OCR Interpretation


The Presbyterian of the South : [combining the] Southwestern Presbyterian, Central Presbyterian, Southern Presbyterian. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1909-1931, May 30, 1917, Image 4

Image and text provided by Library of Virginia; Richmond, VA

Persistent link: https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/10021978/1917-05-30/ed-1/seq-4/

What is OCR?


Thumbnail for 4 (460)

Church needs a university, and ques
tions the right of the Church to es
tablish one for technical education.
He said the supreme need of the
Church is to equip the synodical col
leges, until they will command the
patronage of young men. If young
men are well grounded in these col
leges they will he able to withstand
the temptations and the false teach
ings in the State universities. He is
opposed to money being raised in
churches for schools outside of their
Synod, when so much is needed for
those already established in its
bounds.
Kev. Dr. James 1. Vance, the presi
dent of the Board of Directors of
Oglethorpe University, said that the
payment of a thousand dollars did not
make a man a director as had been
stated, for he had to be elected to
that office by the board. He said that
this matter had not been brought be
fore the Assembly by Oglethorpe, but
by others. He understood that agree
ment reached in the conference in At
lanta was to be presented as the re
port. The Oglethorpe committee, he
stated, did not know that there was
to be a conference with the Educa
tion Committees, as they supposed
those committees were a part of and
agents for the Assembly, and thought
if the Assembly was satisfied as a
whole, that the agents would be sat
isfied. He claimed that what the As
sembly wanted was not to satisfy the
Education Committees, but to propose
some plan that would be satisfactory
to the Church.
Dr. Vance said that the opposition
to Oglethorpe had been pushed by
the Committee on Christian Educa
tion. He said that the opposition
claimed that the University should be
supported in and by the Synods. He
maintained that a university needed
the support of the whole Church.
He stated that any plan which
would guarantee Presbyterian control
and Christian education would be sat
isfactory. In reply to the question as
to whether the Church needed or
wanted a university or not, he said
that one of the best ways to find that
out would be to see whether it would
give the money for it, and that al
ready seven or eight hundred thousand
dollar's had been subscribed for Ogle
thorpe.
Dr. Vance further said that many
Presbyterian students are going to
State universities because they get
there what they do not get in col
leges. He felt that a university should
be provided that will give a Christian
education.
The only other proposition that he
had heard mentioned for doing this
was to establish Christian professor
ships in State universities. This, he
said, was not feasible on account of
the great expense and for many other
reasons, one of which is that there
would be no way to control the teach
ing.
In discussing Section 2, Paragraph
1 . Dr. Vance said that any session had
the right to establish a university, if
it had the money. He said that there
is in the South enough money for both
the colleges and the University, but
that no Synod can or will assume the
financial support of the University;
indeed, they do not do this even in
the case of their own colleges.
In answer to the statement that
Oglethorpe Is not doing university
work, he said that it was not old
enough yet. He stated that under Its
plan the money given In the Synod of
Georgia would be used for college
work, while all given outside of that
Synod would be used for university
work.
Dr. Vance called attention to the
fact that other churches are building
universities, and that be was sure
that if a man were to offer the As
sembty five million ,0
n i verslty, it would accept the gift
?"< for .,1- par, he "a, J
an,OUnt Siven by ten thousand
?.er can'b^ tha< th?t nut
er can be found. This, said Dr.
ce, ,s n bigger question than Ogle
thorpe. The issue is one of life The
is byy^rthanyihW,K big be done
faith, a situation challenging
,.Ur f",th is before us todav. We be
eve His by, he hand of ,hYt,hia
thing lias been done.
God forbid that something which
God seems to have let beKi,
should by this Assembly be slain God
orb,., that a whlc? , a? "b ?
,o? rrr "v "" - ""
In behalf ?f
are anxious to do ai, they J 0'' ?
e"?vr,o 1'"; <<? Prop!
eriJ to the Assembly. Thev i-o
"" <fie education . ? '
warts
?He
ZZrZ Trl
