Newspaper Page Text
June 2, igog. TH!
been to push the questions of Evangelism'
within the Presbytery through our Correspond*
ing Members, a list of whom is hereto attached.
(See Appendix "B."). The effort
lias yielded most gratifying results, as can
be seen from the following quotations from
letters received.
One brother writes, "It is our purpose to
have every church visited by at least two
men, and a week's meetiug held in each
place. This plan was adopted at the suggestion
of the llome Mission Committee of whieli
I am chairman (he Is our Corresponding Member
also) and will be held under my direction.
lOU 1III1J' IIICMKIV iun uuuci iuv nv.. ......
committee us It will lie upon the lines Ink]
ilowu by you." Another brother writes, "At
the sprlug meeting of l'reskytery we
voted to hire n Presbyterlal Kvungelist for
one year, and sufficient funds were pledged to
cover the expense of- same, oyier than this,
no formed steps were taken along evangelistic
lines, but we feel that tills uieuus a great
deal for our I'resbytery." The above are takeu
from a large uuuiber of letters received by
the chairman, all of which indicate that the
Presbyteries are taking hold of this work
with the determination to push same vigorously.
While we believe in the large evangelistic
campaigns, and especially the simultaneous
evangelistic campaigns, we can not but feel
that we can do our best srvice as a Church
by pushing this work through our Presbyterla)
machinery, and thus reach the weakest part
of our territory which is to a large exteut
untouched by the ordinary evangelistic campaign.
Both pluus should lie pushed according
to location and condition of work.
SteDs have been taken to huve the evan
gellstlc responsibility and opportunity or tue
church emphasized In the conference at Moutcngle
and Montrent during the coining suuiliter.
Through the co-operation and courtesy
of the Supt. of Platform* Work at Monteagle,
the Hon. Allen O. Hall one hour each da^
has been given to Evangelism during the
Bible study week, with two of our best inen,
Rev. C. R. Hemphill and Rev. W. M. Anderson,
on the program.
At Montrcat, Dr. W. W. White, who Is
charged with the duty of planning the work,
has given assurance of his purpose to emphasize
evangelism, glvlug the theme an hour
each day throughout the entire course, and
bringing the program to a "Umax In n practical
application of the teaching of the Bible to
evangelistic preaching and efTort.
During the month of March, your committee
was invited to enter a conference with
representatives of other Presbyterian bodies
called to discuss the advisability of organizing
a world-wide Evangelistic Campaign under
th? >111 sulcus of the different Presbyteriau
bodies of the world. The invitation was accepted
and our Chairman attended the conference
In the city of New York. Representatives
were present from the Presbyterian
churches in hte U. 8., the United Presbyterian
Church, the Presbyterian Church in the
U. 8. A., and the Canadian Presbyterian
Church through a message from her representative,
Rev. Ralph Connor, D. D. After
mature deliberation, it was unanimously decided
that the time was at hand when a
great evangelistic effort, world-wide In its
scope, should be undertaken, and that in the
providence of God, the Presbyterian Church
is the one to lead in this greaf nggressiao
movement: That the General Assemblies of
all the Presbyterian bodies of the world should
be asked to authorise the organisation of such
an effort in 1010, and to this end appoint
committees to work out details.
We would make the following recommendations:
I. That the plan of work as outlined above
be approved, and that a vigorous campaign
be waged in all the Presbyteries with the
?' -M ' ? ?maAhlnnpv r\t t ti
View UL UNII1K IUC I'l cocu w umvu...vV ?I
Church In " a more aggressive Presby terlal
evangelistic work.
II. That the- Simultaneous Evangelistic
Campaign plifn of work be commended, ntut
the churches he urged to orgaulze such campaigns
wherever possible.
III. Whereas there seems to be an Increasing
Interest on the part of Presbyterians
throughout the world In evangelistic work,
and, Whereas God has blessed our own
Church In Its effort In days gone by, and is
. continuing to bless her, and. Whereas, there
are Indications everywhere of special awakenings,
and of God's special willingness to bless
us as a people. It is suggested that the General
Assembly, with permission of the Evai?gellstlc
Committee, to be appointed to move
In harmony with other General Assemblies
appointing such. Evangelistic Committees toward
a world-wide Presbyterian movement,
and that from our Committee, a special committee
of five should be appointed to consider
the whole question, to correspond with the
officials of other General Assemblies, to cooperate
with committees already In existence
and appointed like our own, and he prepared
at the next General Assembly to put Into
operation such a movement along evangellstte
lines as might mean the uplift of the entire
Christian world.
IV. That a new committee be appointed,
the members to live near enough to -Insure
regular meetings, and that the Corresponding
E PRESBYTERIAN OF THE SOU'
Members provided for in the plau of work
be urged to n diligent performance of the
duties assigned.
V. That the Assembly set apart one of
her strongest men to the work of loading
this great movement in our Church, providing
him a competent support, and assuring nlm
of her Sympathy nnd prayers.
The coinmitte as at present constituted la
as follows:
Rev. Chns. R. Nisbet, Chairman, Nashville,
Tenn.
Rev. A. B. Curry, D, !>., Memphis, Teuu.
Rev. W. M. Anderson, D." D., Nashville,
Tenn.
Rev. C. It. Hemphill, I). L>., Louisville, Ky.
