Chapter 21
1 Cf. Sprague, Unitarian
Pulpit, pp. 132–140; Eliot, Heralds, ii,20–40;
Bancroft, Sermons on the Termination of Fifty Years of his Ministry
(1836).
2 Cf. Ware, Unitarian
Biography, i, 173 n., in Hill's ‘Memoir.’
3 Cf. Henry M. Dexter,
Congregationalism (New York, 1880), p. 615.
4 Cf. Samuel M. Worcester,
Life of Rev. Samuel Worcester (Boston, 1852);A Narrative of the
Religious Controversy in Fitchburg, etc. (Worcester, 1804);
Review of Narrative of the Religious Controversy in Fitchburg, Monthly
Anthology, i (1804); 654–657.
5 The Ministerial Convention of
Massachusetts was an annual gathering of all the ministers at the time
of the May General Court. The Convention was accustomed to discuss the
state of religion in the State, and to make suggestions to the
churches. Cf. supra, p. 382n.
6 Cf. Bernard Whitman,
Letters to the Reverend Moses Stmart (Boston, 1830), p: 89 f.
7 Cf. William B. Sprague,
Life of Jedidiah Morse (New York, 1874); James King Morse;
Jedidiah Morse, a Champion of New England Orthodoxy (New York,
1939). He had already given much attention to the neglected field of
geography, and in 1784 had published the first geography in America, a
work that won for him the name of Father of American Geography. The
American Geography (Elizabethtown, N. J., rev. ed. 1789), 544 pp.,
8vo, went through five editions within six years, besides several
pirated editions abroad, there being as yet no international
copyright. It was received with marked favor.
8 s v. supra, p.
388.
9 The Thursday Lecture dates
from Boston's early history. A week-day service was held in the First
Church, at which the ministers in rotation preached a sermon which was
called a lecture. It was often a notable occasion and largely
attended.
10He spoke of himself as a
Baptist, and showed special concern for Baptists in relation to his
bequests, although this was in his time a name of ill repute in New
England. But there appears to be no evidence that he was ever a
communicant of a Baptist church. At Sheffield, where his parents lived
during his youth, they were adherents of the “great chapel” (an
Independent foundation for Protestant Dissenters generally, which
eventually became Unitarian), which his father helped erect, and until
his death he was the most generous friend the congregation knew. In
London, whither they removed, he succeeded to his father's business in
wholesale hardware, and they worshiped at the Independent Church in
Pinners’ Hall, where at about seventeen he professed religion and was
baptized, and was admitted the next year to membership in the church,
of which he was chosen deacon. It would seem, then, that though he was
undoubtedly a Baptist in conviction, his formal membership was with
the Independents. Cf. C. J. Street, ‘The Hollis Family and Harvard
College,’ Harvard Graduates’ Magazine, xxix (1920, 536–540;
Letter of January 17, 1721to Dr. Benjamin Colman of Brattle Square
Church, quoted by Morse, True Reasons, etc., pp. 5–9. Cf. Giles
Hester, Some Memorials of the Hollis Family (Sheffield,
n. d.).
11 Cf. Sydney Willard,
Memories of Youth and Manhood (Cambridge, 1855), ii, 172–179.
12 The True Reasons on
which the election of a Hollis Professor of Divinity was opposed,
etc. (Charlestown, 1805), 28 pp. Reviewed in Monthly Anthology,
ii, 152–157, March, 1805; Morse's reply and reviewer's answer,
ibid., pp. 206–226.
13 Cf. the article on Thomas
Hollis, Christian Examiner (Boston), vii (1829), 64–1044, with
one with the same title in Spirit of the Pilgrims, ii(1829),
469–480, 581–594. See Quincy, History of Harvard, ii,284 f;
vol. i, chap. xii and Appendix, 527–540. Thorough investigation there
reported shows that Overseers at the time of the donation, moved by
doctrinal fears, but without Hollis's approval or knowledge, inserted
in his “rules and orders” a qualification calculated to prevent his
broad purposes from being realized; but that he caused to be added a
form for inauguration which gave the professor more liberty, as stated
above. Dr. Morse's opposition was grounded on the clause thus
inserted. Cf. Ware, Unitarian Biography, i, 243–256,
note on the Hollis professorship.
14 Cf. Ezra Stiles Ely, A
Contrast between Calvinism and Hopkinsianism (New York, 1811);
reviewed in General Repository, iii(1813), 324–378.
15 Cf. Monthly Anthology,
v (1808), 602–614, for a drastic review of the
‘Constitution and Associate Statutes of the Theological Seminary in
Andover,’ anonymous, but by Samuel Cooper Thacher (1785–1818),aet.
23(cf. Sprague, Unitarian Pulpit, pp. 435–445; Eliot,
Heralds, ii, 77–79; Memoir by F. W. P. Greenwood, prefixed
to his Sermons, Boston, 1824, and in Ware, Unitarian
Biography, ii, 323–375);answered in the Panoplist, iv
(1808–09), 371, 413, 471; rejoinder by Thacher, Anthology,
vi (1808), 194–205.
16 The scope of this history
does not require us to follow the history of Andover further; yet it
is interesting to note in passing that eventually the requirements of
the founders proved to be intolerable. After some three generations
the Professors refused longer to subscribe, or resigned their chairs,
no satisfactory substitutes could be found, the number of students
fell off, and subscription was no longer enforced. In 1908,
just a hundred years after its foundation, the Seminary removed to
Cambridge and entered into alliance with its old rival, the Harvard
Divinity School. When the Visitors interposed and insisted that the
provisions of the Constitution be obeyed, the Court decided that this
was no longer possible. The Trustees were then permitted to do the
next best thing, and forces were combined with a Baptist school, the
Newton Theological Institution.
17 A Consociation was an
ecclesiastical court, consisting of ministers and lay delegates of
churches, empowered to intervene upon all questions, arising between
ministers and churches. In Connecticut its decrees were supported by
the civil power.
18 Cf. Clark, Historical
Sketch, pp. 237–241, 252 f; Panoplist, xi (1815), 359–373,
507–518,537–545; searchingly answered (by John Lowell), An Inquiry
into the Right to Change the Ecclesiastical Constitution of the
Congregational Churches of Massachusetts (Boston, 1816).For an
account of the long effort to establish Consociations in
Massachusetts, cf. Whitman, Letters to Stuart, pp. 29–37.
