Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

in the three following particulars, and in these only: "First in using certain words, while you attach to them very different ideas. Secondly, in making a human creed, instead of the Bible, your standard of religious truth. And thirdly, in denouncing and condemning those who will not yield to your dictation." p. 127. We shall not undertake to inform the gentleman in how many particulars beyond these we agree or disagree: We certainly do not agree in these.

103. "Those who will not make this creed of the dark ages (the Assembly's Catechism) their standard of religious truth, must be excluded from your communion." p. 130.-We could refer to great numbers, who have not made "this creed of the dark ages their standard of religious truth," nor adopted it as their Confession of faith, who are in full communion in the Orthodox churches.

104. "Not a church (in Connecticut) has the least independence left. All have virtually abandoned the Congregational order." p. 135.-This will be a new discovery to the numerous, long established, and well regulated Congregational Churches of Connecti

cut.

105. "Unitarians "have regarded the parishes of their ministerial brethren (meaning the Orthodox) as sacred ground." p. 136. -They have often intruded into the parishes of Orthodox ministers, with a view to establish Unitarian worship. See p. 155.

106. "They have urged Unitarian minorities in" Orthodox "societies to keep quiet, to pay their ministerial taxes, to attend the Orthodox preaching, and to submit peaceably to Orthodox usurpations of their rights."-They have publicly and strongly "urged Unitarian minorities in Orthodox societies to separate and establish worship by themselves.*

[ocr errors]

107. "Did the Orthodox benefactors of Harvard University bind down their legacies to the maintenance of their religious opinions? No." p.142.-The Henchman legacy was left on the express condition that the persons receiving the avails of it should "profess and teach the principles of the Christian religion, according to the well known Confession of faith drawn up by the Synod of the churches of New England."

Mr. W. intimates, p. 147, that "an Orthodox church has lately excommunicated some of its members for exercising the liberty of attending the communions of another Orthodox church;" and that "an Orthodox Council, with Rev. Mr. Storrs at its head, has sanctioned its proceedings."-We have ascertained the church to which he refers, and have found that his statement is, as usual, incorrect.

108. This Orthodox church has not excommunicated some of

* See a long article in the Christian Register for July 23 and 30, 1825, in which various reasons are urged to show, that Unitarians, residing in Orthodox parishes, ought to separate, and support public worship by themselves.

its members for attending the communions of another Orthodox church."

109. The Rev. Mr. Storrs was not at the head of a Council' convened at the request of this church.

110. The Result of this Council contains no intimation that the members in question ought to be excommunicated.*

111. Speaking of a town in this vicinity, where an Orthodox society has been formed within a few years, Mr. W. says, "One of your disorganizers enters the peaceful fold, and succeeds in turning some of the flock from their present pastor." p. 156.-We have shown already that not a few of the flock had turned from their pastor, and that he had virtually turned from them, before the alleged "disorganiser" came among them. See p. 151.

112. "Their secession takes from the annual salary from five to ten dollars."-A single individual of the seceders paid more than this sum.

113. "Unitarianism has had nothing whatever to do" with the recent persecutions in Switzerland.† p. 157.-We have shown that it has had much to do with them. See p. 153.

114. Separation from the national church was the cause of persecutions in Switzerland."-" It is not separation," says Dr. Smith, "but vital religion, that is the real object of hatred; for many harassments and injuries have been committed upon pious persons, both ministers and others, who remain attached to the established church."

115. Mr. W. says, in conclusion, "I have nothing to say FOR, or against the Unitarian denomination." p. 163.-His readers will judge whether he has had "nothing to say FOR the Unitarian denomination."

We have thus run our eye over the pages of these Letters, for the purpose of exposing, in one view, some of their more palpable misrepresentations. The result is before our readers, and they must be left to draw their own conclusions. We only protest against their concluding that all the statements of our author are fair and accurate, except those which have been contradicted. For we intended, in the outset, to present only a selection from his mistakes and errors, and our limits have compelled us to be even more brief than we intended. The false and slanderous insinuations, and the anonymous tales of scandal, with which these Letters abound, we have not thought it necessary, except in a few instances, so much as to notice. And in regard to some of the persons and places which are named, although we know enough to be satisfied that the statements are incorrect, still as we have not yet re

*See Appendix, Note G.

†This assertion is repeated, p. 160. The false statements which have been contradicted in the foregoing pages are often repeated-some of them many times. Had we been intent on numbers, the contradiction and exposure of them might with propriety have been in every instance, repeated. This, however, has not been done. See Note H.

ceived full and particular information, we have chosen to pass them over in silence. In some instances, we have omitted whole pages together, because the misrepresentations were so numerous, and so closely connected, that we could only condemn them in the gross. We have omitted, too, almost entirely, the many instances of false and injurious statement, in which the error could be resolved into a difference of religious opinion. Indeed, instead of noticing and correcting all the misrepresentations which we have observed, we have to use a favorite expression of some of the friends of our author-we have but just dipped into the subject.' We have but given a specimen of what could be done, were it at all worth while to follow him, in all his devious and distempered wanderings. In view of the whole, we shall not indeed retort the courteous language which he borrows from some of his liberal friends, and say, 'Some Unitarian ministers will lie,' (See. p. 95) but we must say that there is one Unitarian minister who seems morally incapable of touching almost any subject, connected with evangelical religion, without mis-stating and perverting it.

[ocr errors]

We shall detain our readers on these veritable Letters, only while we notice a few particulars, too important to be wholly omitted, and which have been passed over in the preceding remarks. Addressing Professor Stuart, p. 7, Mr. W. says,

"Should a prayerful study of the Bible enable you to discover a slight error in some one article of this long creed, could you retain your situation as Professor? No. This liberty you have sacrificed. The moment you advance in religious knowledge and truth one step beyond the ideas of this human formulary, you must vacate your office," &c.

