The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1856-05-20


ur ss) - blasphsmy idolaIy No cfzeu instances IN
which II 10 praetis.d csa justify IT, doss mot enter.
lows that sAveheding cannot, this grousA made
sutct Of diseiphns By any court Of tue church. But
sdmi.,ins tha. as!shoding cannot b made subject Of
neoefsaIiy implies IT. It b ssksd, cid not Tho Pies
b,terian church in the Unssd States when II adopted
the Confession Of Faith ito standard intend include
th subject discipline the court Of the church, to
IN ss Tss
ms that II 1t can b proved BY Documentary evidence
OF Faith was adopted By the General Assembly the prss
byterian church savehong In intended TO
included under tine term Oppression hsn When slave
vic sustaining the relation may be prosecuted under
the charge Of oppression IL proper to judge Of the
intent Of ii. tanners or Of those WIZ Gist adopted it.
The undersigned then would ask whore ths evlceocs
ran church or sSs tn. synods pse.das the ssst
General Assembly designed to include slAvehold
under the term ro thai Sh'. ssy .a0p n
far from tuoh evidence being on record, hs crcum.
connected with the for nation Of the FIRST General
Assembly end the history Of the mods precsdiog it,
would lead the conclusion that tn ,ucicso could
not have the term oppression include slave
holcng When the General Assembly first org lnizsd
twelve Of the thirteen States slavsholdtng
Ss,es conso cradle portion OF the members of the AS
semby Represented churches existing those aes and
Il 10 unreasonable suppos IN that some Of the
members Of that body were saveho ers Can IL be pos
sibe then that they intended to ude slavshold
oppression, to In innate that the relation ITSELF exis
ing under any circumstances, could be bar TO Christian
comm M ion, and could BIZ . sutjsct Of dicpdue The
Undersigned persuaded thar If tuch An ioea had besn
entertained and expressed the General Assembly would
no. pave pen Ss s y ; rn
cm The Of the term cppre.soD the right OF judi
catoy OF tbs church to regard saveholdng in any
offer CO in the in which the term used tho
Book OF In denying the General Assembly the
power to regard case an offence ia the
sense In winch the term Is used in the Book OF Discipline
proper to that that the of
this relation like those OF every other relation in lie
when brought before the Assembly in the preeorbed
BY the ns,tuuor may be cd sense
in which thu term used in the Book OF Discipline Cru
city, correcting Interiors uuduly, Withholding from them
what necessary to and comfort and disrs
gRrdrg the spiritual interests o. those committed to
care .ir prob In the stan arcs OF the Prssby
terisn church. and may therefore, he made jects Of
discipline, whether they exist IN connect with slave
holding, the relation OF husband and wife Of parent
child of ard apprentice The undersigned
consic that there OBVIOUS els melton
saveholcrg ard the evils incident TO tue relation and
thai whilst the latter being prohole In The standards
OF The church. be the suoject Of discipline the for
not beirg referred TO in the Confessi OF Faith,
cannot he treated offence in any Toe master
to whom child Is bound as an apprentices, msy treat
him cruelty; aid II he ia member Of the church, he
may be dscipiped By the church session for cruelty.
But who soud 50 that he is liable to the discipline OF
the ehulc for sustaining the relation iserS The hus-
band and parent be chargea BILE before church judi
caofy TOR clue treatment towards his wife and children
But lawful marriage and parental rela ton exist in
circumstance that would render the individual SUBJ
ee dscpr for sustain the relation. There may DO
sight If God BY snteriDg into ,be marriage relation
But the church judcatory take ixaaco only Of
The abuses thus reaucn anc not Of the relation itse
In referring various relations in Lie the under
sieI would NOT be Understood Is pac ng savehOding
upon equal footing with them in every Iesoec Ills
object to illustrate principle that he considers vital
TO The question under confederation, to wit that whilst
delinquency in prformiIg the duties arising from ths
relation aster and servant and which are designated
in tie Of the church may render stakeholder
liable to tt discipline OF the church. be cannot unter
any crcumsapcss be disciplined for sus ii, ing the re
itfplf q H.
