Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1859-01-29
INTOLERANCE REBUKED.

We have no excuse to offer for so far depart
ing from the rule by which we are usually gov
erned in our selections of matter for the col
ums of this paper, as we have done in repro
ducing the remarkable letter of the Rev. Henry
Ward Beecher, on another page. After having
read that letter we are quite sure our readers
will agree with us that no apology can be nee
essary. The sensation produced by that letter
is lively and general, and the influence it is des
tined to exert on Christian men of all denomin-
atoms cannot be measured 1t is extensively
copied into the secular newspapers, and has
been already published in pamphlet form, and
will REACH and inAmaroo ,i"~..o- .,.,-cLor IS
readers than any sermon spoken since the days
of our Savior. We find the following obserya-
tons upon this letter in the Springfield Repub-
licdn, and we cannot do better than quote
them -
at is one of those fortunate utterances that
make universal impression. 1t is the right
word spoken at the right time, and meeting
quick and gratiiied response in tens of thou
sands of Christian hearts. 1t is not RADICAL
1t makes war only upon very narrow preiu-
dice. There would seem to benothing in it to
which true Christian man of any catholicity
OF feeling will not respond and yet it is need
ed and a telling blow at a sort Of traditional in
tolerance, which has survived the opinions upon
which it grew.
every Christian man ought to know that he
does not compromise his religious belief by
working with Christians of other faiths, or with
men of no faith, in any good work. And vet
there are thousands Of very excellent men, and
more especially of clergymen, who are in con-
slant state OF anxiety lest they may commit this
very fault. During last winters revivals one of
the chief distractions to the most successful of
all instrumentalites, the union prayer meetings,
grew out OF the serious anxieties of some cler-
gymen lest men should get recognized in these
meetings as Christian men and Christian minis
tiers, whom they could not consider sound in
faith. And this limited and uncomfortable view
of personal responsibility is not unfrequently
manifested in the pulpit. Indeed we incline
to think the pulpit is generally less liberal than
the pews On this point. There are very few of
the laity who think that they endorse all the
opinions they consent to listen to. If they
should be brought to that conviction there
would be woful thinning out of the audiences
OF some of the most exact and most exacting
of the clergymen. The laity for the most part
appreciate the fact that man is responsible on
ly for the opinions that he avows and the deeds
he himself does, and believe that they may go
to the extent of friendly, and even Christian as
ISOLATION and sympathy with others, without be-
coming responsible for their mistaken opinions.
The clergy may safely undergo the same spirit
ual enlargement we do not doubt, without per-
il to their profession or their cause-rather with
infinite gain to both in public confidence and
respect This is the present tendency, and it
is benefcent one. There has been great gain
in the last quarter of century in comprehen-
siveness of Christian charity and catholic toler-
anee OF opinions. The progress will be greater
in the next quarter, and Mr.. Beecher has struck
the keynote Of the onward march,"