''•y-m .. i SOME OF DR. CHARLES A, BRIGGS' VIEWS, PUBLISHED SINCE HIS SUSPENSION BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. SOME OF DR. CHARLES A. BRIGGS' VIEWS, PUBLISHED SINCE HIS SUSPENSION BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. SOME OF DR. CHARLES A. BRIGGS' VIEWS, PUBLISHED SINCE HIS SUSPENSION BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. The followiug comj^arison of the erroneous views advanced by Dr. Charles A. Briggs in his Inaugural Address, for which, on Charges and Specifications regularly made and sustained, he was suspended from the Gospel Ministry by the General Assembl}^ of 1893, with utterances which he has made since then, clearly shows not onh' that he has re- affirmed those erroneous views, but that he is actively engaged in propagating them, and that he has, in some resj^ects, dejjarted still further from orthodox positions. In the column on the left will be found some of the Charges and Specifications, together with the extracts from the Inaugural Address on which they were based, and on the ground of which he was con- demned. The right-hand column contains extracts : (1) From an address on *' The Truthfulness of Hoi}- Scripture," which Dr. Briggs delivered in the City of Chicago, September, 1893, at the World's Parliament of Religions, and which is published in a book which bears the name of The World's Parliament of Religions ; (2) From an article published over his name in The Forum for November, 1898, on "The Alienation of Church and Peoj^le''; (3) From another article published by him in The North American Review, for January, 1894, on " The Sun- day School and Modern Criticism." PKESBYTEKY OF NEW YORK. In The Forum, November, 1893, ON ^ ^ ■ , PAGE 367, Dr. Briggs says : The Presbyterian Church in the United States of America "Therefore, those who have been AGAINST trained in the thought of the age, the The Rev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D. whole class of learned men, are out of sympathy with the denominations. amended charges and specifica- jj^)^ can a man of science have any tions ' '_ patience with the doctrine of cn^ation Charge I. and the theory of miracles and proph- The Presbyterian Church in the ecy which are commonly taugiit in United States of America charges the theological schools, and from Chris- Rev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., being a tian pulpits ? How can a man who Minister of the said Church and a has been trained in modern psychol- member of the Presbytery of New ogy, metaphysics and ethics fail to York, with teaching that the Reason be repelled by the crude philosophy is a fountain of divine aiithprity which may and does savingly enlighten men, even such men as reject the Scriptures as the authoritative proclamation of the will of God and reject also the way of salvation through the mediation and sacrifice of the Son of God as revealed therein ; which is contrary to the es- sential doctrine of the Holy Scripture and of the Standards of the said Church, that the Holy Scripture is most necessary, and the rule of faith and practice. SPECIFICATION I. In an Inaugural Address, which the said Rev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., delivered at the Union Theological Seminary in the City of New York, January 20th, 1891, on the occasion of his induction into the Edward Robin- son Chair of Biblical Theology, which Address has been published and ex- tensively circulated with the knowl- edge and approval of the said Rev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., and has been republished by him in a second edition with a preface and an appendix, there occur the following sentences : Page 21, lines 7-10 and 31-33 : " Divine authority is the only author- ity to which man can yield implicit obedience, on which he can rest in loving certaintj^ and build with joyous confidence. * * * There are histor- ically three great fountains of divine authority — the Bible, the Church, and the Reason." Page 27, lines 9 to 21 : "Martineau could not find divine authority in the Church or the Bible, but he did find God enthroned in his own soul. There are those who would refuse these rationalists a place in the company of the faithful. But thej^ forget that the essential thing is to find God and divine certainty, and if these men have found God without the mediation of Church and Bible, that underlies the dogmas of systems of theology which are regarded as the standards of orthodoxy ? How can such a man look with complacency upon the battle over the doctrine of original sin between creationism and traducianism, or the discussion of the freedom of the will ? How can he en- gage to dishonor the reason, to divest himself of his conscience, or to assent to the unethical dogma of immediate sanctification, whether in this life or in any other life ? How can the man who has been trained in modern his- torical investigation accept the tradi- tional denominational history, with so many spurious claims that will not bear the strain of historical criticism?" Church and Bible are means and not ends; they are avenues to God, but are not God. We regret that these rationalists depreciate the means of grace so essential to most of us, but we are warned lest we commit a sim- ilar