, and the constitution adopted.
Terms of subscription were framed which, in accordance with

4 I'HE NORTH AMERICAN REVIEW.

the Adopting Act of 1729 and the Terms of Union of 1758, lim-
ited subscription to the " system of doctrine."

Besides this main stock of Presbyterians, the several non-
conforming Presbyterian bodies of Scotland and Ireland estab-
lished colonies in the United States which, after many subdivi-
sions and reconstructions, resulted in several branches of Reformed
Presbyterians and United Presbyterians.

In 1810, by an act of intolerance and wrong to a little body of
pious evangelists, the Presbyterian Church provoked a schism of
several ministers who organized the Cumberland Presbyterian
Church, which has grown during the century, in the valley of the
Mississippi, into a great Presbyterian organization with a General
Assembly and many subordinate synods and presbyteries.

Doctrinal controversies sprang up early in the century in the
Presbyterian Church, respecting the extent of the Atonement
and the imputation of Adam's sin and of Christ's righteousness ;
and a New School party was formed over against an Old School
party. These parties were simply the renewal of the Old and New
sides of the previous century, and indeed of the English and
Ulster types of Presbyterianism, under new circumstances and
with regard to new questions. Albert Barnes and Lyman Beecher
were tried for heresy, and although ultimately acquitted by the
General Assembly, yet the Old School was dissatisfied with the
verdicts and in 1837 *' finding themselves for a second time only
within seven years in the majority, took advantage of the occasion
to exscind simply by an act of power, irrespective of constitu-
tional limitation," four synods with all their churches and min-
isters. The aggrieved New School held a convention at Auburn
in August, 1837, and at the Assembly of 1838 demanded the
enrollment of the representatives of the four exscinded synods.
When this was refused two Assemblies were organized, the Old
School and the New School. These continued apart until 1870.
During the War of the Rebellion each school threw off the South-
ern synods. These organized the Southern Presbyterian Church,
which still continues its independent life. The Old School and
New School Assemblies united in 1870 on the basis of the Con-
stitution of 1788 with an understanding of mutual respect and
toleration to both sides on all matters which had been in conten-
tion. This reunion did not remove differences in spirit, in doc-
trine, or in ecclesiastical principles. The two parties were united

THE FUTURE OF PRESBYTERIANISM IN AMERICA. 5

in one comprehensive churcli instead of remaining apart in differ-
ent organizations.

There was an era of peace and good will which lasted about a
decade, when strife again broke out between the same old parties.
The aggressive minority again strove to impose their provincial
theology and their ecclesiastical domination upon the whole
Church. Several trials for heresy and for irregularity were held
in different parts of the Church, which were not regarded as
sufficiently important to rally the parties in battle array. The
Swing case in Chicago, the McCune case in Cincinnati, and other
lesser cases in New Jersey, Pennsylvania and elsewhere, were re-
garded by the New School as breaches of faith on the part of the
Old School ; but they were patiently endured in the hope that
better feelings and actions would ultimately prevail. A greater
peril came when the united Review, after the death of Henry B.
Smith, passed into the hands of those who were not sensitive to
the delicacy of the situation, but the misunderstanding was
removed by the establishment of the Presbyterian Revieio in
which all the theological seminaries were proportionately repre-
sented. It was evident that the reactionary party were becoming
more and more aggressive, and it needed only the emergence of
some great questions to rally them to a new act of ecclesiastical
domination. In the meanwhile the liberal party became more
and more discouraged, and large numbers of ministers and lay-
men sought refuge especially in Congregational and Episcopal
churches, and the conservative party became constantly more
ambitious as it captured one after another of the strong pulpits
of the New School party, and secured the control of alJ the
Presbyterian newspapers, with the single exception of the New
York Evangelist.

The Revision movement, which burst forth from tlie people
without any ecclesiastical leadership, took the Presbyterian
Church by surprise and threw the conservative party into a
panic. It was the last straw which broke the back of the com-
bination of interests in the Presbyterian Review and brought
about its dissolution. The conservatives rallied about a new
Review, and then by shrewd management at Saratoga in 1890
gained control of the committee appointed to revise the Con-
fession. They then recommended such minor and trivial revi-
sions as failed to satisfy the demands of the revisionists. Ac-

6 THE NORTH AMERICAN REVIEW.

cordingly liberals and conservatives united in defeating the
proposed revisions, and the Revision movement came to a halt
in the last General Assembly at Washington. The revisionists
were divided into two bands ; the one seeking relief by amendment
of the Confession, the other by a new and simple creed. The
latter were called by the reactionaries radical revisionists. The
two bands of revisionists worked together until the Assembly at
Saratoga. There the conservatives succeeded in dividing them
with the aim of destroying them in detail. The dissatisfaction
with the revision offered by the compromisers greatly increased
the numbers of those who desire a new creed ; so that the Re-
vision movement has now passed over into a movement for a new
creed. But this movement was not strong enough to gain rec-
ognition from the ultra-conservatives, who held the General
Assembly at Washington entirely in their power. It is evident,
however, that the movement for a new creed will increase in
impetus until in 1894 or 1895 the ultra-conservatives will be
forced to yield to it, and there will be another effort made by
ecclesiastical politicians to stoop to conquer. They will prob-
ably go so far in the movement as to gain the control of it ; and
then so direct it as to render it inoperative and unsuccessful.
They will probably succeed in these tactics, as they have just suc-
ceeded in destroying the Revision movement. Then will come a
movement which the ecclesiastics will be unable to control — a
strong, irresistible demand of a deceived and oft-betrayed minis-
try and people, for such a revision of the terms of subscription
as will make it evident to all the world that a man of the most
scrupulous conscience may adhere to the Westminster symbols as
the historic monuments of the Presbyterian Church witheut
risking his manhood under the ecclesiastical domination of an
ultra-conservative faction which may think that it can dominate
the faith of the Church, or force from the Church of their
fathers by accidental and worked up majorities ministers more
truly orthodox than themselves.

The attention of tlie ministry and people of the Presbyterian
Church has been withdrawn from the movement in behalf of a
new creed by a band of ecclesiastics who have thrown them into
a panic about the Bible because of the Inaugural Address of Pro-
fessor Briggs on the Authority of Holy Scripture, delivered
January 20, 1891. That address, as is well known, did not

THE FUTURE OF PRESBYTERIANISM IN AMERICA. 7

promulgate new and strange doctrines. The doctrines stated in
that address are but the summary statements of the doctrines
which Professor Briggs had been teaching for many years, and
which had been before the public for several years in his several
printed books, such as Biblical Study, American Preshyterian-
ism. Messianic Prophecy, Whither; and in numerous articles in
the Presbyterian Review, which were condoned by the Presby-
terian Church, even if they were regarded as erroneous, during
all that time in which Professor Briggs was joint editor of that
Revieio with Dr. A. A. Hodge and Dr. F. L. Patton. There
was nothing in the Inaugural Address as such which could have
excited such a panic, if it had not been so misinterpreted and
misquoted by partisan Presbyterian newspapers, and by reac-
tionary ecclesiastics to mislead and deceive the Presbyterian
ministry and people, especially in the outlying districts and in
the more remote regions of the country.

It is quite true that the Inaugural Address and the other
writings mentioned raise many important theological questions
which seem new, startling and dangerous to those who have been
trained in the traditional theology, and who have not kept in
touch with the modern scientific study of the Bible and of Church
History. But to those who know the currents of theological
thought in Great Britain and on the continent of Europe, it seems
surprising that the great Presbyterian Church should have been
thrown into a panic by such an address. The pauic has accom-
plished the purpose of those who excited it, and Professor Briggs
has been suspended from the Presbyterian ministry for teaching
doctrines which ''strike at the vitals of religion." These doc-
trines are the following: (1) The Bible, the Church and the
Reason are historically three great fountains of divine authority ;
(2) There may have been errors in the original autographs of
Holy Scripture ; (3) Moses did not write the Pentateuch, and
Isaiah did not write half the book which bears his name ; (4)
There is progressive sanctification in the middle state between
death and the resurrection. These doctrines are beyond the range
of those defined in the Westminster Confession, are extra-confes-
sional, and within the area of the liberty guaranteed by the con-
stitution of the Church. And yet the General Assembly at Wash-
ington by a groat majority declared them to bo errors which
''strike at the vitals of religion," and for holding and teaching

3 THE NORTH AMERICAN REVIEW.

them Professor Briggs was suspended from the Presbyterian min-
istry.

If the General Assembly had the power to determine the faith
of the Presbyterian Church by such a decision it would put all
liberal Presbyterians in a serious situation, in which they would
either be obliged to submit to these decisions or else to retire
from tlie Presbyterian ministry. But a General Assembly has
no such power. It cannot determine the faith of the Church
either by deliverance of opinion or by judicial condemnation of a
minister. The constitution prescribes the way in which the faith
of the Church may be determined, namely, by the agreement of
two-thirds of the presbyteries to a statement of doctrine sub-
mitted to them by the General Assembly. Therefore the only
effect of the suspension of Professor Briggs, for the reasons as-
signed, is that his doctrines are declared to be hurtful errors by
the majority of the last Assembly. But the minority of that
Assembly, who have declared that his doctrines are not hurtful
errors, have a legal right to hold those opinions, and to contend
for them until they are declared to be hurtful errors by amend-
ments of the Confession of Faith.

