The daily morning journal and courier., 1898-02-15
IS HE GUILTY OF HERESY {?
PROF. M'GIFFoRTS BOOK CAUSES
 SOME DISCUSSION.

It Is But Recently Published and Its Title
 is "A History of Christianity in the
 Apostolic Age"--Dr. Buchanan's Opinion
 A Meeting of the New York Presby tory
 No Charges Made
 New York, Feb. 14.-The Rev. Dr. Walter D. Buchanan, moderator of the New York Presbytery, when asked to- day regarding the rumored trial for heresy of Rev. pr. Arthur Cushman McGiffort, professor of church history in the Union Theological seminary, said: If Dr. McGiffort's book con- tains the passage to which my atten- tion has been directed, it seems to me clear that he is out of touch with Presbyterianism as 1t still exists, de- spite all latter day efforts to alter it.. He is not in harmony with the stand ards of our church and I canont see what other course he can properly take than to separate himself from us. In the case of Dr. McGiffort I do not see how the conservatives and liberals can do otherwise than unite In @ condemna- tion of teaching which would destroy one of the most cherished beliefs of Christendom. I do not wish to be un- derstood as condemning Dr. McGiffort off hand"
 The main grounds for a trial, if any there shall be, will be based upon the book of the professor, recently published, and entitled "A History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age" It is asserted that ever since this book has had an opportunity to be we'll read, the most indignant letters of pro- test have been pouring into this city from Presbyterians all over the coun- try These, it is said, have been writ ten by Presbyterians of all shades of opinion and belief-liberal as we'll as conservatives-an the tenor of them, it is understood, indicates that the writers hold Dr. McGiffort to have sinned against the church far more fla grantly than the most rigid sectarist had accused Dr. Briggs of having done. Dr. Briggs, the sentiment seem ed to be, had at worst but differed with Presbyterianism; Dr. McGiffort had antagonized Christianity itself.
 The passage in his book which ap- pears to have provoked the most dis sent is the following: There can be no doubt that Jesus ate the last sup 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 which He gave them to drink, 'This is My blood of the covenant which is shed fol many" and that He did it with a reference to His approaching death But more than this our sources hardly warrant in asserting positively Ii was apparently not the institution o1 a memorial feast that He had in mind impending death, and the assurance that it would result not in evil but ir good to His disciples. To reaC into this simple and touching act-un- premeditated and yet summing up 1T itself the whole story of His life o1 service and of sacrifice-subtle and ab. struse doctrines is to do Jesus great injustice, for it takes from the scene all it's beautiful naturalness which k so characteristic of Him and so per fectly in keeping with His direct an6 unaffected thought and speech.
 He was not teaching theology, nor was He giving yelled utterance to any mys terious truth concerning His persor and work. He was simply foretellins His death and endeavoring to impar to His disciples something of tha divine trust and calmness with whicf He approached it. .. There 1! no indication in our sources that 1T these early days the Lords Supper wa thought of as continuation of or sub stitute for the Jewish Passover, or tha any paschal significance whatever at tached to 1t.