Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1859-09-22
For the forkVhe enquirer. H. ... 80
"REUCHLIN" AND REV. W. C. DAVIS
NUMBER THREE.


NUMBER THREE.
o. Mr.. Editor Hitherto have based my
defence ofthe full clerical authority Of Rev.
VIM. c. Davis, on the ground that the body
at Hopewell Church, which tabled a charge
against him for 'erroneous DOCTRINES and
the body which met at Rama Church and
citeahim to appear and answer to said charge,
was not Concord Presbytery,' and was incom-
petent to do church government and discip-
line. But inasmuch as sReuchlin' has made
his attack, and charged the suspension and
| deposition of Mr.. Davis, on the presumption
that the said body at Hopewell, and also at
Rama, was, bona Jfde, Concord Presbytery,
for the sake of the settlement of this question
beyond the shadow of doubt, and to re-
trieve the memory of Mr.. Davis from cal
umny and degradation, will grant pro tenn.
that this body was really and truly Concord
Presbytery. And now I hold that not one
of all the acts done by said Presbytery at
Hopewell, N. G., in October 1910, and af.
wards, had the slightest bearing la1cfaly
to affect Mr.. Davis at all. Why not? Be-
cause Mr.. Davis, here, at Hopewell Church,
did rightfully declare his independence Of
the Presbyterian Church, and did, in for
NAL, public manner, decline the jurisdiction
of said church; and henceforth he was not
member of Concord Presbytery, nor of the
Presbyterian Church. ...
open the Confession of Faith (Which
presume, sReuchlin' will consider good au-
thority) and turn to the Form of ofGovernment,
chap. 2, sec. A., and 1 find the following !:
"A particular church consists of a number of
protesting christians, with their offspring,
vozuntarily associated together for divine
worship &c. Here we have the rule for
membership, and continuance of member
ship in particular church, viz: the aoiH Of
the member. Now it was the aoiH of Mr..
Davis to discontinue his membership with
that particular church-the Presbyterian
Church. On the very day when Concord
Presbytery met according to appointment,
and betoreany charge had been tabled against
Mr.. Davis, he had his OtU presented to the
Moderator thereof, and it was publicly read
in Presbytery. By this, be declared his in
dependence and his declinature of the juris-
diction of the Presbyterian Church, dated
Oct. 9, 1910, and signed VIM. C. DAVIS.
Now, Mr.. Editor, by applying the rule
above, to the facts in the case, Mr.. Davis
was then, and remained ever afterwards,
lawfully independent of the Presbyterian
Church. The Presbytery, henceforth, had
no authority to table charge against him
for any cause, nor to cite him to appear, to
answer to their charge, nor to require obe-
dience in any form or manner, in any matter;
nor did he, nor could he possibly contract
the guilt of contumacious member Of Con-
cord Presbytery; and because Of all this,
Concord Presbytery never did lawfully sus-
pend, nor lawfully depose Mr.. Davis from
the gospel ministry.
sReuchlin' says: 'Mr Davis declared him
self no longer member of Presbytery, or of
the Presbyterian Church, although, not hav-
ing yet been either dismissed, or had SEN
tence passed upon him by the Presbytery.'
To this I answer true sir He did so de-
clare himself; and there was in this no sub
tie quibbling' nor evasion The declara-
tion was made clearly, and fully, and pub
licly.
sReuchlin' Gas I understand him here)
teaches that Mr.. Davis independence is un-
lawful, LIST. Because he ought to have been
irst dismissed, from the church according to