divdua is invested with the right Of exercsiog
legal power ever tae servces CT another without his
consent to express the sentiment In tho language
Ct 6stir guished author OF our church, it il
the e1ac,irg Of personal services without consent"
and is recognized In tho Word Of God existing
smoeg the members If tie church under the Old
Anostles semited into the Caristi.n church. It is
implied in the resolutions passed by the Assembly In
Detroit, that the relation In itse1 ia not sinful may
be abuted and ike other innocent relations In LIFE It
may be entered into thIoush improper motives, which
may render the indi,idus criminal in the sight
Gtd If the abuses his authority By cruel
stment Of his he 0he dtscp Inc
the church Is The for the cruel ea ment OF
his wife, the parent for unmsrcul conouet towa his
child. In the view of the undersigned it in
quence OF overoc king this distinction between relation
hat is coIiessedy innocent 10 ITSELF and the wialed
abuses Of that relation that the Assembly at Detroit
led to declare aveboldDg in certain circumstances An
offence the 10 ~hica that term Is used in the
sbmes Of the slayeho ing laion-such may exist In
other re- AicEs in lie not the relation iself-was
Book Of Discipline whilst .he undersigned would c'n-
slider the ode which the oeclarati N waa made r.
regular ths mt ieh would meet bis concurrence
He recognizes the right of the lower to ins
tute ostip sgai slavsh older tor city towards
his slaves, anc the light of The General Assembly to
issue judicial case involving the charge of cruelty,
brought regularly before 1t; upon hs oasis Of
Iumor Synod neg ec's to eDjcn upon its presby.
teiies to institute nquy as to cruel es alleged 10 be
the Assembly to answer TO ths charge OF deiaquency
and the Afemb they think proper 10 do can en-
<r~ kiaak aVA
issue 1t S. In the view OF the synod, circumstances
nay require This In the judgment Of the iersigned,
upon the Ames bly in reference to saveholdns andto
other innocent relations in s The abuses OF the re-
lstion may be treaed ss eerces, when the chargeis
brought hefcrs the the way ibed by the
siitutiop but not the relation itself q the second
objection to the resolutions passed by the Assembly ct
Detroit Ito which the unders gned would briefly advert)
is that the pr taton of tine consu ion ia judicial
act, and inAemuch the Assembly can exercise its
judicial power With respect to offences only when case
complaint, appeal; or ~ court Of revisw-and a.
Assembly 1t Detroit not called upon t, decides
Irsneendtd its power when it decaie cd sav~holding in
certain to be an offence in the tense in which the
term used in the Book Of Discipline That the inter
probation OF Il constitution BY court O.. the church
JUDICIAL act will not be questioned for body possess
irg both advisory end judicial p,wer to interpret its
constitution ts advisory caPscy would % an ano-
naly in the history Of all well ordered govern
nen's. In the constitution Of the Prssbyt.rian
church, provision is made FOR securing Judicial
decision Of the General Assembly in respect to other
than Offences BY overtures from the lower courts
Hence when the Assembly nterpren the constitution,
in reference to the suhjecs ought before By these
overtuIes acts IN judicial capacity But neither the
the practice OF previous General Assem-
bies authorizes the Assembly TO interpret the constltu
ton in regard to offences unless either case OF dsci-
pline ueht before the body by reference COM
plant appeal; unless the Assembly acts . court
Of review. Apart therefore from the anomalous pro-
ceedpes of court of the church declaring abstractly
what fife nee. in the in which the term is
used the Boz Of Discipline the undersigned considers
in Detroit TRANSFER ded Its power in max
ipg this declaration, when there JUDICIAL pre-
sepeo Tor it's decision and when 1t not casd upon
to act court of review. For these reasons The
dersened whilst he cordially in the views Of
the ms shortly of the committee the mode in which
recognised in the constitution to be brought
before the Assembly believes that the action of the AS
semb,y Detroit which is sanctioned by the majority
was a violation both Of the letter and spirit OF the
constitution Of the church. In hts Judgment it il
the abnsga,on o. principle which, carried out to IT'S
legitimate results, would place the rights and cha.
rsct<r of every minister and private member Of
the church in the hands Of irresponsible
court governed by prejudice and csprce, and acting
i. as..e:.r 49, ali