Furthermore, the minority contend that the Assembly at
Washington was guilty of usurpation of power and of ecclesiastical
domination of the same general character as the act of John
Thomson and his eleven associates in 1741, and of the General
Assembly of 1837. For the General Assembly violated the con-
stitution of the Church and all the precedents of Presbyterian
practice in these three respects : (1 ) It recognized the right of a
public prosecutor to appeal against a verdict of acquittal ; (2.)
It recognized that a committee appointed by the Presbytery of
New York was independent of the Presbytery which appointed
it ; (3.) It usurped the jurisdiction of the Synod of New
York by assuming jurisdiction of a case which was under the
jurisdiction of the Synod of New York and not yet determined
by that synod. These unconstitutional acts of the Assembly at
Washington have not yet been recognized by the Synod of New
York, and until the synod has yielded its jurisdiction and offi-
cially given its consent to these actions of the General Assembly,
the minority of the Assembly are legally justified in declining to
submit to them.

A General Assembly is not a permanent body. It has no con-

THE FUTURE OF PRESBYTERJANJSM IN AMERICA. 9

tinuous life. It is com posed of representatives of the presby-
teries who meet together for a few days and thee dissolve forever.
One, two or three General Assemblies in succession may usurp
power, may do grave injustice, may make breaches in the consti-
tution of the Church. But all these wrongs may be righted by
a fourth or a fifth, or any subsequent Assembly. There are numer-
ous examples of such things in the history of Presbyterianism.
The minority of the last Assembly and those who agree with them
throughout the Presbyterian Church are therefore justified in
the continuation of the struggle for liberty, for truth, and for
right.

The majority of votes in favor of the suspension was very
great. But if the votes are weighed as well as counted the dis-
parity will not be regarded as serious. The basis of representa-
tion in the General Assembly gives the small presbyteries in the
country districts and on the frontiers a vastly greater power
than they are entitled to by their numbers or influence, while
the strong presbyteries in our large cities and in the great com-
munities are put at a serious disadvantage. The General As-
semblies as they are now constituted represent the least intelli-
gent portion of the Church, and not infrequently a majority in
the Assembly really represents a minority of the ministers and
people in the denomination. A majority of a General Assembly
is not taken seriously by intelligent Presbyterians.

The only danger of another disruption in the Presbyterian
Church at present is in such an assumption of power on the part
of another Assembly as would by an act of violence exclude at a
blow large numbers of ministers and people from the Presby-
terian Church. Such action is improbable. It is probable that
there will be a series of heresy trials for several years until the
ultra-conservatives exhaust themselves and tire the patience of
the Church, when there will be a reaction so strong, so sweeping,
so irresistible in its demands for breadth of thought, liberty of
scholarship, intelligent appropriation of the wealth of modern
science and the efficiency of modern methods of work, that the
reactionaries will be swept all at once and forever into insignifi-
cance. The onset of modern scholarship and of scientific methods
of study and of work is as steady and sweeping as the march of a
glacier. It grinds to powder everything that obstructs its
path. The Presbyterian Church will probably not be seriously

10 THE North American review.

injured by it ; but the ultra-conservative party in the Presby-
terian Church will be crushed by it in due time.

All American churches are in the stream of that tendency
which is rushing on towards the unity of Christ's Church. The
hedges which separate the denominations are traditional theories
and practices ; but they are no longer realities to thinking and
working men and women. The liberals of every denomination
of Christians are more in accord with one another than they are
with the conservatives in their own denominations. The problem
in the near future is this : Can the liberals remain in comfort
in their several denominations and so become the bridges of
Church Unity ; or will they be forced to unite in a comprehensive
frame of Church Unity outside the existing denominations ; or
will they rally around the more liberal communions ? There
seems to be little doubt that the liberals at the present time are
quite comfortable as Episcopalians and as Congregationalists, and
not altogether uncomfortable as Baptists and as Methodists, and
that there is no other denomination in which they are so uncom-
fortable as in the Presbyterian Church. It is possible that
they may, after a year or more of battle for liberty, be com-
pelled to retire from the existing Presbyterian Cliurch and aban-
don it to a traditional, unscholarly and fossilized majority ;
and then organize a liberal Presbyterian Church as has been done
twice before in this country. But this is not probable at the
present time. The liberals will still continue to make themselves
as comfortable as possible during the brief period of theological
war, until a final struggle may determine their destiny. They
will go on in theological investigation ; they will continue the
study of the higher criticism of Holy Scripture ; they will seek
more light upon the dark problems of the future of the earth and
man ; they will continue to seek God through the Church and the
Reason as well as through the Bible ; they will remain the great
constitutional party ; they will be patient, brave, painstaking and
heroic, until the Presbyterian Church becomes as broad, catholic
and progressive as her Congregational and Episcopal sisters ; and
then Church Unity will be nigh, at the doors, and a happy end of
controversy will be seen in a united Protestantism, which will be
then encouraged to seek a higher and grander unity, in which
the Roman and Greek communions will likewise share.

C. A. Bkiggs.

Date Due

, , ^y

0 1^ ^-

•

I,

V-

'.r

, , r

AiLlX

f)

'pilisiiiiiPilii