Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1846-01-16

MY fTlenu argues Ulat tne TACT Ol INC L Iichus
falling to carry out its principles, is a
reason why we should not disown it. If so
| reply, then certainly, the fact Of a member
immorally, is a reason why the socie-
ty should not disown him!
A b c and d form themselves into a re-
ligious society. They declare that the Lord
has gathered them a people to himself-that
if any of them violate christian principles it
is the indispensable duty of the others to treat
with him, and if he cannot be speedily re-
claimed, to cast him off from their connec-
ton and communion, and treat him as a shea
then man and a publican" After having es-
tablished themselves upon these principles
and publishing them to the world, D is known
to be guilty of a slight departure from prin-
ciple. He is treated with, refuses to give ev-
society. At the time d is disowned, G is
known to be guilty Of conduct far more GRIM
inal, and A and b, still protesting the same
princiPles-occupying the same position in
the association and before the world--refuse
to treat with c., but continue precisely the
same connection with him that they did be-
fore he became criminal. Are not 4 and B
implicated with c in guilt If they are not
l am morally blind.
Again, G, though he continues his immor-
al practices, claims to be divinely inspired to
IF sniritual tbinrs 10 ,nd II -rLo,
listen to his words, and declare that they be-
lieve him divinely appointed to impart spir-
itual instruction. G goes on communicating
to A and B what he calls inspired doctrines.
many of which B begins to believe are erro-
noous, and unchristian. They meet together
from time to time, and declare among other
things that they believe G in the communion
tons which he makes to them sis careful to
wait for divine ability" to which B, though
reluctantly submits. | ask again are not a
A and B implicated to the last possible de-
gree, in C's guilt. No one can doubt it.
But B is dissatisfied with G, he believes him
to be far worse than d, whom he believed it
their indispensable duty" to disown. Eut
he cannot disuwn c for 4 unites with him,
and they together carry on the society, and
profess to be living up to christian princi-
plies. What then can B dol He has failed
to make them sensible of their error. Is there
any possible course for him, but to disown
A and c.. There can be no alternative, so
long as he believes in the principles upon
which they united together. Aud EVENT. he
should get to doubling these principles, still
there would be no alternative but to leave
the connection, for by retaining it he occu-
pies a false position, and uphoIds principles
which he believes to be wrong.
The above is a fair illustration of the prin-
ciples, professions and position of the society
of Friends. B. B. D. will not, l am persua-
ded, doubt its applicability. To doubt that
part of it which refers to the professions, and
regulations of the society, would be to declare
that the Ohio Yearly Meeting of 1874,
which revised the Discipline as we'll as all
other Yearly Meetings have been guilty of hy-
pocracy and falsehood---that nearly every
publication authorised by Friends, and nearly
every sermon preached at their meetings,
having any reference to their principles, con-
tain positive falsehoods wilfully uttered; that
much that my friend has recorded as clerk of
Ohio Yearly Meeting, and other meetings, of
the doings Of the society, is utterly void, eth
er of meaning or truth.
About the whole difference between my
friend and myself, if l mistake not, is, that
he is talking of what religious societies ought
10 be, while I am talking Of what they are.
He continues in them because they ought 10
be good leave them because they are cor
rupt.
d. B d. it seems to me occupies precisely
the same position by his connection with the
society of Friends, that B does to A and c.,
in the illustration above. B. B. D. spppos-
es that the disownment Of a member by
Friends; is nothing more than an expression
of d~isapbrobation of a wrong. Whatever dis
ownment may be considered by my friend, it
is at any rate, adopted by Friends as the on
ly proper treatment of ir%reclaimable offenders.
l believe myself, that it is designed as an ex-
preston of diapprobation, full and complete;
and that it is the only way in which disap-
probation can be fully expressed in an organ
which processes to do every thing in
the unity-to unite in all its operations, and
is in other respects similar to the society of
Friends. Nothing short of a complete separ-
alton can under such circumstance exoner-
ate the innocent from the responsibility they in