19 It was succeeded by the
more controversial and short-lived General Repository and Review
(Cambridge, 1812–13),ably edited by Mr. Andrews Norton; but this
was too aggressive for the time, and soon gave place to the
Christian Disciple (v. infra, p. 410).
20 Cf. Journal of the
Proceedings of the Society which conducts The Monthly Anthology,
ed., M. A. DeWolfe Howe (Boston, 1919).
21Treatise on the
Atonement, etc. (Randolph, 1808).
22v. infra, p. 411.
23 Cf. Noah Worcester,
Bible News of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit (Concord, 1810);
General Repository and Review (1812), i, 345–363.
24 Cf. Noah Worcester, A
Respectful Address to the Trinitarian Clergy, relating to their Manner
of Treating their Opponents (Boston, 1812); Stephen Farley,
Letters addressed to the Rev. Noah Worcester (Windsor, 1813);
(Thomas Andros), Bible News . . . not correct (Boston, 1813);
Ethan Smith, A Treatise on the Character of Jesus Christ, and of
the Trinity in Unity of the Godhead, etc. (Boston, 1814);
Worcester, An Appeal to the Candid, 3nos. (Boston, 1814). Cf.
also several writings by his brother Thomas.
25 Cf. Henry Ware, Jr.,
Memoirs of the Rev. Noah Worcester (Boston, 1844); id.,
‘Memoir of Noah Worcester.’ in Ware, Unitarian Biography, i,
1–98; Sprague, Unitarian Pulpit, pp. 191–199, Eliot,
Heralds, ii, 31–39.
26Cf. General Repository, iii
(1813), 373.
27 v. supra, p.
409.John Sherman, One God in One Person only, and Jesus Christ a
Being Distinct from God, etc. (Worcester, 1805);answered by Daniel
Dow, Familiar Letters to the Rev. John Sherman, etc. (Hartford,
1806);(Francis A. van der Kemp), Wreath for the Rev. Daniel Dow on
the Publication of his Familiar Letters, etc. (Utica,
1806);Sherman, A View of the Ecclesiastical Proceedings in Windham
County, Conn., etc. (Utica, 1806);M. C. Welch,
Misrepresentations Detected, etc. (Hartford, 1807). Sprague,
Unitarian Pulpit, pp. 326–330;Eliot, Heralds, ii, 59–63;
Monthly Anthology, iii (r8o6), 249–257, 661;Belsham, Life
of Lindsey, pp. 256–272.
28 The history of this unique
little church deserves more than a passing mention. It was formed in
1803 by about forty gentlemen from diverse sources, and took the name
of the United Protestant Religious society of Trenton and, as soon as
a minister was secured fifteen of these in 1806 formed and organized
the reformed Christian Church on a basis that left members absolute
freedom of belief. The chief leader in the movement beside Col. Adam
G. Mappa was evidently the Rev. Francis Adriaan van der Kemp
(1752–1829),formerly a Mennonite minister at Leiden, who being exiled
from Holland for political reasons came to America in 1768bearing
letters to Washington and other notables, and came to Oldenbarnevelt
in 1797.He formed friendship with some of the foremost men in the
country, and was called “the most learned man in America,” and was
honored with the Doctor's degree from Harvard in 1820 on the same day
with Channing. Even when in Holland he had corresponded with English
Unitarians. This church, isolated in a strongly orthodox region, has
steadily maintained liberal Christianity, despite violent opposition,
for nearly a century and a half. Cf. Charles Graves, A Century of
Village Unitarianism (Boston, 1904); id., An Early Unitarian
Outpost (Boston, 1915),and in Christian Register, June 24,
July 1, 1915;Helen L. Fairchild, ed., Francis Adrian van der Kemp,
an Autobiography (New York, 1923); Autobiography of . . . van
der Kemp, Christian Reformer, N. S. iv (1837), 315–322, 397–402,
487–490.
29 Cf. (Mary Willard),
Life of Rev. Samuel Willard . . . of Deerfield, Mass. (Boston,
1893); Mary Willard, Early Unitarian Movement in Western
Massachusetts, Unitarian Review, xv(1881), III;Eliot, Heralds,
ii, 90–94; Samuel Willard, History of the Rise, Progress, and
Consummation of the Rupture, etc. (Greenfield, 1858); The
Results of Two Ecclesiastical Councils, etc. (Greenfield, 1853);
(J. Emerson), An Address to the Christian Public, etc.
(Greenfield, 1814).
30 Cf. Result of an
Ecclesiastical Council Held at Dorchester, Mass., 12 May, 1812;
Proceedings of the Second Church and Parish in Dorchester,
etc. (Boston, 1813); Memorial of the Proprietors of the New
South Meeting House in Dorchester, to the Ministers of the Boston
Association, etc. (Boston, 1803); Review of the Dorchester
Controversy, Panoplist, x (1814), 256–z8r, 289–307; Review of
Two Pamphlets Published on the Subject of the Ecclesiastical Society
in Dorchester (Boston, 1814); James H. Means,
Historical.Discourse on the Seventieth Anniversary of the
Second Church at Dorchester (Boston, 1878); William Allen,
Memoir of John Codman (Boston, 1853).
31 The last exchange is said
to have been by Hosea Hildreth in 1835. Cf. Sprague, Unitarian
Pulpit, p. xv.
32 Cf. Morse, Jedidiah
Morse, p. 112f; Spirit of the Pilgrims, ii (1829), 227;
Monthly Repository, vii (1812), 56 f.
33 Cf. William J. Potter,
The First Congregational Society of New Bedford (New Bedford,
1889), p. 58.
34 Cf. Abiel Abbot, A
Statement of Proceedings in the First Society in Coventry; Conn.,
etc. (Boston, 1811); (Amos Bassett), Reply to Mr. Abbot’s Statement
of Proceedings, etc. (Hartford, 1812); Proceedings of the
General Association of Connecticut, June1802 (Hartford, 1812);
Review of Abbot's Statement, etc., General Repository,
i(1812), 145–160; Panoplist, viii (1812), 118–142.
35 Cf. Panopllst, ix
(1812–13), 254; xiii (1817), 181–186, 274; Result of an
Ecclesiastical Council held at Sandwich, 24 May, 1817 (Boston,
1817); 9 Massachusetts Reports, p. 276 (Boston, 1850), Burr vs.
