Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1894-05-25
REPLY TO PROF. SMITH.
The Argument Before the General
Assembly.


When the Presbyterian general assembly
convened yesterday afternoon the house
was as full as ia the morning. During the
recess printed copies OF Prof. Smiths ar
gument had been circulated. and his further
speech was punctuated by the rustling OF
turning leaves. Before the continuation of
the argument of the morning the assembly
decided TO sit last night from Z 80 until $50.
Notwithstanding the objections that were
offered. TIE object was to complete the
terday, but IL failed.
Prof. Smith continued his argument, con-
tending that by its verdict of guilty the
piesbytery affirmed that the accused had
committed the crime charged. but that the
evidence adduced had failed to support the
accusation. The speaker then went on TO
speak of the occasion OF the address on
which the charges of heresy were based
and the circumstances of the church at the
time, IL being then in the midst OF the con-
troversy over the revision Of the confess
sion of faith, and in debate over a substi-
tute for the verbal theory Of inspiration.
which was no longer tenable. The inspira-
ton insisted upon by the prosecution laid
the Bible open to dangers which threatened
its complete rejection. To meet this danger
the address was delivered at the call Of
duty.
The appellant continued further, main
tanning that the verdict of guilty implied
that he denied inspiration in the sense i'm
piled or expressed by the Scriptures them
selves. But since the Scriptures and con.
fession contain no definitions, he claimed
that it is not a crime in Presbyterian law
to decline to say what the confession does
not say or TO decline to say that God must
make all He does perfect. according TO our
idea Of perfection. 1t is not an offense to
affirm the facts which a careful examina-
ton discovers in the Scriptures themselves.
The argument was concluded by the claim
that IL cannot be crime to assert that
Gods work is more effectually done by
itself in His instruments. This fact has
always been recognized in the Office of the
preacher. and why not elsewhere? The
whole argument was briefly summarized
ton and the enlightenment OF the Holy
Spirit.
Prof. Smith occupied exactly the three
hours apportioned to him.
An intermission of five minutes was taken
before DIR. McKibben of Cincinnati, chair
man OF the committee Of prosecution, took
the floor to present the case OF the appellee.
He defined inspiration as divine influence.
which operated to make the bearers OF the
revelation and their record infallible in all
their parts and utterances. This doctrine
was declared to be a matter OF faith, to be
accepted because IT was contained in the
Bible. The Bible was declared to contain
one doctrine OF inspiration-not many
Continuing, he said: Having made God
the responsible author of Scripture to deny
the truth of Scripture is to impeach the
veracity Of God himself. But a new school
of theology has arisen. declaring that a
man accredited to speak for God may not
necessarily be entirely reliable. 1t has been
claimed that the Westminster divines did
not hold to the infallibility of the original
autographs but when they declared that
the Scriptures were Immediately inspired
they meant this or nothing. Purity Of tent
mus; refer to some standard of judgment,
which must be the originals. Textual crtti-
cism has sought that text, which should NOT
be called an imaginary book"
The argument of the afternoon was closed
by quotations from professors connected
with the new school branch OF the church
to show their accord with the prosecution
The galleries were visibly thinner when
the assembly met for its evening session.
Immediately after the opening prayer Dr.
McKibben resumed his argument. After
trayersing the charges he alluded TO the
accusation that had been made against
members of the pres bytery for laying a
trap for Prof Smith, in asking him to read
paper on inspiration.
Prof. Smith interrupted to disclaim that
he had ever insinuated anything of the sort.
In enc of the specifications Of error II was
charged that the vote Of q member had
been received and counted during his sb-
sence.
In the discussion q fire Of questions fol-
lowed from all parts Of the house in order
TO get proper understanding OF the case.
1t turned out that the vote had been placed
in sealed envelope. and had been cast by
the clerk.
The main portion Of the rest Of the areu-
ment OF the session consisted of extracts
from Prof Smiths book on Inspiration.
from his letters and from other records IN
the case. The reader was frequently inter-
r,'pted with calls for Go on" Read fur
tier"
The closing point touched upon, he said,
anected the sentence pronounced. The
question had been asked: why not warn
him instead Of suspending him?'
The answer was that Prof. Smith has not
stood simply for his own ministerial posi-
ton. but for the right to teach his views In
the Presbyterian Church.
When the assembly adjourned a little
more than half an hour remained for the