Gordon Clark: Statement of Prosecutors (Christianity Today)

Members of the prosecution: Gordon H. Clark, Ph.D. (General Secretary of Reformed Fellowship), Murray Forst Thompson (Recording Secretary), and Rev. H. McAllister Griffiths (President of the Trustees)

1934. Statement of Prosecutors Against Philadelphia Auburn Affirmation Signers. Christianity Today. Vol. 5, No. 6. pgs. 141-142. Oct 12

"We have today filed with the Stated Clerk of the Presbytery of Philadelphia formal charges of heresy against the following ministers: George Emerson Barnes; Alford H. Boggs; Francis De Simone; Alvin B. Gurley; Edward Yates Hill; John A. MacCallum; Alexander MacColl; J. B. C. Mackie; William R. Rearick; Edward B. Shaw; Robert B. Whyte. Since The Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. does not belong to its ministers, office-bearers or officials, but, in the ultimate assay, to the rank and file of the people who compose it, they, the people, have every right to know why this prosecution has been begun, and to have the fullest information regarding the issues involved and the points at issue in all stages of the trial.

"No man is ever compelled to become a minister of the Presbyterian Church. When he enters its service he voluntarily takes upon himself vows and obligations of the most serious and solemn nature. If he feels that these promises deprive him of his freedom, he need not assent to them. But once he does assent, he is expected, as a gentleman of honor, to keep the vows he has made before God and man. If his mind changes, the whole world outside the Presbyterian Church is his in which to exercise the freedom he craves. But to claim freedom to deny the doctrines of the Church to which he is still voluntarily and solemnly pledged is not an exercise of freedom. Rather it is license, and the abuser of liberty is the enemy of liberty.

"Yet let no one imagine that the Presbyterian Church demands a rigid, inflexible and impossible uniformity of her ministers. She is not a hard taskmistress. She gives, within the circle of her great Reformed system of doctrine, wide and generous limits in which her ministers may differ or dissent and still be in good standing. That liberty in all doctrines which do not touch the substance of her faith is an expression of her broad and generous spirit. No one wants this wide area of liberty taken away. We claim it for ourselves and would be the first to rise to its defense. But the heresies with which these men are charged are not of this character. Their denials, if true, would teal' out the very heart, lungs and spine of our faith, - not only of Presbyterian faith but of the historic faith of the whole of Christendom as well. They pour scorn upon the doctrine of an inerrant Bible. They deny that the Virgin Birth of Christ, His supernatural miracles, His death as a sacrifice to satisfy Divine justice and to reconcile us to God, and His bodily resurrection are any essential part of the Christian message. The fact that any or all of these men may protest that they believe some or all of these doctrines has absolutely no bearing on the case; their heresy consists in their erasure of these doctrines as essentials of the Christian message. As soon could we have mathematics without numbers as have Christianity without the great truths, the necessity of which these men deny.

"We have tried to avoid litigation by every right means within our power. In February, 1932, one of us publicly appealed to these men to renounce their errors or to leave the Church that it might regain its former peace. They tried to make light of the matter, asserting vaguely that it had all been settled, a representation which, if correctly reported is, of course, not true.

"Later, one of us wrote each of these men a letter. All the letters were in the same words. The letter said:

'You will probably remember that last February I addressed to you publicly and to the other signers of what is commonly known as the "Auburn Affirmation," a plea that you would see your way clear, because of the doctrinal views expressed in the document, signed and never repudiated by you, either to retract or to demit the ministry of the Presbyterian Church. I beg to assure you that I did this only after long heart-searching and prayer, and that the action was entirely devoid of any personal rancor or bitterness.

'Feeling as I do, you will not find it hard to understand that I have been keenly disappointed in the lack of response which you have evidenced toward my appeal to you.

'My first concern is, naturally, for the doctrinal purity of the Church. My second concern, little less in intensity, is for the reclamation of any or all of those who, I believe, have been led away from the simplicity and truth of the Gospel. I do not believe that the interests of the Kingdom of God would be as well served by the excision of those commonly called Liberals or Modernists, as by the public reclamation of those to the old but everlasting Gospel. I am, therefore, writing you to inquire whether you would be willing to discuss with me and perhaps with one or two others, the differences which have appeared between us, in accordance with our Lord's commands in Matthew 18:15-17. I have in mind a quiet discussion such as befits those who call themselves Christians, rather than a debate or acrimonious argument, before even a small group. I am frank to say that I am making this request in the earnest hope that you may be led to renounce, publicly, the views which you have expressed in the "Auburn Affirmation."

