New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1896-04-09
DIR. MORGAN'S APPROPRIATIONS"

II the Rev DR. u. Parker Morgan, rector or
the Church OF the Heavenly Rest In this city.
stands in a humilating position before the pub
lie today. he has no one TO blame for IL but
himself 1t was bad enough 10 be guilty Of
preaching as his own last Sunday the sermon
OF another clergyman: but his confession and
explanation make the matter worse. BY
stretch Of charity his confes sion might be- said
10 b. crcdtable 10 him, though the proof. pub
lishcd In The Tribune yesterday. was so
complete that not even the plea OF unconscious
cercbration. often advanced In similar cases,
would have been Of much avail. But while
DR.. Morgan admits doing what must he regarded
as an act ~ dishonesty. II Is unfortunate that
he expresses no regret for that act Itself, but
only for the fact that verbatim report Of the
sermon was published In The Press" In other
words DIR. Morgan Is sorry that he has been
found out: for II was the publication OF this
verbatim report that enabled the Rev. I. j.
Lee. OF Newark. y. j.. 10 prove him n plagarist.
II IL ptlful that man OF DR. Morgan's reputa-
ton and standing In the Church and community
should take such an attitude We have no de-
sire 10 call In question his statement that II Is
not his usual custom To preach other mems ser
mons as his own. Presumably. this was his
first offence. and he was tempted 10 commit IL
by the strain Of ovcrwork incident to Holy
Week. All this might properly have been urged
rs plea In excavation. and would have been
readily accepted ~ such had II been accom-
panied by some expression Of regret for the dis
honesty and deception which the act involved.
II IL not likely that his conduct will subject him
70 an ecclesiastical trial. for we believe he could
only BE- tried on the complaint Of three Of his
brethren In the ministry; and the chance OF
three Of his brethren making such q complaint
Is remote. But he VIII be tried in the far more
important court Of public opinion which IL
hardly likely 10 accept the plea Of justih-
cation which he advances. 1t Is. OF course,
legitimate for a public speaker TO appropriate
another mans ideas. making such Use Of them
as he deems proper. All speakers and writers
do that And there would be no harm in an
overworkcd clergyman preaching another mans
sermon. provided he told his people that he vas
doing ~. Indeed, In some cases the congrega-
ton would be distinctly the gamers by such n
course. But DR.. Morgan will find 1t hard to
convince honest men that his appropriation Of
Mr.. Putnan's sermon was In any sense jusiih-
able. and 1t would have been far better for his
reputation If he had not attempted such justlti-
cation. He preached Ms his own sermon writ
expresses Is over the fact that his dishonesty
has been exposed
1t Is not pleasant 10 say these things about an
honored and distinguished clergy man; but just
because DR.. Morgan IL honored and dIstin-
gushcd his offence Is all the greater especially
NJ he IL man Of undoubtcd ability, who has no
need to Use the ideas of other men, His offence
moreover, IL aggravated by two circumstances,
one Of which was brought ont by Mr.. Lee After
approprlatlng Mr.. Putnam's sermon he made
IN acknowledgment Of ono sentence I'm II. by
the words AS a quaint old writer says" Was
this quotation introduced In order to ease the
conscience Of the appropriation? II so, II was
ut the expense Of truth: for Mr. Putnam WAS
neither quaint nor an "old writer" lie WAS
the late pastor Of Unitarian church I'm Roy.
bury. Mass and the volume OF sermons from
which Dr. Morgan dictated his sermon was pub
lished In 1878. What possible excuse can There
be for calling an up-todate, modern Unitarian
clergyman "a quaint old writer? The other
circumstance that will aggravate DR.. Morgan's
offence, especially with Epscopalians is the
fact that he, Trntarlan Churchman, should
use as an Easter Day discourse a sermon writ
ten by Unitarian. Had the appropriation been
publicly acknowledged it would have been
striking example OF the tolerant charity and
brotherhood that arc to-day binding all Chris
tians together But the unackn0wletlged use
OF the sermon seems to be a confession that Il ia
lawful for churchmen to use the teachings OF
Unitarians in secret, while In public they repro.
bate and condemn those teachings.