New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-02-23
DR.. BIRCH APPEALS
FILES PAPERS WITH MODERATOR op
NETWORK PRESBYTERY. CARRY
ING MGIFFERT CASE To
GENERAL ASSEMBLY.


The Rev. Dr. G W F. Birch as a member q,
the New York Presbytery. has appealed the cass
Of the Rev. DR.. Arthur c. McGifert. accused
him of heresy, TO the General Assembly OF the
Presbyterian Church. which will meet AZ e.
Louis next May. In this course he is acting nor
as the Stated Clerk of the Presbytery but sirnpIv
a Presbyterian trying to do what it is said
he believes to be his conscientious duty. No
one else has signed the appeal, and he alone
takes the responsibility for presenting IT, Tia
time for fling it would have expired by mid
night yesterday but TO be sure OF getting 1t IN in
season he gave it TO the Moderator Of the New
York Presbytery. DR.. Howard Dufield, pastor
Of the "Old First Church. Wednesday. As
DR. Birch was the appellant he decided not to
file the appeal with himself as Stated Clerk He
gives as his chief reason for carrying the case
to the supreme court of the Presbyterian Church
the inadequacy OF the action OF the Presbytery
on the heresy charges
Dr. Birch's side Of the controversy was given
yesterday as follows:
He has never wished any trial to be held IN thu
New-YOrk Presbytery- All he desired was to have
the case investigated when &c up. referred 10
sombiy He was opposed to having the members
OF the New-York Presbytery who had acted as
other Way could a final constituti0naI sefrsnsn3
be made The 1895 General Assembly stated Fenr
fundamental doctrines: Tho inspiration OF the HOLY
Scriptures. the deity of Jesus Christ the institution
by Jesus Christ Of the Lords Supper. the Confess
sion of Faith and the Holy Scripture concerning the
justification Of the believer before God II also
Joined every Presbyter defend and protect these
anu Il IS4eIISg lHe NitTiAEIl use 20 thc FIesOy-
tory Of New-York; which has the primary consti-
peace and purity of the doctrines Of the Church
Now. DR. Birch charges that DR.. Arthur Cush-
McGinert, WashbuTn professor OF church his
these doctrines in his book, "a History OF Chris
tianity in the Apostolic Age" Dr. Birch believes
serve the purities Of the doctrines Of the Church
and therefore. he, as hidden oy the General Assem-
his conscience He acted alone. but he Is not
conscience In order not to take any advantage OF
DR., McGinert. he wrote letter 70 him stating as
Dr. Birch. then following the book. called on the
This action makes it impossible for the New
case except TO appoint delegates the General
Assembly to tell why they voted as they did
The statement then reviews the history OF the
controversy. It asserts that DR.. Birch has been
upheld from the first in his charges. and that
it was only on the final actions Of the Presby-
terry that there developed material difference
of opinion. The Pittsbuig Presbytery sent over
lures to the Assembly Of 1898. stating sub
stantially the errors brought 10 view by Dr..
Birch's charges. The Assembly acknowledged
the errors and counselled DR.. McGinert, II he
could not conform to the opinions and counsels
of the Presbyterian Church, 10 withdraw from
it's membership. This decision was reached By
nearly a unanimous vote. In reply DR.. Nc
Giffert said that the 1898 Assembly had misap-
pretended his views as expressed in his book.
The Assembly of 1899 gave him credit for
sincerity. but stated that his opinions justified
the interpretations put upon them Then the
Assembly laid down the four fundamental doc
trines and fixed the course to be taken by the
Presbytery. The committee appointed in June
to look IN the case in the fall brought in a re-
port in harmony with DR.. Btrch's charges
DR.. Johnsons paper and DR.. Van Dykes pa
per acknowledged the errors. Then Drs- Van
Dyke and Johnson combined their papers, and
the resulting document adopted
Dr. Howard Asnew Johnston. who at the
February session Of the Presbytery counselled
sentler action than trial for heresy. was seen
last evening by a Tribune reporter. He was
greatly interested in the account of Dr. Birch's
action. and gave the reasons for the Pres
bytery's course.
These questions he said, that are just now
causing so much trouble are simply matters OF
scholarship We believe many Of these opinions
are exaggerated and temporary Soon there
will be a reaction. We contend that in the case
of Dr. AIcGiffert we did take adequate action
We disavowed his views as those Of the Pres
byterian Church, and we admOnlsned NM his
book is now beyond his hands. as it was written
on contract We thought that If he should
hereafter keep 10 the teachings Of the Church
he should not be further dealt with II was
both from desire to save the Church from the
weakening effects Of a trial and to do DR.. Nc
Giffert justice that We voted We did. They
are advertising the teachings and the book a
thousand times more than we are II We shouIa
stop at admOnshiOn could have Dr. McCTir-
fert within the Presbyterian Church; II We
should have to hold a trial probably should
have to suspend him. -
Look at the case of Henry Preserved smith.
1 believe admOnishing him would have been
enough. He was suspended, however, and IS
now a Congregational clergyman Then there IS
DR. Briggs an Episcopal minister of good stand
ing. The Bishop took up his case, and acted as
our Presbytery did. vet nothing was done Now.
isn't the Presbyterian Church big enough and
charitable enough TO hold ministers like these?
1 think il ought TO be"
This move by DR.. Birch will settle the ques-
ton for there can be no appeal from the Gen
eraI Assembly. When the New-York Presoy-
terry meets, on March - IL will be officially in
formed of the appeal. and then the appeal VIII
be sent to the Rev. DR. W. II. Roberts, Of Phila-
delphia Stated Clerk Of the General Assembly
DR.. Birch might have appealed to the synod.
but as final action would not be taken IN that
case until 1901 he decided TO take the case Up
to the court of last resort at once