Restless Spirit of Radicalism”: Old School Fears and the Schism of 1837 Exploring a Time When Extreme Passions Led to the Rupture of American Presbyterianism
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The “Restless Spirit of Radicalism”: Old School Fears and the Schism of 1837 Exploring a time when extreme passions led to the rupture of American Presbyterianism. by James H. Moorhead “THE NECESSITY FOR THE SEPARATION OF some quarters, the anger was so deep that it the parties is urgent,” wrote the Philadel- continued to smolder even years after the phia-based Presbyterian on June 24, 1836. division. As late as 1855, one Old School “They do not agree; they cannot agree. We partisan still contended that “the palpable can scarcely conceive of two parties more perversions of religious truth” in the New antagonistic in all the principles of their School would have, if unchecked, “prove[d] belief and practice; they receive not the the programme to an age of infidelity, and same Gospel; they adopt not the same moral introduce[d] upon the American stage the code, and the absence of all mutual affinities shocking theological panorama of universal must oppose an insuperable barrier to their derangement and confusion in the elements harmonious union. Truth on one side, error of the moral world; as a parallel to which we on the other; honesty on one side, artifice on may point only to the reign of terror and the other.…” The two parties were the Old triumph of ungodliness in the French Revo- and New School factions within the Presby- lution.…” To explore the issues and circum- terian Church, and soon the author, an ar- stances that aroused such extreme passion, dent Old Schooler, had his wish. The 1837 especially within the Old School, and led to General Assembly, controlled by an Old the rupture of Presbyterianism is the goal of School majority, voted to expel four pre- this essay.2 dominantly New School synods. When com- missioners from those synods tried to take I their seats at the assembly in 1838, they were not recognized and then proceeded to The most ancient source of the 1837 split organize their own separate General Assem- was the complicated history of cooperation bly. Until 1870 Old and New School Pres- and disagreement that had marked the rela- byterians existed in separate denominations.1 tionship between Congregationalists and How had it come to pass that Presbyteri- Presbyterians. Congregationalists, largely ans framed their disagreements in terms from England, settled initially in New En- starkly dualistic—truth versus error, honesty gland after 1630. Presbyterians, some from versus artifice? Why was it that emotions England but even more from Ireland and were so inflamed that many Old Schoolers Scotland, came in force in the eighteenth found desirable a remedy as drastic as excis- century and made their homes chiefly in the ing a significant portion of the church? In middle colonies: New York, New Jersey, Dr. Moorhead is Professor of American Church History at Princeton Theological Seminary, Princeton, N.J. Journal of Presbyterian History 78:1 (Spring 2000) 20 Journal of Presbyterian History Pennsylvania, and Delaware. The two groups first pastoral duties took him to a Presbyte- disagreed over polity, Congregationalists rian church in New York City. Subsequently distrusting the Presbyterian subjection of the he returned to labor as a Congregationalist local church to higher ecclesiastical author- minister in Massachusetts, first in North- ity. They also had the memory of religious ampton and later Stockbridge. In 1758, he struggles in England, Scotland, and Ireland completed the circle by becoming president that had made them sometime foes as well as of the unofficially Presbyterian College of allies. Yet differences notwithstanding, these New Jersey (Princeton) only weeks before groups often understood themselves as ad- his death. Jonathan Dickinson (1688–1747), herents of a common or at least similar likewise reared in Connecticut Congrega- tradition. The fate of the Westminster Con- tionalism and trained at Yale, made a simi- fession of Faith provides a graphic case in lar, if more permanent transition, becoming point. Drafted in the 1640s as the work of an one of the leading ministers in eighteenth- English assembly with Scottish advisors, the century Presbyterianism. The ease with confession eventually became the official which individuals could shift between the creed of Scottish, Irish, and American Pres- denominations was paralleled by other forms byterians. Although never adopted in En- of cooperation. For example, in 1766 Pres- gland, Westminster did serve as a model in byterians and Connecticut Congregational- important respects for the Savoy Declara- ists approved mutual consultations that oc- tion (1658) of English Congregationalism, curred annually until the eve of the and its central