ground eternal life for himself in a perfect righteousness, it were still inconceivable that others could be admitted to partnership therein with himself." If this statement were only true it would prove the necessity of the divinity of Christ. But if it be true, it makes shipwreck of the covenant with Adam in the garden of Eden. For that covenant puts Adam's posterity into partnership with himself in the moral status that should be won by him under that covenant. So that we all were and are admitted to partnership with a man in death, and if it is inconceivable that we should have been admitted to partnership with him in eternal life, had he grounded eternal life for himself, then it is inconceivable that the covenant, in its nature (in consequence of its head being a man), admitted of anything but death. The necessity of the divinity of Christ, as the second head of the covenant, is not to ground the possibility of partnership in his righteousness, but to ground the possibility of working out the righteousness demanded for the justification of a human sinner. Still further, Dr. Primrose applies his new-found key to the unlocking of the difficulty of the sufferings and sorrows even unto the temporal death of God's justified believers in this world. The key says "that Christ suffered as a partner." Verily, this is poor consolation. If Christ only shared with us in our sufferings, without taking them away, that is, without taking away our obligation to bear them, then the help afforded is summed up in sympathy. But even supposing that Christ's suffering and death were not vicarious, but only the merit of them, this leaves the old difficulty of our suffering in this world unexplained. For the merit is certainly applicable as soon as our partnership with Christ takes place by the indwelling of the Spirit and faith, but the fact that it is not applied to the full until the death of the body, is certainly not explained by saying that Christ was only. a partner with us in these sufferings. If he was only a partner in our sufferings in this world, how do we know he is to be anything more in the world to come? For this difficulty, the old key that we had before was much better. The old key says that the atonement is of such a nature as to admit of the exercise of sovereignty in the application of its benefits. So that, if God sees fit, he may delay our full deliverance from sin and suffering to the death of the body. This leaves room for prayer for deliverance, subject to God's wisdom and goodness. So also the old explanation of the use of our good works is consistent with the analogy of faith. But to say that good works are binding upon us because Jesus did not take away our obligation to fulfil all righteousness, but only shared it with us, is poor indeed-ghastly poor. If Christ only shared our obedience, then was his obedience only in fulfilment of a rule of duty for himself, and not as a condition of life for us? The old explanation here is simple and satisfactory, and opens no flood-gate to error. The other new positions are subject to similar criticism, especially in regard to the indwelling of the Spirit and regeneration, and the distinction between the Spirit with us and the Spirit in us, but this may suffice to put us on our guard. K. M. MCINTYRE. THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF 1891. It might have been wiser on the part of the management of the QUARTERLY to have selected some one who was not a member of the Assembly to write its history, as it is difficult for those who take part in affairs to write impartially concerning them. This difficulty is increased when the writer is unfortunate enough to have been generally found with the minority on most questions where there was serious division of opinion. But if such a person gives his testimony to the high character and earnestness of purpose of the members, and to the general excellence of the work done, his testimony will have more weight, perhaps, than that either of a mere spectator or of a member of the majority. Many eyes were turned anxiously to this Assembly. It was composed largely of men comparatively unknown. The old leaders were nearly all absent. There was not a member present who had ever sat in the moderator's chair, the retiring moderator, of course, excepted. Of those that were known to the church at large, there were a considerable number-like Bryan, Molloy, McElroy, Boyd, Rose and Chester-who could "neither attempt to palliate nor deny" the "atrocious crime" of being young men at least as the church counts young men. Then, too, there were measures before the Assembly that some feared as "revolutionary" and others regarded with grave doubt. Moreover, the Assembly was to meet in a "live" town-one of the most marvellous outgrowths of the new South, and perhaps some feared that the ozone of all this new, pushing aggressive life might enter into the Assembly, and cause it to run away with our dignified old church. - Well, none of these fears were realized. The ozone was there, the life was there, the aggressive spirit was there; but if the Assembly erred anywhere, the most uncompromising conservative will not allege that it was on the side of indiscreet progressiveness. In fact, youth is not necessarily a pledge of aggressiveness. There is no more conservative member of any body than a man who is still too young to do his own independent thinking. But it must not be imagined that this Assembly was composed entirely of young men. Dr. McIlwaine, of Hampden Sydney College, took a leading part in the Assembly, and was the chairman of one of its most important committees. Dr. Price, of Southwestern University, impressed many as being, probably, the ablest member of the Assembly. The presence of the venerable Dr. Marshall, of Texas, who attended his first Assembly in 1835, was a benediction to the body from beginning to end. Just where to classify Dr. Pitzer we do not know, as his white hairs and youthful spirits presented such a marked contrast. The ruling eldership was very ably represented. Judge Martin, of Arkansas, an able jurist and charming speaker, was always heard with great interest. Col. Candler, of Georgia, whenever he spoke, made you feel the power of a man used to great public bodies. Judge Grattan, of Virginia, spoke always with a zeal and enthusiasm that commanded attention. Prof. Fulton, of Mississippi, one of the youngest ruling elders present, treated ecclesiastical questions with a thorough familiarity that made some of the brethren express the opinion that "he ought to have been a preacher." The opening sermon presented a theme peculiarly timely—the unseen defences of the church, from 2 Kings vi. 16: "Fear not; for they that be with us are more than they that be with them." It set forth to the eye of faith the power of Jehovah on the side of the church, whether it was contending earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints, or whether it was pushing forward its aggressive warfare to conquer the world for Christ. In this last respect it struck the keynote of the whole Assembly; with no differences to settle, with no controversies to allay, the great work before us was, How to do the Lord's work. There were, necessarily, differences of opinion about this, but this was the ruling desire in all hearts, and all were alike disposed to look to God for guidance in the doing of God's work. The election of a moderator was in the same direction. The Assembly sought to honor-and thereby honored itself-one who was conspicuous by reason of the work he had done. It desired to honor, not merely a man who had done noble service on one of the outposts, but to honor and emphasize that great department of the work of the church. Dr. DuBose made not exactly a model moderator, according to the ordinary standard, but he was better than that. As he freely stated, the nature of his work prevented his having great familiarity with parliamentary law, and sometimes, when the rights of minorities depended on parliamentary questions, his decisions worked some hardship. But this was more than compensated for by the devotional spirit which he constantly maintained and the devotional attitude in which he constantly kept the Assembly. This is a precedent which all subsequent moderators will do well to follow. It was largely due to his influence and example that throughout the whole Assembly "the peace of God kept our hearts and minds." The Assembly got to work with unusual rapidity. Instead of taking recess the first afternoon, as usual, to allow the moderator time to appoint his committees, the moderator was excused from attendance, and the Assembly heard the reports of the executive committees, which were all referred that afternoon to the appropriate committees, to be announced the next morning. This desire to facilitate business was further manifested by the appointment of an order of the day for Friday to hear the report of the ad interim committee on the Revised Directory for Worship, which was taken up the next morning after the standing committees had been announced, and the various overtures, reports, records and communications read and referred. There were a few questions of reference raised, as when it was moved to refer the overtures on the qualifications for licensure and ordination to the Committee on Education, and the overture on the Robinson case to the Committee on Bills and Overtures, but the latter committee properly got the former overtures, while the latter overture was referred to the Judiciary Committee. There were, by the way, some eminently appropriate appointments in the chairmanship of committees. Dr. Park had bills and overtures as a matter of course. The Education committee was placed under the leadership of the president of one of our most important colleges, Dr. McIlwaine. The appointment of Rev. W. S. P. Bryan to Foreign Missions was a deserved recognition of his eminent services as agent of that cause in the Synod of North Carolina, as well as the remarkable point of development to which he has led his church in recently assuming the support of the whole African Mission. Judge Martin, of Arkansas, as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, was the right man in the right place. Some doubted the propriety of placing a man with the extreme views on "organic union" of Dr. Pitzer at the head of the Committee on Foreign Correspondence, but time-or Dr. Briggshas wrought a great change in his views, and he proved in the end to be more rankly conservative on those questions than the Assembly itself. The Directory for Worship was presented in admirable form, but it seemed at first as if it would take the whole session of the Assembly to go through with it. On the second paragraph an amendment was suggested, and what with the amendment and the debate upon it, and the amendment to the amendment, and the substitute for the whole, it looked as if we would never get beyond the question of posture in prayer. A running fire of amendments was kept up for some time until it was found that they were always voted down, and then the brethren became discouraged and rapid progress was made. There was no change made until the optional form for marriage was reached, where the questions were all, "Do you?" and the answers were all, “I will." This had been recognized by the members of the committee as an error, and the chairman sent a message suggesting one form of amendment, and the secretary suggested another, but the lawyers and judges present gave their judgment in favor of "Do you?" and "I do" throughout, and it was so amended. The committee was thanked for their valuable labors, and the Directory sent down to the Presbyteries for adoption or rejection. It is to be hoped that after the next Assembly it will become a part of our organic law, and the Revised Book be at last complete. The first of the standing committees to get in their report was that on Education. It was read at the popular meeting in the interest of that cause Saturday evening, and taken up and discussed on Monday. It was a most important paper and was taken up by the Assembly with great enthusiasm. Vigorous speeches were made when the clause came up recommending the employment of a secretary for his whole time, and there was a little skirmish of the picket line on the coming battle about the qualifications for licensure and ordination. Those in favor of change were anxious to show that they were in favor of every other method of increasing the supply of the ministry, as well as the proposed constitutional change; while those opposed to the change expressed themselves in favor of this as obviating the necessity of such "revolutionary" measures. The vote by which this clause was adopted was like a whirlwind. This settled also the question of consolidating Education with Publication. When the question of the amount to be |