Sacramento daily record-union., 1881-09-24
THE CHURCHES AND THE HEREsY CASE.


ungodly press" as Mr.. Roberts puts it,
would criticise the late heresy trial in
San Francisco in an unfriendly spirit, and
that the heathen generally would gibe
at the evidence of unevangelical tendencies
which that trial furnished. But we confess
to some surprise at the general disposition
manifested by the ministers of San Fran.
cisco to employ this case as vantage
ground from which to assail Calvary
Church and the Presbytery. These rev.
erend gentlemen appear to have made
common cause against the church of Mr..
Hemphill, and their sermons of last Sun
day were filled with remarks which recalled
the prayer of the self-righteous Pharisee,
and his fervent expression of thankfulness
that he was not as other men. Yet
it is difficult to understand how professed
theologians can find fault with trial for
heresy, or condemn those who resort to
that method of purging church of
unsound doctrine. OF necessity the stand
point of the churches in all
such matters must differ essentially from
that of outsiders. A church is an organ
ization of people who agree upon some
clearly defined creed, and who subscribe to
a certain system of dogmas which all hold
in common. In the case under considera.
tion it is clear that Mrs. Cooper could not
be charged with heresy, because she was
not member of the church. But if she
taught doctrines which were not in accord
with the orthodox creed of the church
with which she affiliated, it is perfectly
plain that either she must have been pre-.
vented from pursuing this course, or the
Church must have abandoned its distinctive
tenets. There is here no room for question
as to the nationality of the Presbyterian
articles of faith. All that is necessary to
realize is that the Presbyterian Church
does hold such and such doctrines. 1t fol-
lows from this that all such doctrines must
be upheld, or the Church will fall to
pieces.
It has been said that Mrs. Cooper is a
woman OF great benevolence, usefulness
andcharity, and that her ministrations have
been very effective. However true all
this may be, it cannot, as it appears to us,
affect the question at issue, which is
whether she has been teaching non-Presby-
terian doctrines in a Presbyterian Bible
class. If the purpose of the Presbyterian
Church was simply to improve mems NOR.
ais and lives, without regard to the char
acter of their religious beliefs, it would not
matter what Mrs. Cooper taught. But the
Presbyterian Church holds that the saliva
tion of souls can only be compassed by be-
lieving particular propositions, which it
has formulated very distinctly; and it fol-
lows from this that no Presbyterian can
consistently believe it possible to obtain
salvation in any other way. In common
with most other churches the Presbyterian
Church holds that the unfortunates who do
not accept it's version of the religious
problem are doomed to damnation. 1t is
therefore impossible that it should sanction
any mode of religious instruction which
departs from its own programme, or that
it can believe the results of such heterodox
teaching to be other than mischievous. 1t
is no part of the functions of can ungodly
"press to explain or to defend this state
of things, but it must point out that such
a situation exists, if only that the public
may understand the events passing before
its eyes.
And what applies to the Presbyterian
Church applies to most others. That is to
say, it is always possible that other
Churches may be called upon to try charges
of heresy. So long indeed as Churches ex-
ist, heresy must be possible, and this is SO
clear that it renders the attitude of the other
Churches the more surprising. With the
effects of heresy trials upon the public
mind we have nothing to do at present. It
appears to be thought that these effects are
to religion, and this is by no
means impossible. But SO long as Churches
continue to hold distinctive and rigid
creeds, they must defend themselves against
all attempts to ignore, to modify, or to
break down those creeds. Regarding the
recent case from the standpoint of Presby-
terian orthodoxy, it is impossible to per-
ceive that Mrs. Cooper has been wronged.
Her mistake was in attaching herself to a
Church in whose doctrines she only par
tally believed. 1t is clear that she is no
Cslvinist, but that in many respects she
partakes of the liberal views Of her rela-
tive, the impious infdel Ingersoll. . as
Mr.. Roberts characteristically designated