The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1877-04-04

union anu OF IraFernal relauous, euu Jue'
now fully disclosed, has been a declaration
on our part as open as day, from first to last
The records of our Assembly are full of IT,
and if the Observer has any doubts it may
turn TO the Address of 1861, the Pastoral
Letter of 1866, and the Pastoral Letter OF
1870. The reasons for a separate aud indie
pendent Church are there fully stated. By
all this our people as we'll as leaders, firmly
abide. Yes, incredible as it may appear,
our Assembly has all along had the i'm
pudence to say that it actually did Intend to
"preserve its separation and independence
jealously, for Christ's sake" This is the
awful ofenceI And the Observer has only
Just now discovered the crime fully, aud dis
closed itl HORRIBLE ct is high time this
spirit Va8 qusnched forever. -
Now al this is simply ridiculous, and all
intelligent readers will say the Observer mus
have special talent for discovering a mares
nest 1t paternelly instructs our people tina
we ought to have "the Church of God uni
ted, and her members, North and South
working together as in the days of old. >
And then We have in the conclusion an ex
ceediugly pious effasiou, "a caviller would
call it regular gash) about I" the spirit Of pa
triotism," "the future of immortal souls,
"the love and spirit of the Master" :" let US
bury old grievances, and in the spirit o
Christian magnanimity, let by.gOues be by
cones, while We are fellow citizens aud breth
rem" This is only ga specimen brick.
We would be the last to deride anything
in the form of pious, loving Christianity
But candOr requires the confession that il
the light of sober facts our judgment looks
all this kind of efusiOn straight in the face
and for such reasons as these:
1. When the Observer declares, as it does il
this paper, that Every stone of stumbling
and rock of offence has been removed on both
sides, because both Assemblies have de
clared in regard to the past, that no acts or
deliVerances are to be construed or admitted
as impugning in any a0ay the Christian char
acter of the other Assembly, or the Assem-
bly, of which tits the successor. the per
son who in all probability wrote this, ought
to know as we'll as does the Chairman of the
Committee of Bills and Ouerture8 in the
Brooklyn Assembly, that in response to the
action of our Assembly they wholly omitted
any allusiOn to the first part of our paper,
the very gist and test of the WhOe-and re-
sponded only to so much as suited their
purpose.
2. Their declaration about constituting OF
admitting, &C., is no removal of "stum,
bling blocks at all. If | have used often
sive language towards another which is am
Jiguous, | am entitled to my own construction
as to the sense intended But if have ira
dueed him in the most explicit and outrageous
terms, and years afterward come to him with
most loving prOtestatious, and declare that
although 1 did publicly and persistently
pronounce him liar and scoundrel, YET
those epithets are not to be construed OF
admitted as impuguiDg in any way" his
Christian character" every one knows
there would be but one answer to such stuff,
viz: "ThOse, sir, are epithetS and imputa-
tions, which have but one meaning, and do
not admit of being construed at all they are
to be withdrawn" Now apply this ; The
Northern Assembly say of us-"Duty to the
Head of the Church forbids that the Assem-
bly, should compromise with heresy and sin -
they (that is the Southern Church, "went
out proclaiming heresy," "the wicked con-
duct" &c. "The Presbyterian Church has
no alternative consistent with safety, With
self-respect, with the righteousness of its own
past conduct, with fidelity to divine truth or
Christian duty, or with obedience 10 God,
but to accept the remuneration of these de,
luded men, to testify against their sinful acts,
aud to keep her skirts clear of their misera-
bic doings." And now these and other i'm
putations, such as " blasphemy," the Brook
Ign Assembly and the New York Observer
propose to "eonatrug" Common sense and
the English language itself rise up and laugh
il to scorn.
3. 1t is said that the Brooklyn Assembly
offered an adjustment of the trouble on the
basis of perfect equality and reciprocity"
Certainly no man, or body of men, could
decently propose or consent to any other,
provided the condition of the parties is the
same. But they are not. The records of
the Southern Assembly will be searched in
vain for single sentence casting an often
sive imputation upon the Northern. We
know exactly what we say, aud if the New
York Observer will venture to assert that it
has, We will undertake to demonstrate that
it has not. Their case standing thus, we
repeat that the claim of reciprocity falls to
dust and ashes. There are many things
which might be appropriately added, but the
length of this article forbids.