Newspaper Page Text
14 . TH
DR. GORDON'S CRITICISM.
The net conclusion of Dr. Gordon's two
articles on The Theology of Infant Salvation
is as follows: The Scripture citations
and references in the book do not
prove that all infants dying in infancy
are saved; or, in his own words, "God's
word leaves us, at most, with liberty to
hope."
This is precisely the position of the
book itself- as the fnllrnviiie- minta?lnn
makes evident: "He (any examiner) will
find himself approaching them all (a
thousand verses of the Bible concerning
children) with a preconceived desire
to find in them some clear-cut assurance
that all dead infants are finally saved,
and that none of them are lost; yet he
will rise from his study wishing that the
Scriptures were more explicit, but still
feeling that the very most which he has
derived by honest grammar and exegesis
is suggestion, hint, hope; and that he is
at last thrown back upon theology, and
compelled to settle the matter by inference"
(P. 11).
Dr. Gordon says: "God's Word leaves
us, at most, with liberty to hope." The
book says: "The very most which we
derive bv honest irrammar anri ovouunii!
is suggestion, hint, hope." Where is
there any issue?
The book argues against the amendment
of the Confession of Faith on the
ground that the doctrine cannot be derived
from Scripture by exigesis and cannot
be supported by proof-texts.
The book takes the ground, however,
that, the Calvinistlc soteriology is biblical;
and that the doctrine, that all infants
dying in infancy are saved, is deducible,
by logical processes, from Calvinistlc
premises, and is thus remotely,
inferentially( Scriptural.
The author, however, is not willing
to see Iris own theological inferences,
nor anybody else's, introduced into the
Confession of Faith, and bound upon the
church as a creed. The Author.
CALVIN CELEBRATION.
By the Next General Assembly at Savannah,
Ga.
The supreme judicatories of all the
churches comprising .the Alliance of the
Reformed Churches throughout the world
hoidirg the Presbyterian System have
adopted plans for the general observance
of the four hundredth anniversary of the
birth of John Calvin. Our Assembly, at
its last meeting, "recognizing the historic
significance of this anniversary, and the
unusual opportunity afforded thereby for
the vindication,-propagation, and inculcation
of the great principles of the Reformed
Faith, which lie at the foundation
of civil and religious liberty," besides
suggesting 10 tne institutions or learning
within its bounds, the religious papers
and the Presbyteries, the fitting celebration
of this Quadricentennial, appointed
a strong committee, with Dr. R. F. Campbell,
of Asheville, N. C., as chairman, to
prepare a program and secure speakers.
That program is now complete and Is as
follows:
1. Calvin?The Man and His Times,
Rev. Charles Merle d'Aubigne, France.
2. Calvin's Contribution to the Reformation,
Rev. R. C. Reed,-D. D.; alternate,
Rev. C. W. Grafton, D. D.
y
E PRESBYTERIAN OF THE SOU!
3. Calvin, the Theologian, Kev. Henry
Collin Minton, D. D., Trenton, N. J.
4. Calvin's Contribution to Church
Pclity. Rev. T. C. Johnson, D. D.; alteinaie,
Rev. Robert Price, D. I).
5. Calvin'n Attitude Towards, and Exegesis
of, the Scriptures, Rev. James
Orr, T). D., Scotland.
6. Calvin's Doctrine of Infant Salvation,
Rev. R. A. Webb, D. D.; alternate.
Rev. W. L. Lingle, D. D.
7. The Relation of Calvin and Calvinism
to Missions, Rev. S. L. Morris.
D. D.; alternate, Rev. W. M. Anderson.
D. D.
8. Calvin's Contribution to Educational
Progress, Dr. Geo. H. Denny, president of
Washington and Lee University.
9. Calvin's Influence on the Political
Development of the World, Hon. Frank
T. Glasgow; alternate, Hon. W. S. Fleming.
10. How Far Has Original Calvinism
Been Modified By Time?, Rev. S. A.
King, D. D.; alternate, Rev. Harris E.
Kirk, D. D.
11. Present Day Attitude Towards
Calvinism; Its Causes and Its Significance,
Rev. Benjamin B. Warfleld, D. D.;
alternate, Rev. Wm. ILoge Marquess, D. D.
12. How May the Principles of Calvinism
Be Rendered Most Effective Under
Modern Conditions? Rev. A. M. Fra
sei, D. D.; alternate, Rev. D. Clay
Lilly. D. D.