First Church in Sandwich.
36 Cf. Charles Graves, ‘The
Inquisition in Connecticut,’ Christian Register, cii (1923),
989 f.1014, 1049;Eliot, Heralds, ii, 168–171; Connecticut
Reports, v, 405,Whitney vs. Brooklyn; Unitarianism: its Origin
and History (Boston, 1889), pp. 174–176. Luther Willson,
Review of Ecclesiastical Proceedings . . . in Brooklyn (Worcester,
1818).
37 Cf. Eliot, Heralds,
ii, 264 f.
38 Cf. Christian Disciple,
iii, N. S. (1822), 43–67.
39 For the record may also be
mentioned the minor cases of Sharon, Princeton, and Ashby, 1816–17.
40 v.supra, pp. 326 ff.
41 The Unitarian Book Society,
v. supra, p. 328
42 Mr. S. F: B. Morse, later
inventor of the electric telegraph. Cf. Morse, Jedidiah Morse,
p. 144.
43 He at once sent a
presentation copy to ex-President John Adams, thinking perhaps to
surprise him by his discovery of a great secret; but Adams in an often
quoted letter (cf. Unitarian Miscellany, i (1821), 189–191;
Christian Disciple, iii (1822), 43 f; Sprague, Jedidiah Morse,
p. 125 f, bore witness that Unitarianism in New England had been held
by various well-known ministers and numerous laymen familiarly known
to him since the middle of the previous century; though, despite his
calling them Unitarian, their views had not developed farther than
Arianism.
44 The review though unsigned
was written by Jeremiah Evarts, Esq., a Yale graduate and a lawyer,
whom Dr. Morse had a few years before persuaded to become editor of
the Panoplist. Cf. E. C. Tracy, Life of Jeremiah Evarts
(Boston, 1842).
45 The Rev. William Wells
(1744–1827) was for many years a Dissenting minister at Bromsgrove
near Birmingham. He had been a pronounced friend of the American cause
during the war; and feeling against him was so strong that after the
Birmingham Riots (which he narrowly escaped) he emigrated to America
in 1793, and made his home on a farm near Brattleboro, Vermont. Here
for many years he preached to a liberal society without salary,
declining to be a formal pastor (cf. Christian Disciple, iv
[1816], 300–304). He received the Doctor's degree from Harvard in
1818. His son, William Wells, Jr. 1773–1860), formerly a pupil of
Belsham, graduated at Harvard 1796 where he was tutor; was bookseller
in Boston until 1830, republished several English Unitarian works, was
active in the Unitarian controversy, and later for many years had a
classical school for boys at Cambridge, where he died. Cf. Sprague,
Unitarian Pulpit, pp. 254–261, 449; Eliot, Heralds,
i, 64–70.
46 Channing had supervised his
reading in preparation for the ministry. A brilliant scholar, he had
written the drastic review of the Constitution of the Andover Seminary
in the Monthly Anthology. When Dr. Kirkland was called to be
President of Harvard, Thacher succeeded him at the New South Church.
In 1814 he had already preached a notable sermon on ‘The Unity of
God,’ which made his views beyond question. He went into an early
decline, and while abroad in search of health he died on the first day
of 1816.
47An example of this
confounding of two widely differing senses of the term Unitarian is
seen in an interesting case of this very period. In 1811 the Rev. John
Grundy had preached a sermon at the dedication of his new chapel in
Renshaw Street, Liverpool; and in a note added to this when printed he
quoted a letter from a recent visitor to Boston telling of the great
progress of Unitarianism then going on there. This note attracted the
attention of Francis Parkman (1788–1850), a young man from Boston who
had been preparing for the ministry under Channing's direction, and
before entering active service was spending a year in England. He
(taking the word in Belsham's sense as then current in England) wrote
Grundy protesting, on the basis of intimate acquaintance with the
Boston ministers, that they were very far from being Unitarian, since
they held high and exalted views of Jesus Christ, and would be very
unwilling to be confounded with the followers of Dr. Priestley.
For the items in this interesting controversy, cf. Monthly
Repository, vii(1812), 107 f, 55–58, 199–201, 264 f, 498–501. The
subject was revived in the Spirit of the Pilgrims, ii
(1829), 220–234; to which Parkman anonymously replied in the
Unitarian Advocate (Boston), iii (1829), 300–308; cf. Christian
Register, April 18, 1829. Returning from England Parkman was
ordained minister of the New North Church in 1813, and served it until
1849, distinguished by his faithfulness and generosity to the
Unitarian cause.
48 v. supra, p. 402.
49 The consecutive items are
these: Thomas Belsham, American Unitarianism, reprinted in
Boston, 1815;(Jeremiah Evarts), Review of 'American Unitarianism,'
Panoplist, xi(1815), 241–272; William E. Channing, Letter to
the Rev. Samuel C. Thacher (Boston, 1815); Samuel Worcester,
Letter to the Rev. William E. Channing on his Letter to Thacher
(ibid.); Channing, Remarks on the Rev. Dr. Worcester’s Letters
to Mr. Channing (ibid.); Worcester, Second Letter to the Rev.
William E. Channing on the Subject of Unitarianism (ibid.);
Channing, Remarks on the Rev. Dr. Worcester's Second Letter on
American Unitarianism (ibid.); Worcester, Third Letter to the
Rev. William E. Channing on the Subject of Unitarianism (ibid.).
The above items include (if one would follow the controversy in detail
over 500 pages), reviewed at length by (Jeremiah Evarts), ‘Review of
the Unitarian Controversy,’ Panoplist, xii (1816), 153–178,
203–234.
50 Related to the above
controversy though not connected with it was one between the Rev. G.
S. White ("Amana"), Remarks on "American Unitarianism;" etc.
(Boston, 1815), and John Lowell (brother of the Rev. Charles Lowell of
the West Church, and an influential member of the Harvard
Corporation), Are you a Christian or a Calvinist?
(Boston, 1815); answered by "Amana," The Catholic Question at
Boston: or, An Attempt to Prove that a Calvinist is a Christian
(Boston, 1815).
