The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1892-02-23

. JbIIt.SS rs JlhClJ W W. OEStcu liOlIl ms
proicssorship or ROMAN where he is
everybody was lett in the dark.
Then, again, all participating in the
conferences have been held.to profound
secrecy. The intention has been not to
lift tho veil OF secrecy until the report
is submitted at the next general assem-
bly, meeting.
DIR. BRIGGS VICTORIOUS.
As now made public for the first time
and its authenticity vouchcd ior-it
is an assured TACT, unless the next gen
eral assembly refuses to endorse tho re-
port OF its committee, or trial in the
ecclesiastical courts gives convincing
proof OF his hcrcsy, that Dr.. Briggs viii
continue to fill his professors chair. In
other words, the seminary directors
have won every point thus far in the
contest.
The first prominent point OF disagree
ment was as TO the authority OF the gen
eral assembly over the Union Theolos-
ical Seminary. After lengthy discus
sion the committee recognized the fact
that the general assembly and the SEM
mary are two separate parties, using
this word in its logical meaning and
tina: neither has authority over the
other. There are those in the Presby-
terrain chuTch-such men, for instance.
as the Rev. DR.. w. II. Roberts, OF Gin
cinnati-who in their zeal tounify the
authority oil the higher bodies claim
that the general assembly should take
absolute control OF all its seminaries rs
the grand highez body. BY the scmina-
ry directors twas insisted that the gen
eral assembl y-while q more digrificd
body, perhaps, and having supreme con-
troll in cases referred to it judicially-
has no control over the seminary, ex-
cept so lar rs the directors can be shown
10 have given it such control. They
maintained that the directors and gem
cral assembly'are equal parties to con-
tract and that the general assembly has
no right under such contract other than
those given it in the contract One
party claims that the general assembly
has suneriudicial authority, SO that it
can deal with professors and preachers
independent. OF judicial process. The
other party believes this to be destruc-
tive OF the fundamental principles OF
Prcsbytcrianism.
INTERPRETATION OF THE CONTRACT.
Much time was spent in discussing
the Interpretation OF the contract made
in 1870 between the seminary directors
and the general assembly. tits claimed
by the representatives OF the general
assembly that under this contract the
general assembly has the right to veto
the transfer Of professors, while tho
directors inEisted that it could only ex-
ercisc such power in tho case OF now
appointment TO membership in the
faculty.
twas found impossible to bring their
minds together on this point. and it
was finally agreed to recognize The dis.
agreement as irreconcilable and so re-
port to the general assembly.
DR.. BRIGGS STANDING.
There was likewise an animated dis
cussion upon the third point, ilfEolv.
ing the present standing OF DR.. Briggs.
The question was whether he is to be
recognized as a professor OF Biblical
theology and rs really installed in the
chair bearing that name. The direc-
tors took strong ground and refused
positively to remove him except in the
case OF his being found guilty OF hercsy
after due process in tho ecclesiastical
court.
By the statu quo referred to in tine
brief report OF Dra. Patton and Has.
tings is meant the undisturbcd occu-
pancy OF Professor Briggs OF his present
chair. This, OF course, ii the report OF
tho committee be adopted by tho gen.
eral assembly, will render futile such
propositions rs that OF tho synod OF
Baltimore, suggesting that tho general
assembly should discipline the semi
nary faculty and its directors for con-
tumacy in not dismissins DR.. Briggs.
FUTURE ARRANGEMENTS.
The final point OF argument between
tho committee and the directors re-
lated TO future arrangement between
the general assembly and tho directors
rs to tho appointment and transfer of
professors in the seminary. 4 fat re.
lusal was made by the directors 10 leave
such arrangement to the dictation OF
tho general assembly, on tho ground
that the latter body is but one party.
Tho directors and tho committee
seemed to be OF ono mind as to tho
hazard OF the present arrangement,
which has already wrought such trouble
in the church. The willingness on the
part OF many members OF the committee
to withdraw opposition from the sem
inary's position was occasioned perhaps
by something which came to light for
tho first time during the conference.
The directors had submitted paper to
tho committee, the contents OF which,
the latter freely admitted, gave them
such light that had it been known at
the timo OF tho general assembly meet
ing last May would have prevented the
asscmbly's action.
This paper, however, was not. pro-
pared for the committee, but before the
meeting OF tho last general assembly
was sent to Detroit by the hands OF ono
OF the most honored members OF the
boor1 ri directors " hn. nul:ad H. Dat