, 1874-03-31
Views Of Drs. Storrs and Buding-
ton and Mr.. Beecher,
The Latter Believes that the Councils
: Deliberations We're 0yerruIed
l. for Good.


New YoaK, March 30.-Various opinions wero
expressed on Sunday and yesterday regarding
the result Of the Congregational Council.
feeling Of satisfaction seemed worry gonorally to
prevail, Tho friends OF Mr.. Deechor assume to
regard it as vindloating their pastor and church,
and as IN assurance OF good will III iho future
from tho large number Of churches represented
They aay it Was shrewdly managed by men able
to ploaso those who want to be pleased without
doing anything that cAn rcnect very severely
upon anyone olae.
On tho other hand, the adhorants] of the
6torrs-Dudington party consider tint the honor
Of tho church is preserved; that tho standard Of
discipline is upheld; tho principle Of responsl-
bility in fellowship is maintained; and tho ac-
ton Of two churches in demonstrating with Ply
mouth Church Ia commended What 1nore could
they ask? Both sides are satisfied, Il division iu
Tue Congregational body IL prevented and It has
boon shown tint much charity aud llberality
exists among churches Of tho denomination,
while they still hold their polity precious.
DR.. BToAns
expressed, In hiB remarks to lis congregation on
Sunday, Lis estimate Gf tho result in the follow
ing words: 1t vinlicatcs and roalllrms posi-
tivoly, powerfully, and with tho weight OF ouch
O. Council an waa neyor gathered on any cnt,se in
this city before. the principles which we hayo af
Hr1ned from tho beginning"
DN DUDISdToN
Expressed to u reporter to-day his satisfaction
with. tho Councils decision. ue said TINT every
point for which the s1nluloniug churches bud
contonded Ind boon suBt tanned. Tho notion Of
Dr.. StorrB aud lis own church has been nliacon-
atrued to their detrimont. but ho believed that
it was now generally cancodod tint their motives.
wore not personal, that tho Council was l.npar-
tial, aud that tho cause Of tho Church and Chris
anity had been subservsd by its deliberations
and doliyerhnce.
when asked today lls opinion Of the doclaton OF
the Council. eaid: stIn regard to tho effect on
Congregational polity at large, and especially tlo
intluoncee Of such precedent as this Council, IL
it should he followed III relation to feo1lo
churches. there Is groat doal to bo aaid; but
waive that now. In roforonoo to Plymouth
Church, have this to say only, that expected
that 100 or 200 mon assembled from
M hand ''' with imposfeot dooa,nentary dts oVl-
dence, aud special ploa or statement
accompanying It, and without my knowledge Of
tho interior affairs of Plymouth Church and tho
moved 1t, would make serious criticisms upon
tlle processes mud results Of Plymouth Church.
Tlloy cossld not bo expected to judge Of our
ailairs except by the analogy, Of thcir own; but
ito prinoipes and raotioasot rynouth w 10 ohuroS nS
such as to make IL unworthy Of fellowship
among Congregational churches? Tho Go uncil
deolded the question in tic negative. Wllilo tic
calling Of a.ltil Council which ulay bo callol
o pendulum vibrating between MI ox-parto
Council aud al advisory ono, must be regarded
as q step iu tho wrong dirootion ani away from
trno Congrcgationalsln. yet its doliyerauco on
tho subjocto tof foloHHh ln tho case OF Plymouth
Nreater froefon, Whatnyer they meant tint
will bo the practical working OF it. God made
their auton great deal Visor than tloy lIad
Asd any intention II SHOULD bo. regarded tho
Oauncit as body of very axccllent nin,, and DO
no. look upon 1T as paoiod Or picked il, ai,y other
aor1o than this: that it WIS undoubtedly aclectod
f:oan mon who Sero aaploaaa tn ho.d tho old and
atringont views Of uo,EH HSatlonalls,n: