Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1891-11-05
THE BRIGGS CASE.
HE DEFENDS HIMSELF BEFORE
ANEW YORK PRESBYTERY.
The Charges are Dismissed by That Body
But viii Probably Come up Be-
fore the Synod.
DIR. Briggs Trial.

NEW YORK, Nov. 4.-The New York
preSbytery assembled this morning in the
Scotch Pres byterian church on Fourteenth
street near Sixth avenue for the purpose of
beginning the trial of Professor Charles A.
Briggs ON a charge of heresy based upon
the language used by him in his inaugural
address in Union theological seminary.
IN John c. Bliss presided moderator
and called the preSbytery to order. There
was Il full attendance.
One of the chief charges against Dr.
Briggs is that he disputes the inerrancy of
the bible Professor Briggs read a paper
Directing to the form of the charges pre-
ferred, stating that the report Of the COM
mittee which formulated the Indictment
AGAINST HIM charges OffenSeS which are not
now proposed for trial.
The committee charges him with uttering
doctrinal teachings respecting miracles, the
original condition of men. etc, without at
tempting to prove the charges. This. DR..
Briggs said, did him great injustice and
was apt to prejudice, the decision of the
members. He said il he had caused wide
spread anxiety in the church he was sorry,
but in his conscience he felt no guilt as
regards disturbing the peace and harmony
of the church. He further added that the
charges We're general obscure and irregular
iii form throughout. There is nothing in
the specifications that can 0e tested by the
defendant. He admitted the excerpts from
his address made on the occasion of his in
aUguration as professor of biblical theology
in the Union theological seminary.
There was nothing to deny in that the
Bible u u book is paper, print ard binding,
nothing more 1t is entitled to reverent
handling because it contains the divine
word of redemption for men, and not for
any other reason whatsoever" He said
also that the indictment contained inSinua-
tons wholly unwarranted. He denied that
he ever taught doctrines conflicting with the
holy Scriptures as the only infallible rule
of faith and practice.
The question was rails cds whether the
committee of Presbyterians which formu-
lated the indictment was the original party
TO rhe action. The moderator ruled thai it
was.
DR. Henry VanDylie, one of DIR. Briggs
supporters, entered a protest based on
precedent which was entered on the records
and will go up to the synod. The mOdera-
tor held that the committee of prosecution
represented the Presbyterian church in
the United States and was the original
party This decision was appealed from
the chair and sustained by a vote of e. to
"a
DR.. John J. Stevenson of the prosecuting
committee said that the committee would,
in due time, reply to DR.. Briggs
answer He maintained that the charges
and specifications are in perfectly proper
form.
DR. yanDyke moved to dismiss the case
against DR.. Briggs and dismiss the commit
tee. The motion was received with laugh
ter.
The presbytery resumed its session
promptly at o'clock The church was
crowded After a brief preliminary the
resolution of DIR. Van Dyke was taken up.
The doctor made dignitied and earnest
plea in support of his proposition to dis
miss the case against DR.. Briggs.
Col. NJ. c. Cook urged that the trial pro-
coed for the purpose of making a formal
record.
Rev. J. Ford Sutton moved an amend
ment, adding the words to DR.. Van Dykes
motion that the charges be dismissed in
consideration of Dr.. briggs answer"
A general discussion followed. during
which this extract from a letter written by
Samuel Hamilton was read; 4 have
learned more of the heighth and depth, the
length and breath of the word of God from
DR.. Briggs than from all other men to-
gether."
Rev. David Wylie offered further
amendment to the effect that the charges
DE dismissed, but wished ii understood that
he had no proof of the statements made by
DR.. Briggs in his address.
DR.. w. CT Sledd made an earnest appeal
against the dismissal of the charges.
The resolution as amended to dismiss was
then read and vote was taken by roll-call
resulting 95 for and 10 against; seventy-one
ministers and twenty-four elders voting in
the affirmative and twenty-siX ministers
and twenty three elders voting in the mega
tive. This action, however, does not end
the controversy, as it will undoubtedly be
taken before the New York synod.