New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1859-10-05
THE CONTROVERSY IN THE METHOD
IST EPISCOPAL CHURCH..

To ~ EdifO, If Ths NJ T. TvisssA
SIR: Your candor will allow few remarks ia reply
to grave personal Interpretations, made BY your
correspondent Of Saturday. The controversy alluded
TO by him was opened for "free discussion" in 7Ae
Christian Advocate and Journal soon after the last
General Conference Of the N. 4. Church, and was
continued for more than year, when by the general
demand of the readers of the paper il was suspended
with the promise that il should be opened again, for
free review, at suitable time before the coming Gen.
eral Conference. This promise has been fully accom-
plished The course Of editorials attacked By your
correspondent were given, with everything written
against them. from week to week; and, after they
were Concluded replies to them were ALEC inserted for
some weeks. The editorials were then put ioto
pamphlet and the controversy closed il WAS deemed
exhausted, and general demand made, especially
by the lay patrons of the paper for the conclusion OF
the discussion. The pamphlet was sent ont with an
express declaration the preface that as the contro-
very had been thorougly prosecuted the author Of
the publication would leave to stand on It's ovn mei-
its and would not resume the dispute ey replies 70 e
tacks nsde upon the pamphlet. This pledge sss made
for the peace of the denomination and az the panphes
wasthorouphly pacific and from discord aud
especially from dlsunion, 1t was hoped that rephes
we're considered necessary they would be male IN its
own form and with its own calm temper MOI ttn
these things cere done, and The pamphlet pas found 20
be ererttng important influence, did your cor
RESPONDENT demand the reopensag Of me coafrorersym
Tie Adrocate How far it sccords with the "smenl-
ties of literature" or the courtesy proper between
controvereass, not to say gentlemen, for him 10 o.
nand resumption OF the dispute under such oir,um
stances, mus. leave 10 the consideration oi your
readers.
him was declined by the editor without examination"
No article submitted, but only proposition to re.
ply 10 The pamphlet; aud the reasons above stated
were alone given for declining IT.
T. ;a fvpa hat ha al
is compelled to hear what DR.. Stevens Is pleased TO
"ssy without the privilege of an answer Toe whole
" audience knows that the entire SUBJECT was open
for months fer free discussion and was freely discussed
till the audience itself was wsaied out with il, and
demanded it's conclusion.
The attempt of your correspondent to represent Inc
Adrocdte the pamphlet as threatening disunon,
utterly Incorrect as the resders of both know. They
cited threats of the kind from both extreme parties,
and demonstrated against both. At the time tae pam
phle was issued il Is well known tina. one OF the organs
ofhe party represented by your correspondent declared
that II what is admitted by the opposite party ~
constitutional way Of eiecting the proposed change
should not be successful, then course which 10 be-
Deyed 10 be unconstitutional should be pursued let
"tho consequence be what Il may and tbst tms
alleged unconstitutional act rends the churches and
" ConfereI ces 60 much the better Since the publ
cation of the articles OF The Adrocafe lwhetner oy
their influence no this menace understood 70 DO
virtually WITHDRAWN and the proposed coufse sbsn-
dored and as the variations OF opinions and measures
among the extreme party have at last clearly defeated
every dangerous plan so far the next General Con-
ferei is concerned ard all possibility OF division OK
tue body at that session. and for four years ensaegb
east cor ciusively. paper has more PHYSICALLY
demonstrated against the assertion Of any such peru
than Tie Christian Adcocae
The ground OF the peril given by your corre.pon-
Dent lie also Incorrect and tue qualified programme
which lie presents making provision for necessary or
humane cares Of slaveholdDg, is very nenly, II nos
dsntcay what the editor OF The Ad0ecats contsndsd
or il amounts 10 bat definition Of what s the scual
position Of the denomination; but it 10 well kno thst
ihe oppression Of sueh qualifications IN me law, has
been persistently res sted by the party which your
correspondent represeLtand precisely here has been
the chef though rot the whole reril OF the Cohfco.
In fte Sir, | can refer your readers 70 40 aii-
Gle lately in your columns, signed " as,nof',t
Republican, san expressi0n OF my Own V!sws an',
A. believe Of the views of the great maze VI lay
Mehodis's on this whole subject And % aoy p''si-
sbty of the success the oOnoxous measure sPps's
low to be psst do not deem it Iecessary 70 defend
mvfen further against your correspondent tusn ny tnls
references to that article. IL is the profound cooycoo
of the Methodist people generally that this n'sppy
controversy can bs practically adjusted If the to Fleai
irg disput will only cease their penons' mnePIs
sent stations and put their heads snd hearts toss'ner~
bfetbrsp ABEL SfLyEss.
Nee York Sept. .6, 1859.