OCR Text |
Show ! L : Dr. De Costa tells Who e - : I j .: Left -toe Episcopal Church j u f New York, Oct. 7. 1S99. The Rt. Rev. Henry Codman Potter, D. IX, LL. D., Bishop of the Protes- ; tant Episcopal Church, Diocese' of New York: Dear Sir: 1 herr-by respectfully resign I the office of Presbyter. 1 It is proper for me to give some rea- son for this course, which, at the end of Inns years of service, is adopted de- 'l M libcrateiy and 'in the fear of God. I I must now, however, confine myself to a few points. In what I have to pay at j this time I desire to speak with entire I plainness, as well as with kindness and J respect; while, to avoid any possible I misapprehension. I would add that 1 do riot resign on account of any personal J grievance. 1 J I canjiot reconcile my convicti ins i h j ih-1 present condition of the Episcopal Church, which, contrary to its own I principles, has Itch drawn into the I adoption of a policy of toleration to- ! ward a. school of theology and Biblical , ) criticism which in my judgment is hostile hos-tile to revealed truth. Your own atti- i tude in relation to the subject forms, of j course, a very subsidiary consideration. 1 may observe, however, that 1 do not j see that you have opposed the svsteni 1 to which I refer. Further permit me to say respect - I fully that I do not find that you have 1 ; been "ready with all faithful diligence i to banish and drive away from the ' 5 Church all erroneous and strange doe- triiies contrary to Cod's Word:" while much Jess have you seemed inclined j "! "both privately and openly to call upon I ! and riiinunip' others to the same." j f n the contrary. I think the testi- niony proves that you have discour- ? am d and baffled men inclined to take , su n action, i ,jo not. hawever. undc-r- take to impugn your motives or charge , upon you the "lamentable ignorance'' j- i and deliberate "malice" which some j time since in the public press you at- t tributed to men by no means your in- ferjors either in learning: or charity. I t desire, nevertheless, to indicate that, as I view the subject, whatever may have be, n your own views, you have acted j . with and defended those '.vho have ' struck at the Scriptures of the old and "j New Testament as the ple-narily in- i spired and infallible Word of Cod. You I Jiave thuc ehampioned a revolution hfts- 5 tile to .'Very evangelical body in the 'land. Yiu have donp this, I think, by accepting- as admissible and worthy of j. -it-ration a system of interpretation r which undermines creeds, orders and I vsacraments. leaving the most sacred ' T;:! crest -of I k Hovers et' every name I j t without the support of th unerring: t i . "" Word, upon which hitherto they have ; ' m. b.-eri grounded. DOL'ltT SPUEADINCi RAPIDLY. ;i ' The progi'ef of doubt durinp the last f ' , few years is most notable. If Newman j, l ' had lived, in our day, he would hardly t .. have been able to write that beautiful r jCHLtlogy of the Bible in which he says of i in.' lnfflishman that "It is the repre- tentative of his best moments," and I I iliit "all that there has been about him j 'of soft, and gentle, and pure, and peni- j tent, and good, speaks to him forever I out of his English Bible. It is his I sacred thing which doubt has never 'been and controversy never soiled." I Even in ICpiscopal suninaries the in- I 1 -errancy of Holy Scripture is boldly and j f systematically denitxt. I You, right reverend sir, have entered j the field at a crucial hour, plainly de- claring that the system of denial or ; j negation im bodied in the "hKhir r criticism" forms an allowable method j ' :i' inteiji-etati'n. and that the aeeept- l l a nee of the me-ilvwls and its conclu- f 1 sioni docs not disqualify t-andidates I f"i- the mini.-try. You have therefore deliln rately received into the den.imi- i 'nation, and you have approved a j j proper teachers fr the people, men J ' who der!ar thai the Scriptures are f I errant and elo not form an infallible j j guile, abounding in myths, fables, ' I scientific and historical errors. Men c.f I ibis kind plainly declare that what j ; hitherto we have called the Bible is not the Bible, and that the real Bible j lies buried underneath the rubbish of I i he ages, waiting' to lie recovered, j I The lorg catalogue of errors credited ! I by so-calleid "higher criticism" to Holy ! Scripture may or rtnv not in your esti- f 1 mat ion ap)ear as triffes. That, however. ' has nothing to do with Khc present j i isMie. but the system that you vouch i - 3 for as within the liberty of clergymen j J bavis, in my judgment, no sufficient f ' authoiity for the Christian relipion. t X- arc plainly told that "The preva- f lent dosrmatic jheories of the inspira- 'i j tion and infallibility of the. Bible have bei n uiiderinini in ..ie entire range of ' I T'.iMii'al s:udy. and it is a cjuestion in many minds whether they can ejver be !