The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1893-05-25


OF the church. beseeches tins venerable court 10
bless the church and the world, and TO exercise
its authority In crisis so momentous as 10
make every plea for a delay OF judgment out or
order. Thus your honorable body Will protect
our communion from what one OF your number,
DR.. Herrick Johnson, has called the peril o. a
DroaIness that would empty our souls OF con-
vlction and our lives or victory.
DIR. Briggs Speech.
At3:15 o'clock DIR. Briggs arose to reply
90 the opening of the prosecuting commit
tee and to protest against the entertaining
of the appeal by the General Assembly. He
stated the question and quoted the law
which prohibits the employment of pro-
fessional counsel in such cases. saying that
If permitted to 90 so he would have en-
ployed such professional counsel for the
reason that il was doubtful If he could
present his case as il should be done. This
Hituation was one that was forced upon
him by the Book of Discipline. which made
It necessary for him TO rise above personal
considerations, and TO appear as the at
sorney for DR.. Briggs. The question
before the assembly was not, he
said. whether or not DR.. Briggs's
teachings were defensible, but whether
or not the appeal could be lawfully enter
tanned. The law of the case at this stage
forbade the consideration of it's merits.
and be expressed regret that the proseou-
tion had not observed this law. The same
law constrained the commissioners or
judges not TO consider the controversies in
question at this time, but simply to deter
mine the Legality of the appeal DR.. Briggs
went on to argue that the form OF the sp-
peal was incorrect. and that there were
many things In it which must be removed
before the General Assembly could enter
tain 1t. He also pointed out matters in
cluded in the appeal which. he said. rem
dered 1t invalid.
DIR. Briggs asserted in the next place
that the final Judgment of the presby terry
IN his case was really declared by the mod
orator OF the New York Presby terry on Dec.
so. 1892, and from that appeal should be
taken, IL from any action of the presby terry,
and no. from the action in January. 1893.
he was not to be exposed to the perils
that lay in possible change of composition
of the body in the interim. nor. put in
jeopardy q second time because of mis-
take by the c0urt which tried him at date
subsequent to that on which the final
Judgment was really delivered. If any man
thought these objections were puerile ard
technical let him put himself in his place.
Why should he waive any of his rights
when the prosecution was endeavorlng to
take bis ecclesiastical ifef The second
ground upon which the appellee opposed
the entertaining of the appeal was that 1t
was a well established principle of law that
public prosecutor could not appeal from
verdict of acQulttal Upon the question
OF the standing of a minister charged with
heresy. DIR. Briggs said, there was no course
open but to remain In fellowship with the
church until deposed after trial.
A much more fundamental question was
at stake. said DR.. Briggs. than any prlncl-
discussed. That was whether the Freshly
terrain Church should be considered as
merely voluntary religious society or a
church of Jesus Christ. 1t was the civil
law of the land, he said. that no man should
hat ri cd Wy mr. a nt
New York Presbytery. under orders of the
General Assembly, tried Dr. Briggs for the
crime of heresy and acquitted him. Was
the Presby terrain Church ready TO ignore
or violate that well settled principle. found
by centuries of observation and expert
ence TO be essential TO the well being Of the
people. without good and sufficient causef
1t was true the church did not punish q
minister in his physical being. but TO de-
pose a minister. TO deprive him of his &C.
clesisstical hfe. was to infict q punish
ment far more cruel than that permitted in
the civil courts.
THE LAW OF APPEALS.
DR.. Briggs then discussed the law of APP
peals. This. he asserted, could be in.
voked only by parties original to the case
and aggrieved parties. The new Book of
Discipline did not contain the word ag-
grieved. he admitted. but in spirit the
right of appeal was confined to those who
were aggrieved. Was o prosecuting COM
mittee such an aggrieved party as to war
rant il in appealing from an adverse jude.
ment! He asked the committee had he no
right of appeal. and an appeal by such O
committee could not be entertained by the
General Assembly without violation of
all church law and precedent To enter
tain such an appeal would be for the as
sembly to enter into conflict with
oil experience and perpetrate q wrong
refuse to right If it were lawful
90 appeal every case of doctrine and law
brought before the court OF presby terry. it
would compel the General Assembly to
finely determine all these doctrinal and le-
gal questions. If this appeal should be
sustained. 1t would become an unfortunat tie
precedent which would be followed by
public prosecutors hereafter who would, In
many cases, II not in most cases. magnify
their Office and bring differences of
opinion before the supreme court of the
church. and thus establish new and easy
way for ambitions litigants to secure au-
thoritative decisions of the General AS
sembly In many matters of faith aud
morals. of life and work, which were now
regarded as legitimate matters of private
opinion, and thus imperil the constitution
result in changes in tho doctrine and law
of the Presby terrain Church.
1t was possible that O majority of the
General Assembly might make an uncon-
btltUtOUbl QcCl5iUus anu bnbt tUcTt ullSQt
be q series OF decisions of questions of
doctrine aud morals in contravention of
the doctrlnal and ecclesiastical standards.
What course should u synod. OF a presby-
terry. or q minister pursue In such q easel
They might be justified In saying: I'VE
refuse to submit to tho decisions of this
unrighteous majority. We shall continue
20 maintain our constitutional rights. In
the next heresy trial we look for right
eous verdict" Unless the high court OF
the General Assembly should act III strict
accordance with the forms of law and upon
constitutional church. and with the sacred
rights OF man as set forth IN
Holy Scripture and our national
Constitution. it would be no re-
bellioD of the minority In the church 70
continue the struggle against unrighteous.
ness and wrong hoping for better times
The General Assembly could not lawfully
revise or amend the constitution by fnal
judgments In heresy trials. The public
prosecutors were pushing the Presby teri an
Church into u very inconsistent and dang.
erous position. They were endeavorng &C
secure new definitions of dogma by iina
JUDGMENT in n heresy trial. when they
ought to aim to secure them by oyertures
in accordance with the provisions of the
form of governments. The form of govern
ment prescribed their paths. not the BOOK
of Discipline. DR.. Briggs epoke for al
hour and u half and then yielded for
motion 10 adjourn.
~