USA > South Carolina > History of the Presbyterian Church in South Carolina, Vol. II pt 1 > Part 16
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37
" Resolved, That to avoid all causes of discord or doubt on this point, so important to good order and harmony among the members of every congregation : WE do hereby agree, make known, and proclaim, that the subscribers hereto do consider themselves as associated in a congregation of THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH."
At this meeting the following persons were elected a Building Committee, and the plan, size, and materials of the intended church were submitted to them in connection with the Board of Trustees: John Murray, David Reid, Robert Cresswell, Oswell Eve, and Ferdinand Phinizy.
The work of obtaining subscriptions to the church stock was prosecuted with great energy, and in a very short time a sufficient amount was obtained to warrant the commencement of its erection. The plan of the building was furnished by Mr. Robert Mills, of Philadelphia, and, with a few slight modifications, was adopted by the Building Committee and Board of Trustees. The edifice as erected is about one hun- dred by seventy feet in size, and will seat a congregation of eleven hundred persons.
157
1800-1810.]
REV. JOHN SPRINGER.
The corner stone was laid July 4th, 1809, by John Murray, M. D., Chairman of the Building Committee, in the presence of the Board of Trustees and subscribers, the Intendant and members of the City Council, trustees of Richmond Academy, officers and soldiers of the county militia, and a large assem- bly of the citizens generally. (Brief hist. of the Pres. Ch. in Augusta, Ga., by Rev. E. P. Rogers. Charleston, S. C., IS51.)
As early however as 1773 applications for supplies were sent up from St. Paul's parish In Georgia, to the Synod of New York and Philadelphia, and Mr. Caleb Wallace, a candi- date, was directed to "preach there some time." (Minutes p. 448.) So that although St. Paul's was received under the care of Hopewell in 1806, there was a St. Paul's petitioning for supplies 23 years before the Presbytery of Hopewell ex- isted. (Minutes of Synod of New York and Philadelphia, p. 448.)
A name long remembered in Georgia was that of John Springer. He and J. W. Stephenson (afterwards D. D.), par nobile fratrum, were licensed by the Presbytery of South Carolina on the 18th of October, 1788, and John Springer was ordained at an intermediate session of that Presbytery held at Washington, Ga., on the 21st of July, 1790.
Rev. John Springer was the first Presbyterian minister, says the Rev. John S. Wilson, D. D., that was ordained south of the Savannah River. He was ordained by the Presbytery of South Carolina, in the town of Washington. No house of worship existed in the place at that time, and consequently the ordination service was performed under the shade of a large tulip or poplar tree, standing on the grounds belonging to A. L. Alexander, Esq. He was installed Pastor of Smyrna congregation, whose house of worship stood some three miles southeast of Washington, on the Augusta road. Mr. Springer died in 1798. Some of his descendants still reside in this State.
The churches northeast of the water of Broad River in their course to the ocean continued under the jurisdiction of the First Presbytery of South Carolina until the year 1810. In the year preceding a new Presbytery by the name of Harmony was erected by the Synod of the Carolinas, embracing the low country in South Carolina and Georgia. This arrangement confined the Territory of the First Presbytery of South Carolina to the Districts of Lancaster, York, Chester, Fairfield and part of Kershaw. But in the year 1810 the Presbytery was dissolved and its members and churches. except those located in Fairfield and Kershaw Districts, were added to the Presbytery of Coneord. This is
158
WM. C. DAVIS.
[1800-1810.
