Excerpted from Volume III of The Presbyterian Magazine, September 1853, pp. 413-415.
This recounting of the venerable Dr. Alexander’s farewell to his congregation bears the following footnote:

THE PRESBYTERIAN says, that “A valued friend recently discovered in the possession of one of the Pine Street parishoners of Dr. Archibald Alexander,  a manuscript copy of the remarks made by him after his closing sermon as the pastor, and sends it to us for publication, with the remark that ‘it is eminently characteristic of the man, and peculiarly seasonable in its suggestions at this time.’ It will, of course, be read with much interest.”

DR. ARCHIBALD ALEXANDER’S FAREWELL ADDRESS.

As it is known to this congregation that I have been appointed by the General Assembly to be a Professor in the Theological School, which they are about to establish at Princeton, New Jersey; and as the time draws near when it will be expected that I should declare my mind in relation to this appointment, I have judged it proper and expedient, in the first place, to make a communication to you, the dear people of my charge.

After viewing this important subject in every light in which I could place it, and after having earnestly sought the direction of Heaven, it does appear to me to be the call of Providence, which I cannot and ought not to resist.

This resolution has not been formed under the influence of any dissatisfaction with my present condition, nor from any want of affection to this people; for, since I have been your pastor, no event has occurred to disturb that peace and harmony which should ever exist between minister and people; and I have had no reason to doubt the sincerity and cordiality of the attachment of this congregation to me, from the first day I came amongst them until this time. For all their respect and attention, and especially for that readiness with which they have received the word at my mouth, “I give thanks to God.” I moreover wish to say, that I do not know a single congregation within the bounds of our Church, of which I would choose to be pastor in preference to this. No invitation, therefore, from any other would ever have separated us.

I did expect to live and die with you, unless ill health (with which I have been threatened of late) should have made a removal expedient. But we know nothing of the designs of Providence with regard to us. His dispensations are unsearchable. In the whole of this business, thus far, I have been entirely passive. I never expected or sought this appointment. When it was mentioned to me by some members of the Assembly, the day it took place, my answer was, that I sincerely wished they would think of some other person; that it was an office which I did not covet, and for which I felt myself altogether unqualified. But when asked whether I would give the subject a serious and deliberate consideration, if I should be appointed, I answered, that this I dare not oppose.

Since the appointment has been made, I have thought much, but said little. I have seriously and deliberately considered the subject. I never viewed any decision to be made by me in so important a light. I think I have desired to do the will of God, and have, as earnestly as I could, asked His counsel and guidance, and the result is, that I am convinced that I ought not to refuse such a call.

To train up young men for the ministry has always been considered of higher importance to the Church of Christ than to preach the gospel to a particular flock, already gathered into the fold; and it has always been considered as a sufficient reason for dissolving the pastoral relation between minister and people, that he was wanted for this employment; and sister churches, which do not allow of removals from a pastoral charge, do, nevertheless, admit this to be a sufficient reason for the translation of a minister.

In addition to this, it ought to be considered that this call comes to me in a very peculiar way. It is not the call of a College, or University, or any such institution, but it is the call of the whole Church by their representatives. And I confess that it has weighed much with my mind, that this appointment was made by the General Assembly in circumstances of peculiar seriousness and solemnity, and after special prayer for Divine direction and superintendence, and by an almost unanimous vote. Perhaps it would be difficult to find a disinterested person who would not say, under such circumstances, “It is your duty to go–it appears to be the call of God;” and I do believe that the majority of this congregation are convinced in their judgment, whatever their feelings may dictate, that I would be out of my duty to refuse. Indeed, I cannot but admire the deportment of the people in relation to this matter. Although tenderly affected, and many of you grieved at heart, yet you have not ventured to say “Stay.”  You saw that there was something remarkable in the dispensation, and you knew not but that the finger of God was in the affair, and therefore, with a submissive spirit, you were disposed to say, “The will of the Lord be done.”

It does appear hard, indeed, that this bereavement should fall upon you who have already been bereaved so often; but consider that He who causeth the wound hath power to heal it, and can turn this event to your greater advantage; and I entertain a confident persuasion that if you willingly make this sacrifice for the good of the Church, the great Head of the Church will furnish you with a pastor after His own heart, who will feed you with knowledge. Commit your cause to Him with fervent prayer and humble confidence, and He will not forget nor forsake you.