Mr. \V. H. Raymond, Nashville, Tenn.
Dr. A. J. A. Alexander, Spring Station, Ky.
The report on the Bible Cause was
read.
The judicial case of Young vs. tile
Synod of Kentucky, involving the questions
about the transfer of Central University
to a self-perpetuating Board of
Trustees, was then taken up. We here
present in one mass a summary of the
debates which extended at intervals during
two or three days.
Dr. H. A. White thought the duty of
jority report of the Judicial Committee
on the case before tne Assembly be
adopted, and spoke to this motion. He
was followed by Col. Bullitt, counsel for
the Synod.
Dr. II. S. White thought the duty of
the Assembly is to consider this case.
The Synod of Kentucky admits that Cen- .
tral University has been lost to the
Church and that the Synod consented
thereto. The University has been the
property of the Kentucky Synod for
twenty-three years, and has become a
part of the Assembly's system of education.
The Assembly has a right to inquire
as to whether the ^ynod was justified
in surrendering the University, and
whether, in so doing, serious injury was
done to the Assembly. Dr. White thought
that the plea to the jurisdiction made by
the commissioners of the Synod of Kentucky
appeals to the civil law and ignores
the cnurch law.
A protest signed by Col. B. H. Young,
and Dr. C. W. Sommerville, against, the
circulation in the Assembly of a pamphlet
containing argument on the judicial
case to come up before the Assembly,
was ordered to be filed. It states
that this pamphlet was circulated
among the worshippers during the singing
of the doxology on Saturday morning,
just prior to the address of Rev. Dr.
James Orr, and some days in advance of
trial. It complains that such a proceeding
is "unusual and unfair," and in direct
conflict with the action of the Assembly
of 1880, when a similar printed document
was eireulatpd in th? AaspimKlv in a.l.
vance of a trial.
Col. Bullitt objected, saying:
"When the distinguished gentleman
from Kentucky (Col. Young) begins to
make the sort of protest which we hear
at this time?a protest against methods
which he choses to decry as improper?
to those who know him in Kentucky, it
can cause only a smile."
Immediately there were objections
against the speaker's use of personalities.
Mr. Bullitt blandly replied that the allegations
in the complaint are infinitely
more personal in its reflections.
The Assembly voted that the protest be
filed.
Col. Bullitt proceeded to show why the
majority report oould not be accepted.
His argument was a legal statement In
the main. He contended that the As
I
TH. f7
sembly haQ Defore it a question of constitutional
law, of procedure, of jurisdic- i
tion, and ultimately of civil law. He
said that Mr. Young and others had no
right to bring a complaint because the
Book of Church Order prescribes that a
d'sagreeable or unjustifiable decision is
the only ground for a complaint. No decision
has been made, no decision is ex- I
tant Tho
in powers involved in
the controversy arose from tne laws of
Kentucky, and not from the Church. He
citea the threat of the complainants to
force the matter Into the courts and hinted
of the dangers with which such a
course was fraught to th$ Assembly.
He described certain allegations in the
complaint as untrue and a slander. He
informed the Assembly that a condition
precedent to the formation of the charter
and subscription of ihe University
was that there should be no ecclesiastical
control.
During the course of the argument. Dr.
U. W. Grafton was given the floor to
read the agreement between the Synod
of Kentucky and the Assembly, made iri
1867, which reserved to the Synod its
legal right of property.
The majority report as amended hv
Dr. White was adopted.
Resolved, That the report of the majority of
the Judicial Committee be adopted, hut this
action shall not be construed as determiningthat
the (Jeneral Assembly has jurisdiction of
the complaint Involved, but that the question
of the merit of the complaint and the question
of jurisdiction shall be argued together
in the time and order set forth in the majority
report.
The clerk read a remaining part of the
record in the case of the complaint
against the Synod of Kentucky.
On the next morning. Rev. C. W. Sommerville,
one of the coonjplairants, addressed
the Assembly and said it is necessary
to determine what is the Central
University case, what are the issues Involved,
and thirdly, what is the reinddy
for the ?rnn? -1-' J ?
? ...<.uui|)iaiueu 01. tie sketched
the history of ihe institution. The interests
involved are property to the value of
1800,000 and an ahhual income of about
$35,000, with 700 students. The Carnegie
foundation for teachers was taken up.
In order to take advantage of this
foundation the Synod of Kentucky had
proposed that hereafter the trustees who
had been appointed by the two Synods,
be made a self-perpetuating body. This
action was taken by the Synod of Kentucky.
Notice of complaint had been filed
to the Assemb]y at Greensboro, N. C.,
last. In spite of the pending of this
complaint the charter was amended,
and the institution was jnade independent
of the Synods. He charged that
this action in making the University
independent has diverted a trust, and
moreover, that the rehearing ordered by
the General Assembly in 1908 had been a
prejudiced affair on the part of the Synod
of Kentucky.
Col. B. H. Young followed for the com
iiiaiuauiB. ne cnauenged bis opponents
to give the reason for the transfer of the
institution from the control of the Preshyterians.
He declared that "the Synod
of Kentucky has divorced Central University,
and has taken our money, too." The
act was characterised as unjustifiable,
violating a pledge to the contributors. He
maintained that the Synod of Kentucky
could not perform a civil act, and that as
its doings must be ecclesiastical they