New-York tribune., 1892-01-03
4 DISMISSAL. NOT AN ACQUITIAL.
THE PREsBYTERY OF NEW-foRK AND Dr''
BuGGs'S INAUGURAL ADDRESS.

THE pRFsBYTERY OF NEw-YORK AND DR.
BuGGs's INAUGURAL ADDRErs.
TO the Editor OF The Trlo n
Sir: The quotation In your Saturdays Issue iro,n
Dr shcdd's article In The Presbyterian Journai
surprised many readers. and in their behalf ms well as
nv own. | ask the privilege OF remohs''''hec' III
Shedd says:
Tho prcsbvtery OF New York by dSmssing the
charge Of here.y against Dr. Briggs. have declared
that this inaugural discourse Is not hercucal ana ooe'
not essentially contradict the Westminster Confession
Of Faith -
A. one who shares the responsibility Of the dis
ml,.al Of the case think II Is time to protest aeS
such au Interpretation Of onr action. which mas oe
come somewhat current among the thonghtleNS or Ill
Informed outside the body. but surprises us whcn
odoptcd bv any OF our members. and especI"hS
by ono 80 calm and intelligent as Dr. shcdd' 'ct
tainly neither party at the tic :" uudeI9'o'" IT,
,boucb some have since been inclined to use IT as Il
nun,i triumph or vndlcation. The first resolution
10 arrest the judicial proceedings expressly provided
,..inst If bv the clan,e without pronOuncng on the
,u1ciencv Of these later declarations to cover all the
polnt, concerning which the accused has been 'aed
IN question: This though referring eSp"'i'"y 10
c-rtnln supplementary utcrances' I'm response 10
question. by the OF the seminary. which were
nado tno prIncipnI ground of defence by his ad-
vocatcs WIS supposed equally to cover relrainlng
from pronounced Judgment upon the sufcency OF ali
DIR Hrgg,'s utcrances mp to that stage OF the tral.
II wa, undoubtedly upon that supposltlon that many
votes I'm the affirmative were gained. And yet even
under that most favorable aspect Of the case. the
resolution did not carry. but failed 10y large ma
jory indicating clearly th" sentiment and poSn"n
OF the Prcsbytcry in regard to the utcrancea OF the
inaugural address" 40 variation In sentiment or
position nationally be supposed to have occurred
between that jth OF October and the 4th Of November.
though II has been ab,uidly claimed That certain
Innocent and calOw members had meanwhile D'cl
reading up a volumlnous radical treatise and had
changed their minds! II the question upon the real
merits OF the case had issued at either date the ma
joriiy would undoubtedly have been essentially the
same The nnal resolution on November was there
fore made still more explicit I'm refraning Judgment
rs. indeed no judgment could have been pronounced
when no avowed defence against the charges had yet
been entered. The clause. without approving OF
the positions stated In his inaugural address, In
troduced by who Is well known to have no SYM
pahy with the positions therein taken. was designed
and accepted positive disclaimer OF expressed
approval. and on that account secured sui oth'r
he peace and IuI,t OF the church" and because they
felt bound and were. by decisions Of the General As
'cmbly actually bound to accept Dr. lrsgss deciar;
lions then mad" concerning his loyalty to the Holy
scriptures aud the Westminster Standnrds.' and BIS
@ @ a" 1trPrsaons put nieSsG Gn SSme to OF s
clare that his Inaugural address Is not hcretlcal that
majority o the Prc~hyt"ry voted to dismiss the case
rhe Implication l., not only unfair but 1t is absolutely
contradictcd 10y the palpahle facts.
Many Of those WHO ncqulcsced In that resolution
and 10y whose concessions II finally passed did 20 In
the full assurance that ts temporary dismissal merely
reccatei the case to the highest court to which The
Prosecuting Committee would properly carry IL ana
where II could b" adudlcat"d more thoroughly. I'm
partially and wisely than WAS possible within th"
bounds Of th" Prc-hyt"ry. and where alone IL could
bc cOncusivey decided. Knowing this. and believing
that nothing practical would be accomPl-hed by
further ,rnl the ground piotractod through many
day. from which appeal would inevitably bc taken
hy original party the other picf'rrng. ther"
fore. 10 hnVc through months when other interests
urgent and studying th" p"ac" aud quiet of the
church Will" II T. possible. they deemed II best
10 dism-, the case" Th" Prc-byt"ry has INITIATED
the prosecution" according 10 IT. Book ~ Discipline.
The Prosecuting Committee. in behalf OF the Pres
bvtc1an Church In the United states II America. will
cpuduc II until the fu Issue J. reached" according
To- tho obligations which ID" same Book lays upon
them McanW hll" no declaration - whether the IN
auFural t. OF Is not hcr'tical has been made.
New York. Dec. 30 1891. IL. Is. ELLIOT