error, and depreciate the reason and the Christian consciousness." Inaugural Address, Appendix, Sec- ond Edition, pages 88, 89 : *' (c.) Unless God's authority is dis- cerned in the forms of the Keason, there is no ground upon which any of the heathen could ever have been saved, for they know nothing of Bible or Church. If tliej' are not savingly enlightened by the Light of the World in the forms of the lleason the whole heathen world is lost forever." SPECIFICATION II. In an Inaugural Address, which the said Eev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., delivered at the Union Theological Seminary in the City of New York, January 20th, 1891, on the occasion of his induction into the Edward Eobin- son Chair of Biblical Theology, which Address has been published and exten- sively circulated with the knowledge and approval of the said Rev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., and has been repub- lished by him in a second edition with a preface and an appendix, there occur the following sentences : Page 28, lines 1 to 22 : "(3.) The Authority of Holy Scrip- ture. — We have examined the Church and the Reason as seats of divine authority in an introduction to our theme, the Authority of the Scriptures, because they open our eyes to see mistakes that are common to the three departments. Protestant Christianity builds its faith and life on the divine authority contained in the Scriptures, and too often depreciates the Church and the Reason. Spurgeon is an ex- ample of the average modern Evangel- ical, who holds the Protestant posi- tion, and assails the Church and Rea- son in the interest of the authority of Scripture. But the average opinion of the Christian world would not as- sign him a higher place in the kingdom of God than Martineau or Newman. May we not conclude, on the whole, that these three representative Chris- tians of our time, living in or near the world's metropolis, have, each in his way, found God and rested on divine authority ? May we not learn from them not to depreciate any of the means wherebj^ God makes himself known to men ? Men are influenced bj' their temperaments and environ- ments which of the three ways of access to God they may pursue." Charge II. The Presbyterian Church in the United States of America charges the Eev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., being a Minister of the said Church and a member of the Presbytery of New York, with teaching that the Church is a fountain of divine authority which, apart from the Holy Scripture, may and does savingly enlighten men ; which is contrary to the essential doctrine of the Holy Scripture and of the Standards of the said Church, that the Holy Scripture is most necessary and the rule of faith and practice. SPECIFICATION I. In an Inaugural Address, which the said Rev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., delivered at the Union Theological Seminary in the City of New York, Januai-y 20th, 1891, on the occasion of his induction into the Edward Robin- son Chair of Biblical Theology, which Address has been published and ex- tensively circulated with the knowl- edge and approval of the said Rev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., and has been In The Forum for November, 1893, ON PAGE 370, Dr. Briggs says: ♦' As a sign of the times, the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America in this year 1893, declared it to be heterodox to say that the Church is a great foun- tain of divine authority, and virtually assumed the position that the Presby- terian Church is nothing more than a voluntary society, a religious club, in which the supreme obligation is in the contract assumed by the vow of subscription at ordination." repubiisheil by him in a seeoiul edilioii with a preface and an appendix, tiiere occur the following sentences : Page 25, lines 1 to 14, inchisive : ♦' (1 .) The Authority of the Church.— The majority of Christians from tlie apostolic age have found God through the Church. Martyrs and Saints, Fathers and Schoolmen, the profound- est intellects, the saintliest lives, have had this experience. Institutional Christianity has been to them the presence-chamber of God. Thoy have therein and thereby entered into com- munion w4th all saints. It is difficult for many Protestants to regard this experience as any other than pious illusion and delusion. But what shall we say of a modern like Newman, who could not reach certainty, striving never so hard, through the Bible or the Keason, but who did find divine authority in the institutions of the Church?" The first and last citations from the Inaugural under Charge I., given above, were repeated under this Charge. Chakge III. The Presbyterian Church in the United States of America charges the Eev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., being a Minister of the said Church and a member of the Presbytery of New York, with teaching tliat errors maj- have existed in tlie original text of the Holy Scripture, as it came from its authors, which is contrar3^ to the essential doctrine taught in the Holy Scripture and in the Standards of the said Church, that the Holy Scripture is the Word of God written, immedi- ately inspired, and the rule of faith and practice. specification: In an Inaugural Address, which the said Rev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., At the Woklds Parliament of Re- ligions, Dr. Briggs said : "The question thus forces itself upon us, can we maintain the truth- fulness of these Holy Scriptures in the face of all these modern sciences V We are obliged to admit that there are scientific errors in the Bible, errors of astronomy, of geology, of zoology, of botany, and of anthropology. In all these respects there is no evidence that the authors of these sacred writ- ings had any other knowledge than that possessed by their contempo- raries."