The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1876-02-17
STILL MORE OF THE MUDBROOK
I ECCLESIASTICAL OUTRAGE" AN
OPEN LETTER ADDRESSED TO
REV j. HUMBERGER BY THEREH
L. M. KUHNS.
CANTON, o., Feb. 8, 1875.
Rev, j. Humberger, Canal Fulton, Ohio.

OhNAVNl S'i NOb' " AO'O'
Reu, j. Humbeger, Canal Fulton, Ohio:
DEAR SIR; On the 18th day of January
last, after the funeral of Miss Cora
Brougher, l was urged by number of
your congregation, not related at all to
the Brougher family, to publish an ex-
pose of your proceedings, but | positively
declined to do so. In the first place |
had no desire to become involved in
newspaper controversy with you, and
secondly, knew well that the transac-
tions of that day would soon gain public
ity without such publication, But sub
sequently friends of the family. who felt
greatly aggrieved by your conduct came
to me and expressed their determination
to publish the matter in our city papers,
and asked me to furnish them the facts,
as | might be able to recall them. In
compliance with this request l noted
down for them such as / could remem-
Der, and they had them published in the
Stark County Democrat of the 2lst ult.,
substantially as | furnished them, so that
whilst lam notresponsible for their publ
cation, am willing to be held RESPONSE
BILE for the substantial truth of the state
ments contained in that article. | make
this explanation to show you that |, at
least, have no inclination to hide behind
a non de plume" and under its cover make
statements which l would not be willing
to make over my own proper signature.
In your review of the article in ques-
ton, you virtually admit the truth of the
main facts there stated, but aim at di-
verting attention from them by some at
tempted witticisms over your lack of at
tention to me in the church, ETC., but
such game won't win. 1t will neither
answer as a substitute for any lack of
that christian courtesy which one gen.
tleman owes to another, nor weaken in
the least the force of stubborn and un-
answerable facts. Your sharp play upon
the words sect and insect, is very much
weakened and blunted by age. 1t is
found in a published sermon preached
by DR.. Harkey, before the General Synod
in Pittsburgh, about seventeen years ago
and has since been in such common use
as to render it very stale indeed by this
time.
You inquire, "When did our Lutheran
Church become a sectP" / will take the
Yankee method of answering this by in
quiring of you who makes such charge
against the Lutheran Church Certainly
it is not done in the article In question.
1t is there stated that a certain Synod
(the Joint Synod of Ohio), of which you
are member, is ultra-symboliCal and
most rigidly exclusive and seCtarian, and
what stronger proof of this could anyone
desire than that furnished by your ex.
elusive and sectarian conduct at Mud
brook on the 18th of January last, espe-
cially when taken in connection with the
closing remarks Of your article, viz That
youCould have no ecclesiastical fellowship
with me because l hold doctrine essen
italy different from that which your
church (the Joint Synod of Ohio) holds
and teaches, By the way, will you please
inform the public in your next article
what that different doctrine ISL:
Ii your article of last week i find a
number of other statements which sur
prised me very much indeed, and which,
in charity, must be attributed to the fact
that laboring under very great mental
excitement on the day of the funeral,
your memory of that days transactions
has proven treaCherous and unreliable.
Let me call your attention to few of
these. You give as your reason for not
reaching the house in time for the funer-
al, the fact that you missed the right
road" Of course we must accept this
statement in the absence of proof to the
contrary. But is it not strange that you
happened to miss the road on that
morning after travelling over the roads
in that locality for more than a year, and
especially 50 when the residence of Mr..
Brougher is so near one OF the main
roads lying between the churches which
you server Now is not this strange
circumstance Does it not seem so even
to YOU? Who would have thought Of at
tributing your delay to sTch cause as
this? Did it not seem much more likely,
in the light of what transpired afterward
that your delay was intentional, so as 10
avoid any conference with me or the
family until we arrived at the church,
when it would be too late for any change
in the programme, and where you could
conduct things your own way, without
any regard for the wishes and rights of
others But your explanation is that you
missed the right road" and of course we
must accept it under the conviction that
your mind was so occupied in perfecting
your plans for the day, that you became
lost to everything else, even to the road
you were to travel, and over which you
had so often travelled before.
Again, you say, "How much the family
desired K to preach, may be known from
the fact that some her minister had
been asked first, who, for some reasons
unknown to us, did not %tend." This
same statement you made to me at the
church and now you publish it to the
community, not as something reported
to you, but as fdct-not that the name of
some other minister had been mentioned
but that same other minister had been
"asked first"
Now, | have the positive assurance
of Mr.. Brougher and his famil !, and the
two young men who came after me, that
this statement is not true-that in con
sultin9 together about the matter, sever
al ministers were named but no one was
asked to come but myself.
''That we introduced ourself to X. is
also mistake, al some one else can ties.
tify." Why you should make this denial
l cannot conceive. Did you not come to
me as got out of my buggy2 Did you
not make yourself Known to me as the
pastor of that church and b"gin to talk
about the services of the day2 Surely
you have not forgotten those thinls SO
soon. Then why say that you did not
introduce yourself to me If you did not
who did ? We certainly got an introduc-
ton to each other that day, such as nei-
ther of us will soon forget. Nothird party
was present to do it, ofwhom l have any
recollection. 1 did not approach you,
but you came to me and spoke first
Now, if you did not introduce yourself
then pray who did it?
Again, you deny that you threatened
to use forcible means to prevent my
preaching in case l persisted in doing SO
that you only expressed your deter
mination to make a public declaration
kLak ..e.. ...o,,Il s..