New-York tribune., 1874-04-03
THE BROOKLYN COUNCIL.


UTE TO THE PURITY OF MR.. BEEcHERs CHAR
,crrp nounrFUL RxPRDIENCE OF HIS MAG
NANIMIrY
,r.,o,, A.. occ.sroyAL CORRESPONDENT THE TRIBUsRJ
Nrw.HAyEN. April 2.-The Rev. Leonard Bacon,
N N laotnrer on Church POty in Yale College,
and Moderator Of the recent Congregational Council
I'm Rrooklyn delivered lecture in Marquand Chapel
atm. m. today on The Brooklyn Council, March.
us741 His well-known reputation as an authority
on Copgregationalsm, ana hisexcellent opportunity
vas Moderator of the Council to judge OF Its Semh-
cameo gave an intense interest TO the lecture, whch
was heightened by his ardent tribute to Mr.. Beechers
nurity of character, and the exceptions which he
took to his magnanmous treatment Of the scandal.
DIR Bacon spoke as follows:
Ihsye been giving to the Senior Glass series OF lee
ures ss they might be called by oourtesy-more prop
CRY familiar takssbout the theory and practice OF the
Congregational Church polity Having been requested
by the Middle Glass TO interpose among my taIAs W
xhsm on American church history an account Oh tno
Scounci which held last week st BROOKLYN proposc
90 make use of that conspicuous example as an ustra
xIop of what have been teaching more aostracty NJ
An general OF the principles and usages winch
Regulate either the government Of our churches or
Skeir intercommunion
Remember the two principles. which, taken together
od carried ou. into applications. are the Con-
Rregattonsl poity'
l. Every stated and organized assembly OF Christian
disciples and worshpers church full and compete
sslfgoperned under the law OF Christ and having ~
Itself all church power
fNere ia an intercommun!On Of churches, and there
are mutual duties which that intcrcommuDion involves
IA there Ia intercourse between independent States
each asserting It's sovereignty, so theIe Il inter
course between churches mutually Independent, ana
esoh main tanning its sefgovernment under Christ
AS political sovereignes responsible TO another
mi
principles OF justice and comfy whchgeguate the In
Of nations and which are international law so
there principles whcE ought regulate the inter
oommunion OF all churches. and which our ehur ehes
profess to recognize.
so much for preiiminaries. We now to our par
tculsr subject the Brooklyn Council of 1874:
What is a Council as understood and prsoticed by
platform of 1865, Part Ill. Chap
1ers1 O.,
l. Not permanent Organization like Presbytery or
a Methodist Conference. 1t into existence for
special OCCASION performs its work well or ILL and e1-
kSts longer.
q Not a governing body. 1t infct no censures in
Ahe technical sense It's Judgment whatever subject
cakes effect only freely accepted and made effect
sal by the churches.
It's function is TO consult to give light, to form and
express opinions concerning given statement OF facts,
or concerning facts which it ascertains by testimony
~ WORD, 70 advise.
III
oil convenedf
l. A certain proceeding In the Plymouth Church was
public and (taken IN connection with foregoing oircum-
stanoes) scsndaous e. causing oeDse, on occasion OF
stumbling 1t proceeding 10 which other churches
had interest
T. The two nearest churcbes-nearest IN the Intimacy
OF their relations to the Plymouth Churchinerposed
with unted remonstrance (Ought they not rather to
inerposed closer analogy with the rule
eernng personal ocensesi first then two or three
o A correspondence eDsued, with satisfactory
result-Do explanation of the questionable proceedings.
A proposal for a mutual council made by the com
planning churches, but accepted.
l. The complaining churches thought they needed ad-
therefore sought advice through this Council
(Psttorm 1866, p III. ch Ii, 81. f. ST. This
their right.
III What the powers of the Council, and the
limitations under which IL actedi
/. 1t had not the power of a mutual council There
no two parties before 1T.
a. IL mad not the power conceded by Congregational
usage 10 p1rts Council. An aggreved member or
minority In church may, under certain conditions Zone
OF which is that mutual Council shall have been dis
tncty refused by the other party namely the church
invite the neighbor churches to review the action
planned Of and to give advice concerning it, This was
not at all Council Of that sort The Plymouth Church
had interest in the but it not party to the
proceedings. The Council could give 1t advice still
less arraign it for trial
s. The Council had just much power the
stuent churches had committed to it, by sending their
Delegates TO the letter "Missve" That let
tsr with the subsequent action Of the churches invited
by It, was its charter.
L. Therefore it had no power to put the pastor OF
Plymouth Church on trial. directly indirectly. II had
little to vindicate him TO condemn him. 1t
had right other theory than that Of his
Christian integrity. ANY statement that the result OF
the Council was in way yndication OF that emf
min "a ahaurd wal " ha
Church to viudicste its pastor against damaging i'm
:putatioo from OF its members But with great
alsCrIty-the pastor himself consentiug-t threw
Che opportunity Of vindication.
". What was the point on which advice was sought
from the Councili
In essence there we're only two. presented under
aspects IN series Of questions. which the
Council carefully considered voting upon most Of them
with great unanimity in their private session. though
they not think necessary to those several
questions. one by one. in their result.
That act just referred TO, in which the Plymouth
Church threw away the opportunity of vndicating its
pastor was what gave occasion for remonstraDce from
oeghbOrug churches As stated in the Result OF the
Council 1t was this In the Plymouth Church .com-
plant brought against member that he had cir
ousted and promoted scandals derogstory TO the
Christian integrity OF the pastor, and injurious to the
reputation OF the Church. The person complained Of
appeared the ecburch-meeng, and declared that four
years before that time he had by his voton ter
minated his connection with Church. and thereupon
his name was by vote OF the Church. dropped from the
catalogue Of It's members" The regularity Of this pro-
coedng that s the consistency OF it with the true idea
OF tho relation between Christian Church and it's in
dvidusl members the first point submitted to the
Council for its advice.
D. The advice Of the Council on that point might be
such would make advice another point necessary
fla cnida ~ he mi ehu ha