death was a part of the punishment inflicted upon fallen man." "God made man upright, but he sought out many inventions.' By his apostasy from God, how dreadful was his fall! The primitive rectitude of his nature was perverted; the moral image of God upon his soul was quite obscured * *. But blessed be the Lord our Redeemer, who has made atonement for our sins, reconciled us to God, and 'given us the spirit of adoption.' Hence the righteous are now the children of God, through the mediation of Jesus Christ, and by the renewing of their minds, through the influence of the Holy Spirit."

In 1795, it was the sad duty of Thacher to preach the funeral sermon of eight seamen who were drowned in a wreck off from Lynn Beach. There was only one survivor from the wreck, and he, being present at the service, in the presence of the eight corpses of his drowned shipmates, was addressed in these words: "Perhaps I may never see you more; certainly I do not expect again thus publicly to address you. Let me, then, most affectionately exhort you, by the solemnities of a dying hour, as you value your own soul, and by a regard to that Providence which has preserved you, to repent of all your sins, to turn unto the Lord Jesus Christ, upon whose merits alone are founded our hopes of pardon, grace and glory. Never will a man be less excusable than you will be, if you now neglect this loud call of Providence, if you do not devote the remainder of your days to the service of that God who has, and can only sustain you."

In July, 1803, Mr. and Mrs. Miles Shorey, who lived on Boston Street, were killed by lightning. In the funeral

sermon Mr. Thacher says that through confession and repentance we are saved "by the dying love of a crucified Redeemer." He insists that this love is available for all. "Come unto me,' is a universal call, and if we are obedient to the call, God assists us with the aid of the spirit." "Freely the fountain flows, unrestricted is the Divine benignity."

It is very evident that according to our judgment of history, the doctrines that I have just quoted would not account for a serious decline in the history of the church. They are not more heterodox than the doctrines of the Methodist Church, which has had a numerical success far exceeding that of our own body. They are not more heterodox than the teachings of Henry Ward Beecher, Lyman Abbott, George A. Gordon, the two eminent divines in whose presence I have the honor to be upon this platform,* and many other ministers whose preaching has attracted thousands. We cannot say then that these men did not build up the church simply because they were not orthodox.

We must remind ourselves also that a small following is not an infallible sign of heterodoxy. Some prophets of truth have had a small hearing in their own day, and some heresies have attracted their thousands. We must judge of the truth on its own merits and not simply by its apparent success.

Some reasons may be suggested for the falling off of church membership. I suggest first, the unsettled state of thought. Layman and minister alike had begun to chal

* Rev. JAMES M. WHITON, Ph. D. Rev. WASHINGTON GLADDEN, D. D.

lenge not so much the basis of the Calvinistic theology, as some of the conclusions to which its adherents and also its opposers forced it. Since it was not longer practicable to kill or banish all who differed from the old views, therefore the discordant elements were left to fight the matter out together. As they had not yet learned to do this peaceably, and as both sides were intolerant, it is no wonder that the church did not grow.

Out of this conflict were born other churches. Had there been less intolerance among our membership there might have been fewer deflections. The ministry of this period inclined to liberal views, though it was not Unitarian. Now if Jeremiah Shepard and Parsons Cooke are to be excused from narrowness and dogmatism because of the spirit of the time, certainly Henchman and Treadwell and Thacher are to be excused for liberalness on the same ground.

The first serious trouble was over the refusal of Mr. Henchman to permit the evangelist, Whitefield, to preach in his pulpit. Our pastor was as fearless as Parsons Cooke in his attitude and writings concerning this matter, and I think his reasons were as good as those urged later by Parsons Cooke against Henry Ward Beecher. For a considerable time, Mr. Henchman seems to have been the only one bold enough to sign his name to his writings against Whitefield, and every one who hates the principle of anonymous writing, must admire him for his manliness. Nor was his attitude more bitter than that of the evangelist, Whitefield, who wrote of a criticising pamphlet: "The Design of the pamphlet itself is base and wicked, * *

intended to eclipse the great work in New England and invalidate the testimonies," etc. This is an assertion of motive, as presumptuous as anything written by Henchman. It should be borne in mind that our pastor had as colleagues many of the New England ministers, and also the faculty of Harvard College, who strenuously opposed Whitefield. Whitefield declared that his design was, "to hew Stones for the Temple of God, and leave him to lay them where He pleas'd." Upon the title page of his pamphlet, Henchman quoted Proverbs xxvii, 12: "The prudent man foreseeth the evil and hideth himself, but the simple pass on and are punished." History has proven that it is not always a wise thing to hew stones and leave them lying about unless careful provision is made for putting them into a building.

We should bear in mind, also, that cautiousness is not only excusable but proper, especially when the means for investigating the record and actions of a travelling preacher are as limited as they were in those days. Deprive yourself of the mail train, the ocean liner, the telegraph, the telephone; let a travelling preacher stand before you, who is discountenanced by many worthy ministers, and whose methods seem far from dignified and sane; would you vote to admit him to this pulpit, or would you, like Henchman, demand proof of his ministry? Experience has proven, even in Lynn, that the membership of a church can distrust the opinion of accredited ministers, and put their confidence in a stranger at the expense of the church and its life. I am not criticising Whitefield, I am excusing Henchman.

We must give the laymen their share of the bad reputation of this period. When Saul wished the death of David he sent him out to fight with the Philistines, saying, “Let not my hand be upon him but let the hand of the Philistines be upon him." Parsons Cooke tells of one or more individuals who were instrumental in getting Obadiah Parsons here, believing that he was an unworthy man and secretly desiring that his coming would work havoc in the church. Whether Obadiah Parsons were guilty or not it would seem that some of the laymen who helped to engage him were guilty. They would not kill the church, but would like to see Parsons do it.

During this period occurred the Revolutionary War, with its terrible distractions and its bad effect upon religious life. It has been noted elsewhere, as well as in Lynn, that those who engaged in the conflict were likely to become demoralized, and even if they survived to return to their native places, often came back alienated from the church. John Treadwell, pastor at this time took a wholesome and righteous interest in the conduct of the war. He is ever remembered as having carried his musket and powder into the pulpit with his Bible. Before the war we were distracted; after it, we were demoralized. Lynn is said to have had its own little tea party when several women besieged a Tower Hill baker and destroyed his tainted tea.

The Half Way Covenant has frequently been referred to as a source of havoc and an indication of heterodoxy; but aside from its political features, the provisions of this Covenant are generally accepted to-day.