Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-05-09
CHURCH CONGRESS.
SESSION OF THE SOUTHERN MErHo-
DIsTs ON YESTERDAY.
Reports Of Committees Appeal on the I'm
mersion Question-Personals,
&C., &C., &c.

Reports Of Committees Appeal on the I'm
mersion Question-Personals,
&C., &C., &c.
Bishop A. W. Wilson, of Baltimore,
assumed the chair at Q o'clock yester-
day morning and called the Conference
TO order.
DR.. b. NJ. Messick, Of Kentucky, con-
Quoted the religious services. He read
the twentieth chapter Of the Acts OF
the Apostles.
The following hymn was then sung !;
"Draw near, o Son OF God, draw near;
Us with Thy flaming eye behold.
Still IN Thy Church voucnssfe TO appear.
And let our candlestick be gold"
Prayer by DR.. Messick, Of Kentucky,
followed.
After the reading of the Journal
Bishop Wilson vacated the chair for
Bishop j. @. CRANBERRY, Of St. Louis.
REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES.
The Committee on ltineracy pre-
sented the first report from standing
committee. 1t was laid on the table
and ordered to be printed.
The Committee on Revisal reported
Inconvenience on paper presented
by Rev. DR.. j. f. Edwards calling for
a slight change in the rubric for the
Order of Public Worship.
The change asked was that where
after the sermon the order requires
" MISUNDERSTANDING, prayer--kneeling,
doxology, and benediction," it be Or
dered that the prayer Immediately sue
coed the sermon and the singing close
with the doxology.
Rev. DR.. Edwards asked il there was
anything like unanimity in the commit.
tee on the point that 1t did not concur
in.
"0nly few dissenting voices" re-
piled DR.. Peterson, the chairman Of the
committee submitting the report.
Then" said DR.. Edwards, " move
that the word non-concurrence in the
report be changed to concurrence.
The report was laid on the table,
under the rules.
CHURCH EXTENSION.
The Committee on Church Extension
reported a resolution opposing any
change in the plan at present observed
Of dividing the money collected for
Church extension equally between the
Conference boards and the parent
board. The report was adopted.
BOUNDARIES.
The Committee on Boundaries re-
commended concurrence in the petitions
of the Mississippi and North Mississippi
Conferences for change of boundaries.
The committee also recommended
concurrence in the request OF the Los
Angeles and Pacific Conference for
change in boundaries.
These reports lie over, under the
rules, for one day.
The call for reports from standing
committees elected nothing of interest.
AN APPEAL.
Under the call for appeals papers in
the case of L. l.. Pickett, appealing
from the decision of his Conference
(which located him, without his consent,
for inefiiciency as an itinerant minis
teri, were presented.
Mr.. Pierce, of Texas, rose and asked
permission to explain the case. lie
said there was no charge against the
brother affecting his moral character.
The brother had refused obedience to
the laws of the Church. He was no
longer useful as an itinerant minister.
Mr.. Pierce was of the opinion that the
appeal should not be allowed, as the
case did not affect the brothers. moral
character at all.
Rev. Paul Whitehead claimed that
the brother who had last spoken was
in error, and that the appellant was, I'M
der the law of the Church, clearly enti-
tied to have his appeal considered.
Rev. W. II. Hughes, Of the North
Texas Conference, was in favor Of al
lowing the appeal to go before the COM
mittee. lie said Brother Pickett had,
it seemed, been located on a single
ground of complaint. lie refused to
administer baptism by immersion. But
in other respects the brother seems to
have conformed to the laws of the
Church, and had been a useful and
faithful preacher. While he refused to
baptize by immersion, he inculcated in
FAINT baptism and baptized as many in
fants, perhaps, as any man in Texas.
lie insisted that the appeal ought to be
allowed.
Mr.. Black, of West Virginia, said /;
This is a subject Of the grayeSt i'm
portance that has come before this Con-
ference since its organization. 1t is q
case of life and death. Worse worse !
for had rather die than be located
against my will And believe if we
refuse an appeal here we do what no
Conference has a right to do" lie
read from the Discipline on the sub
iect, and continued; If we were to
refuse to let this brothers case go be-
fore the Committee on Appeals |
would be ashamed Of this Conference !;
be ashamed to acknowledge that | was
ever member Of it, and if it were
possible to be ashamed in Heaven when
die, | would be ashamed that l ever
heard of this Conference"
Mr.. Evans, Of Tennessee, read from
the Discipline in rebuttal of the extract
made from the law by Mr.. Black. He
claimed that the action Of the State
Conference was justified by authority.
Mr.. Bishop, Of Texas, said Mr..
Pickett had been located on the ground
of violation of his ordination VOWS with
out trial by committee, which was
contrary to the laws Of the Church.
DR.. McFerrin was in favor Of the
matter going before the Committee on
Appeals for investigation there.
MIR. Pierce said that Mr.. Pickett had
kept a great many persons out of the
Methodist Church by refusing to i'm
merse them, as required by his ordina!
ton vow, and that he was located on
the ground Of habitual failure in official
administration.
Mr.. Cooley, Of st. Louis, reviewed
- y