Newspaper Page Text
May 8, 1912 ]
SHALL AVE SILENCE THE WOMEN IN
OUR CHURCHES I
ThiB question must be answered from
the Bible; for the will of God as revealed
in his Word is conclusive and
final. But in order to find the will of
God, we must not take one verse, or one
chapter or one Book; but ail the verses
In all the Books that treat of this subject.
I have been unable to find any authority
in the Now Testament to ordain a
woman to the ministry of the Word or
the ruling eldership; there Is then, I
think, this limitation of her work. But
outside of this limitation, she may do
many things, via: (1) she may vote In
elections of all officers in the local
church. (2) She may teach a mixed
clasB in the Lord's house on the Lord's
day. (3) iln the church at Corinth,
women were allowed to pray or prophesy,
If veiled. 1 Cor. 11:6. (4) She
may apeak in song, even a solo, in the
public assembly met for worship. (5)
The command "To Preach the Gospel"
was not isued to the Apostles only, or
to the men only, but to all disciples,
women as well as men. (6) The Spirit
was given on the day of Pentecost, that
sonB and daughters might prophesy.
Acts 11:17-18.
(a) Anna, the Prophetess, speaks of
Jesus in the Temple to all that were
looking for redemption. Luke 11:38.
vdj rour aaugnters or fnillp did
prophesy in the Apostolic Church. Acts
21:19. (c) The Corinthian -women
prayed and prophesied and were only
rebuked, if not veiled. lBt Cor. 11:6. If
we go to the Old Testament, Miriam was
not silenced in her song to Jehovah by
Moses. Ex. 20:20.
God has placed in the Old Testament
the Song of Deborah. Judges, fifth
chapter.
In the reign of King Josiah, after
Jeremiah, Huldah was the most important
person in the Kingdom to make
known the will of Jehovah. 2 Kings
22:14.
If 'Paul in his letter to Timothy, 1
Tim. 11:8-16, said, "I permit not a
woman to teach," and meant by this to
forbid any woman at any time, anywhere,
to teach the Bible in the
churcheB, then the entire church has
departed very far from the Inspired In- (
junctloja; and our branch of the church
should at once atop our women from
any an;) all Bible teaching, in the Homeland
an(j on the Foreign Field. To asaert
'dominion over Man," la what the
won^ea of our Missionary Unions and
churches have never done, and they
need no lecture on tblB subject; and If
thpy would learn anything, let them
ask their own husbands at home. If
Ihe Injunction to the Corinthian women
to be "silent" in the ohurchee Is of universal
and perpetual obligation, then
I am at a loss to harmonize this prohibition
with the Apostle's permission to '
women at Corinith to pray and prophesy,
provided they were veiled, nor
can thiB prohibition, if of universal and
Perpetual obligation, be harmonized '
With Othor- a. 1 -?
uiai neai 01 xuio
object.
Owing to the abundance of the
"Spiritual Gifts" bestowed upon, the
Corinthian Church, it Is difficult for the
devout student to know the exact meaning
of the Inspired writer on some of the
objects on "which he teaches; and this
very matter of "Woman Silence" Is one
of them. Surely the Apostle did not
Permit in the eleventh chapter, what he
foi^blds in the fourteenth, he does not
contradict himself In the very same
etter to the same church. There were
Peculiar conditions In that church, we
Qo not r.iii? ?j? - -
?- unaerstana; and we must
not Impose on all the churches as of
Perpetual obligation any command that
was local and temporary. This eleventh
chapter must be interpreted In the light
?f. and in harmony with other portions
of the Inspired Word.
THE PRESBYTERI
If the godly women of Phillppl "Labored
with Paxil in the Gospel," 1 do not
see how they could keep perpetual "Silence"
In the city, nor do 1 see how
Phoebe served as deacon without talking
at times.
