The Cadiz Democratic sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1854-1864, 1861-03-06

ment,of the perseverance of the saints,
or any other embodied in our Confes-
sion of Faith, he would have been H.
beled for heresy, ond compelled to re-
can't, or else have been deposed, and
forced to demit his pastoral charge !
But when he breaches, as Gods truth,
what Lord Brougham calls "the wild
and guilty fantasy that man can hold
property in man." defends from the
Scriptures what the Rev. DR.. Brecken-
ridge, looking Louisville audince in the
face, pronounced s'the most attrocious
system upon which the sun ever shone,"
what Wesley defines as ''the sum of
all villanies, nobody rebukes the bias
phemy; nay, so far from being condemn
ed, he is applauded, and loses neither
jot nor little of the respect and esteem
in which be is held by his co-workers in
the ministry! What wonder that inf
deity aboundsI that profane wits sneer
at professed orthodoxy! and that the
way of truth is evil spoken ofi
| We must remember that this is the
hour of one of the sternest conflicts be-
tween despotism and liberty which the
world has ever witnessed; an hour in
which mighty scales hang poised in even
balance. While the friends of freedom,
in all lands stand with anxious eyes and
palpitating hearts, awaiting the issue, it
is proposed to decide this contest by
throwing some thousands of copies of
this ser ~on upon the side of tyranny!
| Itl
ing held somewhere down town the
other day, informed the South that their
dangers did not arise from the politi-
clans, the polical parties, or the press,
but from the conscientious convictions
of the sober, serious, and religious mass
es of the North, who had been taught,
and who firmly believe, that slavery is
crime! With an artless simplicity, which
in such quarter is beautiful and re-
freshing, he asks the Southern Hotspurs
to stay their reasonable hands, and af-
ford time to the North to correct its
false opinions; this, he considers, can cas-
lily be accomplished, by means of va
rious agencies, chief among which he
mentions the preaching of Van Dyke,
Get id omne genus"
Approaching the discourse more noar-
! ", we must at the outset give Mr.. Van
Dyke the credit of candor in his gener
al statement Of the question. He plants
himself fairly and sqnarely upon the
broad ground that slauery IS right
Such man. however much we may de-
test his principle, CIR object to his mode
of defending them, commandSrespect
for. the boldness of his position, and the
honesty with which he states it; while
your thorough bred time-server, who al
ways begins, II am as much opposed
to slavery as any one, but and then
closes his mean abuse of anti-slavery
men and anti-slavery parties with whin-
ing cant about the amelorating inhu-
euces of the Gospel; and appeal to the
Bible argument, deserves and receives
nothing but sovereign contempt.
The first thing which arrests atten-
tention is our authors definition of Abo-
litionism. He says, almost copying the
words of the Repjeao, "by Abolitionism
we mean the measures and principles of
abolitionists." "And what" he contin.
ues, ''is an an aboltionist? He is one
who believes that slaveholding is sin,
and ought, therefore to be abolished"
["Regardless of consequences" says
the Recieto, but Mr.. Van Dyke more
candid, and assuming broader ground,
omits this publications. He goes on:
"This is the fundamental, the essential,
characteristic of aboltionism-that slave
holding is sin-that holding men in in
voluntary servitude is an Infringement
upon the rights OF man, aheinious crime
in the sight of God. A man may be-
lieve, on political or commercial grounds
that slavery is an undesirable system,
and that slave labor is not the most
profitable; he may have various views
as to the right of shareholders under
the Constitution of the country; he may
think this or that law upon the statute
books of the Southern States is wrong,
but this does not constitute him an abol-
ltionist; to be entitled to this flame he
must believe shat slavery is morally
aorong" Here we have 1.-THE italics
are his own--abolitionism is the belief
THAT sLAvEHoLDING IS MORALLY
WRONG" With candor which cannot
be too highly extolled, with fullness
of statement which leaves nothing to
be desired, avoiding all subtle distinc-
tions about "malum in SO" and such like
9quivocations, he comes directly to the
point and pronounces every man an
abolitionist who believes slavery to be
morally wrong. Scorning all distiuc-
tions of theory and practice on this
question, putting in the same category
John Brown and Henry Ward Beecher,
Garrison and Seward, Phillips and Lin
coin, grouping together Garrisonians,
radical aboitionists, political abolition
lists, gradual emancipationists, and Re-
publicans, he stamps all with the same
brand, "abolitionists, writes this same
superscription over all, and proceeds to
denounce them as covenat breakers, ha-
ters of God, and foes to the best inter-
ests of human society
At this point our admiration of Mr..
Van Dykes candor must, unfortunate
ly, cease. 1t would call me entirely too
far from the main vuestion to enter in
to critical examination of all his au-
thorities. stop only to say, that do
accept the Interpretation which Mr..
Banes* gives Of Mr.. Van Dykes text,
for reasons hereafter to be stated; and /
repudiate DR.. Wayland's explanation of
the supposed silence of Christ. can
not omit, however, to notice the disin-
genious use which Mr.. Van Dyke makes
of Mcknight, of whom he says, "Let
me quote another testimy on this point,
from an eminent Scotch divine, I mean
| DR. MAX ninht rul,osa oxros;tion of Tia