The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-12-29
THE HERETICS OF ANDOVER.
Beginning of the Trial of the Four Pro-
feSSOrs on Charges of Heresy.
Prof. Theodore Dwight Appears for the Accus-
ed. and Delivers Strong, Pointed and
Eloquent Argument in Their Behalf.

boaru OF NlSltorS the complalnantS respond
ents and counsel ON both sides. The large din
ing-room of the hotel was filled, even the stand
ing room along the walls being occupied. A
considerable portion of the audience was made
up Of clergymen, but many laymen and a mum
Der of ladies were present and the large audi
ence paid the closest attention from the opening
to the closing of the long session. After consid-
cradle time had been spent in preliminary debate,
Judge French offered in evidence an editorial
article in the Andover Review for April last,
entitled ''The Bible Theme for the Pulpit. '
and Professor Smythe's speech at the American
board meeting at Des Moines, Ia, last October,
said speech being printed in pamphlet, entitled
''The Great Debate" Counsel for respondents
asked that whatever portion of any book or any
document was to be urged against them should
be definitely pointed out On this point Gov.
CASTOR, one of respondents counsel. said:
Professor Smythe willing not only that this tribunal
shall know but that the world should know all that
he has said and all that he has taught and all that he
believes and in the trial against him it is but fair and
just it is legal, that what the charge is shall be
specified
At IL o'clock, the compiainants having entered
their case without any other statement than that
specified above, and citations from the Andover
Review and the book, made up mainly Of repub-
LEGATIONS from editorials in the Review, and en-
titled Progressive Orthodoxy as specified in
the charges, Prof. Theodore Dwight, of Columbia
Law school. opened for the respondents in an ad-
dress of great length, learning and vigorous elo-
Quence. His mastery presents tion of his clients
case won at an early stage such an outburst of
applause from apparently the entire audience
that President Seeley of Amherst College, chair
man of the Board of Visitors, the tribunal be-
fore which the case is being tried announced
that if in future there were any demonstrations
of approval or disapproval the would be
cleared of spectators
Professor Dwight said the first three charges
were without foundation. The only point aimed
at was heterodOxy Does this mean denial of
the principles of religion, simply denial of
the creed which the professors are required to
slgnf No power of removal is granted the visit
ors because the party believes or teaches in
opposition to the creed--at least, not in
those words. The only ground for
removal is heterodoxy, ard there is
no mode of ascertaining what heterocoxy is
unless resort be had to the ordinary meaning of
the word. So that there is no heterodoxy by a
professor in violating the creed, considered as
such, but only heterodoxy in the general form
of not being in agreement with the church de-
nomination to which he belongs, or with Chris
tiaDs at large, This would not cover the pres
ent case
Professor Dwight then took up the question of
charitable trusts After long examination of
the legal status he made the point that too much
tlnkerlnR OF these charitable institutions would
lead men to teach doctrines which they did not
believe. Professor Dwight said Andover Semi
nary was founded on what the founders believed
to be liberal principles. The chief aim
of the seminary was TO teach 1.-THE
great end and business of living" Great
stress laid on discreet acceptance of the
principal instruction The idea of tolerance, &C
cordirg to the ideas held at the time, pervades
all the early documents of the seminary. The
creeds, therefore, are to be approached from
liberal point of view Two acadami0S cOnld
thrive, these antagonistic bodies united to
form one seminary. New Hopknsian phrases
were inserted among the cid cavnistic
doctrines, and the result is creed
which contains in itself two different and
conflicting elements This is the associate
creed, and l say this creed is novel and unex-
ampled in the religious creeds OF modern DAYS.
1t might we'll have applied to it of Ed
clauses Grossly indented and whimsically
dove-taied." This creed can only be taken az
substitute for the Westminster Shorter Cate
chlsm. One man can accept either, but he can
not accept both, as they are at variance one with
the other.
/ come now to the charges themselves The
citations DO not bear out the specifications. l
shall refer only to Specifications IL and r. The
eleventh refers TO the fact that Prof Smytne
has inculcated belief in probation after death
for all men who do not definitely reject Christ
in this life. Prof Dwight then considered the
charge regarding probation after death, dividing
his remarks under four heads:
First-The theory of competent theologians
believing the doctrine OF liberal atonement as 10
the necessity Of knowledge Of Christ to saving
faith on the part of the elect.
Second-The necessary extension of this doc
trine TO all persons, since the theory of universal
atonement has been established.
Third-Historical reasons why the fact that
probation involved knowledge of Christ on the
part OF the heather was not present to the
minds of Christians until recently.
Fourth-The reason why it has heen an OBJ
ject of contention within these late years.
In the course of his statement on this branch
of his argument, Professor Dwight contended
that opportunities for knowing the head of the
church will be provided, if not by probation
after death. in some appropriate way; and one
of the leading grounds why general interest
has been taken In the church. until the present
century. in the fate of the heather after death,
or. indeed of their fate generally, is that there
was assumed to be perpetual enmity between
Christian and heather.
Professor Dwight, in the course of his argu-
ment, was very severe upon the gentlemen VINO
formulated the charges. His remarks on this
head caused decided sensation. He said he
wished to call attention to the manner in which
the self-constituted accusers of the professors
had brought the cases before the
board of visitors especially to the
evidence of duplicity, underhandedness and
uutrutheulness in the manner of subscribing
the charges. The accusers described them
selves as cOmmlttee or the alumni, thereby
implying that they had been appointed by the
alumni whereas the fact is these four men alone
originated and are pushing the movement. They
may, indeed, be called committee Of the whole,
as they comprise the whole of the accusing party.
laughter.
Professor Dwight then made the point that
the accusers had no standing In court, they
did not represent any tangible interest, and yet
were assailing property rights. But he even
denied the right of the court itself 60 act in this
case 1t could proceed only in criminal cases.
and this was. civil case based on an alleged
violation of ttist. Professor Dwight went on
to deny the correctness Of the charges. He said
the board had jurisdiction of heterodoxy. but
Judge Hoar had said that there was no question
of heterodoxy here. The only question
was whether Professor Smythe's alleged
departure from the creed of the founders
was such to amount to a vi
olation of the contract between him and