relating in this decade what occurred in the beginning of the next. But that which led to the dissolution of this Presbytery was the contro- versy and vexations proceedings which were prodneed in dealing with the Rev. William C. Davis, on account of the peenliarities deemed hereti- cal, introduced and advocated by him. This was a season of sore afflic- tion to the Church, and wonnds were inflicted on this part of our Zion which remained to quite a late period unhealed. A schism was produced and a considerable number of some of our churches were withdrawn from our communion. Mr. Davis had been received as a member in 1806. Prior to his reception he had commenced the propagation of his peculiarities ; and on his admission he was located at Bullock's Creek and Salem, lately separa ed from Bullock's Creek By this location it became convenient for him to associate with the brethren of the Second Presbytery of South Carolina. With them he frequently interchanged ministerial labors. His departure from some of our Confessions of Faith was perceived, and animadverted on in their social interviews. Mr. Davis was extremely tenacious of what he seemed to regard as new discoveries, though most, if not all of them, had, in the progress of the Church, been broached, advocated, exploded, died away, and had been forgotten. And when he was opposed in argument, he, possess ng no inconsiderable ingenuity and shrewdness, warded off the force of their reasonings, and was carried step by step until his departure from the received doctrines of the Confession of faith was, regarded so objection- able as to call for the action of the judicatories of the church. But as Mr. Davis had propagated his views mostly without the territorial limits of the First Presbytery of South Carolina, of which he was a mem- ber, and to which he was amenable, its members for the most part, were not so fully apprized of the character of the peculiarities he advo- cated. and the Presbytery felt somewhat at a loss what attention should be paid to them. However. a memorial under date of Sept. Ist, 1807, was prepared and sent up to the Synod of the Carolinas by the Second Presbytery of South Carolina, complaining of what they deemed inat- tention in his Presbytery to the erroneous doctrines which Mr. Davis inculcated in his public discourses. In consequence of this memorial the Synod judged it to be their duty to give special direction to the First Presbytery of South Carolina to take the case of Mr Davis under consideration, and to proceed in it as duty and the discipline of the Church demanded. At their sessions in March, 1808, the First Presby- tery of South Carolina passed an order requiring Mr. Davis, not then present, to appear at their next session, that a conference might be held with him in relation to the doctrines contained in the memorial sent up to the Synod, and forwarded to the Presbytery. Accordingly he appeared at the meeting of Presbytery in October 1808 At this meet- ing he made such explanations in regard to the doctrines charged against him, in the aforesaid memorial, that the opinion prevailed that it was not expedient, at that time, to table a charge against Mr. Davis on account of those doctrines. It was, however, proposed and agreed to to send up to Synood the following question : "Whether the holding any. and what doctrines, apparently repugnant to the letter of the con- fession, will justify a Presbytery in calling a member to public trial ?" In giving the subject this direction there was far from being that har- mony of opinion desirable in Ecclesiastical proceedings. This resulted in some measure from the sympathy that was felt by some of the mem- bers for the man, if not for the opinions he advocated. This state of feeling was manifested by a few of the members of the Presbytery
159
WM. C. DAVIS.
1800-1810.]
during the whole course of the controversy, which created no incon- siderable degree of embarrassment both to the Presbytery, and to the Synod to which it was carried np. When the above query was laid be- fore the Synod, it failed as well it might, to give satisfaction Upon which the Synod passed an order requiring the First and Second Pres- byteries of South Carolina to. meet forthwith the Second to prepare and table charges against Mr. Davis ; and the First Presbytery to receive and adopt measures to dispose of the case as required by the discipline of the Church Agreeably to the direction given by Synod the two Presbyteries convened. Charges were drawn up and tabled before the First Presbytery, in behalf of the Second Presbytery, embracing the following items, viz. : that Mr. Davis teaches.
1. That what has been termed the passive obedience of Christ, is all that the law of God can or does require in order to the justification of the believer : and that his active obedience is not imputed.
2. That saving faith precedes regeneration, and has nothing holy in its nature, as to its first act
3. That the Divine being is bound by his own law, or in other words by the moral law.
4. That Adam was never bound to keep the moral law, as the federal head, or representative of his posterity ; or in other words, that the moral law made no part of the condition of the Covenant of works.