— p. 652. "There are historical mistakes in the Christian Scriptures, mistakes of chronology and geography, errors of historical events and i)orsons, discrep- 8 delivered at the Union Tlieological Seminary in tlie City of New Yorlc, January 20th, 1891, on tlie occasion of his induction into the Edward Robin- son Chair of Biblical Theology, which Address has been published and ex- tensively circulated with the knowl- edge and approval of the said Eev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., and has been republished by him in a second edition with a preface and an appendix, there occur the following sentences, be- ginning with line 4 of page 85 : "I shall venture to affirm that, so far as I can see, there are errors in the Scriptures that no one has been able to explain away ; and the theory that they were not in the original text is sheer assumption, upon which no mind can rest with certainty. If such errors destroy the authority of the Bible, it is already destroyed for his- torians. Men cannot shut their eyes to truth and fact. But on what authority do these theologians drive men from the Bible by this theory of inerrancy? The Bible itself nowhere makes this claim. The creeds of the Church nowhere sanction it. It is a ghost of modern evangelicalism to frighten children. The Bible has maintained its authority with the best scholars of our time, who with open minds have been willing to recognize any error that might be pointed out by Historical Criticism ; for these errors are all in the circumstantials and not in the essentials ; they are in the human setting, not in the precious jewel itself; they are found in that section of the Bible that theologians commonly account for from the provi- dential superintendence of the mind of the author, as distinguished from divine revelation itself. It may be tliatthis providential superintendence gives infallible guidance in every par- ticular; and it may be that it differs but little, if at all, from the providen- tial superintendence of the fathers and ancles and inconsistencies in the historians, which cannot be removed by any proper method of interpreta- tion. All such errors are just where you would expect to find them in ac- curate, truthful writers in ancient times. They used with fidelity the best sources of information accessible to them ; ancient poems, popular tra- ditions, legends and ballads, regal and family archives, codes of law and ancient narratives. There is no evi- dence that they received any of this history bj'' revelation from God. There is no evidence that the Divine Spirit corrected their narratives, either when they were lying uncomposed in their minds or written in manu- scripts." — p. 652. "God spake in much the greater part of the Old Testament through the voices and pens of the human authors of the Scriptures. Did the human voice and pen, in all the numerous writers and editors of Holy Scripture, prior to the completion of the Canon, always deliver an inerrant word ? Even if all th§ writers were so pos- sessed of the Holy Spirit as to be merely passive in his hands, the ques- tion arises : Can the finite voice and the finite pen deliver and express the inerrant truth of God ? If the lan- guage, and the style, and the dialect, and the rhetoric are all natural to the inspired man, is it possible for these to express the infinite truth of God ? How can an imperfect word, sentence and clause express a perfect divine truth ? It is evident that the writers of the Bible were not, as a rule, in the ecstatic state. The Holy Spirit did not move their hands or their lips. He suggested to their minds and hearts the divine truth they were to teach. They received it by intuition in the forms of their reason ; they framed it in conception'^ in imagina- tion and in fancy. They delivered it in the logical and rhetorical forms of schoolmen and theologians of the Christian Church. It is not important for our purpose that we should decide this question. If we should abandon the whole field of providential superin- tendence so far as inspiration and divine authority are concerned and limit divine inspiration and authority to the essential contents of the Bible, to its religion, faith, and morals, we would still have ample room to seek divine authority where alone it is essential, or even important, in the teaching that guides our devotions, our thinlcing, and our conduct." speech. If the divine truth passed through the conception and imagina- tion of the human mind, did the hu- nuin mind conceive it fully, without any defect, without any fault, without any shading of error ? Had the hu- man conception no limitations to its reception of the divine truth V Had the human