Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1886-03-23
The Armstrong Case.

The Armstrong Case.
The Rev. Cbauncey G. Williams, OF Au-
Rusta. who attempted last Sunday TO mar
monte the differences of opinion ex's'lng
among the members OF St. Philips church
at Atlanta relative 10 the justice OF bIshop
Beckwith's action in the Armstrong case,
| did not meet With much success. Indeed.
! as far as we are informed, be met with no
success whatever. II purpose was good,
however, and doubtless he strengt cened
those who are on the side OF justice and the
Bishop. In his letter to a citizen OF Al
lanta, which we pub tshed on Sunday
morning. he presents admirable reasons
why the Bishop should he sustained, and
no doubt his sermon at Atlanta on Sunday
morning, which gave ofFense to some
members of st. Philips congregation,
satisfied all fair-minded men thai the
Bishops sentence in Dr.. Armstrong; case
was just and merciful.
1t is not easy to see how the Bishop
could have imposed lighter sentence and
at the same time shown a proper respect
to the gentlemen who found DR.. Arm
strong guilty of ofenses which deserve
punishment. Those who are dispeased
with the sentence however, do not seem
10 question the correctness Of the verdict.
II Is not improbable as suggested by the
Rev. Mr.. Williams, that much Of tue tes-
timony, upon which the verdict OF gully
was based, has not been made public. 1t
may be of character to silence even the
most hostile OF the Bishops critics. But
even Il there Is nothing m IRE in the testi-
mony rejecting upon DR.. Armstrong;
conduct as a minister OF the gospel than
that which is already in the possession Of
the public the sentence imposed by the
Bishop can hardly be regarded as unjust,
or even harsh. Doubtless the Bishop
would have been glad To have avoided
suspending DR.. Armstrong if he could
have done so consistently with his ideas
of duty.
The members of st. Philips church
who are UNFOLDING DIR. Armstrong and
condemning the Bishop believe, If they
are conscientious in the course they are
pursuing, that the Bishop IN passing sem
tence in the Armstrong case was either
Influenced by Improper motives or COM
mtted an error Of Judgment. They have
not shown, and in fact have not attempted
to show, that he was Influenced by i'm
proper motives, and If they are genuine
Christians they must fad it difficult to
harmOnize their conduct with their Chris
tian professions, ii they have no other
complaint against the Bishop than that
he has committed an error OF Judgment.
1t lis a remarkable tact that whenever
minister OF the gospel is shown to he
guilty of conduct unworthy his sacred
calling, and calculated to bring the
Christian religion into disrepute, there
are always to he found protesting
Christians who are anxious to distinguish
themselves by becoming his champions.
When the Rev. Mr.. Downs, of Boston,
was CHARGED a few weeks ago. with scan
dalous conduct, a part of his congrega-
tion gave him such strong support as to
threaten the ruin Of his church. although
the evidence against him was sufficient
to satisfy almost any iair-minded person
of h 8 guilt.
The Rev. DIR. Bristor, OF Spring valley.
n. Y. has about ruined the Methodist
church In that town. He bad to leave
Newark, N. j., on ace unt Of grave
charges against him. II the conference
Of that State had done its duty the churcl'
AT Spring Valley might have been saved.
That town is now pretty well divided be-
tween Bristorltes and anti-BristOrites,
and it will be years before the damage to
the cause OF religion, due to DIR. BrstOr's
alleged immortality, will be repaired.
In passing sentence upon DR., Arm
strong Bishop Beckwith had something
more Important to consider than the feel
| ings and reputation OF DR.. Armstrong
and the wishes of his adherents. His
duty was to protect his church and the
cause Of Christianity. Nothing is more
necessary for the promotion and advance
ment OF the Christian religion than that
| its teachers should be men of pure lives
| and undoubted piety.