These and a few other points Mr. Davis industriously taught wherever he was called to preach the Gospel, both amongst the people of his charge, and in neighboring congregations. The First Presbytery of South Carolina held a meeting, by order of Synod, at Bullock's Creek Church, which was a part of his pastoral charge, in the November fol- lowing At this meeting Mr. Davis appeared ; and when his case was under consideration. and the Presbytery were about to proceed agree- abiy to the instructions of the Synod, it was found on inquiry that there was no member of the Second Presbytery present, anthorized to act as prosecutor in the case, Mr. Davis discovered that the record of the Synod in the case was not present, and in opposition to the communi- cation made by a member as to the nature of the record, he gave a con- tradictory statement of its purport, and refused to answer to the charges exhibited against him by the Second Presbytery of South Carolina, in conformity with the instructions of the Synod in the case In conse- quence of this state of things, the Presbytery was reduced to the dilem- ma, either to adjourn to another time, or to take up and act on the case in somewhat of a different form. This course being fixed on, with the consent of the accused. the Presbytery proceeded immediately to hear and consider the case. Mr. Davis admitted the relevancy of the charges tabled against him, with certain modifications and explanations. His explanations, as extracted at the time of trial from his written defense, are as follows, viz :
In regard to the first item, he explained by stating, "By the active obedience of Christ; I mean his perfeet obedience to the precepts of the moral law, exclusive of the sufferings which he endured in obeying the penalty of the law, by way of atonement, which last I mean by his pas- sive obedience. Therefore, although I believe and maintain that the active obedience of Christ is absolutely necessary to the salvation of a sinner, not only as an example, but also to render the atonement valid
I
160
WM. C. DAVIS.
[1800-1810.
and acceptable in the sight of God, without which it would not be im- puted, nor efficacions if it could; yet this active obedience is not imputed to the believer for justification ; but the passive obedience only."
In regard to the 2d item he explained " Although I affirm the neces- sity of regeneration as a very principal part of our salvation, and although I argue not as to time excepting a mere mathematical differ- ence betwixt the cause and effect, and although I acknowledge that the exercise of the faith of a believer, after he is united to Christ, is subse- quent to regeneration, and consequently may be holy ; yet the first act of saving faith which unites to Christ, I atfirm to be previous to regen- eration, and consequently in its nature, although it is an act of obedi- ence, yet it is not a holy conformity, or a holy obedience to the moral law, and consequently cannot be a holy act."
In regard to the 3d item he explained, "In speaking of the Divine Being we are obliged to speak after the manner of men, for want of language capable to reach the sublime state of our Glorious God. And inasmuch as God himself uses such language to represent himself to His creatures, I hope no advantage wid or can be taken of me when I use the words bound, obligated, necessary, &c., in this acknowledgment, and defence, as I do not intend to give the idea of any inferiority or depen- dance which would be in any degree derogatory to the infinite perfer- tion of the Deity Therefore I observe that the moral law, in its radical principles, is the only standard of moral perfection and glory, and is consequently the rule of moral action for all intelligent beings; and it is impossible for any rational being to possess moral excellence or glory but in conformity to this law. I don't mean the ten commandments or any class of precepts founded on the moral law, so modified as to suit the peculiar circumstances of any particular class of beings ; but the radical principles of justice and equity which is the foundation of all moral laws. In this view of the matter, I affirm that God is bound by the moral law, so that his moral perfection and glory is in consequence of perfect conformity to this law, as suited to the state of the Divine Being, and it would be impossible, otherwise, for God to be morally ex- cellent or glorious."
In regard to the 4th item he explained : "I acknowledge that Adam as well as all intelligent creatures, was and forever will be, bound by the moral law, as the only infallible rule of moral action ; and that every transgression of it. did, does and will ineur guilt. But I deny that the moral law was, or could be the condition of the Covenant of works, which Adam had to fulfil for himself and for his posterity. And although the moral law had an immediate consequential connection with the condition of the Covenant, either as to the keeping or break- ing said Covenant, yet it is not the guilt of transgressing the law that is imputed to Adam's posterity, but only the guilt of eating the forbidden fruit."
To these explanations Mr. Davis added a protracted defence. Not- withstanding this the Presbytery entered upon record a judgment con- demning his views as errors contrary to the Confession of Faith and the word of God, yet they regarded the errors as not being of such a nature as to strike at the vitals of religion, and therefore as not inferring suspension or deposition, as held by Mr Davis. Yet they were deci- dedly of opinion that Mr. Davis had acted with some degree of impru- dence in espousing and propagating these opinions without consulting with his brethren and the judicators of the Church.
161
WM. C. DAVIS.
1800-1810.]
The resolutions adopted by them were as follows :
"Resolved, Ist. That the Rev. William C. Davis is guilty of propagating the doctrines which are specified in the several numbers of the charge exhibited against him by the Second Presbytery of South Carolina, agreeably to his own confes- sion and explanation.