In the light of all the Sacred Scriptures,
I wish to help the women of our
Church who labor in the Gospel. If
they unite in Missionary Unions, local
or larger, let us help them; and if they
wish a General Secretary, II know no
rciusun wuy mey snouia he denied tbiB
privilege. Phoebus was a traveling
^Dlakonos," a deacon at large, and
doubtless gained a good degree of
standing, and a great boldness in the
Faith.
A. W. Pitzer.
Salem, Va., April 20, 1912.
THE "ELECT INFANT CLAUSE"?LET
IT ALONE.
1. Because it belongs to a venerable
Confession which ought not to be
mutilated.
2. Because it gives valuable instruction
as to how infants are saved.
3. Because the ablest, wisest, longest
discussion has shown no acceptable substitute
for it.
4. Because It Is an awe-inspiring
monument of respect for the limitations
set by the Word of God.
5. Because all our office-bearers and
ministers believe it just as it is, and
are at perfect liberty to put the broadest
construction upon it commensurate
with their vlerw of the teaching of
flcpfntnrn
15. Because approval of Its form by
church members Is not a condition of
membership.
7. Because worldly objections to it
Include the whole sweep of Calvinism,
of which it is a part.
8. Because the people whose common
sense tells them that not one child
more, or less, will be saved by Con
fesslon changes, have endured the
Btrain of this controversy long enough.
Will not the Assembly respect their
feeling?
DR. SMITH'S "PROTEST."
W. M. MePheeters.
The reprinting and renewed circulation
of tire "Protest'" of my esteemed
friend and brother, Dr. Egbert W. Smith,
make some comment upon that paper
proper. Its most noticeable feature Is
the intense emotional key upon which
It is pitched. Herein lies its strength
and herein also lies Its weakness. I
cheerfully recognize the fact that certain
of the emotions of which the "Protest"
is the expression are In themselves
wholly and highly creditable. And on
the other hand, when the frailty of
human nature is considered, I can hardly
be charged with bringing a railing
accusation against Dr. Smith, when I
say that his "Protest" is characterized
by a note of surprise, not mingled with
Impatience and irritation. I do not say
that his surprise, Impatience and Irritation
are unwarranted?that Is a question
to Itself, and one upon which I cannot
here enter. All that I say Is that the
emotions named are In evidence in Dr.
Smith's '^Protest" from its opening to
its closing sentences. And I call attonHnn
tn fh coo foA+a Wo nan VU?rr aw_
plain, and so far seem to me to excuse
other features of the paper which otherwise
It seoms hard to explain or to excuse.
For Instance, Dr. Smith says:
"If our honest belief is that the
Scriptures furnish no ground for a
positive opinion on the side of the dead
little ones being all saved, then let us
commit our church afresh forever to
the glorious doctrine of the Scriptural
doubtfulness of Infant salvation."
I am frank to state that I do not think
that my brother, Dr. Smith, ought ever
to have permitted himself to pen these
words. To me they seem to be as un
wrii?e as mey are nnjvii. ror wnether la
It eaaler, or more illuminating to use
language sucta aa that Juat quoted, or to
eav, "Let ua commit our church to the
glorious doctrine that the whole Iranian
race waa plunged into pollution and
condemnation, and many of them Into
eternal perdition, by 'Eve's eating the
forbidden fruit?"
The latter statement la more certainly
an unwarranted travesty of the spirit
AN O * THE SOUTH
. of our church, than is the former. If 1
Dr. Smith, a man ef mature and trained
mind, holding among us a position of
honor and responsibility can express
himself thus, how can we be surprised
if the immature, the untrained, the ir
responsible take their cue frem him? i
Again, Dr. Smith says:
"The question at issue is one that appeals
to every heart. It Is a question
which every generation sb it comes upon
the stage of life must ask, often with 1
etreaimlng eyes and trembling lips."
This cannot be denied. But unless '
Dr. 8mith had been hurried on by his '
kindly and generous sympathies, he
must certainly have seen that such a
statement as thds throws not even a
feeble ray of light upon "the question 1
at issue." He seems to assume that his \
brethren are either ignorant of, or else 1
indifferent to, the perplexity and dls- \
tress caused by the "question at issue."