My dear brethren, as we have lived in peace and love, I hope that we shall part in the same spirit. I hope that we will remember one another unceasingly at the throne of grace. Let us recollect the times and seasons when we have taken sweet converse together in this house, and other places where prayer is wont to be made. If any shall choose to be displeased, and follow me with hard speeches instead of prayers, I shall not return unto them as they measure unto me. I will not resent their conduct. I desire ever to be disposed to bear you as a people on my heart with tender love; and now to His grace and kind protection do I commit you. Farewell !

This is the concluding article in the series PRESBYTERIANS IN AMERICA. The author, Rev. Prof. Paul Woolley, was formerly the professor of Church History at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. I do hope you have found Rev. Woolley’s articles both interesting and instructive, and I do trust that our readers are more familiar now than they were previously with the several Presbyterian denominations in our country.—Editor.

VII – The Secession Tradition

[Reformed Presbyterian Advocate, 86.4 (April 1952): 37-38.]

                    The question of church patronage—the right of one man to appoint the pastor of a parish—began to trouble the church at least as early as the eighth century. In some instances it has not yet ceased to trouble it. The First and Second Books of Discipline of the Scottish Church, however, in the heroic days of John Knox and Andrew Melville, established the principle that the installation of a pastor was subject to the approval of the congregation and the elders.

               It was the violation of this fundamental principle in the mid-eighteenth century which led Ebenezer Erskine and others to leave the established Church and found the Associate Presbytery, popularly called the Secession. In 1753 two Associate ministers came to this country at the request of settlers here. Shortly thereafter, they organized the Associate Presbytery of Pennsylvania. After the American Revolution a portion of the Associate Presbytery of Pennsylvania and all of the Associate Presbytery of New York joined in a union with the Reformed (Covenanter) Presbytery to form the Associate Reformed Church.

               It would be of little value to follow, in this series of articles, all of the ecclesiastical vicissitudes of this tradition. Let me then refer to what is of importance for our purposes.

               As we have already seen the Reformed Presbytery was reconstituted and continues its existence in the Reformed Presbyterian Churches of today, of which we wrote in the last previous article.

               The portion of the Associate Presbytery of Pennsylvania which did not enter into union continued the Associate tradition and exists today as the Associate Presbyterian Church, the smallest ecclesiastical body in the United States consisting of more than one congregation and bearing the name Presbyterian, to the writer’s knowledge. It has some eight churches in Pennsylvania, Iowa and Kansas with a total membership of about 300. Restricted communion and the use of inspired psalms only in praise are principles of the Church. It cooperates with the United Original Secession Church of Scotland in conducting foreign missionary work in India.

               The Associate Reformed union is still vigorous, in that form, in the South, where the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church has some twenty-five thousand members in about 150 congregations scattered from Virginia to Florida and west as far as Arkansas and Missouri. Psalms are used exclusively in worship. There are missionaries at work in Mexico and in India. Erskine College, with a theological school in connection with it, is supervised by the Church at Due West, South Carolina. A proposal to unite the Church with the Presbyterian Church in the U.S. (Southern) failed of adoption in 1951.

               The largest American Church of this tradition is, however, the United Presbyterian Church of North America. In 1858 the Associate Reformed Church (the western and New York body, as distinct from the Synod of the South) and the large majority of the Associate Presbyterian Church united to form the United Presbyterian Church. It thus became the majority body in number to represent the heirs of the Covenanter and Secession testimonies.

               The United Presbyterian Church today has about 215,000 members in approximately 830 churches. It is perhaps distinctive in combining a reputation for general conservatism with a thorough-going abandonment of the features which characterized the Secession and Covenanter traditions. There is no longer any interest in covenanting, psalms are not used exclusively in worship, restricted communion is not practiced, there is no testimony against oath-bound societies. The confessional basis is probably the most lax of any presbyterian body in the country, since in 1925 a Confessional Statement was adopted which supersedes the Westminster Standards in cases where there is conflict between them. This Statement is unsatisfactory in various ways, as, for example, in its statement concerning Scripture. The major weakness, however, is the indication that it is not necessary for officers to agree with the Standards so long as they do not determinedly oppose them. This makes the Standards largely useless.

               The United Presbyterian Church has historically a strong reform tradition. Its position in favor of strict sabbath observance and against the use of alcoholic beverages has been vigorous.

