The enterprise. [volume] (Wellington, Ohio) 188?-1899, 1893-05-31
BRIGGS On TRIAL
The Presbyterian General Assem-
bly, Sitting as Court.
tho Prosecuting Committee -Abstract
of the Argument for the Prose-
cution-Dr. Briggs Makes
q Reply.

WASHINGTON, May 26.--At ycster-
days session Of the general assembly,
Rev. George d. Baker, chairman, reported
that the judicial committee unani-
mously recommended that the prose-
cutting committee be allowed one hour
to open its case; that five hours be %iven
Prof. Briggs and that the committee be
given two hours in which to close, TO
be extended if desired to four hours.
The assembly thus having given DR..
Briggs all he had asked for, Rev. DIR.
w. L. Birch, chairman of the prose-
cutting committee, took the floor. He
said 1t was proper for the purpose OF
saving time and because of the moral,
legal and ecclesiastic standpoint on
which the appeal placed the appellant,
that brief abstract OF the argument
prepared should be given.
The general assembly entertained
the appeal Of the committee of prosecu-
ton and sent down a decree TO the
presbytery Of New York, defining the
limits of its liberty with respect to this
case. The decree of the general assem-
bly, ordered the presbytery to try the
case upon its merits and gave IL liberty
TO amend the indictment in accordance
with the general nature Of the same.
Thus the presbysery was free only 10
examine the charges, weigh the testi-
mony and decide TO sustain or not sus-
tain. The decree ofthe general assem-
bly, was not obeyed by the New York
presbytery, as it transcribed its own
proper function as trial court by re-
cording It's unwillingness to express its
approval of the critical or theological
views which were the basis of the
charges.
We are here TO invoke this supreme
court 10 put an end to the dissension
and disputation which the New York
Presbytery vainly endeavored TO ST.
lence, first, by the dismissal Of the case
against DR.. Briggs and, second, by the
acquittal of DR.. Briggs, qualifying both
the dismissal and the acquittal by the
positive disclaimer Of any approval Of
the controverted statements Of the in
augural address, as 10 critical or theo-
logical views and manner Of explana-
tion.
There has been tendency TO minim-
ize the full force OF the indictment.
The errors charged are fundamental.
The charges relate: First, to the ques.
ton as TO the supreme and only autho-
ityYn matters of faith and practice.
Second, to the question as to the iner-
rancy or truthfulness of the inspired
word Of God. Third, TO the historical
validity of the Old Testament. Fourth,
as to the fulfllment Of Messianic pre-
diction-a question Of supreme impor-
tance in its bearing upon the view
which is taken Of the truthfulness of
scripture and of the truthfulness of
God
Fifth and lastly, there is no doctrine
OF redemption, concerning which 1t has
been alleged that Prof Briggs teach
ings have been especially erroneous
and hurtful, but which could only be
partially tried in the lower court. Here
Is series of errors covering the whole
: fundamental structure of our faith. 1t
is q question purely doctrinal and
therefore Of universal importance, SO
far as Presbyterianism is concerned.
1t can be fna ly settled by no presby-
terry or synod, but requires the decision
of the presbytery and church in lis
highest court.
He who teaches that the powero the
general assembly can be nullified by
the will of single presbytery lifts the
banner of treason against the presby'
terry and the church.
DIR Birch then went on to say that OF
those who have supported DIR. Briggs,
whether from pulpit, press or seminary
not one in hundred would subscribe
to the inaugural address, all of which
proved that DR.. Briggs did not properly
represent the fundamental theological
opinions of the Presbyterian church.
At 3:lj o'clock DIR. Briggs arose to re-
ply to the opening of the prosecuting
committee and to protest against the
entertaining of the appeal by the gen
eral assembly. The question before
the assembly was not, he said, whether
or not Dr. Briggs teachings were prop
err, but whether or not the appeal could
be lawfully entertained. A much
more fundamental question was al
stake than any principle of law or doc
trine than had yet been discussed
That was whether the Presbyterian
church should be considered as 9
merely voluntary religious society or q
church Of Jesus Christ. II was the
civil law of the land, he said, that nc
man should be twice tried for the sam'
offense. The New York presbytery
under orders of the general assembly
tried DIR. Briggs for the crime o
heresy and acquitted him. Was thu
Presbyterian church ready to ignore o.
violate that we'll settled principle
found by centuries OF observation anC
experience to be essential to the wei
being Of the people, without good ant
sufficient cause. II was true thu
church did not punish minister II
his physical being, but to depose
minister, TO deprive him of his ecclesi
astical life, was to infiicta punishment
far more cruel than that permitted II
the civil courts.
DR.. Briggs spoke for an hour and
half and then yielded for motion b
adjourn.