-o reccnstiucted as to give satisfaction ! to Vhrislian seholais." . REMOVING PROPS OF FAITH. I The party you represent has take.n i possession of the Church and adopted a I new standard of qualification for the I ministry. Heretofore an attempt has j , J bein made to maintain at least an ap-j j pea ranee of resj-ect for orthodox rules i of interpretation, and a class of critics I haw allowed that th-"sft parts of the I Rib!" that clearly relate to faith and morals were inspired and authoritative, i But ihe school of 'higher criticism" mw does not make even this poor dis- " tinction. On the -contrary, it is taking I away th- props of Ijoth faith and nior- als. I cannot afiimi that you agree j I wuli the details of this system, but t it i- im.vr that mi din.m its teachers j lit persons for your ministrj'. The sys- i tern cannot be employed and repuJiat- ! f ed at the same time. This decision re- 1 vises the standard of qualification, and I in the future men cannot prescribe a higher standard. The minimum is the . maximum. I submit that you have I degraded the qualifications r.nd arrang- ' ? el the terms of admission in accord- , Miin- with a scale that now affords f f gratification to enemies of Christian- i ity. The worst is that the church ap- jirovcs your course. Future candidates' : j may o)'enly deride the story of Pente- ost as the world has understood it I from the time of the Apostles. I The former belief in the Bible is no longer required. Candidates of the s-chooS t; which I refer will indeed continue con-tinue to. sign papers, agreeing to ac I cept the Scriptures as the word of God, J but such subscriptions practically will prove little Vxnter than jierjurj". j The phrase "Word of God" is now a I phrase only; its meaning- rras been jug- gled away. Again, let me not be mis- imdcivto.id. On-: standing by the Nileo-! Nileo-! meter docs not fancy that the instru- .; I ment causes the rising of th: Nile. No j! more can I think of you as the author 1 1 of the tide now brimming and swirl- ing in uiwin the lpiscopal body. With- out abating anything from your great j respontribility, I must, with all due respect, think of you as the exponent of an accomplished revolution with which I am dealing. Episcopalianism h.3'5 been set adrift "Higher criticism" has struck every diocese in the land, and from all the states of the Union there is coming a j wild, ungovernable flood of opinion and I sentiment that renders your position j still more significant. You do not stand alone. You are upborne by the power of unconsecra.ted wealth. Your convention, which ha- just closed its session, is with you. having overwhelmingly overwhelm-ingly vindicated your laissez faire ' f-tanding committee by indorsing its I dark act. Your examiners give un-j un-j qualified support. Thus far the case is ;tiocesan; but venerable and saintly men like the Bishop of Minnrc-eta, men i of superior judgment and influence, ap-I ap-I plaud the "wisdom and good senwe" displayed in this phase of your ad-ministi ad-ministi ation, while the criminal silence of other bishops speaks louder than words. The press, being creed :?c?s. is, for the moat part, with you, and hails you as the exponent of incoming "liberal thought." A leading editorial, in a prominent daily, describing present society so-ciety s one that "has outlived the faith of dogma," c'.'aims that your position po-sition is "invincible." Humanly shaking, shak-ing, it is indeed secure. The masses of Episcopalians are with you. THE-"VOICE OF THE . CHURCH." The suggestion that the House of Bishops might interfere with your policy, pol-icy, thought once seemingly probable, now seems puerile. The House of Bh'h-ops, Bh'h-ops, as a whole, i-s on your side. Practically Practi-cally your voice is the voice cf the Church. 