New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-12-09
ARGUMENT OF COL. MCOOK.
TIE PROSECUTION ENDS IT'S OPENING
DIR. BRIGGS TO BE HEARD NEXT TUEsDAY-A
PROTEST TO THE PREsBYTERy.


PROTEST To THE PREsBYTERY
The Pre,bytery Of NewYork closed Its second week
IN the Brgg, hercsy witt the end Of the opening
on ulc part Of the prosecution When 1t cohVehes
next Tuesday afternoon Dr. Briggs. the defendant, Will
present his defence and II Is expected that u VIII
occupy the greater part OF the week. Alter uhe
minutes were read by Dr. oadley te permanent clerk
Colonel A. =. Kctcham, 10 question OF privilege
and gave notice OF protest regarding the admission
OF matter In the StcnOgraphcls notes. TO "flch Dr.
Briggs had referred In his offer Of evidence but had not
read.
Colonel McCook occupied hour and half in bis
argument supporting the charges presented by the
prosecuting committee, Of witch he Is a mehDer'
lie read his address. wiick was followed closely by
the large audience, although the members have been
sitting for days listening to this Interesting case.
After he Tad taken his several members oil me
Presbytery crowded around 10 congratulate hlhl Dr'
Briggs called upon the prosecution TO produce any
more arguments II they had more 10 present, before
he began his reply but Colonel McCook said mat II
had presented all 1t wished TO give until after d.
Briggs had spoken. We defendant insisted then that
the speakers which followed him should traverse Only
his defence and not introduce any other matter ms
demand brought forth vOllcy Of applause from VIe
door and the galleries, and when motion was haue
to clear the galleries because Of the infringement o
rule OF the body DR.. Field, OF The Evangelist ue-
cared that he had guilty of breaking TIE rule ana
added: IL couldn't help 1t, Mr. Moderator Dr.
Bliss as usual, succeeded in restoring harmony WIN
friction and assured the parties that justice "o""
be done by the house as the various questions came
before 1t. II
THE BIBLE AND THE CONFESSION
In speaking of charges and II, which refer to the
doctrine that there are three great fountains oil dle
authorlty-the Bible the Church and the Reason
CoIonc, McCook said: "The Confession of Faith
teaches and the ordination taken by every
minister Of our Church assumes the infabnty OF he
Scriptures. 1t is impossible 10 separate Il uNHIc
Authority from the inialiblc rulc' Later. ne hau
Whatever the IelsOn may accomplish, whatever inc
Church NAV teach if Prcsbyerians we nave no
right 10 claim that the Reason and the Church are
sources OF divine authority That is matter winch
is settled by all when they become Pr'sbyerS o
oug Church.
In his argument under this charge h" said; Mess
the three authorities coordinate, then the reason
or the Church is the supreme authority ior rs W.
Briggs claims the Bible Is not ncrrant ana It's errors
must therefore be corrected either by the Reason Or
the Church. Unless the three authorities are CO.
ordinate they cannot lie held to be divine au'ofiueH
unless they are the authority of three divines when
are not coordinate" In support OF the tina charge
that of inerrancy in tho original text OF the BlDe'
Colonel McCook did not claim that any particular
theory OF the mode of inspiration Is taught III .'e
Scriptures or In the Confession of Faith. The scrip
ture claims inspiration for itself, he said, but as 10
the precise nature Of that inspiration 1t is silent
The speaker also IcpuOlat'U inc pIoPOHiN"' N''''
one proved error destroys the authority OF the scrip
furcs II DESTROYS lie said. " the entire inialblhy
of the Bible" lie next took up the charges ana
VI which d,ul with the authenticity OF the scriptures
maintaining that the doctrines Of the defendant on 'S
point are irrecOncabe with the teaching oi SCRIP
tur, and the Confession OF Faith While Spe%lhs
on the last charge relating to the state Of the soul
after death. Colonel McCook was interrupted by DE-
Briggs who asserted that lie was tIavcisinS the
charges thrown out by the Pcsbytery-McSshhic pre-
diction and redemption after death DE- Briggs addcd
that he wished only to call the attention of the Pres
byte-y 10 that fact but Colonel McCook denied MAN.
tanning that he was not outside his proper limit, under
the amended charges.
THE DUTY or TIE PREsBYTERY.
The conclusion Of the argument was in substance
as follows;
The question to be decided by this court Is very
simple one. Professor Briggs doctrines have Teen
pairing them with the Holy scriptures and with the
standard, OF Presbyterian doctrine. Know ne what me
lIesbyicran church teaches ana what Professor B9sS
teaches you have simply to decide whether the doc
rne of the Professor agrees with that OF The Church or
against him j. proven. and confess that do not
see Low avoid 'le conclusion, the neAt Question
will be to the essential ard vital character Oi these
departures from the standards of oar faith.
whether %T xo SO ay vii, o V Of P Por or not
ond that Is that in these days when We are a->aed by
rauoraStic ana agnosilc pn!0Sophy on The oEcI; IL IS
Ct especial importance that PIcsArte'ianS should b.
decided
thony TO which appeal Is made IN matters OF r"lg m
Let IL be observed, however that am not claiming
uehneo because Gems 10 lie iT'NrHIy chbVeINiNc oil
the Presbyterian principle of authority That has been
already prt s,ltci 20 You. But what an claiming
IS that, assuming that his position With respect T. the
divine authority Of hc Church and The Reason Is hcrc-
81 sets up the Reason divine authority which
puto the lair Of the lo!y scripture but it j. vital
also because II wcakenS the authority Of the scriptures
in matters Of faith 10y Affirming their crrancy by deny
ms their authenticity and by rducins the doctrine ot
to us in matters of faith and practice.
GREAT PRINCIPLES IMPER:LLED
In like manner think that you Will agree with me
that Professor Briggs theory OF redemption i, vital
TO the whole scheme OF Presbyterian belief. 1t Is
opposed not simply to the doctrine OF DEGREES taught
In the Confession Of Faith. That claim might b,
made but there are some who would rot regard such
u departure from the standards as here,ical. But
this theory of redemption Is essentially out OF har
ligon. not to say OF Protestant religion 1t strikes at
the roots o, that great Protestant principle justlhca
ton by faith" and differs frum univcrsalisin only
because the author has not pursued his doctrine
It's logical conclusion. And the doctrine of progress
I've Sanctifcation after death. however 1t may he in
terprctcd strikes at tho fOu cation OF cOtain great
principles upon which all preaching rests and which
ITndcrlic the missionary efforts OF ChriStcndoml.
As soon As we begin TO give up the supernatural
explanation of religion. I'VE are likely 10 be led 10
give up ali religion, at least all religion which
speak with authority In correction of wandering human
theories and false sentimental views Of God. and Of
s!n and Of salvation H. then, you decide that such
divergences these permissible, you have gwen
liberty to method which vii. soon leave YOU about
n much cXcliNiVcneSs Christians in having the
oracle, OF God. rs Mahomeans Eralmins have.
II is. OF course, easy for man 10 say: suppose.
however. | convinced Of the truth Of these
doctrines, will the Church muzzlc me. silence me. for
utterng what am persuaded Is true This brings
us back Ia the question OF h"reHy Look al tie
principle which such question Involves. gan
Ina slne after exhaustive study Of patIstlr
and scholastic literature. becoming convinced tat
the Roman Church was the true church, that he
might preach ROmanism from Presbyterian pulpit
IT Is no; Nkely but make the snppONiuon The
Presbytery would doubtless, interfere. And ten
suppose that ne should say You silencing me
for teaching what believe 10 be true. You not
experts this question. ! have devoted my life Ia
the study Of Roman Catholic literature and ! am
leading you or In the paths Of divine Providence"
Possibly you would reply 4" You II remarkabls
scholar admit that OF has given
much attention 10 the literature OF the fathers AMI
the schoOlmen { have. Hnt church. Mhcthrr