" 2d. That God alone is Lord of the conscience and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men, which are in any thing contrary to His word or beside it in matters of faith or worship," therefore Presbytery consider the rights of private judgment in all matters that respect reli- gion as universal and inalienable.
" 3d. That truth is essentially necessary in order to goodness, and the great touchstone of truth is its tendency to promote holiness, according to our . Saviour's rule, "by their fruits shall ye know them," and that no opinion can be either more absurd or more pernicious than that which brings truth and falsehood upon a level, and represents it as of no consequence what a man's opinions are. On the con- trary, Presbytery are persuaded that there is an inseparable connection between faith and practice, truth and duty ; other- wise it would be of no consequence either to discover truth or to embrace it.
" 4th. That while under the conviction of the above prin- ciple they think it necessary to make effectual provision that all who are teachers in the Church be sound in the faith ; they also believe that there are truths and forms with respect to which men of good characters and principles may and do differ. And in all these they think it the duty both of private Christians and societies to exereise mutual forbearance towards each other.
" 5th. That under the conviction of these truths and agreeably to the constitution of the Church, Presbytery feel themselves at liberty to exercise the dictates of their own con- sciences in passing decisions respecting the opinions or senti- ments of any of their brethren, agreeably to the holy scriptures which are the only rule of faith and manners, and that no church judicatory ought to pretend to make laws to bind the consciences in virtue of their own authority, and that all these decisions should be founded on the revealed will of God.
11
162
WM. C. DAVIS.
[1800-1810.
".6th. That agreeably to the constitution of this church, though heresy and solicism may be of such a nature as to infer deposition, yet errors are to be carefully considered whether they strike at the vitals of religion or are likely to do much hurt.
" 7th. That though the doctrines stated in the charge are, in the opinion of this Presbytery, contrary to the word of God and the Confession of Faith, yet as the constitution of this church has declared that there are errors of such a nature as do not strike at the vitals of religion, Presbytery do humbly conceive that said doctrines are of this nature, and therefore do not infer suspension or deposition as they are held by Mr. Davis, yet Presbytery are decidedly of opinion that Mr. Davis has acted with some degree of imprudence in espous- ing and propogating those opinions without consulting his brethren and the higher judicatories of the church, as the preaching such doctrines to the vulgar at large has a tendency to introduce division in the Church and to excite a distrust in the minds of Christians with respect to a stability in the doc- trines of religion."
Although this judgment was recorded, no censure was inflicted, no admonition was given nor any restraint imposed on him as to the pro- pagation of his doctrine.
When the records of the Presbytery in this case were presented to Synod for review, a general dissatisfaction at the proceedings of the Presbytery prevailed, as not meeting the instructions and the expecta- tions of the Synod. Upon which the Presbytery was called upon to answer why they had not conformed to the instructions given at the preceeding session, which being complied with, the absence of the prosecuting body in person or by representatives, and the discrepance of statement which had occurred at the November meeting was com- municated by the Presbytery. as the ground of their procedure in this case. Whereupon the prominent actors in this case at the former meet- ing of the Synod, and then present, gave a decided and unequivocal ex- pression of their convictions that the ground taken by the accused was unwarranted and without foundation.
The Synod was dissatisfied with the course pursued. It did not in their view conform with their directions of the last year, nor meet the exigencies of the case. They resolved to take the case under consideration from the report of their Committee on Review, and were proceeding to an investiga- tion and trial when Mr. Davis protested and appealed to the General Assembly. To this body the Synod themselves finally remitted the case and sent up also an overture respect-
163
WM. C. DAVIS.
1800-1810.]
ing the book Mr. Davis had published, denominated "The Gospel Plan," in which his sentiments were expressed at large. The further action of the church courts in this vexa- tious case, and the sequel of this attempted act of discipline for opinions deemed heretical by the church, belong to the history of the next decade. It should be stated, however, that before the Synod proceeded to a trial of the case they" ordered the First Presbytery to " withdraw and either issue the case in a manner more agreeable to the order of Synod in our last, or refer it to this Synod." The Presbytery accord- ingly met during the sittings of Synod, and resolved "that they cannot go into the measure recommended by Synod in said order, inasmuch as it would be, in their opinion, nullify- ing their former judgment, which they cannot do upon con- stitutional grounds."