'Phis is no personal or dioeeran fcsue. It takes in the whole body. As one result, discipline stems to be practically dead. Indeed, how could it be otherwise when you, taking a fuller view of rhe situation, declare, in a charge, that the Episcopal Church now forms one of the congeries of interdependent interde-pendent branches of the Anglican communion com-munion that is without a head to think i or a hand to act? I can understand why the Bishiip of western Texas is obliged to admit:. "Wo kmv that the young men are not in the churches and the laboring classes are entirely alienated." The president of your standing eommi'ttee has just reported re-ported to the convention that the youth of the denomination "deny any obligaticn to go to church. They go if they please, but if not, it makes, no difference-"' Indeed, what have. th;y to go for? To listen, to the reading of what preachers pronounce myths and fables. Substantially, Substan-tially, the battle for the Bible has been, fought. The cause is lost, and now you can present no inducements for either youth or age to go to church. By a town meeting process the Bible has been declared ' literature." This new relation of your denomination denomina-tion to the Bible changes the relation of the denomination to other religious bodies, and never again can Episcopalians Episcopal-ians approach the Presbyteri'ans calling to unicn on the basis of a common Bible. The new Bible, when you get it, must at least prove a very uncommon uncom-mon Bible. Its character "is not yet known. Jt is still to be recovered by a patent mining process from beneath the rubbish of the age. Your church has lest its supposed grasp upon the essential factor in any plan of unifiea- t;or:. The new Bible when produced by "critical acumen" will prove no more acceptable than the apostolic succession described in your third triennial charge, where you show how nimbly the apostolic apos-tolic current disregards "gaps in neglected neg-lected order." and puts a broken line in authoritative connection with the apostles. apos-tles. If all this is as easy as alleged, these di nominations to whom you will be obliged to offer your as yet unknown un-known Bible may prefer to put themselves them-selves in position without the aid of obliging Episcopalians, allow the apostolic apos-tolic current to overleap the "break in ihe twi i'ed wire" and "fly onward on its swift enkindling errand" into their own receivers. All this is in harmony with private judgment. Episcopalians are proceeding logically in their work of destruction, in aeeivrdance with reformation re-formation 'principles. Do nv t say that I am misinterpreting your theological opinions. I am not dealing with your opinions, but with the policy which rules the main body of the people. I accept the verdict. You register the revolution correctly, and, however certain bishops and others may dissent, the revolution is a fact. Unless soin? swift" counter revolution takes place this destructive work must go on to the end. DEISM AND DISSENT. At this point I regret that it seems necessary to turn and indicate that the long studied scheme to inaugurate Arianisni is substantially perfected. Ths windows of Episeopalianism are nonopened, non-opened, not toward Jerusalem and the fair realms of Catholic thought, the range on the contrary being down hill, toward what is called the broad and coveted landscape of deism and dissent. dis-sent. The distinguished rector of the leading parish in Brooklyn declares ! over his name that "it is probably true ' ifO per cent of our bishops believe and teach views for which Bishop Colenso was deposed." On the eve of Trinity Sunday last there appeared a public and open repudiation re-pudiation of the Holy Trinity, and your nesiect. in' another case, to allow a hearing under canon 2, title 2, indicates that it would be idle to attempt any action in this or similar cases. Proceedings Pro-ceedings against heresy are no longer to be tolerated; for if the guilty come to trial, may not bishops be brought to the bar? The sense of culpability is general Unbelief is in the air. Indeed In-deed I must here call attention to the fact.' as yet little noticed, that the worst of the prevailing skepticism does not appear in print, nor even in public pub-lic addresses. Yet in private net a few of both clergy and laity openly repudiate re-pudiate the authority of Bible and creed using no concealment. One very prominent rector, who ands high in the ranks cf your supporters sup-porters speaks of the New Testament as a bundle of left-over documents. Ano'her has declared that the first three chapters of St. Matthew form s'lmplv a beautiful legend; while another an-other ridicules even the Apostles' Creed. Important positions are held by. men o' this class, who remain in the pulpit to win present bread to accomplish ul-tcrio- ends. Such men arc well known. Thev enjoy the favor of the bedy at lartre and we must not measure the situation tfmply by the publication of an occasional volume, intended to mis- I lead, it may be, and guard its author's ! position, or defiantly attack the faith. ! The thought takes on the veiled forms favored by the Socinian school of Hoad-ley. Hoad-ley. in the hast century, who then exhibited ex-hibited 'in the Church of England that system of "reserve" practiced by many in and out of the pulpit