St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1874-04-10

pen of Henry Ward Brecher. and a>
such will he read with interest. The
second is the leading editorial in the
NeT Iork Observer. Il paper that ranks
high among the religious papers of the
country. though il j. not u ConpIcga-
tioual journal.
From the Christian Union April /
MOI does amy one doubt that 1t ,thc
touncll) WIS from the beginning ad
verse To the views of plymouth Chnch
II WIS called undcI extraordinary cir-
cumStaHrcS. which would Nitiatr the
decision "f any court an earth. II WIS
not "packcd. hHT ''pickrd." With a
few exceptions. the delegates were not
consulted i'll advance l> I" THEN opinion
of the special east i'll prospect bat ihrl
were :" selected that the Ncll-kn"Wu
advocates of Il stringent covenant should
greatly uutnumIncr the representatives
"t churches hnidin@ the other view.
The members uf the Council thus Sc
lcrtcd were piled beforehand with u
partial and partisan statement. design
rd I" arouse their aprrchcn>i"m> Ton the
view of t"n%I' @J;i"uall>m which they
hrld. and I" iiN them in npini"u> hostile
20 Plymouth Church. ~ Il result of
these careful preparations. the Council
came together With an mnqur>ti"nahlN
large working majority on the side of
the churches that called il.
Day hy day during its sessions this
majority wan"d i'll numbers and weak
cucd IN the intensity OF its demands
Probably the Incorporate presentation
of the east 10y the pastors OF the com
planning churches began Il rractin
which the secret debates continued.
The net result l.. that hl Il vote "t -
YEAS. : nays and - ah>tLining. the
Council endorsed the stringent view of
the corcndRt. bat accepted as C"ngrcg;r-
tiunal the statements of Plymouth
Church as to both discipline aud ttiIpr-
ship.
Ii i true that the decision declares
that these statements seem Inconsistent
with earlier acts and utterance> bat
Plymouth church declares that IT. priu-
ciplcs rs 40" stated are tho>r always
held aud always acted upon.
bn the whole. the history and result
of the Council constitute Il practical
Niudicatiun of PlVmouth Church as Il
Con gl"g;ttinnal Church. The declared
purpose WAS I" cNrnmmuuicatt that
Church. 1t Wa> pushed with desperate
perseverance through hours and day of
debate. and it could not lac executed.
The fact OF failure is more significant
than all the explanations "i it that can
lie offered.
Dul readers must Icncml'rI tlr$,
facts in Judging the decision given III
another column. 1t j. an expression of
opinion drawn forth from Il pcrpleNcd
majority whose >Nmpathi,S were from
the beginning adverse tn Plymouth
Church. II l. To hc compared. not with
the pr"hahlc verdict of - tribunal dit
trrcmtly called. rightluIy iuquirimg and
fully informed. bat with the utlciancc
which was desired. demanded and cx-
pr"tcd of this tribunal. We Ito not
hesitate tn say that the final decision of
this Council Is as different from that
winch Drs. ~torr> and Huntington and
their friends urged upon it H. light from
darkness.
From TN, New York Observer. ApriI2
We have given large space to the
lSrunklyu Council. We do th, for two
reasons. the universal interest felt in
the matter. ana the vital Importance of
the principic which made the Council Il
necessity.
If the Plymouth Church position in
regard /" the rights and priv ilryeS Of
church membership had been sustained
~ the Cnuncil. and cldulS cd 10y the
congregational hndy. it would have re
duccd C"ngrcgationali>m not merely to
independently. hut below the mark of
nIflIrprN i.l,.ttIr,ty
clubs. The doctrine ayowed hv Mr..
icechcI and his church and acted upon
III the ease which led to the Council. is
50 obviously lepugnamt to all correct
ideas of the nature of IL church or any
other >ncictN. that we marvel at any
hesitation on the part of intelligent men
to set the seal of emphatic condemna-
upon it. Fiat the BROOKLYN Council
uf lS14 has condemned it. is Il matter
for universal congratulatinn in this day
of radical distinguishing tendencies and
contempt fnr law ami order.
In advising the other churches to
continue in fellowship with Plymouth
Church. until it is seen whether or not
ii persists in the practice avowed bv it
az its right and purrO>c in regard to
its members. the Council doubtless
sought to prevent Plymouth Church
from assuming the absolute indcpcnd-
cnce which II desires. Probably Il rec
concentration to withdraw would have
been more agreeable To that church.
than the continuance of relations which
hold 1t subject I" the u>Igc- of the
congregational body.
Dr>. Burlington and StnrIs have fought
Il good tight. have kept and defended
the faith with Il perseverance. energy.
cloqueuce and >clt->acIiticc command
ing the admiration and gratitude of the
Church; NOT the Congregational only.
though of that especially. The issue
taken up lay these gentlemen was 80
essential to the life of the Church, that
we are certain they have won the praise
of their brethren. almost universally.
fol the stand they have taken If the
action of the Council should seem 10
amy t" come short of what WAS demand
ed 10y the cause of Christian purity and
ecclesiastical order. it is to h, attribut
ed Ia the peculiar circumstances of this
case. which is embarrassed bv difficult
ties at present insuImountahle. So that
il is impossible To compel the testimony
without which the truth cannot be
made manifest. That must he left to
the Providcntial developments of time.
Meanwhile the Church will he thankful
that the largest advisory Council ever
held in this country has affirmed the
>oundcst ecclesiastical law. and sis