               The Church has a theological seminary at Pittsburgh and six liberal arts colleges. Its foreign missionary activity has been particularly notable in Egypt, Ethiopia and the Sudan. It also works in India. The contributions for foreign missions approach half a million dollars a year.

               The United Presbyterian Church has often contemplated, discussed, and has voted upon, union with the Reformed Church in America, but the union enthusiasm of the latter has not equaled that of the former.

               Wider unions have also been contemplated. The United Presbyterian Church is today an example of a Church which has lost all touch with the principles for which its original constituent elements came into being. It has continued a conservative tradition in certain areas, but its dominant control is unsympathetic to this. There is no evident reason for its continued independent existence.

*     *     *     *     *

Dr. Paul Woolley’s series of articles on Presbyterians in America continues today with a segment on churches of Covenanter ancestry. Please keep in mind that these articles were written in the early 1950s and so much has changed since that time.

VI – The Churches of Covenanter Ancestry

[Reformed Presbyterian Advocate, 86.3 (March 1952): 25-26]

                    In English-speaking lands religious persecution has rarely been as vigorous as it was in Scotland in the seventh, eighth and ninth decades of the seventeenth century. Probably the only exception is the series of burnings in England under the Roman Catholic Queen Mary Tudor.
               The Scottish persecution was due to the loyalty of many Scots to the obligations which they had assumed a few years previous when they signed the Covenants which pledged them to maintain the reformed Christian faith in Scotland. The monarchs Charles II and James II would have no truck with Presbyterianism, and they were determined to force every one to worship under the authority of bishops, led by episcopally installed ministers, and following an episcopally imposed liturgy. There were thousands, however, who preferred to suffer rather than capitulate to an unrighteous demand.

               When William of Orange and his wife Mary, came to the throne of Great Britain in 1688, peace began to return to Scotland. They proceeded to reestablish the Church of Scotland as a presbyterian Church. However, the renewed Church did not formally reassume the obligation of the Covenants which their fathers had made before God. The acts which had made the Covenants and covenanting illegal were not repealed. Presbyterian government was not affirmed as of divine right.

               Consequently some of the faithful of the days of persecution continued to remain outside the established Church. They had no minister, but in 1706 a minister left the establishment to lead them. A licentiate soon joined him, but not until 1743 did the accession of a second minister make possible the constitution of a presbytery. Thus began the Reformed Presbytery, from which, in due course, grew Reformed Presbyterian Churches in Scotland, in Ireland, in Australia and in the United States. Reformed Presbyterians were popularly called Covenanters.

               The first Reformed Presbyterian minister came to this country from Scotland about 1751, and in 1774 the Reformed Presbytery was constituted. In 1782 many of the American Covenanters joined with the Associate Presbytery to form the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church. Those who continued grew, however, and in 1809 constituted a synod.
               Today, however, there are two denominations in the United States which have descended from the Covenanters. This is the result of a difference of opinion which developed during the presidency of Andrew Jackson, a backwoods Democrat. It concerned the possibility of participating in the civil government of the country as a Christian. Would all such participation be sinful? Some held that it would not. Others insisted that the civil constitution must recognize God as the source of all power and Christ as the ruler of the nations before citizens might vote or participate in any fashion in directing the affairs of the civil state. As a consequence, from 1833 onward there have been two synods in the Reformed Presbyterian stream in this country.

               The Reformed Presbyterian Church in North America, General Synod allows its members to make their own conscientious decisions as to participation in civil affairs. One of its members, George H. Stuart, actively promoted the idea of the union of the various Presbyterian and Reformed Churches in the United States immediately after the Civil War. In 1950 the Church reported eleven congregations with 1,374 members. Regular readers of The Reformed Presbyterian Advocate know of its home and foreign missionary work and of the theological instruction at Cedarville, Ohio. Further description is, therefore, unnecessary.

               The Synod of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America restrains its members from voting or other participation in the civil government under the present Constitution of the United States. It urges the amendment of the Constitution. Praise in worship is confined to inspired psalms and without instrumental accompaniment. Foreign missions are conducted in Syria and Cyprus and in Japan. Geneva College at Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania, is controlled by the Synod. Their congregations frequently use the titled, “Church of the Covenanters.” In 1950, 5,339 members were reported in 75 congregations. The Theological Seminary is located in Wilkinsburg, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

On August 27th, 1820, the Rev. Sylvester Larned appeared for the last time before the congregation of the First Presbyterian Church of New Orleans. He had remained in the city during the summer’s “sickly season.” Death from fever was everywhere, and Rev. Larned has spent those weeks and months ministering to the city’s poor who could not afford to flee the city. It was in that context that “The whole of his discourse was solemn, and he himself was unusually affected by the considerations he presented to his hearers; and as he concluded, he wept.”

