The herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1893-1900, 1895-12-30
REV. BURT ESTES HOWARD
lie Is Called Upon to Answer an
Open Letter
A QUESTION OF ORTHODOXY
A Presbyterian Propounds SOME Ques.
ti0ns of Doctrine
riatter of Opinion Regarding the Atonement
Made the Subject of Inter-
rogatories-
A QUESTION OF ORTHODOXY

DEAR SIR-Allow me to address you
briefly in reference to a sermon preached
by you at your communion service, at
which | was a communicate, Dec. Is.
1895, from the text: "For as oft as We eat
this bread drink this cup We do show
the Lords death till he Gomez I. Cor,
1926.
Ii | mistake not, your teaching was
clearly this, that the death of Christ was
nothing more to the world than the crown
ing revelation of God the Fathers love,
and that to Christ himself it was simply
the last step in a life and example of per-
feet self-sacritice.
Unless l msrepresent. you distinctly
stated, and emphasized the statement, that
the death of Christ was to be regarded only
as the browning revelation of Gods love;
also, that Christ did not die to save men
from hell, or from their sins; also, that
God did not cruelty Christ, but that he was
slain by the bigotry which is ever seen to
rise and fall through the ages, and which
exists even at the present day. In this
connection you also interpreted our Saw
ior's last words ut is finished" as mean
ing simply THAI the revelation of Gods
love was finished. With these teachings
you also contrasted the evangelical or
orthodox view of the church on the sub
ject of Christ's death in a way that o me
seemed more like carcature than contrast.
For example your statement THAT Christ
did not die in order to help God out of an
awkward dilemma by satisfying his wrath
and justice. Also, your remarks in regard
to the proper frame of mind in which the
communicate should approach the Lords
table, namely, that To come with hearts
flied with pious thoughts and eyes
with tears, gazing upon a bloody cross,
and counting its blood by drops as SO
much gain to the soul and that the blood
of Jesus Christ cleanseth ns from all SIM"
was, to use your own expression 1.-The very
shame of sacrilege." And further you
said, that to come to the Lords table in
such way was, Il again use your own ex-
pression) no cruelty our Lord afresh and
put him to an open shame"
AS to showing forth our Lords death, &C.
cordng TO the language of the text. your
teaching was that Christ's death was
simply the last step in life, and an exam
pie of perfect self-sacrifce, and that we,
his disciples. are to show forth his death
by repeating that life of self-sacrifice in
our lives even up to the last step II neces-
sary. You certainly did not speak of any
other way of showing forth our Lords
death, or give any significance to the COM
munion service as q special means of show
ing forth that death.
In your sermon the Sunday following,
December 22d, text, II in them and thor
in me-" John 1928. which sermon also
heard, you made the statement, near the
close of your sermon, that with some ths'
communion sermon of last Sabbath mig
seem to sever their vital union with Chris 4,
and if SO you hoped the present address
would set them right, etc. As for my self,
your communion sermon. while it did NOT
have the effect you seemed to fear of sew
ering my vital union with Christ
as my precious saviour, yet it
did rob me of joy and delight as partook
of the communion. could not but feel
that my Lord had indeed been crucified
afresh and put to an open shame, and that
in his own house and at his own table.
Neither can / see how any one who had
been hurt by the communion sermon could
be healed by the one following il. Your
teaching in that sermon, ii again do not
msrepresent you, was simply that Christ
was in everything alike. or rather that
here is but the one divine force in the
world, that works in plant, animal and the
human soul alike, the difference in results
being due wholly to the difference in the
materials upon which 1t works.
NV allow me to ask you, not only for
mys If but for Others as we'll. do yOn con-
slider such teaching Presbyterian or even
evangelical? Do you consider such teach
ing in harmony with the public declaration
recently made by yourself and Session,
I'VE are Presbyterians?" Do you con-
slider such teaching in accord with stand
ards of belief and doc rines in the Presby-
terrain church, which you have accepted
without qualification? Again, the only
test a terms of admission to member.
ship in your church as stated by yourself
on the communion Sunday to which refer,
were that those uniting with the church be-
lieve in the Christ spirit, not a word about
a saving faith in Christ. Is that Presbyte-
ran? Again, your invitation to the Lords
table on the occasion was to all in tia
house, church members or not church
members who believed in the Christ spirit
I dare not, you said, withhold the invitation
from any one in this house. Is this Pres
byterianism?
l understand that the above teaching ia
regard o the death of Christ and it's place
in the economy of redemption ia in q line
with certain article from your pen in the
Arena few years ago. also understand
that the so-called heresy of that article
was, according to your statement, CHARGE
able to the editor, he distorting the state
ments of your manuscript. Now, were
your teachings on the communion on Sum
day, to which I refer. a distortion of your
real belief. or is the distortion with me or
the editor? l write you thus openly be-
cause all your utterances on the subjects
referred to, both in the Arena and in your
sermons, were public utteTances, and be-
reply is due the church and public to whom
you have SO frequently spoken. Yours
respectfully, a PRESBYTERIAN.
RUPTURE.