New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-02-18
METHODISTS AND THE BIBLE


1t has been the boast of the Methodist Church
that it has been undisturbed by the prevalent
discussion concerning the Bible. But that boast
is no longer possible. The fact was noted few
weeks ago that some students of Boston Uni
verslty, Methodist institution had protested
against the Biblical views Of Professor Hinck-
ley G.. Mitchell. President Warren summarily
decided against the students, most of whom
thereupon withdrew from the institution The
agitation however, did not end. Persons SYM
pathizing with the protesting students have
taken the matter up and an organized effort is
now being made TO drive out of the institution
not only Professor Mitchell, but Professors
BOVINE and Sheldon and President Warren him
self. Moreover. the annual conferences of Des
Moines and Oklahoma have condemned the Bib
Heal teaching of the universitys School of
Theology.
THESE protestants against the right of private
Judgment, so greatly priced by Methodism. de-
clare that the so-called higher criticism of the
Bible. as taught in Boston University. must in
ev1tably chill the faith of Methodsts. paralyze
the zeal Of the Church and reduce its creed IN
the low human conception of Unitarianism
They say
The teachings of Professor Mitchell involve all
these diVergences from Scriptural truth and
netn0ulst ooctrlne, either by direct assertion or
denial or carefully insnuated scepticism that
accomplshes practically the same result One
or the graVest features of the whole situatio1 &c
the extent to which Professor MitchelI's vIews
nave already permeated the Church win bts
growing experience he is more and moro oat,,i
control over the students coming under his ir
struction, and swinging the school to bis ~,
sltion If he is permitted longer to remain bo
may succeed in realizing his boast ITO ravoI,i
tionize the theology of the Methodist Church ("
Professor Mitchells reply in brief. Is that
while he has reached certain conclusions CON
those conclusions. on the students. He simplv
places the facts before them and asks them
from these facts to draw their own conclusions
AS to the reference of Christ to the Mosaic
authorship of the Pentateuch he saws:
l suggest two ways OF explaining the fact that
to II, viz, that He knew that Moses did not
write 1t, but refrained from correcting the prey
alent opinion or that this one of the drec-
tions In which His knowledge was limited
give TO my students choice Of these alterna-
tives. at the same time expressing nv prefer
Ing with many other scholars that | do not be-
leVe that Jesus in HIS humiliation was omnis-
Client, and Wesley seems TO have held a similar
opinion. | am accused OF teaching that a belief
In the deity Of Christ is not necessary to saliva
ton This Is correct, and In this | have the
support of Wesley. the founder OF Methodism
am proud to be follower OF this man and
cannot conceive how any one who calls himself n
Methodist can hold or teach any other doctrine
In the same way Professor Mitchell meets
other charges, taking the broad ground that the
critical view of the Bible rests on truth. and
that as Methodist IL is his duty no less than