Morning journal and courier., 1892-11-30
THE HERESY TRIALS.

sion In the briggs CaSe-Ehe Fourth
and Seventh Charges Stricken Out
Some Plain Words Professor
Smiths Matter.
NEW York, Nov. 29.-The first import
ant question to come up in the second
days sessions of the Briggs heresy trial
this afternoon, is the stand which the pro-
scouting committee would decide to take
in regard to Professor Briggs objection to
the charges and the demand that Nos. 4
and 7 be stricken out.
To days session was opened with prayer,
and after the roll was called Moderator
Bliss announced that the business before
the court was the consideration of the
motion to strike out the two charges.
Colonel McCook read the opinion of the
committee on the motion, and argued that
the two charges could not be dropped. In
reference to charge seven, Colonel McCook
said that DR.. Briggs answer was irrele-
want, because, although he had affirmed
before the professors of the Union semi
nary that he believed that one who died
unpenitent was forever lost, he had since
promulgated his theory of progressive
sanctifcation in his inaugural address, and
it was on the address that the charge was
founded.
The fourth charge could not be dropped
because DR.. Briggs denial of the fulfill
ment of the details of prophecy was a
denial of the truthfulness of the Bible and
an impeachment of the omnipotence of
God.
DIR. Alexander insisted that the commit
teeman had no right to argue on the OBJ
lection, and Colonel McCook resumed his
seat.
DR.. Briggs said that one of Colonel Nc
Cooks points was based on Topographic
cal error in the printed copy and must be
dropped. He declared that the offer made
other charges was made conditionally. DR..
Robinson, the chairman, wanted to know
what the conditions were. DR.. Vandyke,
who was corroborated by the defendant,
replied that the condition WAS that the
charges which embodied two separate
counts should be divided. The pastor of
the church in which the trial is being held
moved that the committees charges be
considered seristim, and that until the
fourth charge was reached the mo-
ton to strike out be laid on the
table. This motion was lost and DR.. Alex
ander's motion to strike out charge was
taken up.
Professor Brown of the Union seminary,
and foremost of DIR. Briggs supporters,
said the committee had acted unfairly in
quoting part of DIR. Briggs statements and
taking them out of their proper connec-
ton.
DR.. William G. Shedd defined the mean
ing of the word disclaimer" A laugh
was precipitated by his statement that DR..
Briggs was not guilty of falsehood, but of
self contradiction.
DIR. Hastings, the venerable president of
the faculty with which defendant is con-
nected, said: "The change made in the
charge is radical. 1t gives the lie direct to
DR.. Briggs, and there is no getting around
it by causistry."
81 call DIR. Hastings to ORDER" exclaimed
William R. Worrall, Colonel Shepard's
private secretary.
DR.. Hastings WAS cautioned to use
milder language. He continued by affirm
ing that DR.. Briggs should be his own in
terpreter and as he has disclaimed the
charge should be dropped.
A vote was taken and the motion was
carried by vote of 70 to 40. The sew
enth charge suffered the same fate by
about the same vote.
Colonel McCook asked that an exeep-
ton be entered on the record in behalf of
the prosecuting committee. The court
took a recess till to- morrow.
CINCINNATI, Nov. 29-The entire fore
noon session of the Cincinnati Presbytery
| was spent in discussion of the sufficiency
| in form and legal effect of the third charge
and specifications against Professor Henry
P. Smith. Yet, as in nearly all the pre-
ceding discussions, the speakers have wan
dered from the form to the substance, and
have been in effect treating the case as if
| 1t were before them to decide upon Profess
sor Smiths guilt or innocence rather than
| upon the merit of the work of the prosecut-
| ing committee in it's effort to present prop
| er charges and specifications. Speeches on
| the question were made by Drs. Roberts,
Robertson, Lord and Richie on behalf of
sustaining the work of the committee, and
by Revs. Taylor, Acksmsnn and Gilchrist
| against.
Dr. Roberts said there was a crisis in the
Presbyterian church of the gravest nature.
/ There was an attempt to force the theory
| of inspiration upon the church.
Professor Smith asked if he meant that
he, If sustained by the presbytery, would
bring those to trial who did not agree wit
him.
DR.. Roberts replied that he referred to
q forcing of theory by other than Judicial
process.
The doctor went on to explain his view
of the inspiration of the scriptures by say
ing that he did not believe in a verbal in
SEPARATION, but in a plenary inspiration. Ht
did not believe, as Professor Smith appar
entity taught, that the scriptures contained
the word of God as water Ia contained in I
cup, but as silver is contained in dolls,
every grain silver.
He quoted from the language of tn,
ordination VOW, and from the basis of re
union of the old and new school churches
the declaration "That we believe tn
Scriptures to be the Word of God" No
to contain the word of God; and said tn
whole Bible from Genesis to Revelation
according to the fundamental doctrines o
| the PRESBYTERIAN church.