New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-01-11
MR.. MACQUEARY'S BOOK.
THE ARGUMENT AGAINST SUPERNATURAL
ISM

|
Few recently published books. probably, have been
more widely discussed and less generally read than
this ambitious volume, the first edition OF which ap
peared little less than year The appearance OF
! the book made absolutely impression on either
| scholars theolOgians Its author was young ana
unknown man, settled in q little Ohio town, whose
name provoked interest and carried no weight
The critics who noticed IL at all dismissed 1t with
! few words Of the numerous attempts on the
| part Of radical clergymcn to harmonic religion and
science by declaring everything false in religion which
| cannot be proved by science. But the
| book not allowed to sink into the oblivion
OF Indifference. The organs Of the Episcopal Church,
| Of which Mr. MacQueary is q clergy man, speedily
discovered tlc full OF heresies and infdeltes,
and denounced the author in unmeasured terms as
| traitor to the Church. Prominent dignitaricS OF
the Church took up the cry. Within the space OF a
| few weeks this hitherto unknown young man found
himself of the burning questions of the day in the
theological world and at last his fame has eliminated
in his presentation for trial on the charge of hercsy
| before an ecclesiastical court OF his Church.
When We turn to the work itself which has caused
| all this theological perturbation we find that, while
il is far from being epoch making book, il is much
more worthy of consideration than its critics have in
dictated their attacks it. It's author tries. with
cOmmendabe honesty and with considerable clcarncsS
| and ability. to free Christianity from number OF
supernatural elements that in the popular conscious
ness have become essential part Of it, and thus
make it more rational and more in harmony with the
| approved conclusions of science. His spcculations
take wide range and many fields Of inquiry but
that is the final point toward which they all tend Incl
dentay, he found it necessary to traverse many OF the
traditional beliefs opinions of the Church Of which
he is member But in such he assumed either
that the Church wrong when modern criticism
contadcted it, or that its dogmas could be explained III
harmony with the conclusions of criticism. In word,
1t taken for granted that when historical criticism,
with its careful and exact scientific methods. pro
| nounces for against doctrine or a passage OF
Scripture, its utteranccS must be regarded the final
settlement OF the question the Church to the contrary
Notwithstanding. As might naturally be expected, the
tendency TO minimize the supernatural elements Of
Christianity is very marked throughout the book. In
it the voice of the nineteenth century Is strong ana
powerful. while that Of all preceding centuries up to the
Reformation is weak and uncertain. with the ne
daevalst nothing TO be explained by natural
laws for which miracle could be invented With
MIR. MacQueary and those whom lie follows nothing
is to lie explained by miracle which may be ar
counted for By natural laws. At tho same time 1t
must admitted that much Of what Mr. MacQneaI}
says ,eems be subvcrsive of the teachings Of H."
Episcopal Church. however true it may seem from tn
point OF view Of science.
But it must not be supposed that Mr. Macogeary
admits he denies any fundamental teaching Of his
Church. On the contrary, he asserts that his views
are within the tolerated limits Of opinion ia the Epls
copal Church. and that many eminent men IN that
Church have avowed such views In the preface To
this second edition he especially addresses himself 10
this point, and makes out strong II not convincing
case for himself lie first Of all declares that he ac
cepts the Catholic doctrine OF the incarnation IN
Christ. he saws. "dwet all the fitness Of the Godhcaf
bodily, which influx Of Deity into Humanity was due
10 special operation OF Gods will. acting along The
line Of ordinary generation" He also asserts his be
lief in Chrlst's resurrection, but aIirms that HI
phy siCal body not raised from the dead. Thee
points. involving they do a denial Of the Virgin
birth and phy steal resurrection Of Christ. 10 have
received attention than anything else IN the book
But in reality they more startling or radical than
many other assertions and involve no more scrou,
consequences The attention paid to them !, 0:
course due To the fact that they seem 70 Involve
surrender OF clauses in the Catholic cTcefs
Mr. MacQueary. however CONTENDS that the creed
are binding only in 50 far as they may be proved b.
the Eble. al contend" he saws, that I've Episcopal
church. being Protestant Church, allows liberty oi
thought and spcech-accepts the Bible her rule 81
faith and practice and holds that her Creed, and
Articles must be interpreted by the Scriptures 10;
vice versa and further. that the Bible should he in
tcrpIcted by facts and reasons as they appear 10 tn
individual. This contention has not been rciutcd.
The idea that general council, a council Of
the whole Church, is nfalliblc rests on the absuNd
assumption that the influence Of the Holy spirit de
ponds upon the number Of people seeking it: on tho
contrary our Lord said, where two three are
gathered together in His name there He VIII De
Matthew xviii, 90; nay, that any individual who
would enter his closet and pray to the Father would
receive the Divine blessing tMatthew, Vi. 81. Tn
shows that the Holy spirit influences individuals n
truly as lie does masses OF people. But, be it oh
served. il is not said that He makes individuals In
fallibe and, If not how can general assemble, OF
fal!iblc persons enuncisc nfallible truths surely
tie whole is not greater than the sum Of lis parts and
if the separate units OF general council are fillibc-
and all insist upon thiS-then the council must lie
more fsllible." But Mr. MacQueaIy -ocs
even further than this. and maintains in the follow
ing passage that the individual churchmcmber /,
charged with the duty OF deciding whether the
traditional belief, Of the Church The Nine
tecnth Article says The Church Of Jerusalem, Alex
andria. antioch and Rome Ghe very Churches rep
resented in the first General Councils have erred.
only in their living and manner of ceremonies. but
also in matters Of faith. Why say more! l. it not !
evident that those bishops and clergy who have l.:
nOunced me as volatOr of solemn ordination VOWS |
are themselves condemned by the Church whose |
doctrines they profess 10 believe and defend IT, |
now. it be said that the foregoing theory of ccclc
astHl authority leads logically 10 In, destruction of |
all creeds formulas. and therefore di,organza
ton of the Church, rcplr /. If ] am rcspon
sble for 1t, but the RefOrmcrs who framed Articles
>. This is not 50. for the Republic exists com
fOrtably under Constitution that admits Of amend |
ment, and why cannot the Church cXisI1 Indeed |
common sense teaches thdt The Church should DC at |
liberty to revise her articles OF faith from time to
time light is gained but how j, she to do thi,
If every who proposes either an Interpretation Of
her formulas different from that commonly accepted |
or an alteration in those formulas is forthwith OK
communicated Surely If believe IN the Holy |
Ghost. as we profess in the Greed believe thai He
Will be with the Church-wiih each member Of the |
Church-to the end Of time, must admit the truth |
OF this view Of the Church." As nigh, naturally be |
expected, Mr.. MacQueary brings up the fact thst |
he is simply following in the footsteps If such eminent
Broad Churchmen as Maurice, Stanley Abbott
Momerf Canon Fremantle. Hawes and Heber Newton. |
In particular" he says DR.. Abbott Dr. Newton and
Mr.. Have els hold essentially my views-or rather |
hold thelrs-On the authorship and authority Of tie
books OF the Bible. And we also agree in our view
of miracles. These clergymen represent and
ARE known a larn and ra,rln