Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1880-01-30

one that we need and must get stand
ard as Il test to which all Congregations
2 ministers shall submit all their nterpre
tations of Scripture and their claims t,
= drnominational fellowship We may al
l NIT argi'n1cai cu"sa, what was alleget
by some in argument againsS>the provi
so,-that the Bible is nothing, unless III
terprctcd by denominationally authori
, tativc standard But none the less Is II
+ true that src hare that STANDARD nat get
Such development seems to us essential
" m-Congrngational Let those who
wish to developc dcvelope. We clam
the right to stay on the historic ground
consecrateI alike to freedom and to Evan
gelical doctrine.
'enc Appeal so Scripture a Source oi
strength
Nor does il seem to us that tile princi-
Pile, hitherto characteristic of Congrega-
tionalisln, which refuses to recognize
creeds rs authoritative standards con
tains any element of doctrinal weakness.
1t is on, strength. and the reyy thing o.
Wh;ch IRE boast Our fathers scorned 10
fight from behind walls They sought
the open field, and desired nothing but
fair encounter. Creeds were to them. as
defcnccs. worse than useless. They be-
lievtl ; they knew what they believed !;
and by the force Of their own faih they
defended the purity of their communion.
\ Congregational council, imbuel with
the spirit of our fathers, would hardly
listen to Il man who should undertake to
justify any doctrine which seemed to
them unscriptural, by appeal to the creed
Of Westminster.
| Suhiecs;nn q, Crac.I. =, Snrrca ns xvaul
Ii is Il palpable fact that the thirty nine
articles of the English church, and the
thirty-threc doctrinal chapters of the
| Presbyterian church, however useful as
confessions. are as standards of ortho-
doXy worse than useless
Men thoroughly Evangelical, according
To the present Specification of the term,
If they strictly construed those crecds,
could not enter the ministry under them
And men whom We do not account Evan
gelical. claiming the same liberty of
qualified assent which all have claimed
who try To JOIN Il varying orthodoxy to an
unvarying formula, could not be easily
and consistently excluded from fellow
ship. So honest, and SO heretic:ll. a man
ms Charles kisgsley, trained to qualified
assent. could answer, when charged with
rcpEIiating substantial parts Of the arti
rles of the church, ''.UcHtiris i0pudca-
HsSin,C'
ConSregationalism has plainly seen the
folly and the peril of binding a living
church. nourishcd and growing by the
living word, to any creed which is the
work of uninspircd men. Simplicity and
godly sincerity are virtues which Con-
gregationalism pre-eminently seeks to
cultivate
The demand that assent for sub
stance he given TO some formula of doc
trine, illustrates its own purpose and
tempts L. some measure of mntruthful-
ness at the door to tine sacred office.
The strictest sense Of honor will forbid
the making of contrac: where one can
not himself know the precise extent Of
his OBLIGATIONS And genuine self
respect viii deter one from a contract So
vaguely expressed as to invite unjust
charges of breach Of faith.
But the evil is aggravated when scve-
raj creeds not coincldcnl are made the
standard 10 which substantial assent is
demanded. No civil court would try to
administer justice under as many editions
of the law, marked by as many differences,
%
which the congregational ministers of
Vermont are to he halcd. Nor could any
ecclesiastical court wisely enter on such
task, though judge, jury and defendant
Were united i'll one person.
The task is too great for human abili-
ties What is actually the standard, does
not appear. Ii the largest creed, then
let it he said. Ii the smallest. let that
I.D : Al
need to know just what. If no creed in
particular iut several III general, then
the required assent, ltseIl quahfled by
new o,''''hr''i-s III me word suostlli-
,l'''' ,' Is III neS' "rluSiNe Pr"tectioh 10
l Doctrine. In feAllfN SUP
lsc'' I'D t','''l l'i"- ll.h nose
eii''i'.''.S i''"''il''I' NilIn, Iln'iihi; men
n'iiiis'' i: 10 /" 'iy'I' i'' "'ii' tnTl' /" pu'
Iii'5 "'I'' I"" .il:'l '', l''1Iiii S.'l''''-
,,li. III ti', ''i,r l'T''fii',; SlIusile pe'Wtfli
an M 'oii'',6' i'"' "i"'!I WINS;
n''' i'iiS''iS f ''' ''''i' una. S''h nli'
"tserNr '"f ai'l'ii'e "i 'c'''si's.ie''i p nv
',''' '''eii ''i''' i''''H,'as vi
,n S,ieiiS'n "','a tn''r .Is"ia''' "a s'apii'.
i"o'' "'''i 'ii'' '''''i ~ ~, i'"i! seem u,
','ni'H' "'"HlHS "i'i ''o f''iici "a
h''i'i,''i ''i''S'H '' i'''f''iiEe 'hc iisn,
"i m "Plc"i 'l'ii ,i''" W ,''iil''"i'' "ii',
'his iei"H', h''' "''ii "iS't q" 'no Si'''i;u
'i't' ~ sue "!l''i " M'i' 'iii'"ee' 1t Noui''
open '"t "''f ", ~ '"ri,iS oi rtiiSi''a
riI"i' tH' iii'N i':'"i' 'ihi,H'h'ion is' 'h,',
"p''i,ii's are io'iiiS 'iicir h"i',
upon u.s. anu 'ii'' our MINISTER'S anu
,""i''''' .'''i'"' 'o 'i'iS'',' !" 'ii''ii''''',
'i,'hi II - s''lis 10 us .l'.i Ill '.l' recent
nr'i"ii ,.. "i 'ne convention ihe interests oi
l. u,'''i''i' S'n'I th' sie'''s'
x;'i'iiini '''''' i''S ever "'iaiie" ti''''' III
''''i'
h' necessary ."r 'he ''ro' i,"'
We do not forget that some who voted
against the iIrst proHls" regarded IL 'is a
mere sup'rliilty, Il virtual repetition oil
what WAS already expressed III the res"in-
tioh- W" nope 'h't tiie number oi these
Is hrS''. For We are sure that all such
VIII ShdiN review thc record, 10 see
whether through lhaiNcrtence they may
have lmg"'fllI'd principles thnt they hoid
dear.
Even ii til" rr"I!so were rrpetltiOlis,
the fact that ii WAS offered proved that it
was not 80 regarded by all And if be-
tween the meinhers of the Convention
there existed relations of mutual conf
dencc We se,. no! why the desire of even
a small number for more cilectunl guard
ing Of tn" rcsou,innagai abuse. should
not have been granted by adopting al
amendment whose only fault was its su-
pcriluity Never before have Congrega-
tinnalists, eager to maintain the right Of
appeal to the Bible, shrunk from so much
of repetition rs was ncedful To make their
meaning clear to the wayfarinc man.
II is moi without significance. that each
one Of the three members of the commit
tee, who for twelve months had pondered
what they meant to say. and how tosay it.
declared in debate that the proyiso was
nat r,u,,jti.us 6af cout,oyy 10 thc rcso-
hticn. The committee from whom the
resolution cnme. and mos. of the sneak
ers in IFS behalf. demonstrated that il did
not clearly con.nin the priuciple of the
uroyiso And even though the principle
IF thr prnyisn were really contained in