New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-06-01

THE GENERAL THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY DEFENDED
BY MEMBER OF THE FAcULTY-A srUDENTs
| CRITICISMS
| The members of the faculty of the General Theo-
logical Seminary If this city. not pleased with
| the structures upon that institution expressed Dy
| the Rev. r. Heber Newton from his pulpit on sun
day morning. and yesterday they denied 10 q
TRIBUNE reporter that there was any ground tor MS
statement that the education given at the Seminary
showed lack of generous scholarship As 70 n p.u
fcssOr having said in the lecture room that Dean
Stanley was an ass" the members of the faculty 10
whose notice this statement was brought tepHieo
| en;thet was applied to the Dean of Westminster.
One of tho faculty, the Rev; Thomas Hickey, said
! to the reporter: For Mr.. Newton to make such
| statements upon mere ad captandum evidence Is
very wrong and ought not to pass unc0rrected.
| This institution does give liberal eduGation-as
| Among its yonng men it knows no difference be-
tween what you call high church and low Gnurch
it leaves every one VINO comes mere 10 ond oloWs
| no interference with received opinions. 1t has
among its professors men who may be regarded as
representative of both schools IN the NhuTch' ana
vet good feeling pcryadcs the whole institution, both
among the students and the professors"
"But is i what may DO termed hgn cnurcn
"Not at all. am high church. and $50 are one or
two others, but most of the professors are not. 80
far from the Seminary being open to the charge MI:
Newton makcs-that it is narrow school OF
theOlOgy-it is made the subject OF attack because
it will not make itself a narrow school, but mas
resisted every attempt that has been maze 10 MAKE
it the school of party" .
How about tile young man who got disguised
with its blgOtry' and left "
@IIe was a Young gentleman who had been round
the world in search of vocation, and who had
tried many things but always failed. lie was here
ONLY for short itne. and from his very detectye
preparation was not qualified to judge as to. the
character of teaching which the institution gives
there can be no truth in that. Why, this year we
had DR.. Plumptrec. who is representative OF the
same school us Dean Stanley, to address the stu
dents and the missionary sermons of this year
have been delivered for the most part by such men
as DIR. Potter, DIR. John Cotton Smith, and Bishop
Huntingdon. 1t is because we will not be narrow
that such people as Mr.. Newton attack us. We
have had iii attendance at our lectures young man
who is in preparation for the Baptist ministry, and
he has expressed his great satisfaction at the
Teaching of the Seminary. These statements of Mr..
Newton, of course, will do MS great deal OF harm
"Mr. Newton says thirty out OF every hundred OF o,
csR Rar ,'''' '''' ~
"Wrli, that Is not many, considering that he
calls this high church institution. THINK we get
Ore ' of 't the students G. F. Pratt, said: think
Mr.. Newton is right 10 some extent There IS lack
of generous scholarship. For instance, l am in
cinrd to ask questions i'll my class and sometimes
perhaps doubt point and Criticlsc it. have gem
orally been stopped short, or had some curt question
put 10 me. The teaching certainly is high church;
All the professors except one are high church, l
incline to the other school myself, and while be-
lieN ing in the Apostolic succession ana the eilcacy
of sacramcnSll do not hold that they are absolutely
necessary points of belief. The reason say that
Mr. Newton is right in stating that there is lack
of generous scholarship is this: prefer discussion
in class, but the professors look upon certain points
as fixed. They teach them us they were taught
and believe one ought to accept them on the
authority of their teaching. Ii to teach high
church doctrines is not liberal then the teaching
here is not liberal. But upon this question of dis
clSsiOn in class you know, there is another view.
Ii we discuss some matters OF belief SHOULD he
continually shifting round, and would not be
fixed on any theological point 50 they, expect us
tn tlp liVl church doctrines they tpacn
Dean Seymour gave the present tone to the Semi
nary. and the reason why it is not better supported
by church people is because the bulk vi them are
not high church,
Which of your professors called Dean Stanley
an ass I" was asked.
Il scarcely believe that part. One of them may
have done So being ANNOYED or VcXed about some
thing. They don't like Dean Stanley here.
Whether on account Of lis broad views or net
cannot say but think il is particularly from the
fact that when he came to this country lie visited
the Union Seminary and not this"