WHAT PRICE HERESY?

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22353, 29 August 1934, Page 10

WHAT PRICE HERESY?

THEOLOGICAL HALL TEACHINGS IMPEACHMENT OF TWO PROFESSORS SYNOD REFUSES TO TAKE ACTION No doubt bearing in mind the Scriptural example of the wages of importunity as presented in the story of the man who knocked continuously and long until the householder was compelled to open his door, the Rev. P. B. Fraser has addressed his third letter to the Presbyterian Synod of Otago and Southland on the subject ot allegedly improper teaching and instruction of students by two members of the staff of the Theological Hal! at Knox College—Dr Dickie and Dr ,S. F. Hunter. But he has on this occasion made it quite clear to the reverend fathers and brethren that he is not content merely to be importunate much longer. Failing Ins charges receiving the serious consideration which he considers to be their due, he tin catena to invoke the aid of civil law for a mandamus to institute u proper inquiry. The synod, however, was singular! v unimpressed when this ultimatum was presented to it yesterday morning, and went so far ns to refuse even to receive the letter,, entrenching itself behind the impregnable security of the Book ox Order, the ordinances of which, like the laws of the Modes and Persians, altercth not. And while on the subject of this unquestionable authority, the synod saw fit to remind Mr Fraser that'no one in the Presbyterian Church was less in need of instruction in such matters than-he. The text of Mr Fraser’s letter was as follows: “I am writing with studied brevity in reference to my Ihtter or petition to last synod relative to the teaching at Knox College which was refused even a record on your minutes. “ I renew the request for the synod to institute a candid inquiry and report into the teaching of Professor Dickie’s book, which substitutes a confused artificial theology of his own, based not on the inspired Scriptures and the testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ, but op variable religious experience—on sand, not on the Rock. “ I now make a further and final appeal to the synod to investigate the teaching at Knox College relative to the teaching of Professor Hunter- as indicated by the prescribed text book on the Old Testament, entitled ‘Old Testament History/ by G. W. Wade, a Church of England scholar, written 30 years ago. It exhibits the principles and methods o: modern sceptical scholars in aii excessive degree. Its first sentence is typical of all that follows. ‘lt is very doubtful whether the patriarchs were historical individuals, and, if they were, in what period they lived/ ‘ Very doubtful is written on every page of the Old Testament, the testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ to its historicity being completely ignored. Sacred supernatural scenes are caricatured or denied. As an objective reality the ‘ burning bush ’ of historic Protestanism is, like so much else, only a fairy tale. Daniel, acknowledged of the Lord Jesus Christ, the delight of childhood, and the glory of brave men and women, who survived the den ot lions, perishes ingloriously in the critic's den, and, indeed, like the patriarchs, it ’is more than ‘ doubtful ’ if he were an historical individual. In one sentence, it is simply that such, a book on such destructive principles should be endowed by the Presbyterian Church ot 0t “ B With all courtesy and respect,,! beg to inform the synod that if it continues refusal to make candid inquiry and report a 9 to the teaching at Knox College relative to the written standards ot the synod and church, there will be an appeal to the civil_ court for a mandamus to institute such inquiry.” . Addressing -Jhe synod on subject, the clerk. Dr Gumming, said that this was the third communication of its kind that Mr Fraser had addressed to the synod. The first was received two years ago, when there was some discussion whether it be received. Little opportunity was given to make inquiries before synod met/ but a committee was appointed to consider what action should be taken. The committee met on several occasions, and considered various aspects of the matter —ecclesiastical and legal—and at a meeting of synod last year the report was presented. A letter was then received from Mr Fraser while the synod was actually in session. Nothing was done with it, the letter not having been handed to the clerk within the specified time. Another point was that synod had appointed a committee, and the letter traversed the same ground as the previous one. The committee s re•port, which was unanimously approved of and adopted by synod, contained several resolutions, one being that synod declined to set up a committee, as suggested by Mr Fraser, without identifying itself with-every phrase in the book to which Mr Fraser had referred. “The final paragraph of the report asserted that the avenues of the Church Court had not been blocked, and we-main-tained, and synod maintained, that the procedure in reviewing the teaching ot any minister or professor must follow the lines set down in the Book of Order,” said Dr Gumming. ‘ Mr Fraser was informed accordingly, and I have no reason to suppose that synod has changed its mind on a matter pf that kind. It is a very serious matter indeed when the teaching of any minister or professor is called to question, and we all agi’ee that the very greatest care must be •exercised in matters of this kind. Mr Fraser, who is present, has not adopted the method prescribed in the Book of Order, and, to my mind and the minds of a great many here, it would be an improper thing to take notice of this letter. If anyone wants to bring up a matter of that kind against a minister or professor let him do it in the way that the Book of Order prescribes.” Dr Gumming thereupon moved that the svnod pass on to the next business, ‘The Rev. J. Douglas, Smith, seconding the motion, quoted the regulation in the Book of Order covering such a case, and said that he did not think that there was any member of the Presbyterian Church of New Zealand who was less in need of instruction in these matters than Mr Fraser. If it was his wish to take action he should go about, it in the right wav. and cease approaching the courts of the church in an irregular manner for the purpose of making charges of such a grave character against the honour and doctrine of their teachers. Dr Gumming then withdrew hia motion, and substituted for it the motion that the letter be received. The motion was carried unanimously.