New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-05-25
Spec HES TO THE ASSEMBLY.

Of. BIRCH FOR THE PROSECUTING COMMITTED
AND DIR. BRIGGS IN REPLY.
Washington May o4.-In his speech to the General
Assembly the Rev DR.. W. F. Birch. chairman OF the
Prosecuting Committee. said that there was an eH
ceedingly suggestive comparison between 'he ac"on
OF the Apostolic Council with respect to the appear
Of Paul and Rarnabas. and the appeal OF the Com-
nittee OF Prosecution. The Apostolic Councli en-
tertained The appeal Of Paul and Barnahas ana sus
toined II by sending down decree TO tho Church OF
Antioch which defined the limits OF Christian liberty
OF those Gcntiles who might BE admitted to Church
membership The General Assembly entertained 'hH
appeal of the Committee OF Prosecution ana SEM
down a decree to the Presbytery OF New-iork &C.
lining the limits OF Its liberty with respect to this
case. The decree OF the General Assembly ordered
the Presbytcry to try tho case upon its merits. ana
gave II liberty 10 amend the indictment In accordance
with the general nature OF the same. mus inc
Prcsbytery was free only to examine the charges.
weigh the testimony and decide TO snstaln or not
10 sustain The decree OF the General Assembly was
not obcyed By the New-York Prcshytcry. rs II
transcribed its proper function as trial court
by recording its unwngness to express its approval
OF the critical or theological views which the
basis OF the charges. The decree OF the Apostolic
Council taught tho Gentle Christians that purity was
the absolute condition of peace. So that when the
question between purity and loss OF concord the
former 10 he preferred TO the latter.
with all respect TO the accused in this case, am
ready to say that his personal interest is nothing
In comparison TO The interest OF the Church In whose
name he has been teaching. The question. What is
really Prcsb ycrian doctrnc7 Is to be answered, not
for ourselves alone. but for all American Presly
terians. both now and for years TO como. and
must be answered by the whole Church. Hence your
appellant. the spokesman OF hundreds OF thousands
Of Presby;erians. In the name of law and order OF
UNCONVENTIONAL loyalty. Of Scripture prcccpt and Bbli
cal example: In the name OF the historic orthodox.
evangelical constitutional, missionary Presbyterian
branch OF the Church, bcseechcs this venerable court
TO bless the Church and the world. and TO exercise It's
authority in Il crisis momcntOus rs 10 make every
plea for delay OF judgment out OF order Thus your
honorable body will protect our communion from what
one OF your number. DR.. HeriCG Johnson has called
the peril Of n broadness that would empty our souls
OF conviction and our lives OF victory
Dr. Briggs, in reply, said In part that the first
thing TO be decided whether the form OF the
appeal correct. not whether any matters existed
which might justify the sustaining OF the appeal. If
there was any want OF form detail In the appeal.
the General assembly could not lawfully take juris
diction. Was the appeal then. DIR. Briggs asked an
appeal from the final judgment of the Presbytery
OF NewIork, Dr. Briggs asserted In the next place.
that the final Judgment OF the Prcsbyery IN bis
was really declared by the Moderator Of the New
York Presbytcry December so, 1892, and from
that appeal should be- TAKEN II from any action oi
the Presbytcry and not from action oil January o.
1893. lie WAS not TO be- exposed to the peril tit
lay In IL possible change OF the composition OF the
body IN the interim: put in jeopardy II secod
time because OF u mistake by the court which tried
him vt u date subsequent to that which final
judgment really delivered Upon the question
Of the standing of Il man charged with the crime Of
heresy, Dr.. Briggs quoted sarcastcally the expression
OF a member OF the Assembly, used in article h"
had Written TO prepare his brethren for considering
this In II Christian and judicial frame Of mind.
that II found himself teaching Views In
opposition 10 those Of majority OF the Presbyt terrain
thu.ch he was In honor bound 10 leave the Church.
This was not question OF majority, but Of law and
OF right. Any attempt Of II majority OF the Church
10 exact from a brother, minister teacher any
thing more than what was required by the constitu-
tional standards might be good club law, out II
was not good ecclesiastical law.
much more fundamental question was at stake.
said DR.. Briggs. than any principle OF law or
Doctrine that had yet been discussed. That
whether the Presbyterian Church should be con
sidercd merely voluntary religious society or
q Church OF Jesus Christ. 1t was the civil law OF
The land he said. that no man should be twice
bytery. under orders OF the General Assembly tried
Dr. Brsss for the crime of heresy. and acquitted
or Violate that welsettcd principle. found by
centuries OF observation and experience TO be- essen
ana saen It was rua he ch%rch sC Sd
not punish minister In his physical being. but to
cal life. was to lnnct punishment far more cruel
than that permitted In the civil courts.
me pdse % he s sq Were pushing the
dangerous position. They were endeavoring 10
secure new definitions OF dogma by final Judgment
In hercsy trial. when they ought TO aim TO secure
them by ovcrtures In accordance with the pro
visions OF the form q government. The form OF
government prescribed their path. not the Book Of
TIE WORK OF THE WOMEN.