today. HOSTILITY" UNCONCEALED. Still, with all thi precaution, the underlying un-derlying hostility is by no means concealed. con-cealed. The perforated, honeycombed condition of Protestant Episcopalianism is still indicated by agnostic phrase. ; We all know perfectly well that clergy-. clergy-. men in -your. t diocese are assaulting J tnd riddling the faith, and openly cir-iculating cir-iculating Socinian literature. The skeptic skep-tic is- secure, and the revolution wins I honor and applause, though it cannot I be said of the system carefully sheltered shel-tered in dioceses by the purple of the Episcopate that "the scoffer observes a side of it that reduces his sneers to silence." si-lence." In reality, it forms the boulc-versement boulc-versement of Christianity. I have thus endeavored to point ut the work of "higher criticism," for the reason that I wish to keep well up in the front the true state of the Church, that no one may pretend that I leave the Episcopal ministry because you or any other person may disagree with my conception of truth. This revolutionary-process revolutionary-process in the denomination possibly, was inevitable. I recognize, but do not accept the result. For years, in common com-mon with others, I have tried to stem the current, and in the course of discussion dis-cussion the temper of Episcopalians has been thoroughly tested. "Evils have been pointed out privately ' thought. No language has been found so superb in describing its work of j eimane-ipatien tuid purification. Now,, however, you assure us that we have been r-istaken, that all the while the Bible has been shut up within iron walls, robbed of interest and power. Do you, right reverend sir, suppose that the people of the land, who ha ve organized Bible societies and carried them on at a large cost for many years, are sufficiently ignorant of the history and influence of the Bible to accept tamely this charge? Your language is astonishing! I deeply deep-ly deplore the necessity which exists fc.r saying this", yet you are winning laurels among infidels far and wide. Still you have Christian people, Catholic and Protestant alike, to reckon with in this attempt to charge an ignorant and degraded fetichism upon scholars and holy and enlightened j men of every name, who, rejecting a carping, uncriticaJ criticism, revere now as formerly "the Bible of our forefathers." It is hardly to be supposed sup-posed that one in your position is aualified to make this charge of "fetichism" and "intolerable ignorance." ignor-ance." . The particular kind of usefulness that vour criticism may aspire to is indicated in-dicated by the language of one of your own friends, the Bishop of Washington, who declares that, "under the influence of the 'higher criticism' thousand's have lost their faith in the Old Testament as the inspired word of God;" while "the faith of multitudes is so- shaken that even Sunday school children speak of the Scriptures with an irreverent freedom- that would have amazed the preceding generation." This statement is sadly emphasized by the last annual Sunday school report, which shows that while your party has been engage! en-gage! with plans to secure the ascendency ascend-ency and make the. Bible acceptable with sceptics no less than 1,250 Sunday school teachers have parted from their work. SUNDAY" SCHOOL DISCREDITED. The youth recognize no more loyalty to Sunday school than church. Of the influence of the whole scheme upon the body at large one may judge from the testimony of Dr. Paret. the bishop of Maryland, who sayS: "The church in this country has aliriost lost the idea mm w : Sl! i?il?pfl ! i fel V Jftii k fezj mm IJf ' THE RECENT DISCUSSIONS OVER THE BIBLE. to the Bishops, and the pessimistic reply re-ply of one, Things will never be any better in your day or mine," may be accepted as the expression of nearly all. Letters in my possession from some of your associates in office form instructive reading. F'or myself, recognizing recog-nizing the situation as I do, there is but one course; and, therefore, whatever what-ever other men. whom personally I , esteem, may do. and however they may regard their obligations, .mine seems ; clear. ! Wrhile no action on your part could j lead me to go out, I recognize a. con- dition that no one man, or any possible i combination of men, .can now success- j fully meet. The Episcopalian scheme, based on private judgment, is not only far overshadowed by doubt that will characterize the incoming . twentieth century, but it is possessed by the unbelieving un-believing spirit. The storm is already here, but the Protestant- Episcopal body has no anchors. The future is clear. Your people are hastening to