The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-11-21

According TO the prosecution it was not
the doctrines OF the Church. that were
under trial, but the orthodoxy of DR..
CRAPsEY. That can hardly be accepted
as a correct statement OF the issue.
What was under trial was the legitimacy
Of tho Interpretation put by DR.. CRAPsEY
on certain doctrines set forth in the
Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed.
Open to some objection, also, was the
position taken by the defence, namely,
that DIR. CRAPsEY's contract with the
Protestant Episcopal Church permitted
him to teach the truth as he found it in
the Scriptures, ever where his construc-
ton was at variance with the literally
interpreted creeds Of the Church.
The real question appears TO be
whether or not a particular interpreta-
ton Of the Scriptures does or does not
strike at the root Of Christianity. The
central idea OF Christianity is the recon-
citation Of Con and man through the
person and work Of CHRIST. To this
central conception these four factors
are essential: GOD; man unable to ap-
proach GoD until reconciliation has been
made; CHRIST the Mediator, who recon-
Giles; and finally, His people, brought
again into communion with COP. Prot
estant theology has usually recognized
four kinds Of heresy corresponding to
the four fundamental ideas on which
Christian doctrine rests. II is plain,
indeed, that the nature and character of
IAn onl AF He ralaNsan ca NkA s,nsx.-raA
and to nan may be so misread a. to make
reconciliation an impossible thing; so
misread, also, may be the nature of
CHRIST, the nature Of man and the
nature of the results Of CHRIsT's work
among men.
1t is the second kind Of heresy whereof
DR.. CBAPsEY has been pronounced guilty.
By his Interpretation OF the Scriptures
he has so described the Saviour az to
imply that there is no solidarity between
Him and COP. This was the Ebionite
heresy, the antithesis OF the Docetist,
which asserted that there was no soil
darity between the Saviour and man.
The Ebionite heresy was coeval with the
dawn Of Christianity, when many jew
ish converts persisted in regarding the
Saviour as simply the last of the pro-
phets, and may be said to be maintained
to-day not only by Jews and Mohamme-
dams but by the Unitarians. Unques-
damental conception Of Christianity as
that was defined by the Council Of Nice
and by other authoritative councils-a
definition which has since been upheld
not only by the Orthodox Greek Church
and the Roman Catholic Church but also
by the Protestant Episcopal Church.
Here it is that the Crapsey case differs
from several cases of heresy which have
been tried in England, as, for example,
the Essays and Reviews" cases and the
case of NOBLE rs. VoYsEY. In the Essays
and Reviews" cases it was held by the
judicial committee OF the Privy Council,
the highest Court Of Appeal in the Church
of England, to be not penal for a clergy
man to speak of merit by transfer as a
fiction" or to express a hope Of the
ultimate pardon of the wicked. In the
case of NOBLE rs. VoYsEY the committee
declined to admit that it was bound TO
affix a definite, authoritative meaning
to articles Of really dubious import, but
at the same time it declared that any
manifest contradiction of the articles Of
faith or any obvious evasion of them
would subject the offender to the pen
alties of deprivation. Under this de-
cision there seems to be no doubt that
DR.. CBAPsET would have been convicted
OF heresy and sentenced to deprivation
In England, as he has been here.
We believe, however, that we express
the conviction Of all fair minded men in
the community when We say that DR..
CRAPsEY deserves respect and esteem
for confronting the penalty Of depriva-
ton by avowing boldly that his study
OF the Scriptures had brought him TO a
conviction which, a he himself must
recognize, is radically incompatible with
the fundamental conception Of Chris
tianity. He might have kept his opin-
ions to himself, as it is to be feared that
many of his clerical brethren do on both
the United States is concerned, they are
authorized 20 do so by the pastoral letter
sent out by the House Of Bishops in
October, 1904. in which clergymen were
told that if they found that they had
lost their hold upon the fundamental
v~erities they should be silent or with
draw. DIR. CRAPsEY's published COM
ment was that the silence which would
satisfy the Bishops would not satisfy the
conscience of an honest man. He has
lived up TO that declaration. He leaves
the pulpit with honor. Guilty Of the
Ebionite heresy he may be, but he has
not been guilty of suppressing what he
believes to be the truth.
Where IL Is Always Afternoon.