Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1853-08-06
From the Christian Press.
Shall we deny Christ in order 10 Free the
Slave?


Many questions which nre now being
somewhat warmly discussed in various quar-
ters, will finnly resolve themselves into the
very important one which heads this article.
Towards this conclusion, in our opinion,
things are rapidly tending; and the more
rapidly parties and individuals assume dis
tinctive positions, aud nyow their sentiments,
the grenier will be our JOY.
Ii is, we think, quite time that the follow
ers of the Lord Jesus Christ, should earnest
ly and proyeriuly study the character Of the
popular antisayery movement of the day,
aud soberly consider its bearings upon the
interests of the Redeemer's kingdom; for
no intelligent christian will, for moment,
believe that anything which opposes the
progress of evangelical religion, can help 10
elevate our race, or improve the condition
of the world. For the true disciple, the
worlds hope is bound up in the doctrines of
the cross; and therefore, every collateral ef-
fort for the worlds redemption, must, if it
receive his approval, ut the very least, not
oppose and deny the truth ms It is IN Jesus
lie who hath made Christ his hope and ref
uge, must necessarily view oil things in rela-
ton to him aud his cause.
With these preliminary remarks, to indi-
in a general way, a somewhat numerous
collection of newspaper articles, aud private
communications, touching the course of the
Christian Press, concerning the late conven-
ton in this city, aud the questions involved.
To prevent confusion we will state the
questions which are really at issue between
the Christian Press aud its opposers.
First: was there, Notwithstanding the
general invitation, specific character given
to that convention 10y the call itself? We
thought so then; we think so still and if
Judged by the common rules applied TO such
transactions, we see not how any one can
reach different conclusion. The exclusive
naming Of Mr.. Garrison, and a woman, as
The speakers relied upon to give interest TO
the affair, placed upon il definite impress,
which was not changed ut all by general
invitation TO free discussion. This, OF
course, has no reference TO the actual com
position of the convention, when it assem-
bled, but refers to the character of the call
under which it met.
All were invited and TO free discussion,
but under the prescribed condition, of recog-
! uizing certain influences us the prominent
views of the occasion. Each one, of course.
judged freely for himself whether he would
or would not comply with the condition, and
ClhluilIR luC buulo IlRuN hUlCu WC Uttll
award TO others, we concluded not TO place
ourselves in such position, and, as yet, we
have seen no cause to regret the decision.
But the discussion of this matter has given
rise to second question, of much graver
import: shall christians associate, for the
overthrow of slavery aud the general work
of reform, with open and undisguised inf
deity?
The decision of this question depends
first, upon the views we take of the anti
slavery question, as one Of politics merely,
or of morals aud religion; and secondly,
upon the nature of tho alliance proposed.
II the nnti-slavery movement of the day
is merely political one, n question between
party and party; il il can he altogether sep
nrated from morals aud religion, 20 TINT n
mnn's anti-slavery action has no connection
with his christian principles and christian
character, then, perhaps, he mny have nc
more soicltlda for the character of his AS
sociatcs, than he would have in exiinguiBh
! ing fire, or in rescuiug n man from tlC
grasp of pirates or robbers.
But the case is widely different from this
and illustrations Of this sort only serye |,
mslead.
As mere political movement, it woul
excite in us but little interest, because W
are convinced that the slave power cannot b
broken by the collision of parties only.
Ii is, however, apparent to oil that th
great question now before the America
public, is one touching the foundation {
morals, the existence of a church, aud
belief in evangelical religion.
Slavery itself presents n question Of MOI
ais, which cannot be treated with a poliiicu
nosrum alone; but the question Of SLAYER
.Io 10, c,at inn cacnnharu
one far more important, vix. shall the bibl
be rejected, the cross despised, and evangel
ical religion he abandoned?
These, and not the abolition of slavery
are the real issues which we are called upor
TO decide. The existence of slavery is only
, the occasion for presenting the actual anG
the profounder question concerning the ma
, ture aud value of christianity itself.
The party which arrognnlly claims to b'
pre. eminently and exclusively the abolition
body of the country, so that to oppose il i,
denounced as hostility to the anti-slavery
cause, has, we suppose, beyond denial
placed itself upon the platform of mere
naturalism in religion, and proclaims n posi-
tive rejection of the inspiration OF the hi
bic, denial of mans depravity, the ne
cessty of regeneration, or an alonement
the divinity of our Saviour, and of eterna
| retriDutlon.
These views are rapidly sweeping out
side the small body who refuse 10 vote OF
hold Office under the constitution, and are
already claimed 10 be the distinguishing
doctrines Of the majority of reformers.-
Let us suppose for moment, that in |
not distant future, this should be really
true, and we should behold a great polt
icul party based on direct antngonism I,
evangelical religion, whose leading mel
and persons and influences were brougll
to bear, not only against slavery, but also
and with greater earnestness, against III
, bible and the doctrines of the cross.
Could Christian, then, innocenty oil
. himself to such party? Could he give
his influence; even tlv benefit Of his silence