The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1878-04-03


|
DR.. DABNEY AND DR.. BLEDS0E.
| In the Central Presbyterian of February 6ti
| 1878, appears an article over the signature OF
L. Dabney, in which he says: Gan attack Anne
at my character in the Southern Recae1o number
of April July and October. 1871, and the dispal
agement, through me, OF this Seminary, and IN
plictly of the Presbyterian Church. necessitates %
asking space for the purpose of mere selfdefense.
II Dr. Dabney had succeeded in that attempt a
self.defense. without doing injustice to one who's
hand had been palsiet ~ death two months befor
the article in the Central Presbyterian appeared il
print, no friend of DR.. Bledsoe would have wore
to say. But careful examination of all the fact
in the case necessitates reply to DR.. Dabney.-
The living controversiast is able to speak for him
self; the memory of the dead must appeal tt
friendship for its vindication.
1t is exceedingly unfortunate that the April
July and October numbers of the Southern Rerie,.
did not reach the hand of DR.. Dabney until Dr.
Bledsoe had passed away from earth. The cause
of this misfortune is given by DR.. Dabney in bis
article. That periodical was not taken by him, mol
by the library Of the institution in which be is q
Professor-nor does it seem to have had any cur
rency or appreciation among the professional cir
cles in which he is Conversant Hence his ignor.
ance of the attack made in April, 1877, and his
unavoidable silence until the death of DR.. Bedsoe
After that event, "some acquaiutauce" of DR..
Dabney called his attention to the matter. This is
the substance of the statement which is given to
explain Dr. Dsbneys past silence and his present
uttersnce. Whether this explanation is a satisfac'
tory one the reader will determine.
A brief statement of the history relating to this
case is necessary to clear conception of the issue
between DR.. Dabney and DR.. Bledsoe
In the Southern Presbyterian Reuieso of Janu-
ary, 1872 DR.. Dabuey published an article entitled
Theology of the Plymouth Brethren" AT the
head of that article nine works are placed, among
them two essays, entitled, "Notes on Genesis, u
and "A Word to Young Believers These two
productions are Published with only the initial let
ters of the auth, rs names, &C Fl. NJ" and "W
de R. B." respectively. In the course of his re.
view Dr. Dabney charges upon these writers the
odious doctrine of Antinomianism. To support
this charge, he cites the language of &C. H. M"
in "Notes on Genesis" and that of "W. de r.
B." in "A Word to Young Believers. -
In April. 1877, DR.. Bledsoe published in the
Southern ReUseto an article on : plymouth Breth.
renism." In this elaborate defense of what he be-
eved to be misrepresented people, DR.. Bledsoe
reviews the article of DR. Dabney published in the
Southern Presbyterian Reuie,o in January, 1872
Dr. Bledsoe examines the Notes on Genesis" to
see the proof of the Antinomian heresy there and
does not find it. After thorough search, he is per-
suaded that &C. Il. NJ" has taught no such doc.
trine. Dr. Dabney quotes few lines from ''Notes
on Genesis" closes this quotation with ''etc" i'm.
terposes two lines of his own-then resumes the
quotation marks for and embracing six lines. and
adds the words: "Whst more does any Autinom
ian negro desire, to encourage him in his foulest
hypocrisy. and most fsnatical joys?'
DR.. Bledsoe saw that DR.. Dabuey's paragraph
began with the words: Now take the following
from the Notes on Genesis, p. 2OO"-that the
reviewer intercalated one remark Of his own, and
Immediately resumed the quotation marks without
specifying that he was quoting from new author
ity. Was it not natural was it not inevitable, ir
the ordinary construction of a logical argument
that paragraph or sentence in quotation marks
following after similar quotation from specified
author, must be regarded as coming from the same
source as the first, unless otherwise expressed p
Was there any violence to the text in the consruc
ton placed upon it by DR.. Bledsoe2 Surely not
He searched the "Notes on Genesis" and coult
not find the second quotation in that work. and as
serted the fact with his usual promptness and en-
ergy of diction. He asserted that DR.. Dabney hat
misrepresented the author of the Notes on Gen
esis." Appended to this article in the Souther'
Reuie,o is DR.. Dabney's explanation of the matte
that the second quotation in the paragraph il
question was not taken from the Notes on Gen
esis,r but from "a Word to Young Believers.
by "W. de r. B" Upon this statement DR.
Bledsoe comments with much severity, whethe
Justly or otherwise will best be seen by comparip
the paragraph of Dr. Dabney with the criticism O
DR.. Bledsoe
In order that the reader may see the attitud
which DR.. Dabney's paragraph presents in tn
Southern Presbyterian Rerie,0 for January, 1877
quote it precisely as it appears
But take the following from the ''Notes on Ger
esis." D. 200: Regeneration is not change Q
the old nature. but the introduction of a new.
Nor does the introduction of this new nature ate
in the slightest degree the true essential chsracte
of old. This latter continues what it was, and
made in no respect better; yea, rather, there is
full display of its evil character in opposition of th
new clement" etc. 1t is not hard to see how tel
ribly all this may be carried out to God-defyin
csrnsl security. "The notion of progressive saut
t6catiou is false, and the work not to be expected
The evil nature in me is not at all weakened
grace, but rather infamed. If have faith, hav
the standing and | am not to doubt my fait
because OF supposed deficiency of fruits; becaus
to conclude it a true faith by any frames in mysel
or works of self, is sheer legalism." What mol
does any Antinomisn negro desire, to encourae
him in his toulest hypocrisy, and most fanatic
joys?
Let the candid reader examine the above par
graph, and think he cannot fail to justify d
Bedsoe's impression that the author intended
quote the words of the Notes on Genesis" in Il
last quotation as we'll as in the first. But it a
pears that this last quotation cannot be found
the "Notes on Genesis" DR.. Dabney admits tn
the words are not there. and says he obtained the
from "a Word to Young Believers by "W.
R. B." But what shall we say, if it should tu
out that these words are not to be found ther,
Neither the words quoted by DR.. Dabney, nor t
doctrine comprised in them can be found in g
Word to Young Believers"
There is but one edition of this tract known
me- 1t is evidently the edition quoted elsewhe
in Dr. Dabney's Reuiea0 article, because the
tached sentences in the quotations there made O.
, respond to the references to "A Word to You
! Believers" That DR.. Dabney has not eorrec