Newspaper Page Text
390
WITHIN i
From striving day by d;
And longs for that fa
Within whose gates no i
For sin and night ant
Sometimes, I catch a nt
Within my heart, mak
Sometimes I seem to se<
Tlorbnil mo nnnrniwl * ^
^vviw.i HIV UUHrtlU IU
Somewhere my bruised
My hands shall cease
Somewhere my aching t
And from mine eyes s
In every earth-born joy
Behind each smile the
But, O thank God, there
Within that far far-off
A WORD OF WAR
RIES AND 1
n r\:
Rev.
A member of the I
Presbytery, upon recei
follows: "On reading ^
tion with them, I don'
us to do, as the Presb
any amendations, critic
but merely vote "Yes'
whole. They are to 1
stand, without change,
essary than to read th<
Yes or no, a job which
hour or so, and hence
your committee togeth'
This seems n iiict 1
~ J w **v-rl
taincd in the circular
texts, that the "only qi
byteries is the adoptior
Revision Committe as
memb^ers of the Examii
suggesting texts other
the Assembly by the R
it to be inferred that 1
duty of criticisms and s
between the lines. Nc
has the Committee of
or a would-be atithori
sembly's action ? The
clear, and needs no i
adoption necessarily op
ter to be adopted. T1
attempted application c
competent for the As;
to adopt a system of pr
but it is a fact that the
this responsibility and i
themselves. If then t
texts as prepared, after
be difficult to make o
deny to them equal aut
The texts will serve to
Confession, just as the
THE PRESBYTERIAN
\ FAR COUNTRY.
ay my heart is weary,
r-off, mysterious somewhere,
[lay is ever dreary,
i death can never enter there.
>te divine that seems to linger
mg eacii numble task seem fair;
e 'a shadowy finger
the heights of that somewhere.
feet shall cease to hurt me,
to toil and learn to play;
leart shall cease to pain me,
ill tears be wiped away.
there is a note of sorrow,
re is a scalding tear?
is a bright tomorrow,
, mysterious somewhere.
?John Richard Moreland.
NING TO THE PRESBYTE'HEIR
PROOF-TEXT
MMITTEES.
Luther Link.
'roof-text Committee of Macon
ipt of the proof-texts, writes as
Ir. Magill's statement in connect
see that there is anything for
vteries are not allowed to make
isms or suggestions of any sort,
or 4Xo' on their adoption as a
)e accepted or rejected as they
So that nothing more seems nec;se
proofs through and then say
certainly will not require but an
obviate the necessity of calling
er."
1 ' e ?
[illusion irom tne statement conletter
accompanying the prooflestion
for decision by the Presi
or rejection of the report of the
a whole." "This will relieve the
tation Committees of the duty of
than those already submitted to
cvision Committee." They leave
they will also be relieved of the
uggestions, but this is easily read
>w it may be asked, What right
Publication to give instructions,
tative interpretation of the AsAssembly's
action is perfectly
nterpretation. The question of
ens to discussion the whole mattis
is indeed a new form of the
>f the gag law. It may have been
sembly, as has been suggested,
ooi-texts on their own authority,
Assembly did not care to assume
isked the Presbyteries to express
hree-fourths of these adopt the
the action already taken, it will
ut the distinction which would
hority with the Confession itself,
indicate our interpretation of the
Confession itself is our interpre
OF THE SOUTH.
tation of the Scripture teac
sonable that any committe
in the way of a full consic
the original Assembly math
hastily prepared work of a
examination, why should tl
that this business has aire;
committee for five years? 1
mittee should he given five
work, and then the Presbyt
pass upon it instanter withe
it intelligently? Is the pr
infallible than the original
mittee should not wish to I
railroad this matter throng
tion, and if they are not tl
they should promptly disci
The Assembly itself knet
in detail when it adopted tl
ing them down, so that noi
ment can be claimed for tin
and voted for the action se
was further from the Asset
tempt to curtail the libert;
nassiticr nnnn tlmii
jr ? "I'~ ? UUUF,,V"
The high sounding term
the head of this work, and
it will be useless to make
tion" is different from our
of the Constitution. Oi
tion of the Scripture must
itself. It was the recognit
the proof-texts to be orig
seems to be getting very
business should induce th?
earnest study of the Scrip
the chief good to come out
why should anybody want
to be desired result? The f
gle question, namely, Does
detail to a sound interpretal
is not the object of the te:
to attach them. It would
the old texts with the full I
tion.as to fitness, than after
ourselves to the fact that
essarily raise the question
text of the Confession to b
to raise the question of revi
One does not have to go
nation before he meets wit
section at least (Section 4,
any text to support the s
note of explanation or supy
Why, that it could not be
of date to say that the "co\
fnrtb ill *
- ... wjv.iipi.iiic uy
This is not true according
guided by modern scholars'
yet the Proof-Text Commit
to recommend any revision
they have put upon the Pre
tees the responsibility of di?
ment of the proof-texts witl
and the resoonsibilitv of in
March 30, 1910.
hing. It is therefore unreae
should wish to put a bar
leration of this subject. If
e a mistake in adopting the
committee without detailed
lat blunder be repeated now
idy been in the hands of a
s it reasonable that the com:
years in which to do their
teries should be expected to
iut opportunity to pass upon
esent committee any more
one? The Proof-text Comje
a party to the attempt to
li without, proper considerate
author of the suggestion,
aim its authorship.
,v nothing of the proof-texts
icm for the purpose of sendt
even the Assembly's judgMii.
The writer was present
nding them down. Nothing
nbly's intention than the atv
of the Presbyteries while
II.
of "Constitution" is put at
after the texts are adopted
the plea that the "Constituauthoritative
interpretation
nr confessional interpretacome
out of the Scripture
ion of this fact that caused
inally attached. Somebody
uneasy lest this proof-text
e Clutch to do some good,
tures. This is just exactly
of the revision of the texts;
to interfere with this much
>roof-texts stand for one sinour
Confession conform in
tion of God's Word? If this
cts, it is worse than useless
be better far to hold 011 to
cnowledge of their imperfec
five years of study to blind
their attachment must nec1
of the correctness of the
e supported, in other words,
si on.
far in this proof-text examih
the striking fact that one
, Chapter 7) is left without
italpmpnf nnJ 1
...vni, miu w11novil any
>ort. What does this mean?
supported, because it is out
enant of grace is frequently
the name- of a testament."
to the Revised Version as
hip. It is out of date. And
ttee has persistently refused
whatever. This means that
sbyteries with their commitscovering
the detailed agreeh
the text of the Confession,
lOVtncr in fVi.. ...... ? f
t