Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1846-10-09

(2) "Thr comniuce are no, prepared to |,
report in f.vor of Withholding fellowship
from LEGAL churches, on the ground Of their
sustaining ecclesiastical relations to bodies
that do not bear oprn and faithful testimony
against slavery-the local churches giving at
tie same tiur every suitable evidence Of
their own hostility to slavery"
10Y 'rhe committee ara not prepared to
report against extending the ordinary courte-
sizes Of ministerial fellowship 10 ministers
who ste themselves outsp ken abolitioni els,
because they are enthusiastically connected
with bodies TINT d. not bear pen, and iaitl-
ful testimony against slavery, or brc ,usp
thy preach - churches e tho slno charac-
ter"
This tho rcm. submit nnotcon.istently
he done 80 long ~ rs it is i question in dis.
put" among homes, men, whether the %rtilin-
ing &C such %reittion, il not the bost means OF
exciting m ahti-Slavsry Influence. and (2) AZ
long, os il ia doubtful. whether the rell'ion
being admitted T. he q wrong onr, the indi.
viJu,l sustaining it IVA, light on tn" suo.
jcct."
the com. believe tina, the Questions here
in involved are unsettled, aud therefore call
for 6jscu>,i0n, rather than for protrripiive ac-
ton; ard that it wou'd be too hlsry t, with.
hold fellowship in those cases, for this is a
MEASURE, hich presupposes that The prinri-
Pir' involved are no longer honestly disputed
and also that the persd,is concerned are duly
en'ighterpd in regard to them"
TIE above report was acted upon, section
by section. and adopted, " 18th but thror dis
srrting votes. or those dissenting. two
nithdrcw at the nest meeting Of the church.
Whether or not the present position of this
church, frees it from all participation in the
sin Of slivoholding, is a question on which
there is difference Of opinion. Bnt does it
not yet stand a strong pillar ofthlt Dulwatk.
in, and behind which slavery ''livrs and
moves and has its beins''-and without
which it could not survive a single day -
Would to heaven that it did not,--that it
war Groe from all fellowship with the I'M
fruitful works Of dRhness.'
Bat can tint church b. guilt'oss, which
continues TO rive to, and receive letters from
churches which are not only in fall fellow
shir with, hat made up in part of slavehol-
ders! Yet the church in Ohcrlin does this!
Can tn, church be slii to have washed
its hands in innccenov, rel tive TO the slave,
xrhini, pxtaptS tio r;,l, had ,F c,IIa.-.L;..
10 ,hoso ministers and churches who 60 up
to the Geparl Assembly aud sit around its
communal table with men-thieyes1 Yet
the church in Oh"rlin dors this!
How SiraAge that that c,n he though,
''suitabie eYid-nce of hostility to Slavery
which is Consistent with f,llowstipping the
apnlogist { r s,ovcry-,ei 50 il Ia!
How slrang' lhir discussion, and lab red
orGunent, should he 'hnu al nccess nv TO
entte N" question. whether or not. he can b.
a christi n, wh, without a word Of rebuke.
en- see the mother robbed Of the blhe of her
bosoni. while nothing Of the kidd is necess =
~ to prove him = sinner, who merely likes
a lamb from the fold; yet so it ia!
The friends of tho slave had a rinht 10 ex.
pct different things of the church in Ober-
lin, h IN on account Of lis professions, and
the high and hoy ground, 1t has actually tl-
ken relative to the reforms in general. With
pain and surprise therefore, will they see,
that this church (~hltrvPrit may think gift.
SELF does in reality form a link in the chain
which not oo'y bl,ls down, bat wears deep