'I would very much appreciate your giving me an early reply to this request, for the matter is very much upon my heart. You may write as frankly as I have written. If you feel that your views are unalterably fixed and that no good purpose would be served by our talking together about it, I will accept your decision with regret. But I cannot refrain from urging you to reconsider the views to which you have given public approval.

'I expect to be gone from the city for two weeks, to return about the middle of September. I will appreciate it if you can see your way clear to giving me a definite answer by that time.'

Their reply was silence.

"A second letter was then sent them by registered mail as follows:

'On August 30th, I wrote to you in the terms of the attached letter. To date I have received no reply. Deeply as I feel this apparent discourtesy, I am willing to overlook it in the interest of the true peace and unity of the Church.

'Could you not possibly favor me with a reply? It seems almost unbelievable that men of standing would ignore a request that might so materially affect the welfare and tranquillity of the Church. To me, judicial process is a last resort, only to be entered when means of reconciliation have failed. But when you will not confer, when you will not even answer letters, can you not see the inevitable result you are inviting, and the construction which all fair-minded people will put upon your silence? Again I appeal to you to retract the views expressed in the Auburn Affirmation, or else to do the honorable thing and leave the Presbyterian Church. I also renew my request for an interview for the purpose of seeing whether this matter may not be arranged amicably. If you do not see fit to answer this letter, I shall assume that you wish me to understand that your views have not changed, that you still adhere to them, and that you are willing to defend them on their merits before the courts of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A.

'I repeat that there is nothing personal in my request or attitude. Who you are means nothing to me; the position you take and the doctrines you teach mean everything.'

Again nothing but silence.

"What else then, can we do? These men are usurpers, intruders in a church whose doctrine they boldly deny. Our duty is clear. We do not welcome it, but we cannot honorably escape it. The issues are not trivial. They involve the truth of the Word of God and basic doctrines of the Faith. The greatest problems of the day will in the perspective of a hundred years be insignificant beside them. We have exhausted all peaceful means. The only resort left is an appeal to the law of the Church against those who flout it so openly and proudly. And in the prosecution of that appeal we ask the prayers and cooperation of every believing Christian man and woman.

"We do not wish or contemplate a secret trial. The prosecution will request that the hearings be open. The people, who are the Church, have an undeniable right to know how issues so profound and so clear are dealt with in the courts of their Church. The world outside the Church will conclude, and rightly, that somebody has something to hide, if the trial is held behind closed doors. A self-respecting Church will remember that it is a public institution, and will not be afraid to let the light shine in.

"Judicial process in this case may still be avoided. It may be avoided if the accused will resign their commissions as ministers of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. and save the Church from the division which their own acts and presence make otherwise inevitable. Doubtless they will have much to say or imply about 'peace', but intelligent people will not forget that if these men really want peace they, who themselves are breaking the law of the Church, can secure it by eliminating themselves or else by recanting their heresy, and returning to the faith of Christendom. If they do really believe that they and others holding their views are entitled to a place in the Presbyterian Church, under its laws, then we challenge them openly to defend this case on its merits, not attempting to barricade themselves behind a smoke screen of inapplicable technicalities, or to becloud and confuse the issues. If they are sincere in their views they will not be afraid or ashamed to defend them on their merits. The rank and file of the Presbyterian Church has the right to know whether that Church is going to surrender weakly to Modernist unbelief, or whether she will lift up her voice anew for the Christ of the Bible, the Christ of the Ages, the only Saviour and hope of a lost and dying world.

"This action will also be a test of the true orthodoxy of those men now in control of the machinery of the Presbyterian Church. They have been foremost in saying that if we believe heresy is to be found, we should prefer formal charges. We have now done so. If the dominating party in the Church comes to the aid of these Modernists, if it attempts to help them evade trial through pleading technicalities or in any other way, the rank and file of the Church will not be slow to get the point. Men who love the Gospel will not come to the aid of those who deny its central truths. It will now appear whether the Presbyterian Church is a Modernist or a Christian Church."