accomplish their evolution. Few will be misled by the pompous diction of J that Bishop who in his last charge j foretells great victories. Fewer still,, i allow me to say with all kindness, will be persuaded by your own phraseology, j where you speuk of "the Book" as "in- 1 comparable and precious." since it is commonly believed that many churchmen church-men would not now disdain such language lan-guage if applied to the works of Shakespeare and Homer. One can very well anticipate the reply re-ply of men who, with assumed indignation, indigna-tion, deny that they, refuse the Bible as the word of God. but discerning persons per-sons know the value of phrases out of which the erstwhile faith, robustness and honesty have departed. You are, of course, ready to affirm that ths school, now- in power, honors the Word of God. and that the effort being made is one simply to "separate the chaff from the wheat," the false from th,3 true. You would, indeeu, place the Bible on a more "impregnable basis" than ever. No doubt it will be set upon the impregnable basis of Veda and Shasta. A REMARKABLE DISCOVERY. I You charge .that . "a modern fetichism fetich-ism which has dishonored the Bible by claiming to be its elect guardian has shut it up these many yours within the iron walls of a dreary literalism, robbing rob-bing it thus alike of interest and of cower." You have f um4shed a remarkable re-markable discovery. . All along the people; lave regarded the Bible as a free book. It has stood, the pride and glory of the nations, accredited with the uplifting of society and the advance ad-vance of civilization and modern of aggressive work. Its missionaries' enthusiasm, if it ever had much, is now- very feeble." This is echoed by your church press. One may, therefore, safely dismiss your statement where- you speak of what "a higher scholarship has done for us in our generation for the advancement advance-ment of godliness and good learning throughout the Christian world." It is, on the contrary, driving people away from the religion of Christ. It should, therefore, be borne in mind that the Episcopal body was not founded on this "higher criticism." However logically it may put in force private judgment, no logic will enable it to survive on this new system of Biblical interpretation. interpreta-tion. Furthermore, it might be remembered with profit that Christianity was never designed to entertain any comparative religions, and the system you applaud can only degrade the Episcopal denomination denom-ination to a plane where the maintenance mainte-nance of the simplest element of Christianity Chris-tianity will prove impossible. As for your own diocese, the central and most ! important, when . its actual state is ! known, it will be seen that it is rap- idly approaching the condition of the bloodless heart. Spiritually your strongest strong-est corporation is failing. The appear- I ance of prosperity, as the statistics prove, is unreal, As things are tending, far-sighted friends say that if the ca- tnearai is ever nntsnea it will, prove I the sarcophagus of Episcopalianism, the coffin of its creed. It is to be devoutly hoped that the policy with which you are identified may yet be paralyzed. NOT AGAINST THE CHURCH. I need not say that I write these words with much regret. I am not. here, let it be understood, speaking against the Episcopal church, but against its, administration. I have always recognized recog-nized the Church of England as tha masterpiece among modern denominations. denomina-tions. I can make the language of Newman my own where he says: "I recognize in the Anglican church a time honored institution of noble historical memories, a monument of ancient wisdom, wis-dom, a momentous arm of political strength, a great national organ, a source of vast popular advantage, and, to a certain point, a witness and teacher of religious truth." Moreover, I should desire to see it preserving whatever of truth and integrity integ-rity it may posses, since no right minded mind-ed man can find any satisfaction in religious re-ligious decay. I should be glad to see it demonstrating essential superiority over other modem systems found around us, and I can only feel a profound pro-found concern when I view the course upon which the branch of the Anglican ; body in this land has now fully entered. enter-ed. Others are not simply concerned, but one of the most eminent of your bishops, a wise, far-seeing man, says to me in one of his letters that he is "greatly alarmed." One of your leading lead-ing and most trusted periodicals comes to me while I write, saying editorially-great editorially-great the danger of the movement .i, iv, thKi-jtMid