Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1849-01-25
Reply TO Edwards"

DR.. CONvERsE-DEAR SIR:-In your paper
of the 18th ult, noticed with interest, an arti-
Gle entitled The Change proposed in the terms
of communion" undersigned Edwards" which
the writer designed the editors of religious pa
pers in New England to republish; that their
readers might possess thu views generally enter
tanned by their brethren at the South, in regard
to the iustifabeness of the relation which they
sustain to slavery. If this writer really express
ses, as he he supposes he does, the common
opinion of ministers and churches at the South,
in respect to their having a right, by divine au-
thority, for the liberation, support and perpena-
ton of slaveholding, his article certainly oHgh'
to be republished, not only in New EhgiaNu
but throughout all the free States OF our Union
~ .f.~.s e..s so.sss.zr i--r~e~-suz extensively
made, which should be removed. Let US under
stand each other, and then we shall know wheth
er, and wheI eiore, we differ; and we shall b.
able to speak to each other with some hope oil
doing good. was glad to see, Mr.. Editor, that
you offered room in your paper for reply to the
views of your correspondent That is fair and
ri hit. Let the matter be ably discussed, i'll a
candid, Christian manner, and the Truth will
ultimately prevail. | have been waiting fol sew
eral weeks, in hope that some one whose views
correspond with my own, and who is better able
to maintain them, would reply; but as no one
to my knowledge, has done so, feel constrain-
ed to undertake the duty myself
The resolution lately passed by the General
Convention Of Vermont, which constitutes the
text of your correspondents discourse, was this,
"Resoved that this convention considers it ex
pedent to appoint, at this time, a Committee
consisting Of ministers and luymcn, to consider
thoroughly, whether it is or is not the duty Of this
body to withhold fellowship from individual
churches, and other ecclesiastical bodies on &C
count Of their practice or liberation of slaVehod-
ing and particularly whether our present con
nection with the two General Assemblies of the
Presbyterian Church, ought not to cease, on &C
count Of their continual federation of this gross
violation of the most precious rights of human
nature and that such committee make writ
ten report Of their opinions, together with the
reasons Of them, to this Convention at its next
annual meeting"
This resolution, it is obvious, was not design
ed to PREJUDICE the case but merely to appoint
and to report to the Convention their deliberate
conclusions, another year. In this there is har-
mony, rather than conflict, with all which ED
wards says, in regard to the importance of
the question, and Of the necessity of its being
settled in accordance with the word of God, SC
that it shall no longer be considered an open
question, or be permitted any more to disturb
the peace of the Church. This is the very thing
contemplated. 1t is what the General Conven
vention of Vermont unanimously desire. Blu
that The question has been already settled by thu
word of God, in favor of the liberation and prac
tice of slavery in the Church, is not admitted
1t is easy for your correspondent, if he so be
lieves, to make the affirmative and equally ca
sy for me to express my solemn conviction tina
he has fallen into deplorable mistake. Nci
Their his declaration or mine, in such a case
will have much weight, unless attended with sat
isfactory evidence of its truth. That in tn
Christian Church, "Christ is the only lawgiveI
and that no man, or body of men, ecclesiastica
or civil, can lawfully enact any rules whic
are not taught, or implied, in the scriptures, t
bind the church in matters of faith or practice
is freely admitted.
Your correspondent states his understandin
Of the question which the Vermont Convento
have submitted to. their committee to be thi
8 "Npght those who tolerate or practice sav,
r holdllT to be excluded from communion of ii
church, N the ground that their practice is
. 'his respecrnmoral j? Now the question whet
5 CT sioVeholdlneis, in all cases, an mineral &C
= though a iair one ~ discussion, is not the que
. ton before this comnrtee. What thew are call,
to consider Is not the ,orality, or immoraIit
e fpracticing or tnerationg s,veboldinp in &c
t tain supposed cases, but its oro-.rv torm--or
+ a genera thing. They are to look, Va. a, ;solo
ed instances in which the thing exist IN ~,