Recent division of the Presbyterian Church.—Distinctive opinions of the two parties.—American Presbyterianism essentially the same with that of Scotland, and of the French Protestants.—Sources of knowledge of the early character of our Church.—Obscurity of its early history.—Presbyterian settlers of this country.—I. The Puritans.—The English Puritans were generally Presbyterians.—Many of those who came to this country were Presbyterians.—Their settlements out of New England.—II. The Dutch—their settlements.—III. The Germans.—IV. The French Protestants.—V. Scotch and Irish.—The persecutions of the Scotch under Charles I, and II.—The settlements of the Scotch and Irish in this country.—Conclusion.
THE controversies which have so long agitated the Presbyterian Church, have, at length, resulted in its separation. It would not be easy to state, in a manner satisfactory to both parties, the points of difference between them. It may, however, be said, without offence, that the one party is in favour of a stricter adherence to the standards of the church, as to doctrine and order, than the other. On the one hand, it has been contended that the Westminster Confession of Faith was adopted as the Confession of the Presbyterian Church only in a very qualified manner, and that the proper condition of ministerial communion is nothing more than agreement in those points, which are “essential and necessary in doctrine, worship, or government.” As it regards church order, it is said that American Presbyterianism is something very different from the Scottish system; that our higher judicatories have only judicial and advisory powers; that is, the right to hear and decide appeals, complaints, and references, and to give advice; that the General Assembly, especially, is nothing but an appellate court and advisory council; that our several courts are, as to their existence and action, entirely independent of each other. It is asserted that “Congregationalism was the basis of Presbyterianism in this country.” And that “had Congregationalists never entered the field beyond the bounds of New England, Presbyterianism would scarcely have existed in this country, except in name.” It is not to be supposed, however, that all the brethren who are now considered as “New School” adopt, to their full extent, either of the extreme opinions above stated.
On the other side, it is contended that our church, ever since it had a constitution at all, has been strictly Calvinistic in doctrine, and purely presbyterian in government; that is, that such were the requirements of the judicatories of the Church. The condition of ministerial communion was not merely agreement in the essential doctrines of the Gospel, but the adoption of that system of doctrine which is contained in the Westminster Confession and Catechisms. A great distinction has always been made between ministerial and Christian communion. We are bound to regard and treat as Christians, all whom, in the judgment of charity, we believe to be the children of God. Accordingly, assent to the Westminster Confession of Faith is not required of the private members of the church; nor are private Christians subjected to discipline for any error not regarded as subversive of Christianity. But of those who aspire to be teachers or rulers in the church much more has been required. It is not enough that such should be Christians. They must be sound in the faith. To secure this end, the church has required their assent to her doctrinal standards as containing the system of doctrines taught in the word of God. And by system of doctrine, according to the lowest standard of interpretation, has been understood the Calvinistic system as distinguished from all others. There are indeed many, whose views of subscription are such, that they could not adopt the Confession of Faith, unless they were able to receive every distinct proposition which it contains. This may be right; but it is believed that no attempt has ever been made to enforce the discipline of the church against any individual who was not believed to reject some of the distinctive features of the Calvinistic system as contained in our Confession.
With regard to church order, it is contended that our church adopted from the beginning, and has ever continued to exercise that form of government which had been previously adopted in Scotland, Ireland, Holland, and among the protestants of France. This system was every where, in all its distinctive and essential features, the same. It required the government of individual congregations to be vested in the pastor and elders, and not in the brotherhood. It required the association of several particular churches under one presbytery, composed of ministers and elders. It provided for provincial and national synods, composed of delegates from the lower courts, and recognised as belonging to synods, the authority of review and control, and the right to set down rules for the government of the church.