The star. (Reynoldsville, Pa.) 1892-1946, 1893-06-07
DIR. BRIoos FOUND GUILTY.
rho Assembly Bustains tho Heresy
Charge Against Him.

The Presbyterian General Assembly In
'ession at Washington, ID. c.. sustained the
,ppeal OF the Prosecuting Committee from
he verdict Of the New York Presbytery,
which acquitted Dr. Briggs Of the charge OF
hefesy. This is equivalent TO n verdict OF
,eresy against Prof. Briggs. OF the total Of
100 votes cast, 2Ds were TO sustain the ap.
peal 50 to sustain II In part, making total
u 1893 to sustain, and no not 10 s,st In.
A committee will now he appointed 10
prepare n minute for All omission to the
ieneral Assembly prescribing the punish.
nent TO be meted out. There are five things
'he General Assembly can do Admonish.
tebuke, suspend, deposc from the ministry
Or expel Prof Briggs from the church. One
of the last three courses is likely to be fol-
lowed.
Tnr GROUNDS or ArrrAh
There were five grounds Of appeal and "a
ipeciiicn'ioiIs. Each of these specifications
was voted upon singy. At the end OF the
voting nn these the roll was 10 be called
upon the general question:: Shall the appeal
be susinined2" and 10 wns.
The whole day was spent In three. minute
speeches on DIR. Briggs case. Nearly all
the leading commits toner's took part In the
debate. The first voice raised In favor Of
DR.. Briggs was that of the Rev. Charles
Fuller Of the Presbyiery ofGunnison. Col.
with vigorous language he asserted that In
his opinion DR.. Briggs's language was mis-
understood.
Then he added that the words of Jesu.
were also inisun derstoOi, and that the
Christian church to day Is divided on the
Interpretation OF the words Of Christ. "fhis
II my bOdy.n II wac lust ~ reasonable. he
Mi, A., ,,u Il, IA
more clearly as 10 bring such charge
against Dr. Briggs
The venerable DR.. Smith, OF Baltimore.
expressed the belief that the appeal should
be sustained. while the com missioners from
this city. the Rev Joseph T. Kelly and
John Randolph, ranged themselves ON the
same side.
AS the call Of the roll by synods went on,
ministers aud elders arose and gave their
opinion Of DIR. Briggs, and the character
and influence of his teachings.
-Four members of the Synod of Illinois
spoke against sustaining the appeal. DR..
Herrick Johnson's speech was fOrcible and
clear, The Rev. Thomas G. Hall took oc-
casion to explain that his fathers name had
been maintained among those who favored
the prosecution. while he had expressed no
opposition to the proceeding In writing.
change Of views was announced by the
Rev. John w. Pugh, ID. d.. Of the Bloom
ington, H., Fresbytery. lie said he had
voted against entertaining the appeal, but
after hearing DIR. Briggs defence he had
concluded that II was merely special pl cad
ing and avoided the issues. A rather blunt
alternative WAS presented by the Rev. John
$. Hays ID. d.. the blind preacher of Ken.
lucky, which was that DR.. Briggs's doctrines
would have TO he made part OF the stand
ards of the church. or else DR.. Briggs
would have TO leave the church.
At noon DR.. Briggs asked TO be relieved
asa party from further attendance at the
session. He looked tired and sad. The
request was granted amid considerable ex-
element.
The debate closed at 10 p m, when the
vote was taken. After its announcement
committee was appointed 10 bring in
explanatory minutes and the session ad.
ioLrned