,emb" Tht Up by th* A,
They do not want exi<jMn??
to mT" hU"' and bC"eve lh? there
?lve ,7orUgh f?r Some win
other Ca"8e """ Some to
(here "a'd Relieved ,fiat
the Church' to Mttl/Thls C"0"E''
The one question left unaettled rt "he
money cues, ion. If paragrai)h
be madeK"?ar<1 ma"er ,h?" " ?"
: Bald ,h" Mr. Bruce, a lawyer on
Ihe Assembly's Committee, says ,?a
a relation does exist between the As
sembly and Oglethorpe. ,, '?v
be satisfactory hu, ItexIstfL Dr ?
? 'o.v called attention to the fact that
??h O, the directors is ?ud b '
a session, which ,? ? by
Church w! ? COUrt of the
Since aS be8t We cou'<*
then the conditions which make
" Church school have Wen
adopted by , he Assembly, and 7.?
as this institution is concerned it is
ZZal'M? ????'
t ie bottom, we now come to the ,op
..Huh ' ?rPe ?s " Presbyterian^ Z
n! I * a relation. If ? ?
make It so. ,
want the Assembly to taTce such ac
oUhe'ch";!" ."e '?r *?"< '"" re",
or the Church at large.
cameeVflDr' ? "" ?gC,en saId that he
me as a resident of Atlanta as a
ss not as an advocate. I have
he Germ ""l' ?Ur """"" <?*??>?
he Cermans. have a proverb, "Do not
x.?;:hia:t r the bath
ai?fhe0ciPr0dlg,0U-8 8iZe ^n8,derlng
all the circumslances. it will n,,i
Chrisn COMege WOrk he
ovc ? ??m' tUrn th"
ver to the State institutions. One
do no," "lat m'nr youn?
l"Lr, ",ro';l!h ">? Christian col
veraltv Th * " the S,ate ??'
?ni , ? Who go trough the
" fiTfliV? to touch ,u,ure ,|vm
the faith of a man is broken in the
acher;i;:,d ihe m,n ??<* ,?
. ,he "cho?"' "I the
)" "ee" to our bands
on the post graduate work.
al?av.?;T "*"? """ ha wa? ?ot
won hi ,1 , T " 0?'?">orpe. What
men, The ",""d"r " the mo'"
Th? professors are men of
The bd ,ab,Uty a"d S?,ld ~e
he business of Oglethorpe ig man
aged by leading business men of At
ZlZr bU8,nft8S Prtnclple,.
Subscrlptlo.. made have been pro
nounced safe and secure by a com
mittee of the presidents of three lead
ng banks In Atlanta. These subscrip
tions are being promptly paid
Oglethorpe, he said, is going on,
and f you do not want it, do not try
o kill it. There is power there. Why
not use it? We ask that Oglethorpe
may have the privilege to live.
Kev. Dr. * Thornwell Jacobs, presi
dent of Oglethorpe University, said
that at the first meeting of this As
m y in 1861. The question has
been discussed ever since, and there
have always been many of the great
men of the Church who have always
wanted a university. Another proof
that the Church wants a university is
>e fact that more than one hundred
churches have given one thousand dol
lars or more to Oglethorpe. Much is
said about an opportune trme. When
did the Church ever demand an op
portune time to preach the gospel?
? \iee? niakes the time opportune.
Hundreds of students arc in State
schools that do not and will not go fo
Church colleges.
Kev. Dr. w. McF. Alexander, a
representative of the Advisory Com
mittee on Education said among other
things that he believes in the Presby
terian Church and Presbyterian con
trol, but is opposed to the use of the
term Presbyterian without authority.
Here is the crux of the matter, and
this is the ground of my objection to
Oglethorpe. This is not a Presbyte
wfsh infSUt"tion- The Oglethorpe men
wish to have a relationship estab
ished that they may put their hands
Into the pockets of the people. The
Presbyterian Church is great enough
<> P an and build its own university
when it feels the need of it. Let Ogle
\nZPtene? fiead 38 a" ,ndePendent
institution, but do not let it be called
Presbyterian.
Rev. Dr. H. H. Sweets, secretary of
Ministerial Education, said among
other things in discusing this subject
that about ten years ago as his com
mittee looked over the Church we
found that there was no plan for its
work- 08 a" the churchM
? h- nJ ereat arms ?f work Of
the Church are evangelism and edu
cation. They found that the Synods
ami not the Assembly owned the
100 s. Men in some of these schools
have made great sacrifices. The
Committee on Christian Education
felt that the question of a university
ought to he left to the Synods. He
Haimed that his committee was one
of the parties concerned in this mat
ter and did not feel that any plan
ought to have been proposed that was
not satisfactory to them. The strategic
Place is the Christian college. The
Methodist Ohurch is trying the ex
periment, but it is only an experiment.
He quoted J. B. Duke and J. j Hill
as in favor of Church controlled edu
cational institutions.
r?f n?V" a^1" ^ **utt?n. a member
or the Advisory Committee on Educa
tion, said that he had no objection to
