North Branch democrat. [volume] (Tunkhannock, Pa.) 1854-1867, 1865-03-29
An old school Preacher.


shriekers" from this place, had not been
there, to have refuted the arguments and put
the DR.. down. His opinions sound little
copperheady. 1t must be remembered,
however, that be is not one of these
slater day saints" He will doubtless
suffer expulsion for daring to introduce such
old foggy bible doctrines into the church.
Mr.. President l presume that when the
put, no one will be permitted to give the rea-
sons for his vote; therefore now desire 10
state mine. When am called upon to vote
| shall say no. My reasons are these:
do not think that according to the teaching
Of Scripture. the simple relation subsisting
between master and q slave necessarily in
voIve sin. 2. / do not think the church
has any right to keep out Of, or exclude from
her communion any but wiful sinners 3.
Should be charged, then, as pro-slavery-
in favor of slavery as system-my reply is
| AIN Methodist of the old school, "as much
as ever opposed to the evils of slavery )" no
more and no less than our fathers were when
| became u member.
4. Should it be alleged that the times have
changed once "God winked at this
evil, but now commands all men every where
to repent and REFORM" answer: God never
winked at sin, but bore with sinners If the
relation necessarily involved sin we should
We should not bear with it. 5. The poit-
Ical status Of slavery in this country can
make no change i'll my moral views Of this
| question. view it now as | have always
done since | have seriously thought of il at
all. g. Should it be said that every demon
inatIon has right to make such terms of
membership as it pIeases, I answer: If we
were mere voluntary association this is
true. But Christ builds his own church,
and she has only to determine what is reveal
ed touching the fitness of a candidate fo
membership, and dare not exclude for any
cause but sin. 7. | could have voted for the
| iule as recommended by the minority of the
Committee on Slavery, at the late session of
General Conference, stating mhen the rela-
tion is not sinful. Should it be insisted that
such would be false legislation, and not ac
cording to Scripture, because the Bible SAYS
Thou shalt not kill, leaving it to the Ad-
mlnistralion to say when killing is sin; | |
answer. Our Lord, in quoting this law says:
Thou shalt do no MURDER" aud thus our
only guide explains itself. II the General |
Conference had said in foot-note or IN the |
chapter on slavery, that the proposed amend |
ment only forbids slavery when it is neces. |
sary; | could have voted for tile proposed |
change. This kind Of legislation is precisely |
what has been done by the National Con- |
gress in proposing to the State Legislature |
change in the Constitution OF the United |
States-that slavery shall be prohibited Eek
cept for crime" This is what our church |
has done in changing the General Rule on the |
use of Intoxicating liquors; it forbids ''drinh
ing them, unless in cases Of extreme neccss- |
ty-" There might have been legitimate leg
islation Of the same kind on slave holding. !
{. am aware it may be thought that the !
pro-slavery surroundings ofmy recent field Of
labor shaped my views, Perhaps so but |
think not. Would it be generous to say that
the political surroundings of our Bishops and |
Church and Conference, have shaped their |
views2 Certainly great change has taken |
place within few years. ain inclined 10
believe it would be more popular, where
have lived and labored for the last two years |
to vote for, than against the change. And l |
anu fully persuaded that now with these my
bre thren, whose favor cannot too highly
lar vote to say aye Than nay. But having
carefully examined to know, | shall fearessy
do what deem right. Believing, however,
that my vote will neither prevent the pa ssage
institution against which the church of my
| choice has ever given her testimony and
which now believe is tottering to its fall,
cast my vote from principle alone, and shall
say at the proper time-no.
Rev. P. Coombe was exceedingly sorry
| that any member Of the body was determine
ed to vote in favor of sav cry. He proceeded
at length to agle in favor of the passage of
the new rule
Rev. Dr. Hodgson followed.
He regretted the necessity "f differing from
his brethren; he had never been a factious
man he had usually been in the majority,
but never because it was the majority. He
dared to be when the time comes, in the mi
nority. Ii it were mere question of policy,
whether slavery shall be allowed in the NJ. Z.
Church or not it would be another question,
but it involves ques ton of doctrine.
That all slaveholding is sin has not been
the doctrine Of the NJ E. ChurA. Mr.. Coon.
be was the leader Of conservatism but now
he is the leader of the Abolitionists. We