Farewell to the First Congregational Church in Norwalk, Conn. (bound with other addresses)

valid defense of Dr. Bushnell's heresies against ecclesiastical censure, they form an equally valid defense for all conceivable heresy. They protect the most unlimited license of opinion-. They open wide the door for'every heresy — " as many creeds as may be offered." Ood in Christy [p. 82.] They sweep away all known means of vindicating or maintaining truth, intelligi- bility, and accuracy in language ; logic, except as a weapon against doctrines, he dislikes ; creeds, and the normal author- ity of the Bible itself, as a standard or even iminediate source of Christian theology. Christ in Theology ^{^.^4:^ They un- dermine all foundations, and if the foundations be destroyed, what shall the righteous do ? Certainly, if Dr. Bushnell is right, the Apostle John was wrong in charging us, " if there come any man unto you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, nei- ther bid him God speed ; for he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds." 2 Johm, 10. And why should Peter warn us against those who '■^privily bring in damnable heresies, denying the Lord who bought them ?" 2 Peter, ii. 1. Moreover, does not Paul charge us to reject a heretic after the first and second admonition ? Tit. iii. 10. And does he not beseech us to mark them which cause dimisions cmd offenses contra/ry to the doctrme' which we home learned, a/nd a/void them ? And does it in the least extenuate the sin of making these divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine of our communion which we have learned from the word of God, to say that he is no more "responsible for" his views, than for the growth of his body ? God m Christ, [p. 98.] CONCLUSION. " "We have thus presented an outline of the doctrines which we find taught by Dr. Bushnell in his " vindication of himself from the charges of heresy brought against him from various quarters," to which our brethren of the Hartford Central As- sociation. have referred in explanation of their published decis- ion by which we are aggrieved. We have also brought to view the sentiments advanced in those discourses of his first book which are designed to explain, or defend, or to show the prac- tical bearings of, his doctrinal principles. "We have thus examined this second book for three reasons. 1. The " vindication" of Dr. Bushnell is all to which the Hartford Central Association have referred as in explanationiof their decision. ■ 2. If it had contained any real justification of, his former book, or shown him to be sound in the faith, we should hare rejoiced to see it, and to withdraw our complaint against him as a. teacher of heresy, and against his Association as abetting that heresy. 3. If on examination, it turn out to be, what we think we have found and proved it to be, simply a reaflSrmation of the heresies of the previous volumes, then it is only a renewed as- sault upon the truth, which, so far from relieving, aggravates dll former grievances. The real question now before us is not, what are deemed among us fundamental doctrines, the denial of which is heresy, in refer- ence to the Trinity, Incarnation, and Atonement; — this has al- ready been declared by our General Association at its meeting in Litchfield, June, 1850 ; — ^but whether the sentiments advan- ced by Dr. Bushnell are or are not a virtual denial of these fundamental doctrines. We think the proof is abundant and overwhelming, that, in each of his volumes, he has published and laboriously advocated that which our General Association has pronounced heresy; And we shall feel constrained to be- lieve this, until the contrary is shown. This has not, asyet,been even attempted with reference to the sentiments, which in our original remonstrance we alleged, and in our humble opin- ions proved, were contained in his first book. The question, then, arises, is such a demaZ as these i)Ql'}fmes contmn of Tvha,t constitutes the essence of the great Christian Doctrines of the Trinity, Incarnation, and Atonement, hence" forth to be adjudged and treated among us as consistent with soundness in the faith, good standing in the ministry, and a full title to the confidence of our ministry aud churches ? Or, 89 stated in anothe? form, it^is this : whether, if the advocate of suqh doctrines succeed in procuring an acquittal and an indorse- ment of his soundness in the faith, by the vote of a majority of his own Association, our ecclesiastical system affords any remedy ? and whether, in such case, all other Associations are (i^bliged to recognize such deniers and impugners of the faith, as in full fellowship with themselves, and are estopped from aU further proceedings in the premises ? "We have as yet seen no argument going to show that there is, no remedy in this case, which would be not equally conclu sive in & case of avowed infidelity. None have as yet come to our knowledge, which do not go the length of maintaining that our system affords no remedy when an Association pro- tects plain and admitted heresy. Is this so ? Are we willing to avow before all Christendom and all the World that it is so ? Are we willing to plaice ourselves and our children in a com- munion, or under an ecclesiastical organization, of such a char- acter ? We are persuaded, that when these questions are dis- tinctly met, they can receive but one answer from any true Christian minister or Christian man. For to say that, in such a case, oar ecclesiastical system has no means of clearing itself of heresy and heretics, is to say that it is incapable of fulfilling some of theplainestinjunctionsof Scripture, and that a certifi- cate of good standing among us, is not evenprimdfaGie evi- dence, thait the holder thereof does not embrace "damnable here- sies." Nor, on such a supposition, have we any means of guard- ing our churches from being the sport of any heresiareh, who may choose to come among us and sap the foundations of their faith, if he can succeed in carrying a majority of a single Association. "We cannot believe that any who love the truth, and love Congregationalism, are prepared to say that our ecclesiastical system hinders ,or' prevents the application of the Scriptural remedies, in a case of plain, and incorrigible heresy. If it contains no specific written provisions for such a case, it at least leaves the way open for the application of those Scrip- tural principles, which lie deeper than all human constitutions. 