, 1876-04-30
CONCRECATlONAllSM.

One Of the benevolent results OF the plyn1-
outh er-Tilton-AdyiRory Coun-
cil which goes to counterbalance the evils OF
the continual agitation Of Athe scandal" ia the
light shed by the discussion Of its character
upon the question Of the nature and value of
Cougregationalism as a religious syRtem.
The polity OF this cnurch-or. mora correctly
speaking, OF the Congregational Church-is
being discussed by some OF the ablest men OF
that " faith and order,"-Dr. Storrs, Dr.. Bacon,
Mr.. Beecher, and DR.. 6turtevant, President of
Illinois College, being among the disputants.
The views Of these eminent cOntroverslaliats
arc oy no means as harmonious as the nature OF
the question at issue aud the supposed unity OF
expect. Indeed. it is becoming evident
that there ,s = "Hign Church" and
q 'sLow Church party among Congregational
lsts, as well a. among Episcopalian8.-the form
differing not essentially from Prasbyterlanism,
which recognizes the necessity aud proprietv Of
higher judicatory than the individual church,
and the latter maintaining that the local church
is the highest ecclesiastical tribunal on earth.
from which there ls no appeal: Dr.. Storrs, OF
Brooklyn, appears On the field as champion of
tho High Church" party, while Henry Ward
Beecher stands az the vindlcator of the latter,
supported By DR.. Ssurtey8nt, 8nd other dstin-
gulshed men, who have taken up the gauntlet
thrown down by the Church Of the Pilgrims.
We must confess that, ut the present writing.
the Low Church party seem to have their haush-
ty antagonist upon the hip, and that DR.. Storrs
wiii be compelled to betake himself to the shell
ter Of either the Episcopalian or Presbyterian
Church. in order to escape the sturdy blows with
which his opponents have sought to crush his
helmet
The present attitude Of Dr. Storra serves to
give currency to the charge, which has been
freely made BY his opponents that he occupies
the unenViable position OF being a Congrega-
tioaahst only in name Which his spirit, tenden-
cies, and the logic OF his position, all indicate
thst his sympethies are With the hleEarchal and
presbyterial chnr2hes.
The reveatio1fof this fact will go far to nullify
any utterapce Of DR.. Storrs OF the question OF
the nature and sigt iticance of the late Advisory
Council for, if its work eau only be set aside
and repudisted as ''un- Congregational by an
''un-Congregational " doctrine On the part Of the
learned Doctor, it can hardly be condemned, but
the condemnation must fall upon Dr.. 6toErs
himself
The most trenchsnt blows which have been
given By the ''Low Church party, so far a. i
have observed the controversy, hare been de-
hvered by President Siurteyant- Referring to
the resolutions Of censure of the "Adv1sory
Council, bT the Church Of the Pilgzims,-doubt~
less from DR.. Storrs' pen,-he eayss
Ny first criticism is that authority can, believe
be found in any respectable Congregational writer for
using the phrase Church "1n any such
Eense aa that which 1t Is here employed. It is
ing under centralized Systems Of Church Gore1nment,
and under the influence OF the ideas which such
Systems foster. often speak Of the Congregational
We emile 1t their Ignorance Of that Of which they are
assuming TO speak and never ourselves the words
the Congregational form. Tho drst impression we
received In reading this first sentence Of the ocumept
WAS one Of the profoundest wonder that such q use
OF language should have emanzted from the Church
Of the Pilgrims nnd its renowned PASTOR
ns.le moro @ rejection. however, disc1oses 10 our
barhar1sm in our denominational literature. It is
more md worse than that. Changcs in forms OF
speech generally Imply t corresponding changes in
Of principle which Is fundamentally at variance With
our Whole pofty, and subEersive Of it-a principle
and proclaimed Till lie had already parted With al Of
Congregationalism except the name.
That principle is that there is On earth organic
church, separate from the local society Of believers
having and administering an authoritative govern-
ment over ali the local churches IN gwen fellowship
The P1esnyte5i4n, Episcopal Catholic, and all hier-
flness Of such general organization Precisely at
this point all Congregational churches are at issue
tai system without which there can be no Congregs
hona1ism Is that there eccles1hstca authority
but that Of Jesus Christ above and having authority
wk3 denies this principle Is contradiction in tsrms.
There can be no such aystem Of Congregational law
other than the Law Of Chris. himself IS written in the
divine Word, Ia here claimed How wzs that code
Df law enacted7 Is it answered by the DEGREES Of
syuods and the decisions Of regularly organized and
orderly Councils This can never be No principle
IS better understood among us than that tie whole
Junction Of Syuods and Councils il advisory. They
an advise they cannot egislate Their acts never
a,re the force Of authoritative law. They can have
authority whatever but the there
IT," TO claim for them any other authority is to
trike blow at the very foundation Of Congregation
lsm It it, as the Christian N,rTor has well said,
new Congregationalisn. - Congregationalism
rhich tg no Congregationalism+-a system unknown |
on. fathers, except they knew it well, to resist
nd reject it. ]
81 must not be understood to deny thst thero are
rincinles In and underlying our eystam which are
ecoonized by Us as obligatory. There prtn-
iples Many Of them expressed IN the DEGREES Of
ynods and tho decisions at Councils. But they do not
erira their authority from the synods Councils |
mi h,ye affirmed them- They are not made binding
4 iooal churches and indir1duala hy the le2tslsSe