Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1844-09-06
CORRESPONDENCE.
For the Green Mountain Freeman.
BROTHER AsPENwALL--

ton OF the "treeman,' which appeared IN the
sixth number thereof is by no means satisfactory.
Perhaps you did not understand me, and perhaps
the fault was my own that you did not Twill now
therefore try to state the question clear and exp-
cit, viz: The question, is not; what do you think
of the ",aerits, "of Mr. Birney's work. Nor is it,
whether YOU think, |, in my remarks, endorsed the
doctrine thus put forth by Mr.. Brney. Nor yet
is it, whether you think | am an enemy to the
church, aud therefore ought to take my stand
"with Mr.. Garrison, N. 2. Rogers, Mr.. PilIsbury
and Others" But this is it, viz. "lS the position
of Mr.. Birney that "the American church is the
buwark of American Slavery" the position of the
"Green Mountain Freeman" And now Brother
Aspenwall, after having thus clearly stated the
main question proposed in my first communlca-
ton, unncumbered with with any remarks, will
briefly notice some things contained in your reply
to it, as to my mind they are of very extraordi-
nary character And first. 1t is marvellous to me,
that a minister of that GOSPEL, whose cardinal
foundation principle, is that "charsty," which
"Ihinketh no eviI,' should hold up brother TO
public reprobation, as an enemy of the church of
Christ. for no other reason than endorsing (and
even this did not avow) the doctrine put forth
and ably supported by the Hon. James 6. Brney,
the Liberty Party candidate for President of the
United States. And secondly, 1t is still more
marvellous, that either from the eagerness of your
desire to publish me to the world as an enemy of
the church, or by an objectionable oversight or
from both these causes combined, you Sir, the
Editor of Liberty Party party, should place
your candidate for President Of the United States,
in so awkward position. What DO you think
Mr.. Birney will say, when he sees himself ar
raigned by the "Green Mountain Freeman" as an
enemy of the church, Yes, and chaStlse-
ment for his temerity, in thus presumlng to call
the church to an account, for chattelizlng the i'm
age of her God-(or selling her Lord to the high
est bidder, to find himself shut out from the col
umns of the "Freeman," and turned over to the
"Liberator," as ga more appropriate channel for
such sentments?' Aud what will he say to see
his name associated with "Mr. Garrison, N. P.
Rogers, Mr.. PilIsbury and Others" with the mot
TO "hat the first and great work to be done is the
destruction of the American church," Will Br.
Aspenwa, don't know what Mr.. Birney will
say to these things, hut one thing do know, and
that is, have such an exalted opinion of Mr. Bir-
ney, both as man, and christian, that | shall
not feel very bad, for being thought by the "Free-
man. TO be his disciple, so far at least, as his
charge against the church in this matter is con-
cerned. But must now say word about the
Church, OF rather, notice briefly what you said a.
bout it in your introductory address, for have not
tinae at present to 60 at length into the subject OF
the position of the church on this great question.
You say, GIVE regard the christian church, DIV
lhis we mean all its different branches) as an in
stiuton of God. And though it has, in this coun-
try, generally taken wrong positions on this great
question, like almost every other department oil
society, we shall labor for its reformation and not
dts destruction" Now sir, if you mean to say that
God is the author Of call the different" sects OF
protesting christians, generally termed orthodox
in this country. You have assumed position in
my view equally at variance with the word Of Goo
has the slavehoIding Christian, who maintain;
that slavery, as it exists in the United States, il
az an Institution of .God'' The very secret of thu
truth, that the &" American Church is the hulwarl
of American slavery" is the rivalry of those diff
ferent church organizations. In this they are sit
uated just as the two great political parties are
which you say are both tirratrievably sold tt
slavery" And had you placed them all OH a leve
in this respect.l assure you that whether coulC
exactly subscribe to the declaration without a
mending by striking out the word 1wetrtevably,
I should not have troubled you with any question
upon the subject. Fer they have all legisated 70
slavery. They have all trampled the image O
the blessed God in the dust. They have all Vie
with each other in slandering and opposing al
who have rallied around the standard of liberty, t.
maintain the heaven-deriged principles that " a
men are created equal, and are endowed by thei
Creator with certain inalenabIe rights, anon
which are, life, liberty, aud the pursuit of happi
ness" You say truly, that slavery is " mora
.evil--a sin against God,'' AID that our " enter
prise is emphaticalIy moral reformation, and ca
really be promoted only by moral and chrstia
Measures Why then, ask, in the name of reaso
and religion, do you attach more Importance to tn
political parties than you do to the various churc
organizations? Is not the answer found in you
church party attachments? when, l. ask, has eithe
of the political parties, which you say are I" IRE
&rievabIy sold to slavery" directly legisated ava
the right Of the christian slave to testify against
white man who may have murdered, or ravishe
his wife or daughter before his eye52 And "
the Methodist Episcopal church has done this
Yes such has been the action of this church i'm Fl