Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1876-08-24

INC tuic may COMPROMISING BASIS or
Standardization to the Bishops AVID
Brethren The Question Of Church Prop
'rfy-Harnsony IncaIcGted-Ihe Fss-
ture OF Nicholson.
The boards OF commissioner appointed by
the Methodist Episcopal Church and the
Methodist Episcopal Church South TO re-
move all obstacles to fraternity between the
two churches have been In session At Con-
gress Hall, Cape May, during the last ten
days. They concluded their lsbors last eve
ming and issued the following
ADDRESS.
TO me Bishops. The Ministers. and the Members
o. the Methodist Episcopal Church, and of ne
Methodist Eptscopai Church South.
missioners appointed by authority OF tue
General Conferences respectively of the
aoove-named churches TO remove all obsta-
Giles 10 formal fraternity and TO adjust al
existing differences between them. deem IL
proper. in advance OF our report to the Gem
eral Conferences OF our respective churches,
TO communicate TO you Ia general terms the
result OF the recent harmonious session or
our joint commissions.
Pursuant to previous appointment we con-
veDed at Cape May, n. j., on the 10th day OF
August, 1sI5, and were favored by the at
tendance OF all the members OF both boards
OF commits slooers. After a written commu-
Methodist Episcopal Church south vas re-
ceived and answered by the commits toner's
of the Methodist Episcopal Church 10th
602rds met In joint session, the labOrS of
which were continued during seven DAYS.
We rave had u full and free conference and
interchange OF views respecting the import
ant matters that claimed our united con-
siderat1on. If any In the churches entertain
ed the fear previous to our meeting that we
could not attain complete harmony OF senti-
ment touching the momeutous question to
be determined, they will be rejoiced TO learn
that af,er having given due attention TO all
questions involved in the proper construc-
ton OF a platform Of complete fraternity be-
tween the two great branches OF Episcopal
MethOdism In the United States, we have ar
rived at settlement of every matter affect
ing, as we suppose, the principles OF a lasting
faction to declare that our aspirations for
harmony OF views on vital points have been
realized. BY divine guidance, as we trust,
we have been able, after q frank Interchange
OF views and prayefful endeavor, to harmon
lie all differences and to arrive at the desir-
ed consummation OF unanimous agreement
OF complete fraternity. We believe that no
principle OF honor on either side has been
invaded. We struck the keynote OF brother.
ly love till Ii sounded high and clear, and so
have been enabled TO reach the elements OF
perfect harmony. No divergence of seuti-
ment mars the complete unanimity of the
joint commission touching the essential
principles OF fraterniZing.
At the beginning OF our consultations one
great question seemed to overshadow all
others. 1t concerns the relations of the two
churches to each other and to Episcopal Me-
thodism. To this important matter our most
earnest thoughts and prayerful CELEBRATIONS
were first directed, and the result attained
congratulations between the members OF the
joint commission. We adopted, without q
Dissenting voice, the following declaration
and basis OF fraternity as to the status OF
the Methodist Episcopal Church and OF the
Methodist Episcopal Church South and their
co ordinate relation as legitimate branches
OF Episcopal Methodism:
BASIS OF SETTLEMENT.
Each OF said Churches is legitimate
branch OF Episcopal Methodism in the
the Methodist Episcopal Church, organized
In 1884, and since the organization OF the
Methodist Episcopal Church was consum-
mated in 1915 by the voluntary exercise of
the right OF the Southern Annual Confer
ences, ministers and members to adhere TO
that COMMUNION, 1t has been an evangelical
church reared on Scriptural foundation,
and her ministers and members, with those
OF the Methodist Episcopal Church, have
constituted one Methodist family, though In
distinct ecclesiastical connection.
CLAIMS TO CHURCH PROPERTY.
1t was next incumbent on US to consider
questions concerning conflicting claims to
church property, and some special cases that
could not conveniently be referred to the
operations OF a general rule. There were two
principal questions TO be considered with re-
gard To the church property in dispute be-
First. AS TO the iegai ownershipo mot said nror.
erty. Second. As la whether IL will be con-
slsIeDt with strict equity or promote Cnris-
possess those societies Low using church
property which was originally intended for
their use and occupancy, and OF which they
have acquired possession, although they
may have lost legal title to it by their trans
fer from the one church TO the other. We
have considered the papers In all cases that
have been brought TO our notice. These arose
in the following states: Virginia. West Vir
ginia. Maryland, Tennessee, Louisiana,
North Carolina and South Carolina. In re-
spect OF some of these cases We have given
M y "A hat nr q <aek,
The joint commission unanimously adopted
the following rules for the adjustment OF adj
verse claims to church property:
Rule !. In cases not adjudicated by the
Joint Commission any society of either
church, constituted according to its discip-
line, now occupying the church property,
that where there is now in the same place
society OF more members attached to the
other church and which has hitherto claimed
the use Of the property, the latter shall be
Rule 2. For as much as we have no power
to annul decisions respecting church proper
mission ordain in respect thereof, first, In
cases In which such decision has been
made, or In which there exists an agreement,
the same shall be carried out In good faith;
societies, one belonging to the Methodist
Episcopal Church and the other to the
have adversely claimed the church prop
erty, 1t Is recommended that without
delay they amicably COMPOSE their
differences, Irrespective of strict legal title
and settle the same according to Christian
principles, the equities OF the particular
case, and, so far as practicable, according to
the principle Of the aforegoing rule; but II
such settlement cannot be speedily made
then the question shall be referred for equ it-
able decision to three arbitrators, one TO be
chosen by each claimant from their respec-
tive societies, and the two thus chosen shall
select q third person not connected with
either OF said churches, and the decision OF
any two of them shall be hnal.
Third. That in Communities In which there
is but one society rule first shall be faith
fully observed In the interest OF peace and
fraternity.
Rule 3. Whenever necessary TO carry the
sfOIegolDg rules into effect, the legal title TO
the church property shall be accordingly
transferred.
Rule 4. These rules shall take effect i'm.
mediately.
In order 70 further promote the peaceful
results Contemplated oy THIS joint commits.
! ION, and TO remove, as far as may be, all
occasion, and especially to forestall al fur
ther occasion for hostility between the two
church,s, we recommend to members OF
both, as wise rule of settlement where
property Is in contest and one or both are
weak, that they compose their differences
by uniting in the same communion, and In
all cases that ministers and members recog-
A r.N - 4 III IL