in make patches and shreds of Holy Scripture and to reduce the faith of the church to an iridescent dream." I regret to view this successful attempt at-tempt to pervert a time honored institution insti-tution and to discredit the noble historical histor-ical memories associated with fealty to the Word of God, reducing ancient wisdom wis-dom to "fetishism" and "intolerable ignorance." ig-norance." Today authority is gone. I can no longer declare that Episcopalians Episcopal-ians hold as firmly to the Bible. The idea of men-ant inerrancy is a "fetish." I cannot on the prevailing theory present pre-sent a single text from Genesis to Revelations Rev-elations that carries any final author- . ity; and, with the departure of inerrancy iner-rancy from the Written Word, I lose the inerrant word that was made flesh; since, if one cannot depend upon written writ-ten tradition, how can he accept any spoken tradition, coming down through various languages and people during a long course of ages? You destroy the value of the church, since a" body that cannot vouch for a written record cannot vouch for anything. any-thing. That, I am. sorry to say, is the case with the body you so fully represent repre-sent It is the case of the blind leading lead-ing the blind. In quoting Canon Gore, you say that the Church "is not tied by any existing definition cf inspiration," inspira-tion," and that "we cannot make any exact claim upon-any one's belief in regard to inspiration, simply because i we have r.o authoritative definition to I bring upon him."- Therefore, you will observe and confess, "that what is heterodoxy . today in one jurisdiction may tomorrow be pronounced by some other court in another to be orthodoxy.'' and that such decisions in the Episcopal Epis-copal Church "absolutely determine nothing." No more deadly stab had ever been aimed at the Protestawt Episcopal system sys-tem than this which you have given. You wrote even almost gayly, conscious con-scious of the fact that you were get-, ting the better of the men who sought to defend the Bible, and the wo Id recognizer, what you have done. It ;s i a sad fact that the Episcopal body ( stands; helpless in the midst of attack, but the saddest of all is that ycu give no sign that the situation is distaste- i ful. For myself I cannot bow to the guidance guid-ance of the "distinguished critics" whom you have set forth eus teachers and examples for the faculties in Episcopal' Epis-copal' seminaries, masters in IsraelJ who now, side by side with the professional profes-sional infidel, rtand forth to lecture on the "Mistakes of Moses." My sense of right would not support me in any ! such course. I retire from the field, 'convinced that I am- no longer called - to struggle with an- overwhelming and j rapidly-increasing force. I cannot ac- ; cept the revolution or drift with the i tide.- Your school is indeed benevolent, benevo-lent, and quite willing to tolerate Catholic faith, bestowing upon it. from time to time nothing mere severe than ignoble terms. But for myself I ask I no favors. I will not remain where I doubt commands a premium, and the belief in an infallible Bible enjoy. I simply the immunity granted to a fallible fal-lible Koran. Therefore, however the- i.sue may ha regarded by some excellent blttbren who have steed firmly by the Word of God; for myself I must be guided by the light that is given. I may have been- misled by my teachers and examiners, exam-iners, but I entered the Episcopal ministry min-istry with the distinct understanding that whatever theories some individual. might hold with respect to inspiration, inspira-tion, the Scriptures themselves were I Inspired and inerrant. That was the I view held by all so-called orthodox j bodies. By degrees, however, new I views arose, shocking the Protestant I sentiment at firt, but afterwards mak- ' ing progress, until" -finally- the present I opinion took on form. The situation f " is? therefore changed. The Episcopal j 'body has relinquished the- fM-mprb"tief I and requirements and the contract that I 1 made i-, broken. I am free. In, closing, while wishing you. per- sor.al prosperity and happiness, allow . me to express th? hope that the eyes of I your soul may yet be opened to see the I real character of the work which ha secured the influence and support of th Episcopal body, and that, 'by the Divine I blessing upon the labor of earnest :n,t upright men.-- Episcopalians, finally. may be brought to realize the s?p!end::f realities of the Catholic faith mirrored j In the Divine Word. I Committing my future to God. ant 1 to the holy angels, f remain, very re- J. sp'ctfuliy your obedient servant, B. F. Di: COSTA. . I |