Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

deliver the doctrine for which I insist, as part of the Counsel of God; on this account alone, my people would be obliged, on a disputable point, to give me an impartial hearing. A minister by his office is to be the guide and instructor of his people. To that end he is to study and search the Scriptures and to teach the people, not the opinions of men-of other divines or of their ancestors-but the mind of Christ. As he is set to enlighten them, so a part of his duty is to rectify their mistakes, and, if he sees them out of the way of truth or duty, to be a voice behind them, saying, "This is the way, walk ye in it." Hence, if what he offers to exhibit to them as the mind of Christ, be different from their previous apprehensions, unless it be on some point which is established in the Church of God as fundamental, surely they are obliged to hear him. If not, there is an end at once to all the use and benefit of teachers in the church in these respects-as the means of increasing its light and knowledge, and of reclaiming it from mistakes and errors. This would be in effect to establish, not the word of Christ, but the opinion of the last generation in each town and church, as an immutable rule to all future generations to the end of the world. Thus it would evidently be the duty of a people to their pastor, in such a case, if no such important act of theirs with respect to him, as their rejecting him from being their pastor, depended upon it. But when they are proposing to withdraw themselves wholly from him to cast off all the bonds of their covenant with him, to withhold his maintenance, casting him and his family on the wide world, and to renounce all the obligations and duties which they owe to him as their pastor; and their doing this depends on their judgment of the doctrine, which he offers to preach to them, as the mind of Christ; for them resolutely and finally to refuse so much as to give him a hearing, is one of the most flagrant instances of injustice, in a people towards their pastor, which perhaps has been heard of in these parts of the world.

"Surely, the state of things among a people, cannot be regarded as ripe for such important proceedings as these, till they are in a capacity to act in them understandingly, and as knowing what they do. But it is obvious that this cannot be, until they have given their pastor a fair hearing; nor can they ever be regarded as having prepared themselves for thus rejecting their pastor, as having no farther concern with him in a pastoral relation, until they have first discharged the debt or obligation due to him as their pastor; and this cannot be done, until they have heard him, until they have heard what he offers to teach them as the mind and will of Christ, have heard what he has to say for himself in this matter, wherein they are offended with him, as supposing that he fails to perform the duty of a minister of Christ towards them.

"This Church, in its first establishment, held the very principles for which I now contend; but Mr. Stoddard was of a contra

ry opinion, and from the pulpit he freely and abundantly delivered what he supposed to be the mind and will of God. And was it ever doubted, whether the people were obliged to give him a hearing? In the days of Mr. Mather, the Church was Congregational in its principles and practice. Mr. Stoddard was a Presbyterian, and abundantly preached his Presbyterian principles; and did any body doubt of their obligation to hear him? Yea, it never entered into the hearts of the people, that any proceeding of theirs, so important as their rejecting him from being their minister, depended on their judgment of his doctrine.

"That my people have never given me a fair hearing on the point of controversy between us, is exceedingly apparent.

66

They have never generally read the work, which I have published on the subject. This is publicly confessed. Only twenty copies have been procured. Many of those who might have read even these, have showed an utter aversion to reading it. One of my most strenuous opposers declares, that the people are in no way to be informed of the reasons of my opinion, for two years to come; while others have asserted, that they are never likely to be generally informed. Numerous witnesses declare, that some have altogether refused to read it, and that others have said, that they would not even let the book come into their houses. If the Council are at a loss on this point, or any one should call it in question, I suppose there are numbers present, who can say enough with regard to it, to satisfy any reasonable person.

"From the Narrative which has been given, the Council also see how stiffly and inflexibly the Committee, and the people, have ever declined hearing the reasons of my opinion from the pulpit, when proposed from time to time, before the printing of my book, and since; and how they have been so much engaged in the matter, that they have repeatedly refused to have the question, whether it was reasonable and best that I should preach upon the subject, submitted to the neighbouring ministers, or to any Council whatsoever. Before the publication of my pamphlet, they would not consent that I should preach, on the ground that it was best I should publish; and now I have published, they will not read.

"Finally. Though I have often desired it, they have never given me an opportunity to state the reasons of my opinion, even in private conversation.

"Thus, the great part of my people have refused to give me any hearing at all, or to suffer themselves to be informed in any way whatsoever, of the reasons of my opinion. Nay, they have industriously guarded against it, as what they have so much dreaded, that they would by no means allow of any advice, or any thing which they thought might open a door for it; but have been engaged to have me hastily thrust out, before there should be any farther opportunity for the people to be informed, lest it should make some

proselytes to my sentiments, and thus divide the people, and make parties among them. If this be not a violent proceeding for a Christian Church towards their pastor, I never expect to know what is. Herein, they have not only violated the rules of christian charity and gentleness, and acted inconsistently with moral righteousness, but very inconsistently with themselves. They themselves, from the beginning, have implicitly acknowledged, that I had a right to be heard by them, and that there was a necessity that the people should in some way or other be informed of the reasons of my opinion. If there was no need of this, then what need of their desiring me to print my reasons; and what need of their meeting together in July, to see if they should wait any longer for my book; and what need of their desiring Col. Dwight to enquire when the books were likely to be done, and to send them word; and what need of their determining, if the books were likely to come speedily, that they would wait for them; and what need, after the books came, of their forbearing to act for about two months?

