The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1876-01-26
Signs Of Decisive Action.

Signs OF Decisive Action.
IL IL now manifest that the Congrega
| tionalists will demand "A full investigation
OF Mr.. BEEcHER's case. The wiser head
In the denomination now see what has al
along been plain, that the scandal is Just n,
much alive to-day MS when it was first pub
| lished-that II will continue alive until il
| Is probed to the bottom. The talk about
| further exploration damaging pubic
morals. Is simple folly. What damage 1.
done grows out of Mr. BEEcHrR's i'm.
munity.
The course he and his church have taken
opens the eyes of the Congregntionaists
to the fact that truth and innocence need
not pursue such devious path, while il is
the only road for lying and guilt. The at
tempt Of Mr.. BEEcuER aud the crafty
Brother SuEARMAN to throw the RESPONSE
bility of the breaking up OF the mutual
council on the shoulders of Mrs. MoUIroN.
Is plainly contrary to the truth that 1t
does the pastor infinite harm with the few
who have still endcavorcd to think him in
noccnt. In the face OF his twice repeated
public declaration that he would not let
his case 90 before any council in which
DR.. SToRRs and DR. BuDINGroN sat, he
now makes an elaborate effort to show
that he was willing TO have them among
his judges. Before the council was pre-
vented, he unreservcdly refused to let
these ministers share in an investigations
As soon rs II was prevented, he said Z" I
won't. WON'T 20 before such "hodge-
podge' council. One week later he saws
he was willing to have them. but that Mrs.
MouLroN, TO avoid council, made pre-
text of an innocent protest, not intended
to keep them out to bring the negotia-
tons for council to an end This is a
square sclf-convicton OF duplicity.
Take this in connection with Mr.. BEECH
FRS whole course otherwise since Mrs.
THToN's confession, and no fair mind can
reconcile conduct SO evasive and contra
dietory, with any theory OF innocence. In
stead of gaining public confidence, Mr..
BEEcHER has been steadily losing it from
the day of his trial until now
1t looks now as IL the device of an advi-
sorry council would utterly fail. 1t is very
doubtful il he can get together such n
council ut all. The questions he proposes
TO submit TO 1t are questions of church
order and discipline passed upon by the
council OF 1874, and thoughtful Congrega-
nonnlists will not submit to ne used to re-
open old and settled issues, in order that
the scandal may be covered up under the
fogs of discussion OF denominatioual
usIges.
Prof. BARTLETT of Chicago told a re-
porter of the Times of this city that n mu-
tual council Of churches In this vicinity
should be called to investigate the bot tom
facts, ana that he has been in corresponds
ence with number of leading clergvmen,
all of whom agree that it should be held.
and that speedily. Ills remark that Mr.
BErcHERs refusal to take part in such a
council would he strong prosumptive evil
dcncc Of his guilt, expresses what would
be the universal opinion outside OF the
ranks OF his infatuated followers But If
that would be presumptive evidence of
guilt, what's proved by his refusal to have
his case tried by council OF which DR..
sroRRs and Dr. BUDINGroN are mem
bers! Could any council OF neghboring
churches be gathered which did not in
'lude these powerful ones? 1t il plain that
L could not he brought together. Yet Mr.. |
BEEcHER says "Iwou't, | won't" be tried |
by any such "hodge-podge council as |
me containing these eminent ministers.
1t looks, however, ~ if the settlement Of |
he scandal was near at hand What will |
De the result Of Mr., BEEcHER's convictions
Vill he step down and out? OF course he
must from Congregationalism, but it is not |
o sure that he will have to vacate the
pulpit