Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1852-1859, 1857-11-04
IPOr the In.elligencer.l

tieuiar Caaes--GlGnce at the Case in the
Synod of WAeeling.
The distinctive policy Of the Protestant
church, contTasted with that of her great rival,
the church Of Rome, has ever been separation
from State and secular affairs. To the obser-
vance of this principle must we attribute the
growth and preservation, as great dlstlnct
body, Of the Protestant branch OF the cnnrcn-
In the pages of the early ecclesiastical history,
we find the church every where, acknowledging
suboriination to the temporal authority. Com
ing up step farther, we discover her advancing
the idea of separation of the secular and spirtu-
al powers, aud, from this era, but a short period
elapses until she stands forth, boldly asserting
her independence and achieving it. Here the
church stood in her true position, ana here' II
would have been well for her had she been con-
tent to stand. But, having attained her indie
pendence, (Which but too often breeds the de-
Sire of power) she makes another step, and as
hires at supremacy. A deadly conflict between
the ecclesiastical and civil bodies, the natu-
raj result;-for years and centuries this bitter
hostility was kept up between them, the one
Jealous to retain the power it had always before
possessed, the other ambitious to acquire that
power for herself Vaulting ambition is sure to
overlap itself, and the mighty spiritual estab-
lishment of Rome, like one Of her haughtiest
and greatest English cardinals, found her ruin
begin, even whilst in the climax of her glory
The Reformed church, the Protestant, growing
out of the partial ruin Of Rome. and prohhnG
by the example of the terrible results OF 2m-
bition and the lust of power in the Ecclesiastical
body. has hence, in all her subdividcd branches,
ever considered the principle of eXclusiveness
from the State, as main stone in the foundation
of her distinctive organized existence.
Such are the fruits of History and experience.
The great lesson so dearly bought, ought ever
to be before the church, and whether she act in
her grandest capacity ito instance from the great
Presbyterian church of the United States) as a
General Assembly, Synod, a Presbytery, or
an inferior church Session., she ought for the
sake of her own respect and her very existence,
to remember how much she is interested in OBJ
serving that lesson; and in her hottest zeal, she
ought not to forget, that even the cause OF re-
ligion and morality depends somewhat on policy
We have deemed the foregoing apparently
irreIevenO proper preface to our subject, be-
cause we believe the Synod of Wheeling, in
assuming las it did at its late SESSION. to con-
denim, and thus so far as the power of the church
extends to forbid the exercise, by her members,
of legal right, in particular cases, has over
stepped the just limits of this true policy.
There is no better established historical truth,
than that the piety and religion Of the people OF
a State are intimately connected with their tenn
poral happiness In proportion as the laws are
free to permit them to pursue their own tenn
poral prosperity, and they free to enjoy them,
will be the growth of true and active piety. In
trusiOn upon this freedom, from whatever source
it come as it must be ruinous to temporal hap
piness, is also to result disastrousy to rei-
gion Especially is this so, if the intrusion come
from spiritual source. When the church be-
comes antagonist to the State, men, perceiving
both standing upon common ground, lose their
reverence for the former, and remembering the
immediate benefits of the latter, arc apt to take
part with her. Reverence for the church being
gone, disrespcot for hor religion follows, and
this, again, is TOO often followed by disrespect
for morality itself Not only is this so with the
nation, but with the individual How nftnn do
we find the individual member, who has been
punished by the church QberhapS only by sim
pie reprimand) for what, he thinks, she had no
right to punish him, becoming alienated from
her and her peculiar forms and doctrines of re-
ligion, and losing, perhaps, his respect for all
religion. Policy, therefore, (and by policy, we
here mean the true interests of religiOn,) whilst
it would dictate non-interventiou in affairs Of
State concern would also dictate to the church
the utmost caution in respect to temporal affairs
touching the personal liberty and personal legal
rights of the individual. Says D'Aubigne, class
ing aggregate nations and individuals together,
(" the less cause kings and their subjects have to
fear the intrusion of clerical power into the
affairs of the world, the more will they yield
themselves to the vivifying power of faith"
The civil State, Jealous of its supremacy and in
awe of ecclesiastical usurpation loses its respect
for religion, and national piety decreases; and
the individual, alike jealous of the ri hts given
him by the State, when those rights are sought
to be invaded by the church,, loses his respect
for the pety which she is designed to promote.
Such, then, is the error which the church, if
it study wisely the interests of religion, will
avoid, but such is the error into which the Sy-
nod of Wheeling has, unfortunately, permitted
itself to run. Though the most honest and
pious motives (and we attribute no others) con-
duced to it, still it is an error deleteriOus in its
nature. The Synod's decision (and herein the
error) was, in brief, the right of the church,
through her judicat>ria power, to inve li5ate
the religious conduct of her members in iead-
ing the statute oof limitations, in the defr'ce of
a suit at law, and, accordingly, to condenn, and
punish for the same, if, she may judge it, I'M
pleaded.
The Synod assumes the church's right to con-
denim the member for the use of a right which
the law expressly gives, and which the law will
protect him in the exercise Of To condemn is
nothing other tan to forbid; for what is the
difference between saying "thiS you ought not
to do, and this YOU shall not dor" We have
then, in the Synod's decision, the church upon
one hand, saying, in the case in which it would
condemn, "this you shall not do, and for doing
this will we punish you" and the state, which is
the law, on the other saying, in the very same
case, this you may do,-this we warrant and
protect you and assist you in doingI" Need VIC
picture the ults2-thcy are but too truthful