West Virginia argus. [volume] (Kingwood, W. Va.) 1877-1946, 1893-08-31

least, know whose hands are set
against the government OF the
church and who are for IT.
Again he says: "The majority
headed by j. J. Esher s. Bowman,
contend for the most sweeping high
church -ights--''powcrs vested in'
the bishops by which they may sus-
pend from Office any minister or
sweep out whole conferences With
out trial or Defense" Our Disci-
pllre, page rs. says, it does not
become him Bishop or Elder or
Preacher) to amend our rules, but
to observe them. Page 67 says, he
is to see that our church Discipline
is observed IN every respect OR his
charge.
Our Bishops do not make laws,
but exact them, and since they do
not make law they have not the
power to do as Domer, wants them
to do. and to show how this truth
full ~ Domer represents them as
being tyranical we give this bit of
law under their special duties:
Page ~, sec. 99-1st, TO preside
at our Conferences ; I'd, lie (the
Bishop also has power to receive
preachers on trial, and to depose
or expel disorderIy ones.
MIR. Domer says "The MINOR
ity hold to the fundamental law of
the church as contained in our
Book OF Discipline" but do they |?
Remember that prior to the meet.
ing of the Supreme Court of Law
of our church in 1887 the following
persons held offices III the church
that are now on the minority side:
K. Dubs as Bishop, IL. B. IIartzler
as editor of tho Evangelical Messen-
ger for Is years, j. Hartzler as
Superintendent Of Japan mission,
w. Stanford was assistant editor of
the Messenger, l.. West, Missionary
Collector. In 1887 Dubs was
elected for the fourth time as l}ish-
OPP and Il. Bach was elected as a
member Of the Board of Publlca-
ton.
Will Mr.. Domer say they were
not put there by the authority of
the church, and did you not ODE.
dlently obey and acquiescc in their
doings! But Immediately when
Others took their place. you refused
obedience. BY this all can see that
the minority and majority held
offices alike, but when the minority
candidates got beat and Others put
IN their places they refused to sol
low and at once set up their own
establishments. He says Bishop
Esther was jealous of Dub's great
ness. This we cannot believe, or
else Dubs would have been expelled
from the church at the Allentown
General Conference, but Bishop
Esher relieved him. / ask, does
such an act show jealousy?
Again he (D.) equalizcs and SIM
ilarizes Dubs with Christ before
PLATE. What effrontery Again
he says, "the E0aagclicM was pub
lisbed rs a means of our defense. -
My Dear Sir, you hal nothing to
defend, as you were heard at full
length upon all the questions that
you brought legally before our
Supreme Court of Law. And the
thing with You is that you have
refused obedience to its decisions
and instead of obeying have set IN
dehaEce, and now your only plea of
defense is that our Supreme Cour;
OF Law gave tho Board of Pu olica
ton the power TO fix the place Of Is
next meeting without authority to
do so.
Let every one remember this
portion of our church law, as found
on page Sc, section "a: "Thc
General Conference is the Supreme
Court of Law in our church il
shall decide upon the legality Of all
acts of Annual Conferences, and
upon oil such cases as may arise
between any incorporated society Of
the church and its officers. or any
Annual Conference and in its
judicial capacity it shall decide,
render verdict and declare judg
ment only on such questions as arc
lawfully brought before it fol
adjudication. 1t shall have power
/ "a utatn ct.ok r.l.. - .4 g..