The Ecclesiastical Disruption of 1861 [pp. 321-351]

~876.~ THE ECCLESIASTICAL DISRUPTION OF I~6i. 333
ion and the South," in which he says of South Carolina: "History has nowhere upon her records a more sublime example of
moral heroism. Ignorant whether she would be supported,
even by her sister across the Savannah, relying on nothing save
the righteousness of her cause and the power of God, she took
upon her shield and spear as desperate and as sacred a conflict
as ever made a State immortal." Extracts of a similar character might be given from the discourses, delivered about the
same period, of many other distinguished clergymen of the
Southern Presbyterian Church.
The special value which these utterances pos~ess, consists in
~he fact, that these eloquent ministers of Christ who have urged
so strenuously, as a distinguishing characteristic of the Southern
Church, that the things of God and C~sar should be kept
wholly apart, were so early in the field in the open advocacy
of secession, in the pulpit, upon the platform, and in the pubJic journals. Indeed, they had the credit, at the time, of being
far in advance, in this r6le, of many of the foremost of Southern
statesmen. Hon. Alex. H. Stephens, who afterward became
Vice-President of the Confederate Government, viewed the election of~Mr. Lincoln in a very different light. In that same
November, i86o, when Drs. Thornwell and Palmer so earnestly
pleaded for secession, Mr. Stephens made a speech before the
Georgia Legislature, in which he said: " The first question that
presents itself is, shall the people of the South secede from the
Union in consequence of the election of Mr. Lincoln to the
Presidency of the United States? My countrymen, I tell you
frankly, candidly, earnestly, that I do not think they ought."
"This appeal to go out, with all the provisions for good that
accompany it, I look upon as a great and, I fear, a fatal, tempta~
tion." And yet, "this appeal to go out," vehemently pleaded
by the clergy, succeeded.
In short, Southern statesmen deemed the aid of the clergy in~aluable in urging secession, and held that without their aid in
leading on the church of the South, it co:ild never have been
acc6mplished. Among many testimonies to this affect we cite a
single one for illustration. The So~M~crn Prcsbytcrian, a weekly
religiousjournal, then and still published at the capital of South
Carolina, under date of April 20, 1861, argues this point elaborately. A communication appears, of that date, entitled,