The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1868-09-23

ulSutJ W VO Win SitJ va S"NSN ~
such as justice between man and man,
OF State and State; domestic tranquility !;
the common defence, &C., &c.,-that His
name should be invoked at all III connec-
tion with them? Such is my friends
third position
But my brother declares that the State
is ''of CAIN" and always has been and
always will be, till the millennium, Gain
like" So that it is now vain and use-
less thing to insist on her doing her duty
TO God. This appears to me strange
argument for minister of the Gospel OF
grace to urge. Moreover, our Confession
teaches that God has ordained the State
for His glory The Scripture says the
magistrate is Gods minister. "Virgin-
ia however says she is Of Cain, and will
be wicked to the end-nay, even if she
were all Christian, for her to know the
God who set her up for His glory, or to
pay Him the least homage, would be
wicked. My brother must suppose that
there is something very intense in what
he calls 1.-The Cain-hke spirit of the
State, that it should be strong. enough to
transform such Christian thing as
homage to the Lord into very wicked
ness
Such is the length to which every fair
and candid brother is necessarily carried
by his theory, The Church and her min
isry are the appointed and proper wit
ness-bearers for Christ. For the State,
land by parity of reasoning for the fami-
IVY to bear witness also, in secondary
way, is service not required, and thus,
of course, forbidden. Not only they may
not, but they must not testify for Christ,
but be ignorant of Him-be Christless
and Goddess. "It is no part of their
functions to bear witness for the truth; |;
this is the point of difference betwixt the
Kingdoms of this world and Christ king
dom; for the State to confess Christ is
to make this discrimination nothing
worth" (See ''Virginia's" No. 81 Are
our brethren of the other side prepared
to 90 this length, or will they disown
"Vrginia as their spokesman?
An eyewitness of the scene has des
cribed to me prayers in the Confederate
States Congress, where the few stood re-
verently and the many sat with hats and
feet cooked up. Does my brother con-
denim both classes of these representative
men? Does he think it sin for the
State, thus represented, to mock God in
this way, and at the same time sin for
her thus reverently to confess and ac-
knowledge Him? Ought the people in
Congress assembled to worship God or
not? If | am not mistaken, "Virginia"
was, at one time, considerably exercised
about government appointing too many
Army and Navy Chaplains from one
Church. Does he hold now that Gov
ernments ought to have any chaplains at
all? Ought Governments to pray at all,
and if so to what God, and through what
names
| read the following in late newspa-
per:
"a suttee, or the burning of widow
alive on the funeral pile of her husband,
has recently been attracting great atten-
rion in India. The British Government,
however, has shown its determination to
punish all the participants in such barba-
rous rites. Of the friends of the widow,
who were present on the occasion, four
teen were transported for life; thirty for
ten years; and eleven others were to be
imprisoned for FIVE years"
What says my friend about the duty of
the English Government in this matter /?
The victim here is not forced she makes
voluntary sacrifice. No doubt she is
persuaded; but still the Suttee is not
murder-it is religion. The English
Government cannot interfere on any
mere police grounds. What then is the
duty of that Christian Government in the
premises? Ought it to interfere with the
free exercise of their religion by its Hin
doc subjects on the ground that it is a
minister of the one living and true God
who forbids such sacrifices to Devils, or
ought it to close its eyes on these abomi-
nations on the ground that it has no reli-
gion itself; is only for temporal and
human ends; knows no God in particu-
lar; and has no responsibility to Him as
representing Christian people possessed
of His revealed truth Hanover Pres
bStery (which my friend follows said
Government must show "no preference
for Christianity over the other religions
which prevail amongst men" Does that
theory suit my brother when applied to
a case like that of the Suttee?