Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1859-03-08

words
1 am convinced. youn. gentlemen. ;hst :.
rioI.s denomination, al Christians haze eyis
cd from the first, even since the ,iay> of >
apostles. AIN convinced thar >prinhlir,a
used as a mode of baptism Ian. m b., .' -s
riacd Mat il tie tine Of Il, 0losti,s y..,5,
1as u,,J. y,s. and diPp0g. '"i r,tsinq. no..
trcntv either moj.. Ind. y,H'IW,a. h i.
bigo' srko ,dys ih,T, IS ""iV "T' "l,","iir 5.,
cfbHltisai.
ar, M.Ae ,'at.n.sntS traF They ale n.ai.
by Young gentleman OF high rc'pcc,ability
a student Of the University. and memJ,. g..
the Moral Philosophy class. who has not CO..
cealed his name lie is Well known 4, Il.
University 4, the author Of the article /
ANONYMOUS communications in the papers 4.
signed to yindicate the course Of DR. McGuG,
the material fact, in the charge have been Al
mittrc and in no case have they been dcn.ct
The Doctor himself having his attention !s
tinctly directed 10 these Statements. doc, To-,
.j,,cstion their correctness hut merely der.e.
any consciousness Of the jEte,tion which the
are supposed To indicate Indeed. Tor sever.
wears past. statements OF the saline cla>, q.
those under consideration have been i.eouc,.
lv made hv students who have attended h,
lectures of the substantial Correctness 9th.
testimony Of a Student. there seems TO b,
no reasonable ground OF ,iorht
Is M. cour" Or Dr. NGlH;y rigt.' II.
University is Il State institution. endowed D,
funds derived from all classes Of the comr.ur
". II was designed by lis lu>trious :our.i.
to be- peculiarly free from ..cHrmaism. i,A.
been looked 10 by virginianS IS schoo, IT,
which their sons might be taught the hsh,f
branches Of literature. art and science wi,.ou
the danger oi having their religious sentiment.
perverted, and especially Of being publicly re.
preached on account Of them. To emp,oy Il.
Chairs for propagatng or defend ling. even :;
the most courteous manner. religious dogma, !.
4 violation Of the intent of the institution ~!
must prove injurious 10 lis Interests. ero@
these views, it is presumed, no intelligent y;
gilman will dissent;
The science of Moral Philosophy eabs4te,
many principles AID prccept> in commj.
with Christianity and the Professor in hi,
department should not be restricted :rcu
pointing OH, the beautiful harmony bc,wee.
the deductions of reason and the teaching
Of revelation; nor. indeed. from the fullest
AMI the free>t discussion o! all topics te
longing to his Chair But what has M,.s
Philosophy 10 do with Christian BAPTISM b
what authority does il decide whether il VS.
administered in the times Of the apostles b,
one mode. or by twenty-four: IL is positive
institute Of the Christian economy AMI :
embraced in the department OF Didactc The
ology. 1t is al q great distance from the ligi,!
mate sphere Of Moral Philosophy Tie laiitu.
dinous classification which can bring baptism,
can readily bring the whole system Of Theology
within the sphere Of the science. The prInc.'
pie which would justify DR.. McGuileyS course
would authorize all the Professors 10 publish
and defend their peculiar religious views, ani
wound the feelings of such students rs d!s>cn..
q, from them.
The subject oi baptism has long been one q
the battlctclds OF TheologanS. Whether baf
tisin is one act or whether it may bepcriormel
in several modes. is = question Oh both sides %!
which haze been arrayed diyines OF erudion.
picty and reputation. But the Professor %
Moral Philosophy. in the University Of Firs!
nia, undertakes 10 decide tJcdfhtdra. that
there were more than twenty modes Of bap
,iSm in the time Of the Apostles There ar"
thousands of Christians in Virginia. and I'M!
lions elsewhere who think that baptism Is one
act and not more than one; and al this GAS
Of Christians are pronounced, by the learned
Lecturer. TO be "Gigot," Whether man ma!
entertain this opinion from weakness OF int!
lcct ignorance the bias Of early eduratlon. OF
a thorough and candid examination of the sub
iect without being justly liable 10 the charge
Of biJotry. is question not proper now to be
discussed. 1t would be well if bgotry were
confined to those who adopt this opinion, whe-
thcr il DC true or false but unfortunately. II
is an evil limited TO no sect or party. and no'
unfrequen,ly appearing under the suSe Of great
libcrality
The Doctors opinions OF the variety Of rc'
giouS denominations, and the number OF the
modes Of baptism in primitive times, may pas
without farther notice; but the charge of big".
try claims more attention The word bigot !,
invariably used as term OF reproach In conr,
tcous religious controversy, it is never applied
to an opponent. In popular usage. it denotes
one who is blindy and ilibcrally attached 10 HI,
religious opinions There were young gentle
men in the Moral Philosophy class Of Profcsso:
McGutTey, who believed that in the apostolic
times baptism was orc act. ard not many. II
was not doctrine held by them incidentally;
but was distinctive Of the denomination 10
which they of choice belonged. All this was
known to the Professor, and yet without ne
cessty. provocation or OCCASION from his oil.
cial Chair, and in the presence Of his class. h,
stigmatizcd these young gentlemen, and the de
nomination. or denominations, with which they
were connected, as "bigots." Was It right
|, IS not questioned that the Doctor has the
fullest right to form, and, on all proper occa
sions. to utter, his opinions on baptism, ana Oh
bigotry There is no complaint because he be.
licves in more than twenty modes Of baptism,
or that those who say there is only one mode are
bigots but because that from his professional!
Chair he published these sentiments. VIII HE
religious denominations consent TO be called
5igots by Professor Of the State University. IN
his official lectures. on account Of their peculiar
religious doctrines: Suppose the Professor Of
Moral Philosophy should proclaim to his class.
that those who believe in prclacy, or the apps
tolic succession. are bigots would EpiscopaIiani
calmly bear the reproach. If any Professor
should denounce as bigOts those who believe 10
the apostolic origin Of infant baptism. would
his conduct be tolerated by an intelligent Pro
tcstant public? There can scarcely be two
answers TO these questions among the enlighi.
cned and liberal friends Of the University.
Entertaining these views, addressed no;e
10 DR.. McGuffcy on the subject, hoping tina; II
might comport with his sense Of propriety -
deny the statements of "A STuDEsT," if they
were false or, if they were true, to give such
an explanation apology or assurance as 20 his
future course. IL would satisfy those who con.
slider themselves injured by his remarks. IL
did not legitimately infer that | thought he
was not called upon 10 notice the charges made
against him in the Religious Herald" II Il
man, from impulse, inconsiderateness, or mi,
conception, does injury to any class Of persons.
especially public officer to his patrons and
friends. he should be ready to make repara'ion
no matter in what mode the offence is brought
20 he notico IL tho article If 4 SrrppS1
: was deemed discourtcous to his teacher, Il
should be borne in mind that he wrote to rcpci
what he thought, and what others will ti!.nk
was gratutous assault on his religious prIn'
ciplcs. It should be remembered. 900. thai
the Editors Of the " Religious Herald" cndor,et
his standing, and candidly invited a reply.
Ny note to DR.. McGufcy was dictated by the
hope, that he might be willing to concede, n