Atlanta tri-weekly journal. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1920-19??, 1923-11-01

Bishop Lawrence seems to think a creed
concerning the nature of the Redeemer is a
matter Of secondary Importance; but the
creed which he holds concerning the apos-
tolic succession causes him to deny ministe-
rial authority to the preachers of the largest
and most evangelical churches in the United
States. Why does he fracture Christian
unity by asserting so strongly that creed and
then plead for liberalstic belief about the
person of Christ? Is his faith in the doctrine
of apostolic succession more important thaA
BELIEF in the virgin birth of Lord? Ii
the former is so necessary why is the latter
so nOn-eSSential?
Moreover, Bishop Lawrence could not have
been confirmed as a communicate of the
Protestant Episcopal church. nor admitted
into any order of it's ministry, without affirm
ing his steadfast belief of the historic creed
in which the Virgin Birth of Christ holds a
conspicuous place. Did he affirm that faith
feignedly after the manner which he now
suggests others may do honestly and inno-
Gently? If so, his faith was most truly IAN
adventure" and not a very creditable adven-
ture at that.
To deny the Virgin Birth is to declare that
accounts of the nativity found in the Gospels
of st. Matthew and St. Luke are false Does
that make no difference?
Such denial repudates the plain meaning
and implications of other Scriptures. Does
that make no difference?
Such a denial casts doubt upon the fact
of the eternal pre-eXistence of our divine
Lord, and takes all the force and meaning
out of such Scriptures as this: Let this
mind be in you, which was also in Christ
Jesus, who being in the form grasped not at
equality with God as for a prize, but made
Himself Of no reputation, and took upon Him
the form of a servant and was made in the
likeness of men; and being found in fashion
as a man, he humbled Himself, and became
obedient unto death, even the death of the
cross" philippians 1859 Does that
make no difference?
To deny the Virgin Birth takes away the
strongest motive to Christian benevolence;
for did not the great Apostle to the Gentiles
exhort the Corinthian Christians to liberality
by the example of the pre-existent Christ
mpoverishing Himself in the days of His
flesh? Did He not say to them, For We
know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ,
that, though He was rich, yet for your sakes
He became poor, that ye through His poverty
might be rich?" (II Corinthians vii:9.)
Why should Bishop Lawrence affirm that
the church of all ages has incorporated into
its creed worse than non-essential article
an article which puts a needless and injuri-
Gus strain on faith? Is he wiser than all the
learned fathers of the church and than the
overwhelming majority of all the faithful
now on earth? If he thinks so, sober minded
men will not feel inclined to follow him.
Notwithstanding his emphatic profession of
conservatism. Wherein does he reveal con-
servatism?
The doctrine of the Virgin Birth is not nom
essential. 1t is most essential to the integ-
rity and vitality of Christian faith and life
That eminent Scotch theologian the late DR.
James Orr, of Glasgow, we'll says: THE
article of the Virgin Birth is not, doctrinaIly
Indifferent, nor can it be legitimately dropped
from the public creed of the church. The
rejection of this article would, in my judg-
ment, be 4 mutiIation of Scripture, CONTRA
diction of the continuous testimony of the
church from apostolic times, a weakening of
the doctrine of the Incarnation, and prac-
teal surrender of the Christian position into
the hands of the advocates of a non-miracu-
lous, purely humanitarian Christ-all on in
sufficient grounds"
This is the wretched surrender which
Bishop Lawrence seems to wish should be
made And he pleads for such surrender
in the name of 1.-The younger generation"
Well he does not truly represent large
majority of "the younger generation" There
are many callow youths who wear doubts as
watch charms, but they are a small minority
of all the educated young men of today
They are more noisy than numerous, and
their noisy nonsense seems to have fright
ened Bishop Lawrence.
But if they were as numerous as he mag
ines, there is no occasion for surrendering
to their liberalistic folly. Of writers who
speak as does Bishop Lawrence, Bishop Eli
colt said most pertinently and forcibly,
They avow themselves to be under the con-
victiOn that the attempt must be made to put
the Catholic Faith into its right relation to
modern intellectual and moral problems;
and they distinctly tell US that If the true
meaning of this faith is to be made conspic-
nous it must be dsencumbered reinterpret-
ed and explained. The ayowal is singular
and igniticant-singular as it would have
seemed more natural to attempt to put these
intellectual and moral problems into their
proper relations to the Catholic Faith than
conversely; and significant as showing the
direction and bias OF the minds Of these
writer's"
For one, prefer to disagree with Bishop
Lawrence and to agree with Bishop Ellicott
in what he says about the universal or Cath
Ollie faith. He was far more learned than is
Bishop Lawrence, and far more stable in
his faith.
1t is not the Christian faith that needs
operating on in order to make it small
enough for "an intellectual" to swallow; but
rather it is the mind of "the intellectual"
which needs to be expended and clarified.
1t is the office of men of apostolic mind
and faith to least down imaginations Otter
ally "reasonings'D and every high thing that
exalteth itself against the knowledge of God,
and bring into captivity every thought to the
obedience of Christ" (II Corinthians x:5)