ADDRESS BY REV. A. H. QUINT,1

THE RETIRING MODERATOR.

Elders and Messengers of the Churches:

1895.

It has been decided by those in charge of the opening of this Triennial Session, the ninth of the series, to follow a custom of our English brethren, whereby an address, more or less extended, is demanded from the retiring Moderator. This new requirement may or may not become permanent. I have, however, only to obey.

You will not censure me, I know, if for the moment I turn in memory to the hour when at Oberlin, twenty-four years ago, there came to me, as Chairman of the Preliminary Committee of our Churches, the simple duty and the great honor of calling to order the members of that First Council. I see before me, here and there, one who was then present. You will certainly allow me to mention the faithful Registrar, who has served us so efficiently from that period until now. But Budington, the Moderator; Bacon, who preached the sermon; Ray Palmer, whose beautiful hymn, beginning "My faith looks up to Thee," was sung then as now; Langworthy and Kitchel, from the east; Atkinson and Dwinell from the Pacific shore; Healy from the mouth of the Mississippi, and, from the intermediate States, Finney, Morgan, Sturtevant, Wolcott, Andrews, Chapin, Turner, Post, Ross, Merriman; with Barstow, Russell Bradford, Hardy, Farnsworth, Grinnell, and the war-governor Buckingham, have all gone, with many another, from the church militant where they fought a good fight, to the church triumphant where they find the promised rest.

But your ranks are full to-day. I see in them men coming from all parts of the broad land which greets the morning sun on the Atlantic shores and witnesses its setting in the waters of the Pacific; which reaches from the great northern lakes to the salt southern sea. I see gray-haired men who were young in the time of that first Council, grown only more strong in faith, more rich in experience, more powerful in work by the service of this quarter 1 ' Page 12.

of a century. I see a new, a young generation, bold, ardent, enthusiastic, already achieving successes in our Lord's service, and giving promise of still more heroic deeds and still greater triumphs. But no; we are but one body, neither young nor old. We are united in Christ, in the one perpetual Church, which has but one object, and which is always young and always old. We have but one experience, though more or less advanced, reproduced in every generation by the one Eternal Spirit. We come together in the name and in the service of our churches, found in the cities, in the mountains, in the valleys, in the prairies, in the cotton fields, and in the mines. We are one of the smaller tribes, but important interests are embodied in our more than five thousand churches and an equal number of ministers, our fellowship of six hundred thousand communicants, and the more than seven hundred and fifty thousand upon the roll of our Sunday schools; and we meet to consult upon the great single work which overrides all the diversified interests, and meets all the diversified wants, of humanity, by the one unchangeable gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, gospel of Bethlehem and Calvary and Olivet, and the Christ who is the same yesterday, to-day, and forever.

- the

There are interesting questions agitating the Christian world, or some parts of the Christian world, which I do not care to enumerate. They are mainly controversial. I do not think we are here to discuss them. If they were to be discussed anywhere, certainly I should not feel called upon to introduce them. There is a primal thought, under Christ, which seems to belong to this occasion. This Council stands before the world as a Congregational Council. We are Congregational people. Our churches are Congregational. Our ministers are Congregational. Our methods in carrying on the work of the gospel are Congregational. The word seems to differentiate us from other parts of the Church catholic. What in the present condition of the Church, and particularly in the desire for church unity, does Congregationalism signify? Let us attempt

an answer.

Yet first, we are not separated from the great Church of Christ by any distinctive doctrines. We affirm no provincial theologies. We hold the historic faith in common with all christendom. The constitution of this association of churches itself declares that the understanding of the scriptures by our churches is in accordance with the faith commonly called Evangelical. It is the faith embodied

in the consensus of the whole church. So greatly and reverently do we recognize the supremacy of the sublime facts of redemption, in comparison with even the most important of beliefs which distinguish any one part of the visible Church from any other part, that we are at a disadvantage when we come to discuss any peculiarities of our own.

Congregationalism is almost ashamed to be distinctive, and gladly it would be merged in the undivided Church, if it found the undivided catholic Church in which to lose its name.

It is so

merged, so far as the mighty facts of Christ's royalty are concerned, and it refuses to be separated from Christians of other organized polities in the communion of faith, or in the labors of the Church universal for the salvation of men.

Yet again, while we have a particular outward order and certain methods of service which we conscientiously believe are the best for us, and to which we think we have been providentially led, we do not say that this order and these methods are the best for others. Still more, we dare not exalt a system into any such prominence as to obscure or diminish the real glory of the kingdom of Christ itself; nor dare we limit in thought the power of the Holy Spirit to work through all agencies. Before the fruits of the Spirit, wherever found, we bow in reverence. Our chosen instrumentalities have in fact suffered from this breadth. We have dreaded, not to be called narrow, but to be narrow, in benefactions and labors for the great cause. Our churches have been the favorite foraging fields of men who sought for gifts to promote individual enterprises outside of our established work, although often of the same character,― enterprises which appealed to sympathy, and which may or may not have been wise in inception or judicious in management. Gifts have not been niggardly even when appeals came from men of other denominations for purely denominational use. We have established thirty-four colleges and universities outside of New England; had the moneys which our people have given to kindred work outside of our fold been given to these institutions not one of the feeblest of ours would now be lacking the generous endowments necessary to their highest success. Had the moneys lavishly given upon personal appeals to the assistance of work which is far better done under the guaranties and by the hands of our own responsible agents, appointed by our own churches, been given to those agencies, our great societies would not now be depressed by the chilling debt-cloud which hangs over them.

Still, there is distinctiveness of character.

cil? Why our history? Why our future?

Else why this Coun

We

We are bolder than our fathers. In a proper sense, we have become assertive. have no more denials to make as to our character, and no more doubts to cherish of the safety of our system. In 1799, the Hartford North Association united in the declaration : 66 This association gives information to all whom it may concern, that the constitution of the churches in the State of Connecticut . . . is not Congregational, but contains the essentials of the church of Scotland." And in 1805 the General Association of Connecticut appointed a committee to "publish a new and elegant edition of the ecclesiastical constitution of" what it placidly called "the Presbyterian Church in Connecticut." But we have ceased to be ashamed of our name. It is distinctive because it embodies a principle. It is an historical fact that professors, in the early years of our theological seminary, advised young men who were going westward to enter another denomination. This was far from being due merely to a desire for unity. They did not believe that Christians in the new settlements could be trusted with the power of local self-government. Liberty is the safety of liberty, and we have found that Christians can be left to the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Experience has demonstrated that the American idea of local self-government, which Congregationalists gave to this country, is safe in the church where it originated; originated not by elaborate constitutions which dictated the form of the church, but by the natural union of believers whose hearts brought them together for the united worship of God, the observance of the few symbols which the Master gave, and communion in exhortation and Christian work. Such do we find in the apostolic days. Christians, led by the Spirit, are capable of administering their own affairs. If they sometimes err, that they see their error and voluntarily change their course is the only effectual remedy. When our churches were entirely within the sound of the Atlantic surf, their very neighborhood and constant intercourse gave them essential union. But when they began their extension over broad areas, more formal recognition of oneness came of itself. I think that churches in Ohio led the way in formal permanent union. Then in time came broader association. Experience has demonstrated to us that the natural affiliation of all churches in such organized gatherings as this present one, for discussing