imagination and fancy no colors to impart to the holy instruc- tion ? Did the human mind add noth- ing to it in reasoning or in fancy ? Was it delivered in its entirety exactly as it was received ?" "If the human medium could liardly fail to modify the divine truth received by it in revelation, how much more must the human medium inlluence the divine instruction in connection with Biblical history, lyric poetry, senten- ces of wisdom, and works of the imag- ination which make up the body of the Old Testament ? Here the mass of the material Avas derived from human sources of information ; the history depended upon oral and documentary evidence ; the lyric poetry was the ex- pression of human emotion; the sen- tence of wisdom was the condensation of human ethical experience ; the w^orks of the imagination wore efforts to clothe religious lessons in artistic forms of grace and beauty. All we can claim for the Divine Spirit in the production of these parts of the Old Testament is an inspiration which sug- gests the religious lessons to be im- parted." — pp. G54, G55. In !Z7ie North American Review, Jan- uary, 1894, Dr. BRiGciS says : "The question will often be asked in the Sunday Schools whether the eailier chapters of Genesis are real historical narratives or whether they contain historic facts embellished by legend, myth or tradition; whether the poetic imagination is chiefly re- sponsible for tlie story of creation and paradiso, and of tin* antediluvians and 10 patriarchs, endeavoring to teach the most important lessons of the origin of the world of man, and of sin, in beautiful pictures which are easily un- derstood." — p. 70. "If these stories are regarded as works of the imagination, poetic in structure and poetic in conception ; if the days are simply the frame-work to set forth the general orderliness and progressiveness of the creation ; the seventh day the appended conception of a later prose writer using the poem of the creation as the basis for the Sabbath of the priestly law; if the story of the serpent and the tree are poetical pictures of that mysterious event, the first entrance of sin into the world, then the great spiritual lessons of the creation and the original sin of man stand out in attractive beauty and power and bear witness to their own credibility. It is really im- material to these lessons how far the poetical embellishment of the stories may extend or how far it may be in accord with the actual facts of the case." — p. 71. Charge V. The Presbyterian Church in the United States of America charges the Eev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., being a Minister of the said Church and a member of the Presbytery of New York, with teaching that Moses is not the author of the Pentateuch, which is contrary to direct statements of Holy Scripture and to the essential doctrines of the Standards of the said Church, that the Holy Scripture evi- dences itself to be the word of God by the consent of all the parts, and that the infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself. SPECIFICATION. In an Inaugural Address, which the said Eev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., In The North American Review, Jan- uary, 1894, Dr. BkiCtGS says: " Biblical criticism has shown that Moses did not write these books and that the author is unknown. . . . . . It matters little if a few Ameri- can professors in theological semi- naries renowned for their extreme conservatism, hold the traditional opinion, when the majority of Ameri- can Biblical scholars agree with all the professional teachers of the Old Testa- ment in all the universities of Protes- tant Europe that Moses did not write Genesis and Exodus If the Sunday-school teachers are con- tent to state the facts, that the tradi- tional opinion is that Moses wrote the Pentateuch; that modern criticism 11 delivered at the Union Tliooloj^ieal Seminary in the City of New York, January 20th, 1891, on the occasion of his induction into tlie Edward Robin- son Chair of Biblical Theology, which Address has been publislied and ex- tensively circulated with the knowl- edge and approval of the said Eev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., and has been republished by him in a second edition with a preface and an appendix, there occurs the following sentence : Page 33, lines 6-8. " It may be regarded as the certain result of the science of the Higher Criticism that Moses did not write the Pentateuch." holds that \u^ did not write these books; but that the question is unim- portant for the religious lessons of these books ; he may reserve his own opinion and that of his scholars with safety. But if he undertakes a polemic against Modern Criticism in the in- terests of the traditional theory, and nuikes the question a test of ortho- doxy, the divisions and heart-burning which are among the ministers will arise among the Sunday-school teach- ers and scholars; and if he should pursue the unwise course commended by the ultra-conservative teachers and maintain that if Moses did not write Genesis it cannot be inspired, it is altogether probable that not a few teachers and scholars may be forced into a dilemma and be compelled to give up the inspiration of the book." —p. 68. " The Sunday-school teacher sliould