New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-03-23

drop their from the roll, with such other action
may ~, Se e seem needIu ior inc
would In reply to the other case proposed say tnat
tons on which fellowship was originally extended, il is
the night OF the churches TO withdraw from as 1t IL
writing first to endeavor convert them to sounder
But experience has thus far taught that is wise TO
DO this by associated ecclesiastical action the expert
OF the churches Massachusetts, with reference TO
reached BY each church acting for Itself thus escaping
these Liabilities 70 the usurpaton OF authority aud the
conversations Of minister's and the consciousness,
their part that they represent and WELD the con-
reveals not single instance OF beneficial results from
an attempt TO discipline church by associated eee,es
astical action. H. W. BEECHER-
BROOKLYN, N. Y, Jan. 20, 1874.
REQ II. W. BEHcHER: On the subject Of church |
membership you hold understand you That every
member has tho right TO leave church, at any tlme for
another church. or for the world that the exercise OF
this right ia not conditioned the consent OF the
church that the Covenant into which he enered IN
joining the church, only the expression OF his then
intention and purpose and that bis separator Hn
ton in retiring the church having SIMPLY TO drop his
principle wholly unknown to Congreeatonallsn, and
contradcted by its history from the beginning; che adj
mission of which would render impossible the admins
traon Of Christian and orderly discipline; the preva
lence OF which would absolutely dissolve the bands Oh
We say we should be content with deverance upon
these two questions; for what You say In your letter on
the subject Of fellowship to far just and
compre as TO warrant belief OF substantial
accordance between We differ from you widely, II
true, regard to special points connected with your
expression Of your vewss. for example. in regard 70
the argument which you derive from the action and
experience the churches Massachusetts, in the Uni
tartan controversy But it Is aside from the purposes
OF this correspondence TO consider the history ana re-
why think council expedient when serious di
to M however to lay down the essential principle
yolved in the communion Of ehurenes o waeTy
and avowediy change the essential cond
tons upon which II was publicly received INTO Tue te
by individual action, by council to withdraw their
fellowship" Upon this gladly unite as well as upon
and reasonable inquiries preceding dsfeowship." As
respects therefore, this question Of the OF
Will favor the Introduction into your new church
manual of some declaration similar to the above quota
from your letter The resolution adopted by your
church, December seems to make corporate declare
ton OF this kind important and needn't Ins Wou,u
your letter any basis Of agreement Would you DC VIII
ns t o esycs in asking the advice Of
council. mutually called, upon these TWO questonsi
l. Does the order and usage Of Congregations,
churches permit member who has entered INTO pup
lie covenant with church terminate his relations
with that church, by his voon ACT, 80 that no
action on the part OF the church Is requisite 70 such
q Was the action OF plymouth Church the slst
October 1873, IN dropping member against whom
sened action in accordance with the usages OF Con-
gregatona churches, and with their understanding OF
r. 8 SToRRs
BROOKLYN, Feb. 8, 1874
NY DEAR ns a@ ga Sau 'n apprG y0n
The kind tone of your reply leads me To nope
proceed at once to the points which yon have made.
With only single addition, accept tho nrs article 10
three churches conclude call one As 1t now reads 1t
is Does the order and use OF congregational Churches
permit member who has entered into public covenant
with a church 10 terminate his relations with that
church by his voton or act, 80 tnat no action on
the part Of the church requisite to such termination OF
1 would suggest that the
Does the Word Of God. and the order and usage OF
Congregational Churches" etc. You are aware that
regard the night withdraw part OF an
latent right, not ordinarily 70 De USED anu IKE ne
right OF used only IN extreme cases
would therefore suggest that Gin any case, be IN,
Serted thus 70 terminate, IN any case MS reiatoh
In regard TO the second point, would suggest that
she thing aimed at be stated as question OF usage; anu
not ss historical question II IL can be put INTO a lorm
which shall the particular case OF Plymouth
Church, and be made general l shall lor myself, 90
But as 1t stands It would be difficult TO induce the
Plymouth Ghuf T 70 ssse1: 70 M CSUqc sossrd
ing 20 Word Of God and the usages OF the Conerega
tonal Cnurches exercise its own discretion IN dropping
from ron the OF ono against whom serious
charges preferred but who declares hliDseu not 10
corins 70 the Word Of God and Congregational usage,
60 forward with the trial Of charges TO nnal ISSUE
will mention points in which we regard your
internal economy as unwse, and which could be easily
corrected insertion In the respective manuals OF
your Churches Of some such rule as TINS 49, ,.os
1. That at every business meeting oil tne churcn
Chairman be chosen by the brethren.
~.
churches shall be TAKEN except at meeting publicly
called from the pulpit ON the Sunday preceding the
meeting.
These changes. equivalent, would take away
from the minds Of our people the impression tnat you
are attempting legislative authority and will bring
churches together in such amcabe consultation as
could not but restore the cordially wmch once existed
between In all tins letter have gwen you my own
view aud not that gathered by conference with the
brethren of the church, HENRY WARD BEECHER.
BROOKLYN, N. Y, Feb. 10, 1874
The Rer. II. W. BEHCHER: Dear BroheT-It was the
aim Of letter reduce the points OF difference
between the minimum, and to meet you, as lar as
could, without surrendering principles dear 10 US
| and, think, TO all our churches. we are disap-
pointed consequently, tn find that yon cannot unite
with upon either Of the three propositions submitted
Your proposition that churches should change
their manuals 10 certain particulars as an inducement
to Plymouth Church TO adopt your. statement on the
inject fellowship between churches concerns mat
ters which have been in discussion between US,
and appears 10 wholly irrelevant.
The matter OF fellowship with other churches Is
directly concerning those churches. Plymouth
Church has adopted resolution designed expressly 10
declare s relations to other churches. You have In
terpreted this resolution IN sense materially derent
from its obvious import. 1t appears TO us lnasnnch
however this n only private statement OF your per-
sonai OPINION seemed Legitimate, indeed neces
sary 70 inquire If tho Plymouth Church would accept
and affirm the doctrine which you lay DOWN. NOT OF
II it will do this only impossible conditions
then expression of personal views the sab
ject alter affect the public attitude of your
church toward ours and others. -
We should feel constrained, consequently TO add
third question to the two PROPOSE Tor the advice OF
council question concerning the proper relations OF
churches to yours in view OF its resolution OF De-
d.oiaraton be suojcct OF Fellowship as on
the others
We regret that rhe three propositions, submitted to
letter OF the 10Th n5 as possible basis or
agreement, satisfactory To you; and
not surrender them modify them in any important
particular there probably occasion, in view OF
ataaa f.Ff unft mr. fa