The herald and mail. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 1873-188?, 1874-06-12
CHURCH FRATERNIzATIoN.

The committee to whom was referre,
the matter of fraternal greetings, con
yeyed to this general conference by th
delegates duly commissioned from th
general conference of the Methods
Episcopal church, respectfully report
We have considered the action of tn
general conference of that church, a
its session in Brooklyn, New York, il
May, 1872, and which is partly incorpo
rated in the certificate in the following
terms, to-wit:
ITO place ourselves in the truly
friendly relations toward our southern
brethren which the sentiments of oul
people demand, and to prepare the way
for the opening of formal fraternity
with them, be it hereby
Resolved, that this general conference will
| appoint delegation consisting of two minis.
ters and one layman to convey our fraternal
greetings to the general conference of the
Methodlst Episcopal church, south, at its
next ensuing session"
On Friday, May 8, this delegation.
consisting of the Rev. DIR. Albert S,
Hunt. the Rev. DR.. Charles Fl. Fowler,
aid Gen. Clinton B. Fisk, having an
nounced their presence, were formally
received and their communications
|
1t Is with pleasure that we bear testi-
mOny to the distinguished ability and
to the eloquent and courteous manner
IN which these christian brethren dis
charged their trust. Their utterances
| warmed our hearts. Their touching al
luslons to the common heritage of
Methodist history; to our oneness of
doctrine, politY, and USAGE; and their
calling to mind the great work in which
we are both engaged for the extension
of the kingdom of both their Lord and
ours, stirred within us precious mem
ories.
We are called upon by the terms of
| the action of their gen >ral conference
| to consider measures necessary to pre-
pare the way for the opening of formal
fraternity" Every transaction and ut
terance of our past history pledges us
to regard favorably, and to meet
promptly, this initial response to our
long expressed desire.
1t is admissible to review briefly
what has been done or attempted by us
IN this direction. Our general confer
ence in 1916,
Resolved lby rising and unanimous voteI
Ihat Dr. Loylck Pierce be, and is hereby ell
Methodist Episcopal church, to be held in
Pittsburg, May l, 1S48, to tender to that body
the christian regards and the fraternal saluta-
tons of the general conference of the NJ. E.
church, south.
Inpursuauce of this action Dr. Pierce,
duly commissioned, was present at the
seat of the general conference of the NJ.
&. church, and by a note courteously
advised them of his errand. The an
swer of that body was a unanimous
vote declaring that there are serious
questions and difficulties existing be-
tween the two bodies" and that they
do not " consider it proper at present
to enter into fraternal relations with the
Methodist Episcopal church, south"
Had our delegates been received and al
lowed hearing, a more definite under
standing might have been obtained Of
those "seriOus questions and difficult
ties, and the result, we think, would
have been in the interest of peace. He
closed his letter to the general confer
encee, on receiving copy of its action,
in these words:
" You will, therefore, re ard this
communication as final upon the part of
the NJ. e. church, south. She can never
renew the offer of fraternal relations
between the two great bodies of the
Wesleyan Methodists i'll the United |
States. But the proposition can be re-
newed at any time, either now or hereaf |
ter, by the NJ. z. church, and if ever
made up II the basis of the plan of sep
aration as adopted by the general con-
ference of 1874, the church south will |
cordially entertain the proposition.
He reported the failure of his mission |
to our general conference in st. Louis, |
in 1850 which, t ereupon adopted the |
following:
Resolved, That we will steadfastly adhere to
the ground taken in the last communication of
our Celeeates to the general conference of the
VI. +. hurch in Pittsburg, in MAY. 1913. to-
wit: That we can not under their act of re-
Jettlor ard refusal renew our offer of frater-
nal relations and intercourse but will at all
times entertain any proposition coming from
the NJ. E. church to rs, whether it be a writ
ten communication or delegation having for
its object friendly relations and predicated on
the rights guaranteed to us by the plan of
adopted in New York in 1914.
Here the matter rested until Nav.
1869, when the bishops of the NJ E.
church opened negotiations with our
bishops at their annual meeting in st.
Louis, inviting them to "confer" as to
g the propriety, practicability, and
of reunion" Our bishops re-
spectfully declined to consider that sub
iect but invited their attention to one
having precedence-the cultivation of
fraternal relations. They suggested also
The removal of causes of strife; and
this was done in n manner and spirit
that net the hearty approval of our
church. They reaffirmed the position
in which DR.. Pierce left the matter,
saying, 1.-The words of our rejected dele
gates have been ever since ana still are
our words"
One passage of the correspondence
we quote. The northern bishops in
heir letter used these words ''That
.he great cause which led to the separa-
ion from us of both the WESLEYAN
of this country and of the
VI. Z. church, south, has passed away"
To which the southern bishops replied
eve cannot think you mean to offend
is when you speak of or having sepa-
'ated from you, and put us in the same
'ategory with a small body of schis
natics who are always an acknowledged |
secession. Allow us in all kindness, |
brethren. to remind you and keep the
Important fact of history prominent.
hat we separated from you in no sense
n which You did not separate from us. l
The separation was by compact and
mutual and nearer approaches to each
other can be conducted with hopes of
issue only on the basis"
A deputation visited our general con-
erence of 1870, at Memphis, proposing
o treat with us in the name of the NJ. |
.. church on the subject of union. {
They were received and heard with re- {
pect. But it appeared, upon due in {
Iuiry, that they were not commissioned
o MS by their general conference.-the {
,nly body with which we can treat on
interests. Nevertheless, the !
General conference referred their COM
nunication to a committee whose re-
,ort, unanimously adopted, contained {
Eese resolutions
Resolved That the action of our bishops.
d their last annual meeting in st. Louis in {
e-pouse to the message from the bishops of :
he Methodist Episcopal church, has the full
ndorsement of this general confer ence, and :
ccurately defines our position in reference to
ny oyertures which may proceed from that /