The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1869-06-23
SOUTHERN PRESBYTERIAN REVIEW.
ITS DISCLAIMERS, ACCUSATIONS AND MISTAKES.


Having been long absent from home, the num-
Der of this Revielo for April did not come under
our eye till after the adjournment of the General
Assembly at Mobile. The proceedings of that
body have, until now, left no room for referring to
what is said in its critical notices concerning
"Smyth's Ecclesiastical Catechism, our Form OF
Government, and the Committee of Publication,
and things connected Herewith. We take the
earliest suitable opportunity to state that the Re
vie10 very fully and emphatically disclaims any In
tention whatever to give offence in the criticism
contained in the number for January, to which
we called attention at some length about that time
In regard to the language to which serious excep-
ton was taken, it says among other things in ex-
PLANTATION:
"When we spoke of the Committee lending it.
self to party purposes, we referred in all simphci-
ty integrity and kindness to the plain fact that it
had allowed the Church's seal to work express
ing views regarded by many in our Church as un
sound and unsafe We did not mean to charge
them with any design to do wrong And so, when
we said it had taken upon itself to publish what
is not generally acceptable among us, we simply
wished to signify that they had done, of course
with no evil design, what the Church had not au-
thorized them to do.
1t gives us pleasure to make as public record Of
this disclaimer as we did of the language under
stood to convey the imputation we emphatically
repealed. Of.course il will sMH forth, salts
factory We must, hO 49, surprise that
this disclaimer should have been so long in making
its appearance. The reviewer admits he was early
aware that he had given much offence to brethren
here Yet he now represents himself as ''embrac-
ing the earliest opportunity which has been al
lowed this journal, of setting himself right In
one sense this is true, as the publication is quar-
terly But it will be remembered that the article
in the Reuieo was defended at much length in the
Southern Presbyterian The editor and proprietor
OF that paper is also, we understand, the proprie
tor of the Reuie,o and one Of its editors. And
irasmuch as, from the intimate fellowship, not to
say the almost personal identity between the two
that paper felt so naturally interested to speak
freely in defence of the whole position. purpose
tone and temper of the article in question, is it
unreasonable to say that few words on this point
would not have been out of place? If it could
speak so freely for the Rerie,o as if by quasi au-
thority at least, on all other points, why not on
this especially when to this very point its atten-
ton was emphatically and repeatedly called? But
let that pass we are grati6ed to find the diSclam
er made, and have no doubt all concerned will
accept it at It's full value.
But candor requires us to say that almost in the
same breath in which it is fully made, the writer
begins to offset it by rebuking his brethren for
taking any exception to his speech concerning
them. He says that the Interpretation which
has been put upon his language is unfair and
unjust" He is very specially displeased with
&c one of the Committee, so much so that he is
of the opinion that he might well have except.
ed" him " from this offered explanation and dis
claimer." 'That brother did us the injustice Of
forcing an offensive Interpretation publicly upon
our words, &c.
1t is to be regretted that the author Of that I'm
happy criticism ESQ imagined, which gave rise to
much unpleasant feeling on the part of his breth-
rem, should now in the very act of mitigating his
offence, seem as if cut of humor with himself for
so doing. The disclaimer is very ample and noble,
and is, By ITSELF entirely satisfactory; but the
downright scolding into which the writer runs at
the very moment of making it, throws him into
an attitude which few would concur with himself
! in pronouncing graceful OF beCOming.
While cheerfully agreeing to the right claimed
| by the critic to give his own explanation to his
words, he must excuse us for not agreeing that we
are chargeable with forcing an offensive interpre-
tation" upon them, or that his brethren here have
treated him in manner unfair and unjust" in un-
Outstanding them as they did. We have heard no
one any where refer to the matter who did not say
that such was the natural import of the language
used There was, therefore, no forcing" in the
case.
| 1t would be with much satisfaction could we
stop at this point. But the extraordinary liber.
ty personal to us, which the reviewer has taken
in other remarks in which he INDUCES, justifes, il
| it does not demand brief notice. No one will ex-
pect us to quote them. In so far as it is becoming
! to make any reply to such style of speech, we
viii say this The period during which we have
had charge of the Central Presbyterian has been
one of unexampled excitement, and conflict Of
opinion, into close contact with which we have
been often unavoidably brought. We have felt ii
duty sometimes to repel with sharpness of speech
unjusti6able assaults upon our Church, our people,
and occasionally upon oursef If any one can
point to a single other instance in which we have
used what the writer is pleased to call 'hese per-
sonahties," it shall be met by all the reparation
possible When, therefore, the critic whom we
felt impelled to call to account for the language he
had applied to many brethren, including ourself,
sets himself to draw our caricature, he naturally
draws his own likeness Many at least will be al
no loss to say where the picture belongs. 1t viii
not be the most fortunate circumstance should a
grave review have attached to itself any one who,
perchance, may have attached to himself pretty
extensive reputation for being sort of "objurga'
tor communis, and who, though repeatedly and
severely rebuked, in public and in private, by his
brethren on account of an unamiable propensity to
badger them, could not be improved in his temper.
Such attachments will however sometimes be
found, and are as hard to be scraped off as barna
cles from ships keel.
| So much as to the reviewer discaimer-personal
to the Committee, and his accusations personal
to us As soon as convenience will allow, some
notice may be taken of his mistakes, and the
rather curious statements" to which he refers
East Hanover Presbytery,-Ata special meet
ing in Richmond, on the Odd instant, leave was
granted to the Presbyterian church of Fredericks-
burg to prosecute their cali before the Presbytery
of Montgomery, for the pastoral services of the