The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-05-31
FREDERICK DOUGLASS.

The Press Of the 30th inst. publishes the
following letter from Frederick Douglass:
Some one has Just now kindly favored me
with a copy of your paper of the 10Th, con
tanning an account of a somewhat extrdordi-
nary meeting held in Sixth-street Bethel
Church, Philadelphia. The special object of
this meeting seems to have been to arraign,
try, and condemn me for the utterance of
dangerous sentiments on the occasion of
the recent celebration of the fifteenth amend
ment in your city.
Trials for heresy in our day and country,
where liberty of thought and speech is con-
ceded to the humblest member of society,
are usually deemed farcial, if not harmless. 1t
was once, indeed, fearful thing to fall into
the hands of the Church. History proves that
there is no malice or cruelty so bitter aud
unrelenting as that malice and cruelty which
clothes itself in sanity robes, and processes
to be 'contending for the faith once deliv-
cred to the saints A few centuries ago the
weapons of religion against heresy were car
nal enough. "Cord and steel" sire and
sword, " 'halter and rack, were the chosen
instruments. Thanks not to faith, but to
the enlightenment of the age and the growth
of rational ideas among men, to differ with
the Church to-day does not bring torture
and physical death. The worst that bigotry
can now do is to assail reputation and fill the
mouths of the vulgar crowd with meaningless
malice is the same to-day as three hundred
years ago. 1t would bite, sting, and devour
now as then, if it only had the power. 1t
would crush living flesh to-day with the same
sanctimonious ferocity as it does reputation.
The will to do is manifest, the power only is
wanting. The Church and the street are
about the same in point of authority and in
point of excellence. Both are ever on the
side of popular wrong, and both are against
unpopular right. The condemnations, male
dictions, and denunclations of the Church,
whether Bethel or st. Peters, to the outside
world, have no more significance than the
vulgar curses of the crowd. 1t may be said
of Bethel as of other religious bodies they
are ''nought but men and women" and no
wiser or better than other men and women.
Be it remembered that the dangerous sem
timents" for which have been thus formally
condemned were uttered in speech delivered
under serious disadvantages for accuracy of
statement and completeness of argument. 1t
was an impr0mptu speech, delivered at the
call of the assemblage, upon the spur of the
moment, amid the heat and excitement of an
enthusiastic meeting, after a particularly
fatiguing day of public parade have no
report of that speech now before me, and
cannot say with certainty whether the words
employed fifty expressed my thoughts and
sentiments or not.
Let it also be remembered that whatever
may have been the language employed, or
whatever may have been my manner of utter
ance on that interesting occasion, l did not
assume to speak for any class, sect, or party,
and certainly not for Bethel Church Ispoke
for myself, and for nobody else. 1t is there
fore, difficult to perceive any special reason
why the preachers of Bethel should lead off
in the war upon my dangerous sentiments"
1 am not a member of that church, and never
was. Why, then, should they dlsclaim my
views, and denounce me personally in solemn
meeting? The views and sentiments of that
church, right or wrong, upon the whole sub
ject of the special interposition of Divine
Providence are well known. Nothing that L
said was likely to cast the least doubt upon
the theological soundness of my Bethel
brethren. That church has never been noted
for heresy; for heresy implies thought, in
quiry, and reflection. The members of that
ministry walk scrupulously in the old clothes
of Methodist theology of half century ago,
and indulge in the same wild worship. Their
thoughts, like their clothes, are after the most
ancient pattern, and they abhor nothing more
than they abhor innovation. In so far as the
proceedings of that condemnation meeting of
theirs pretended to laudable desire to set
that church right before the public, it was
hypocritical or stupid, or both. The position
OF that church was In no way compromised by
my speech.
IL DlbuOp SdulpDoll, tuo luSllBdbOr OF GQlS
sham trial "a man whose history have known
during more than thirty years., in place of
getting up these church meetings to try dis
tant heretics like myself, would honestly go
to work and endeavor to reform the charac-
ter, manners, and habits of the fostering
thousands of colored people who live in the
utmost misery and destitution in the imme-
diate vicinity of Big Bethel, he would do
more to prove his church sound than by
passing any number of wordy resolutions
about thanking God. 1t was always more
common to meet with men who would pro-
fess love to God whom they have not seen
than to show love to man whom they have
seen. For many reasons the denunciations of
these Bethel brethren touch me nowhere. So
far as their proceedings in my case have
taken the form of public trial for heresy,
they have no claim to any respect or defer
ence from me or from anybody else. Besides
destitution of jurisdiction, they are worth
less, because ee parte, indefinite, illogical
and unfair. Everybody knows how easy it is
to prove man guilty of uttering dangerous
sentiments. You have only to pick out SEN
tence here, another there, wrest this part
from that, and break up the logical connec-
tion of all its parts with the whole, and your
case to the unrefecting and unskilled is made
out.
Let no one, however, who heard me on the
occasion in question, suppose from these re-
marks that l shrink from any Just RESPONSE
bility or criticism on account of that speech
AS l now remember it, l stand by every
position taken in it. Single words may be at
fault, but the substance and philosophy of
that speech / am perfectly willing to defend
even against Bishop Campbell, Whenever 1
can do so on equal terms. 1 will not, of
cnurSA consent to bo arraioned at the altar