A longer controversy of this period, on the question of Creeds, was
more or less concurrent with these, though separate from them. In this
the Rev. Jacob Norton of Weymouth, still professedly orthodox,
published anonymously Seasonable and Candid Thoughts on Human
Creeds or Articles of Faith as Religious Tests, etc. (Boston1813);
answered by the Rev. Thomas Andros, who had already replied (1811) to
Worcester's Bible News. Norton continued the discussion in
Things Set in a Proper Light (Boston, 1814); and in A.Short and
Easy Method, etc. (Boston, 1815), and Things as they Are: or,
Trinitarianism Developed, etc., in two parts (Boston, 1815), in
which the writer throws off the mask, signs his own name, and shows
himself opposed to making acceptance of Covenants a condition of
fellowship. A brief digest of all these is given in Gillett,
Unitarian Controversy, pp. 276–281.
51 Cf. Christian Disciple,
v, N. S. (1823), 237.
52 Largely as a consequence of
this controversy over the Hollis professorship, Dr. Morse became a
very unpopular figure, and his unpopularity was much increased by
being linked with a subordinate controversy with Miss Hannah Adams
(cousin of President John Adams), over their writings on American
history. Cf. Jedidiah Morse, Appeal to the Public on the
Controversy, etc. (Charlestown, 1814); (John Lowell), review
of the above (Boston, 1815); (Morse), Remarks on the
Controversy between Doctor Morse and Miss Adams (Boston); Hannah
Adams, Narrative of the Controversy, etc. (Boston, 1814).
53 He died in 1826. His
distinguished son, the inventor of the electric telegraph, became
toward the end of his life a devoted adherent of the radical Unitarian
preacher, O. B. Frothingham, in New York. Cf. John W. Chadwick,
William Ellery Channing (Boston, 1903), p. 128 n.
54 Cf. Monthly Repository,
xv(1820), 14.
55 Cf. Herbert B. Adams,
Life and Writings of Jared Sparks (Boston, 1893); Eliot,
Heralds, ii 203–205.
56 The church at Philadelphia
was of English origin; and that at Oldenbarnevelt originated
independently of Massachusetts.
57 Save for one or two
unsigned articles in the Christian Disciple.
58 The Rev. Anthony Forster,
pioneer of Unitarianism in the South, had been ordained as a
Presbyterian and was settled over a Presbyterian church at Charleston;
but he outgrew his orthodox faith and withdrew from the Presbytery.
His congregation also separated from the Presbyterians and organized
as the Second Independent Church of Charleston (1816). But his health
failed, and he died early in 1820. Meantime Gilman who had supplied
his pulpit, succeeded him, and the church affiliated with the
Unitarians. Cf. ‘Memoir of Forster’ by John Bartlett in Ware,
Unitarian Biography, ii, 379–408; Unitarian Miscellany,
i(1821), 249–262; Christian Disciple, iii, N. S. (1822),
280–299. For Gilman, cf. Eliot, Heralds, ii, 274–280.
59 CL Jared Sparks, Letters
on the Ministry, Ritual and Doctrines of the Protestant Episcopal
Church (Baltimore, 1820); Christian Disciple, ii,N. S.
(1820), 287–330.
60 Cf. Samuel Miller,
Letters on Unitarianism (Trenton, 1821); Sparks, Inquiry into
the Comparative Moral Tendency of Trinitarian and Unitarian Doctrines,
in a Series of Letters to the Rev. Dr. Miller of Princeton
(Boston, 1823).
61 The Rev. John Wright,
brother of Richard Wright (v. supra, pp. 334 f), victim
of intolerance and persecution at Liverpool, emigrated in 1817 and
settled at Georgetown near Washington, where he found a few English
Unitarians lately arrived, who had held several meetings together on
Sundays. He at once began to hold public worship and to preach,
attracting attention and causing alarm in neighboring towns. They
organized as the Unitarian Society of Georgetown, and had 150 members.
They were bitterly opposed and maligned, and the Presbyterian church
was refused for the funeral of a Unitarian who had been drowned in May
1819. Attacked in print, Wright replied in a series of letters in the
Georgetown National Messenger, May 18, 1819. Several ministers
replied, and the controversy ran for fourteen numbers. See the account
in John Wright, American Unitarian Controversy (Liverpool,
1819), 114 pp. Cf. Monthly Repository, xiv (1819), 703.
In 1820 a congregation, doubtless succeeding to this, was gathered in
Washington by the Rev. Robert Little, an English Unitarian formerly of
Gainsborough, Lincolnshire, and now engaged in business in Washington.
A church was organized in 1821; John Quincy Adams, John C. Calhoun,
and Judge William Cranch were original members. The church building,
dedicated 1822, was designed by Charles Bulfinch, one of the original
members, and architect of the National Capitol. Mr. Little died in
1827. Cf. Jennie W. Scudder, A Century of Unitarianism in the
National Capital, 1821–1921 (Boston, 1922).
62 They seem afterwards to
have coalesced with the Disciples.
63 Cf. Unitarian Micsellany,
i (1821), 322 f, 289–292, 368–370; ii (1822), 261–267, 301–303; iii
(1822), 207 f, 289–292.
64 Cf. Christian Examiner,
iii (1826), 515–520; Christian Disciple, ii,N. S. (1820),
224–227;John Ware, Memoir of the Life of Henry Ware, Jr.
(Boston, 1846), i, 130–137.
65 Cf. Christian Disciple,
iii, N. S. (1822), 66–71; ii (1821), 402–419; Gardiner Spring,
A Tribute to New England (New York, 1829); (Henry Dwight
Sedgwick), Remarks on the Charges made against the Religion and
Morals of the People of Boston, etc. (New York, 1820);Henry D.
Sewall, On the Alliance of Unitarianism and Mahometanism (New
York, 1820).
66 Cf. Moses Stuart,
Letters on the Eternal Generation of the Son of God, addressed to the
Rev. Samuel Miller (Andover, 1822); Samuel Miller, Letters on
the Eternal Sonship of Christ, addressed to Professor Stuart
(Princeton, 1823).
67 Cf. review by George B.
Cheever, Quarterly Christian Spectator, v(New Haven, 1833).
421–447.
68 Frank Hugh Foster,
Genetic History of the New England Theology (Chicago, 1907), p.
300.
69 Cf. Leonard Woods,
Letters to Unitarians (Andover, 1820); Henry Ware, Letters
addressed to Trinitarians and Calvinists (Cambridge, 1820); Woods,
Reply to Dr. Ware's Letters (Andover, 1821); Ware, Answer to
Dr. Woods' Reply (Cambridge, 1822); Woods, Remarks on Dr.
