Litchfield enquirer., 1877-08-16

popu4alon increases 10 the umiI our soll
 can support. their improvement must de-
 pend on superior industry, superior thrift,
 and superior intelligence.
 1 H8 Just or Unjust?
 LIBERAL OR LAx.-July IS. I was in
 Litchfield Go. Conn, at council held for
 the ordination of a young man. To The
 examination developed decided general doctrinal shakiness in the candidate. [bl Though denying it, he held strictly to the
 moral view of the atonement;1c] did not
 believe infant baptism; [d] thought there I might be probation after death; Tel was
 confident there were many statements in
 both Old and New Testaments which were not true.;T His views on inspiration
 were very far from those held by onr own churches, though claimed to be those of l Prof. E. Tn the Seminary where he studied. LII The candidate expressed not doubts.
 but strong convictions on the above and other subjects. Every member of the council expressed disapprobation of the 1 young mans views; yet voted to ordain
 him, because CD he was sincere and hon. est; CD he was in the veaLy state, and | would outgrow it; (3) because, as the
 brother from Hartfordkwho preached the sermon said, young men nowadays were generally loose on fthese subjectsts and most of them came out alll right after
 ward. The members of this council were 1 all good men and true. Holding aconscien. tiously the faith once delivered to the 1 saints. No suspicion has ever attached
 to any of their names. But did they show liberality orlaxity Tn introducing an opinionated young aman, holding such views, as @ teacher to our churches? =" Visitor" i,s The Advonce, August 2d 1877.
 MR. EDITOR. will pardon few notes from me, as this article refers to the ordination of our young minister:
 GlThis is the opinion of our mysterious visitor. The council had no such opin- ion. The people. who rejoice in him, do not think so. The audience wiio listened to the examination did not think SO. These all thought the young candidate
 manifested decided general doctrinal STABILITY with unusual modesty, and freedom from dogmatism, state of mind which our, visitor did not appreciate. To He declared that he held to the so called moral view of the atonement with additions, he thought there was more in the atonement than is expressed in the moral view. What does Visitor mean by the phrase ''though denying it?" He distinctly declared that he held it, he de- nied not. This phrase, conveys dis tinct n0n-truth .txaf E.. -.... -
 [c]i The candidateT distinctly affirmed his beilef in baptism as rite enjoined in the Scriptures; declared he soould 6apttze S'efa'sts at the request of parents, and when a child had grown to maturity could baptize him aga1n at his own re- quest.
 Iflmy statement is true, does Visitor tell the truth in this sentence?
 dlSThe candidates language was this, HThat some soul might repent after death he was not prepared to deny." Is this modest expression equivalent to the language Visitor puts in his mouth? [el The candidate avowed his belief in the whole scriptures as constituting an infallible guide in religion; did not be- lieve the Bible was given to teach Science or was always correct in matters of histo- ry; thought inspiration of the New Tes- lament higher than that of the Old as having more of the very words of Jesus. Is Visitors statement on this point fair, just, true? Does it give exactly such an expression of opinion as the language I have quoted? u Upon the question of Probation as possible after death and upon question relating to the Darwinian theory of the origin of mans lower nature. he expres- sed doubts not convictions, strong OF weak. Upon topics alluded to in notes 0, c, e. be did express strong convictions? modest ly to be sure. but frankly and clearly. But does Visitor represent fairly his con- 7ictiops.' *se ,i9f'i 5nR3sff'~rif
 Since Visitor made his appearance in | the Advance. I have conversed with many intelligent auditors of this examination, and with several members of the council, and they all agree that the misrepresenta- tions in Visitors article are outrageous.
 Many points invite comment. but for bear, your space forbids ss +- .t IL Who was this Visitor? Was he lay man untrained in the discrimination. and representation of ideas upon religious subjects? Some man of little intelligence. but much conceit? Or was he some dog matist that will not allow any other ex- pression offopinien than that couched in his own pet phrases? a
 TAs former supPoaition seems5 support ed by one expression in his letter. He speaks of the young man as being in a vealy state. Clergymen do not often in- dulge in slang. E Whoever he may be, he has insulted a young and sensitive preacher of the gos- Fpel; church that has with singular una nimity chosen that minister for their pas tor, and council composed of ministers and laymen as worthy as can be found in this county. A mysterious visitor. he came nnannounced, and remained unrec.. ognized; he has borne his false witness, and retired into the mysterious darkness from which he emerged.
 Let dafkness cover him sfs. sS F. w. G. The papers have been publishing lists
 of the millionaires of the Pacific coast. The San Francisco Bulletin mentions over
 twenty each of whom is worth more than
 four millions The Bonanza firm of
 Flood. O'Brien, Mackey & Fair are rated
 at 100 millions, and thesfonr chiefs of
 the Central Pacific Ring at half that l amount. These rich Californians are all I young and all self-made men. Mir.