sitions and all the phraseology of the Confession. What they asked was, that a man should honestly and truly subscribe to the system of truth that was presented in the Confession of Faith, and not merely to the words of the letter in which it was presented. He thought a substantial relief was given to persons of scrupulous conscience." So far as the present agitation in the Scotch churches arises from this cause and tends to this result, it is an effort to attain a situation as over against the Standards which the American churches have always enjoyed, and it must have the hearty sympathy of every American Presbyterian.
In this advocacy of a liberal formula, however, we are not to be understood as if we could at all accord with those who would so relax the formula as to make the Confession of Faith little more than a venerable relic of a past age, still honored as such by the Church. Such a change as that made in 1816 by the Church of Holland by which ministers were no longer pledged to the Standards, because (quia), but only in so far as (quatenus) they accord with the Word, is justly pointed to by Mr. McEwan[1] as fatal. That there are, nevertheless, some in the Scotch churches who might desire it, seems to be hinted by some words of Mr. Taylor Innis.[2] Unfortunately there are some even who act as if this were all that the present very strict formula bound them to, as was evinced, for example, by the amazing plea put in by Mr. James Stuart, author of that very remarkable book, The Principles of Christianity, when arraigned before the Presbytery of Edinburgh.[3]
- ↑ The New Movement in the Free Church (Edinburgh, 1889), pp. 10 and 11.
- ↑ The Theological Review, November, 1888.
- ↑ As reported in The Scotsman for January 31, 1889. Mr. Stuart is reported as saying: "He could not see how the subordinate standard and the ultimate standard were on an equality. He regarded the sub-
