The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1875-12-08

the wrong they perpetrated. We assert shiS
reluctantly but adgiSedly. By examining
his Pastoral Letter in which these accuse
tons flourish in sll their pure impurity, 1t
will be observed that he had the Pastoral
Letter Of our Assembly right under his eye
and that he actually refers to one OF its
statements in close connection with that part
which disavows the Interpretation put upon
the words in our Narrative of 1861. More
over, Dr. Stanton was subscriber to the
Central Presbyterian when our Assembly
met in December, 1865 in which paper was
full report of the discussion which took
place when attention was called to the design
with which dsavowsl of his Interpretation
was introduced. Yet with the full knOwl-
edge of all this, ne had the audacity to do
what we hope, for the credit of religion, not
many men would have ventured upon, and
has now the greater audacity to repeat the
disreputable act. We have heretofore re-
Trained from making this exposure; but when
the great Apostle said of certain men in His
day that their "mouths must be stopped" he
was simply doing what has to be done occa-
sionally in all ages.
We do not propose to notice all that DR..
Stanton brings forward on this point, nor
even to touch upon what he says about sim
morality" "heresy," and "schiam." As
our people have become SO we'll used to such
things they will not be at all surprised to
hear the old proposals of fraternal rela-
tions" We give the conclusion of this pro-
ductiOn in his own words;
"Bat you have charged the South with
being great sinners, and yet you propose to
unite with them" Precisely so. But their
offences were against the nation and against
God. There we leave them. If, as Dr.
Palmer says, they stand in 1875 just where
they stood in 1860, be it SO. And what doth
it matter? We bore our testimony against
their errors, as we viewed them, and IN this
discharged our whole duty; and the contest
waged between US ended in the overthrow Of
slavery and rebellion, the only two things
which divided US. If now they still choose
to stand in the tracks of 1860, let them
, stand; for as they do not propose to recall
, from the dead either slavery or the war, their
standing there can do no harm to the pre-
sent or the future. Their standing there
f need not, then, prevent our uniting with
them, for the issues on which they stand are
dead. We make no demand that they aban-
, don that cherished ground as a condition
precedent to fraternal relations" nor must
! they demand that We abandon ours in order
to reach the same end"
We would ask if Jesuit could exceed this,
were it not that we know Jesuit would not
3 be so stupid. Now just put by the side OF
the above what DR.. Stanton and his Assem-
bly say in his Pastoral Letter of 1866
Speaking of the action of his Assembly OF
r 1865, he says-"The tenets which that ac-
. ton condemned, and remuneration of which
} it demanded, are both heretical and blasphe
nous. 1t is essential to the honor of our
8 common Christianity that they should be re-
nounced, in those coming to as from the
. South who hold them, both for truths sake,
D and for the evil they have wrought in the
land" " 1t was clearly its duty TO require
remuneration of these gross errors, as truly
as to demand repentance of the terrible
crimes which they had SO naturally begOtten. ,
{ The plain English lie this: In 1865, |
held sentiments which ought to exclude me
from the pale of their Church. In 1875,
while holding precisely the same views, and
without particle of repentance, | am en-
tirely worthy of any degree of fellowship
But how? Now only listen: because those
are only "ofences against the nation and
against GOd" At which we confess to a
sort of internal necessity of exclaiming, Bah!
This is in itself deplOrable production
from the Moderator of the General Assem-
bly of 1866 in st. Louis. But it will be
overruled for good. Our people have now
still clearer view of what the concurrent
declaration of 1870" and Of the "null and
void" added to it in 1873, really amounted
to. We know there are many in the North
ern Church, who, like DR.. Nelson, see the
grievous wrong their Church has done to
ours, and are ready to repair it. The vast
body, however, agree with DR., Stanton, DR..
Niccolls, and others, in holding that those
accusations were all true and perfectly pro-
per, and mean to stand by them. "Nuu and
vOid" was simply an eye-duster. The whole
state of the case is we'll understood. DR..
Stanton, unless our memory is quite at fault,
published our Church as holding "damnable
heresy." If We held it then, We hold it still.
And what sort of "fraternal relations" would
grow out of such state of things!
Southern Presbyterian Review. The card
concerning this RC0ie,o explains the new arrange
meut, which we believe will be satisfactory and
gratifying to our people in all parts of the Church
One such periodical is sufficient, and better than
two. Let US all unite in this new scheme, let our
-.o.. blo 1nr;tare thorouohlu diDeetad