be careful lest he risk the credibility of Genesis with the assertion of its Mosaic authorship. He should teach that many of the best modern critics deny the Mosaic authorship of Genesis and yet maintain its credibility. "-p. 70. Charge VIII. The Presbyterian Church in the United States of America charges the Rev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., being a Minister of the said Church and a member of the Presbytery of New York, with teaching that Sanctification is not complete at death, which is con- trary to the essential doctrine of Holy Scripture and of the Standards of the said Church that the souls of believers are at their death at once made per- fect in holiness. In The Fcrum, November, 1SU3, Dr. Briggs says: "How can he engage to dishonor the reason, to divest himself of his con- science, or to assent to the unethical dogma of immediate sanctification, whether in this life or in any other life ?"— p. 367. SPECIFIC A TIOX. In an Inaugural Address, which the said Rev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., delivered at the Union Theological 12 Seminary in tlie City of New York, January 20th, 1891, on the occasion of his induction into the Edward Robin- son Chair of Biblical Theology, which Address has been published and ex- tensively circulated with the knowl- edge and approval of the said Rev. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., and has been republished by him in a second edition with a preface and an appendix, there occur the following sentences : Pages 53, 54, 55 : "(c.) Another fault of Protestant theology is in its limitation of the pro- cess of redemption to this world, and its neglect of those vast periods of time which have elapsed for most men in the Middle State between death and the resurrection. The Roman Catholic Church is firmer here, though it smears the Biblical doctrine with not a few hurtful errors. The reaction against this limitation, as seen in the theor}^ of second probation, is not sur- prising. I do not find this doctrine in the Bible, but I do find in the Bible the doctrine of a Middle State of con- scious higher life in the communion with Christ and the multitude of the departed of all ages ; and of the neces- sity of entire sanctification, in order that the work of redemption may be completed. There is no authority in the Scriptures, or in the creeds of Christendom, for the doctrine of im- mediate sanctification at death. The only sanctification known to ex- perience, to Christian orthodoxy, and to the Bible, is progressive sanctifica- tion. Progressive sanctification after death, is the doctrine of the Bible and the Church ; and it is of vast impor- tance in our times that we should understand it, and live in accordance with it. The bugbear of a judgment immediately after death, and the illusion of a magical transformation in the dying hour, should be banished from the world. They are conceits 13 derived from the Ethnic religions, and without basis in the Bible or Christian experience as expressed in the symbols of the Church. The former makes death a terror to the best of men, the latter makes human life and experi- ence of no effect ; and both cut the nerves of Christian activity and striv- ing after sanctification. Renouncing them as liurtful, unchristian errors, we look with hope and joy for the con- tinuation of the processes of grace, and the wonders of redemption in the company of the blessed, to which the faithful are all hastening." Inaugural Address, Appendix, 2d ed., pages 107, 108 : " Sanctification has two sides — a negative and a positive — mortification and vivification ; tlie former is manward, the latter is God- ward. Believers who enter the middle state, enter guiltless ; they are par- doned and justified ; they are mantled in the blood and righteousness of Chri^ ; and nothing will be able to separate them from His love. They are also delivered from all temptations such as spring from without, from the world and the devil. They are en- circled with influences for good such as they have never enjoj'ed before. But they are still the same persons, with all the gifts and graces, and also the same habits of mind, disposition and temper they had Avhen they left the world. Death destroys the body. It does not change the moral and religious nature of man. It is un- psychological and unethical to suppose that the character of the disembodied spirit will all be changed in the moment of death. It is the Manichean lieresy to hold that sin belongs to the physi- cal organization and is laid aside with the body. If this were so, how can any of our race carry their evil natures with them into the middle state and incur the punishment of their sins ? The eternal punishment of a man 14 whose evil nature has been stripped from him bj^ death and left in the grave, is an absurdity. The Plj-mouth Brethren hold that there are two natures in the redeemed — the old man and the new. In accordance with such a theory-, the old man might be cast off at death. But this is only a more subtile kind of Manicheism, which has ever been regarded as heretical. Sin, as our Saviour teaches, has its source in the lieart — in the higher and im- mortal part of man. It is the work of sanctification to overcome sin in the higher nature." V m 1