South Congregational Church history and catalogue, 1852–1865 · scan page 156

Searchable source text

146  THE    EX-PARTE    COUNCIL.
ascertained  when  he  does  not  express  thein,  as  is  often  the
case  ?  It  would  be  more  coiTCct  to  say  he  is  sure  to  sustain
the  will  of  the  majority.  Happily,  an  accordance  of  views
has  commonly  existed  between  him  and  a  majority  of  the
Church,  but  not  always.  How  about  that  "majority  of  the
brethren  "  claimed  by  the  petitioners  on  the  occasion  above
alluded  to  1  So  there  was  a  little  independence  left  at  that
date,  although  confined  to  the  petitioners  and  those  who
"sympathized"  with  them!  When  the  last  of  them  has
withdrawn,  agreeably  to  the  advice  of  their  own  Council,  all
independence  of  opinion  and  of  action  will  have  gone  with
them,  no  doubt !     In  other  words,  the  Church  will  be  united.
"  One  of  the  petitioners  is  informed  for  the  Jirst  time,  bj'  tliis  docu-
ment, that  censure  has  been  passed  upon  him  by  the  Church,  which  it
is  understood  was  voted  at  the  dob-e  of  the  ^rraijer  meeting^  Dec.  2Wi,  -
1863,  (barely  in  time  to  be  used  in  the  reply  of  the  Committee  of  the
Church,)  and  without  any  summons  to  the  accused,  who  was  con-
demned without  a  hearing.  Considering  that  this  brother  is  one  of
those  who  received  letters  of  dismission,  and  over  whom  this  Church
has  declared  itself  to  have  no  control,  it  must  be  acknowledged  that
their  action  in  the  case  vindicates  the  position  wliich  thej'  claim  for
themselves,  of  being  an  ^  Indepaident  Con'jnrjalional  Church.''  "
The  censure  passed  upon  the  late  Clerk,  Dr.  Nicoll,  for
tampering  with  the  records,  was  in  perfect  accordance  with
the  position  maintained  by  the  Church  as  to  members  dis-
missed from  it  without  as  yet  being  connected  with  any
other  Church,  viz  :  that  although  such  persons  are  not  enti-
tled to  the  full  rights  of  membership,  yet  the  Church  can
exercise  a  watch  and  disci|»line  over  them  until  received
into  some  other  Church.  By  what  authority,  then,  do  the
petitioners  assert  that  "this  Church  has  declared  itself  to
have  no  control  over  those  who  have  received  letters  of
dismission  ?  "  AVhen  did  they  make^  such  a  declaration  1
Never.
"This  brother  would  stale  that  tlie  fact  which  he  noted  in  the  re-
cords was  derived  from  the  2}ublic  declarations  of  a  majority  of  the
brethren  in  their  meeting,  both  as  it  respected  their  opinion  and  their

Cite this page

Silent Grounds Collective, Church Burial & Death Records, CH-P004-0156. South Congregational Church history and catalogue, 1852–1865, printed page not verified, PDF page 156. Hallock, Gerard, 1800-1866; digitized copy contributed by University of California Libraries https://archive.org/details/historyofsouthco00hall/page/n160/mode/1up Accessed September 8, 2026.

Historic U.S. publication before 1931; public-domain assessment based on publication date. Internet Archive does not necessarily provide an explicit license. Preserve publication and digitizing credits.