Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

p 302 T HE COUNT KYMAN last named would join issue with the writer, for they will not admit that they are a ‘denomination,’ but contend that they arc the church—but let us hope for the best. The article goes on : ‘‘Of these five denominations, two might unite without much counnuta- tiou nu either side: I mean the Luther ans and Methodists, as both of thorn are staunch Arminian# * * * Now it is easy to see that a similar union might be effected between these two sects and the Presbytorians, provided the latter would not insist on engraft ing the peculiarities of Calvinism into the creed of the church. As individ uals, they might continue to hold those peculiarities, but let them not be con stituted into articles of belief * * At present, Lutherans and Methodists nave intimate and hospitable fellow ship with Presbyterians—they all preach, pray, and commune together. ‘As wo do not consider it necessary to put any Arminian peculiarities into our Confession, perhaps our Presby terian brethren might consent to be as reticent in regard to-the peculiarities of Calvinism. # * “In regard to our Baptist brethren, there is a difficulty which does seem insormountablc. That which divides them from us is not a mere doctrinal speculation—it is a practical, funda mental matter, so far, I mean, as church membership is concerned. I wish we could get them to think as Bunyan, Robert Hall, and Spurgeon teach, that it would not be improper for them to unite with us in looking at the portrait of our common Friend. There are churches in England, the pastors of which arc Pedobnptists, and tlio members are some Podobap- tists and some Antipedobabtists. * * * “The question of union with our Protestant Episcopal friends is, per haps, as much complicated as that just considered. The unchurching dogma of ‘succession* presents a formidable banier in the waj of union. 1 liavo no doubt that many Protestant Epis copalians as firmly believe in the real ity of tbeir apostolic succession ns John Wesloy believed it was a ‘fahlo.’ Wo certainly cannot subscribe to that dogma. * * There are, moreover, certain passages in the prayer book that affirm the dogma of ‘baptismal regeneration,’ so called. Bishops Sea- bnry, White, Moore, &c., say that these passages are not susceptible of any other interpretation * * For the sake of union, a Methodist or Presby terian might submit to the reimposi tion of hands (as Dr. Poke was ever willing to do)” * * * Here follow suggestions concerning many other obstacles, ayd then occurs this ; “Perhaps if the P. E. Church could unite with any other, or any other with it, that other would be the M. E. Church. A few years since) one of the foremost clergymen of the P. E. Church proposed a union to two of our bishops. lie said lie could not insult us by proposing the roordhia- tion of our ministers—he himself be lieved in the validity of our order. But as a good many of Iris brethren did not, ho proposed that in all future ordinations one or more of the bishops of each church should unite in the imposition of hands * * * “But let them (the Episcopalians) not delude themselves with the fancy that the other churches, who outnum ber them, perhaps twenty to one, will surrender everything, principles, pre possessions, prejudices—v/liile they surrender nothing at all. Let them seriously and thoroughly investigate tho whole question, and then tell us candidly what they can do, and what they cannot do, to effect a union, and we will du likewise -A * * “Tt may, perhaps; .Jfcsaid that if a union could be effecten between the P. E. and M. E. churches, still the other communions would not unite with them because of the episcopal government, which it is not proposed to supercede *' * So far as the Puritan clement has impregnated the Presbyterian churches, thoy would, of course, oppose imparity ; but then there is a great deal of Presbyterian ism that is non-Puritan. Calvin was uo Puritan, but lie was tho father of Presbyterianism; yet lie expressed himself favorablo to the Anglican episcopacy, and would, perhaps, have won a mitre, had ho lived in England. The learned and immortal Grotius was an Arminian Presbytciian, yet he ex pressed himself favorable to the Augr lican episcopacy—not, of course, on the High Church basis.” The Doctor concludes thus: “If no other good results from in vestigations cf this sort than the as certaining, not how widely wo may differ, but how nearly we may agree, our time may not bo misemployed.” Tire article is quite a long one, and very little idea can be gained of .it, and justice cannot Le done the author, by the meagre extracts we have giv en It should be read as a whole, It seems fo bo written in a gOod spirit— rather different from that which we heard (with what truth we cannot say) actuated the Georgia Conference in its course with regard to the very affectionate farewell, letter addressed to it by the Rev. M»\ Thomas, a min ister of tlio Methodist faith, who withdrew from that persuasion, united with tho Protestant Episcopal church, and took orders. If we have been misinformed, we would bo glad to be sot right. Now the question arises, “Can any thing be done towards effecting the purpose of Dr. Summers’ article?” Whether or not tlioro is any hope, wo throw in our mite by giving the fore going a place in tho' columns of this journal. Dr. Summers mentions a proposi tion made by an Episcopal clergyman to Methodists.-—‘Unless wo are mista ken a similar proposition was once made by Methodists to Bishop White, an Episcopalian. * Brilliant Success of the Con federates !—We do not wish to givrr any sensational news, but tliiuk that we are fully warranted in assuring our readers of, and congratulating them upon, the fact of a victory achieved by our gallant troops on monday,.be tween Swift Creek and Drewry’s Bluff. The buttle commenced early on the morning of monday, and raged some five hours, with groat success to our anus, and resulted in the driving back of tho enemy at every point, in the direction of his gunboats, and ho is now at Bermuda Hundreds, rejoic ing iu this avenue of escape. This avenue he never would have had, but for the cpuduet of a General officer, acting snbordinately to Gen. Beaure gard. We know what reputation is worth, and how grave an offence it it* to sully causelessly that of any man. Particular caution should be used in sifting reports concerning lire conduct of such an officer as General Whiting, placed in such a command as be was eutrustod with on monday, when so much depended on his ‘ acting well his part,’ at a most critical time. But so many concurring reports, made by men coming from the field, uncontra dicted by one dissenting voice, attach to his neglect, or disobedience of or ders, t lie weighty responsibility of the failure of Gen. Beauregard’s plan for i iifr capture and destruction of Butler’s