The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1881-10-12
For the Central Presbyterian.
Historical Injustice.

~ hon 'Ae misrepresentation OF secular
historians. Enemies for the most part of
all religion, they have complimented ours
with superlative abuse. Among their
tiippant accusations, audaciously and ma
lignantly repeated, is the charge of per-
sec1tsor. The only proof is reiteration.
They know the propensity of human ma
ture to believe any falsehood that is con-
tinually repeated.
AS specimen of this maGgnity, re-
fer to the following language Of Smollett.
In his continuation of Hume's History of
England. The paragraph refers to the
state of Scotland just after the accession
of William and Mary:
AL the laws in favor of Episcopacy
We're repealed. Three score of the Pres
Dyterlan ministers, who had been elected
at the restoration, were still alive and
these the Parliament declared the only
sound part of the Church. The govern
ment OF it was lodged in their hands:
and they were empowered to admit such
as they should think proper to their as
sistance. A fen furious fanatics beino
thus associated, proceeded aoith ungove17s-
aoSe o'o<ence to prosecute the Episcopal
porty' erercasa9ag the very same tyranny
against aohsch they themselves had so
loudly exclaimed"
Many youthful readers are led astray
by such reckless and prejudiced state
ments as this. For their information, 1
make the issue. that the Presbyterian
Church Is absolutely free from any such
lmputation. The charge is not made from
historical data, but from desire to break
the force of those facts that fix the stigma
OF former persecution upon another
Church. The statement of Smollett can
be easily shown to be false But the de-
tails OF the history of the times would
weary the reader. I take shorter
method. 1t is conceded that William
secured the crown of Scotland as the
choice of its Presbyterian population, and
in opposition to the prelatists and papists.
The former party, however, would not
accept him without first securing their
liberties and privileges. They stipulated
in terms for the Protestant religion. and
for cavaI and religious freedom. The set
Element was based upon these terms.
During twenty-eight years they had been
prosecuted under Charles and James. and
four hundred of their ministers had been
elected to make way for Episcopalian in
truders. Only sixty survived. and these
were empowered by the Parliament to
reconstruct the Church. One hundred
and seventy-nine of the intruders were
found inadmissible, but only part of
these were deprived of their livines, and
the rest were tolerated. This is the sum
and substance of the persecution to which
Smollett refers in such bitter language.
A small number of intrusive curates were
turned out to reinstate the rightful par
ties. Thence forward, during successive
relgns, the Presbyterian Church of Scot
land continued its course as the leader of
progress and the bulwark of reAiqsous hb-
erty.
Now it must be obvious that if four
hundred Presbyterian ministers were per.
secuted out of their own Church, to make
room for others, the undoing of this
wrong, to partial extent, qoas mo perse-
cattso'a at all. But the charge is far more
serious, and is still often insinuated, that
the Presbyterians prosecuted the Episco-
pallans In the same sense and the same
sparst with which they had been oppressed.
Nothing could be further from the
truth. For twenty-eight years thew had
suffered, not only by the exclusion of
$1,000 buU lh GuclT homes, per-
sons, and families, such barbaritles, on an
immense scale, as many American In
dams would now blush to confess. The
rack, the gibbet, the thumb-screw, and
the boot, were common forms of torture.
inflicted upon men, women, and children
and the Infamous Claverhouse desolated
large districts with cruelties, the recital
OF which now makes all generous blood
to boil. Such was "the tyranny against
which these Presbyterians had exclaim-
ed" That the Episcopalians of Scotland
ever suffered such infections after the
Revolution of 1888, is a pure fiction of
subsequent writer's; as baseless as q
dream TWAS literally impossible King
William was opposed to all persecution,
on principle, and gave great offence in
England by his principles of federation.
1t Is further incredible from the known
adherence of the Presbyterians them
selves for all such methods of maintain
ing religion. We would freely challenge
any party to undertake the proof of such
an accusation.
This paper is not intended to cast any
reflection upon our Episcopal brethren of
the present day, who as heartily as our
selves condemn every form of persecu-
ton. But secular writers, and extrava-