The Grange advance., 1876-03-01

.-.u.-
Cssclusts. essns,s. !. = Z = saisxs s,s the
j U sss ssas dvls0ry Ce0ncll. & - ~
81. The plymouth Church Advisory Ccun.
clt concluded its session the evening Of
the 18th nth thereport Of the commit
zee pi nins, eiSin9 the 6ndings on the
seya qut 1tio11s submitte BY plymouth
Chuich. The session cornm1nced 6 5
o'clock, atWhich zine thu building was
nlled g lts utmost capacity, stools being
brought into use 5sin the ais.es. CAlla
!illes and red roses graced thefront Of
the platform: All of Beechcr's family
we're in church. and all the noteworthy
people OF the congregation, and Mr.. Hors-
tio y. King and Rev. MIR. Halliday were
busy procuring front seats for dis.
tinguished visitors.
Shortly before o'clock Mr.. Beecher
ascended the platform, and in = few re.
marks urged that the findings of the
committee should be received without
outward manifestations of approval or
dissent, but with grateful hearts with
thankfulness and silence before God.
The report Of the council was read Tn
relation to the first two questions the 70.
port says, among other things. that the
case may occur that a member shon;S
openly and notoriously abandon all COM
munioR with the church, and also be
charged with = scandalous offense either
by public rumor or by specific allega.
tions: in such case the church NAV. to
avoid greater scandal, use wise discre-
ton in relation to the offense, in which it
shall separate him from its fellowship.
and discharge itself from all further re-.
sponsibility for his conduct asd charac.
| ter
In respect to rule No. 7 of Plymouth
church, we suggest that it is deficient in
not providing that notice should be given,
hen practicable, in the ordinary prac.
tice Of the church. The council, so far
as advised, find nothing to condemn We
are gratitied to learn that measures are
IN progress to effect change in the
phraseology of this and other rules, and
to reorganize and enforce distinctly the
prlnclplc amrmed.
The church asks the council what
course it ought to adopt in respect to five
classes of members. TO the first fonr
the council would make the following re-
ply. The reasons supposed to be given
by the persons described, for deliberate
and permanent absence from services and
meetings of the church, without letters of
dismissal, are in our opinion entirely in.
valid, schismatic and unchristian. The
example is destructive of all church or.
ganization. If a member is so far dissat.
lstied with the decision of the church that
he cannot share in its friendship, he
should at once ask for dismission, in an
orderly way. If he feels bound to remain
in fellowship, for the purpose of bringing
Its members to better mind, he
should show himself loyal to its author.
lty, as an essential condition of prcsecu-
ting the work to which he may think his
Master has called him. The conceit that
he may protest more effectually against
the supposed errors Of the church by
withdrawing partially from it's fellowship.
we regard as emincntly dangerous and
disorganizing.
The fifth case is as follows: s5th
Members who are generally reported and
believed to have charges or insinuations
of gross immortality against other mem.
bers Of the church, and who decline either
to affirm or deny the truth of such re-
ports or of such charges, when properly
questioned by suitable brethren, for the
sake of the purity and peace of the
! church,
The report says the 5th case stands by
itself, and admits Of only one possible
| answer. A person who is convicted of
the offenses described, and can find no
reasonable explanation Of his conduct,
ought, II he persists, to be cast out from
the fellowship of the church. While we
assert these principles, we would advise
any church that in time of excitement
it should use great forbearance with per.
sons who have Withdrawn themselves
from its fellowship under a mistaken the
ory Of their rights and duties as members
of the church of Christ.
To the fourth question the council re-.
ply as folloAs: The church is a tribunal
appointed by Christ for the investigation
of offenses of its members. A mutual
council cannot, in the nature of the case,
exist unless there are two parties, one of
which is aggressive. In the case sup.
posed, the council cannot properly be
called unless the aggrieved person has
submitted specific charges against the
pastor and can furnish prim0, facie evi.
dence that he can make them good. We
utterly and emphatically repudiate the
doctrine that because a church member