St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1879-06-20
The Congregational Convention.
xciting Debate on the Historic Resolution
Concluded from fourth page.)

Concluded from fourth page.)
luton. 1t seems to say this but after
all it holds that the ultimate standard
is not the Bible but the cOncensus. That
is revolution. There is another ques-
ton whether a brother shall be con-
demned without trial. The case of Mr.
Dudley of Milwaukee has been alluded
to. The trouble in that case Was that
the brethren there did not do theil
duty. An honest man may not know
when he is varying. essentially from the
creed. This throws him on his own
judgment-he must must try and con-
denim himself. We shall gain nothing
by passing this resolution by a majority
and lose much. | do not like the
resolution but can accept it with the
amendment. Had we better not make
a declaration which we can send forth
unanimously
Mr.. Bushee said that when the sup
porters of the resolution tell us it has
no reference to individuals but is sim
pie expression against loose tendencies,
we should believe them. The resolu-
ton is needed to tone up councils to
their duty. When told that we are to
to go back to the Bible, what does it
mean Nothing at all. The question
is, by what standard do we accept the
Bible-if by Congregational standard,
we are COngregatiOnalists. if not, we
are something else. We must have a
standard of Interpretation.
Rev. S. |. Briant has hoped to see
entire agreement in accepting the reso-
luton us amended. The last brother,
says the Bible is nothing, but it is our
our only rule of faith and practice. For
one L shall accept and preach the truth
of the Bible as it comes to me, by care
full study under the guidance of the
spirit of God, us above all human STAN
dards. The resolution at best, needs
some verbal amendment. 1t omits the
word Congregational from the title of
this convention. 1t hits only the pas
tors, of whom we have perhaps thirty
IN this house, and sixty in the state,
and Omlts to require acceptance of the
doctrines of the rest of the two hun
dred Congregational ministers in our
state. If it is meant to apply to all our
ministers, why not say so. 1t would
improve the resolution to omit the word
former, which does not belong there.
But the main objection to the resolu-
ton Is that it is uncOngregatiOnal. 1t
Will tend to increase the uncongreSa-
tional practice of employing stated sup
plies, instead of settling pastors. 1t
will fetter councils.
Mr.. Bushee explained that he meant
only to say that the Bible was nothing,
if not interpreted.
Rev. AID. Barber opposed the amend
ment as putting the Convention on the
extreme ground of private judgment.
The private judgment of man cannot
stand against the judgment of the
church, If left to private Judgment,
we do not know what is truth or even
what Is the true canon of Scripture.
Colenson, judging by his private judg-
ment, throws out the Pentateuch.
Others throw out parts of Isaiah. 1t
will not do thus to cut loose from the
Judgment of the church as expressed in
its councils. Our polity exalts the
council, and the Judgment of the coun-
Gil should be most carefully guarded,
for its action is final.
Rev. Mr.. Olmstead said that if we
wish to say that man may embrace
Unitarianism and Universalism and
keep his standing as Il Congregational
we should adopt the amend
ment. If not, we should adopt the res
olutlOn without the amendment.
Rev. W. L. Herrick presented resO-
lutions adopted by the Orleans County
Conference, to the effect that our Con-
gregational churches have basis of
historical doctrine, which our ministers
should accept and hold, and that the
Convention ought to make clear de-
liverance on the subject.
Rev. MI. Garland read similar reso-
lutiOns of the Lamoille County Confer
ence, and Rev. j. A. Bates said that the
LamoIlle Association had adopted SINH
lar resolutions.
Rev. r. Il. Hall thought the last part
of the amendment unnecessary. The
resolution assumes us a matter of course
that i'll trying ministers Congregational
methods will be adopted. The first
part of the amendment utilities the res
olution. Having been an opponent of
the original resolution, he had accepted
the substitute reported up the commit
tee as Il fair common ground of agree
ment for both sides. But the adoption
of the amendment would give the case
to one side, to the opponent of the res
OlutiOn.
Rev. S. p. Wilder said when we de-
clare that there must be a standard
other than the word of God, we go back
on the bottom principle of the Reform
alton; we make the majority our pope,
and claim infallibility for the councils
of Nice and Oberlin and Boston. We
cannot go before the world on that is
no inhf nf
and believe his Bible, without instruc-
ton of priest or council, was what Luz
Their maintained, and what Congrega-
tiOnalism has always asserted.
Rev. Henry Fairbanks said amen to
that Let every man open his Bible
and see what it teaches. If it leads him
out of sympathy with the faith of the
Congregational churches, let him 90
where he will find sympathy and aban-
don his claim to Congregational fellow
ship. [Applause.l There will be room
for him across the line which bounds
our denomination and he can still be
treated as Christian brother.
Rev. E. L. Hooker thought a council
had a right to say to man who aban
dons portions of the Congregational
faith, you have your right to private
Judgment; the council has it's right of
judgment and you differ with us so far
that you should not stay with us.
Rev. Mr.. Cobleigh believed in indi
vidual freedom and in giving a man
freedom. to go out of company where
he does not belong.
Rev. F. B. Phelps of East st. Johns
bury said if men want to wallow in res
toration or humiliation let them: but
don't let them come into our pulpits.
He trusted the amendment would he
voted down. Under it a man might
preach MOrmonism if he said he believ-