Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1816-02-13

the petitioners
Asking pardon of the worthy gentlemen,
whose names have been introduced for the
sake OF more distinct Il uStration, ] would
observe that this case is precisely similar
to that which has lately been before the
Legislature. Not the shadow of differ
ence en- be pointed out, unless it be, and
surely it will not be. assumed, that the
ministry of the Gospel is an unlawful call
ing.
But we are tod, that the petitioners have
asked for an unnecessary favor-They
can just as well accomplish their avoTaed
PURPOSES in another way. With submits
SION, SIR, think that the petitioners asked
tor the protection and security Of their
rights. And really, with my I'D fashioned,
l trust not obsolete. republican notions, l
cannot we'll understand how represen-
tative, servant OF the people, can,
on this ground, be authorised to re-
ject such a petition, as that Offer
ed in favor of the Tn olog cal Semina-
ry.-Suppose that the persons interested
in this laudable charity, should wish to re-
tain in their hands the power of removing
the seminary from it's present location, to
Lexington or Staunton, or any other place
that regard to economy might point out,
doyou imagine that they will be at all pleas
ed to be told by their representatives lyon
can answer all your purposes by annexing
professorship of divinity to some college
already established we will therefore
hear nothing of your petition"
Pint the worthy letter-wr.ter not only
voted against the petition because The gran
ting of it was unnecessary 4" it might al
so be dangerous"
The greater part of the reasoning under
this had, has already. as APP to me,
been refuted by the illustration which has
been given OF the nature of the Theologi
cal Scmnary.-Rut, AS some observations
OF the writer have been urged with consid-
cradle piausbility /; 81 especially rs he has
made an appeal to e,rflericuce, you must
bear with me, sir, while ! make some par
ticular remarks on this part of the letter.
The whole argument here supposes that
the incorporation of society of Christians
and particularly of Clergymen, was sought
for by the petitioners whereas their
prayer was to be incorporated as Trustees
ofGn academy. The intelligent gentleman
whose reasoning I oppose, will at once
perceive that this ;itcrs the whole state
OF the case. But were it otherwise, the sit
nation Of affairs in this country, at this time,
is so widely different from that of the coun-
tries and times TO which he alludes, that /
cannot but marvel that man of his pers-
picaciiy could for moment imagine, that
there exists any analogy between them. /
admit with him, that human nature is, in a
certain sense, always the same and of
course that in the same circumstances, 81
milar conduct may be expected. A fair
corOllary from this proposition is, that in
different circumstances, the actions of meR
will be dissimilar-Now, when the abuses
OF which the writer speaks originated, the
clergy were forbidden to marry. This
prohibition separated them from the rest of
society, and created a set Of interests pecu-
liar to them-but among us,there Is no such
restriction, and We find clergymcn as fire.
quently as other men, united TO the com
munity and interested in its welfare, by
conjugal and parental relations, and all the
ties of natural affection which are instru-
mental in producing that noblest of human
virtues, true patriotism.-F ormerly in eve
ry country in Christendom, the clergy
were intimately connected with a foreign
ecclesiastical authority, and were Gem
pletely subservient to it but here we owe
no allegiance but to our God & our country.
Formerly, not one man in hundred thou
sand had ever the least conception of what
was meant by liberty of conscience here
and in the present day, it is fundamental
principe "that religion is 90 be directed 6g
reason & c0npiction" the Bible
was kept from the laity, & they were even
compelled to pray in an unknown tongue
but among us, the Bible is in the hands of
every man and the people are accustom-
ed not to take their faith from the prea-
cher, but to judge of the soundness of the
preachers doctrine by the bible, the COM
mon standard of faith.-Form it reouir-
ed a princely fortune TO purchase even a
few books but now the art ofprintng has
made knowledge accessible to all. Are
not these differences too important to be
overlooked in the argument ON this subject
Ought they not materially to affect our con-
CIusons ? In fact do they not prove lust the
reverse of what the worthy letter writer
intended to establish
/ am very sorry that gentleman so trs-
ly amiablc as he appears to be. should have
thought proper to illustrate his subject by
an alluson to the society of Jesuits IL is
hardly possible to imagine cases more un-
like than those here assimAated. The
Society Of Jesus, as it was impiousy called,
was instituted for the express purpose of
supporting the papal throne, tottering as 1t
wasfrom the rude shock giveuby the Re-
( rmaton the members were obliged n
addition TO the usual vows os the religious
orders. to take one of obedience to the
hope, binding them to 60 whithersoever
nc should direct, for the service Of religi-
on :" in what land soever they solourned
then, Rome was their country and how
devout soever they might appear, the Pope
was their G0d--NNe have no country but
~tr,,