‘To me to live is Christ; and to die is gain.’ — Philippians 1:21.

“To a sentiment like this, my hearers, what can we conceive superior in dignity of thought, or loftiness of feeling? How majestic does he appear who can look with so triumphant an emotion upon the grave,—and that too, not in the sternness of philosophy, nor the torpor of fatalism, but simply in the meek and confiding hope of salvation in Jesus Christ! In the present case, also, there are some facts which render the spectacle still more illustrious. When St. Paul uttered the language of our text, he was a prisoner at Rome. The terrible Nero had hunted long and eagerly for the aged saint, till at last the apostle was seized and conducted to that imperial monster, who had so often feasted on the blood and tears of the Church. Here it was that the godly old man—chained to a soldier, to prevent his escape, uncertain what day might prove his last, and listening, at every sound, for the fearful tread of the executioner,—here it was, under circumstances which might have appalled the stoutest heart, that he exclaimed, more like a conquerer than a captive,

‘To me to live is Christ; and to die is gain.’

Now what, my hearers, is life? It comprises, you well know, two leading ideas—activity and enjoyment. Every man has some great object upon which his activities are more awake than upon any other. Wealth to one, Beauty to a second, Fame to a third, and so on; and, I trust, experimental religion to a few, calls forth that paramount solicitude and exertion which show most decisively in what direction the main current of the feelings is set. By this rule, if you look at the apostle Paul, you may find out, at a glance, the real spring of his movements. His whole efforts were bent to the single aim of promoting Christianity, not only abroad, but in his own bosom—not alone in the display of its external embellishments, but in the urgency of its work upon the affections and thoughts.

The same is true in regard to the idea of enjoyment. There is scarcely a man in a thousand who does not show to the eye of his acquaintances, and indeed to his own eye, if he be candid and impartial, the actual feelings by which he loves chiefly to be engrossed. The secret will come out. The votary of pleasure, of fashion, of gold, and, may I add, of the Saviour, are sure to betray the supremacy of their attachment to their separate objects of pursuit.

By this rule, too, St. Paul appears in a character the most unequivocal. His enjoyments were in Christ. All his views of happiness appear to have centered on the one absorbing principle of union with Him, ‘in whom,’ to use his own words, ‘tho’ now we see Him not, yet believing, we rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory.’ Well then did the great apostle of the Gentiles say, that ‘To him to live was Christ.’ But, my brethren, does not his language convey a sentiment of conviction and reproof to you? Could you adopt it, and assert that the Lord Jesus constitutes the primary object of your lives, either by making you supremely active in His service, or by making you supremely happy in His promises?

These are inquiries which lie, depend upon it, at the very basis of personal religion. Easy as it may be to carry about us the semblance of a hope for eternity, the Bible declares that God looketh at the life, not simply in its visible conformities and observances, but in the entireness of its dedication to Jesus Christ. But the venerable Paul goes on to say, that ‘to him to die was gain.‘ How is this? How should a poor frail mortal, who had known only one world, feel a confidence so strong in approaching the untried scenes of another? The reason, my hearers, plainly was, that he had an interest in the Saviour’s blood.

This inspired his triumph, and having this, Death, was to him, as it is to every believer, a subject of thanksgiving and praise. It released him from all his sorrows; and many a one have the children of God in walking through this vale of tears. The hand of God’s bereavement, or the reverses of His Providence, break in upon their happiness so often, that, ‘if , in this life only, they had hope in Christ, they were, of all men, most miserable.’

And besides, in entering the grave, the Christian leaves his sins behind him; and I know of no one consideration more glorious or more animating to a renovated heart. Certain it is, that by just how much we are assimilated to the Redeemer, by just so much will the bare danger of violating his commandments, or incurring his displeasure, be to us a source of the most lively uneasiness and anxiety.

And then, more than every thing else, the hour of death, however shrouded for the time in gloom, ushers the experimental believer into a better and a brighter world. To him it is that God has promised ‘an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled, and that fadeth not away.’ The very moment life is gone, the certainty of Heaven comes home to him; and thus it happens that every one, rich or poor, bond or free, who can truly say, with the apostle, that ‘to him to live is Christ’, may say also with the same assurance, that ‘to die is gain.’

