New-York tribune., 1891-05-16
LOYAL STILL TO DIR. BRIGGS.
HIS COLLEAGUES AT UNION SEMINARY
STAND AT HIS SIDE.
a STATEMENT FROM THE FACULTY REGARDING
THE INAUGURAL ADDREss-soME OF ITS
POINTS ExPLAINED-DR. SHEDDS
NAME MI ssING.

NAME MISSING.
The New-York Presbytery on Tuesday decided to
hnrn judicial investigation In the Of Professor
briggs Of Union Theological Seminary, on the ground
that his inaugural address delivered lest January, was
opposed m certain particulars to the Westminster Con-
feson Of Faith Immediately after the Prcsbytery ad
journed tho seminary professors met and decided to
urepare statement giving their views of their col
leagues position. One of the professors, DR.. Francis
Brown is at oxford, experimenting the publication m
hi, Hebrew lexicon DR.. W. G. 7. Shedd, the emeritus
nrofessor OF systematic theology, who has had ms
classes as usual during the year just closed has
written review Of the address Which did not please
the suthor. Dr. Shedd's successor has now been
chosen, that no is no longer considered an active
member OF the faculty.
The statement" is signed by President Thomas o..
Hastings and Professors Philip Schar, george H.
Prentiss and Marvin X. Vincent with the cohVlc-
ton that Christian courtesy. modesy ana mutual TO
spect for difference Of opinion should characterize teo
logical controversy" they distinctly recognize ana
deprecae the donatic and irritating character Cd Ger
tain of Dr. Brggs's utterances in his inaugural ana
IN others Of LIS writings" they do not recognize even
IN these any warrant for persistent mlsrepNsealIa
lions of his views and for the style and temper IN
which he has, In many cases, been assaheo. ino
three points made are these o. "The views pro
ponnded by Dr. Briggs IN the inaugural are not new
iol sThe address contains, in our Judgment nothfng
which csn be fairly construed INTO heresy OF ue
parture from the Westminster Confession TO whch Dr
Briggs honestly subscribed at his recent Inauguration
and 3 After years Of familiar acquaintance with Dr.
Brisgs and his teaching, are moved to utter our
emphatic protest against the spirit and language with
which In many cases, be has been assaled'
Under the second head many expressions nom the
address are quoted and their meaning explained IL
is called preemnently unfair 4" 10 assert. as mas
been so often done, that Dr. Briggs Is aiming 10 uue
mine the divine authority of Scripture. NOT only lnS
rhad NrvSfin
the most positive and uncompromisng expressions Oh
love and reverence for the Bible" Regarding his
views on inspiration it is said "Dr. Bilggs hoiiS
and teaches the doctrine of the divine inspratOn' III
fallblity and authority of the Holy SCRIPTURES III All
matters OF Christian faith and duty which Is all that
any evangelical divine is bound to mahtah> OH ua'
subiects In regard TO progressive sanctihcauon aer
a.h DR. Briggs is said to be "cntitled to the largest
Iertv in the attempt to elucidate subject so little
understood and which the STANDARDS arc open W
difference of Interpretation"
The - astatenent1 closes with a fine tribute to DR..
Briggs and protest against the assaults mace against
him AMI the seminary WHICH he represents. 1t says
y, xiexv of the general comment and discussion
ii.d forth by the recent inaugural address On Pro
tssr Charles A. Briggs, D. D., the undersigned mem
bers Of the faculty Of Union TheoOgical seminary ueeii
~ their duty 10 make the following statement -.
With the conviction that Christian courtesy m3aesIy
and mutual respect for difference OF OPINION shoT tI
Characterize theological controversy we irS4tTs
Recognized and deprecate the dogmatic ana lria'e l
chasote Of Of pertain IT hs&s OF Or OF his STnS While on the
other hand we do not recognize even III IheSe, aIp
warrant persistent m @ Ol hS S MANY
and for the style and temper In which he mas III i'
casos been assailed n,, T., b;s in
fhey have all been stated by him In one or another
Of his published works In articles h "a and IN more
recant oontributiOns to other periodicals
for the last ten years Dr. Briggs has snd peen Sas been ex
o1nding to successive classes of students the sa1e
eas for which he IS now arraignea, me t6 te tone
excitement is as believe, due largely o 40 'e
Of fhe inaugural address. to certain unguardea eNP& &
sions and to an impression that the tanSIer he % % %
snfbor To the Chair OF Biblical Theology woulu DC SUI
iect to the veto OF the General Assembly o+b,nc
The address contains IN .r31 91f hsSsy or departure
from the Westminster Confession TO which Dr. brseS
honestly subscribed at his recent are not
aimed at humble and deyout reverence for the % Mo, 0t
God but At the error reSasedt tbS by sply Mg
o. Dr. Briggs declares that conformity int sources %S Of
Bss the ~ ohSIis So and He the usss the
as embracing the conscience and the ea there is but
We oS2ecs a1rce 20 Of divine himself we
prefer to that the B5e nSes the fOTomeS when
recognize receive the dyne poseo ss9StS
the generally aseepiGd chpstendom admits that the
Church is medium Of divine authority tbSt unto the
The Confession of Faith declares Sen tTat the ministry
orsrics and ordinances of God l., h,ob u is
That the reason, in the broad sense III & SI 70 and
exnlaineS bv DIR. Briggs is also an organ W any ~
SroSeR which the divine authority is conveyed Is
assumed in scripture and % IN dTHe e TeVeiston to
If is the only point in the natural man s 70 az His
Qualities Of GeS tSs rss saTsse% Of Ills claims
can appeal and IL Is distinctly decIaeu anu aIet ~
BY s. Sec PAU 20 Of PG the ee divine SPIRITS Illumination and
10 become thus the proper instrumeht Io th on
comparing and Judging i sp9Sl prsan if !: saperuoHs 10
assert that "Scrpture is profitable LOT Hac&S & tos
siscIpune and for upbuildng in rghteoaSnesS,G sSG
right
rational perception and reoepnoh p ol wbcS t6 is holy
Tl,n H nacntaSie W unto GodD is rational service
But Dr. Briggs does not with the Konah'St e1a.S dS
the Church above the Bible and the Reasn oaSo e the
HG Se aSd the Church Neither does he as has been
son IL the Protestant and the Presbyterian position
assumed In his subscription to the @ al &
Confession that the Scriptures are the only lniaoe
'e ~ faith and practice" and asserted In ms address
in the words Protestant Christianity builds It's isn
I'D fe on the divine authority contained IN the ocrpI
That Protestant Christianity too 9fen dePreet
ates the Church and the Reason Is an enTT S tb tate
snsn+ and its discussion in way affect Dr. B1ggss
Endorsement OF the Protestant doctrine oi tle supree
To assert as has been often done that Rr;
Dr. Briggs aiming 70 undernne the Not anV his
Inaugural but al his published writings TEEN WIN @ te
most positive aud qnoomPromlSins eAp'SSOHS u iO'0
c The consistency Of Dr. Briggs p R9IUhs dII S no Se
supreme authority and INV his views Of the nature Of
Inspiration .,,u..r ,nsn,r.t,oD o, Scripture.
While asserting the plehary It % Tnarsnry
be Cenes that inspiration Involves aDSoluIe ~
Iii era verbal accuracy, and perfect correspondence
Of minor details. 49, -,u,,o, ~ novv n
is the view of Calvin, and OF an overwhelming ma
ority of Protestant divines in Europe ana m @
II was propOunded at least elghU years aso W III
Briggs In his Biblical Study" ,,, ,ao,, 4, M
iSSnirafion in the OF literal lnerrancy' Is uo-
vrhers Pclsined for scripture by Scripture itself a.
It is conradiced by the contents OF sSrPEIe N lne
minute specific divine superintendent OF eacn oe-
tail Of the entire process OF M I lrnr
transIatinr pntng-and the prevention OF an errors
n confronf, those who maintain IT, not only Win oslvp Up
sncies OF statement in the present text pnt VIII d .
innumerahIe tnxtuaI variations in the Hebrew anu
Greek bibles and the variations between the HeDrew
and the septuagint To meet these faGts WIN Ie as
70 beg the whole question in dispute, TO Lay down
purely arbitrary a priori hypothesis anu 70 tt n[
duce INTO tho discussion entirely irrelevant Iactoi
seeing that the error and discrepancies remain ana
the original autographs cannot be rec9vel t,rn unon