ating ▁class ▁was ▁composed ▁of ▁seven ▁sen iors , ▁though ▁only ▁six ▁of ▁them ▁were ▁in ▁attend ance ▁for ▁the ▁address ; ▁Em erson ▁was ▁invited ▁to ▁speak ▁by ▁class ▁members ▁themselves . ▁Em erson ▁decided ▁the ▁time ▁was ▁appropriate ▁to ▁discuss ▁the ▁fail ures ▁of ▁what ▁he ▁called ▁" histor ical ▁Christian ity ". ▁In ▁his ▁address , ▁he ▁not ▁only ▁rejected ▁the ▁notion ▁of ▁a ▁personal ▁God , ▁he ▁cast ig ated ▁the ▁church ’ s ▁minister s ▁for ▁suff oc ating ▁the ▁soul ▁through ▁lif eless ▁pre aching . ▁Also ▁in ▁attend ance ▁were ▁the olog ians ▁including ▁Andrew s ▁N orton , ▁Henry ▁W are ▁Jr ., ▁and ▁Div inity ▁School ▁Dean ▁John ▁G . ▁P alf rey . ▁ ▁Response ▁Em erson ▁anticip ated ▁a ▁scholar ly ▁discussion ▁but ▁was ▁completely ▁surprised ▁by ▁the ▁negative ▁out bur st ▁which ▁followed . ▁Att acks ▁on ▁Em erson ▁quickly ▁became ▁personal . ▁He ▁was ▁called ▁an ▁at he ist , ▁a ▁negative ▁comment ▁in ▁ 1 8 3 8 . ▁The ▁chief ▁Un itar ian ▁period ical ▁of ▁the ▁time ▁( The ▁Christian ▁Ex am iner ) ▁stated ▁that ▁Em erson ' s ▁comments , ▁" … so ▁far ▁as ▁they ▁are ▁intellig ible , ▁are ▁utter ly ▁dist aste ful ▁to ▁the ▁instruct ors ▁of ▁the ▁school , ▁and ▁to ▁Un itar ian ▁minister s ▁generally , ▁by ▁whom ▁they ▁are ▁este emed ▁to ▁be ▁neither ▁good ▁div inity ▁nor ▁good ▁sense ." ▁ ▁The ▁address ▁touched ▁off ▁a