Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

ing, and he had previously visited her in company with Mrs Abbot. 2d. He says he read to Mrs Whitney the letter of her brother; whereas he never read a syllable of the letter. 3d. He says he found her under the influence of infidel sentiments; whereas she was greatly grieved by the infidelity of her son, until a change took place in his views and feelings a fortnight before his death; and his infidelity originated in the former Calvinism of his mother. 4th. He denies mentioning the sentiments I ascribed to him; whereas my statement is fully corroborated. 5th. He says Mrs Whitney never spoke of his visit as described by me; whereas my description is fully confirmed. 6. He says Mrs Whitney requested Mr Ripley to say nothing about the visit; whereas she merely wished him not to give Mr Harding the just reprimand his conduct deserved.

I cannot help saying one word in relation to Mr Harding's excuse for his conduct. He says he was requested by a brother of the widow to visit her. Just reverse the case. Suppose Mr Harding should be absent on a journey. Suppose his wife should be taken dangerously ill. Suppose her only brother, who is a Unitarian, should write me a letter and request me to visit her in her danger. Suppose I should assure her, that unless she renounced Orthodoxy and embraced Unitarianism, she could not have any expectation of salvation. Would it be a sufficient excuse for such a proceeding, to say that I had received a letter from her brother? and that it would be cruel and unkind in me not to comply with his request?

VII. Your seventh subject of remark is the case of mental derangement which occurred in this place, and which I published in my Letter on revivals. The young lady belonged to Amherst, N. H. She boarded at Mrs Seaver's. I was in the house during her confinement there, and from several members of the family heard the facts as they appear in my publication. Most of the boarders have departed, and Mrs Seaver is at a distance. But the following naines of those who remain, will be sufficient to substantiate my statement. I therefore refer you and others to Micah M. Maynard and John Butrick.

VIII. Your eighth topic of remark is the case of the female who drowned herself last winter. You have not denied the truth

of my statement; but contend that her insanity was not occasioned by Orthodoxy. I fully believe it was; but neither of us can satisfactorily prove our position. But, Sir, there are cases of this description almost without number, which have occurred during the past year, and which can be proved to a demonstration. Oh! how much will some of your denomination have to answer for, in the many minds they have been instrumental in breaking down, and the many lives they have been instrumental in destroying. It is enough to make a heart of stone bleed, to read the dreadful and melancholy results of your protracted meetings, and your unchristian manner of preaching. I perceive that a gentleman in New York State, is collecting well attested accounts of all such cases as can be proved to have occurred in consequence of your sectarian measures; and that he intends publishing them in a book for the benefit of the rising generation.

I have now noticed all your contradictions of my statements, which are worthy of the least attention. All your hard names and bitter expressions may remain for your own private edification. When I wish to acquire 'common delicacy of feeling,' and learn the language of a gentleman,' and form a habit of speaking the truth' with accuracy, I shall not select for my teachers either Eliphalet Pearson or Sewall Harding. You intimate that I have slandered high men of your party. Sir, have I not offered evidence, convincing to any jury on earth, in support of my accusations? Why do not those slandered men come out in self-defence? Why do not Mr Bennet, and the East Sudbury deacon, and Messrs Payson, Braman and Putnam contradict my testimony. In short, why do not some of your injured friends appeal to the law as your minister repeatedly threatened? You dare not. The evidence against you is conclusive.

IX. Your ninth subject of remark is the conduct of the Orthodox Ecclesiastical Council, at Southborough. I published an account of the proceedings of this body, which was sent to me by a responsible author. He and he alone was answerable for the correctness of his own statements. Instead of attacking him, you have accused me of stating six falsehoods in relation to this business. Suppose I should pursue the same course in regard to your pamphlet, and charge you with publishing half a dozen

falsehoods in relation to Mrs Whitney, because Mr Harding's letter on this subject contains this number. You had better learn to do unto others as you would have others do unto you. In answer to all you have said about the Southborough case, I shall now publish a letter which is signed by nine of the most substantial and respectable inhabitants of that town. From this document, you will perceive that the former statements were substantially correct, and that your pretended corrections are mostly quibbles about non-essentials. Here you have the communication; and I would simply observe, that the names of the nine gentlemen shall be given to the public whenever their statements shall be contradicted by responsible individuals.

REV. BERNARD WHITMAN,

"Southborough, Nov.

