The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1892-02-15
THE MODERN REEORM.iTION.
Dr. HriEgs Defends the Higher Criticism
AgnInat the Cha m plons Of Orthodox.

The last OF the course Of Sunday evening
lectures Mt the Presbyterian Church Of the
Covenant, Thrty.h It'll street and Park avenue.
whigh began last fall was delivered last night
sy Pro-. Charles A. Briggs. his subject being
The Bible and the Higher Criticism
DR.. Briggs said TINT it was necessary to
know whether tho Bible is the Word OF God
This could not he taken on the authority Of
the Church alone for the Church has made so
many errors in the past that 1t is necessary to
SEQ whether tho Church is in error about
Tho Bile. Thist tho speaker said. could
only be accomplished by criticism. The
criticism Of the literature OF the Scrip
lures is called tho higher criticism
to distinguish 1t from simple textual
criticism. a number OF obstacles which are
urged rs orthodox confront the critics. Ira
ditional theories have given names OF authors
to tho various books Of the Bible without rea-
son or discrimination. DR.. Briggs asserted
that no creed. catechism. or confession had
given sanction to these traditions. An official
decision would be respected. although 1t could
not he considered by Professionals as infaIlihle
When tradition. however. parades in tho liv-
cry OF orthodoxy. 1t must be brushed aside and
the study Of tho Word OF God entered upon.
Dr. Briggs said that tho opponents OF the
higher criticism used as one OF their arxu-
the statement OF Christ that Moses was tho
author twas BY no means certain. said DR..
Briggs. that Christ meant that Moses wrote
the Pentateuch. And again. those who under
stand the doctrine Of humiliation find no more
afSHty II hat CHRIST hd not know
they do in believing Hispwn atatainrnt thnt
10 did not know the time Of Hi- advent
cchdrd the science or history Of His own time.
-, ne majority Of the ministry now in the
inspiration Of its authors. This error Of hitch
ng the doftrins Of the authority Of the
q 0 all tSe csesaens '' in IS the '' cS SaTss
hghar criiiei SIN DR. Green p q Frnceton, a "e
e ,ao TeH , l. it IS not written Iy
critics in this country and two score in Europe.
who, deny tho Mosaic authority # the Ptnia
men who, wore its authors were Inspired. This
doGm" that t." o aqitnority q the Scriptures
who hold to it can no more stay tho progress
q tho higher criticism that NJ sounding Of =
nv t|%' Bible We say ~ ws "'g arc 'i Hsi"s
Gonsasp wsh Of Is f th
II its Ideas and al It's statements Of truths .,
no value unless It f literally inSrrant' Who
Is errorless as n rule of faith and practice or
the dogmatistS no say that ono proved error
destroys its inspiration? Tho critic who ne
ccpts al the results Of criticism and yet re-
CARDS tho Bible as an absolute rule of faith
and practice. is not destroying tho Bible but
the dogmatst who rests the authority Of the
Bible on mere chance Is certainty imperillng
tho authority Of the Scriptures.
IL shall net deny that tnc methods q the
higher criticism tit a,G reyontionary. They
and. verbal inspiration. These are not even
ancient traditions: but all er9wths OF com
nous gain when they, are blotted from the
wrestling in z, lie and death struggle. II Is
the Reformation over again with the Bible
IN the hands OF critics and tradition In the
hands Of tho ecelesia;stics Biblical criticism
CRITICISM Is nothing but IN exhaustive
study OF tho Bible and it has resulted in max
ing the Eihe moro rc9l, In, tho time when
dogma was supreme tho Bible was simply
treasury to furnish texts to establish tho
ddogmas which were built up entirely on de.
to cover: Think not that the critics nre, de-
higher position than ever before"