The Pickens sentinel. [volume] (Pickens, S.C.) 1871-1903, 1878-04-11

S'"AHo I''''S9S ihNA 'V'A 'AtS "0ohiiSco VA
the King, and some of his ministers
as dissolute. now say what | did
not say before, that the logical inter~
ence is that 10 first class men would
have got ON that board of translators,
for they could only DO 80 by crouch
ing to these debauched youths, and
first class men, would hardly do this?
My histories do not teach that the
7 translators were eminently pious, the
inference from Rev. Mr.. Walkers
statement is that each and all were
such. He makes me. say it was in
dark age. Now the word dark did
not occur in my article, he surely
did not mean to misreptesent mis-
takes revolutionary for dark hope
he has better luck in inter preting the
Scriptures than when criticising my
article.-I am not at all afraid to say
now, that there was some dark, and
from some of the light, good Lord!
dcliyer us.
In less than thirty years after the
translation, doubtless while some OF
the translators still lived, Marcns
Wilson in his out lines Of history
says: ''The' English clergy; at the
head of whom was Arch bishop Laud,
one of the chief advisers of thesKing
(Charles) usurped the civil powers of
the government, and the Puri,ans
were 60 vigorously prosecuted that
great numbers Of them sought an
asylum in America-drove the Scot
tlsh Preysby'erians to open rebel
lion, ETC." Mscaulay says "the de-
votions of private families could not
esca g his spies" They increased
tue power of the two courts, that OF
the Star Chamber and High CON-
mission, two of the most Infamous
probably the civilized world has any
account OF, "Tbe PuritaDs or church
reformers suffered most. They were
dragged in great numbers before an
arbitrary court, called the Star
Chamber, and sometimes men VEN
erab!e for piety, learning and worth,
were scourged. through the streets of
London, and had their ears cut off,
and their noses split for merely diff
tering in opinion on the most specu>
!a1ive of all subjects, with the King
and his clergy" See Prescott's Ell
cyclopedia. Dazzling light again,
and it in the churches.
Why do lnen laud the wisdom,
piety and enlightenment oY this
age SO much? Is it because of the ar
bitrary power assumed by the church
office rs2 The churches 80 called were
governed by fanaticism and in
constant revolutionary state. Is it
at all reasonable to suppose the men
of that age were nnprejudiced2 We
arc taught the reverse most unques-
tionably. In the days of this big
oted Laud, the established church of
England and the Catholic church re-.
sembled very much, were in pretty
close alliance. ....'
About this time the Westminster
divines are said to have adopted
pouring or eprinkling instead of i'm
mersion. England had some able
n en- intellectually, but she had a
weak King to bind their hands in
many particulars; in laying down
certain rules, etc. ~
said in my article that no Lexi-
con on earth gave baptize as the de.
tininon Of baptizo; and published q
card the, next week qualifying this
statement i'll this way. II do not
believe there was one that SO gave it,
as Ihadanever seeu one that did. etc.,
The Rev. Mr.. Walker makes me
say that no photographer in the
universe gives the same meanining
to the word baptizo as to that of
baptize. Is this a fair statement, even
if the Reverend gentleman had not