The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1894-05-24
SMITH HERESY TRIAL
Accused Begins His Defence
Before the General
ssembly
SINCERE IN HIS BELIEF.
The Several Charges Answered
Doctrine of Inerrancy Given
Much Consideration.

SARATOGA, N. Y, May "A, lS94.-In an
ticipation Of a lively opening of the Smith
heresy case, which is to be heard today by
the Presbyterian General assembly, the
auditorium aud galleries of the church in
which the session is being held. wei re crowded
an hour before the time set for the opening
of the session.
The Judicial Committee presented an or
der for the proceeding in the Smith case re-
moving The two hour limit to the time for
commissioners to be heard.
Ex-Moderators Young and Craig ciashed
in the debate over this question, but the rule
was adopted. This will prolong the Smith
case until Saturday.
The Assembly thereupon entered into the
consideration of Prof. Smiths appeal.
THE DEFENSE
Prof. Smith began his address at TO- 80
o'clock. He assured the Assembly of the
sincerity of his belief that his views of the
Bible were within the limits allowed under
the Presbyterian standards. 1t was, therefore,
his duty to appeal his case. He asked that
the court would not presume that the case
was practically settled at Washington. He
declared that no two cases were alike,
and that The court was bound to take
note of the difference of conduct of
the accused in the two cases. He argued
that the lower courts had erred in allowing
members to sit in Judgment on the case after
they had published opinions on his guilt.
He cited the cases of several members
had SO prejudiced his views before the case
was heard. This, he declared. was wrong,
and ought not to be sustained by the highest
judicatory of the church.
PROCEEDINGS INFORMAL.
Prof. Smith argued also that the prelim-
mary proceedings of the P~resbytery were
technically informal. There was no at
see whether Judicial proceedings could not
be avoided. He described the report of the
committee recommending his trial IN the
Cincinnati P~resbytery as a war whoop,n
and IAN appeal to arms."
His third argument was to the effect that
the charge OF teaching the errancy OF the
Bible was insufficient in form and legal
effect, because the committee had not
shown that the doctrine of inerrancy was
an essential and fundamental doctrine of
the Church. The doctrine is not essential
or fundamental, therefore his teaching that
the Bible contained errors was not a crime
under Presbyterian law. He challenged
them to prove that the doctrine OF inerrancy
or the Scriptures was fundamental.
He explained at length his idea of
the chronological n scientific err
rors of the Bible, and cited
examples Of Inconsistencies n con-
tradictions in the Bible. There was nothing,
he said, in the Westminster Confession nor
in the judicial decisions Of the Church, until
1898, which marked this doctrine as essen
tial.
He examined the two arguments Of lner-
rancy advanced by the Conservatives, that
it was taught by the Bible itself and by the
Westminster standards.
DIR. George C. Moore, Of Andover Semin-
airy, relieved Professor Smith by reading
extracts from published pamphlets on these
points.
HIS IDEA OF INSPIRATION.
Prof. Smiths fourth point was directed
against the third charge, that he taught a
theory of inspiration which was con
trary to that taught by the Bible and
the Presbyterian standards. He defined his
idea of inspiration. This was that God
had revealed himself in his prophets and in
Jesus Christ. All other revelations were
tributary. Inspiration was the method of
this secondary revelation. That it made
these non-inerrant was nowhere affirmed.