Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register

[300] which resulted in a division of the church. For obvious reasons, the particular incidents of this controversy are not here repeated. Each party published its own version of the whole matter in 1829: one, in a pamphlet of 58 pages, entitled, “An Account of the Controversy in the First Parish in Cambridge;” the other, in a pamphlet of 103 pages, entitled “Controversy between the First Parish in Cambridge and the Rev. Dr. Holmes, their late Pastor.” It may suffice to record the result. An ex-parte council, called by the First Parish, assembled May 19, 1829, and, after due deliberation, “Voted, That there is plenary evidence of the facts, that Dr. Holmes has materially varied in his ministerial and Christian intercourse from that of his two immediate predecessors, and from that of more than thirty years of his own ministry; that such change more essentially affects the peace, comfort, and edification of the Parish, than any mere change in speculation, or in points of dogmatical theology; that this change has been persisted in, contrary to the repeated remonstrances of a large majority of the Parish, consisting of about three-fourths of the legal voters, including several members of the church; that this course has greatly grieved them, and so far impaired their confidence in their pastor, as to preclude the possibility of continuing his ministerial relation to them, either with comfort to himself, or any prospect of advancing their religious interests. Voted, That the First Parish in Cambridge have sufficient cause to terminate the contract subsisting between them and the Rev. Dr. Holmes, as their minister, and this Council recommend the measure, as necessary to the existence and spiritual prosperity of the society. This Council wish it to be distinctly understood,” it is added, “that the service, to which we have in Providence been called, is one of the most painful services of our life. We do not arraign or condemn the motives of the Rev. Dr. Holmes. We are happy to testify that all our impressions of his course, during the peaceful state of his society, are associated with the most interesting and honorable views of his ministerial character and the Christian spirit.” ¹ In accordance with this “Result,” the Parish notified Dr. Holmes, June 11, 1829, that his “services will not be required or authorized in the public religious services in the meeting-house in said Parish hereafter.” ² And, as Dr. Holmes expressed the opinion that he was still the legal minister of the Parish, and professed a willingness to perform all his pastoral