Evening journal., 1912-03-16
METHODISTS IN DEBATE
OVER HERESY QUESTION
Ufferances in The Sunday School Journal Attacked
in Sweeping Resolution and Editor Mcfarland
Declares He Would Rather Lose His Hand
Than Refacf What He Has Said.

is not going to get mad said DR..
Mcfarland. 81 am dealing, ] assume
with honest men, and will you assume
that you are dealing with an honest
man..
Dr.. Mcfarland referred to state
ments printed about the book of
Daniel, and said he accepted the
canonical authority Of that book. Il
have neve- doubted that it was the
spirit of God that ispired it, he said.
You misunderstood us when you
think for one moment we are ruling
God out OF the book of Daniel. Don't
charge me with any disposition 10
rule the supernatural out OF the
Bible.
You arc proposing to taboo me
in adopting that kind of a resolution
and to charge and convict me Of
strange doctrine out of harmony with
Methodism VIII the brother tell me
when Methodism passed upon the
date and authorship of any book Of
the Bible? Methodism doesn't require
YOU to believe and me to believe that
the Apostle John was the author Of
the fourth epistle, yet believe he
was. What we are called c. 70 be-
lieve is that the Bible is an inspired
book. that it contains the substance
of faith, and that / believe as firmly
as any Of You.
"The view of the book Of Daniel as
printed in our Journal is the view
taught and that has been taught for
many years i'm our theological semi
naries,' said DR.. Mcfarland He read
letter from Professor Longacre Of
n hnu Sc
statement He also read letters from
Professor NeudstOn. Of Boston School
Of Theology. and Professr Robert w.
Rogers of Drew Seminary. endorsing
the views set forth in the Sunday
School Journal as tho modern view Of
specialists who have made a study Of
Scriptural history
"Yet you come here today proposing
to write me down as a heretic.' ex-
claimed Or. Mcfarland. Before you
take up this undertaking of crushing
| your Sunday School editor. ! think
/ you ought to take proceedings that
would be widespread and take in your
seminaries and your bishops
Resent "MOb Taik.r
This is not thing to be settled by
a vote that of necessity must have
]
The Rev DIV S. Collins interrupted
II beg your pardon. Does Dr. McFar
lond mean 10 say that the Whining
ton Conference is OF the nature of
mob?' he asked
II withdraw it," explained DR.. Nc
Farland. Il meant that such proceed
ings contain an element Of mob pro
cedure. and did not mean any renec
! fiOn unDn vpfrr f'onfqrnpro
He went on to say that he is a mem
bcr Of the Iowa Conference. and al
such could be brought to account fo
any so-called heresy charged agains
him. DR. Collins again questioned th'
line of Dr McFarlands claim to ;
fair hearing. and Bishop Wilson rule,
that the correctness Of DR. McFar
lands line of statement might be ques
toned.
But 7 think he is not INTENTIONAL!
violating any of the proprieties." tn,
Bishop added we understand" sev
eral Of the ministers commented, AM
DR. Mcfarland continued saying H.
felt he was speaking as brothe
minister TO question of highest priv
, ilege.
, 81 hold now that every one who goe
. 'hi VI ihf iNlhSubH vi HNu HAuf
come back to it through. repentance
through new birth, but ! do believ
that it is possible for the small chill
to remain in the Kingdom. But tn
sad thing about it is that We hay
not been true to our primal fait
and many of the young people g,
away from US. What ! want to do
to save our boys and girls. TO recol
a nize that our responsibility begin
2 at the cradle.
t Behcs Conference.
o You may have your way If tn
= paper expresses it. you may sen
. your delegates to the General Cor
d ference instructed against my re-ele,
g ton. But this is a small thing.
b. would rather have my right hand cl
- off now than to retract one syllab
of the essence have been teaching.
oil Continued on Second Page.)