The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1870-03-16
WHO Is MISTAKEN.

This world through which we are passing has so
much to vex ones righteous spirit, that when
good man happens to fall into state of special
satisfaction, it seems pity to disturb him. If the
important interests of truth did not require it,
should be disposed to let our brother in Alexan
dria remain under the strange mistakes into which
he falls at least until the direct line of this discus
sion should be passed over. But some of his err
rOrs in the last two numbers of the Southern
ChwchmaR are such that neighbOrly benevOlence
requires an effort to extricate him, and if possible
inspire more earetulness in the future. We are
considerably impressed by the sentence with which
his article Of March Sd, opens He says: mot
long since we printed an anecdOte of a Seotchman,
who said, it behooved SoOtchman to be right, for
if he we're wrong you never could convince him. "
Which is the greater ScOtchman, the Central
Presbyterian, or the Southern ChurchmGn will
have to be left to the judgment of any who may
feel an interest to read what they are debating
Our brother is much exercised about Isaac Tay-
lor, as the extracts we gave from that distinguished
writer led us to anticipate But, strange 60 say, it
is lust there he accuses US Of being in the wrong
and playing the Scotchman. He declares US mis-
taken in two points, the first of which is in saying
that Taylor was an Episcopaian. We found it so
stated by a number of authors, one Of them Of the
Episcopal Church. Nothing has been adduced to
disprove it; the passage quoted by the Southern
Chirchman is by no means explicit, and leaves 1t
doubtful whether his formal church membership
when be wrote Ancient Christianity, was with
the Dissenters or not. We admitted this was pos
sible, and our opponent is welcome to the benefit
of the doubt. The only thing material about the
case is on our side, which is that whether nomi-
nally so or not he was really an EpiscOpalian. On
this point he makes in the preface to his book the
following avowal let the terms be nOticed-"As
this controversy affects in peculiar manner, the
welfare of the Established Episcopal Church, it
seems as if it should be demanded Of those who
engage in it, that they can cypress FIRM coRCic-
ton IN taU0r Of EpjSe0pacg as well as a cordial
approval Of Etrgcol 'corsdjp, and specially or
that of the Established Church On this ground
then my deliberate opinions are such as to allow Of
my fairly entering the lists,
Now, it is for our purpose quite immaterial
whether his name was or was not on the list Of
some register in a dissenting Church; if the Ian
guage here quoted does not show him to have been
a thorough Episcopalian in his convictions, there
is no use in having words as signs Of ideas. To
quote hearty Dissenter against the Prayer Book
could have no pertinence; but to quote an avOwed
friend against it, and one of such great diStinc-
ton, was a damaging fact Let it be hoped our
contemporary viii not longer attempt to break the
force Of Tayor's concessions about the remnants
of POpery in the Prayer Book, by pleading (even
this, however, he has not proved that he was not
BIZ actual formal membership an Episcopalian.
But, in the second place, the Southern Church
man denies that Taylor makes any such cOnces-
sions as we claim. Here our brother does pre-
cisely as he has done in regard to nearly all the
authorities we have quoted in this discussion. We
set out to show that the defect of the English Re
formation was that germs or seeds Of Romanism
we're left in it. The current of historical authority,
ecclesiastical and secular, bears out to a remarka-
BE degree the correctness of this assertion. But
ne Southern Chucbmaa imagines it quite a sutb
lent refutaton to prove from these same authors
nat the whole Of ROmaniSm was not left in it
mat there was actually great body Of valuable
Protestant truth in that Reformation We point
"a out this mistake long ago, and requested him
% keep close to the precise issue which had been
made. But such a Scotehmau The way he
manages our quotations from Taylor is something
Of curiosity. He says:
'Taylor afirms over and over again the Pro
-sstantism Of the Church of England, and that it
i qhgags Protestant But our neighbor says be-
cause he raises one or two difficulties about the
Church, therefore he teaches there are deadly ele
aents Of Popery in the Prayer Book.
But notice now the account the Southern Church
nan gives of what Taylor does concede. IL says;
Taylor says the position Of the Established
church is-nOt ROmish, not neutral but ambigu
Gus in one respect; 1t has POpish. badgeS IN ITS
alendar; not Popery in its calendar, but badge
# Popery because some Of the calendar saints are
Somish saints, &c.
As we gave full extracts from this author, we
only ask that his tremendous invective against the
Church Of England may be read. But take it as
the Southern Ctuckmaa puts it, which is that,