Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-05-22

10 De brought before the bar OF the general
assembly. the highest court Of the Presby-
terrain Church, this week. It may be that
consideration Of some legal point involved
may result in sending the case down to the
synod, over which the appeal from the judg-
ment Of the New York synod was taken. How
ever, there seems to be among the members of
the assembly a general desire to get the case
OF the docket finally and settle once for all a
controversy that has vexed the church for
over two years. There seems TO be little doubt
that In the assembly. a. constituted, large
majority is opposed to DIR. Briggs Though
the case has not come up yet in any form it
has dominated everything. and constant evil
dences have been given that stanch Presby-
terians have grit their loins for an ecclesiasti-
cal combat which will not be uncertain in It's
results. At the very outset the retiring mod
orator, in the sermon which preceded the con-
stituting of the assembly, declared in unmis-
taxable words the view of the conservatives,
that such teachings as those with which Prof.
Briggs is credited cannot be tolerated within
the church. Then the report made by the
special committee on theological seminarles
gave evidence of the belief Of the majority
that the assembly must adopt means for secur-
ing control of the teaching in such seminaries
and insure for the future ministry an orthodox
training according to the conservative view.
THE ELECTION OF MODERATOR
The Briggs case was not an open issue in the
election OF the new moderator, yet it was sig
nifcant that the assembly departed from the
custom of making nominations without
speeches, and that in the presentation of can
didates particular stress was laid in each in
stance upon the fidelity Of the minister named
TO the standards Of the church. The very fact
that such nominating speeches or testimonies
TO The qualifications of the men named were
Called tor, because as some members claimed
they did not wish to vote in the dark, showed
the state of mind at least of some commission
ers who seemed to be filed with fear and sus-
plcion that the heterodOxy ascribed to Prof.
Briggs might even secure a seat in the moder-
ator's chair. and from that eIninence have a
material influence over all the proceedings of
the great assembly. Then a further evidence
OF the overshadowing presence OF the issues
raised by the case was given in the sermon de-
hvered by the moderator to the assembly yes
terday, in which he maintained the duty OF the
ministry to be fsiIbful to the great trust i'm
posed upon them. to guard and preach the
gospel and inveighed against rationalism or
intellectualiSIn that sought to revise or add
to the word of God. While the Briggs case was
not direct issue in the election of moderator,
as there was no candidate known as a Briggs
man, 1t had an influence in the choice, az there
seemed TO be a determination among many Of
the antI-Briggs men to choose moderator
with a view TO the questions which he might
have to rule upon who would not be likely to
be lenient at critical moment. Dr. Craig
gave evidence yesterday Of his uncompromls-
ing adherence to all that the conservatives
hold az sacred in the teachings OF the church.
GREAT ECCLESIASTICAL BATTLE.
II the question comes before the assembly on
Its merits it viii be fought out on both sides by
men who are the greatest masters Of theology
and polemics in the church. and the combat
will be a notable one. The controversy will be
conducted by the cultured men of the assembly
in courteous phrase, but beneath the gloss the
hight will be grim one. On the one hand will
be arrayed earnest men defending as they be-
heve the sacred faith of their grand church,
whose history and achievements, since the
days OF Calvin, are matter of pride to them;
and on the other hand men equally earnest in
purpose who believe that an enlightened view
of the Scriptures and the standards Of the
church give room for some modification Of the
severe doctrines of Calvin. II may be that the
vast proportions of the case. from argu-
mentative point of view. will make its trial by
the assembly impracticable and a commission
will be appointed to adiudicate it. Prof Briggs
required several days to present his case before
the New York Presbytery. and the arguments
made by the members of the prosecuting COM
mIttee would fill large volume.
One who had acquired a casual knowledge of the
case might have the I'm preston that the question
was merely that Of tolerance or intolerance; that
ID
OF liberal thought than his brethren and that
he Is undergoing some sort of persecution for
hs daring. To Prof. Briggs opponents, how
ever, the case presents itself in another light
The question that will be tried. il the case
comes to trial, is practically not whether Prof
Briggs is right. but whether he il Presbyterian.
OF course, according to the Presbyterian view,
IL may be said that if he is Presbyterian he is
right. II is not, however. the standards of the
church that are on trial. but Prof. Briggs. His
feAs a. H.. n
conform TO the standards. If the contention
OF those who are prosecuting DR.. Briggs is cor
rect DR.. Briggs may still be ever so good and
true q man. but he il not Presbyterian, but has
adopted another faith. Hence he is guilty OF
heresy from Presbyterian standpoint.
IS IT PRESBYTERIAN?
This view is set forth clearly in the argu-
ment made for the prosecution by Mr.. John J.
McCook, and which has been placed in printed
form in the hands Of members Of the assembly.
Mr.. McCook says: lit is, of course, easy for a
many to say, suppose, however, / am con-
weed OF the truth Of these doctrines, will the
church muzzie me, silence me, for uttering
what am persuaded is true? This brings us
back TO the question of heresy Look az the
principle which such question involves. /
can imagine a man. after an exhaustive study
Of paulstlc and scholastic literature, becoming
% convinced that the Roman Church is the
true church that he might preach Romanism
nom IIcsOl terlan puipit Ii Is not likely.
but make the supposition. The presbytery
would. doubtless, interfere. And then suppose
that he should say: You are silencing me for
teaching what believe TO be true. You are
not experts on this question / have devoted
my life to the study of Roman Catholic litera-
ture. and am leading you on IN the paths of
Divine Providence Possibly you would reply:
You are a remarkable scholar; we admit that
no one of US has given much attention to the
literature Of the fathers and the schoolmen as
you have. But our church, whether mistaken
or not, has required Of you. at your ordina-
ton. to take a vow to sustain its standrri.s Of
doctrine. We are not silencinc YOU because
you know more about this literature of the
past than we 10, but because we believe differ
ently from you. And our belief is not some
thing which can be changed, even at the de-
uand of n great scholar have made the
imposition. but there ia no one who would
remain IN the Presbyterian Church long enough
10 listen to such reply. He would take his
patristic and scholastic literature with him and
20 TO his spiritlral director. who would doubt
less tell him thar IL he had not left the church
of his own accord the Presbyterian Church
would have been quite justified in inviting him
TO Leave. he-esy trial IL not persecution for
when the charges are proved il is simply
proved that the accused has been converted
10 another form Of religion We are sorry that
he is so mistaken. wish that he had not left
the faith In which he once believed; bu. we
have to choose between our own doctrines and
his