Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1876-08-24
NE rH0DISM.
Reports from the Boards Of Commission
ers Appointed by the Methodist
Churches to Fill the Chasm
Separating Them.
A PrayerfuI, Thoughtful and Consider
ate Result-A Basis for Mutual
GOOD VIII and Christian Eel.
lOwship-PrOperty to
be Restored


Methodist Episcopal church and Meth
odist Episcopal church south, to remove
! all obstacles to fraternity between the
two chuIches, mas been in session here
the last two days. They concluded their
labor this evening, aud issued an ad-
dress TO the bishops, ministefs and
members OF the Methodist Episcopal
church, and of the Methodist Episcopal
church south, ir which they say:
You will be rejoiced to learn that
after having given due attention to all
questions involved in fraternity between
the two great branches Of Episcopal
MethCdism in the United States, we
arrived at settlement of every matter
affecting, as we suppose, the principles
Of lasting and cordial sGju.tment. We
have the satisfaction to declare that our
aspirations for harmony of views in the
vital points have been realized by divine
guidance, and we trust we have besn
able, after frank interchange of views,
and,prsyerful endeavOrs, to harmonic all
differences, and to arrive at the desired
consumnnstion Of the unanimous agree
ment OF the complete fraternity. at the
beginning of our consultations one
great question seemed to overshadow
al oCherG-it concerns the relation of the
Episcopal Methodism. To this impor-
tsnt matter our most earnest thought and
prSyerful deliberations were first direct
ed, and the result attained occasioned
su interchange OF rejoicing and congrat-
uations between the members of the
joint com mission. We adopted, with
out dissenting voice, the following
declaration and basis OF fraternity as TO
the status of the Methodist Episcopal
church, ard of the Methodist Episcopal
church sCuth, and their coordinate re-
lation as legitimate branches of Episco-
pal Methodism. Each of said churches
Is legitimate branch OF Episcopal
MethoSism in the United States, having
q commo On origin in the Methodist Epis.
cOpal church organized in 1884; and
siuce tho organic alton Of the Methodist
Episcopal church south was consum-
mated in 1S45, by voluntary exercise
of the right Of southern annual confer
ences, ministers and members to adhere
to that canoD, 1t has been
al evangelical church, reared on scrip
tural foundations, and her ministers and
the members, with those of the Metho-
dist Episcopal church, have constituted
one Methodist family though in distinct
ecclesiastical connections. 1t was next
incumbent on US to consider the ques
ton concerning the corfii3tiDg claims to
church property, and some special cases
that could not conveniently be referred
to a general Tuie. There were two prin-
cipsl questions to be considered with re-
gard to the church property in dispute
between tine local societies of the two
churches. FIRST, as to the legal owner
ship of the said property. Second,
as to whether il wall be con.
sistent with strict equity or pro-
mote christian harmony, or the cause
of religion, to dispossess those societies
now using church property which was
originally intended for their use and oc.
cupancy, and of which they have ac-
quired possession, though they may
have lost the legal title to it by their
transfer by one church to another. We
have considered the papers in all cases
Brought to our notice. These arose in
the following States: Virginia, West
Virginia, Maryland, Tennessee, Louisi-
ana, North Carolina and South CaToli-
ma. Iu respect to some of these c4ses
we have given particular directions, but
for al other cases The joint committee
unanimously adopted the following rules
for the adjustment of adverse claims to
church property:
Rule l-In c4aes not adjudicsted by O
1int committee, any eociety OF either
church constituted according to its dis
cipline, now occupying, church property,
sbsll remain in possession thereof; pro-
vided, where there is now In the same
place a society of more members at
tached than the other church, and which
has hitherto claimed the use of the prop
erty, the latter shall be entitled to pcs
session.
Rule 2-FOrasmuch as we have DO
power to anDul the decisions respecting
the church property made by the State
courts, the Joint commission ordsin in
respect thereof, first, ia cases in which
such decision has been made or In
which there exists an agreement, the
same shall be carried out in good faith;
in communities where there are
two sscieties-one belonging to the
Methodist Episcopal church and the
other to the Methodist E Episcopal church
south-which have adversely claimed
church property, it is recon- mended
without delay they smicsbly dispose OF
their differences, irrespective of the |
strict legal title, and settle the same ac-
cording to christian principles and the |
equities cf the particular case, and 80 far |
ss prscticsb Q, according to the princi- J
pies OF the foregoing rule. But il such /
settlement cannot be made, the question |
shall be referred for equitable decision to |
three ATbitrstors, o0e to be chosen by |
each claimant from their respective sec
tions, and the two thus chosen shall Sc. |
lect third person not connected with !
either of the said churches, and the de-
cision of any two Of them shall be finsl. |
Rule 3-In communities in which |
there is but one society, rule shall be
observed in The interest of |
peace and fraternity.
Rule 4-Whenever necessary to carry |
the foregoing rule into effect, a legal ii. |
lie to the church property shall be ac.
c5riiDgly transferred.
Rule 5-rhese rules shall take effect |
in order to further pro-