The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1857-11-26

reason than this is therefore, of course, pre-
Guided
That this is the right Interpretation of the
Article in question, is manifest from the sixth
Article of the Constitution. 1t is by this Article
provided, that the officers and directors shall
be elected from different denominations of Chris
tians the publishing committee shall contain
no two members from the same communion
and no Tract shall be published, to which
auv member of that committee shall object"
The principle to which have referred is here
distinctly recognised, and it teaches rs clearly
what is meant by the appreciation of Evangeli-
cal Christians. The sixth Article shows the
manner in which the object of the first Article
is to be accomplished, and therefore shows what
was intended by the words then used.
That the above is the true Interpretation of
the first Article Of the Constitution, ia proved by
the whole history of the Society. Every year,
on every platform and in every pulpit of the
land, this restriction, precisely as here explain
ed, has been held forth as the browning excel
lence of this catholic, and specially unsectari0n
institution. The Baptist has been told that
the Society can publish nothing at variance
with the Confession of Faith of Baptists the
Episcopalian, that nothing can be published at
variance with the Thirty-nine Articles; the
Presbyterian, that nothing can be published at
variance with the Westminster Confession; and
the Methodist that nothing can be published
at variance with the Book of Discipline. No
ether principle of restriction has ever been
suggested until very lately; and any other view
of the duties and obligations of the Society
must certainly awaken in its best friends the
emotion of surprise.
The question at issue seems, then, narrowed
down to the simple inquiry, Is the Christian
awfulness of Slavery, as it exists in the United
States, affirmed in the Formulary or Confession
of Faith of any Evangelical denomination? Is
this affirmation found in the Thirty-nine Arti-
cles of the Episcopal Church; or in the West
minister Confession of the Presbyterian Church
or in the Heidelberg Catechism; or Canons of
the Synod of bort, of the Dutch Reformed
Church; or in the Book of Discipline of the
Methodist Church; or in any of the Comics.
sions of Faith of the Congregational or Baptist
Churches? Every one knows that in none of
these denominational Creeds is such an affirm
alton to be found. Nay, more: it is the fact
that, at various times, portions of all these de-
nominations have borne testimony against the
evils of Slavery. They do it now even in the
Southern States. But, so far as know, it has
never been urged that this was at variance with
the Confession of Faith of any sect of Evangel-
ical Christians. 1t would seem, then, evident
that this is not one of those subjects of demon
national difference, on which the publications
of the Society are forbidden to treat 1t is,
therefore, one of those questions concerning
vital religion and sound morality, the treatment
of which comes fairly within the objects for
which the Society was constituted.
But 1t may be asked, Are We under a moral
obligation to publish on this subject? The an
swer to this question must be determined by
the answer to another. Has the existence Of
domestic Slavery anything to do with /" the
interests of vital goodness and sound moral
ity2" Have vital goodness and sound morality
no answer to give, when the question is asked,
Have right to buy and sell my felloy man
like an OK or mule? Many of our young
men, professors of the religion of Christ, annu.
ally emigrste to the Southern States Is it not
important that they should understand the
teachings of the New Testament on the sub.
ject? Many Of our brethren in the Southern
States are sorely tried as to their duty in this
matter, and earnestly desire to know what is
the will of God concerning it. Should we not
make known to them all the truth respecting
1t which has been revealed TO us?
But more than this : this is one of the most
practical questions known in ethics. 1t is no
other than this Can | rightfully seize another
man, or employ another to seize him, and oblige
him to labor for me. and his children to labor
for my children to the end of time, without re-
Enumeration, for The food and clothing required
to keep him in good working order is not re-
mureration y and may another man SEIZE me.
and reduce me and my children to the same
condition This is the real question at issue
tor ethics know nothing of the color of the skin.
This question lies at the foundation of every
right whether Of person or property. Ia it not
then as important that the teachings of the
New Testament should be made known on this
subject, as on the subjects of dancing, tenn
perance, observance of the Sabbath
But even If we set aside the question of the
right OF man In man, another question i'm
mediately presents itself.
1t IS well known that there are, at present.
more than three millions of human BEINGS in
this country, who are forbidden to form a mar
rage contract, and who, if they Ggree to live
together after Gods holy ordinance, may at any
moment, at the bidding of another, be separated
from each other forever; who have no right
over their own children, and are therefore nm
able to perform the parental obligations en-
joined IN the New Testament who, if females
are obliged to submit their persons. without
resistance, to the will of another; and who are
forbidden to read the word of God, and learn
from the Bible the way of salvation. These are
all, like ourselves, human beings for whom
Christ died; and hundreds of thousands of Them
are our own Christian brethren, members of
Episcopa'ian, Presbyterian Methodist. and Ban
fist Churches. They may be weak, ignorant.
degraded, but so much the more are thew
Chrlsts little ones and he has said it is better
that a mlIstone be hanged about our neck, and
we be cast into the sea, than we should offend
one OF them. They are our Christian brethren,
and are we to utter no word on their behalf
Shall we make no effort to rectify their wrongs
ana alleviate their sufferings? Can we be dis
n Chriqt Il,
like the Priest and Levite, pass over to the other
side? 0'-'o-
These wrongs, inflicted on our fellow men
ana our Christian brethren, either are assen.
italy connected with the system of domestic
slavery, or they are not. If they are essential.
~ connected with it, then Slavery itself mnst
be wrong and there can be no reason wbv ito
wrong should not be exposed, and the wroro
doors called to repentance. If these WRONGS
are not essentially connected with the system
OF domestic Slavery, then they stand alone.
like any other wrong-doing, and may be treated
OF without offence, even to the shareholders
themseivesIJust as we speak of the expressions
endured by Protestants in Italy, and the per-
secutions of Christians in Madagascar.
But to this tits replied, if we publish Tracts
on Slavery, or the evils of Slavery. we shall be
obliged to abandon the whole Southern field
our Tracts will not be received, and our col.
pOrteurs will be driven away. To this objection,
several replies may be made.
l. Suppose it be so does this in any respect
affect the question of Christian duty? Have we
any right to withhold any portion of Divine
truth, because men are unwilling to receive it
10 do this, would be to adopt one of the most
pernlclous errors of Romanism. Our blessed
Lord seems to have made provision for precisely
TINS case. De might, by suppressing a part of
tne truth, have made his doctrines acceptable
| 10 his canntrumnn IL. - III ;. !: