place he communicated his change of sentiments to the congregation with which he was connected; when, to his great surprize and satisfaction, he found that, with a single exception, they were all earnestly desirous that he should continue his connection with them, and that each should quietly allow to others the right of private judgment in this and every other case. This however did not satisfy his clerical brethren, with whom, as residing in the neighbourhood, he had joined in a voluntary association. Being duly informed by Deacon Southworth, the dissatisfied member before alluded to, of his reverend pastor's departure from the faith, they first in a formal session, held in October, 1804, excluded him from their society, and disavowed ministerial connection with him. And in this measure was no injustice; for the associated ministers had as good a right to judge of the truth and importance of their opinions, as Mr. Sherman of his. But the zeal of these pious inquisitors did not stop here: they wrote an official letter to the church at Mansfield, stating, that they had judged it to be their duty to withdraw from their heretical brother their own ministerial connexion, and pretty plainly intimating their expectation that the society would follow their example, and dismiss their pastor, who stood convicted by his own confession of many capi

had always been kind, and which will either deliver us from the evil, or inspire us with fortitude to endure it.”

Upon these generous and pious principles did this Christian confessor act throughout the whole of this arduous conflict; and however his ignorant and malignant persecutors might injure his good name, and deprive him and his family of the comforts of society, and leave them destitute of the necessaries of life, they could not rob him of the inestimable treasure of an approving conscience. How rapidly and extensively must the cause of Christian truth prevail, if all who were convinced of it possessed the fortitude and zeal of Mr. Sherman! But this is an elevation of character to which every one cannot attain. Different persons have different gifts, and are called to different duties. Let every one judge impartially for himself, and candidly for others.

tal errors. This advice, though treated with merited neglect by a majority of the church, nevertheless made a considerable impression upon a small number of feeble-minded members, who, in April, 1805, addressed a letter to the venerable association, expressing their dissatisfaction with their worthy pastor for denying, as they express it, that "the man Christ Jesus is truly and properly God ;" which, say they, "is a doctrine which we cannot be persuaded to give up but with the Bible which contains it." And they further profess that "the doctrine of a Trinity of Persons in the Godhead, as held by Calvinistic divines for ages, is a doctrine clearly taught in the holy Scriptures ;" and that, however mysterious and incomprehensible, it lies at the very basis of Christianity." Under these difficulties, they implore the advice of the reverend Association. But notwithstanding all the activity of Deacon Southworth, and the artifices and intrigues of some bigots in the neighbourhood, only ten signatures could be procured to this address. Such however was the eagerness of the venerable body, and such their zeal to exterminate heresy, that they immediately directed an answer to be sent to the complainants, advising them to have recourse to a Council or Consociation, which is an Ecclesiastical Court consisting of ministers and messengers, and invested by law with great and indefinite powers. But as the Consociation was to consist in a great measure of the same ministers of whom the Association was formed, who had already prejudged the cause, and as the congregation at Mansfield had never acknowledged the jurisdiction of this Court, they rejected the advice with the contempt it deserved. Nevertheless, as this worthy confessor saw that his unrelenting adversaries were determined to pursue every possible method to disturb the peace of the society, and to accomplish his ruin, and being desirous of preventing the disastrous consequences of religious discord, he came to the resolution of resigning his pastoral office. This resolution he communicated to his friends; and at his

desire the church and congregation concurred with him in inviting, according to the custom of the country, a Mutual Council of respectable ministers to give their advice in the case, and, if they should judge it expedient, to grant Mr. Sherman an honourable dismission and recommendation.

This council assembled in October, 1805, and Mr. Sherman first stated his case, and the reasons which led him to wish to resign his connexion with the congregation at Mansfield. After which, a deputation from the church, that is, from the communicants,* were heard on their own behalf; who stated, that

* It may not perhaps be known to the generality of readers, that, in the strict independent form of church government, the whole power of ecclesiastical discipline, the entire management of the property, and the sole right of choosing or dismissing a minister, is vested in the church, that is, in the body of communicants, of those who have been admitted into the communion of that church in particular, according to its prescribed forms, or who have been received by regular dismission from other churches. Mere subscribers have no vote, however numerous and opulent. Mr. Howard, the celebrated philanthropist, was the richest member, and the most liberal supporter of the congregation at Bedford; he also joined statedly in communion with the church; but not having been regularly admitted into the church, he was only regarded as an occasional communicant; and in the choice of a minister, not the least attention was paid to his expressed opinion and desire, and a minister was chosen who was by no means acceptable to him.

