The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1903-04-05

\, !.
4 Before he comes to q detailed discussion
of the schism in the Congregational churches
a New England. which Is commonly said
20 have begun In the year 1915. Mr.. Chad
wick points out in his fourth chapter that
Jonathan Edwards probably did more than
any one else In the eighteenth century. ex-
oept possibly Wakefield, to bring In the Uni
tartan day. "No num- says our author,
scould think so powerfully and acutely AZ
Edwards did, and not set many others to
thinking. after the fashion OF Abraham
when he went out of Haran-not knowing
WHITTIER We are reminded that Edwards
insisted stoutly on the right OF the new gen.
erations to revive the thinking Of the DID,
There soon arose men who turned to uses
other than thos, which he contemplated
the fundamental premise laid down by him
when he declared that she who believes
principles because our forefathers affirmed
them makes idols Of them, and it would be
no humility but baseness of spirit for us to
judge ourselves incapable of examining
principles which have been handed down
70 US. Mr. Chadwick reminds us that II
was in 1874 that Edwards's dread Of the
Arminian invasion reused him to the pitch
Of those terrible sermons which produced
the Great Awakening OF the following
year, and melted Whitefeld to cross the
ocean In i740 to SOW New England with the
wheat and tares of enthusiastic piety and
party strife. Mr.. Chadwick recognizes
that Whiteheld's visits TO this country
marked the stages Of great recoil from his
theology. and from the exaggerations OF his
Gerry zeal Between Whiteheld's first visit
and his second in 1744. a critical temper had
Get in which Edwards's Thoughts on the
Revival, and Chauncy's 'Seasonable
Thoughts had helped to generate. Before
whitefield's next coming N76l) the reaction
had 90 gathered strength that 1t had swept
Edwards from his Northampton pulpit in
temporary disgrace with fortune and mems
eyes
1t is evident that nobody in our day has
more carefully studied than has the author
OF the book before us the causes OF the
Unitarian schism. Two men, he says.
stand out from all others in the earliest
stares of the revolt from Whitefeld's CAL
yinism, to wit Charles Chauncy of the
First Church in Boston and Jonathan May
hew Of the West Church. Chauncey's
Reasonable Thoughts on the State Of Re-
trion in New England O743) is generally
Acknowledged to have been the most ef-
fective criticism OF Whiteneld and bis
friends. .It claimed for q diligent use Of
the ordinary means Of grace a more eff
Gent operation than that Of revivalism.
with its spasms Of sense and sensibility.'
Mayhew was dilirnt in republishing EN-
lyn's and other English Unitarian books.
MAYHEM. has been described as "the first
clergyman in New England who expressly
and openly opposed the scholastic doctrine
e -soG -ho hno
nanifestly read his writings, says that,
rs to the nature of Christ. he was more
Arian than Socinian, but preferred to leave
the matter where it is left by the New Testa-
ment--not sharply defined. As early as
1850, according to DR.. Peabody. there was
only one Calvinist preacher in Boston, the
minister Of Brattle Street Church. and he
had q liberal congregation. while Eckley
Of the Old South Church was a liberal
with an orthodox congregation. Lemuel
Briant OF Braintree preached in i749 a SER
mon in which he denounced the abeurdity
and blasphemy Of depreciating moral vir-
tue, and John Adams, one Of his parishion-
ers. has recorded that in 1850 he could
count many Unitarian ministers besides
his own, together with lawyers, physiciana,
tradesmen and farmers. who were liberals
10 theology.
Attention IL directed by Mr.. Chadwick
to the fact that the first definite schism
was not at any point along the Congrega-
tionalist line, where It seemed threatening.
but at the fountainhcad Of New England
Episcopacy, to wit: Kings Chapel Boston.
In i7ss the proprietors Of Kings Chapel
saw their way TO striking out from the
Prayer Book everything savoring Of Trini-
tartan doctrine. James Freeman. grand
father by marriage OF James Freeman
Clarke, was their lay reader till 1887, when,
no Bishop being willing to lay his hands
upon head 80 full Of heresy. he received
lay ordination at the hands Of his vestry-
men. Mr.. Chadwick thinks that, although
Freeman was increasingly loved and VEN
Grated till his death In 1888. his close alliance
with the English (Socinian) Unitariana
made him a Questionable figure In the eyes
OF Boston Unitarians OF the stricter (Arian)
sort. Among the incidents preceding the
schism should be noted the fact that the
minister Of the Federal Street Church
from 1857 till his death in l7Ds was Jeremy
Belknap. who in 1892 published q Uni
tartan sermon.
A we have said. the year 1915 Ia usually
Axed upon as the beginning Of the Uni.
tartan controversy, but Mr.. Chadwick ID
undoubtedly right in pronouncing 1t no
more precise than are the majority Of the
dates current as the starting points OF
important events. The schism OF the
Unitarians from the orthodox body, or
perhaps, we should rather say the schism
Of the Calvinists from tho Liberal body
was not q sudden cleavage. The readers
Of Mr.. Chadwick's book will see that all the
way from the beginning OF the eighteenth
century. and even from an earlier date
there were signs Of q partition OF Con-
gregationafsm-the signs being. on the
one hand. the growing strength Of the
liberal party. and on the other. an increas-
ing disposition TO exclude liberals from
fellowship, or to withdraw from an assembly
IN which they were too strong TO be ex.
Guided. Due stress 10 laid by our author
on q point to be borne In mind. namely
that % far as a considerable part Of New
England was concerned. II was the Cal.
vinists and not the Unitarians who se-
ceded. Not, Of course, that the liberals
constituted the main body Of Congrega'
tionalists-they were 30 in Boston and III