The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1876-02-17

Il mlRnJ nave COIlbllefeu III very ulHoH-
tlemanly on your part, would have been
no special barrier in the way of my
preaching. never asked or intended
that you should be responsible for any
utterance of mine, and | think the con-
gregation would have had enough good
sense to know that without you telling
them. No, no, Sir, this was not what
you said to me. 1t may be that you in
tended to say just what you have ex-
pressed, and in your excitement spoke
differently from what you intended, but
certainly you said that whatever preach
ing was done there that day you intend
ed to do yourself, and that if persisted
in my determination topreach, you would
have to prevent it, if necessary, by the
use of forcible means; to which | re-
piled that you would be saved that
trouble, as had no intention OF forcing
myself into your pulpit This ended our
conversation for the time, and you hast
ened into the church and took your place
at the altar without paying any further
attention to me.
AS to the occurrences within the
church, l need not say anything, as the
people can form their own judgment Of the
propriety of what was said and done
there. But with reference to these things
you again betray very treacherous
memory indeed, especially when you de-
ny the statement that no family had a
right to invite another minister to attend
and participate in the services of such
an occasion. If you had merely said that
they had no right to "set their pastor
aside and choose another new pastor" for
the occasion, it would have been with
out any force in this case, for nothing
of the kind was done or attempted You
were not set aside at all, you were want
ed to preach and conduct the burial SER
vices, as pastor of the congregation, and
l was only invited to make an address,
or preach short sermon at the same
time.
The very nice sentence which you have
written in your newspaper article about
the administration of the Holy Spirit,
through the ordinance of baptism, may
have been what you intended to say ard
what you would have said, when less ex-
cited, but / must insist that it was not
the language used on that day.
You said that after all was over you
did not come and offer any az ology to
me, or desire me to offer sny to the
family. Well, this is very much like the
matter of the introduction. Possibly we
don't understand the words introduction
and apology in the same way. Quite
likely this is the case. You speak of my
insisting on going back to the house
Now, you must certainly know that this
is calculated to make wrong impression
intended to go and you seemed to know
it and asked me to speak to the family
about their duties to you as their pastor
Finally, you say you could never con-
sent to have any ecclesiastical. fellowship
with me, because | had doctrine essen.
TALLY different from yours. Did not
charge you with this that day when you
tried to make me believe that this was g
special and peculiar case, and did you
not deny it and assure me that under or
dinary circumstances you would not OBJ
ject to my officiating with you? Please
be more careful in yOurmeXt communica
ton and do not allow treaCherous mem
ory to lead you into so many mistakes anC
contradictions, Very respectfully,
l.. NJ. KUHNs.