The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1893-06-02
Lane and Union sem.naries $.


was necessary.
Lane and Union Seminaries.
An interesting feat ure of the proceedings
OF the General Assembly to-day was the re.
port submitted by Rev. John Dickson.
chairman of the committee on theological
seminaries. The institutions generally re-
port prosperity. and Mccormick, at Chi
cago. with 212 students is now at the head
of the list. As to Lane and Union semi
naries, the report said:
The trustees of Lane Theological Seminary
find that the income OF the seminary has been
seriously reduced, and as a result they have
been compelled TO abolish the chair OF practlcei
theology, thus requiring the resignation or Dr
Roberts, who was the incumbent thereon. Ihe
assembly put on record its high appreciation OF
the value of DR.. Roberts's services and expresses
formed, the board did not advise Or Roberts OF
its purpose before taking such decisiTe action.
In the list of professors the assembly fnds the
name OF the Rev. Henry p. Snith, d. D., who
was in December last suspended By the Presby-
terry OF Cincinnati for unsoundness In the faith
On the 31st of January. 1893. Professor smith
rendered his resignation to the board because of
that suspension. The board declined 10 receive
such resignation, but continued him by formal
action in the duties of his profcssorShip III the
seminary. Where a minister Is suspended he is
suspended from all the functions o. MS Office
Among the most important or such funcuonsls
that or training young men for the ministry.
However serious the embarrassment TO
the seminary. the board should have Immediately
accepted the resignation OF Professor Smith and
at least relieved him from the discharge OF his
duties. Loyalty to the church shonld have COM
PEELED thom TO take such action. But they were
further bound 10 do by faithfulness to the
trust which they have assumed with regard to
that seminary. Its charter requires that "all
the professors shall be members OF the Presoy-
terian Church in good standing" The assembly.
therefore, is constrained TO withhold It's approval
and commendation of Lane Seminary until the
board has reconsidered Its action in this respect
and remedied the error.
UNION SEMINARY.
From Union Seminary has been received the
usual report. The board of directors have sent
a special communication. This was the report
of the action last October OF the board of trus-
tees in Withdrawing from the compact OF 1870
with the General Assembly, To the special
communication from the directors OF Union
seminary your committee have given careful
and prolonged consideration. While they would
recommend the assembly TO recognize the fact
that the directors of Union Seminary have de-
clared, upon their own motion and authority,
that the compact of 1870 is void, and OF no bind
ing effect, and, while insisting that such action
is wholly without warrant, yet they advise the
assembly, for the present, simply to place on
record. by way Of protest, its view OF the sitia-
tion.
Fortwenty-oney years most cordial relations havc
existed between Union Theological Seminary and
seemed its plain but moot painful duty the Gcn-
eral Assembly at Detroit declared its disap-
proval of the appoin tment OF Prof. Briggs to the
chair of biblical theology The board OF directors,
instead OF removing DR.. Briggs or at least re-
quiring him to desist from teaching in the semi
nary until the question at issue between the as
sembiy and the seminary as to the full and
proper meaning OF the compact had been de-
cided resolved to continue DR.. Briggs in the
not to occupy. This action was the more ques-
tonable because the assembly appointed a oom-
mittee OF fifteen to confer with the directors or
the Union Theological Seminary in regard to the
relations OF the said seminary to the General
Assembly. This conference resulted In practical
failure to remove the misunderstanding and It
meeting IN Portland. That assembly ap-
pointed five arbitrators to meet a
Union seminary with power to select five others
to determine the Interpretation Of the compact,
namely as 20 the transfer of a professor. The
stated clerk OF the assembly notified the al.
rectOrs Of the seminary on July TO- 1892. that
the assembly had appointed such a committee of
arbitration; ,. On the 4th OF August Dr. I;
dressed similar uuicaton TO the directors.
To this letter the recorder OF the board respond
ed that the board could not take any action be-
fore the middle of October. On the 18th OF Oc-
tober the board OF directors met and resolved TO
terminate the compact This action was taken
nearly three months after the hoard had been
officially informed OF the appointment OF COM
mittee of arbitration, and before any opportuni-
ty was given TO the committee OF the General
Assembly to present their case.
This extraordinary action of the board of Gi-
rectors is inexpiicable to the assembly. The
board fully warranted the expectation that
such proposition as that of arbitration would
not be treated IN such way. Because then. OF
rectors in retaining DIR. Briggs after his appoint
ment had been disapproved by the assembly;
and because of the refusal by the directors to
irbitrate the single point i'm dispute between the
assembly and the board. and because OF the at
tempt by the board. and on its own motion and
abrogate the compact Of 1870. the assem-
bly, .ds,r disavows all responsibility for for
declines to receive any report from It's board
until satisfactory relations are established. The
assembly, however, cherishes the hope and will
Seminary into such a relationship with itself as
will enable the assembly to commend the insti-
tuition again to students for the ministry. Your
committee would further recommend that the
board of education be enjoined to give aid TO such
students as only may be in attendance upon semi
inaries approved By the assembly. Your COM
mittee would also recommend that the re-elec-
ton ot the Rev. Charles A. Briggs. ID. D., by the
man Theological Seminary at Bloomfield, n. j..
no disapprOved by this assembly.
THE REPORTS ADOPTED.
A long and excited discussion followed
the presentation of the report. which was
received by the assembly without obieo-
tion. Professor Duffieid, of Princeton
Seminary, tried to correct the statement In
the report In reference to Prof Henry Pre-
served Smith. He claimed that Professor
Smith. while he had been deposed from the
ministry. was yet o member of the church.
No SIT; no, SIR shouted out n number Of
mmissioners. claiming that DIR. Duffield
was wrong, and in the confusion Dr.. Duff
field sat down.
DR.. Herrick johnson defended the direc-
tors of the Union Theological Seminary in
refusing 20 arbitrate. He said that the
status QUO was that DR.. Briggs continued
as O professor under the direction of the
board of directo of the Union Theological
Seminary. and that the veto power should
also continue until the General Assembly
settled the matter.
Cries of Question" here interrupted tho
speaker. but before the question was put
DR.. Dnffield succeeded in making an ex-
PLANTATION about the case of Prof. Henry p.
Smith. Prof. Smith, he contended, was
simply suspended from the ministry, and
not from communion In church matters,
and the report related solely to his ri ght as
o membe of the church.
A member moved that that portion of
the report in regard TO the character of
Lane Seminary ana the election of Prof.
Smith be laid on the table. but the motion
was lost
Rev. DE-. Moore. one OF the trustees OF
Lane Seminary, arose to explain why it
was that the name of Professor Smith was
found on the list of professors of the SEM
mary. He said that when Professor Smith
was suspended there was no person to fill
his chair at the seminary, and. as the term
was so near an end. 1t was determined to
continue him until the school year was
over.