HERESY TRIAL

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22260, 12 May 1934, Page 14

HERESY TRIAL

THE DR ANGUS CASE GRAVE (From Oor Own Cobr spondent.) SYDNEY, May 5. The Presbyterian Church in New South Wales, and perhaps throughout Australia, has been stirred to its depths as the result of the controversy over the doctrines preached by Dr Angus, of St. Andrew’s College, within the University of Sydney. Following the publication of a book by Dr Angus, “ Truth and Tradition,” in which he outlines very fully his beliefs, there have been grave developments, and although it appeared a fortnight ago that his explanations would be acceptable to his church, there is every reason for thinking now that that will not be the case. The issues at stake are of such a character that the Sydney Presbytery has decided to refer them to the General Assembly, believing that they can be decided only by the higher court. Dr Angus has his supporters In the presbytery, and in the assembly, too, and the “trial” is arousing great interest among adherents to the Presbyterian Church, and among other church authorities as well.

At a meeting of the presbytery last week Dr Angus made a statement which occupied him for more than an hour, and at the end ho received an ovation and was virtually forgiven. A decision, however, was postponed until members had an opportunity of thoroughly digesting the book which Dr Angus had prepared. Since the publication of the book there has been an almost complete reversal of the attitude of the church. Leading Sydney Presbyterians are convinced that their church cannot endorse the broad doctrines of "Truth and Tradition.” The number of sermons that have been preached, and the statements contributed to the press, seem to show that Dr Angus has again fallen into grave disfavour. Does this mean that Dr Angus failed to give an accurate precis of his beliefs when he addressed the presbytery, or that members of the presbytery failed to understand his statement? The situation is certainly a very delicate one.

It is pointed out that there was no official shorthand writer to take down the remarkable speech that was made by Dr Angus. Members must rely on their memory, and on the abbreviated reports that appeared in the newspapers. The press reports show that Dr Angus touched on every one of the main controversial points in his book, and fearlessly set out his attitude towards them. He was by no means a meek advocate of his own case. He said quite bluntly that he would continue to preach Chris-

tianity as he saw it; whether he preached as a Presbyterian op not was for bis church to decide. He then proceeded to give his views of Christ’s teachings and the biblical and doctrinal interpretation of them.'

It is difficult to state briefly the beliefs and teachings of Professor Angus. He denied the deity of Christ, but extolled His divinity; he refused to accept the doctrine of the Trinity; he denied the “ materialistic ” doctrine of the resurrection, and said he was concerned only with what happened to Christ’s body, not to His soul; he refused to preach the einlessness of Jesus sis being too negative a glorification; he flatly denied the doctrine of atonement and propitiation (as deduced from the belief that God required the violent death of Christ as a sin offering)' and man’s predestination to everlasting life or everlasting death.. All these points are raised in the book and are argued at much greater length than they were in the speech. Yet the speech moved, the presbytery to thankfulness that a “ happier way now seemed to lie open through its difficulties.” The book seems to have confirmed the church in its original belief that Professor, Angus had been guilty of heresy. It would be unjust to say that the whole of the presbytery has been guilty of a change of attitude, for there have always been many of the elders who believe that the teachings of the professor strike at the very roots of Presbyterianism. This belief is held very largely, too, among the members of the general congregations. i

It is claimed in many quarters that if the church condoned or accepted the doctrines of Professor Angus there would no longer be any justification for the Presbyterian Church. This section insists that the creed that has been advanced is almost a form of free thought, limited only by the facts of the Bible and hi; own interpretation of them. It would seem, therefore, that a heresy trial "ie bound to follow. If Dr Angus were convicted of heresy the position of Dr Anderson and Dr Edward would provide an interesting corollary. These two men, with Dr Angus, constitute the teaching faculty at St. Andrew’s College (Dr Anderson is the principal) and both of them have said that they share the views of Dr Angus of the true interpretation of the teachings of the Presbyterian Church.