The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-04-28
THE CRAPSEY HERESY TRIAL..
PROSECUTION SAYS HE SHOULD
BE OUSTED FROM CHURCH.
DR.. Crapsey's Statement Read in Which He
Defines Ills Views Regarding the
Incarnation, the Holy Trinity, the
Virgin Birth and the Resurrection.

BATAVIA, n. Y. April 27.-Deep in the pro-
fundities of theology went the arguments
in the Crapsey heresy case to-day. The
prosecution tried to maintain its position
that the only question at issue is whether
DR.. Crapsey violated the doctrines of the
Church and his ordination vows, but the
nature of the defence was such that the
prosecution was worried to take a stand on
what it called the side issues-that is, the
questions Ringing on the conflicting inter-
pretations Of the doctrines which the de-
PENDANT is accused of denying, particularly
the doctrine of the Virgin birth and the
resurrection of the body, To that extent
the contention of the defence that this was a
trial of the Church, not Of DR.. Crapsey,
was borne out.
The summing up was not finished when
court adjourned. The audience, COM
posed of less than 200 clergymen and lay
men, members Of the laity, including
women, listened from morning till evening
to speeches by Attorney Franklin D. Locke
and the Rev. DIR. Frank J. Hill of the Western
T~heological Seminary for the prosecution,
and to Attorney James Breck Perkins,
the Rev. Elwood Worcester and the Rev.
Samuel McComb for the defence. They
have vet to hear the concluding argun ents
of Attorney Edward NJ, Shepard for the
defence, and Attorney John Lord O'Brian
for the prosecution, which are expected to
take up the greater part Of tomorrow.
The case will then rest with the five
clergymen composing the diocesan court.
II they find Dr. Crapsey guilty and sem
tence him to be deposed, as many have
~ g.. 49, ,,art hn unl la-o ,ha.
right of appeal to the Court Of Review e
the second department Of the Protestant
Episcopal Church. This department is one
of the eight covering the United States,
and embraces the dioceses within the States
of New York and New Jersey.
While the defendant has a right Of appeal,
there is some question whether he Court
Of Review will have jurisdiction over the
Crapsey case, as section 8 OF the canons
Of the general convention provides in part:
Until after the establishment Of an ultimate
court Of appeal (Which. as the defence
pointed out in its answer to the present.
ment, has not been established), no Court
OF Review shall determine any question of
doctrine. faith or worship"
Franklin D. Locke spent less than five
minutes opening the summing up, He
merely explained the attitude of the prose-
cution. In a word. he held that it was
intoIerable for DIR. Crapsey or any other
clergyman bound by the VOWS Of the
Church TO subject members Of the Church
to explanations of doctrines of his own
and that he ought to be ousted from the
Church.
Attorney Perkins devoted an hour and a
half to his speech, 1t was interesting
throughout. 1t embraced a statement
prepared by DR.. Crapsey himself, which
Mr.. Perkins said the defendant desired to
have laid before the court.
DR.. Crapsey's statement informed tho
Court that his "lscture-sermons." from
which the alleged heretical utterdnces are
taken, were designed not to start contro-
versy but simply to instruct and edify his
people at Sunday service. In making his
ordination VOWS he had, first Of all, pledged
himself to base his teachings On the Holy
Scriptures and teach nothing as necessary