New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1869-10-01
LAY DELEGATION.

LAY DELEGATION.
THE QUESTION NOT YET sETTLED-wILL THE
MINISTERS VOTE TO MODIFY THE RESTRICT
I'VE RULEP-THE VOTE IN THE CHURCHES
DR. CURRY's CHANGE OF sENTIMENr-SoME
OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. ..
The subject of lay delegation in the Metho-
dist Episcopal Church not yet been settled The par
tenar point now s whether the ministers In the
several Conferences bound by any moral or
implied obligation to vote for change OF one OF the re-
strctye rules OF the Discipline that the next General
Conference may admit lay delegates The General Con
ference ia the highest law making body OF the church, ana
limited only by restrictions of which, though
believed by stand in the way OF lay delegation
may be changed by vote of tbreefourths of the mem
bers Of annual Conferences and by concurrent vote
Of twohrds OF General Conference. According 10
the principle of the decision OF the United States Cour
In the great relating to the Methodist Book Con-
Germs in NewYork and Cincinnati. the General Confer
ence FULL power the subect but as In the opn-
ion of many members that those decisions were nctured
with too much Difference 10 the Southern" brethren,
their authority has not been generally acknowledged
The rule referred to provides that the General Confer
ence shall not allow Of moro than one representative
for every IA members Of the Annual Conference nor OF
less than for every 500 Some suppose that
this rule relates only to the ratio Of representation OF the
Annual Conferences which composed exclusively OF
Minister'S and that would not be nfrnged should the
General under general power admit also
to its body lay delegates OF the church
at arge the time adherng to the rule as 10 the
clerical delegates the Annual Conference But at
the session OF the General Conference.-The third In
succession at which the question Of lay delegation was
consideredhe friends Of the measure, in tho spirit OF
concesson almost unanimously allowed its opponents to
assume the proprey of change OF the restrictive rule
and nasmuch as General Conference had atts sue
cessye sessions In $780, 1864 and 1865 declared In iaver
OF the introduction Of laymen into the highest councils
Of tho church. whenever the people should desire ~
submission OF that question was ordered 10 De made 10
all the members Of the church Of q years old and up
ward.
The pan further provided for the Introduction OF lay.
members into the next General Conference to be held In
1871 OF the aiy resulted In favor OF
ure and the conferences voted TO change the rule
referred to- After the action Of the General Conference
Of 1865 certain members OF that body, VINO had peen
members Of the Committee on Lay Delegation some OF
whom, wore In of. and Of whom was against
the measure, united in card, which published In
the Church papers. In 1t those ministers say:
as This action being passed with great uosnniy 1 y h.
the Church that they Indicate de.e lay
clear and encouraging for the eIpsOo Of their views, there
being no probability nor even moral posy .s,. these g.e men
S The voting both and minister, eteoar.. be
free expressing GsdJ judgment q each Bot. veil be
1ss 5o The he q Ss
well the upreserved opinion. Of the ministry eveuvhsre
tS coS SslS Ss S and i nsI VIII great
% .Ds s s 1 SS 1ss t siS9S:s % s
Ofths Methodist Episcopal Church"
The vote of the lay was taken last juno and resulted
lay delegation by about two to one but some
OF the opponents Of the are now endeav-
oring TO persuade the ministers to vote against the
change OF the restrictive rule IN the Annual Conferences
The question Is, can the ministers refuse 10
change rule after hearing the result OF the vote OF
the laitys The plan, came down from the General
Conference thought both Sides 70 be one OF CON-
promise WHILE the side, concession was made In
the last General Conference to meet the views OF those
who planted their opposition constitutional grounds,
on the other everything waived but the constu-
tona question In the people declared for lay dele
CATION Dr. Curry editor of the chief church organ The
Christian Advocate who Is now one OF the leaders IN OPP
posing the admission OF lay delsgatos then said: 81 am
ready for 10 do thisto waive everything Dut inc
signed the card aforementioned, which, among other
clauses. contained tho two: ,,..,
evidence that the 'ht oseL, cSosIs's W. 'tI NO
duct 81 y. n s.b. Vnsp. SoS nscs. So
thai The dese change such require pscil consider
s almost ns sa that .f f.' grounds s
n sses sns' s 9. az Sfcs p.s
a,ed s: repetition ID; moral q III o. The
question for lay delegation OF ss, lay dsiton nov made
ola majority ofhoss present Ts be considered ness
The conditions Of the proposed sh1of % Is % %
should method Ofeotsuing electoral eufrsbce
a'. and ~ s etse may ..
pess pastors and bishops and The
anticipated ,Ossb, ha. prOySS based uPSs = which s0ah
The ministers opposed TO lay delegation assert that the
General naa no ~ Sd eY e %
change the rule vote against the change matter
for the individual judgment OF every minister who must
determine for himself when comes to cast his ballot
The objections are substantially these;
responded to q. nsiison given them 10
desire the question Of 10y deegalO1 s' . y.,s va. not
- pss 'S'; 81. s c:sEeS on IS. T pe: % Ai
act upon their judgment chrt'd" advocate
II Would b. .u.utabs nads dates up the pie.
Cha. the responsibility Of bringing Il ~ delegation must real 0P'n the
I'VE have sased Of tn. n.Ipsd'ne q
u: ysG e. s sns .e' So. rsp d H'" oppose
To these points the riends OF the movement replyi
d dnss a The at any
authorized election determine the resut That women
fair presumption that but small per centage OF them,
Whatever their sentiments on the question: ayai!ed them
number Of members who voted near as can be ascer
tained not less than that the entire number
soc.sss; that even counting the women, more
than a third OF the whole adult member.
ELECTORS OF OF the state Of New taken pro-
OF UI state in service IN the
to vote The great political parties were excited on
this question and e Mere tSa Soo ON
the amendment was only 3O6Si, while the number or
qualified in the State, at lifetime, was not prob
ably less than 100000 .
O. That II 1t DO necessary 70 change the restrictive
rule bring in lay representation, the responsibility OF
making the change certainly does rest on the ministry
They say: Here is church whose government Is an
anomaly in It's essential elements partakes OF an
oligarehy. class has the power to rule tho whole:
The supreme legislative body Is composed exclusively OF
clergymen No ayman has there any voice or vote; yet
the aymen the subjects OF the legislation and the
chief supporters OF the Church. There Is nothing ike
among American institutions. The Church OF Rome IL
not an American institution. There Is principle OF sell
government that Is dear to the heart Of every American
nf
The principle has been too long struggled
ana too clearly vindcated to be abandoned now by
oh NJ NOR n IN q