OCR Text |
Show 206 NO'fES ON of the American Church on Sla\·cry." On this part of her work I could say a grc:.tt dc:\1, ·but I hasc already consiUcraLly cxcccJcd my limits, and I must th erefore be very brief. "If,'' snys Mrs. Stowe, "the argument of ~hades Su~ncr be contemplated, it will be Hccn that tho lu s ~ory of tills l'rcsbytcrian Uhun·h ttll(l the hi ~ tory of our Ull!tcd Statrs ha\·c strong points of siHgularity. In both, at the outset, the strong influence was . nnti·.!:davcry, even a~o~g s la.rc- 1toldcrs. In both there was 110 difrcrcncc of opinion as to th.c desirableness of aholi t- hing slavC'ry ultima tely; both marlc a. concession, the smallest wl•ich could possibly be im: Igincd; both made the concession in all gooJ faith, ~ontemplatin rr the speedy r('moval antl cxt inctinn of tl1c evd; anJ the hi~tory of' both is alike. The li tt le point of concc:-:si!~Tl sprcaU, :md :tbsorbctl, aml acquirctl, :rom yca,r to yea r, .tdl the U11ited St<ttes and tl1c l)rcsbytcnan Church stand JWd where they do. \Vorse has been the history of the l\lcth oclist Church . ~rho history of the Baptist Church shows the same prin ciple; :tnd, as to the Episcopal Chureh, it li:.1s ne\'el' done anything but comply, cidtcr North or South. It tliflCrs from all tl1e rest in that it has never had any resisting clcUlent, except now and then a. protestant, like \~'ill ian~ J-ay, a worthy son of him who signed the DeclaratiOn of Independence." 1 thank vou, Mrs. Stowe, for this admission. Tt shows that the Cl.mrch underst:tndti liCI' tni . ..;~ion,-the "plan" of ]H' I' ])j,,inc Found er-too well, to lllix lwrsclf' up with the iu stii utions of society and the affuirs of State. She receives :-tliko 1\ithin her fold the }?rc>c-Soilcr and the I)ro-Siavcry man, a8king no qu estions of either : she would as s.oon tl 1ink of n::;king her candi(lates for baptism or the communiOn, whether they were whigs or democrats. Enough for her that they nrc churchmen : as sueh she receives them; as 11 N (' J, 1<: T (I l\1 'S ('A JlJ N. 207 Euch tlH'y suLmit thcm~cl\'CS to her. On this point her members :u·e all agreed: there is no difrcrcncc of op inion amongst us in regard to it. ln Olll' COTH"cntions ·we never di scuss Anti-1\Jn sonry, or Anti-Sla rcry, or a.ny other anti,~ rectotalism or Fouricrism, or any other ism: we ignore their very existence. Outside the Church, inUecd, in our capacity of citizens antl in(lividualfl, we l1:t\'C our opinion upon each and nil of these, and we Uo not l1esitate to express it, on all fitting occnsions. But C\'('11 here, we harm onize to a fnr greater extent thrm most other religious bodies. No sound clturchm:tn could go all lengths with the lfrec-Soil party. I am acquainted with one, und but one, who is a JH'Omincnt mcmLer of that pn.rty,-thc 0 110 yo.u quote from on pnge G7 and tktt he docs not go all lengths with them, you ha.vc his own declaration in his speech at the llalc dinner. 'l,here is a good deal in this book that he would not ngrce with, but there is a good deal more that you woultl not agree with, that he would. I have the best reason for saying that he utterly di sa.pprovcs of the proceedings of ~rmTey nnd Chaplin, but you sympathize with those proceedings, and try to make your readers sympathize with them. Again: you ohjcct to the Church that it "has done nothing but comply." 'Vhat you mean by this, viz., that it has never taken any action :1t all, upon the su1jcct, pro or con, he and I agree in considering its glory. I have mentioned two points in which you differ from him and me: I am happy to say tha.t there are two other points in wl1ieh we all three ag ree. First, we ngrcc in our estimate of the Smiths, the Sonthors and the Castlcrnn.ns et z'd omne [Jf'nus. Yon, however, think the law of the land shoultl take hold of them for carrying a proper kind of punishment to excess, even though it do not result in death: I do not, and I very much doubt if ho does. |