SIR,-In your Reply to the Review of your Letters to Professor Stuart, you published an extract from a letter, giving some account of the formation of a new church in this town. In a late publication, purporting to be written by one Eliphalet Pearson of Waltham, certain statements made in the letter above referred to, are said to be false.

Although your correspondent has made some trivial mistakes, yet he has stated the material facts correctly. As there has been a public denial of some of his statements, we deem it proper to give an account of the transactions as they occurred in the formation of this new church. This we do that the facts may be known as they are, and that it may be fully understood, who and what has disturbed the peace of this heretofore peaceful town.

The Rev. Mr Parker was settled in this town, as its minister, in or about the year 1799. His preaching has generally been acceptable to his parishioners. His theological sentiments have ever been what is termed orthodox. So far as we know, he has had no personal difficulty with any neighboring minister of the gospel, from the day of his settlement to this time. His walk in life has ever been characterized by that dignity of deportment, affability of manners, and pure, unexceptionable conduct which ought always to distinguish the devout Christian, the peaceful fol

lower of Jesus. This society was united, peaceable and happy. But the evil hour at length arrived. Mr Parker continued to regulate his exchanges with his neighboring ministers as he ever had done, declaring that he would lose his station as a minister rather than come into the exclusive system, which he considered altogether unchristian. This gave offence to some of the Orthodox ministers in the neighborhood, and his ruin, as well as that of the peace of his church and parish was determined upon by those domineering individuals.

As a preliminary to a combined attack, the town was literally infested for a time with Deacons and lay-preachers from neighboring places, assisted by some beneficiaries from Amherst College. They held frequent meetings, preached and exhorted. much, made direct and untiring efforts to injure Mr Parker's character and influence, by condemning him as unchristian and heretical, and especially for his exchanging with all the Congregational ministers in his vicinity. The church in Southboro' did not escape denunciation. That too, as well as its pastor was pronounced heretical. For a considerable time, little or no success attended these efforts, till Orthodox ministers from the neighborhood stepped in to lend a helping hand. We recollect nine or ten of this class who came amongst us last year to hold meetings, and to assist in disturbing the harmony of our community. During this period, their meetings were held at private houses, any where, so that they could get together any number of hearers. Families were visited, and such letters written to females as were calculated to injure the influence of Mr Parker, and alienate their minds from him and from the present order of things. A partial success ensued. A few converts were made, among whom were one or two who had become disaffected in not being elected to the office of Deacon in Mr Parker's church. These few furnished a good opportunity of converting the town into a den of discord. Accordingly, five Orthodox ministers, being part of the nine or ten before mentioned, assembled in this place on the 17th day of last February, and organized themselves into a council. It was publicly stated in this body, by one or more members, that the church in this place was not evangelical, and

was destitute of an evangelical ministry. It was also announced that they were about to form a Pilgrim church, because there was no evangelical church or ministry, in the place. Two or more of the council were deputed to visit Mr Parker and give him notice of the meeting, to state to him what was about to be done and request his attendance.

The deputation returned with word that Mr Parker was at Boston. No information was given to any of his family what was the object of their mission. Mr Parker had in fact gone to the city two or three days before, and was there detained by the badness of the travelling and the weather. After this deputation had reported their doings, it was objected in the council, that no further proceedings should be had by reason of Mr Parker's absence. But the Orthodox ministers were not so easily to be put off. They declared that as Mr Parker was not at home, they would proceed and take the responsibility upon themselves. Certain laymen who were engaged in this business, when since spoken to on this subject, and reminded of the injustice and impropriety of such conduct, have said it was nothing to them, for the council declared they would take the responsibility upon themselves.

The council then organized a church. This was done with closed doors. All we know of the proceedings during these formalities is what we have learnt from those who were then made church members, and from one who has since been admitted to the Pilgrim church, and who stood listening at the key hole of the door during this time.

But we are not anxious to relate any thing received through the medium of their eaves droppers. This eaves dropper was then and for many years had been, a member of Mr Parker's church, and had been very active in this work of disorganization. He has often related that he has been born again, and taught of the spirit and the like, and that he had experiened all before he united with Mr Parker's church. When asked why he should join that church when it was not and never had been evangelical in his estimation, he answered, that he joined it and had continued in it as a spy. Whether he has transferred his connex

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »