New-York tribune., 1906-04-27
HERESY TRIALNEAR END
RECTOR'S BELIEF TOLD.
Sudden Close of Prosecutions Case
-Clergymans Testimony Ruled Out


ordination vows the evidence against him being a
oook of sermons printed his name and the
Loooh OF Common Prayer of the Episcopal Church
lhe prosecution abruptly ended its case to-day.
me defence endeavOred to present the testimony
OF a number of well known clergymen to whether
or not Dr. Crapsey's sayings constituted heresy
nu' the court ruled the testimony out on the ground
- no man could qualify expert In doctrine
~ gu On 'he iurtEer ground tha1 the witnesses were
calied TO express opinions on subjects which We're
Oeiore the court for decision. The lawyers for the
prosecution and defence will sum up tomorrow.
me widespread interest which is attracted 10 the
ulaI was attested to-day by the greatly increased
HLihce. me courthouse crowded. A
per OF well known Episcopal clergyrnen came to
bataVia from points far distant as Boston, New
10TH thcago and Cincinanti. There were also a
nuihoer OF women present, including DIR. Crapsey's
daughter
me most interesting incident of the day was an
exchange between Judge Stiness for the prosecu-
SioH' ana Edward NJ Shepard. the defence. This
-ono"ed the placing on the stand Of the Rev. Jo-
Ph alexander Leighton, chaplain and professor
OF philosophy I'm Hobart College the first wit
ness called by the defence. After Mr.. Leighton had
read the fun text Of the presentment against Dr.
Crapsey Mr. Perkins said to him:
IN your opinion. is there anything contained in
me speclncauons which is contrary to the doc
trines OF Christ as the Lord had commanded and
as THIS Church had received the same?'
o'BRIAN AND PERKINS TILT
I object" emphatically announced Mr. OBrian
OF the prosecution. Il do not understand that the
witness is impersonating the doctrine of the Prot
estant Episcopal Church. He has no more right to
Characterize and interpret the doctrine of this
Church than man never heard Of because the
Church Is an organization. with its constitution
bylaws. The Church speaks a Church This is
a question of law and not of fact Such testimony
as this is manifest absurdity."
1t is charged" replied Mr. Perkins "that DR.
Crapsey has violated his as a clergyman in
mat ne has advanced statements contrary to the
doctrines OF Christ What this Church II the ar
gument of the prosecution is correct? Who is the
Church but the laity and the clergy? We are the
Church Suppose somebody. my friend says
held TO some doctrine contrary TO his interpreta-
ton and the whole Church was this man He would
have the whole Church hereto. except the stand
ing committee
This is an important question:" Mr.. Perkins con-
unued; 1T goes 10 the essence OF the whole mat
ter. We want to show what people think, not
necessarily what is right and wrong"
AT this point Judge Stiness ex-Chief Justice of
the Supreme Court of Rhode Island spoke for the
first time.
MY associate" he said ''has requested me to
define this to the court. I do This court has
10 determine two things First whether DR.. Crap
sey made the statements cited in the presentment.
There is no proof necessary. because this is ad-
mitted by the defence; second, whether those
statements amount TO violation of the doctrines
or Christ. 1t is not question whether that doc
trine is true The great question is. Are these
doctrines of the church,"
Il assure my friend" said Mr.. Perkins in reply,
that he has not lost the OF the advocate. The
matter Of the Greed has been brought into this
discussion. The respondent says his Greed with
as firm a belief the counsel for the prosecu-
tion Everybody believes the Creed. But we exer-
else the right TO give creeds what Interpretation.
according 10 the Scriptures. choose. 1t is not
the literal meaning we beleve it is our own IN
depreciation
THE CREED FAITHS FOUNDATION.
For instance take the statement as to the
resurrection OF the body. That can literally
but thing Every Sunday declare that TO
be our faith, only because give 1t a consistent
Interpretation. We do not deny the statements
quoted; we deny the innuendo. We our Greed
as sincerely and. we hope. pleasing to God. as
any, other man"
federation of error rejoined Judge Stiness.
does not establish it the accepted truth
Mr.. OBrien realizing the crisis in the case.
spoke at length. eloquently reviewing the points
in question
''As Mr.. Perkins said' he concluded this is
the great question in the case beg the court to
Judge Stiness, during his argument, mentioned
the doctrine Of the Holy Catholic Church as CON
taken mean the entire Church OF Christ or just
the Protestant Episcopal Church -, .-,.. -.
on this point and presented the argument Of de-
..I think" Mr.. Shepard said. that Judge stiness
hit his controversy at the centre or heart when
IN the creed that we believe in the Holy Catholic
Church Judge Stiness says that there are two in
may hold He did not deny that each different
Pope Of Rome Here is one item to which he con-
cedes there two interpretations How. ask,
Is the doctrine Of the virgin birth more sacred
than that Of the Holy Catholic Church; there
be two Interpretations to one part of the creed
'The real question is this" Mr. Shepard con-
vows devotes Himself to the study of Holy Script
ure and IS driven to the conclusion that the creed
preach that is il not? That is the Whole Dues
ton Gentlemen Of the court. believe in the
creed we, place our case and our argument as
much on the creed as the prosecution does
row will be made by John Lord OBrian. franklin
D. Locke, lawyer Of Buffalo, and the Rev Fran
Chicago. The following will up for the de-
fence, Congressman Perkins. Edward NJ, Shepard
manuel Episcopal Church, Boston.
CRAPSEY DENIES VIRGIN BIRTH.
Dr. Crapsey's position the matter OF the inn
maculate conception enunciated by his counsel to-
day. is follows; He says that he denies the vr-
gin birth. but he does not deny the immaculate
conception The birth of Jesus he says was I'M
maculate- Jesus, however, he believes, was the
son OF Joseph. He naturally born. although
exception to the doctrine that Jesus Christ the
Congressman Perkins said this afternoon that in
case the finding of the court was against DR..
Review. which is an ecclesiastical court in con
sant operation for the appeal Of any and all Church
combdssd nsd of the Right Rev Dr. sarhorough
Bjsbon os New JerseS the Rev Dr. HnnTington'
rector of Grace Church. New York: the Rev DR..
Baker Of Newark the Rev. DR.. Alsopp. of Brook
lyn: Marcus T. Hun, an attorney. of Albany; JUS
tce Andrews. or me state supreme Court. Syra-
SAYS u. S. LOST $50 200, 400.