The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1898-02-14
ANOTHER HERESY TRIAL.
.,or M,GIFFERT OF UNION SEMI
VARY TO BE TRIED soon.

,ord,s supper was mereiS oVO' '
u.a 40 Paschai NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
,.0u Liberals. ~ well as from ConnerVa-
calling on Preabytery 70 Try Him.
movement to bring about another horesJ
..to, may be begun at the meeting OF the new
wi presbytcry this afternoon. Inc triei VIII
s.ohoby soon take place in any event. Letters
ss.or every section Of the country are coming 10
a.mbcrs Of the New York Presoytery urging
m Tho man to BIO tried is a professor of
Union Theological Seminary VINO "to.e .
o"T and published "a History Of Christianity
ee",' nos,nlic Age" and is understood TO have
III hat he expected a trial for heresy as q
y" Tho author OF the book is tho
u w" w. Arthur C. McGifert. member OF New
- prcsbytory and washburn professor Of
tV,roh history In Union Seminary. The book
Hs,,o,o,v condemned is one in a series OF which
A. nav DIR. Charles A. Briggs is n co-editor, the
~ odi,or being Prof. Selmond OF Aberdeen.
prof McGiTert, although not much over forty
ala ia recognized rs the ablest authority
- ,ho prcsbyterian Church in his special Held.
VI. ,,s graduated at Adelbert College,. and
-, soon inter to Lane Seminary at Cincinnati.
Ann which tho Rev. DIR. Henry preserved
smith was elected for hercsy. While there he
-ro,o "A hook which attracted attention to its
.,,bor and obtained for him q call to Union
Seminary in 1898
Tho ,,tters demanding the trial for heresy do
~, I, Ia said. come from the conservative party
In the Church. They come, so 1t Is said, in
nuiio as great numbers from the liberal party,
or that which heretofore has backed Union. AS
nroof TINT the Church at large is opposed to the
teaching in the book, letters are shown from
leading Presbyterians in the central middle
states and tho Northwest, where the liberal
e,cmont is strong, while comparatively few
have vet been received from western Pennsyl-
yania, where the conservative Scotch.1rish party
an the Church has its centre.
Tho argument now made Is the same as WAS
made in the case Of the Briggs and Smith con-
troycrsics, namely, that a man whose views
have undergone a change ought to retire from
the Church, or at least that he ought to cease
IN teach students who will eventually fill Pres
byterian pulpits.
MANY parts of the book, "A History of Chris
tianity in the Apostolic Age" are attacked. but
the sections that are urged upon which to base
A trial for heresy are found on pages 90 and 70.
These passages, 1t would seem, are directly in
conflict with the Larger Catechism. They
refer to the Lords Supper and Its authority,
and affirm that 1t has, and was intended by
Christ to have, no paschal significance what
ever; that 1t was a nero social meal on the
night on which Christ was betrayed, and that
the remarks there made were intended to point
the disciples to an approaching event which
was to appear to be disastrous, but which was
In reality 10 rebound to their benefit. Here is
what the book says:
There can DO no doubt that Jesus ate the
last supper with his disciples, as recorded in all
three Of the ~synoptic gospels, and that He said
OF the bread which He broke and gave to His
companions. This is my body. and Of the wine
Of the covenant which is shed for. many and
that He did il with a reference to His approach
ing death. But more than this our sources
apparently not the institution Of u memorial
feast that He had In mind SO much as the an
n .nSsnos ,h Of His h impsSdnd Ins, death nth and an . the
but in good to His disciples. He had already
told them that He must die, and that His death
t aHaal he ae now 10 repeated / that %ta prop6eoy and Prom.
loo in q vivid and impressive symbol. As tho
bread was broken and the wine poured out, SO
not in vain. It was for their sake and not for
theirs alone, but for the sake of many. TO read
INTO this simple and touching act.unpremedi-
tailed and yet summing up in itself the whole
story Of His life Of service and Of sacrifice
subtle and ~abstruse doctrines Is to do jesus a
gre9t Injustice. for it takes from the scene all
Its beautiful naturalness which is so character
htic OF Him and so perfectly in keeping with His
direct and unaffected thought and speech.
lie was not teaching theology. nor was He
giving yelled utterance TO any mysterious truth
concerning His person and work. He was SIM
ply foretelling His death and endeavoring to inn
part TO His disciples something of that divine
trust and caImnes with which He approached
T. But after His death. when His followers ate
bread and drank wine together, they could not
nag broken bread in their presence and. with a
reference TO His impending death, had pro-
pHnnced The bread His body and the wine His
blood; and, remembering that scene, their eat
ing and drinking together must inevitably.
shether with or without . command. from Him.
eke on the character of a memorial feast in
%hieh they looked back to His death and He had
looked forward to II.
soo Even 4 one were to question, as Julicher
memorial feast which His disciples were to con-
pnge celebrating until His return. it can hardly
y aoubted that Paul was reproducing what no
nsa received from the earlier disciples when he
represented Jesus as saying. This do in remem.
ofence OF Me- II can hardly be doubted, in
olher words. that it was believed at amy rate at
s9atch OF Jerusalem. that Jesus had command
= lnem 10 do as they actually were doing when
saty ave and drank together. There is no indi-
IN thss'In y our sources that In these early days
the LORDS supper WAS thought of ms a continue
,,i,oh oil or substitute for the Jewish Passover, or
tSsbe5 ny ~ paschai significance whatever at
q, Yen this point the Presbyterian Confession
"AAssi H. ~ me larger cateehism says:
HHH H. or carnally present in, with, or under
Me bread and wine in the Lords Supper, and
wtuIo spiritually present to the faith OF the re-
ma neI no less truly and really than the ele-
~ enls themselves are to their outward senses,
msnt NAT worthily communicate in the sacra.
ma VI the LORDS Supper do therein feed upon
mo-, pouy ana blood OF Christ. not after a cor
tr mi Ut carnal but in a spiritual manner; yet
s mn aha really while by faith they receive and
inc benefits Of His death"
a member OF the New York Presbytery smoke
ssstetaay OF the MeGiffert book. fhaye seen
snst a hundred ~letters.' he said, "meption-
kHnseLn o' al4ne the quotation from the McGiffert
toIjjn' a History OF Christianity In the Apos.
i %,G age; wherein Is denied that Jesus Christ
tssntuteu any sacriicial supper, and that there
sna memorial or spiritual signidcance tn tho
saeharlst, but half a dozen other parts Of the
ss sye oook, One Of the latter Is Prof. McGif,
fIi.s Remarks about tho passage in St. MARI
80, saying: Expecting az he did to return
ens ~ carry day, he can hardly have been solicit.
orv pio'lue Tor the preservation of his mem
thew ~ y IS q notable fact that neither Mat
the y nur hiark records such a while
In MASSAGE "A which II occurs in Luke is omitted
rarJedd' ot me oldest manuscripts, and is re.
EoriTH as an Interpolation by Westcott and
MINI fenr the New York presbyterv will no
&, Tor n - INC another heresy trial. 1t may not
do. rsnS oTn ian never tell what a presbytery will
al vSpeclaly ;he New York Presbyterv hui I
ters No. see how else this storm of i1din5ant" iot.
hernloSm every Part OF the country, and from
Swcrod as wen as conservatives. can he nm.
Brigysu. ~ Is not the old division over The
Wessnn hnI smith matter. This denial of the
the nthster Catechism affects as deepiy
Prs sVcaIIcd progressive party In tpItoo
6cnI,ny hcrinh Church as H. docs Tia ia