[15] S.K. Lothrop, History of Brattle Street Church, 7-40; E. Turrell, Life of Benjamin Colman, D.D., 96, 125, 178, 180. [16] The Churches' Quarrel Espoused, edition of 1860, 140. [17] Ibid., 143. [18] Ibid., 145 [19] The Churches' Quarrel Espoused, edition of 1860, 32. [20] Ibid., 58. [21] Ibid., 72. [22] Ibid., 65. [23] Ibid., 30. [24] Ibid., 33. [25] The Churches' Quarrel Espoused, edition of 1860, 34. [26] Ibid., 37. [27] Ibid., 64. [28] Ibid., 54. [29] Ibid., 55. [30] Ibid., 32. [31] The Churches' Quarrel Espoused, edition of 1860, 32. [32] Ibid., 39. [33] Ibid., 40. [34] Josiah Quincy, History of Harvard University, i. 44-54. [35] Ibid., 65, 200. [36] Josiah Quincy, in the seventh chapter of his History, gives a detailed account of this movement. It is also dealt with by Brooks Adams in his chapter on the founding of the Brattle Street Church, in his Emancipation of Massachusetts, though he gives it a somewhat exaggerated and biassed importance. Most of the facts appear in Lothrop's History of the Brattle Street Church. III. THE GROWTH OF DEMOCRACY IN THE CHURCHES. From the moment when the Puritan control of the church and state in New England was so far weakened as to permit of free intellectual and religious activity the democratic spirit began to manifest itself. The old régime had so fixed itself upon the people that the progress was slow, but none the less it was steady and sure. So far as the new spirit influenced doctrines, it was called Arminianism, the technical theological name for democracy in religion at this time. [Sidenote: Arminianism.] Arminianism is a dead issue at the present day, for the Calvinists have accepted all that it taught when the name first came into vogue. Every kind of reaction from Calvinism in the New England of the first half of the eighteenth century took this designation, however; and to the Calvinists it was a word of disapproval and contempt. Toleration, free inquiry, the use of reason, democratic methods in church and state, were all named by this condemning word. Vices, social depravities, love of freedom and the world, assertion of personal independence, had the same designation. It is now difficult to understand how bitter was the feeling thus produced, how keen the hurt that was given the men who tried to defend themselves and their beliefs from this odium. What the word "Arminian" legitimately meant, then, is what we now mean by liberalism. Primarily theological and doctrinal, it meant much more than the rejection of the doctrine of decrees and the autocratic sovereignty of God or the acceptance of the freedom of the will and the spiritual capacity of man. First of all, it was faith in man; and then it was the assertion of human liberty and equality. In a theological sense it did not have so wide a purport, but in a practical and popular sense it grew into these meanings.