The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-04-27

Episcopal Church, are they not?' asked Mr..
Perkins of the witness.
Mr.. 0'Brien objected, saying; They
may not be members Of good stand ing.
1T is true they may not be OF good stand.
Ing from the viewpoint OF the prosecution,
granted Mr.. Perkins.
The audience laughed. So did DR..
Crapsey. The witness said they had never
been under charges in the Episcopal Church.
Then came the question that evoked
the argument of the day; In your opinion
IS there anything contained in the. speoi-
f~ications in the presentment which Is con-
trary to the doctrine Of Christ as the Lord
hath commanded and as the Church hath
received the sameI'
conclusion On this point, Mr.. O'Brien said;
Il do not understand that the witness
is impersonating the ecumenical court
or the Protestant Episcopal Church. He
has no more right to characterize or inter-
pref the doctrine referred TO than q a
Episcopal Church is an organization which
has a constitution and bylaws and order
Of baptism and Of confirmation. II every
clergyman of good standing in the Church
Of England and the Church OF America
should testify that nothing in DR.. Crapsey's
utterances is contrary TO the doctrines
OF the Church it would have absolutely
no weight. The Church is taken as a church,
not as an individual. Its laws and doctrines,
duly adopted, speak for themselves, and
for any individual or set Of individuals
to decide that the law is not what it says
It Is Is a manifest absurdity and the height
of impertinence.
The Apostles and Nicene creeds as we
have them were written in the most 40
curate of all languages and were expressly
framed for the purpose OF avoiding mis-.
conception. Their language Is simple and
their meaning nlpin To allDw one mans
views to change their meaning would, as
my associate counsel, Mr.. Locke, has just
suggested, be like entering q plea for q
man arrested for theft that the Elan bad
cause some one held that what reads to
be the law is not the law
In reply, Mr.. Perkins said that DR.. Crapsev
was accused OF preaching contrary to the
doctrine -as accepted by the Church
who is the Church?' he asked n an
are the Church, Men differ in thought,
and yet are within the liberties Of the
Church.
Suppose we say hat when we die that's
the last Of US. The prayer book speaks
OF the resurrection Of the body. IL is plain
the body Is the frame in which we are
And yet are there any of us, in this en-
lightened age, who believe that the actual
frame is raised from the grave? No, we
place a spiritual Interpretation upon the
words of the prayer book, and we feel we
are within the liberties of the Church.
w simply desire to show by this witness
and others what is their view Of DR.. Crap
seys utterances; not to say whether or not
they are right but TO show whether they are
within the range of the C~hurch-andI thank
Goo that its range is big
The Hon. John H. Stiness, late Chief
Justice Of the Supreme Court Of Rhode
Island, OF counsel for the prosecution,
accused Mr.. Perkins Of trying to distract
the courts attention from the real issue.
There are just two questions for the
court to decide" he said. First whether
DIR. Crapsey uttered those words attributed
to him in the presentment. And he had
admitted in his answer that he did Second.
whether those statements amount to a vio-
lation of the doctrine of Christ as this
Church has received it. The question is
not whether or not that doctrine is true.
1t would be an insult to the intelligence Of
this court to say that a denial of the Apostles
Creed or any part of it Is not a denlal of
that doctrine. The doctrine is the first
condition Of the faith in baptism, in con-
of the Church. Tn Apostles Creed isn the
foundation of the Church, and a denial Of
any branch Of it j~ustiies conviction upon
the charge.
When DR., Crapsey says that Christ was
born As we are born there can be no mis-
understanding of what he means. That
is a denial of the conception by the Holy
Ghost and Of the virgin birth. In the
Nacqueary case the Court did not de-
termine whether or not the doctrines which
he denied were right, but whether the utter
ances were contrary to those doctrines.
IL courts could determine questions Of doc
trine il is easy to see how there might be one
doctrine in the State of New York, another
in the State OF Ohio, another in Pennsyl-
vania, and so on. Where then would be the
~ - a.
of unity, anarchy instead of order. The
Courts duty is very plain
Attorney Shepard Of DR.. Crapsey's
counse made a boomerang OF one OF Judge
Stiness's remarks. He said;
THE Judge has alluded to the fact that
OF the Creed which says: L believe in the
Holy Catholic Church True enough, and
both interpretations are permitted within
the liberties Of the Church. The wording was
literally true in the sixth century, when it
was adopted. But this il "a later day, and
we all give to the Greed that Interpretation
which is based on the Scriptures as we UNDER
stand them, We do not take the literal
meaning Of the Greed. II we did we would
be- acknowledging faith in the Catholic
Church controlled by the Pope.
so with the doctrine of the resurrection,
the doctrine of the virgin birth. We are
within the liberty of the Church, we contend.
II we give to these doctrines the same con-
scientious interpretations which we put
upon the declaration as to our faith in the
Holy Catholic Church. If we are permitted
either of the two interpretations put on the
latter, why should We be restricted in our
construction of the former? Is one part of
the creed more sacred thar another2"
Judge Stiness replied: -Tole ration OF
error within the Church does not establish
that error as accepted truth"
The Court concluded TO ponder the matter
at dinner, afterward giving lis ruling to ex-
olude the expert theologian conclusions. as
stated.
1t is rumored here tonight that in sum
ming up the Crapsey case Tomorrow the
defence will claim hat the standing COM
mittee and Bishop Walker have laid them
selves open to a charge of heresy by the
wording Of the first part Of the ~presentment
against DR.. Crapsey, which the committee
drew and the Bishop approved, The word
ing referred to speaks of Jesus Christ as
God, the Saviour Of the world" This,
Il il said, il a basis for charge Of the heresy
of tritheism, or three separate Gods.