New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-03-09
SELECTIONS FROM THE NAIL.
DR. SAvAGE'S EVIDENCE.
HIS CITATIONS AS TO THE BELIEF OF THE EARLY
CHURCH FATHERS AS To CHRIsT'S DIVINITY


HIS CITATIONS AS TO THE BELIEF OF THE EARLY
CHURCH FATHERS AS To CHRIsT's DIVINITY
To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: VIII you kindly permit me to express my o.
legation to The Tribune for printing extracts
of The sermon of the Rev. DR.. Savage in reply 10
few criticisms passed upon one published IN for
issue? / regret that Dr.. Savage is too unwel
To write controversial articles, and trust that ne
may have fully recovered
May I ask space 20 say that afraid that 7
did not make nv meaning clear TO the Reverend
Doctor and briefly the matter at issue?
l purposely avoided controversy save on the ons
point that the majority of Christians. learned
and unlearned official and unofficial ancient and
modern, have been taught and evidence have
ever held that the Bible the Fathers and all the
Apostles believed that God came down and in-
carnated In man and suffered and died and went
to hell d. the place Of departed spirits) u
save men,
But now DR.. Savage tells the citizens OF New-
York in his pulpit and through the much greater
congregation of the readers o. The Tribune. that
neither the Bible the Fathers authorized
these beliefs of she vast majority Of Christendom
but that they are the mistaken offspring OF meta
physical speculations and first expressed in tha
Nicene Creed which had its origin in the fourth
century
In short Dr. Savage issues challenge TO tbs
verdict of the Christian ages. do not dis
cuss the evidences in behalf of this verdict 7
might make thousand quotations from the Bible.
the Fathers" ard contemporary history uphoains
the contention of the Church of Christ against
DR.. Savages position. but cui bono The readers
OF The Tribune would siumber with the in
nocent wearisOmeness that some of Us used TO in
dulge in when in the school of theology We were
called upon to recite the various passages from
the Fathers and the Scriptures which proved be
yond all controversy the very things that DR. Saw
age holds they utterly ignorant Of
| still insist that good common sense teacE-
the average man 70 respect the historical sound
ness of a position which for least sixteen centu-
ries survived the struggle for existence and IS
as much alive al ever, | am not debating the IN
dependent truth of the Nicene Creed am Simply
maintaining that for a great many hundred years.
and in the face of debate and a trial unparai-
eled in thOroughueSs. the vast majority of Chris
tians have held that the allegations OF that creed
are not the outcome of mere metaphysics, but me
historical result of attempt state in creedal
form that which the Church of the fourth century
believed be the truth of the Scriptures, or tne
churches throughout the Roman Empire. True, N
an attempt of this kind use would ne made or ncth
a philosophical and a metaphysical interpreta-
ton of the writings at hand. though only as
of Interpretation.
DIR Savage brings forward a number of citatior:
10 establish a doctrine of the Standardization on
the Son" concerning which there is need or con-
troversy, even were II my intention 10 enter una.
was that Of ''Sabeanism' or "PatrpasStanism
wherein the due and proper "subordination OF me
Som lost sight of. No catholic theologlan
would dream of denying the PrOIer doctrine on
Standardization" Therefore all citations in It's be-
half easily capable OF an orthodox tnterpre'a-
ton. ., -
am afraid that the eleven Jurors" will still re.
main obstinate unless DR.. Savage has evidence nor
none w NJ n.
Morristown. y. j.. March 2, 1900.