Ware's Answer (Andover, 1822); Ware, Postscript to the Second
Series of Letters (Cambridge, 1823). Reviews in Christian
Disciple, ii, N. S.,1820, 393; v> 1823, 212–230, ‘State of the
Calvinistic Controversy’; Spirit of the Pilgrims, vi (1833),
686; Andrews Norton, ‘Views of Calvinism,’ Christian Disciple,
iv, N. S. (1822), 244–280.
70 As an example, Belknap’s
Psalms and Hymns (v. supra, p. 397),published in 1795, was
purged of the doctrine of the Trinity, but its doctrinal reform went
no further. It.was consistently Arian in its view of Christ. It was
acceptably used in many liberal churches for nearly forty years. But
by 1820it was sharply criticized in one of the liberal periodicals as
quite too orthodox. The critic said, “Belknap’s collection was
excellent for its day; but its day is now past. It can not be denied
that it contains much which no considerable part of any Unitarian
congregation believes.” Cf. Christian Disciple, iii, N. S.
(1821), 76, 340–353. But long before this, striking further progress
in doctrinal reform is seen in Buckminster’s Hymns for Public
Worship, for the church in Brattle Square (Boston, 1808),which is
so thoroughly purged of all traces of Calvinistic doctrine that
hardly one of the 176hymns in Part II, is doctrinally objectionable
today.
71Cf. Eliot, Heralds,
ii, 206–209. In calling Lamson the Parish took the initiative,
contrary to all precedent.
72 A Statement of the
Proceedings in the First Church at Dedham, respecting the Settlement
of a Minister in 1818, etc., by a Member of the said Church and
Parish (Cambridge, 1820);reviewed in Christian Disciple, ii, N.
S. (1820), 257–287.
Cf. 16 Massachusetts Reports, 147 and 488; George E.
Ellis, ‘The Church and the Parish in Massachusetts: Usage and Law,’ in
Unitarianism; its Origin and History (Boston, 1889), pp.
116–254; Enoch Pond, ‘The Rights of Congregational Churches in their
Connection with Parishes,'’in Clark, Historical Sketch, pp.
318–335; George E. Ellis, A Half-century of the Unitarian
Controversy (Boston, 1857), pp. 415–442.
73 Cf. Congregational
Quarterly (July, 1863), v, 229.
74 Cf.Clark, Historical
Sketch, pp. 270–272; Walker, Congregational Churches, p.
343; ‘The Exiled Churches of Massachusetts,’ Congregational
Quarterly, July, 1863;‘The Congregational Churches of
Massachusetts,’ Spirit of the Pilgrims, i (1868), 57–74,
113–140.
CHAPTER 22
1 Lyman Beecher,
Autobiography, etc. (New York, 1865), ii, 110. The passage quoted
is generally mistakenly assigned to Dr. Beecher himself.
2 Cf. John Ware, Memoir of
the Life of Henry Ware, Jr. (Boston, 1846), i, 127.
3 While the Monthly
Anthology was founded in 1806 as a distinctly literary journal,
religious interests tended to predominate in it, so that its
successors, the Repository, the Disciple and the
Examiner became the recognized organs of liberal Christianity. But
the literary strain also continued, under a separate management. For
in 1815 one of the old members of the Anthology Club also began the
North American Review as a literary periodical, with much the same
constituency; for it appealed largely to the Unitarian public, its
contributors were very largely Unitarians, and for more than sixty
years its editors were Unitarians.
4 Cf. Christian Disciple,
ii, N. S.(1820), 230 f; Charles Lyttle, ‘Outline of the History of
the Berry Street Ministerial Conference,’ Meadville Theological
School Quarterly Bulletin, xxiv (1930), 3–27.
5 Cf. William Henry Channing,
Life of William Ellery Channing (Boston, 188o), pp. 218–223.
6 Cf. Christian Disciple,
ii, N. S. (1820), 230; iv (1822), 229.
7 Evidently he referred only to
his Sunday sermons, for he used the word repeatedly in his Thursday
Lecture, May 20, 1824. Cf. Octavius B. Frothingham, Boston
Unitarianism (Boston, 1890), p. 97; Christian Examiner, i
(1824), 182 ff.
8 Cf. his Life, ut
supra, p. 427.
9 Cf. Charles Graves,
‘Freedom — the Unitarian Tradition,’ Christian Register,
January 6, 1838, pp. 4–7.
10 Cf. George Willis Cooke,
Unitarianism in America (Boston, 19022), pp. 124–142.
11 By the most extraordinary
coincidence the British and Foreign Unitarian Association was formed
on the very same day, though the coincidence was not discovered until
some weeks later.
12 This paper was founded in
1821 by David Reed (1790–1870), who had studied theology and been
licensed to preach, but was never ordained or settled. He felt the
need of a weekly newspaper in spirit like the Christian Disciple,
but more elementary than that. It began simply as broadly
Christian, but in the era of controversy it soon had to take sides,
and has ever been a stanch organ of the liberal churches. It is today
the oldest religious newspaper in the country.
13 Cf. Eliot, Heralds,
i, 108–117; Memoir by Mary Carpenter, in Ware,
Unitarian Biography, ii, 136.
14 Cf. supra, p.
354.
15 Cf. American Unitarian
Association, First Annual Report, 1826, pp. 3, 21. It
would appear that though meetings were held with some regularity, and
the Lord’s Supper observed at Northumberland as long as Priestley
lived, with him as acting minister, and that though they got so far as
to build a house of worship, yet the church to which he looked forward
was never actually organized while he lived; and after nearly six
years, writing to Belsham in London, he was able only to say, “I do
not now despair of an Unitarian society being established in this
place in a reasonable time’ (March 30, 1800; cf. his Life,
ed. Rutt, I, ii, 429).The movement apparently languished until
1822,when the Rev. James Kay from Hindley, Lancashire, came, was made
Principal of a local academy, and began preaching at regular
intervals, and formed a Tract Society. Cf. Christian Reformer,
ix (1822), 198–200. Mr. Kay reported the formation of a “new society”
in 1826,with a two story brick meeting-house 25 or 30 feet square; and
an appropriation of $100 was granted him. In the following summer he
went to a new society at Harrisburg. Cf. A. U. A., Second Report,
1827, pp. 14, 50.
