Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1855-03-02
RELIGIOUS ASPECT OF POLrrICs'-"rHE
RICHMOND ENQrIRER-THE METHOD

RICHMOND ENQCIRER-THE METHOD
ISTS."
In Tho Richmond Christian Advocate" dated
March lot, and issued today is an editorial with
the above caption, which, ms friend, and, may say
n child of Alcthodism, sincerely wish had not been
published. The pr"voraon OF this editorial was sn
edtorul which appeared in the Enquirer on tb0 lsth
Of this month introducing, I" rsc the language o!
DR.. Lee "an objectionable editorial paragraph and
an extract from pamphle. lAat abuses Methodism
md Mc,hoiists with.li bn as moro tyranlcn than
Pnpcry, more degraded 'han PapStS, and quite RS
much lc b. Cra!ed the foes Of Republican govern
mcn,. The ''clirnriu and "rxract alluIt,: ~ were
copied from the Trenton True American. The par
cular offence that In ~ complained Of II, that
the Enquirer should haze published such represcn'
a,On 0f MsthnIi-In without strong and stern re-
hike of tic caulnny against the largest body Of Chris
tau. in Virginia" Now, whatever difference OF OPT
mon may have existed ns 10 tie tono and tchper Of
the Enquirers editorial I'll the l?th inStnnt-nnd |
will here remark that very intelligent plous and
devoted Methodist. larc very different construction
upon ,t wom that which appears in the Rich
mord Christian Adyocate-hr explanatory editorial
which aupcarGd III Yesterdays Enquirer c0nd AJt hnfc
been misunderstood, and should have settled the qucs
non uf doubt 10 the real intention Of the Editor IN
copying the "objcctinuGblc editorial paragraph md
the extract :l,,t the more objectionable panrhl;t
In lhi. view Of thr ca3e cannot re thI ntccasty M
the proprcty Of the editorial in .a2 !,c.orh Chris
tau Advocate. The cdi:cI %, c1rsr thinks different
lv. and has the got only to think !nr himself but
10 speak c;.d write nr himself Egi as one who has
rrytIcrtni regard for MsAodism and who is will
Ia tn endorse every thing that Dr. Lee ran say i'll lis
priiiac do regret in the accrndItcd organ OF
tho Methodist Church in Nirginn such al editorial ms
rlls nearly two and half columns ot The last number
ni the Richmond Christian Ady"tdic II sounds To
my cnrs about as much like defence oil Know Moth
inrism as Of MethodiSn, and has very much the mp
pcnr"ncc OF m intent Ia IL" "spiiltiihl wcipoiIr
against .ns Democracy ~ me present contest. Of
Gaur.e | do not impuc such motives or intentions TO
DR.. Lee, but his editorial, under the circumstances
and particularly, ia consideration of the !isclanl-
er which appcarci in the Enquirer of Tuesday
last il we'll calculated Ia excite suspicion, at east
i: !. Democratic mind, tia, lis object was NC! .Gcly
drjrVrp Of .N,hol,Sm The Enquirer r"alc no attack
on the Mc,hodists or the Mrhc.i1 church, 1t did not
directly or indirectly, cnGorlo my such attack 1t
cnpicd for the purro.e ot exposing to the Indignation
and "stcrn cetvkc" of Southern Mc;h"dsts, M en-
lrnc, ir,ra pamphle; ,rriti"a by hno~- Nc'h'ns,
which pamphlet wH- written and published with The
avowed purpose of showing the ti-Amerlcan and
ant. .Rnuiblicnn features and tendencies OF the Me-
thodst Episcopal Church.
Richmond, Feb, 2S, lS:.'. NlNDEX.