The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1868-05-13
DIR. THoRNwELL's MEMORIAL.

We fully agree with ''South Caroline" IL
his estimate Of this great mans learning, pa
triotism and Sanctity; but not of his logic in
this memorial And his credit for consistent
reasoning is of far less Importance than the
fundamental principle in question. Our chief
purpose is to beg our readers to note carefully
Just what that issue is 1t is not whether
theories Of civil rights, and the form given
thereto in the Constitution, ought to be found
ed in atheism, or in a recognition Of the God
head as the source of rights and duties. The
former we have never asserted or approved (;
the latter we have always taught But the
question is whether the Constitution of the
State ought to found itself in formal recogni-
ton of the mediatOrial rule of Jesus Christ,
as the Goldman and Redeemer. That the
difference between South Carolina" and us
"hath this extent no more, is plain from
our approval of the Constitution of the Con-
federate States, which was designedly changed
from its goddess pattern, the Constitution of
the United States TO introduce a recognition
Of the GOdhead as the original source of rights
and duties, and ruler of men in all their acts
and combinations. The same thing appears
from our statement of February 5th, which
we borrowed from the immaculate pen of Mad
isOn. 1T is the duty of every man to render
to the Creator such homage, and such only,
as he believes to be acceptable to Him. This
duty is precedent, both in order of time, and
in degree of obligation to the claims of civil
society. Before any man can be considered a
member of civil society, he must be considered
as a subject of the Governor of the universe"
&c. We are entitled to assert the same, by
what was said by us in commentator of DIR.
Dabney's Defence of Virginia and the
South, - for those who read that work will re-
member that the author began the construction
of his theory of civil rights by denouncing the
absurdity Of the attempt to make a scientific
statement Of the natural rights of man, bv
leaving out the prime and most eminently nat
ural fact of the caSe-the existence and supre.
macy of God; and to that error he traced Jas
do WEI much of the malignant folly and error
of the JacObinical scheme 1t is true the
ableSt Christian moraliSts have taught that
the perception Of the moral obligation is so
necessary an intuition Of mans reason, that
not even would an atheistic position Justify
any one in repudiating it. Whence it follows
that the Jacobin or Radical does not logically
free himself from the obligations of right en-
bodied in Just Constitution of the Common
wealth, even by asserting blank atheism. But
still the great truth remains, in which we fully
agree with South Carolina, " that the proper
basis of human rights and duties is to be laid
in the recognition of Jehoyah's eternal pow
er and Godhead" -of his righteousness as the
source and rule of mans obligations, and of
his proyidential and moral government over
individuals and States The only difference is
l0hether herecogRitjoa Of the nlediatorial reign
Of Jesus Christ as Redesn,er, IS also necessary
IN a right Constellation Of eiril government.
This definition of the issue at once meets the