16 Cf. A. U. A.,
Second Annual Report, 1827, p. 49.
17 v. supra, p. 426f.
Cf. A. U. A., Third Annual Report, 1828, pp. 45–51;
Christian Examiner, iv (1827), 183–192.
18 Cf. Ware’s Life of Henry
Ware, Jr., i, 226–228.
19 In 1705 the rule of the
Genevese church was repealed which required candidates for ordination
to subscribe the Helvetic Confession, and in 1718 Calvin’s catechism
was superseded by a Reformed Catechism that was substantially the same
as the Geneva Catechism which was widely accepted by the early
English and American churches. Cf. The Geneva Catechism, for
instruction in the Christian Religion; prepared by the Pastors of
Geneva, for the use of the Swiss and French Protestant Churches.
Trans. from the French, new ed. 1814 (London, 1818); Jean Jacques
Chenevrière, Causes qui retardent chex les Réformés le Progrès de
la Théologie (Genève, 1819); Christian Examiner, iv(1827),
41–61.
20 Cf. especially A. U. A.,
Third Annual Report, 1828, pp. 52, 64.
21 Cf. his Autobiography,
i, 439–449.
22 Cf. Lyman Beecher, The
Faith once delivered to the Saints. Sermon at Worcester, October
15, 1823, etc. (Boston, 1823); Reviewed in Christian Examiner,
i(1824), 48–81; reply in Christian Spectator, and reprinted in
his Works, ii, 301–413; Beecher, Autobiography, chap.
lxxii.
23 To make sure that the
church building should never by any possibility fall into unbelieving
hands, title to it was held not by the proprietors but by a board of
trustees chosen from other orthodox churches. This most
uncongregational provision was criticized as an attempt at illegal
ecclesiastical tryanny. Cf. John Lowell, The Recent Attempt to
defeat the Constitutional Provisions in Favor of Religious Freedom,
etc. (Boston, 1828). Nothing came of it, for the church was
destroyed by fire within a few years, and was rebuilt elsewhere. This
scheme was credited to Dr. Beecher, but his friends declared that the
trust was drawn before he arrived, and was unknown to him. Cf.
Christian Register, February 9, 1828. Several other churches bound
themselves by these trust deeds. Cf. Bernard Whitman, Two
Letters to Moses Stuart, p.14 f.
24 Beecher, Autobiography,
ii, 76 f.
25 (Lyman Beecher), Rights
of the Congregational Churches of Massachusetts (Boston, 1827);
The Congregational Churches of Massachusetts (Spirit of the Pilgrims,
i, 1828, 57–94. 113–140); (John Lowell), Review of “Rights”
(above), Christian Examiner, iv (1827), 124–153; Vindication
of “Rights of the Churches” (Boston, 1828); Review of
“Vindication,” Christian Examiner, v (1828), 298–316, 478–505;the
above all reviewed in Spirit of the Pilgrims, ii (1829),
370–403; (Caleb Butler), Collection of Facts and Documents relating
to Ecclesiastical Affairs in Groton, Mass. (Boston, 1827).
26 When the conservatives had
failed in their long efforts to establish Consociations through which
Unitarians might be excluded from their pulpits, some of the leading
clergy covertly introduced a plan under which the orthodox would
refuse to exchange pulpits with Unitarians or otherwise recognize them
as Christians, and even used personal pressure when necessary. This
was known as the “exclusive policy,” and it was an effective means of
splitting the church. Cf. Christian Register, July 23, 1825, p.
1; James Walker, The Exclusive System (Boston, 1827);
Christian Examiner, i (1824), 384–398, Remarks on Ministerial
Exchanges; Anon., Pulpit Exchanges between the Orthodox and
Unitarians (Boston, 1828).
27 Of the nineteen male
members of the church one third were liberal, while of the legal
voters of the parish about three fourths were liberal. Cf. Account
of the Controversy in the First Parish in Cambridge 1827–1829
(Boston, 1829); Controversy between the First Parish in Cambridge
and the Rev. Dr. Holmes (Cambridge, 1829), reviewed in Spirit
of the Pilgrims, ii (1829), 559–571.
28 Cf. Spirit of the
Pilgrims, v (1832), 402–434, review of the Brookfield Case. The
minister referred to was the Rev. George R. Noyes, later distinguished
as an Old Testament scholar, and Professor at the Harvard Divinity
School.
29 Quoted by Jared Sparks,
Inquiry into the Comparative Moral Tendency of Trinitarian and
Unitarian Doctrines, etc. (Boston, 1823), p. 52.
30 Cf. Gardner Spring, A
Tribute to New England. A Sermon delivered before the New
England Society of New York, 22December, 1820 (New York, 1821);
(Henry Dwight Sedgwick), Remarks on the Charges made against the
Religion and Morals of the People of Boston and its Vicinity by the
Rev. Gardiner Spring, D.D., etc. (New York, 1820).
31 Though at first
Trinitarians, the Universalists had by this time generally abandoned
belief in the Trinity. But the majority of the Unitarians were long
reluctant to avow belief in universal salvation, fearing the effect of
the belief on morals. Difference in the social origin and the general
social status of the two sects long held them apart, and it was yet a
generation before the Universalists had outgrown the extreme views of
their first leaders and the two were practically at one in doctrine.
Cf. Christian Examiner, vi (1839), 249–262; Spirit of the
Pilgrims, iii(183o), 205–224, reviewing Hosea Ballou,
Recommendation and Reproof of Unitarians (Boston, 1829).
32 Considerable attention was
drawn at this time to the case of the first Treasurer of the American
Unitarian Association, who had been a member of Dr. Channing’s church
and a zealous and active Unitarian, but in his two years’ service was
so much impressed by the greater devotion and religious earnestness of
the orthodox as compared with the Unitarians that he concluded that
theirs must be the truer system, resigned his office, and transferred
his membership. He attributed the difference apparently to the
doctrine of regeneration. An interesting series of anonymous letters
in this connection was given to the public, thus: a) (Lewis
Tappan), Letter from a Gentleman in Boston to a Unitarian Clergyman
in that City. b) (J. P. Blanchard), Review of A letter,
etc. c) (Henry Ware, Jr.), Reply of a Unitarian
Clergyman, etc. d)Remarks on the Letter, etc. e) Which
Society shall you join, Liberal or Orthodox? All Boston, 1828.
