New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-05-02
WOMEN AS DELEGATES.
A QUESTION OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.
BISHOP WALDEN EXPLAINS WHY THEY SHOULD
NOT BE RECEIVED UNDER rRysENT RULES.

BISHOP WALDEN EXPLAINS WY THEY SHOULD
NOT BE- RECEIVED UNDER PRESENT RULES.
Az considerable discussion Is likely to In re-
gard to the admission of women delegates, Bishop
Walden was asked yesterday to give his views on
this important question He said:
Methodism has done than any cther form Of
Christianity the prominent tace they
now have all moral movements and. In turn Method SIN
has been benefited by their Chrstsn activity In
view OF this fact srklnsly ypfed by the influence
OF Mrs wesley on her John and Charles It is not
matter Of surprise question Of admitting women to
General Conference is before tina church, but cedaoe
as the fact named Methodsn has no bearing on
the constitutional question involved In the relation OF
women to the law-maing body OF the church.
The election OF several women as lay delegates Is the
occasion OF examining this question. but the fact OF
their election Is entitled TO no weight In IT'S settlement
Had IL been raised four eight twelve or sixteen years
provide for or admit Of the election OF women as
ago. when there little thought OF such election
tho same principles would have been involved aa now
and to the extent more and no less Inc case
a. t. stands leads to tho following inquiries: Does the
ulnn Of Law delegation adopted by constitutional
lay deerates or under that plan 10 wo'oh e'ec'ou
as lay delegates have constitutional right to seats IN
tho General Conferencei And II not what futAer steps
are requisite to their ADMISSION shouu bno 'o' W
the church favor til 90,
strictly speaklng, tho Methodist Episcopal Church
can hardly be said to constitution It has Aruces
OF RELIGION General Rules Of tho United socieues
an accepted and distinct form OF govefnmehI anu
delegated general conference but this General eohesco
has a consutuon-an Instrument through which IL was
constituted In 1908 By the whole BODY OF i"neran'
preachers This constitution. Discipline 1854 pars o'
has two parts-ore through which the General Conference
va constituted and invested with authority the other Oy
which s nowers are limited The General Conference
has full power to make rules and regulations ior our
church" under limitations and resticuohs spcoi"ou "
the Restrictive Rules" and to inaugurae Or conp'
changes in the Restrictive Rules In constitutional way
| kaa
NO CHANGE IN THE CONSTITUTION
This constitution In each and all Of its provisions nA'
exactly moaning 1t had when aaoptcu III io0 70 ~.
in so ror as It has been modified by changes MADE I'D ''
constitutional way known the restrictive rule pocc'
pestdas tho changes n ratio OF representation o
constitution has altered In 1--WE particulars, IA 80
by changing the restrictive ruc process III ooo O'
tborzin9 fractional representation; In 1900 ny n'
h o,ho1 ~ calling an extra Of the GeDcr''
Conference and by providing for the appointment. ..
missionary Bishop; and In 1soS'72 by proV''s 80.
admission OF lay delegates into the Gensrai oon,'
Tho effect of these amendments upon the constitution
IA exactly what 1t was at the tlmc they n'er'h', ~
adorted and each one has the enact meaning no" 'a'
was understood and intended 70 have by thoso y, 49,
it was adopted. Thu province OF on ao'0oi" , Tha
nret,t,on IS TO ascertain declare this meaning
judicial power OF the General CONFERENCE III ~
ular Is limited by this principle. 49,. .,,...,.,
The kind Of lay delegation In the methodiss Np'p
Church provided for IN the plan Adopted ., s.a,.
considered IN settling whether women are ' -, -,
I'm
ING this man were unusual The resuSufS'u 49, 49,
requires the concurrent action OF one Oehe'a' oO'
and the Annual Conference but this plan "'' "efo0"
unop nv the General OF 1905 tnen voo upoh
and anrroved nv the Annual Conferences ana tnc aco
,,.s conquered I'm by the General Conference OF 1914 au
,rs,nwhe the question Of Lay Deosauoh was Pase"a
unon ny the laity This plan, adopted Win Such ac'
heraon does not secure representation 70 inc WHO'S
bodv of the Iaty OF our Church. nor 70 I'll tao myheh IN
our Church but is form Of lay delegation thfobgh whca
m. ovnen who arc members o. the Quarterly Conference
are renesented I'm tho General Conference Inc lay dele
gates in the Conference are seee'eI o' feo
Confcrences whose members elected ~ quarterly Con-
the Quarterly Conference Is thus tho primary
hodv OF the syse and TO members comprise the en're
constituency represented BIZ lay delegates In the Genera
| Conference
The submission OF the question Of lay delegation 70 no
vote OF the members OF the Chureh' MAZE anu o'
no bearing in determining who are represented In the zen
eral Conference and who may be members Oh - 49,.
vote was 10 ascertain the sentiment OF our Ohur0" " -
matter and IL was taken directly on the question u '
delecaton- and only by Implication. at ALL upon hc o'"
f. shouia bave The vote gave additional suIhor'V !"
either the General Conference the Annual Soh'oen'o'
in amondIng the constitution through the resrouVc'u'
process neither docs that vote prevent any urnc oNs
or Modification OF the plan. which might be the eae
had tho force OF constitutional sanction inc oenerM
and Annual Conferences by tho authority 'e''ou ~ S-
settled the present plan Of lay Delegation "heoy w
members Quarterly Conference are tue
| OF the lay members % the General Confcrencc
The second restrictive rule not only axes the prnclpe
-----------------------------