The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1891-10-25


PROBABLE, however, that any witnesses will
ne examined The charges rest wholly upon
the celebrated inaugural address delivered
by Dr. Briggs Jan. 20, 1891, on the occasion
OF his induction into the Edward Robinson
cnair OF Biblical theology in the Union
seminary, The accuracy Of the published
version VIII be admitted by the defense,
ana nothing will remain but argument.
-, ana mere comes an interesting point
There are five members of the proceeding
COMMITTEES and it would appear that each
mas right to speak. Against them. DR.,
Briggs must stand alone. Every lawyer
WIN admit that this is heavy odds. But
tnere Is nothing in the Book OF Discipline
which authorizes anybody to help DR..
Briggs bear the brunt of the argument, I'M
less he appoints a counsel, which he will
not DO. ln conversation with members Of
TINS presoytery, l have found many who
supposed that any person in the judiciary
could speak at this time. But the language
or the Book OF Discipline seems
mandatory as to the order Of proceed
ure, and leaves no gap for argument before
the tribunal as such. When that portion
OF the judicatory which acts as the jury has
gone into private Sc sion, any member NAV
speak. Here, indeed. DR.. Briggs may be
SAID to have compromising advantage, for
Wnile I'VE OF his opponents are excluded, he
AS to the right to speak during the prog
ress of the trial, there will doubtless be a
question raised, which the moderator will
nave to decide 1t must be remembered
that this is the first important trial under
the new Book of Discipline prepared 10
1884. The Swing trial occurred ten wears
before that date. la that case after the
arguments Of counsel had been made, each
presbyter was given ten minutes in which
RI gk..Nv H. IL
Ion. 1t Is thought by some that such course
will be followed in this case, but others say
II is not in accord with the new Book Of
Discipline. Some of the best informed Of
the clergy have told me that the new book
would be on trial ITSELF and might be con-
vlcted or many errors, for it was somewhat
hastily put together, and will, doubtless,
permit OF no end OF whet might be called
appeals on technical points.
But whether the arguments are made In
open or private session, by counsel or ac-
cused or Jurymen, they will have knotty
points 70 deal with. 1t is quite possible
that DIR. Briggs may attempt to introduce
the Series OF questions and answers which is
now kno wn as his catechism. in calculation
OF his address. The complications which
must thus arise may be imagined after the
contemplation of two such passages as these:
The bugbear of judgment Immediately
aIter deatn should be banished
from the world" From the inaugural ad-
dress.l do you believe that the issues of
this life are final, and that man who dies
impeniteut will have no further opportunity
OF salvation Answer-Yes" From the
Briggs catechism.)
Upon such nice points must the iudicatory
pass. 1t will consider each of the charges
and specifications Sc arateIy and will vote
by roll call: A majority convicts or aoquits.
As is well known, there are two charges.
The first alleges that the inaugural address
cannot be reco3cilet with belief that the
Bible is the only infallible rule of faith and
practice. Under this there are seven spsci-
fcations. They deal chiefly with DR..
Briggs famous dictiOn that there are his
torlcally three great four tains of divine
authority-the Bible, the church and the
reason" The second charge attacks his
doctrine Of progressive sanctidcation. There
is one specification.
Nobody can say how the vote will stand
II is unwise to take as a guide the result OF
the contest in the meeting of the presby-
terry on Oct 5. There an amendment to
the committees report ordering the trial
was under consideration. The amendment
would have prevented the trial. Fifty
ministers aud twelve elders voted for the
amendment; forty.four ministers and
twenty elders voted against it. [ have
since learned that one Of The clergynen who
voted against the amendment did so under
the impression that be was pronouncing
against a trial. If he had recorded his
true sentiment the vote would have been q
tie. Its meaning is no more than this: that
there is a pronounced hesitaucy to condemn
DR.. Briggs, His friends believe that he will
win In the trial before the presbytery some
of them think he will succeed with the
synod; but nobody has any idea that the
general assembly will sustain an acquittal.
That the case will be appealed to
the highest tribunal nobody sesms to
doubt. Some Of those who oppose Dr.
Briggs mo5t strongly think that In this case
the Swing trial may be duplicated; that is,
the presbytery may acquis and the synod
reverse the judgment. DR.. Briggs will not
follow the Rev. Mr.. Swings example. He
will not Withdraw. He will see the fight
through to the end, and that will not be
until the civil courts are reached. AS to
the result before the presbytery, believe
that he confidently expects an acqui.taL.
There is one possibility Of which ! have
not spoken. When the judicatory meets
on Nov. 4 DR.. Briggs may take exception
to the charges or may allege some error in
the preliminary proceeding. In that event
the judcatory, II it thinks his point we'll
taken, may throw the case ont of the court,
and then it will have TO De done all over
again.
The Briggs controversy has not produced
any very noticeable effect upon the Union
Theological Seminary. There will be few
more students this year than last. though
the entering class is little smaller The
senior class is the largest that was ever in
the seminary and there are more graduate
students than formerly. The feeling among
the students is strongly in favor OF DR..
Briggs, and this is especially true of upper