And here, my brethren, let me again inquire, if the sentiment of our text do not tacitly imply a reproach—or an expostulation to yourselves? In what sense is it that death, to you, would be ‘gain’?—Death, which will stop you short in your pursuits, and lay you motionless and cold, beneath the lids of the coffin—death, which will put forever beyond your reach the offers of mercy—which will cut short the busy activities of the world, and dismiss you at once to the tribunal bar of the Omnipotent God. Justly indeed might St. Paul contemplate these things with joy; for he was prepared to put off his clayey tabernacle. But, to us, the question comes most impressively up, whether we have any evangelical and well-grounded reason to believe that Christ has been formed in us the hope of glory?

“Now, my hearers, in looking at the subject which has been briefly examined, I cannot repress a remark, adapted, I think, to the serious reality of our present circumstances. It is this: At all times a becoming preparation for eternity presents itself to us as a most desirable attainment—but now more than ever, for the simple reason that now the distance between time and eternity seems to be most solemnly short. You can all attest how suddenly a few weeks past have hurried some of our fellow-beings from health to the tomb. Do not, however, mistake my meaning,—do not think I say this with a design to alarm. By no means. Your own good sense will teach you, that at a moment like the present, composure and tranquility, even without religion, ought carefully to be sought. But what I say is, have an interest in Jesus Christ. Then death will have no terrors, and the grave no victory.

Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for you is, that you may be saved. Why will you put off the business of your immortal souls? Why will you rush forward with the infatuation of madness and the rashness of despair, when the arms of a compassionate Saviour are thrown open to welcome you with all your sins and all your fears? I entreat, and God grant you may remember the appeal—I entreat you to be up and doing—to work while it is called today, because the night cometh,—and how soon or suddenly we know not,—wherein no man can work.”

———

By the exertions of this Sabbath he appeared to be much overcome, but complained of no indisposition until early the next morning, when he was seized with fever, which no medical skill or appliances could subdue; and on Thursday evening, the 31st of August, the very day on which he completed his twenty-fourth year, he resigned, in the full confidence of a blessed immortality, his soul to God.

To read more of the life of the Rev. Sylvester Larned, along with a small collection of his sermons, click here :
Life and Eloquence of the Rev. Sylvester Larned; first pastor of the First Presbyterian church in New Orleans, by Ralph Randolph Gurley (1844).

Dr. Woolley’s series of articles on Presbyterians in America continues today with a focus on the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and the Bible Presbyterian Church.  Our Monday and Tuesday posts will conclude this series. Do keep in mind that these articles were written in the early 1950s and so much has changed since that time.

V – The Orthodox Presbyterian Church
and the Bible Presbyterian Church

[Reformed Presbyterian Advocate, 86.2 (February 1952): 13-14.]

                    As was true last month, we are again pursuing the history of churches which have grown from the root which became the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A.

               War often dims the doctrinal consciousness of church members and leaders. The loyalties and comradeship of the war overshadow other interests and then gradually replace them. The truth of the Word of God begins to be less important than the principles for which the state is, or is alleged to be, fighting. Soon everything is caught up in the enthusiasm for victory for the nation’s cause.

               This occurred at the close of the Civil War in the United States. The result was the reunion in 1869-70 of the Old School and New School Presbyterian Churches in the north. The separate existence of these churches was caused by important differences in their teaching about man’s condition. Was man a helpless sinner needing God’s regenerating power or could he decide his eternal destiny himself? The Old School said the former, the New School the latter. The two churches united without any reference to the solution of this and the other doctrinal divergences between them.

               In this way they gave notice to the world that doctrine was to be a minor matter from that time on it the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. and so it has proved to be. We have noted already the ease with which the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. absorbed the Cumberland Church with its divergent doctrine.

               In the 1920’s a number of Presbyterians showed serious concern about the undermining of the authority of the Bible. There was a country-wide expression of it in the World’s Christian Fundamentals Association which, of course, included many denominations. But individual Presbyterians such as Alexander, Allis, Buchanan, Macartney, Machen and Wilson were anxious to maintain the doctrinal loyalty of Presbyterianism to the Scriptures and the Westminster Standards. The effort came to center more and more about Princeton Seminary, until its doctrinal position was altered by the action of the General Assembly of 1929. Then Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia became the heart of the cause.

               Matters were brought to something of a crisis in the 30’s by the conduct of the Board of Foreign Missions. It was maintaining modernist missionaries in foreign countries, supporting educational institutions where little Christianity was taught, and had a signer of the modernist Auburn Affirmation as its Candidate Secretary. When the General Assembly refused to alter this situation, an Independent Board for Presbyterian Foreign Missions was founded to send out Presbyterians who could not conscientiously go under the existing board. The General Council threatened the members of the new board with disciplinary action and the next Assembly carried out the threat. It became clear that it was no longer practicable to try to be a true Presbyterian in the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. One had either to hold modernist or indifferentist convictions or else refrain from putting one’s evangelical convictions into practice, just keeping them within very small local limits. This put all evangelical Presbyterians before a dilemma. Were they to preach the gospel as they believed it, or were they to accept the restrictions of the ecclesiastical leaders and allow modernists to represent them in Presbyterian courts, agencies, boards and other organizations? Some made one choice and some another.

               Those who chose to preach the gospel without restrictions became the Presbyterian Church of America. It was founded under that name in 1936, a few weeks after a number of them had been disciplined by the General Assembly for various evangelical offenses. One had run an evangelical summer camp for children, one had advocated refusing to give to the Board of Foreign Missions, and a number were supporting the preaching of the gospel abroad by conducting the Independent Board.

               The name of the church was soon changed to the Orthodox Presbyterian Church as the result of a suit instituted in the civil courts of Pennsylvania by the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A.

               Today the Orthodox Presbyterian Church has about eight thousand members in nearly one hundred congregations scattered from Maine to California and from Wisconsin to Florida. Contributions for all purposes are about half a million dollars a year. There are fifteen foreign missionaries working in China (Formosa), Eritrea, Japan and Korea. A like number of home missionaries are supported in the United States. A Committee on Christian Education has an extensive publishing program, concerned largely with Vacation Bible School and Sunday Schools materials, but also including booklets on important matters of Christian principle in modern living. The congregations as not evenly distributed over the country and in many areas where one is wanted there are insufficient funds to make it possible.

               In 1937, less than a year after the organization of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, a number of its ministers demanded that it adopt a statement concerned with alcoholic beverages which would not only point out the sinfulness of drunkenness but would also state or imply that no Christian should use alcoholic beverages today. Since the Bible is the only binding rule of faith and practice for the Christian and since the Bible does not take this latter position, the Church could not, of course, do so either. It did adopt a statement calling attention to the danger of drunkenness as presented in the doctrinal standards of the Church at several places.

               Because the Church was unwilling to go further, a number of ministers separated from the organization and set up what has become the Bible Presbyterian Church. It was designed to emphasize, in addition to total abstinence, the premillennial return of Christ. A modification of the Westminster Confession which incorporated premillennial assertions was adopted as a part of the constitution of the new Church. The Bible Presbyterian Church has about eight thousand communicants. In 1950 there were sixty-seven congregations. Contributions for all purposes total about $650,000 per annum. The congregations are scattered throughout the nation except for New England. The Church does not conduct foreign missions directly as it channels its missionary service through the Independent Board for Presbyterian Foreign Missions, whose control and policies are now similar to those of that Church. The board has seventy-seven missionaries in 12 different countries.

               The introduction into its standards by the Bible Presbyterian Church of the novelty mentioned above is an indication of the fact that the Church is primarily a Church with a modern fundamentalist emphasis. It has relatively little interest in the historic tradition of Presbyterianism, but is sensitive to the changing currents of American evangelicalism.

               On the other hand, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church was founded for a very specific purpose—to carry on the spiritual succession of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. It is anxious to retain all of the values of the study, thought, prayer, experience and energy which have gone into the building of the historic church since the time of the apostles, so long as that tradition is true to the Scriptures. A pertinent question is—Why is that Church then not larger?

               There are probably three reasons for this, of varying importance. One is simple that people are emotional, and many of those who are ruled by emotion prefer to cling to familiar ties rather than to join what is, in many cases, a strange and uncongenial set of people. Secondly, many people believe it is of more importance to be connected with a large organization than a small one. Size and influence outweigh other considerations in these cases.

               In the third instance, the fault lies with the members of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. They have not by life and word made clear enough their allegiance to the ever old and ever new gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ as presented by historic Presbyterianism. They have failed to make plain the gospel testimony of the Church and so it has been misunderstood or neglected.