Morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven [Conn.]) 1848-1894, 1884-04-18
Installation Ceremonies.

hS60AL OAVAMc8s
The Rev. Charles W. Park and his relations
towards the Congregational denomination. to
which he belongs, and its approved creeds
have been prominently before the public
both here and elsewhere already. II will be
remembered that the Howard avenue Con-
RreeationaI church asked Mr.. Park to be
their pastor last summer, and called eoun-
Gil which rejected Mr.. Park on account of
his views. on infant baptism chiefly. The
church, however, said they wanted Mr.. Park
and, therefore, engaged him as their acting
pastor. He has been laboring with the
church in that capacity since that time, and
has given such good satisfaction that the
church voted to call another council in the
hope that the council would find Mr.. Park
acceptable.
This council met yesterday afternoon at
o'clock in the Howard avenue Congregational
church Prof. Fisher was nominated for
moderator, but declined to serve: Rev. I.
@. Meserve was then elected moderator and
Rev. Cyrus P. Osborne, of Brsnford, was
chosen scribe.
Professor Barbour arose and stated that as
the college was enjoying vacation when the
letter of invitation was sent his church had
not received it yet, and therefore he could
not claim the privileges of the council. A
motion was made by DIR. Newman Smyth
that DIR. Barbour be allowed to be member
of the council Professors Harris, Fisher
and others objected SO strenuousIy, saying
that such course would be out of order,
that DIR. Smyth finally withdrew his,
motion.
The scribe then read the call, and the CLERK
of the church, W. N. Butricks. read the fol-
lowing, which explains why the call was
issued.
CATER the action of the council which
met here last July, advising that the church
do not install the Rev. @. W. Park, it vas
deemed best by the church to temporarily
employ him, hoping that such course
would enlighten as to what would be best
for the best interests of the church in future.
mo discourtesy was intended toward the
council in this step, nor do the church con
slider that in this action they were doing
what would be considered contrary to the
advice of the council or uncongregational.
Mr.. Park has now been with us about ten
months We find his preaching evangelical
and his work among us satisfactory. The
church has, therefore, extended new call to
MT. faEk duO dSAcu GnO d0EACO VI IAO
churches OIL his installation, trusting that
with the light which will now be thrown on
the matter they will see their way clear to
comply with the wishes of the church"
The list of delegates was then read and the
following gentlemen were found to be pres
emit: DIR. Newman Smyth, Rev. l. G.
Meserve, Rev G. P. Osborne of Branford,
Franklin S. Bradley, A. w. DeForest, Rev.
Burdett Hart J. P. Smith, Rev. W. w. Nc
Lane, 81. A. Darlington, Rev. j. J. Willard
of Westville, Rev. Spencer 81. Bray, A. D..
Bissell, VIM. Atwater, G. /, Scranton, Rev.
Thomas r. Bacon, John G. North, Rev.
George II. Hubbard, Montclair, N. j., A. o.
Bradford, T. Fl. Benton, L. B. Morse, Presi-
dent Porter, Prof. Harris, Prof. George p.
Fisher. Prof. Timothy Dwight, Prof. George
T. Ladd. Rev. G. NJ. Noyes, Rev. Charles
Il. Williams, Rev. Erastus Blakeslee, Rev.
G. A. Bray, Rev. D. W. Clark, Rev. N. G..
Squires, Rev. Joseph Anderson of Water
bury, Rev. G. E. Park of West Bedford,
Mass.
and said the council was entirely out of
order. It had no right to sit. It was uncon-
stitutional, inasmuch as no Congregational
council had right to pass upon the action
of former council. He called for the reading
of the record of the last council and added
that he believed there was not quorum
present when the council met.
The Rev. Thomas R. Bacon said that he
remembered as well as he remembered any
thing that there was no quorum present, and
said that the matter of quorum was not
once brought up, and therefore the action ~
the council NJ entirely valid. The church
thinks that circumstances have been changed
and have sent out letters missive to the differ
emit churches. A majority of the churches
think that there is an occasion for
a council or they would not have
sent their delegates here. It is
true that one church has not sent delegates.
But the others have, and we have come here
with instructions from our respective church
es and have no right to dissolve the council
because we don't think there is any occasion
for it. think the debate is entirely out of
order"
Professor Fisher: 81 do not concur at all
with those views. A council met and acted
upon a certain question. A few months
later another council is called IN to consider
the fact whether new case has arisen or
not The acceptance of the invitation is
binding upon no one. What we need to I'M
derstand is whether there is really new case
II this matter of calling second councils is to
be suffered to go on we will have no end of
them. One council will be called
and will take action, and then
another will be called which will take an en-
tirely different action. That makes the bus
mess of church government by council an ut
ter farce"
President Porter disagreed with Professor
Fisher. He thought q second council could
be called when the need of one was evident.
Without that power there would be no sp
peal whatever.
delegate from Montclair, N. j., said that
infant baptism was the only question men
toned in the objection to Mr.. Park by the
former council. He said further: 81 know
one man who voted against installing Mr.
Park, although he said he really did not see
any objection to Mr.. Park, as he did not con-
slider his stand on the question of infant bap-
tism of enough Importance to cause his re-
lection. That sole point against Mr.. Park
has come up in the church and has been an
swered by Mr.. Parks performing the bap-
tism. In view of that evident change of |
ground I think the case is reopened"
Professor Fisher: ''Can we be assured that |
Mr. Park has altered his belief on that sub |
iect? If so, possibly we might have a new |
case. Mr.. Park is here; let him tell US in a |
word If he has changed his belief. I pre- |
sumo the council will give him permission " |
DIR. Smyth doubted whether the council |
could question Mr.. Park before it was orr |
ganized. The statement of the church was |
before them on the question of fact that he |
aad changed his practice, and that was suf-
icient.
Mr. Fisher objected, and then held
Y whispered conversation with Professor
D wight, who did not take part in the discus
ZION.
After some further discussion President
Porter moved that the papers be deemed |
sufficient and the council proceed with the
examination of the candidate. He added in
of his motion that the history of
bore evidence to the fact |
hat second councils had been called when
here existed reason for them. He thought
hat in the present case there was a reason
or reconsidering old grounds and consider
ng new ones. He sympathized with Profess
or Fisher in his condemnation of the bad
Practise of calling second councils when
here was no valid reason for them.
Professor Fisher moved to amend Presi-
lent Porter's motion and make it read that
he council be by themselves.
The amendment was lost and the original
notion prevailed. At this juncture Profess
ors Fisher, Dwight and Harris withdrew.
Rev. Mr.. Park gave statement of his re-
igiods beliefs. He said he adhered to the
apostles Greed, the Nicene creed and the
reed recently adopted for Congregationalists
y committee appointed for that purpose
Ie believed in infant baptism in the sense of
onsecration. Christian parents should con-
ecrate their children to God. He was will
ny to perform the rite of infant
aptism according to the sstab.
shed usage of the church, but preferred
be simpler form of conservation. He be-
eved further that no soul could be saved
kept by conversation, and no soul would
"a lost until God had done all he consisfen