St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1879-06-27

The COngregatiOnalists of Vermont
believe that the Bible contains certain
distinct teachings: why should they be
denied the right of saying so? Why
should they be shut up to such declar-
alton of belief in the Bible alone as
would fail to discriminate them from
half score of other denominations,
who, holding radically dissimilar views,
nevertheless, make the same appeal to
Gods word as their ultimate law. Why
apply rule to orthodox Congregation
alism which you never think of apply
ing to anybody beside? ....
GEORGE LEON WALKER.
Hartford, June IA, 1879. ..-
From the Boston Herald, Secular and sensatiOnal.I
A convention of Congregational min
listers at Burlington, insisted upon a
requirement in the cases of pastors in
the ''historic belief of those churches"
and voted down the right of appeal to
the Bible. 1t has been generally un-
derstood that the Protestants stood by |
the Bible as intallible against the infal-
H6Le authority of the church believed in
by Catholics. Or, as one of the Yer
mont clergymen put it, the Bible has
tested doctrines, instead Of interpreting
UncH. we udluiy SEC nO" ohO fSi
mont Congregationalists can continue
to discipline their members without a
Pope, and, possibly, Holy 1nquisitiOn.
The final vote by which this interesting
action was taken was "a to IL.
Is THERE A CONGREGATIONAL POPERY
IN VERMONT.
From the Boston Journal. Secular and Orthodox
i Al
make is that the Vermont Congrega-
tionalists have virtually. adopted the
Romish view of the authority of the
Bible. The Herald calls excitedly for
Il Pope; the Advertiser predicts an
"ecumenical council of Congregational
lists - and the Springfield Republican,
which has taken the religious affairs of
Vermont under its especial protection,
is in convulsions of righteous indigna-
ton. 1t is with regret that we find
ourselves compelled to differ with these
eminent expOsitOrs of ecclesiastical doc
trines and pOlity, but we fail to see the
Justice of their criticisms. A careful
examination of the resolution adopted,
and of the amendment voted down,
does not disclose to us any such Popish
element as these critics allege. If there
is one feature of Congregationalism
more strongly marked than another, it
is the tendency to have the widest pos
sible freedom to the individual. If
there is one criticism more commonly
made upon Congregationalism than
another, it is that, both as regards doc
trine and discipline, it is too loosely put
together to secure the highest effective
ness.
1t is an open secret, we believe, that
the particular departure from "the his
tOric faith" arrived at in the resolution
cited above has reference to the ques
ton of future punishment. There has
arisen within the Congregational body
a school of thought, of the extent and
influence of which we are not qualified
to speak, which in its teachings or its
! silence on this point verges more close
| ~ upon Uuo OUIiIurvu ~ pc OF UuIVoIsaI-
ism than upon "the historic belief of
the Congregational churches. 1t will
be granted, we presume, that even in a
body sO loosely organized and allowing
such freedom to the individual, as the
Congregational, there must be some
consensus of belief, some agreement up
on essential doctrines which should con-
stitute the basis of action. 1t will be
granted also that to one who holds a
belief in eternal punishment the prob
lens of life and sin and salvation will
hold quite Il different position from
that which they occupy in the views of
one who believes in the final restora-
tiOn, or even in the annihilation of the
impenitent. There is no doubt as to
where Congregationalism has stood on
this fundamental question, from the be-
ginning. The question to be determin-
ed is simply this: When a Congrega-
tional minister finds that, on this or
any other fundamental point of doc
trine, he has ceased to be in accord with
the "historic belief" of his order, shall
he remain where he no longer belongs.
or shall he go where he does belong?
The Congregational churches of Ver-
mont, in convention assembled, give it
is their judgment that the latter is the
tnly honorable and Christian course
and we should suppose that the average
minister would not require the hint to
lelp him to conclusion so obvious.
The Congregational minister who has
accepted Universalism, or Unitarian
} SIN, for example, can remain in the
Congregational fellowship only for one
Df two purposes either to conceal his
Fiews, which is dishonesty, or to preach
) Them, which is treachery, or something
Very like it.
I We may add a word as to the amend
ment which was voted down. This
, proposed to leave the question of de-
parture from the historic faith, First,
; to the Bible, and Second, to the indi-
J Fidual judgment, in default of dis
: linct ecclesiastical decision. The sec
! pnd of these alternatives scarcely re-
: huires discussion. Its effect would be,
? Wactically, to invalidate the resolution
efdfsi i6 f1dTidua d ahH mihstef hfhes think so
| andbo, but you may think what you
= chooe.n AS to the first clause of the
amehment, it is perhaps sufficient to
] say tat its effect would be to open the
4 way o interminable and prOftless dis
cussin. All the Christian sects, how
ever gidely they differ between them
t selves, base their creeds on the Bible !;
: the Universalist has his texts, the UNI
t tariai his, the Congregationalist his,
: and s. on. 1t will not be thought IT.
j reveHnt, we trust, if we recall the tact
T that satan himself quoted Scripture ef-
: fectiply in support of his arguments.
d No god would come from war OF
S texts inside of denomination. The
y real purport of the action of the Yer
mont Congregationalists, as we under
It standit, is simply this: That, in thell
# judgment, the old faith is not out
It grown; that the full acceptance OF i
It is necessary to effective and harmoni
5. GUS work among Congregational minis
o ters !; and that if Congregationalis
a becomes a Universalist or a Unitarian
q ~ :, Doo+;ct 70 tho TIni lists. O