, 1874-03-30

o3h1urOhos, whoBo pr}nciplos Of disc
R}ams R} @o9o sas "Sis Endangered ai'F Ds oF''t|p tb
ooursc which Plymouth Church seoinot1 to b
pursuing. For .hls moral llorolam tl,oY ioBory
thanks, oven should orrorH Of Judgment b
traceablo III Soma Of tho dotailH Of thoir proco
duro.
III cur
| CONSIDERATION or TIE LETTER
then addressed 10 plymouth Church, wo find thu
tho Impression matlo by It NAG, in some measure
different from what was intended by it's author
anxietlos long suppressed, 1t Hoems to havo i'm
pingod moro painfully than was intond
cd on tho son6ibilites Of those to whom
1t wan addressed. To many tho letter soemI
entirely unexcepttouablo In mntter and In mnn
ns%r, r%;, and entirely appropriate to tho occasion
tho tone Of fts condemnation Of tho proceeding
complained Of.
lnItloir second letter the complaining churches
having heard what impression they had made b}
which, ITO trust, was not unacceptable. Con.
corning
| THE nErLY or PLYMOUTH CHURCH
to thnt lottor. NO say nothing moro than that an
ingonlous e1pIanation Of tlo rreasons which had
of an OFFENDING n'omber by "a an osooptaaaI M lanai
method might have brought tic correspondence
| to an early and happy termination. We Gnu soo
no sufficient reason why the request Of tho COM
| planning 'churchcs for a fraternal conference
correspondence, wo Hco on tho part Of tue COM
planning Churches m expression Of their dcairo
to unite with Plymouth Church In referring tho
polnte OF difference to tho advice Of Council.
Mo iind On tho part Of Plymouth Church 10
definite expression either Of consent or
olareh did d. not 'A'n distnoty rofaso 0ato to
unto In roforence to Council, we oaunot
utrogret that tho complaining churches did not
urge request till refusal or an evasion should
have become une1uirocal
We woro not Invited, nor do We tako 1t upon
our9olves, to adyfse Plymouth Church concern
lug its methods Of doaling with Offenders, but
wo arc invited to advise thoso two churches on
certain questions; therefore no Soy distinctly
thpt tho ldca of
10 the idoa Of a covenant hetwoon individual men-
bers mud the church that by virtue OF that
covenant momber Is responsible to the church
TOR Lis conformity to tho law Of Christ, and tho
church ~ H. responsible for him and that this re-
5o1ne m formal and incorporate act, has declared
the dissolution of tho covenant. This covenant
may DO broken by the member liz NAV
offend, and, whom duly admonished, may
snco no IL tat eydoncS Of repent
OF from communion tho church, hnving given
Its testimony, is no longor responsible for him
aud ho Gnu DO restored only ny tho removal Of
tho conanro. Voluntary absence OF q resident
n3onncr from the communion of church md
from itspublc whorBAip docs not dissolve tho GOV
onant, bnt is reasonable ground Of admopition,
aud II persisted in, Of final uo1surc.
Nhen regular complainti Ia made agoinBt such
q momper, that IN some other respect ho violates
iho lho 1aws ,,. Of ohrist,, aud ESPECIALLY when
and promoted scandals terogstory to tho Chris.
tian integrity Of The pastor and Injurious to the
reputation Of tho church," Tho consideration TINT
lie has long ago torsal1cll tho church is ouly an
nggravatlon OF Ills alleged fault.
III regard TO
between these churches aud plymouth Church.
wo exproeH our hopo that the worry extraordinary
proceeding which gave occnaon for tho corre-
spoldenco aud for this Council will not bo Il
church hereafter. Could We suppose tl'at tl,tt
snch proceedings will bo repeatod, wo should
feel that tho disregard Of tho first principles ,-
VOWED i'll tho idea Of church momberHhip md
tho idca Of tho fellowship Of churches with eac,
other would require the strongest possible pro-
tcst; but tho Communication from the Plymouth
Church to this Council makes professions and
declarations which justify tho hope that such q
deviation from tho orderly course Of discipline
wlll not DO repeated. Tho accusod person in
to any other church. Wo roc,to
some Of thoae
DECLARATIONS FHoN PLYMOUTH CHURCH
which encourage tho hope wo have expressed:
We rejoice to 1.-Two in afectionate fellowship with
II tho churches Of the Lord jesus aud ESPECIALLY
aih those who arc IN all things llLomndcd with u.s.
olding the sane faith and ordar not only IN things
but in things less essential ret denr 70
~, w cheorfully admit that whenover any church
;sssy s;sn; 4sss1sS ssaa,s"' into ii. "AsS
churches shall by fragrant neglect cS-
,rt pcrn1coua and immoral Influence upon lilo com
iy 81 GI Ron sstcs churches # Is their rgh either
ellowship. "" '0'AA
We bold that preceding disfellowship in all such
nIury as shall show that tho OWL u real that the
auecs Of 1t are Within tho control Of the church, tint
ho CYL Is aot transient owl such nay bela1l any
Anfch but is permanent, and tending to incroaso
ather than to diminish.
Whilo it is not to DO forgotten that this COM
nanioation from Plymouth Church is entirely
uosoquent to the case al it stood upon the con-
on;ing n; OF the Council when the Plymouth Church,
lole 1or no other church, and no other church
Or 1t, in respect to doctrine, order, and disci-
llnc, which action, interpreted in the circum-
tanoos then existing, implied withdrawing to
,' no ground OF total indepondency, yet that
hurch il to bo fraterually
JUDGED nY ITS Latest uTrEnANcEs.
, Ihese professions, on the part of the Plymouth
'hnrch, may bo accepted BIZ other churches M
1tllcatlng its intention to maintain an etliciont
iiss:eiP!'no, and to regard tho mutual rosponsl-
il fools constrained to declare that those dec
'rations seem to ua inconsistent with tho roso-
itlon OF Interpretation adopted by tho Plymouth
hnrch Dec. e. 1873, md with othor acta aud
ocaments a%e'F'Dg fhot a. the G Pnosho "n
on Of that church I1' as presented res
these documents, il unmodlf1ed would justify
1850 caarehea in withdrawing fellowship. Yot