Thus the two parties, still connected together under one name, but opposing each other in doctrines, with different rallying centers, leaders and periodicals, simply awaited some signal for a formal separation and for gathering into opposing camps. The Unitarian party held power and prestige in Boston and its vicinity. It had obtained full control of the ancient college. It claimed nearly all the ministers in Boston. churches, the strongest in the land in numbers and wealth. But the orthodox forces were better organized. They had a theological seminary already well endowed. They controlled the State Association. Their leaders were being diverted by the peril of division from their own differences with one another in theological beliefs, and they had a deeper stimulus to effort in the missionary organizations already begun with the aim to convert the world to Christ. An occasion for a declaration of separation between the two parties was soon to arise.

CHAPTER XVI.

THE UNITARIAN DEPARTURE (continued).

N the beginning of the year 1815 there appeared in Boston a little pamphlet entitled "A Brief History of the Progress and Present State of Unitarian Churches in America." It at once created intense excitement. It was merely some extracts from a memoir of Theophilus Lindsey, an English Unitarian minister, written by Belsham and published in England. in 1812. It contained letters written from time to time. by Freeman to Belsham, describing the growth of Unitarianism in America. The memoir had been for two or more years in the library of Harvard College when Dr. Morse, after repeated applications, secured the privilege of reading it. He caused extracts containing the letters to be published. A few specimens will show the significance of these letters. In 1789 Freeman wrote that there were in Massachusetts

many churches in which the worship was strictly Unitarian." In 1794 he wrote again, that he was "acquainted with a number of ministers, particularly in the southern part of Massachusetts, who avowed and publicly preached Unitarian doctrine," while others. "more cautious, contented themselves with leading their hearers by a course of rational and prudent sermons, gradually and sensibly to embrace it." Similar letters appeared in this pamphlet from Mr. Wells, a Boston publisher.

This publication at once precipitated the crisis which had long been approaching. The orthodox forces declared that these letters were evidences that the "liberals" had for years been concealing their beliefs and intentions with deliberate design to carry the churches over to Unitarianism. The Panoplist published a review of the pamphlet, written by Jeremiah Evarts, presenting the known sentiments of Unitarians in England, and ascribing those views to Unitarians. in America who had not avowed their belief. The "liberals" indignantly denied the charge of unworthy concealment. Channing, in a published letter to Thacher, declared that his worship and sentiments had been Unitarian, and that while the great majority of the liberal clergy differed from English Unitarians and believed that Christ was more than man, it was "no crime to believe with Mr. Belsham." Samuel Worcester of Salem replied in the Panoplist to Channing, that "it seemed to have been received as an established uncontested fact that ministers of the liberal class were not accustomed to be unreserved and explicit in the public avowal and declaration of their sentiments." Publications on both sides multiplied, the controversy lost dignity Unitarians disavowed and attacked orthodox doctrines in their pulpits, Trinitarians drew closer together and complete separation was before long established. Trinitarians had already defined their position. Park Street Church had expressed it in its original confession as a "decided attachment to that system of the Christian religion which is distinguishingly denominated Evangelical; more particularly to those doctines which, in proper sense, are styled doctrines of grace." Unitarians refused to avow these

"doctrines of grace," but pleaded for charity. They charged Trinitarians with illiberality and exclusiveness, and were in turn charged with insincerity and disingenuousness. The Unitarians were trying to retain the name and historic prestige of Congregationalism, while they repudiated its chief doctrines. The conten tion had increased through the use of the press, especially of the periodicals which represented one or the other party. In 1816 the Boston Recorder was begun as representing the Evangelical churches. Two years before the American Tract Society had been formed in Boston. The Panopolist and Missionary Maga zine published earnest and able articles in defence of Trinitarian belief. The General Repository, begun in Cambridge in 1812, represented the Unitarians.

An

Ministers also drew apart from one another and ranged themselves according to their beliefs. Earnest efforts were made to increase the number of Evangelical ministers, not only by strengthening Andover Seminary but by providing aid for young men preparing for the ministry. In 1815 the American Education Society was organized for this purpose. attempt was also made to unite the Massachusetts churches in consociation according to the plan established in Connecticut, but this failed. The attempt was based on a manuscript found among the papers of Cotton Mather, and presented to the General Association in 1814. It proved to be the original draft of the Proposals of 1705, which had been printed as late as 1772, but had been forgotten. Of course the lines of division between Congregational ministers were not at once in all cases distinctly drawn. But of the two hundred and seventy-five in Massachusetts at that time

about seventy-five immediately came to be regarded as Unitarian. The churches mostly followed the lead of their ministers. The large majority rallied to the defense of the old faith. But in Boston all except the Old South and Park Street were Unitarian, and their influence, with that of Harvard, was intellectually and socially very great. Many of the churches in eastern Massachusetts were in sympathy with them.

The

The sharpest controversy, however, came where the dividing line was drawn within the local parishes. Already this had been done in several instances. cases of Plymouth, New Bedford and Sandwich have already been mentioned. The crucial question soon arose as to what legally constituted the church, and whether church or parish, in case of a division, had a title to the name and property. Each parish was then a religious society for maintaining public worship; and the cost of so doing, including the support of the minister, was usually raised by a tax on the property of the parish. By a law passed in 1754 the deacons of the church were made trustees of property designed for religious and charitable uses.

The first case decided by the courts was that of the First Church, Dedham, which began in 1818. A vacancy having occurred in the pastorate, the parish, contrary to all precedent, took the initiative in calling Mr. Alvan Lamson to be the pastor of the church. The church thereupon decided by a vote of eighteen to fourteen of the male members that it was not ready to call a pastor. An invitation to several churches was then sent out by "the First Parish of Dedham” to assemble in council and install Mr. Lamson. This the representatives of the invited churches proceeded to