We could name a certain Unitarian Professor who has long received the income of an endowment given for the support of a man of sound or Orthodox sentiments,"―and also of a legacy given for the support of one who should "profess and teach the principles of the Christian religion, according to the well known Confession of faith drawn up by the Synod of the churches of New England." If Professor Stuart's conscience is like that of this man, why may he not "discover a slight error in some one article of his long creed," and still retain his office in the Theological Institution?

Mr. W. is in the habit of calling certain persons Orthodox, whose Orthodoxy, to make the best of it, sits very loosely upon them. They may aspire to the honor of the name, but obviously they have little more than the name. We have noticed several instances around us, of late, of this kind of management. Individuals, who have not committed themselves too far on the Unitarian side to render a retreat impossible, are beginning to call themselves Orthodox, and in some instances 'reformed Orthodox.' Others are dropping the name Unitarian, and retaining the simple one of Congregationalist. The Christian Examiner tells us, that were it

not "for the existence of a Unitarian sect, there could be no obstacle to the rapid and universal prevalence of Unitarianism.” * The plan, therefore, will be, probably, to get the sect out of the way as fast as possible. Instead of endeavoring to prevail as a sect, an attempt may be expected to mingle silently with the Orthodox denominations, in the prospect of leavening the whole lump. We certainly are not unwilling that any of those who have departed from us should return. If they return in good faith, and with honest and good hearts, they will be welcomed with tears of gratitude and joy. But we have no wish, and no intention (if we can prevent it) too see the old arts of amalgamation and concealment acted over again in Massachusetts. And we take this opportunity to warn our readers—our clerical readers especially-against the impositions of those who are beginning to style themselves Orthodox, and as such claiming our fellowship and confidence, while, if they have repented of their errors, they bring forth no fruit meet for repentance.

The charge of concealment against the Unitarians, Mr. W. declares that he has never been able to understand. p. 70. And if he cannot understand it, after all we have said and written upon the subject, we despair of making it plain to him by any further efforts. We can only refer him, for satisfactory explanations, to several of his own brethren. Let him ask Mr.Parkman what he meant, by attributing to some Unitarian ministers in Boston a 'cautious reserve, so that neither from their sermons, their prayers, nor their private conversation, it could be inferred that they were Unitarians.' Let him ask Mr. Greenwood what he meant by saying, that "the time may be easily remembered when, in our religious world [in and around Boston] there was nothing but distrust on the one side, and fear and evasion on the other; when the self-conceited theologue looked awry on the suspected heretic, and the object of his suspicion answered him with circumlocution and hesitation." Let him consult a certain writer in the Christian Examiner, if he knows who he is, and learn what he meant by saying, "I can remember the time, and I am not old, when, though Boston was full of Unitarian sentiment and feeling, there was no open profession of it. A dead silence was maintained in the pulpit on doctrinal subjects; a silence which was not disturbed by the press."-If Mr. Whitman's own brethren cannot make this subject plain and intelligible to him, it will be vain for us to attempt any further explanations.

Our author informs us, that "since so many churches of the fathers have fallen into the hands of Unitarians, they have been raking up their first covenants, and restoring them to their proper and former standing." p. 134. This cannot be true of all "the churches of the fathers," which have fallen into the hands of Uni

*Sept. 1830; p. 19.

4

tarians, since in some of them, as we are informed, they have now no covenants at all. The formality of covenanting is quite abolished, and the whole congregation are invited to the Lord's table together.*-Mr. W. says, "So long as a believer takes the Bible for his guide of faith and practice, and exhibits a Christian character, he is cordially welcomed to our celebration of the ordinances." And so he is, in some Unitarian societies, whether he "takes the Bible for his guide of faith and practice, and exhibits a Christian character," or not. All are invited and "cordially welcomed to ordinances," without regard to any of the old, invidious distinctions about faith and character. We have now before us a copy of the covenants lately adopted by the first church in Salem,-the second in age of all the churches of New England. We say covenants; for it seems 'the half-way covenant' is still in use there. The covenant, prepared for those who wish the benefit of baptism but are not in full communion, is truly characteristic and appropriate. One would suppose beforehand, that 'half way' between a Unitarian church and the world could not be at a great remove from the latter; and so it is represented in this 'half-way covenant,'which is as follows:

"We believe in Jesus Christ as the Messiah; and we receive his religion, as the rule of our lives, and as a revelation from God."

This venerable church, it would seem, is not one of those which "have been raking up their first covenants, and restoring them to their proper and former standing."

Among the numerous passages we had marked, as deserving of animadversion, many still remain untouched. We shall call attention, however, to but one more; and this as indicative of a degree of mental obduration which we can but poorly conceive, and shall not attempt to describe. It is that in which our author trifles with the feelings of an afflicted mother, in his own neighborhood, who had been called to weep over the grave of an only son.

"All are willing the Devil should have sinful strangers and enemies; but they firmly trust that sovereign grace will save all sinful acquaintances and friends. And such a belief the Orthodox do not hesitate to avow in conversation. Nay; they even proclaim it to the world in the epitaphs they place on the tombstones of the abandoned. The following shall suffice as one example of the many that might be quoted :

'The mother's sigh, nor friendship's tear,
Cannot recall thy spirit here;

Yet may a boon more blessed be given,
Hope tells us, we shall meet in heaven.'

True, this son had lived an irreligious life; and although he exhib

*Mr. W. complains that some Orthodox churches have violated the principles of Congregationalism. He ought to know that some Unitarian churches (if churches they can be called) have wholly departed from these principles, and have no longer any just claim to be denominated Congregationalists. If any thing is essential to Congregationalism, it is the existence of a church, a body in covenant, in distinction from the congregation.

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »