The morning call., 1891-05-12
ACCUSED OF HERESY.
Rev. Dr.. Briggs Case Before the New
York PreSbytery.

NEW YORK, May 1.-THE Committee of
the New York Presbyt terry appointed to con-
slider the alleged heresy in the address of
Rev. DIR. Briggs before the Union Theolog-
cal Seminary Janua ry 10th last. subusitted
their reports before meeting of the Pres
bytery this afternoon. The majority report
openly accused Dr.. Briggs Of heresy and a
radical divergence from the belief in the
church as stated in the Confession of Faith.
1t was signed by Rev. DR.. g. w. Birch, Rev.
DR.. Jesse L. Forbes, Rev. Dr. Joseph j..
Lampe and Professor John j. Stevenson.
The minority report was presented solely
by Rev. DR.. j. Ii. McIlvaine OF the Church
of the Covenant. Walter Edwards, law
yer, who was also on the committee, de-
clined to sign either report. He agrees with
the majority report as to its first article,
'The Sources of Divine Authority and
agrees with the min ority report in the other
recommendations.
There was a large audience present when
the Presbytery convened this atte rnoon, IN
Guiding the opponents and partisans OF DE.
Briggs, and there was much applause at dIf-
ferent points Of the debate.
When routine business was taken up DR..
Hastings arose and offered resolutions
setting forth the action OF the Chester (Pa.)
Presbytery, which made the first complaint
against DR.. Briggs, and declaring that the
New York PreS5ytery 0Vertures the General
Assembly to pronounce against the Chester
Presbytery because it violated the cOnsttu-
tional rights of DR.. Briggs in declaring his
views wrong while he is member OF the
New York Presbytery in good standing, and
violated the constitutional right of the New
York Presbytery, which has sole jurisdiction
over DR.. Briggs. Similar action was asked
against other presbyteries which have fol-
lowed the lead of the Chester.
After a vigorous debate Hastings resolu-
tiOn was defeated-66 to 81.
Then DR.. Briggs arose and read lengthy
protest against the action Of the Presbytery
of New \ Urk in appointing committee for
the investigation of his annual address, etc,
as unconstitutional; as violation OF the
usageS of the denominations; as breach OF
justice and sound discipline. He went on
to define at length each of these points.
Among other things he said no previous in
timati0n was given him by the movers or
supporters of the motion Of their intention
to take such action against him; the COM
mittee Was appointed IN his absence
when i'll, In cOntraVentlon OF decisions
of the General Assembly that no discussion
ought to be allowed Involving the charac-
ter of an absent person." Furthermore, he
had no opportunity for making any explana-
ton to the PresbyteTy. such as might have
made the appointment OF committee un-
necessary. He also argued on points OF
discipline based on the Presbyterian doc
iIluc, tncn
the committee was illegal He was pre-
pared to name certain individuals who
hnve rashly, consciously and maliciOusly
instituted these charges"
Here DR.. Briggs was called to q point OF
order. He said he had asked the members
of the Presbytery again and again to charge
him with heresy. He wanted an adjudica-
ton of the Presbytery on the question
then let it go to the General Assembly.
What he complained Of was that he received
no official intimation of the committees ap-
poiHtment
Then DR.. Birch arose to question of
privilege, and said he had personally moth
fed DR.. Briggs of the meeting of the COM
mittee, and invited him to be present; that
DR.. Briggs had declined, alleging i'll health
and the illegality of the committee.
DR.. Briggs admitted receiving letter
FROM Birch, but said it was not official.
After unintelligible wrangling over mo-
tions, an adjournment was taken until To-
morrow, the report Of the committee being
made the first order of the day.