Morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven [Conn.]) 1848-1894, 1892-10-25

~ people in Connecticut have ached | q
r the appointment of board of visitors - :.
= your general association to prevent =
our professors from teaching heresy.
[any things, in state and church, are best =
one by individual association, and, I am
rec to say that belong to the party which
elie7es that missionary work is best done :.
iRidly held to account by a vigilant con-
tituenoy. You will remind me that If |
he churches want voice in the nomina-
ion and election, they are entitled to it on
;he very ground which have advocated.
You are right. You can change your ma
,hinery when and as often as you please.
You might bring such pressure to bear
upon the corporation of Yale university as
e. tbe 9l'1 dir ,ss one' q board elected
by the Congregational churches of this
Do you think it would do
any better work If you made the changea
I have been wholly Indifferent
to the question which has been debated for
q number of years among US, as related to
the organization of the American Board,
because no vital principle is involved in
the discussion. To me 1t matters not who
Is in and who is out, and how anybody gets
in-so long as the work Is vigorously |
pushed. may have my views on what is |
best, but my preferences have nothing to
do with my Congregationalism; and !
claim to be an old fashioned and radical
Congregationalist. Congregationalism is
machinery, leaving individuals to associate,
If they 80 choose, and recognizing
tho right of churches to associate if they SO
choose. Both are permissible; neither is
obligatory to the exclusion of the other.
The tendency toward ecclesiastical central
ization, toward corporate Indignation,
toward the consolidation of churches into
q church, is one which still calls for re-
sistance. In this department Congrega-
tionalism has still a mission. 1t has seemed
to me sometimes as If we were in danger Of
surrendering our ancient heritage. The
fever of Observation-Disclosures is burning in
our veins. We are anxious to build up a
great, compact, national organization, so
that we may not suffer by comparison with
other bodies. We imagine that some CEN
trail advisory body, like the National Coun-
Gil, introducing uniformity into our
church life and methods, formulat-
ing creed and reducing our
benevolent organizations to common
would be good thing. We are told that
full grown man cannot wear the garments
of his boyhood. We have outgrown our
infancy; we have become national and may
be cosmopolitan. We are faced by new
conditions and problems and we must
adjust ourselves to our new environment.
Let us do our utmost, let us have the best
methods, but let us not surrender the
principle for which we stand. That princi-
pie is resistance to ecclesiastical uniformity
and Capitalization. Our unity has been in
our diversity, our strength has been in our
radical democracy. Congregationalism
cannot take on the features of a compact
denominationalism and remain true to it.
self. There are certain evident advantages
in denominationalisn. 1t fosters an "esprit
de CORPS" which, is lacking in INDEPENDENCE,
unless, as in the case of the Baptist
churches, the INDEPENDENCE can be united
with some distinctive doctrine and custom.
It is gratifying to know that the standard
around which you rally enlists cosmo-
poitan constituency, and that it is march
ing to dominance. 1t requires some self
| denying heroism to be content with COM
| parative obscurity. But some bodies must
! remain obscure or fade away in the contest
| for supremacy. ongregationalism, in its
| origin, was severance from ecclesiastical
| dictation, a voluntary and deliberate retire
| ment from denominational ascendency,
and we are digging our own grave if, now
| that we boast over half a million of COM
| municants in our American churches, We
| initiate the example of those from whom
we separated simply to enjoy our freedom
| in Christ. Congregationalism has nobler
mission than to become a great sect. It
stands for the local chufch, for the compe-
| tency of any body of Christian believers to
| manage its own affairs in submission to
the will of Christ and in obedience to
| the great commission. I am not an alarm
ist. I do not believe that denominationsl
Capitalization can ever be grated upon
our system. It may prove to be a tempo
rary malady, but the centralizing tendency
Is hostile to our true vocation, and I have
sometimes thought that there might be a
call for independent and unassociated
churches in order to preserve the Congre-
gstionalism of 300 years ago. For such
independence u.s. not isolation and schism.
1t simply accentuates the fact that ecclesi-
astical association is human substitu te
for Christian fellowship. Not that these
two are necessarily antsgonistio, but eithe,
may exist apart from the other. And
Christian fellowship is of supreme impor-
lance. To this living and universal fellow.
the great head Congregationalism
is pledged by Its very claim of independ
ency. 1t may feel more closely drawn to
| ward those who accept and maintain its
great principle, who sympathizs with it il
the Reputation of theological dogmatism
and in the protest against ecclesiastical
Capitalization; but consistency will compe
it to exhibit the spirit of fellowship toward
all communions of Christian believers.
cannot be polemic; it must be irenic. I
must, perforce, act on the policy of non
. Intervention in missionary fields, at HON,
and abroad. 1t is bound to concede tina
the churches of its planting in distan
lands have the right to govern themselve
l according to their own preferences. It
very independency fits it to act as leaven
ing force for Christian unity; for it's ambi
ton is not to give supremacy to on
, theological school, and to reduce al
,, contending for Its own freedom t.
defend and honor the liberty O
ALL For myself believe that Congrega
tionalism holds the key to the unity o
, Christendom in the independence of the 10
,, cal church. The Lutheran communion, a
you know, is split into three or four grea
warning sections in this country. Plan
,, of union have been numerous and non
have thus far succeeded. The doctrina
, and ritual differences seem irreconcilable
One of their leading divines recently mad
this startling and apparently paradoxica
statement: "Our true unity lies in our di
versity." 1t twas true note; and it i
,, the Congregational solution of the vexe,
:. problem. Unity will not come by readin,
Calvinism in or out; it will not come b.
the acceptance of the historical episcopat
and hypothetical ordinations; it will no
. come by the universal prevalence of i'm
, mersion as the only valid form of Chris
a tian baptism; it will not com
by the universal supremacy of al
ecclesiastical polity-for the simple reason
! that not one of these things enters into tn
substance of the Christian confession an,
testimony; it can only come by the fire.
. concession that each local body Of believer
has q right to pass judgment upon all mat
ters under debate, following its own en-
!, lighteaed judgment without detriment t.
O its full Christian standing and not pre-
q Stunning to condemn those who reach diff
J ferent conclusion and formulate a diff
ferent practice. No one, in my Judgment
, has spoken more soberly and sweetly OF
= this great theme than DR.. E. 81. Sears
> twenty years ago, in his volume on tn
fourth gospel: "We cannot move TOWARD
, the Christ without coming closer to eacl
= other. Leave out him and his unitizin,
|, word, and let everyone strike out for him
a self, and we tend to a erumbling individu
! alism, to endless distraction and confu
, sion. But those who acknowledge Jesu
. Christ as the supreme authority and guide
and enter more into his all revealing mind
: are making progress toward the harmonic
q ing truths which he represents. Howeve
wide apart they may be at the start, thei
| nrOoraaa ia ever IN nonvaroino 1ipao Es