In Northamptonshire I recollect another instance in which a venerable minister of irreproachable character, of most amiable manners, and unimpeached orthodoxy, was dismissed from his office by the church, under some trifling pretenee, in opposition to the sense of by far the most respectable part of the congregation. His friends appealed to a court of law, to reinstate their respected minister in his office. But Lord Mansfield, who whatever might be his political delinquencies, was a most liberal and impartial judge in all cases in which the rights of Protestant Dissenters were concerned, demanded to see the writings of the place; and finding that they vested the communicants with the discretionary power of choosing and deposing a minister, he dismissed the cause immediately, and the worthy veteran was obliged to resign his claims. Another chapel however was provided for him, where he continued to

though the discontented party did not constitute more than one third of the church, yet they plainly perceived that their design was first to exclude their pastor, and then to excommunicate their brethren. That, in order to prevent this schism, they had offered to the complainants either that they should remain unmolested with the majority; or, that the majority, for the sake of peace, should dismiss their pastor, in order to remain unmolested with them; or, if this would not satisfy their opponents, Mr. Sherman's friends would retain and maintain their own minister, and let the discontented party have theirs. This concession, however, liberal as it was, did not satisfy the dissidents. Lastly, a deputation from the Congregation were heard before the Council, who stated, that not less than nine-tenths of the society were well satisfied with their minister, and had no desire to part with him, or to restrain him in his enquiries. "Being," as they express it, "tenacious of the right of private judgment, they wish to indulge their minister in the same neither would they wish that he should act the hypocrite to gain the approbation of any man. And they apprehend that, in case Mr. Sherman is dismissed, the society will soon be found in a most unhappy situation, not likely to be settled with another minister for many years.'

officiate, and was supported by his friends as long as he lived. In America, it is presumed that where the independent form of church government prevails, this principle is in general maintained. But in Connecticut, they have strangely deviated from the original freedom of the separate churches, by the institution of what is called the Consociation, a sort of spiritual court, which was established in Connecticut in the beginning of the last century. This court has power to interfereupon all occasions ecclesiastical," and its censures are authorised and supported by the civil power. Each Consociation consists of ministers and messengers from every congregation which belongs to it. But no congregation is compelled to join it. As far as its power extends, it is properly a court of inquisition; and in some cases the members have discovered too much of an inquisitorial spirit.

Notwithstanding however these strong facts, this noble profession, and this conciliatory spirit, the prudent Council proceed, as a matter of expediency, to dismiss Mr. Sherman from his connection with the society and while they bear honorable testimony to his character and talents, and "recommend him to the kind reception of those who may see fit to employ him," they cautiously subjoin, that they "do not consider themselves as giving their approbation of Mr. Sherman's peculiar phraseology or circumstantial difference of sentiment on the subject of the Trinity." And in their subsequent advice to Mr. Sherman, they admonish him to guard against a bold spirit of speculation, and an inordinate love of novelty.

It is not a little curious to contrast those differences of opinion which this venerable Council coolly describes under the soft expressions of peculiar phraseology and a circumstantial difference of sentiment. The man whom they gravely caution against a bold spirit of speculation and inordinate love of novelty, asserts the doctrine, that there is One God, the sole object of religious worship, and one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus, who is the prophet and messenger of God. While his orthodox opponents, to accommodate whom the Council think it expedient to dismiss their exemplary pastor, maintain as a doctrine essential to salvation, and which they 66 can never give up but with the Bible which contains it," that "the man Jesus is truly and properly God." Is the venerable Council serious in stating differences so glaring and so substantial as these, as nothing more than a 66 peculiar phraseology" and a "circumstantial difference of sentiment"? No! No! Opinions such as these can no more harmonize with each other than light and darkness, than Christ and Belial.They who hold doctrines so diametrically opposite cannot be fellow-worshippers in the same temple. It was expedient that they should separate. So far the Council judged right. But the difficulty lies in disCovering the expedience, the justice, the common sense