any party establishing an institution
but he was opposed to Its representa
ves making a canvass under the
claim that the institution is the head
of the educational system of the
lurch when the Assembly has not
authorized it. He believes the need
of the Church Is the college rather
than a university. The college, he
said is at stake. It is not the part
of the Church to give technical edu
instff" ?i If ft ,8 a quest!on aH to which
.h " UVe ?r d,e' hG
CAoUege? own"l by the Syi^ds
and the Assembly should live.
After the representatives of both
parties considered specially concerned
In the matter had been heard the mat
ter was thrown open to general de
hate and many speeches were made
were too numerous to be reported.
The resolution offered by Dr. Rich
ards was finally adopted as the action
of the Assembly by a vote of 116 to
106.
The Narrative.
The report of the Committee on
Narrative was adopted as follows:
Reports from eighty-six Presbyter
ies have come into our hands. We
remark the usual lack of distinct facts,
but there are several conditions pretty
clearly revealed:
(1) On those things that belong to
what may be called the public or out
ward religious life, the report is good
and the prospect encouraging. These
things include the attendance upon the
preaching of the word (with some
lack recorded, on the part of city
churches), the evangelistic effort on
the part of the churches (mainly rep
resented by the preaching of the min
isters in adjacent places), the pres
ence and power of the Holy Spirit in
the churches; the worshipping of God
with our substance; the prompt pay
ment of the salaries of our ministers.
It is characteristic of these things that
they are akin to the energy and for
ward movements of the day. They
record a real improvement and we are
thankful for them.
(2) But our Assembly may as well
accept another fact. In those things
that. concern the life of devotion and
prayer such as the family altar, the
instruction of the children in the
Bible and the Catechism of the Church
even the meagre and general reports
reveal a lack. It is a fact as certain
and as clean cut as was, say, our debt
a few years ago, on our Foreign Mis
sion work. And it requires an effort
just as definitely directed, and just
as persistently urged, as was made at
that time. It has the matter of im
provement, the additional difficulty of
having an atmosphere that is hostile,
the most difficult of all things to deal
with. And the question before our ?.
Church is:. Shall we accept the con
dition of the of the family life as be
ing one of the things characteristic of
our times and address ourselves to
our other and prosperous work? or
shall we settle to the trench warfare
and determined assault upon the
threatening fact?
Recommendation.
( 1 ) That our Presbyteries urge the
matter of the Family Altar League.
( 2 ) That the Presbyteries see to it
that Presbyter ial chairmen of com
mittees use greater pains in making
reports to the Assembly.
(3) That the overture from St.
John Presbytery asking the Assembly
to define or remove from sessional re
port the item concerning unholy con
formity be answered (as the Assem
bly answered it last year) by reference
to Alexander's Digest, p. 483.
(4) In response to the overture
from the Red River Presbytery con
cerning the meaning of "Special man
ifestations of the Holy Spirit" in
question nine, we recommend that the
word "special" be changed to the word
"marked."
M. McN. McKay,
Chairman Committee on Narrative.
Council of Reformed Churches.
The Committee on Minutes of Coun
cil of Reformed Churches of America,
holding the Presbyterian System, re
ports as follows:
The minutes of ttie 1916 Council
placed in our hands were Examined by
General Assembly of 1916 and report
of such is found in minutes of said
Assembly.
We have selected the following
members in place of those whose term
expired March 31, 1817: Rev. W.
McF. Alexander, D. D., New Orleans;
Prof. D. A. Penick, Austin, Texas;
ltev. R. C. Reed, D. D., Columbia, S.
C.; Mr. H. O. Fulton, Columbia,
Xpnn.
Alternates: Rev. A. B. Curry, D.
D., Memphis, Tenn.; Rev. W. L. Lin
gle, D. D., Richmond, Va. ; Mr. George
W. Watts, Durham, N. C., Mr. H. T.
Mcintosh, Albany, Ga.
R. W. Jopltng, Chairman.
This report was adopted.
The Judicial Committee
Reports, recommending:
That ?the paper of Rev. Dr. J. L.
Mau/.e, asking for certain changes In
the Standing Rules of the Assembly
and in the Constitution of the Church,
be referred to the Ad Interim Commit
tee already appointed by this Assem
bly consisting of the professors of
4

xml | txt