New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-11-05

authority, the Bible the Church and Reason but
specification is illegal in form, in that II intoduees
an Inference from the fact by the prosecution lil'
cannot DO recognized other true or valid. IL not
aioogeher clear what the prosecution mean W , ea
by the word SUFFICIENT II they mean to intimate
mat Inc inaugural teaches that the Cnurch anu 10
Reason are each alike sufficient fountains OF divine
authority and that the Church ana the Reason are no
less sufficient to give that knowledge OF GOD ana ms
WILL which Is necessary unto salvation than HOY
scripture they infer what they have right 70 infer
nom anything taught In the inaugural address; ,b
is unlawful to put in specifications inierences OF ue
prosecution not recognized by the accused, as II they
specmcauon l, though it cites fact, when the
for the specncauon does not attempt 10 prove at th
tact conflicts With and Is contrary ." the G cd N
PRACTICE Furthermore, there process Of logic
charge Tho Reason is great fountain Of divine Fi
divine authority and yet not an inac , rule Of
Of divine aHtTory.p and it IS also the only infabIe
rule OF faith and practice HIRE two different
statements Of truths that may be embraced under h
Church and Reason that they are great fountains OF
only one of which the other can be affirmed, namely,
hat the Scriptures are the only nfalhble rule OF
conscience He speaks with divine authority and tbs
eSnSeence becomes great fountain OF divine a
"infai5le rule of faith and practice God speaks
through the holy sacrament with divine authority, and
the sacrament OF the Church is then great fountain
| AN inialhble rule Of faith and practice" / affirm
statements or taught doctrines that in the slightest
Segss impair 51, what d have REGARDED as cardinal
| infalble rule Of faith and practice"
B.-SPECFICATION 9.
1t Is a fact that have taught and most firmly
hold and assert that Moses is not the author Of the
Penateuch, and that Isaiah Is not the author Of half
Of the book which bears his name" but specification
does not Indicate by what method II reasoning 1t
brings TINS TACT Under tile Cha &C. Ii Is Irrelevant
| u "A
nave been made the ground of dsuncl charge, and 1t
Moses has the renta,eucn, and Isaiah the book
that bears his name, according 10 the Concession and
| with, or with holy scripture. Though Moses be not
| the author Of the ten,a.euch yet Mosaic history.
Mosaic Institutions and NJ saic legislation lie at the
base OF all The original documents and the name Of
Noses pervades the pentateuch as sweet frasrance.
and binds the whole together with irresistible at
traction INTO an organism OF divine law. Even though
Moses be not the author OF the tentateuc, yet tno
Pentateuch may be, as ! FIRMLY believe, one OF the
books OF Holy scripture, having divine auth Jiy and
Tie Pentateuch -, as ! have always taught, one Of
only infailible rule ID faitn and practice
which bears ais name yet firmly believe that hoy
prophets no less inspired Than Isaiah wrote the greIter
spirit so Ina, he book With Sacreat auhcr. is as
tuly one OF the books Of holy sculpture, -" the only
written by Isaiah alone: The fact adduced has no
manner OF relevancy 10 the charge:
specifications. and relevant to the charge. they
would put the accused in false position and expose
these two facts. which, after rejecting the illegal In
feIences. he must acknowledge true. but which he
claims need explanation. and are entirely Irrelevant TO
| the charge.
it is conceivable that might be proven guilty Of
teaching doctrines contrary to the Confession in regard
| TO both Moses and Isaiah. and the Church and the
Reason as fountains Of divine authority but It would
t, cardinal doctrines Of the Confession. Much less
ould it be that these doctrines conflict rrecon
cdaby with the cardinal doctrine that the Scriptures
Of the Old and New Testaments are the only mfanbe
rule OF faith and practice
INTERPRETATIONS Q. 3 AND OF CHARGE
Specifications 2, 8 and may be grouped. because
the same objections hold against the three They all
make false differences and erroneous statements.
"a. APPROPRIATIONS 2 AND g.
Specification alleges that;
DIR. Briggs afrms that in the case OF some. the
edge edge Of God and His VIII which is necessary unto
syaon though s Se ye 6 sere 80 ano
Of the Word of God. obtain that saving knowledge
| of Him through the Church Up. 12).
Specification alleges that:
Dr. Briggs aflIms that some such as James MART
ncau who denies tho doctrines Of the Holy Trinity the
Body, the personality OF the Holy Ghost who rejects
miracles of the Bible and denies the truth OF the
Gospel narratives well most Of the theology OF
the Epistes), to whom the Holy Scripture Is not SUI
fcent to give that knowledge Of God and OF HIS VII
which Is necessary unto salvation may turn nom the
supreme authority OF the Word OF GOD ana ma That
| knowledge Of Him through the Reason (p. 13l
These specifications, they now stand are false
10 truth and to fact No such facts are recorded in
the inaugural address, IT, however, they were true, and
| 1t could be proven, or j should admit, that had
affirmed that tho scriptures are not sufficient TO give
| that knowledge Of God and His will which Is necessary
unto savalivn," even tnen, III that case, the epeu
| tcaIons would be- Irrelevant TO tho charge, for the
charge all &c, that teach doctrines that rIeconcaoy
| conflict with cardinal doctrine tiat the HOY
scriptures Of the Old New Testamenls are the only
| infaluble rule " faith and praodce.' But these
specne atoms aege very different thing which can
not he brought under Tive cardinal doctrine. namely.
that alarm that the Scriptures are not b no
suicency Of Holy scripture Is one uJculle us III
fahbty another doctrine botn nu ,ho ana %iustr
Confession but two different anu disuhct uoctIm.S
therefore specifications 2 and are irrelevant l" INC
'' Farthermore, the specifications are invalid STATE
mens OF fact o tOp Wrter that have Written is
it affirmed that in the case OF some tne no y,
scriptures arr not sufficient to give that kno%ego o
| or I" that ONE, 10 whom the Holy scripture Is ~.
sufficient to give that knowledge Il God ana Oh Iils
the supreme authority OF the W0d OF oou anu h Inv
| that knowledge OF Him through the Reason. navy
nowhere denied the sufcency of Holy scripture ,h 60,
have ever maintained that II Is Sulhcenb 10, ee Se
pedempton through Jesus Christ is sufficient for al
mankind. The Word OF God which p,ocais a s az
lSog = snfsient for every one and for all the worh
But the sufhcency Of Holy Scripture Is one un s e
efficacy OF Holy Scripture Is another anu D''e''''
Il is evidently the teachings Of our Standards thai
always eiiicacious to those who use them put riar
efficacy depends the tbs sSur Sad IN pf their
use affirm both the sunicency OF the senP,uess SI
the efficacy OF the Scriptures, when The DIVINE oPnlt.
accompanies them but this s not TO Affirm that III Iact
all those use the Scriptures as means OF ap s o
to God do certainly find them efficient In telr rase vi
mat the Divine Spirit may not work eiiecthiiS upon
some men through the Church or the Reason ,. T.,
| The prosecution, with great Improperly, nave ~
serted I'm the midst Of the fact so wrongly Imputed 10
| me a summary Of their own composition scttne Iotn
me- errors of James Martineau. This Is entlrlF reie
want / have nowhere affirmed the ortho4oxy Oh
Maruneau On the other hand selected nm as ga
man entirely outside OF the OF evdngecals anu
| churchmen 10 represent a class OF men who found
| Divine certainty I'm the Reason. The prosecution may
Ard n dlGicuIt 10 believe that God would grant cer
tnde 10 such a man through the Reason but they 90
| odd from