A STATEMENT AND APPEAL.
To the Presbyterians of the Synods of
North Carolina and Virginia.
You are the owners of Union Theological
Seminary at Richmond. Its splendid
work in the past and the present
should awaken your interest and gratitude,
and should excite you to devise
liberal things for its support and enlargement.
Its faculty is an able body
of men, learned and apt to teach. Jt3
number of Rtudente la larcpv than that
of any other seminary in our church;
which fact shows not only that Union
has a right to he, hut that she has a
claim upon the people of the sustaining
Synods for a complete equipment for
her great work.
One thing?and that which is in your
hands?is needed to complete its equipment.
This thing is MONEY. Your
seminary is sorely in need of a much
larger endowment fund, whose Income
shall be sufficient to meet current expenses
and to add betterments to the
scholastic course and to the plant. Tlila
need is urgent; it is crying.
For eighteen years the undersigned
has had, by repeated appointments, the
responsibility and pleasure of serving
on the board of directors and trustees
of your seminary. On this board there
have been distinguished business men
and elders. To say nothing of those
who are ministers, we have on the board
at this time such business men as Messrs.
Q. W. Watts and B. F. Hall of North
Carolina, and Judsre ChrlRttnn nn.i t?*
Gov. J. Hoge Tyler of Virginia, Mr. C.
C. Lewis of West Virginia, Mr. H. Bradley
Davidson of Washington, and Mr.
C. W. Dorsey of Baltimore. For years
we have had the remarkable efficiency of
Mr. Munce as treasurer, to aid in managing
the finances. Yet every year
7H. February 17, igo?.
finds us witli a yawning deficit! This
appalling fact has fdr many years stood
like a mountain directly athwart the
desire and the effort of the board to
make improvements thai have been sadly
needed And there it still stands
an unsurmounted obstacle.
"The two Synods have voted to remove
this nhslnplo hv ralcino- fc*>AA AAA
? w iMiumg fwvv,vuv uy 1110
year 1912, when the seminary will celebrate
its Centennial. But the people
have not yet shown tangible signs of a
determination to raise this amount. Only
a small portion of it has been contributed.
The good people of Richmond
have set a good example. They have
erected a much needed building at a cost
of ?40,000. This fact, however, enforces
the appeal to other ]iositions of the
Church; for, of course, the maintenance
of this building will add to the expense
of maintaining the whole. The liberality
ot these people should stimulate others
to contribute to the Endowment Fnud.
Will not ministers and sessions inform
their churches of the seminary's want?
Will not the alumni, in a spirit of very
si auiuue, itii tneir people ot the wants
and opportunity of their Alma Mater?
We sometimes hear that we have too
many seminaries, and too many'preachers
in professorial work, while there is
such demand for more pastors and evangelists.
Well, this may be so; but is
Union Seminary responsible for this state
of things? She is by far the oldest
seminary in our church, and has the largest
number of students of any. These
students must have professors. This
objection, if valid, would lie against some
of the younger seminaries; it i3 hardly
pertinent to Union. You Burely can not
wish Union Seminary to contract its
course or to diminish the number of its
teachers. The demand of the times is
rather for enlargement of both. Let the
peopic give the $300,000 and amply endow
the seminary; and It is almost certain
that 110 other appeal will be made to
you for this cause for a generation.
Everybody knows that the cost of
living has much, increased within the
last fifty years. Not only so, the rate
of interest has lessened. With these
changes, the one upward and the other
downward, the current expenses of your
seminary must become more aud more
embarrassing unless the income is illcreased
by an enlargement of the endowment
fund. If the people of the two
synods desire their seminary to advance
its equipment and usefulness they must
come to its help. Calls for help to
our executive and evangelistic work are
made with perplexing frequency, and will
continue to be made. When this $:i00,000
is contributed, it is not likely that
your seminary will make another call on
you in your life-time. Raise this needed
endowment, which you can do if you
only make up your minds to do it, and
your seminary will be well furnished for
her work, and can hold a front place
among our seminaries.
To two gentlemen we are indebted for
a large pkrt of our present plant; and
ro one or inem further for repeated contributions
to the betterment of our plant
and course of studies. Shall the rest
of our people not be stimulated by their
example to sustain the seminary, and