, 1881-10-09

Grades itself. The Church cannot afford Il
MIong-cannot afford to do an injustice. Tht
eeatechlsn' e is correct when it quotes Scripture
OUT II Is mt exact in lts explanations. The
Speaker could make a good argument charging
ncresy 19a:nSt its author. Df. Thomas may be
11Ps.icd On ne catechism rs standard, and sc
Pr. natt:etl wanted TO know II the counsel
believed in eternal punishment.
or- A.3ter replied that the question revived
THE DISCUSSION on THE WORD q 'A1oS1oS' u
III. btttief then re1d Thomas views Oh future
probation. and stated thAt Thomas js1stittes etcr~
a f. punishment on tho GROUND Of eiernai sin
VII give him chance to stop SHINING. He lays
Gown three postulhrcs-frcetonl Of 1ns will IL,
the hereafter, the nercicul goodness OF God. and
the possible c0rrigbi,y Of the sinner at some
future time. Many persons have died uucon-
3: xessed. and & yet they we're not ineorriEible Dr.
less punishment against the incorrigi-
BE- pr. Thomas hopes that God
may let men eease from s!3 and suf~
Aeyes In the freedom OF the will in the future.
Dr. Thomas has formulated no doctrine on the
nnect m o. eqs af af9Sdon % n bis love for
culng man In the hereafter. DR.. Thomas pres
entauon of the doctrine Ut eternal punishment
DOES NOT HoLD OFT AN INDICTMENT FOR
ANY MAN TO SLY
that be eau indulge in sin on earth and TX 1t up
iii the hereafter. There is an endless punisn-
1nent tor endless sn and this the Doctor
reaches The counsel then cusei with resume
Of his arguments on the. three Charges preferred
against the defendant whose manly, yet gentle
loving qualities he compli1nented. but whose
theological knowledge be held in very slight es-
TEEN.
The Court thereupoa adjourned I'LL Monday
morning.
DR. M1I,1.EES ARGUMENT FOR THE DEFENSE
was mastery effort. and attracted the closest
attention, not ouly Of the brethren, Of whom
over lN} were present. but also OF the fully
packed auditorium. 1t WAS ait exhaustive nrEll-
neut in ciear-cut English. in which he defined
ihe diuerentiatiors OF Methodist theology as ex-
as the fathers Of the Church. Some OF tue
stratght-out orthodox brethren Affected to be-
HeEe that the Doctor WIS given to Just q
lille bit of sopoistry. and at times
ssanderet from the tenets Of the Church
10 bis desire 10 save his friend, all OF whose
teachings be did not approve. and for whose
theological attachments he had not the slightest
admiration.
TIE DocToE's WIT i
Is polished to degree or keeuness and sharp
ness seldom seen among brethren OF the CLOTH
kno On several occasions his delicate thrl1sts |
made the proSecuTou vince and wish they were
somewhere else THIS WAS particularly uo1ict.- !
able when Parkhurst. III reply the infimA lion
that Re had been pursuing Thomas for ten years, /
Chair CORRECTED The angry brother, when /
Dr. Miller. who Was proceeding with his
arKunent p1aciuiy remarked. You needn't /
wi1r me- Cu1En aud nurulilel he
With bis argument speak ing slowly
and clearly. and when he came to the delicate
theological distinctions he never felt at loss for
the pruptr 'Ft'fsl. His speech .sAs two and hnlf
tours long. and at its conclusion he recretted |
thai he would not have the closing a,xutneut to {
make In addition.