90 It interposes no yeto, no barrier to the application of such principles. Indeed, under our system, we are constantly taking measures for the welfare of our churches, for which our written constitutions make no express provision. There is, then, there must be, a remedy in the case supposed. "What this remedy is, what precise steps, order and method, are to be adopted in applying it, is a question of more diffi- culty and embarrassment, owing to the absence of all prece- dents. For the case has never before happened in Connecticut, in which an Association has, after regular inquiry, form- ally acquitted and recommended as worthy of public confi- dence, any who have publicly assailed the great doctrines in question. We have our own views in relation to it. But in a case so novel and untried, and withal so momentous, we are unwilling, without more extensive discussion, to trust our own isolated judgment. "We think that it demands the collec- tive wisdom of the ministry and churches of the State. We think it proper, therefore, to lay the whole subject before the General Association of the State, which being comprised of Delegates from all the District Associations, must in a good degree, and far more than any other ecclesiastical body among us, reflect the prevailing opinion of the ministry whose repre- sentatives, and of the churches whose servants, they are. We are well aware that it has been said that our General Association has cleared itself, and discharged its whole duty in the premises, by the declaration at Litchfield. This view, however, we think cannot bear examination. That declara- tion was such action as the case demanded in the posture in which it then stood. It was good as an initial proceeding. As such it was all that we then asked, and we rejoiced, in it. Had the principles of that declaration been since carried out, it would have been an adequate remedy. But if they are not carried out by the District Associations ; if they are openly and allowedly violated by them ; if, while the General Association declares that the denial of the propositions of the Assembly's Catechism on the Triaity, Incarnation, and Atonement is heresy, and is so regarded by the ministers and churches of 91 this State, it remains true, that our District Associations per- sist in recommending those who deny them as duly accredited Christian teachers who deserve puhlic confidence ; then such declarations are proved before all Christendom and all the world, to be not only vain, but false. A declaration for the mere purpose of self-clearing, which proves to be untrue, does but deepen the stain it is intended to eflPace. And such must be the efiect of the declaration in question, if the General As- sociation continues to look quietly on, while those whose good standing it certifies, openly and conspicuously deny the doc- trines which it declares fundamental, and are, nevertheless, acquitted and commended to public confidence by their own District Associations. In such circumstances, if the General Association does nothing more than declare that the ministers and churches regard the denial of these doctrines as heresy ; if it does not gp forward and take effectual measures for re- moving such heresy from its connection, all such declarations are proved to be false and insincere. They are masks, which, if they hide our shame from ourselves, do but attract the at- tention of others to it. We cannot, therefore, admit for a mo- ment, that the declaration of the General Association at Litch- field is satisfactory, unless followed up by such measures as alone are consistent with its truth. To this body, therefore, we design, unless God should show us a better way, to submit substantially the following questions, at its next annual meet- ing: 1. Has not the Hartford Central Association, in their pub- lished decision concerning Dr. Bushnell's book entitled " God in Christ," publicly given their shield and countenance to teachings which deny the fundamental doctrines of the Chris- tian religion, or " the essential elements " of fundamental doctrines, as those doctrines are set forth in our Confession of Eaith, and particularly as they were set forth by the General Association at Litchfield in 1850 ? 2. Does not the aforesaid book contain such. prmi6, fade evidence of heresy, and has not the complaint of Fairfield "West to the Hartford Central Association, set forth such^nwid facie evidence of heresy in formal specifications and proofs, that the latter Association in still holding that the author " could not justly be subjected to the charge of heresy and a subsequent trials nor be denied the confidence of his brethren in the ministry," and that said book "furnishes no sufficient ground for instituting judicial proceedings against him," while they still refuse to reconsider their decision, or to even attempt to show Fairfield West wherein -their speciflcatioBs and proofs of heresy in said book are insufflcient,-^subverted the essen- tial principles of our union as a General Association ?