The General Assembly [pp. 511-546]

Reorganization of the Boards.
is $536, when $1000 would not be too much. Only 1705
churches contribute to this fund, while 1783 churches are noncontributing. They do not contribute, he said, because they
do not like the system. 2. He insisted that the system was
wrong. God has given us a divine system of governmentsessions, Presbyteries, and Synods. The Synod should not do
the work of a Presbytery, nor a Presbytery of a session; much
less should a Board be allowed to do the work of the Presbyteries. Every Presbytery should attend to the work of missions within its own bounds; the proper field for the Board was
outside and beyond our ecclesiastical territories. It is its
business to follow the emigrants to New Mexico, Utah, Dacotah, &c., with the missionary and the means of grace. Each
Presbytery having performed what was necessary within its
own borders, should send its surplus funds to a Central Committee, by which they should be used for missionary operations
beyond the borders of the church, and to aid the feebler Presbyteries who need help to do the work within their own limits.
3. The Board system is not only wrong in principle, and inefficient in operation, but it fails to unite the church, and call
forth its energies. We want, he said, to co-operate with you,
but we must work apart if you insist on your present system.
We want to operate through our Presbyteries, Synods, and
General Assembly. Boards have no life in them. The Presbyteries do not feel any interest in the work of missions.
They say the great Board in Philadelphia will attend to it.
4. It was strenuously urged on this side of the question, that
the Boards were an incumbrance; that they did nothing; that
they stood in the way between the Assembly and the Executive Committees, shielding the latter from direct responsibility
to the church, and yet exercising no real inspection or control
over them.
Dr. Thornwell took higher ground. He argued the question
as one of principle, as involving radically different views, on
the one side, and on the other, of the nature and powers of the
church. His speeches on this subject were very long and very
ardent. They are of course imperfectly reported, and we can
only give the heads of his argument as presented in the public
papers. 1. He insisted that God had laid down in the Scrip
1860.]
515