The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1868-01-22
-"aeIr1n Ann hts DEFENDERs.


/ "ARIEL" AND HIS DEFENDERS.
We are no little surprised at the communication
of "Ernesta." which appears in another column.
That an intelligent and refined Southern woman
should come forward in defence of this work,
awakens not only surprise, but deep regret. With
out cause, our correspondent seems touched by
an allusion made to those persons disposed to ac-
cept ..Ariel," and sraightway demands the proof
Ito sustain the position We have taken Further
than this, '.Ernesta' denies the right OF any one
| s.to denounce another unless he can prove his po
sition a false one" This is really refreshing
We might. with equal propriety and force, deny
the right of ..Ernes;a'' to defend another, unless
she is able to sustain hat defence by argument.
This is not done in the present instance by hrn-
esta." But we will defend our course upon other
and higher grounds. The right to denounce the
substance of any theory does not rest upon tie
ability of the person exercising that right, to de-
molish the theory itself. The mind may be con-
vnced of an error and the prompiings of the heart
may ead lis possessors to warn the community
against its delusons, while the discussion OF that
error might lead to direful consequences We WILL
illustrate this point by reference to the alarming
condition of Southern society. This condition can
not be ameliorated by adopting the theory that the
negro has no soul, and is not responsible being.
The few barriers left 10 sustain peace and avert
anarchy cannot be strengthened by the white peo-
pie of this oppressed section declaring that the
negro is ell irresponsible beast The legitimate
consequences are frighiful to contemplate. That
the agitation of this question has msled thousands
already there can be no doubt, and among the de-
lutled foil overs OF Ariel are TO be classed the
pure and innocent. We have 10 hesitation in de-
clariug, even at the risk OF incurring the serious
dispeasure of our correspondent, that the work OF
.Ariel is damning and destructive in its tendency,
pervertiug the Scriptures and inculcatng doc
trincs false and dangerous. Neither is ii incum-
bent upon us TO reproduce the arguments by
which we have reached these conclusions. They
are to be found in reverence for Bible truths; in
careful compnrison of statements and pretended
quotations in strong reliance and faith in the all
sufficency of Christs redemption; i'll the last in
junction of '.Iim who died that we might lise,
when the Saviour said to His disciples just before
fore and teach all nations These are some OF
the reasons by which we have been governed
Moreover. We are not disposed TO accord TO him all
the honesty of Investigation that Ariel has as
.uuad His perycrsions and misrepresentation
are slaring enough and repeat, that "relectior
and calm thought" will reject his conclusions be
cause the foundation and structure Of his theory
! arc false We commend to our correspondent, anl
I'll others disposed to accept the statements Of
| .Arel." careful and unprejudiccd comparison o
the Bible with The construction Ariel has placed
upon certain passages. y single instance will suf:
ace to convict him Of misrepresentation, and foi
that purpose. we will refer correspondent &c
Leviticus 2lst chapter and 18th verse, and also to
the following paragraph from ''Arcl,' page Al
..In the laws delivered by God TO Moses, for the
children Of Israel, he expressly enacs and charges
.tha, no man having 2at nose. shall approach unto
his altar > BY reading what precedes and fol
lows the text, and examining the deductions made
by .'Ariel' from this pretended quotation, every
candid mind will unite in cendemniug such gross
perrerson.
But one word more to our correspondent, and
we are done with the subject. We have had nc
desire TO discuss the merits of this work, and
neither time nor inclination to investigate the as
sumptions of this bold ibeorist. We arc likewise
doubtful of our ability to handle the subject COR
rectly, and are positive that limited education will
not rank us among the learned Therefore, tho
criticisms of .Erncsla' upon course fall harm
less and we cannot be swcrved from what we deem
right by the frowns and displeasures of the many
or few