tenets were reaffirmed by Revolution. In the 1790s, both denomina- New England Congregationalists at the Re- tions agreed to grant representatives of the forming Synod of 1680 and of the Saybrook other body the privilege not only of speaking Platform (1708). Congregationalism and but also of voting in their deliberations.4 Presbyterianism often appeared as variants The cooperative spirit reached its most of a common theological tradition. In fact, significant embodiment in the Plan of Union the precise boundary between the two was (1801). Approved by both the Presbyterian sometimes hard to determine. For example, General Assembly and the Congregational- the first American presbytery, organized in ist General Association of Connecticut, the Philadelphia in 1706, had several members plan outlined principles whereby the de- from Congregationalist New England; and nominations could work together in the cre- the uncertain degree of authority the ation of churches in the “new settlements” presbytery exercised over its ministers and produced by the nation’s westward expan- congregations has led some to suggest that it sion. The plan allowed congregations com- was possibly more like a Congregationalist posed of members of one denomination to ministerial association than a presbytery as call a minister of the other. In cases of we know it today. On the other hand, Con- dispute between church and pastor, the min- necticut Congregationalists in the Saybrook isters could appeal to the appropriate bodies Platform opted for connectional structures— of their respective denominations—Congre- consociations of churches—that looked to gationalist ministers to their associations, some suspiciously like presbyteries.3 Presbyterians to their presbyteries. If the Given the similarities between the groups congregation demurred, then the appeal and the sometimes murky boundaries divid- would be taken to a council drawn in equal ing them, it is not surprising that Presbyteri- numbers from each denomination. The plan ans and Congregationalists often maintained also permitted the formation of union cordial and relaxed relationships in the eigh- churches composed of both Presbyterian teenth century. The career of Jonathan and Congregationalist lay people, mandated Edwards (1703–58) provides a case in point. the creation of standing committees in such A child of Congregationalist Connecticut, congregations, and allowed these “Presby- he prepared for the ministry at Yale but his gational” committees to send voting repre- Old School Fears and the Schism of 1837 21 sentatives to presbytery. The Plan of Union was not simply a policy decision imposed from the top down. It formalized and ratified cooperative efforts already underway in par- ticular communities, especially in the state of New York. The originators of the plan, while blurring denominational distinctions, did not envision their obliteration. Assum- ing that parallel Congregational and Presby- terian structures would continue to exist in the same territory, the creators of the plan sought to coordinate efforts so that together the two denominations might more effi- ciently serve the expanding populations of the nation’s western regions.5 Yet in some areas, the two churches soon moved beyond cooperation to amalgam- ation. In 1807, the Synod of Albany in re- sponse to an overture from the Middle Asso- ciation (Congregational) invited that group to become a “constituent part of our body.” Rev. Samuel Hopkins The synod offered the association’s churches the right to continue conducting their inter- home missionary work or the distribution of nal affairs in accordance with Congrega- Christian literature—created voluntary be- tionalist usage while simultaneously enjoy- nevolent societies. Non-denominational in ing the privilege of representation in the character and outside formal ecclesiastical synod. In effect, the synod was proposing to structure, these organizations were con- make the association a presbytery under its trolled by boards composed of individuals jurisdiction. Approved by the General As- (often lay people) who represented only sembly in 1808 and confirmed by the Middle themselves, not their churches. The volun- Association, this Plan of Accommodation tary societies thus embodied a task-oriented cleared the way for Congregationalist ecumenism that brought Protestant Chris- churches to enter en masse into Presbyterian tians together in an ad hoc fashion. Although affiliation while maintaining their own dis- these organizations were formed both lo- tinctive practices. The pattern set in 1808 cally as well as nationally, it was at the was then followed subsequently in other national level that they gained great notori- parts of New York and in the Western Re- ety. A group of an interlocking organizations serve of Ohio. How many churches were known collectively as the evangelical