"It may here be said that, although the people in general have not read my pamphlet, yet most of the leading men in the Church have read it. To this I answer; If I have a right to be heard by some, I have a right to be heard by the body, of the people. What need of any being informed, if there be no need of the people in general being informed? If one can be justified in refusing to read or hear, why not another; and why may not every one be justified, in refusing to hear or read a word. And thus, why might not the people have thrust me out immediately, as soon as they knew my opinion, without giving me any opportunity to print or speak any thing for myself? The controversy on this subject, is between me and the Church, and not between me and the leading men of the Church; and if I have any right to be heard at all, it is by them with whom I have this controversy. It is not merely the leading men, but all the brethren, who are to have a hand in the act of the Church, which must make way for a dissolution of my pastoral relation to them, if it be dissolved. They have lately, expressly and deliberately refused to leave the government of the Church to the leading men, in a public formal consideration of the matter; but would have it in the hands of the whole Society. If others beside the leading men are not set aside as cyphers in acting, with regard to my being turned away, they ought not to be set aside as cyphers in learning and judging.

"The grand reason continually urged and insisted on, why my reasons should not be heard from the pulpit, has been-That there was danger of its making parties in the town. Now I beseech the reverend Council to consider, for a moment, what sort of an objection this is.-The very reason, why it is thought just that a person, in a cause in which he is liable to suffer, should be allowed to

plead his own cause, is-that he may have fair opportunity, before he suffers, to convince others that his cause is good. What a strange reason then is it, why a man in such a case should not be allowed to plead his own cause, and why his plea should not be heard, lest some of those to whom he offers his plea, should be convinced that his cause is good. So unreasonable is this opinion, that the very end of a man's pleading his cause, and the very thing which is the sole ground and reason why it is accounted fair and just, that a man should be allowed to plead his own cause, viz. a fair opportunity to convince others that his cause is good-is by the people made the main objection why I should not plead my own cause-viz. because if I do, there will be an opportunity, and so a possibility, of convincing some that my cause is good.

"The case would be the same, if it were a cause, on the issue of which my life depended, and the people, as at present, before a hearing, were generally united to condemn me. In that case, on hearing my plea for myself, the people might be divided. This discussion might occasion parties, and unhappy contentions. This is not only possible, but often has actually been the case, with regard to the execution of persons in a public capacity. How often have cities and nations been set into a ferment on such occasions. Must we therefore say, that the suspected person shall have no hearing, because the people-the judges on whose voice in the case his life depends are united in condemning him; but there is danger of their being divided, if he is allowed to speak for himself.

"And besides, my people, in the very making of this objection, are condemned out of their own mouths. The objection, in the very terms of it, is an implicit acknowledgment, that there has been as yet no sufficient trial, what the minds of the people would be, on a fair and full hearing of what I have to say for myself—yea, a confession that they suspect, and that very strongly, that the opinions of many, if I should have a full hearing, would be far otherwise than now. For, if not, how would the people, after hearing me, be divided into parties, any more than they are now? But if, as they thus confess, there has been no sufficient trial, what the minds of the people would be after a full hearing, certainly there ought to be a sufficient trial, and they ought not to strive to hinder it; for in striving to hinder it, they do directly and avowedly strive to have me condemned and turned out of the ministry, and with my family deprived of maintenance, without a fair and proper trial; which is certainly the most barefaced injustice.

“But it may be asked-" Why did not you preach? Who has hindered you? If you have a right to preach, why did you not use your right, without waiting for the consent of the people?"-To this question, I have several answers.

"1. When, for the sake of peace, I have repeatedly proposed to the people that, with their consent, I would preach upon the subVOL. I.

46

ject, they have, as I just observed, uniformly refused it; and have also refused, from time to time, even to submit the point, whether it was reasonable that I should preach upon it, to the neighbouring ministers. After such refusals, this question should scarcely be asked, and certainly not by my people.

"2. The state of the people has been most obviously such, that, if I had taken any opportunity on the Sabbath, without their previous consent, it would have been the occasion of tumult on that holy day, to the extreme dishonour of Christ, and wounding the interests of religion. Noise and uproar have risen to such a height already, that I cannot think that it was my duty, or that it would have become the prudence and moderation of a minister of the Gospel. It would have had the appearance of great strenuousness; and I thought it better that the people should first be prepared by the advice of a Council, which would greatly tend to prevent the mischievous effects.

"3. If I had appointed Lectures, there was not the least probability that the people would have attended them. Of this the Rev. Council will be satisfied, by considering the account they have had of their conduct.

"On the whole, I thought it the most prudent course to wait for a more favourable opportunity.

"It may be said, That the people are the more to be justified in rejecting me, and turning me out from my office, without hearing me, because I was settled on the contrary principles.

"I answer, That this objection can be of no force, unless they mean by it, that I settled on Mr. Stoddard's judgment as my rule. If I did, I did not settle as a minister of Christ, but as a minister of Mr. Stoddard. Even if it had been so, that I had settled in this manner, on Mr. Stoddard's principles, this was one which I found among his principles, which he expresses in one of his works in these words "He, who believes principles because our forefathers affirm 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 to us. If we are any wise fit to open the mysteries of the Gospel, we are capable of judging in these matters."

"It was implied in my ordination vows, that I would study the Scriptures; that I would make the word of God, and not the word of any man, my rule in teaching my people; and that I would do my utmost to know what was the counsel of God, and to declare it. This was implied in my covenant with God and the people at my settlement; and it was implied in their covenant with God and with me, that, in my so doing, they would diligently and impartially hear and examine what I should offer to them, as the counsel of God.

"It is said, That Mr. Stoddard would never have consented to my settling here, if he had foreseen that I should so differ from him in my principles. To this it is sufficient to reply, that he

« ElőzőTovább »