Presbyterian Peace

People are prone to think of the Presbyterian Church (North) as riven from top to bottom by five insuperable points of theology into the two parties, Modernist and Fundamentalist. That this is no longer so was demonstrated last week at the 138th annual meeting of the General Assembly, in a Baltimore theatre (the Lyric). Of politics the Presbyterians have plenty, and of late years their Assemblies have assumed the aspect of embattled conventions. But the political alignments and the issues in last week's election of a Moderator, were these:

1) The diehard, militant Fundamentalists, led by Dr. Clarence E. Macartney of Philadelphia, who interpret Holy Writ literally; insist that all Presbyterians shall thus interpret it; and put a candidate into the field to combat a supposed menace to the "historic, blood-bought standards of the Presbyterian Church."

2) The Moderates, led by no one man but rather by a broad group whose theology is Fundamental yet not militant to the extent of imposing its tenets upon all Presbyterians by other than the duly constituted judicial agencies of the Church. Its political program was to put in the field--as it successfully did last year after the Modernist-Fundamentalist fight had reached its peak--a tolerant nonmilitant Fundamentalist who would administer church affairs in a businesslike way and smooth over internal disputes.

3) The Modernists, a comparatively small group led by Dr. Henry Sloane Coffin of Manhattan. Their attitude, theological and political, is noncombative and rather Olympian save for a few retorts and counter-attacks upon the Fundamentalists. They put forward no candidate for Moderator, and while their vote was responsible for the election of the Moderate candidate, it constituted but a small portion of the entire ballot, which was, theologically speaking, preponderantly Fundamentalist.

The Election. To oppose the Fundamentalist candidate, Dr. Lapsley A. McAfee of Berkeley, Calif., the Moderates chose a man possessed of three extraordinarily varied qualifications: a compelling, genial personality; an indorsement (last year) from the late Fundamentalist William J. Bryan; and a high administrative record in a big position. He is Rev. Dr. William O. Thompson, bald Bismarckian lately retired president of Ohio State University. When Dr. Macartney tried to reconcile Dr. McAfee's alleged tolerance with Dr. McAfee's own declaration that "there is room in the church for all but the extreme Modernists," the Liberal nominator, Rev. Dr. Roy E. Vale of Oak Park, I11., countered with the fact that Dr. Thompson is a man of lowly origin whom, but for "the clammy hand of death," Mr. Bryan himself would have arisen to describe as one with whom "the integrity of the gospel would be absolutely safe." When thoughtless Dr. George A. Sevier of Denver, , seconding Dr. McAfee, protested that the West was entitled to "recognition" this year, eloquent Edward D. Duffield, president of the Prudential Life Insurance Co., pointed out that Dr. Thompson is no"provincial" candidate, and asked, as a business man, that the affairs of the Church be rested with a tried administrator. Bolstered by the Modernists and Bryanites in the Fundamentalist camp, the Moderates elected Dr. Thompson 535 to 382. Mr. Duffield was appointed Vice Moderator and the Moderates had achieved another step towards their goal--peace in the church.

But the spirit of concord did not yet brood undisturbed over the Assembly. There were still charges and counter-charges to be heard that had been made during the year between the two extreme wings, and most important of all there was the report of a commission of 15, appointed last year to "find peace."

Peace Report. The "peace commission" consisted entirely of Fundamentalists--including Dr. McAfee and Dr. Mark A. ("Lion of the Lord") Matthews of Seattle--but largely of tolerant Fundamentalists (i. e., Moderates).

An acute controversial point to have been deliberated by these men was the constitutional one raised by the Modernist New York Presbytery, which had claimed the right to determine the fitness of candidates for the ministry within its district, without interference from the General Assembly.

But the report sidestepped this dangerous issue quite neatly. It contented itself with rebuking all disputants in general for intolerance, evil-speaking, misjudgments and unwarranted publication of slanders. It transferred the responsibility for unrest in the Presbyterian Church to well-known causes such as the War, modern science, the mechanical age and lack of home training. It reaffirmed belief in the virgin birth of Christ and other Fundamentalist tenets but held "that the Presbyterian system admits of diversity of view when the core of truth is identical." It asked for the commission's continuance for another year to study the constitutional questions involved--i.e., delayed decision in the matter of the New York Presbytery until a quieter day.

The reading of this report brought a standing ovation of three minutes' duration in which both bands of extremists joined. But when the time came for debate it was found that the extreme Fundamentalists were by no means pleased with the report's pacific sidestepping.

Leader Clarence Macartney fiercely attacked it because it did not specifically condemn the New York Presbytery for having licensed a preacher who doubted the virgin birth. Thereupon, his brother, Rev. Albert Macartney, spoke up: "The only trouble with him [Clarence] is that he is not married. If Clarence would only get married there would be more harmony in the church and he would not have so much time to worry over other people's theology."