A REPORT OF THE DISCUSSION HELD IN NEWMARKET, N. H. BETWEEN REV. S. C. BULKLEY, UNIVERSALIST, AND ELIAS HUTCHINS, FREEWILL BAPTIST- INCLUDING A REPLY TO A LETTER FROM MR. BALFOUR. "If we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, 'Perhaps there is no better way of detecting the fallacy of a doctrine, than by DOVER: PUBLISHED BY E. HUTCHINS. William Burr, Printer. 1842. P NOTE. Lest some should suppose that my opponent is not very well qualified to sustain universalism, the testimony of two of his brethren is here adduced to show that he is an able disputant. Mr. C. C. Burr, universalist minister in Portland, Me., and editor of the Universalist Palladium of that city, in his paper of Aug. 14, 1841, says, 'Elder Hutchins seems to have ransacked all the works against universalism within his reach for objections to our faith. Every objection is fairly met and triumphantly refuted by brother Bulkley, who certainly possesses an eminent degree of talent for a controversy. He deserves a gold medal for the service which he is doing our cause in this way.' Mr. R. O. Williams, formerly pastor of the universalist Society in Dover, in the 'Star of Bethlehem,' Vol. 1, No. 21, asserts, Br. Bulkley is very well qualified, both from his familiar acquaintance with the subject, and his experience in theological controversy, to engage in such a discussion.' These witnesses testify that I am a stupid block head,' a ' most consummate blockhead,' a' theological minney,' my ‘ideas' in the discussion, are pointless and crude,' &c. Yet, strange to tell, Mr. B deserves a gold medal for the service which he is doing' universalism by triumphantly' refuting the crude ideas of a consummate blockhead!!! P R E F A СЕ. The following discussion was held on the evenings of the 27th, 28th, 29th and 30th of April, and on those of the 3d, 4th, and 5th of May, 1841. Dr. G. W. Kittredge acted as moderator. The challenge was given by Mr. Bulkley, and the debate was held in his meeting house, which was most of the time crowded to overflowing. The disputants spoke twice every evening, occupying twentythree minutes each time of speaking. As universalists at a distance claimed a decided victory for Mr. B. I proposed to unite with him in publishing our arguments. He flatly refused my proposition although I pressed him to accept it. But notwithstanding this refusal, a report of the controversy was written by him or some one else, and published in the Universalist Palladium, printed in Portland, Me. In this report my part of the discussion is garbled, distorted, and mutilated; two of my replies are wholly left out, another is given in five lines, and my main arguments throughout the discussion, are mostly omitted. Before its publication was commenced, Rev. C. C. Burr, an editor of the Palladium, wrote me an offer to publish my own report of the replies to Mr. Bulkley. But the letter containing this offer, contained also a condition which entirely excluded me from the privilege offered! This statement Mr. Burr has attempted to deny publicly; but I have proved it by the testimony of another universalist minister. This evidence he has not attempted to set aside, therefore he stands charged with misrepresentation in denying what I have proved to be true. Numerous misstatements, perversions, and misrepresentations have been published by universalists respecting my-, self, and matters respecting the discussion. Thirty one of these were exposed in the Morning Star of Sept. 1, 1841. These, however, are not half of what were published in their papers! WEISS ARE 4 1923 |