Swept along by hlB feelings, he
has simply not stopped to reflect that
this, after all, is only one of many ques- [
tions "which every generation as it '
comes upon the stage of life must ask, ]
often with streaming eyes." Our children
do not cease to be our children
after the period of infancy has been '
left behind them, and they have grown 1
to manhood or to womanhood. And yet '
in the mysterious providence of God not 1
a few of them after reaching years of '
maturity die without having made a 1
confession of faith in Christ as a per- J
sonal Saviour. Under such circumstances
our hearts ache to breaking. |
Now, would Dr. Smith say to such
parents: Your children are certainly
lost! Couid he say to them: Your chil- j
dren are certainly saved? Ought our 1
sympathy for them, if genuine, lead '
us to insert into our Confession a state- 1
ment to the effect that "all children of 1
believing parents, being elect, are re- (
generated and saved, etc.? In the case !
of our adult <?hlldron It mow V- .... I -J '
w uu| iv j uc oaiu
tfhat they had the opportunity to ac- '
cept the Saviour. That ia true; but ]
does it in the least abate either our
pain or our perplexity? Dr. Smith as- 1
sures us that it "Is the practically uni- J
versal belief of Protestants" that all in- 1
fants dying in infancy are saved. But j
thft Imnofna r\f Kin . 1 A
VI u<D iCCHUgD HUB not
-permitted him fo stop to glance at the 1
creeds of the great Protestant Churches. !
Had he done so, he wduld have found
that they are singularly silent upon '
this point. I shall not undertake to con- :
strue their silence. But some things 1
that I cannot pause even to mention, invest
it with significance. Nor have Dr. ]
Smith's feelings permitted him to pause 1
to inquire how we are to reconcile Dr. '
Cha8. Hodge's statement, "It is there- 1
fore the general belief of Protestants 1
that all who die in Infancy are saved," 1
with his equally clear and unqualified J
statement, "It Is not positively revealed 1
that all Infants are elect, but we are left
for many reasons to Indulge a highly
probable hope that such is the fact." Dr. [
Hodge evidently regarded the one state- ;
ment as consistent with the other. Nor '
is it difficult to see how such is the 1
case, if only we bear in mind the fact 1
that in colloquial use the word "belief" j
has come to do duty for two totally
different things?namely for both "cred- 1
al statements," and for "personal
opinions.'" These two things are as l
different the one from the other as the t
bases upon which they respectively rest. <
"Personal opinions" may rest merely *
upon "highly probable" inferences. For <
most of our "personal opinions" we can- <
not claim and do not require any more <
stable foundation. It is different with 1
our "creda! statements." The latter
must rest either upon an "express"
statement of Scripture, or, upon a
"good and necessary inference" from express
statements of Scripture. What- 1
ever may be true of Dr. Smith, it is, I J
thinlc. evident that Dr. Hodge did not I
regard it as a "good and necessary" in- I
ference either from Rom. 6:12-21, 2
?am. 12:23, or from Mt. 19:14, or from ;
anv other Scripture that all who die in i
mrancy are saved. But he did regard j
it as a highly probable Inference from 1
these passages and others that such Is (
the fact, and an Inference sufficiently
probable to Justify a "belief In the \
sense of a "personal oipinlon," though
rot a "belief In the sense of a "credal" j
statement It is easy, of course, to flout 1
this distinction, I presume, however, j
that by this time facts have become
aulte accustomed to being flouted. At ;
anv rate they are not perceptlblv affect- .
ed by It. And tfhe fact is that there are i
matters upon which all of us do, and
must have "beliefs" in the sense of
'^personal opinions," for whlcb It does
not occur to us to claim the authority
of either an express statement of God's
"Word, or of a "good and necessary Inference"
from such statement.
How completely Dr. 9mith was under
(525) 17
tfhe domination of bis feelings when he
penned bis protest is perhaps In nothing
more evident than In the way that
he uses Scripture to support what is
clearlv with him a foregone conclusion.
