Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1847-03-19

ing, out " so, MS intelligence Is NOT
The repentant pirate no more prcclaims to
the world by his continued connection with
Probity and worth, than those protesting an
ti-slavery churches which retain their con-
neciion with slaveholding bodies, proclaim
that men-stealers are worthy members Of the
church of ~Christ-lndeed we think the diff
ference is greatly in favor of the former. If
such ecclesiastical connection be wrong, as
ia a previous article we endeavored to show,
then like s!aveholding it should be immedi-
a'ely abandoned. No hope Of converting the
stakeholder should be an inducement to re-
main in such a position; and if individual
churches which are ani-sIavery by profession,
ave not enough of its life 10 enable them 10
withdraw, then the members who or, aboli-
tionists should leave them, and thus cease 10
be Tartakcrs in the sins Of others. We diff
fer from Iams . A.. ThoHas, and believe that
local churches, hoping to effect an Ultimate
separation between the siaveholding and nom
sIaveholding portions of the body with which
they are enthusiastically connected, can give
a better evidence Of an,i-slaveTy character
than by remaining in The body and in this
case the two extremes meet, for the slavehol-
ders will agree with us, that secession from
such a body, if done for the accomplishment
of an anti-slavery end, is rather better evil
dence of abOlitionism than the continuing Of
that connection.
It'll a somewhat remarkable fact, that most
Of hose who are ready 10 denounce Comeout-
ism in general, are equally ready to mako
at least one exception in its favor; though
not so remarkable hen we remember that
all the sects in this land owe their existence
to The very principle upon which anti-slavery
Comeouiism is based. For instance, the
early followers of Luther, Calvin and Melan-
thon were mostly Comeouters from the Ro-
mish church. Their defenders will not of
course condemn Comeoutism in that case, for
they say it was necessary in order 10 preserve
Christianity in its purity. In course of time
the corruptioHs in doctrine and in practice Of
the established church Ct England. became so
glaring, that these who dissenird were obliged
to be Comeoutels not only from the church but
from the land Of their nativity and this, the
descendants ofthe Puritans say, was necessary
in order to preserve Christianity in its purity.
BY and bye, The doctrines of the New England
Puritans became so Objectionable to many,
and their practices so far from what was deem
.
ed right, that individuals in connection with
them were forced to be Comeouters and
the Baptisis and Quakers now say that the
step was necessary in order 10 preserve Chris
lianity in its purity. In more recent days a
portion of the members of the PRESBYTERIAN
church believed it their duty to secede from
that connection, and the ObeIlinites will now
tell you that they did it in order to preserve
Christianity in its purity. Abolitionists also
believe it 10 be their duty to secede from a
corrupt church in order TO preserve Christian
ity in its Puriiy-they follow the example Of
the early Protestan,s, of the Puritans, of the
Baptists and Quakers, and of the Oberlinites,
and are condemned by each and all for so do
ing-the early Protestants speaking by their
defenders Of the l9th century. The Prof.
however. in his review has laid down a pro-
position-to which we design to refer here
after-which, without the writer intending it,
fully %justiies the anti-s!avery Comeouters.
We will now briefly refer to the three
points which we had not room to notice last
week, the first of which was, that a church
which gives or receives letters TO or from
churches which are in fellowship with slave
holding bodies, is pro-slavery.
No christian church ever grants a letter,
certifying 10 the good standing of The DEPART
ing member, and recommending him TO the
fellowship of any body, but one which it re-
CARDS christian in character. No christian
church ever receives Il person into member
ship on recommendation from a body which
it does not consider a christian body. No ar
gument is necessary 10 prove this, or to show
that by so doing it virtually endorses the
christianity Of The churches with which it ex-
changes such certificates Of character. Now
if a pro-slaveTy church is necessarily anti
christian, and a church which PROCESSES 10 be
anii-slavery endorses its claim 10 christianity
as well founded, does it not by that act de-
clare that its own anii-slavery christianity is
no better Than the pro-slavery christianity of
the former? We are unable to draw anv
other conclusion, for a church always places
its own character down as low as those whose
religion it endorses. If the man-thief is fell
lowshipped or recognized as a christian, then
man-stealing is not inconsistent with its IDEAS
OF religious duty-ifth the pro-s!avery professor,
then supporting slavery comes up to its STAN
dard of right. If church goes into bad COM
pany, if ii greets pro-sIavery churches as wor-
thy of its confidence ard fellowship, il has