River Falls journal. [volume] (River Falls, Pierce County, Wis.) 1872-2019, 1893-01-05
PROF. BRIGGS WINS.
The New York Presbytery Votes Against
Sustaining the Charges of His Prosecu-
tors.

The New York Presbytery Votes Agains,
Sustaining the Charges of His Prosecu-
tors.
New YORK. Dec. 31-The session of
the New York presbytery. which is
sitting as court on the trial of Prof.
Briggs, was begun promptly at o'clock
Friday afternoon. Each member was
allowed three minutes in which TO ex-
press his views
The voting on the first charge was
begun at 4 o'clock and the vote on the
sixth charge was completed and the
presby terry adjourned shortly before 8
o'clock. The result of the several bal
lots was then announced to the re-
porters. The result was great sur
prise, for on all OF the six counts the
vote was adverse to sustaining the
charges.
On the first charge, accusing Prof
Briggs of te Teaching that the reason is u
source of Divine authority, the vote
was as follows: To sustain the charge
go; against sustaining the charge. IS.
On the second charge, which accuses
Prof Briggs with charging that the
church is source of Divine authority,
there were SIS votes in favor of sustain
ing the charge and II against.
The closest vote was on the third
charge, that Prof. Briggs taught that
the Scriptures contained errors of his
tory and fact On this charge the vote
was as follows: To sustain the charge,
81; against, s.
After this vote had been taken two
or three of the anti Briggs men left the
court and others refrained from voting
on the last three charges.
On the fourth charge, accusing Prof.
Briggs with teaching that Moses was
not the author of the pentateuch, the
result was: To sustain the charges, So;
against, ~.
The vote on the fifth charge, ac-
cusing Prof. Briggs with teaching that
Isaiah did not write many of the chap
ters in the book bearing his name was:
In favor of sustaining the charge, 40;
against, 40.
The vote or the sixth charge, accus-
ing Prof. Briggs of teaching that sane
tfication is progressive after death,
was as follows: To sustain the charge.
81; against, 90.
The case viii be appealed to the
general assembly, which will meet in
Washington early in the spring The
assembly will appoint commission
consisting of fourteen unprecedented
members to act ON the appeal
The friends of Dr.. Briggs were great
lv pleased with the result. They had
calculated on a majority ranging from
four to six.
The movement against DIR. Briggs praeti-
cally took its rise January %, 1891, when he was
given the Edward Remsinon chair of biblical
theology in the Union theological seminary
The alleged heretieal doctrines he ac-
cEsed Of giving utterance to we're eulled from
his inaugural address on that occasion. His
address was severely criticised by many Pres
byterian ministers in New York and by
numerous others attached to outside pres
byteries Several articles scoring him for the
views expressed were printed in religious jour
nails. Demands were also made upon the New
York presbytery that summary measures Of
discipline be taken in DR. Briggs case
The friends q DIR. Briggs claimed that the
real motive Of the attack on him was to stop
the movement in favor OF the revision of the
creed He had been one of the foremost lead
ers Of the reysiOnists in the previous gen
eral assembly The antireyis Onists, it was
claimed, thought that II they could get
then out of the church they could make an
example OF him that would scare others who
held the same views ana kill revision al one
stroke. The New York presbytery met May
II, 1891, and after a stormy debate resolved that
DIR. Briggs should be tried for heresy and a
committee was appointed to prefer formal
charges
The directors of the Union theological sem
mary propounded questions TO DR.. Briggs
which he answered to their satisfaction on
May 90 1891, and they decided to stand by him
The presentation of the charges was made
IN June, 1891. Al the meeting of the general
assembly held in Detroit, Mich, May 3 1891.
the committee on theological seminaries. to
which the whole matter had been referred,
presented its report condemning Dr. Briggs
and advising that his appointment to the chair
of biblical theology in Union theological
seminary be disapprovcd After two lengthy
conferences by the committee of fifteen, ap'
pointed by the Presby terrain general assembly
OF Detroit and the directors of the seminary as
TO the removal of DIR. Briggs from his chair
held February II, 1892 they adjourned without
coming TO any satisfactory understanding
DIR. Briggs WAS arraigned before the New
York presbytcry November Is, 1891, and it was
yoted to dismiss the charges against him with
out trial
His prosecutors appealed from this decision
70 the next meeting OF the general assembly at
Portland, Ore, Nav 80 1892 DR.. Briggs argued
his case but the case was sent back to the pres
bytcry for trial