New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-02-23
UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY.
ONE WHO ASKS THE MOTIVES FOR CONTINUED
ATTACKS UPON THE INSTITUTION

TO tho Editor Of Tho Tribune
Sir: In common with many others, ain interested
10 III cover tho animus ot recent ATTACKS upon 'H'n
Theological Seminary. TIL" au- are utterly vague
or entirely aside from facts far a can discover
them. F5r example the latest attach-!n your Issue
Of February lends thus:
II the student, In tas seminary could BE- In truct'd
,v the men above mentioned tDrs. John Hall. Brooks
Bancroft Meredith and few Other at stated times
and learn hom them. they would be letter fitted for
enouivc service in the pulpit than By an extended
study Of the higher critic.sm'
now by A reference TO the catalogue Of last year. |
find that aside from tie professors IN students hid
instruction from such active pastors ~ Dr..
George Alexander. Lyman Abbott, Colonel Elslng'
Gibson ,of London. Griffith ~ Eo,tonl. Cuthhert
Hail. john Hail. IIaicy, kltwodec. Ludlow DC
Arthur. Mcllvalnc Mckenzie ~ Cambridge FafR
hurst -caullcr Taylor Teal. Thompson, ETC." beside
the brightest men from the mission field, like Jcs-up
Dcnnls. Atcrbusy. ctr. Why critcl>c the seminary
for Mt doing what II IS doins In far greater measure
than even the critic would laopose
This iratc correspondent also dcprecatcS 80 much
attention being paid t. theological discussion a
90 Fat gtng In the cHtr,W".' Vet he tells H. that ne
himself attended the meetings OF the NcwiorI Prc,by
terry which occupied week, OYER creed revision; and
not atl,ncd with that. followed the CongcentionalNt7
T. their debating clubs and wcarcd himself listening to
the debates about the future prospects Of the hcahen
surely the anmus of hi, criticism does not appear IN
h, statement that the people are "iatlgned' with dis
sion.
similarly. he hint, that the hiehec criticism for
which Union seminary IS becoming noted, II "A danger.
ON, system of study. l.uf :, Mt higher criticism
,n'pE Scbolar, hip beyond The line, Of mere teXiual
or iowcr7 c.iticismI What Is the anmuS IN thu,
ns.aing full education and candid religion, Inquiry
~ IL strike, an outsider, seminary that dld not use
higher criticism the extent q the professors ability
nurht 10 close It's doors We want brood Of preach
rr, who como from c training school cOnftsscdy ignO-
| rant OF what the thinking world Is discovering.
Your CORES pendent makes the usual nIng AT ITO
fc.,or briggs l3nt why TN" directors NJ the SEM
| ,rhss arr h,l
doN rcpute a, in professional and bushes, rank, have
ii, searched the land over FOR man 10 MI IN" new
chair Of Biblical theology. and anuOnn'c Their uhahl
nous choice Of Or. Briggs. Ii h. Is such dangerous
man as these vague titles would have the public be
lcvc how comes il about that the directors have not
discovered IL From all that learn from these
assault, upon him, the Professor IS plain. honest,
fearless student, who thoroughly believes IN his
Ulbl that hc Is willing TO turn any ana all lights upon
! H. Why not! DO the critics object 10 this sort 81
| man
! am sNe that tue popular interest in this matter
so far ~ there Is any ntere,trclatcS chiefly to the
aunIis of the aS,ailant, Of Union seminary. ON all
sdc the question Is being ASKED what do they mean
| Can give IL Light
East Orange. y. D. Feb 10. le9l