Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1883-05-11
TIE MeLANE TRIAL.

Dr. MCLANE u u hiihi'eeA Va sAS
Presbyterian denomination, now in
charge of congregation at Steuben-
vile. He has written a book upon
/ which the charge Of heresy is founded,
and the question TO be determined Is
whether the doctrines set forth therein
are antagonistIc to the confession OF
the faith upheld by that church; and
inasmuch as the book speaks for itself,
and the doctrines of the church are
also set forth in print, it would seem to
be matter of Interpretation solely-of
putting the matter of the book side by
side with the confession of faith and
have the official authority of the
church determine whether they agree
or whether they are in conflict.
II this is point upon which the doc
tors differ; that is to say, if any of the
divines who are called upon to de-
termine this question, should dare to
assume that MCLANE'S manifesto is in
harmony with the doctrines of the
church they put themselves in the
same box with the accused, and if the
verdict of the official body should be
against MCLANE, they must also pro-
coed to try and convict those who de-
fend his position.
DIR. MCLANE is recognized as one OF
the ablest men OF the church. His own
Interpretation Of his book makes no
issue with the church. He denies that
it is in conflict with the dOctrinal tenets
of the church. He defends himself on
the plea of mot guilty" of teaching
doctrines antagonistic to the confession
of faith. He claims to be in entire har-
mony with the church.
Now, if this IS the position of one of
the abIest expounders of the doctrines
of the church, il Is not improbable that
he will find many able men of his de-
nomination agreeing with him. The
! very men who are called upon to deter
mine the question at issue will differ
| some agreeiI and some disagreeIng
| with the accused. 1.-THE verdict of the
| Presbytery is, therefore, against the ac-
| cused, what does it settle? Will the
| membership of the church agree with
the position of the Presbytery, or with
| the dissenters: Or if the verdict ac-
| quits the accused, what is settled?
Win the body of the church accept he
verdict. or will they still maintain the
| belief of thOS- who nave instituted the
! prosecution"
What can any body Of men settle for
any other body of men who have minds
| Of their own, aud are accustomed to
| think for themselves" True, every
| church organization has it. doctrines,
| and ought to have. II Is proper that its
ministers should agree as to those doe
trines and teach one faith. When they
do uOt-when man finds that he is
not in harmony with the teachings of
| the church he represents, he should no
longer desire or ask to be n minister of
that church. But when the dis
| tinctiOn is 80 finely drawn be-
tween the doctrines laid down
! by the church, anu the teachings of its
ministers, that the highest authorities
cannot agree or decide between them,
of what value is il that the differing
| doctor be cast out? When fallible men
| set up a cast-irOn code of doctrines that
essay to infallibly define the mysteries
of Holy Writ, and declare that there
must lie nc departure, no inquiry be-
yOnd, no freedom of belief or expression
outside the prescribed code, they there
by possibly put the letters of error about
their followers and cut OIL all hope of
rescue in the future.
The Bible itself does not do 50. "Be-
lieve on the Lord Jesus Christ and
thou shalt be saved, is the one simple
condition. All else is nOn-essential.
Some other things, nevertheless, are
made essential III our church creeds.
4 short time ago the Methodist
church cast out of its communion one
of its brightest lights, DR.. TIIOKAs, Of
Chicago, for preaching doctrines that
are maintained by probably majority
of the church; certainly Dy many OF its
ministers and members who are looked
upon rs authority in the church. They
cast out DIR. THOMAS, hut could not cast
out the belief which remains among
ministers and members who are still
holding communion with the church
and are recognized as It's teachers.
What is the effect" Simply and sole
ly to suppress inquiry or progress along
the line on which DR.. THOMAS gave
Offense. IL DR.. THOMAS was wrong,
discussion was the very means by
which the error should be exposed. If
he, was.wrOng the church ought not to
be afraid of discussion. If he was right,
though differing from the church, it
had still less reason to fear him.
! But, it will he said, to allow such lat
itude among ministers of the same
/ church would soon break down all de-
nomiuational barriers. and churches
would have no specific doc
trines that anybody would be
bound to respect. And to a certain de-
gree this Is true. The one question is
whether it is best for the church to
maintain the strict letter of its dOgmas
and to diligently prosecute and pro-
scribe all who do not hew close to the
! line, or whether it is best to simply
maintain and teach these dogmas as
non-es>entials-as secondary to the
main purpose Of the church, as they
/ really are-rather than to eXalt them
to undue prominence Icy formidable
arrangements and solemn excommuni.
] catinns Mhnrn they find q hair.snlitfine