There were several irregularities in these proceedings, of which Mr. Davis, in his defence, subsequently written, com- plains. And the Rev. J. R. Davies in his historical sketch of those transactions from which we have largely drawn, says that "for the want of experience some errors were fallen into which proved highly embarrassing and doubtless contributed to the failure of the process against Mr. Davis."
These irregularities however have nothing to do with the question whether the newly adopted opinions of Mr. Davis were consonant with the Confession of Faith, which at his ordination he accepted, and contrary to which he might not, as a minister of the Presbyterian Church, teach. For this he and all other ministers of this church had adopted as embra- cing the system of doctrines contained in the Scriptures.
The minutes adopted by the Synod of the Carolinas was as follows :
" The Synod of the Carolinas after a lengthy and serious consideration of the relation in which the Rev. William C. Davis and the churches in our bounds at present stand, came to the following resolution :
" That the members of this Synod are firmly attached to the system of doctrine and discipline of the Presbyterian Church of the United States of America; that they highly disapprove of the doctrines complained of in the charges exhibited against the said Mr. Davis; that a Committee be appointed, consisting of the Rev. James McRee, Samuel C. Caldwell, John Robinson and John M. Wilson, to meet at
164
HARMONY PRESBYTERY. [1800-1810.
Poplar Tent on the second Wednesday of November next, to prepare a pastoral letter to be addressed to our churches, stating a brief history of the business, and testifying a decided disapprobation of the doctrines alluded to in the charges exhibited by the Second Presbytery of South Carolina against the Rev. William C. Davis, and that this letter contains a solemn caution to our churches against being seduced from the form of sound words, which hath been received and adopted as the standard of their faith and practice, next in authority to the love of God."
" On request, the Synod of the Carolinas did at their ses- sions at Poplar Tent, North Carolina, in October 10th, 1809, constitute a Presbytery out of the territory of the First and Second Presbyteries and the Presbytery ot Hopewell, to be known by the name of Harmony, whose boundary should begin on the sea coast, following the divisional line of North and South Carolina till it strikes Lynch's Creek, thence down said creek to Evan's Ferry, thence to Camden, thence to Augusta, thence in a direction nearly south (including St. Mary's), and which should consist of the following ministers, viz : Of the First Presbytery of South Carolina-Rev. George G. McWhorter, Andrew Flinn and John Cousar; and of the Presbyter of Hopewell, the Rev. John R. Thompson ; that they should hold their first meeting in Charleston on the first Wednesday in March, 1810, the Rev. Andrew Flinn, or in case of his absence, the oldest minister present to open the meeting and preside until a Moderator be chosen.
EXHIBIT OF THE TWO PRESBYTERIES.
It will be remembered that the boundaries of the Pres- byteries had been changed at the close of the preceding century. In October 3Ist, 1799, the Presbytery of South Carolina then existing, petitioned the Synod of the Carolinas, that, as a matter of convenience, it might be divided, and the Broad River as it passes through the State of South Carolina should be the line of division, that the members on the north- east side of this line should be constituted a Presbytery. The First Presbytery of South Carolina was to meet at Bullock's Creek on the first Friday of February, 1800, the Rev. Joseph Alexander to preside, or the senior member in his absence. This accordingly was done. The First Presbytery of South
165
1800-1810.1 FIRST PRESBYTERY OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
Carolina was organized at Bullock's Creek (alias Dan) on the 7th of February, 1800.
The Ministers and Churches, according to this division, were as follows :
Ministers.
Congregations.
The Rev. JOSEPH ALEXANDER. Bullock's Dan.
ROBERT MCCULLOCHI. Catholic and Purity.
JAMES W. STEPHENSON Indian Town and Williamsburgh.
JOHN BROWN. Waxhaw and Unity.
ROBERT B WALKER Bethesda.
DAVID E. DUNLAP Columbia.
SAMUEL W. YONGUE Lebanon and Mt. Olivet.
JOHN FOSTER
Salem.
GEORGE G. MCWHORTER
Bethel and Beersheba.
JOIIN B. DAVIES Fishing Creek and Richardson."
Licentiates.
Vacancies.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.