The eastern clarion. [volume] (Paulding, Miss.) 1837-1863, 1859-01-08
F0r thC Eastern C7Hri0n.
The Presb Yterian Church on Slavery.

Mr.. EDITOR: Let me speak hight on the
gloom which some think they see in the
Assembly
/. WKo is H. Ncic,ono Read the minutes
Of the New School Convention, which
MET at Richmond, Va, on the 9th of
August. lS57 and you will find the fol-
lowing:
''Resolrot, That a union between us and
our Old School brethren, could it be effect
I'd on termsacceptable to both sides, would
be conducive to the best interests of the
Church Of Christ: and this Convention,
after free and full interchange Of views
and opinions on this subject do now re-
commend that the united Synod, when
formed and duly organized, shall invite
the General Assembly, 70. s. to a frater-
nal conference with us in reference to
such union"
Well, who framed and offered such a
resolution as this? Surely it was done by
some aJ0ht9aist. For how could any man,
true to the South, propose thus to affiliate
with such can abolition concern, F." as \. New
| ton would have all men believe the Assem-
| bly, to Ice? Sir, there are some strange
things in this world; and here is one =
! \. NEWTON gftrsR that same resolution! "a
change came o'er the spirit of his dream, .
and sothere did DER Sambo's, when his rab-
bit got away. 1t was very good when there
/ % Of - Il ! L..
when that prospect vanished, it was gooa
| yor J.1ttrg-a c'g2cd thing!
But, II Presbyterian" q P says, a. New.
ton elwavs den,anded in their terms 20,
union, that the Old School Assembly must
| put itself right before the world on thi:
very question" ! reply, nothing of this
Is seen in 4. Newton's resolution. And
as to the term respecting slavery, proposed
| by the New School to the Assembly al
| New Orleans, it Is substantially the very
same with the Assembly's deliyerance il
lS45. Read that deliverance as quotec
by 4. Newton, and see Would A. Newto1
haveus "alter" our faith as then expressed
and now ''understood?"
Il PreslT.rion" l?) further says, "HaC
the Old School Assembly agreed to thi
reasonable proposition, union of the tw,
bodies might have been consummate,
upon terms honorable 10 10th parties" |
there is meaning in words, this means tina
nc s'arrry question ras the ''Sins qua uou." am
| ne only one. Had the Assembly agreed t.
MS on', union might have been consun
mated. This. then, was the great barrie
in the way of reunion. Sir, were
school boy / would know what to call sue
an assertion.
But II. There were several terms c
union proposed; and each was a "sinc q,
Hoa.' The Assembly did not refuse to r,
ccive the New School, simply because
could not adopt their terms on slavery
There were four other Germs. 50 .dishor
orahle' to the Assembly, that the one O
slavery was scarcely noticed. And here
must say, that A. Newton has made mi
representation similar to the one made /
Il Presly'eria1," ~ While reading his a
ticle did you not, Mr.. Editor, get the idei
that the great difference between the A
sembly and the New School was slavery
and that our faith on this subject was III
a!tcrable. And yet, sir, this is far frol
= the truth. 1t is no where asserted in an
p of our "deliverances," that our faith on ii
, | isolated subject of slavery is ,oqalteraJls.-
No man under the sun can find any sue
p "a record. The part of the Assembly's a
ton on the overture for union, to whic
4. Newton refers is as follows: "Tl
subjects upon which thewhole New Scho
body differed from Us, at the period
their secession from US, and the subiec
upon which the two very unequal portion
of that body have recently separated fro
t. each other, are questions upon which W
e as denomination, are at peace and, wit
1 regard to the whole of which, we see /
occasion to revise the understood and II
+ | alterable faith of our Church, or to ent
! into fruitlcss controversies" The "su
!, | iects' of difference at the secession we
n L.yi7a, as every body knows; and have Il
u New School, still smarting under the las
ing of the Cleveland Assembly, forgott,
so soon that there were adyects-mo
than about which ''the two very u
equal portions" divided And it is co
ccrning these, as a ,ckolc, that our faith
+ unalterable; and not on the naked qu,
% ton Of sl5rcy as a. Newton represents.
If Sir, let me show you arrogance p,
r. sonifed: 1t Is the prodigal returning
{, his fathers house, but demanding teri
a Of reconciliation which he knows tn
i father cannot honorably grant! The teri
.r Of union proposed in the overture to t
'e Assembly, can only be mentioned now
y In this overture, the New School demal
4 ed the Assembly to admit
NJ lst That the Extending Acts of Is
n were unjust and unconstitutional
G. ID. That the rule requiring every m
u ster to be examined who may come to
n from another body, or from one Presl
terry to another, is unconstitutional, anC
| HtDtdltAl IL ~ littlll. 1T ltdHl. lllS,
is our measuring rod, by which we les
= whether applicants for admission into {
= body are like-minded with us, or not; a
if they be not, we do not want them
Of And the fact that the New School ask
" rs to rescind this rule is prima tdcio a c
nhg fession of their inability to furnish the
t. ouisite dimensions; and while it ste
ut among the terms, it alone would have 81
Of them out eternally, even if we could HI
bTiea accedcd to every other term.
ing 3d. That the adopting act requires
on more than the reception of the Confess
ess of Faith, ''for substance of doctrine"
=. 18th. They required the Assembly
I adopt the principle of elective affini
in the formation of Presbyteries and
Ike mods, which was repudiated in 1887. !
ny finally, they required the Assembly TO
assert its deliverance on slavery in Is
and then to exclude its discussion fore