New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-05-11
nR. BRIGGs's STATEMENT.
AN ANSWER TO PROFESSOR sHEpD's CR1rr
CISM.
rur REPORT OF THE INVESTIGATING CON-
M1TrEE TO BE PRESENTED TO THE

rs. rr.,or,ty and minority reports Of the investi-
- Committee In the case Of the Rev. DR.. Charles
nr,ces WILL it is expected, be presented at the
.st,ng NJ the Presbytery to-day. The former which
a,ntans that the views Of DR.. Briggs as expressed IN
-. nmous address of January 20 last are contrary
~. westminster Confession Of Faith, and recon-
n.rane that the Presbytery enter at once upon the
,dcial Investigation Of the case will probably bear
ths signatures of the Rev. DR.. George w. F. Birch
chairman the Rev. DR.. Jesse +. Forbes the Rev. d.
Joseph J. Lampe and Professor John j. stevenson
The minority report will be submitted, it is under
GOOD BY the Rev. DR.. ]. H. McIIvane and Dr. WaiVeT
EAwsrds, and will declare that the views OF Dr.
briggs do not anagonze the Confession OF Faith ana
that no grounds for the charge Of heresy exs'hg'
judicial proceedings should not be entered upon
While the struggle at the meeting OF the Presbytery
Is looked forward TO with lively interest," hV'o ANY
thing can be accomplished Immediately or even re-
motcly that will in fact remove the SUBJECT n0'h
CONTROVERSY member of the Presbytery SAID yes
terday Though the majority report be adopted all
that can now be done is to appoint cehHni''ee W
prepare formal charges against DR.. Brlggs' o"ns "
She absence of many ministers and eoers ouiins 'i0
summer months, the committee VIII not De aoie 10
report before next autumn. Tho law OF the Preebyty
rsouires them to be present during tr1a ana over!
msmber has a right TO be heard II the trial shouio
result In the conviction Of DR.. Briggs the case may
then be appealed TO the Synod Of 1892 Thero wouiu
probably not be any very great majority one way OF
ths other but II necessary an appeal could De made
10 the General Assembly OF 1893.
"When the trial of minister Is begun II simply
results in keeping the whole Church in state OF
agitation for number Of years. do not believe tat
the present controversy grows out Of any personal
hostility to DR.. Briggs ard l have no DOUBT hc
thought such hostility really existed ne wouid heO
hesitate TO withdraw. Circumstances nave SIMPLY
made him the representative Of very consloeraeie
marty. extending throughout the Church, holding
10 fhoxa yhi (
Even IL Dr. Briggs should retire, the situation would
not be relieved, for the controversy would still go
on 1t would give the conservative element a tempe
rary triumph, but they would resume their attseKs
upon the next Of prominence who gave ex
pression to similar views / think this whole aeata|
&C.. Is due IN the antdievsion party who think they
can stay the progress of revision by attacking repre-
sentative OF the theories advanced by DR.. Briggs"
The following statement was given cut yesterday by
DR. Briggs IN reply 10 the CRITICISM BY Professor
Shade IN a recent issue of Tile NewYork Observer:
4Tb. Rev. Dr. shedd has long had the reputation OF
a.ng calm, cool and might say an ley theologian
living IN the clouds and doing his thislns In company
With the schoss divnes Of the past but underneath
al this ice and snow subterrenesn fires have been burn
ting and now, alas the iceberg II all adiame. The
faculty of Union Theological Seminary have up to this
point regarded the policy Of silence as the PROPER enc
IN pursue under the circumstances Of tbs attack upon
one Of their number and have waited ioJ the proper
HThe Rev. Dr. Shedd, who retired tram the faculty
,ast vear but who has been with dfng the present
wear as professor emeritus has broken the policy Of
silence by an attack tust IN time to influence tire
Presbytery OF NewYork In rs meeting To hear the re-
mort Of committee appointed TO consider nay inaugural
address DR.. shedd claims that 1T has nothing per
|. opsl In It, II is purely intellectual judgment; as
srroh so as any mathematical Judgment and yet he
goes ON TO say in next sentence we as certain
THAT the author of this Biblical Theology ID in error and
s teaching error as we of anything This theology
and that Of the standards are as contradictory as the
lPtolemac and Copernicsn astronomers. There is no
middle position possible respecting such views Ihey
must either be approved and adopted by the Presby-
aerian they must be condemned and rejected
az this man is not on fire very much mistaken.
WHY this haste to come out in print against colleague
of seventeen years standing Just in time TO influence
the Presbytery il there is not something more than
mathematical precision in this Judgments Dr. sheau
represents that 'Dr. Briggs has the power OIL sell
deception to an amazing degree because maintain
that NV address is not at all inconsistent with my sub
scripton to the Westminster Confession. ihere are
two things in which may claim to be specialist; one
Of these is In the theology of the Old Testament and the
other the Westminster Confession
al have for many years devoted nyeeh to a study OF
+he Westminster Standards, by careful reading OF
+be Westminster divines and the ortgDel documents OF
the Westminster Assembly and their Puritan teachers
Of document by historical research have faithfully
nursued that method have studied the Westminster
documents repeatedly in all the great libraries of Great
Britain. 1 have gathered In the library OF Union
Theological Seminary the best library OF the west
minister divines outside the British Museum. nave
studied these divines with enthusiastic devotion for
many yesrs have repeatedly endeavored to interest
DR. shedd in these studies, but IN vain. He has not
studied the Westminster Confession tn its sources and
il is well known to him that I have done this work
laeorously and faithfully.
(which one Of us Is most likely TO know the West
minister Cenfessior-he who nteprets IL by study OF
its authors or he who interprets it TO suit his own
opinions with studious neglect OF its antboTY IL Is
not q matter of logic: shall not compete with Dr.
shedd at this point 1t is matter Of Interpretation,
which is within my province Biblical and historical
student. II is my charge against Dr. shedd and the
American dogmaticans in my book 'WhitherP that
they have perverted and misrepresented the west
minister Confession, because Of their neglect OF the MIS-
tory of the men and the times that produced it. and
because they dednce from It the more recent dogmaue
speculation.
"In my paper Advance Toward Revision' / have
shown by table of comparison between DR.. Shields
degmatc theology and the Westminster Confession that
in his system the proportions of the faith in the West
minister Confession have entirely changed. New
doctrines have into the field, old doctrines have
been discarded some doctrines have been depressed,
other doctrines have been exalted The systems are
different in their structure in their order Of material
in the material itself, in Its proportions and in the
structural principles. The essential and necessary
articles of about onehah Of the Westminster system
are in these systems but the other half with its es-
senual articles is not there page III
q DR.. shedd judges me not by the Westminster Con-
fession, which he has studied with sufrcient
diligence to be entitled to interpret TO pronounce
judgment upon IT. He judges me by his own Dog
rrla Ghadh hat have sTan
sented the Bible the Church and the Reason as CO.
ordinate and coequal authorities for mankind in obtain
ing the knowledge of God. But DR.. Norris, another
venerable dogmatician in his Calm Review Of the
Inaugural Address Of DR.. Briggs says while the
author nowhere represents these as coordinate sources
and distinctly recognizes the Bible as the superior
source Yet his language both to separate the
three .onrcoe Ton uidelv they cOnld be indie