Thus, wfaen he cites the familiar and
precious words of the Saviour, "Suffer
the little children, and forbid them not,
to come unto me, for of such is the
Kingdom of Heaven," he seems to regard
it wholly' unnecessary to use any
special care or pains to determine just
what the words quoted must mean, or
even may mean. On tihe contrary he appears
to think that h? hn? *v<
Ticanlng of the words beyond all reasonable
doubt when be adds:
"If, 'of euch Is the Kingdom of Heav.
en,' is It believable that of such also Is
the kingdom of the lost?" Perhaps Dr.
Smith will permit me to ask a question
or two. Was our Lord speaking of
little children generally, or only of
those before him? Did he mean that all
little children, so long as they are little
children are in virtue of being children
members of the kingdom? Did he mean
that little children are of the kingdom
In virtue of their moral fltnesB? Were
they Jewish or Gentile Children? "Why
does Paul distinguish so sharply between
the children of believers and
thoBe of unbelievers? 1 might of course
inner questions equally as pertinsnt.
But enough have been asked to
ihow that these words of our Saviour
cannot safely be made the basis for
'good and necessary inference" without
much more careful consideration than
Dr. Smith seems to think called for.
When Dr. Smith says, that the salvation
of all who die In infancy is to be
Inferred "without a shadow of doubt
from the character of God, set forth
everywhere in Scripture," it is simply
in additional illustration of the fact
that when one throws the rein, so to
jpeak, upon the neck of his feelings,
they may land him in positions which to
?ay the least are not judicious. For it
becomes evident as we read on that
by God's "character," Dr. Smith means
merely God's goodness. Now I trust
that many of us bhare Dr. Smith's adorhg
views of this glorious and precious
attribute of God. But surelv to say that
'God is love" 1b not to give a complete
account of his character. He is wise
as well as loving, righteous as well as
loving. The question between some of
us and Dr. Smith is not, What would
God's love move him to do in case of
infants dying in infancy? But, what
will God's richtnj-mon/voo -? ?* -
_ auu wiBuom
permit him to do? I presume that the
spostle Paul, for instance, had quite as
profound an Insight Into a reverent adoration
for "the character of God set
forth everywhere In Scripture," as my
sincerely esteemed brother. Dr. Smith.
Ajid yet as the fonmer contemplates the
actual unfolding of God's plan, we hear
him <exclaim: "<0 Ithe deipMi of the
riches botfh of the wisdom and knowledge
of God. How unsearchable are his
ludgments and his ways past finding
out. For who hath known the mind of
the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor?"
It seems to me that there Is
In these words a suggestion for all of
us. lest our adoration itself have a
savor of presumption about it.
Dr. Smith's unrestrained feelings even
made him go to the length of saying
Bhat "By no means can we conceive it
to be otherwise" than that God should
save all those dying in infancy. In
Other wordn ?? " " "
__ 1. oiuuiJljr Jlicoucevl. Die
that God should not save them. But
bo It must be because there Is something
either In God's nature, or In the
nature or circumstances of those dying
In infancy that it makes it Impossible
for God not to save them. But if so,
what of the doctrine that the salvation
of all, adults and infants alike, is a
matter of pure, sovereign grace? "For
If It be of doubt, then it is no longer of
grrace."
And Just here is the main danger of
this -whole movement. It tends greatly
to obscure, if not practically to deny
many characteristic doctrines of Calvinism,
that Is to say many characteristic
doctrines of the Gospel as preached by
Paul and believed by Presbyterians; the
federal headshin of Adam -
.r ??M| vuo Ittll) kliC
Imputation of sin, the nature of eln as
inhering primarily In innate dispositions
and the free sovereign grace of God in
salvation.
To me it seems far safer to "trust him
for his Grace" in the case of those dying
In infancy as we have to do and as I
trust we learn gladly to do in many other
matters than it is to undertake to lay
down the lines along which his grace
must be manifested. The grace that
mast is no longer grace.
Failure i? not the worst thing in the
world; the worse thing is not to try.