Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1858-08-26

avowal by E. A. CaESsHAw of the unhallowe'i die
tum that, 1.-THE providence of God reveals no duty
to man in any given case" should excuse and tol-
crate few remarks.
Should not every pain, which the human frame
endures, every disease with which humanity Is
afflicted and every death We behold or learn re-
veal to man rule of moral action-a duty to be oo-
served? Is common sense extinct! When the
winds of Heaven impctuously rush through the
forest, or even when an old tree in solemn sti-
ness of the atmosphere falls TO the earth' should
not E. A. CnEvsHAw learn, adopting his own pic
turesoue dialect, sto run foot race to save his
own scalp?" But it seems from his account, the
providence Of God can teach him no moral duty
ia any given case, whilst the inhabitants of the
whole earth by their acts, recognize and ackpowl-
edge the reverse. Ethical writer's inform us, that
every nation on our globe, in some form or other,
requires and practices, in certain transactions IN
life, the administration Of on oath. What does
this signify? Is it anything less than a solemn
appeal to moral Governor and Judge? That
virtue or holiness even in this hfe is in degree
concurrent with happiness, and misery with sin,
is patent and unnistakable to those who choose to
discern. The doctrine, that the providence Of God
reveals no duty, we'll justfes the tsmaetes in clo-
sing their eyes to the fulfllment of'prophecy.
In word, the doctrine, if true, abolishes the
Bible, demolishes the Christian Church, and OBJ
iterates the Christian religion; yet there stands
in the public gaze the avowal Of f. A. CRENsHAw
that, "The providence of God is manifestation
Of his government of his creatures" (a natural
government) sand reveals no rule for his right &C
ton to man in moral matters, in any given case"
The question is, did he make the assertion 'tor
conscience sake" or was it only some scheme Of
':good policy"
These remarks" says Dr.. THoRSwELL, though
they appear to me to be intuitively obvious, are
felt to be necessary in order to rebuke the grow
ing impression, that speculative principles have
no immediate influence in regulating conduct
We live in an age of sophsts. A man may be-
leve anything or nothing; and yet if his actions
are consistent with the standard public decency
his principles are not to be condemned, and he is
not 10 be charged with wickedness on account
of them. In the formation of his opinions, he is
exempt from the moral law; conscience takes cog
nizance of nothing but the life. As if there could
be any real virtue, where practice is not the result
Of principle; as if the opinion were not the soul,
life and being of all that is praise worthy or e1
cellent in the conduct. There can be no morality
without intelligence; and if there exists in the bo-
som of the Almighty an eternal standard Of truth,
from which tie law of Righteousness proceeds in
conformity with which the arrangements of Prov
ideuce are conducted, the relations Of things ad-
iusted, and by which alone the harmony Of the
world can be effectually promoted, the first step
towards communion with the Father of lights is to
recognize that standard and to have its rays reec-
tod upon our countenances. The mind cannot
move in charity, nor rest in Providence unless it
turn upon the poles Of truth"
To whitewash every sort and degree Of wicked
ness may seem to be laudable social duty. but
it is neither moral duty, righteous judgment,
Gods command, nor Christ's example. That We
may love righteousness and hate iniquity is found
more frequently on the lips of Christians, than in
their conduct in life, few will have the hardihood
to DENY. PRESBYTERIAN.