33 At Mercer and Prince
Streets. Later known as the Church of the Messiah.
34 William Ellery Channing,
Discourse preached at the Dedication of the Second Congregational
Unitarian Church, New York, December 7, 1826 (New York, 1827);
Review of the Rev. Dr. Channing’s Discourse, etc. (Boston, 1827).
35 Cf. Parsons Cooke,
Unitarianism an Exclusive System (Boston, 1828); (Isaac Parker),
‘Letter to the Rev. Parsons Cooke,’ Christian Examiner,
iv(1828), 276–283; (Parsons Cooke), A Reply to a Letter in the
Christian Examiner (Boston, 1829).
36 The Massachusetts Election
Sermon, preached before the Governor and Council at noon of election
day (the last Wednesday in May), was instituted 1634 with the Rev.
John Cotton as preacher. The custom was continued with rare exceptions
until 1884, when Dr. A. A. Miner was the last preacher. The preacher
was chosen by the Governor and Council. The sermon was likely to deal
with public questions from the standpoint of religion, and was often a
notable utterance.
37 William E. Channing, A
Sermon Preached at the Annual Election, May 26, 1830
(Boston, 1830); Moses Stuart, A Letter to William E. Channing, D.D.,
on the Subject of Religious Liberty (Boston, 1830).
38 Cf. Bernard Whitman,
Letters to Stuart; review in Christian Examiner, x (1831),
87–129; Spirit of the Pilgrims, iv (1831), 117–189.
39 Cf. (Enoch Pond), ‘Review
of Mr, Whitman’s Letters to Professor Stuart on Religious Liberty,’
Spirit of the Pilgrims, iv (1831), 117–180; also separately;
Whitman, Reply to the Review of Whitman’s Letters to Professor
Stuart, Spirit of the Pilgrims, iv (1831), 326–336,
reviewed in Christian Examiner, x (1831), 385–394.
40 Cf. John Codman, Speech
in the Board of Overseers of Harvard College, Feb. 3, 1881, n. p.;
F. C. Gray, Letter to Governor Lincoln in relation to Harvard
University (Boston, 1831); Christian Examiner, x (1831),
129–160;‘Review of Certain Publications relating to Harvard College,’
Spirit of the Pilgrims, iv (1831), 373–386.
41 Dr. Beecher went to preside
over a new Theological Seminary at Cincinnati, where he later had the
experience of being himself defendant against a charge of heresy
brought by his conservative brethren. Of his seven sons, all
ministers, three became well known for their liberal views, and one of
his granddaughters became the wife of the Unitarian, Edward Everett
Hale.
42 Cf. Christian Examiner,
xii (1833), 337–363; xvi (1934), 138 f.
43 Cf. George B. Cheever,
Some of the Principles according to which this world is
managed, contrasted with the Governmentof God, etc. (Boston,
1833);reviewed in Christian Examiner, iv (1834), 171–192;
Cheever, ‘The Course and System of the Unitarians Plainly and
Solemnly Surveyed: a Letter to the Conductors of the Christian
Examiner,’ Spirit of the Pilgrims, vi (1834), 708–734,
also separately. Parallel with the above was a controversy running
about half a year in the Salem Gazette between the Rev. Charles
W. Upham and Cheever. Upham’s articles were reprinted (1834)under the
title, Salem Controversy.
Unitarianism had long been dominant at Salem when Cheever settled
there as a young man, and found orthodoxy declining. His ministry
there was marked by a violent campaign against the Unitarians.
44 For an interesting
contemporary account of the growth of the denomination, cf. an article
by John Parkman in Christian Examiner, lvi (1854), 397–428;and
the History of the Association at its twenty-fifth anniversary in
A. U. A., Twenty-fifth Report (Boston, 1850), 8–48.
45 Cf. Henry Ware, Jr.,
Sober Thoughts on the State of the Times (Boston, 1835); also in
his Works, ii, 99–144 (Boston, 1846).
46 Minister at Brookfield,
1827–34; Professor of Hebrew at Harvard, 1848–68.
47Cf. Emerson, An Address
delivered before the Senior Class in Divinity College, Cambridge;
Sunday evening, 15July, 1838 (Boston, 1838).
48 Christian Register,
Sept. 29, 1838, p. 154.
49 Christian Examiner,
xxv (1837), 266.
50 Cf. Henry Ware, Jr., The
Personality of the Deity. A Sermon preached in the chapel of the
University (Boston, 1838); Works, III,26–39; review in
Christian Examiner, xii(1838), 267 f; Ware, Memoir, ii,
183–188.
51 Cf. Andrews Norton, A
Discourse on the Latest Form of Infidelity (Cambridge, 1839);
review by Andrew P. Peabody, Christian Examiner, xxvii (1840),
221–225.From this point on for several pages I shall use substantially
an account that I have used in an earlier publication and shall not
try to improve.
52 Cf. (George Ripley)
Letters on The Latest Form of Infidelity (Boston, 1839); Norton,
Remarks on a Pamphlet entitled ‘The Latest Form of Infidelity
Examined’ (Cambridge, 1839); Ripley, A Second Letter to Mr.
Andrews Norton, etc. (Boston, 1840); Ripley, A Third
Letter,,etc. (Boston, 1840); Levi Blodgett (Theodore Parker),
The Previous Question between Mr. Andrews Norton and his Alumni,
etc. (Boston, 1840); (Richard Hildreth), A Letter to Andrews
Norton, on Miracles as the Foundation of Religious Faith (Boston,
1940).
53 Cf. The South Boston
Unitarian Ordination (Boston, 1841), 64 pp., includes both the
orthodox attack and the Unitarian replies.
54 A chapel built in 1838 for
the unchurched poor. It was on what was known as “the neck,” near
Washington and Dover Streets, but the location is now obliterated.
55 The final act of expiation
by the denomination was the publication by the American Unitarian
Association in 1885 of a selection from his writings, entitled
Views ofReligion, with an introduction by James Freeman Clarke.
56Cf. A. U. A.,
Twenty-eighth Report, 1853.
57 For a list of meetings and
speakers, cf. Monthly Journal of the A. U. A., v (1864), 49 f.
58 At the Berry Street
conference. Cf. Christian Examiner, Ivii (1854), 163.
59v. supra,pp.348 ff.
60 Cf. Quarterly Journal of
the A. U. A., ii (Boston, 1855), 326–338, 344–351; iii (1856), 544
f.
61 Only the churches at
Charleston, S. C., and New Orleans survived after the war.
62 Cf. Monthly Journal of
the A. U. A., i (1860), 350 f.
63 Cf. George Willis Cooke,
Unitarianism in America (Boston, 1902), pp. 173–186.
CHAPTER 23
1 Lists are given in Cooke,
Unitarianism, p. 176f; Eliot, Heralds, iii, 132 f.
2 Cf. Cooke, Unitarianism,
pp. 177, 184 f.
3 Cf. Charles J. Sti11é,
History of the United States Sanitary Commission (Philadelphia,
1866), p. 69 f, for a fine characterization of Dr. Bellows and his
services to the Commission.
4 Total receipts,
$2,055,604.33; California, $1,233,977.81; cf. Stillé, op.
cit., p. 546.
5 Cf. Jacob G. Forman,
History of the Western Sanitary Commission (St. Louis, 1864).
6 Cf. Monthly Journal,
vi (1865), 312.
7 Under a resolution by Dr.
Bellows, which was therefore the germ of the National Conference. Cf.
Monthly Journal, vi (1865), 15.
8 The published official
records of the meetings are greatly condensed, and give little idea of
what was said in the actual debate; and they have to be supplemented
from other contemporary sources, especially from Edward C. Towne,
Unitarian Fellowship and Liberty: a Letter to Rev. Henry W. Bellows,
D.D. (Cambridge, 1866). Cf. Report of the Convention of
Unitarian Churches . . . April,1865 (Boston, 1866), Stow Persons,
Free Religion, an American Faith (New Haven, 1947).
9 Cf. Martha Perry Lowe,
Memoir ofCharles Lowe (Boston, 1884), p. 330.
10 This college had been
founded in northwestern Ohio in 1852 by the Christian Connection, on a
non-sectarian basis. It marked an important step toward religious
freedom in American education, for only three or four colleges in the
country were quite free from sectarian control. Unitarians had from
the start contributed to it generously, the Unitarian Horace Mann had
been its first President, 1852–59, and it promised to become in the
West as liberal an influence as Harvard had been in New England; but
it had fallen into serious financial embarrassment, and was about to
close. In consequence of the action of the Unitarian Conference and
the aid there promised, the college was saved, and control of it was
given to the Unitarians. Cf. H. W. Bellows, ‘The Claims of Antioch
College,’ Monthly Journal, vii (1866), 81–87, 131–141.
11 Cf. Monthly Journal,
vi (1865), 294.
12 Cf. Report of the Second
Meeting of the National Conference, etc. (Boston, 1866), p. 20
f; Memoir of Charles Lowe, p. 384 f; Persons, Free
Religion, p.40 f.
13 Cf. Persons, Free
Religion, chap. iii.
14 Cf. Clarence L. F. Gohdes,
The Periodicals of American Transcendentalism (Durham, N. C.,
1931), chapter xi.
15 The last public meeting was
held in 1827.
16 This school began with
great enthusiasm, but it lasted but two years. Its financial support
was insufficient, and with the removal to New York of Mr. Hepworth,
who had inspired it, it faded away.
17 Article IX. “ . . all the
declarations of this Conference, including the Preamble and
Constitution, are expressions only of its majority, committing in no
degree those who object to them,” Adopted 326 to 12. Report of
the Third Meeting of the National Conference (New York, 1868),
p. 87.
18 Cf. Forty-fifth
Anniversary Report, 1870, pp. 7–22; Defence of the Action of
the A. U. A. (Boston, 1870).
19 Cf. Forty-fifth Report,
ut supra, pp. 23, 22–39.
20As a contribution to this
controversy, cf. various articles in Monthly Religious Magazine,
xliii and xliv (187o),which largely devoted itself to the
conservative interest.
21 Substituted for Article IX,
v. supra, p. 475.The substitute ran, “reaffirming our allegiance
to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, . . . we invite to our fellowship all
who wish to be followers of Christ.”
Though he had won his point in the amendment he had offered,
Hepworth became increasingly dissatisfied with the denomination and
more in sympathy with the orthodox; and two years later he left his
pulpit and entered the orthodox ministry. Late in life he made
overtures for returning to the Unitarian ministry, but was discouraged
from doing so.
22 The Rev. William J. Potter,
minister at New Bedford. Cf. Index, v q (Jan. 1, 1874).
23Cf. Forty-ninth
Anniversary of the A. U. A. (Boston, 1874), pp. 14–16.
24 Article X. “While we
believe that the Preamble and Articles of our Constitution fairly
represent the opinions of the majority of our churches, yet we wish,
distinctly, to put on record our declaration that they are no
authoritative test of Unitarianism, and are not intended to exclude
from our fellowship any who, while differing from us in belief, are in
general sympathy with our purposes and practical aims.”
25 For authorities as to what
follows, see contemporary issues of Unity (Chicago) and The
Unitarian (Ann Arbor); J. T. Sunderland, The Issue in the West
(Chicago, 1886); W. G. Gannett, Unitarianism or Something
Better (Chicago, 1887); Mrs. S. C. Ll. Jones, The Western
Unitarian Conference, its Work and Mission, Unity Mission Tract
No. 38 (Chicago, 1890).
26Cf. Unitarian Review,
xxviii, 39–61.
27 Cf. Reports presented to
the Western Conference, etc. (Louisville, 1854).
28It was largely an academic
question, for there were in fact only two or three such cases, and
those were short-lived. The danger was theoretical rather than actual.
29Thus practically reaffirming
the resolution voted in 1875, v. supra, p. 482.
30 v. supra, p. 480.
31 “These churches accept the
religion of Jesus, holding, in accordance with his teaching, that
practical religion is summed up in love to God and love to man . . .
and we cordially invite to our working fellowship any who, while
differing from us in belief, are in general sympathy with our spirit
and our practical aims.”
Formulated by the Rev. J. T. Sunderland, presented by the Rev. M.
J. Savage, amended by the Rev. George L. Chancy.
32 See an editorial by the
Rev. S. J. Barrows on ‘The Unitarian Name, its Growth and Application
in the United States,’ in the Christian Register, May 6, 13,
1886.