The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1892-11-27
Relieious Hombng.

There is a good deal of comment over the
placing of DR.. Henry P. Smith of Cncin-
natl on trial for heresy. Comparisons are
drawn between this proceeding and the
placing OF hereties in jeopardy in the dark
times when conviction meantimprisonment
or death. That is all nonsense and folly.
No matter what may be the result of DR..
Smiths arraignment, he will not be made
to suffer in life or limb or properly. His
will not be criminal trial The tribunal
win not be even of a civil character. 1t
will be purely ecclesiastical ana without
punitive power or authority.
THERE'S a great deal of sympathy wasted
over preachers who are out OF harmony
with the creeds of the sects to which they
belong. When minister casts Off some
dogma or tenet which is held by the church
he is engaged to represent, and there
is probability of his being brought
TO account for his heresy, he imme-
diately becomes an object of sympathy for
admiring women and tender-hearted men,
, and is looked upon as victim of intoler-
ance. Everything done by the authorities
of the church is denounced as persecution.
This is in the highest degree absurd.
There is nothing in this free country to
prevent any man from advocating any doc
trine or theory in which he may believe if
he can get people to listen to him. Free
dom of speech and of the press is per-
mitted by the law TO the utmost proper
limit. Heresy is as free as orthodoxy, so
far as that is concerned. And one is no
more entitled TO commiseration than the
other.
But why should Presbyterian clergy
man. as in the case of DR.. SMITH, claim the
right or be permitted to advocate in the
Presbyterian pulpit and under Presby-
terrain authority, doctrines which are at
variance with the Presby creed! II
he dissents from the articles of faith which
he is hired to disseminate, why should he
not come cut of the church which holds to
them and promulgste his opinions indie
pendentiy, or join some other body more in
harmony with his ideas.
We do not believe in the sham martyr
dom which these modern heretics are sup
posed to suffer. They ought not to pose as
ministers of a churoh in whose doctrines
they do not believe, nor wish to retain q
position which they cannot conscientiously
occupy. There is variety enough in the re-
ligious arena for the advocates Of almost
any religious theory; sects enough to take
in nearly every yagary of the religious
mind. And if not, the world is wide and
open to new flights of thought and new
sectarian ventures.
Presbyterianism has recognized creed.
It's ministers should cling to it or revise it.
There appears to be good cause for modi-
| fcstions of it's tenets. That, however,
must be done, If at all, by common consent
of the body. No man clothed in it's minis
terial robes has the right under that garb
to oppose its established principles. If he
cannot convince his associates that he is
right, he should step down and out and
carry his views elsewhere. If he will not,
but persists in his dissent and in holding
his position, he ought to be expelled after
fair trial and conviction.
The question of right or wrong in doc
trine cuts no figure in this argument. DR.
SMITH may have the truth on his side or he
may not. That is not the question. 1t is
the occupancy of g Presbyterian pulpit for
the PRONUNCIATION of ideas that are not en-
dorsed by the Presbyterian body. No man
has the right to make such a position a
cover for the undermining of the creed he
is pledged TO support, and any assumption
of martyrdom when he is exposed and cast
out, is nothing but religious humbug.