New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-01-21
THE RESULTS or BIBLICIL CRITICISM.

THE RESULTS or BIBLICIL CRI1TCISM
The Rev. Dr. :. d. Mcconnell. prominent
Episcopal clergyman. has written II letter Id
THE Churchman.' of this city, In which he
makes n point of vital importance In regard
10 the results Of modern Biblical criticism. one
Of the most striking characteristics of IN" de-
strucivc Biblical critics within the churches
such men. for instance as Professors Chcync
and Driver in England and Professor Briggs
in This country-i, their belief. oftcntimcs cX-
pressed with passi"nat" carn"stn"sS' mat me
conclusions Of the Higher Criticism do not. and
cannot In any way. affect the faith OF CHRIS
,lans In the Bible pr Mcconnell addresses
himself 10 the task Of disprovng 'his aSser-
ton: and what he has TO say on The subject
has all the more weight because he Is under
stood to be largely in sympathy with the meth
DDS and conclusions of modern biblical crit
lcIsm. though he does not permit his own views
on that question 10 appear In this letter All
mittinc cor the sake of argument. however, that
fine conclusions Of the Higher critics are true, 1t
* N, contends. untrue to maintain that these
conclusions will not affect mems belief in the
Bible Take. for instance. the claim of the
critics that Moses did not writ" the Pcnatcuch.
II would be impossible for average Christians
70 believe in the Bible rs Of old. For their be-
lief rests, among other things. on the theory
that Moses was directly inspired by God to
write an infallibly true record. II. instead OF
This. they learn that some unknown chronicler
of a later age worked up a mass or Oh docu-
mcnts and traditions and called the result the
law Of Moses they may or may not continue
to regard the Bible as In some sense Divine
hat 10 rinin IL
Bible will not be to them the same book that
It was before.
Or TO take n still more specific instance, the
Higher critics say that the elaborate ritual
worsbip SO minutely described in the Book of
Ieviticus was not, as n matter OF ract, estap-
lished by Moses acting under a Divine COM
mopd ON the contrary. rs Dr. Mcdonnell puts
H. the critics say that it WAS constructed out
of whole cloth by little group of scribes ana
nriosts NJ the time Of Ezekiel and Ezra; that
during the centuries preceding II hnu Deen III
fact unl<nown; that it was foisted into the He
bro,v religious development almost in all points
os were the False Decretals into the Christian
dov.onment ot n later day. that upon this dis
honest and fictitious foundation was built up
a svs,cm which eliminated in jewish ccre-
moniolism lust as the False Decrctals bore
fruit in the Papacy'
Now. II that assertion Is true either In detail
or I'm substance, It is idle for critics IKE III.
briggs to say that 1t will leave the belief OF
Christians I'm the Bible just where 1t was be-
fore For" to quote DR.. McConncli again.
"accordIng to the accepted IDEAS about INC
I,cyitical System. the doctrine or expiatory
s,critice ,cs nj the root Of revealed religion,
was the antique OF. and eliminated In CHRIST
According TO the other set OF ideas, expiatory
sacrifice never held any legitimate place III inc
evolution Of religion. but was foiscd mo IL ny
n pous fraud. set up within 1t, pseudo ueVe'-
onment which eliminated In Annas AMI C"ia-
mas and broke itself into rretricvaDe rum
against the person Of Christ. who so far from
being It's Type. was its deadliest foe
II will seem to most candid people thnt IT.
McConnclrs point Is well taken. The critics
declare that their only object Is to separate the
human from the Divine element In the BiDle, III
order that the Divine element may become more
visible. But, as DR.. Mcconnell sa5ss these TWO