The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1879-12-17

regard the Southern Ch'trch"a'', OF TINS
city, as one of the truest and soundest re-
igious papers in this country, as we have
ever regarded the clergy of the Episcopal
Church in Virginia as among the finest
exemplifcations of Christian character
that the evangelical Church affords. 1t
was, therefore, with mingled pain and
surprise that we read the two leading
editorial articles in the last issue of the
Murchnaan, the one entitled Change,
the other entitled The Late Bishop
Phillpots." Possibly we have misread
them; we shall be only too glad to learn
that this is the fact; but the most that
can be said in their defence is that they
were carelessly expressed. In the first
article, there is a strong squirting to-
wards the views of Canon Farrar and
Col. John NJ. Patton, of this State, on the
subject of eternal punishment in the
second, the editor seems to regard the
holding of the doctrine Of Baptismal Re
generation as Every little thing" and
as a matter about which entirely toe
much ink has been shed.
As to the first point, the Gerchm@n
seems to condemn the Cincinnati Confer
ence of the Methodist Church for expell-
ing minister (the Rev. D. R. Baker, fol
holding "the doctrine of humiliation, OF
conditional immortality doctrine,
says the Chwchnean, (which has great
deal of Scripture and reason on its side.
"This matter, it continues, "of perse-
cution, whether by expelling, excommu-
nicating, beheading, burning or what not
on grounds where there is no immoral
practice, ought to be well considered be-
forehand."
The Cba~chman, it is true, in the same
breath is condemning the Conference fol-
not expelling another minister charged
IEith-drunkenness "palliated by state
some peculiar circumstances and
sequentpenitepeee;" and itsay'
strange that the one was expelled
the other retained. Not knowing
the facts, we cannot speak of the case Of
drunkenness; nor is it necessary to our
present purpose
But, if we understand the Oio~chna'a
it holds the view that the doctrine Of
conditional Immortality" is one (which
has great deal of Scripture and reason
on its side, and that persecution" by
expelhng or otherwise for such opinions
ought to be well considered beforehand.
If we misapprehend the CHmrchmon, we
shall>be happy to correct; if we do not,
we shall have more to say.
The other article, that on Bishop Phil
pots. refers to his belief in the doctrine
of Baptismal Regeneration, and it lauds
him very highly as a most devout Chris
tan, who "when he came to deal with
the individual soul of Lord Eldon put
baptism in the background, and pointed
him to the Redeemer. And speaking OF
the famous Gorham controversy in which
this same Bishop refused to institute Mr..
Gorham to the living of Brampford Spoke,
the Cb,uchman exclaims as if it were a
very wearisome and improbable discus
sion that of Baptismal Regeneration
"What oceans of ink were she'd" We hope
again that we do not misrepresent our
contemporary we certainly do not want
to understand the thing i'll this way. lie
of course does not believe in the folly OF
Baptismal Regeneration; that we under
stand; but does he regard it as trivial
matter that a clergyman of the Episcopal
Diocese Of Virginia should believe such a
doctrine? Does he not regard it as an
ectreH1elY pernlclous doctrine, and one
which ought not for moment to be
winked at or tolerated in the Episcopal
Church? If he does motif that is the sen
timent Of the hitherto conservative Epis-
oopal Church of Virginia, then we think
the sooner Bishop Latan6 returns to Vir
ginia the better and the sooner those il
the Episcopal Diocese Of this State who
do not believe in such doctrines, hois
the Reformed standard, the very muol
better it will be for all the parties con
cerned.
We cannot believe that the tone of thi
issue Of the Southern Cbmchmaa reflect
the sentiments of the clergy and earnes