Centre Democrat. [volume] (Bellefonte, Pa.) 1848-1989, 1884-03-06

u1lttfu tHhb 0NH N
hul claimed that he did not remain one.
But strange TO say, in his last article he
comes out again and denies th" Rdmis-
sion. But look at his lanruas". "Fhi+
charge OF predestinaiion' strike me as
strange thing from Mr.. DeL"ng. |
found fault with IL from the first On nc
count OF its offensive boldness emit un.
fairness. IL would be just "a fair TO call
him q Roman Catholic or Monk. lie
was these, but did he remain them y
II that does not mean that Luther once
was predestinarian but did not remaie
one, even as he once had been but did
not remain q Romsn Catholic or =
Monk. will Rev. f. please tell us what
10 does mean. Now | can see but two
possible conclusions Either Rev. T. Is
con vinced ot the truth oil Luther's having
been u predestinarian, but refuses 10
own and acknowledge the truth, or he
does not use the English with sufficient
accuracy to make intelligent controversy
possible. In either case the controversy
ought to cease. II he clsims that the
above IL undigniaed, | answer the want OF
dignity lies in the facts, not In manner oil
of pesenting them.
What are we 10 think Of man who
boasts before the whole county, that he can
bring forward, at least, a dozen men a. sus-
tain his charge against you and when you
insist upon his doing so he SINNERS right
down and asks you to come to Centre Hall
10 be quietly and privately introduced To
them. A man ought to give no greater
publicity 10 his charge than ho can TO his
proof brought forward my witnesses.
Rev. +. did not do so, because he could
not. Does he remember Judge Orvis'
statement TO n friend, that che never made
a statement In court, which he could hot
back up ~
In my hrst article, | presented long
argument showing and proving most con
clusively that Luther did not distinguish
properly between saving faith and
''doctrinal faith" Rev r. never made
the least attempt 10 answer my argument
or To- establish the contrary. Yet because
1 did not continue to re.Assert the same
point in every subsequent article, but took
for granted that the said point was dispos-
ed OF Rev. r. boasts that have admit
ted defeat. That Is truly boSish. From
this one example, the reader can scc how
much bottom there 4 10 all bis pretended
glorying. | would say once for all that
IN respect II no statement | have mHde
either at Centre Hall or in this controversy.
have | -een any reason whatever 10 change
hold eNac,ly what ! d 4 In tho begin
ming, being only confirmed therein by
this controversy. Whist passed over in
Rev. F.s articles, did 50 pass over for
the reason that / did noI consider It
worthy OF notice. II in respect Of Lu-
ther's predestinstion the only point
which was discussed with any degree Of
fullness-Rev. +. has an inch Of ground
left to stand upon, frankly confess that |
am unable to see L.
But two things must vet add. lat. He
charges me with saying that you "conld
not speak weil ~ all the Reformed and Do
Justice TO ZWingli." | never thought, nor
ever meant 10 s~y any such thing. ! hsve
spoken yell n Thousand timas Of tho other
Raformers, especially of Luther, without
thought Of injustice 10 Z~Ingll. The pub.
tic will remember that our LutherHns, in
Bellefonte, msde an attack through the
Daily Mess Also on Dr. Apples sermon an
Zwingli here in Bvllefonle. a, little
tau party which I attended n few days
= afterwards, the subject Of that attack IN Dr..
A ppIs's sermon was unthinkingly introduc.
cd into the cot versauon. Every one present
felt the improprisiy OF such discussion At
such place, snd ~, sftsr some half doz-
en- remarks by almost rs many different
parties, each one using IS fe~ words IS
possible, the subject was dropped. ! mad.
= remark Whicn may be- understood Ne
Rev. +. charges, but need not snd was not
meant to be 90 Understood. What |
meant and did say, properly un'eru'od, il
that you could not do justice "a IEingli
without showing the reistiOn ot bis work
10 the work of Luther with whom he
coniended. But one Of Rev. F's Luther
m advisers of BeiiefUnte wss present, tsUk |
The remark In its most obiectons bio sen-~,
and speedily communicated Il To Rev. r |
n be used hy him ~ mean' 8" impugn /
my motives. That i all the bottom there /
i to Rev. F.'s charge. Comment on such /
is unnecessary.
One more word and ! sm done. R-v 4
r hiss repeatedly given forth thnt his ur-
Is object In his public attack on mr Uas tu
.pt hls own people right-,n crrrrci The /
false impressions which hsj u,sg". Bat
hat il little too thin. NV aIir.ss ~.
not published to the county, but delivered
in the Reformed church uf Centre HAilun
very stormy night L. an audience from the
immediate vicinity. A sermpn ~ two fruu.
his pulpit would have sct bt. own people
right There was no need stall Tor an st.
Jack before the whole county through the
,olumns Of The paper. No. The truth is
simply THE, Rev, + and yet more cspeCi-
,Ily some of his Lutheran advisers 10
for reasons best known to them
selves, has conceived grudge against me,
and thought this ~ss good opportunity
io lead me TO the public whippingrosL But
have instead of whipping me,
they got whipped themselves This is
truth plainly put. FtSis.
J. F. DELoSG.