Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-11-27
CONFERENCE CALLED
Churchmen Asked to Meet Before
the Convention Assemblies
TO DISCUSS Some IMPORTANT POINTS
Views Regarding the Rules Govern
ing the New Diocese.
OPINIONS ON BOTH SIDES

The interest in the approaching primary
convention of the new diocese of Washing
ton does not diminish as the day of Its
meetings. week from today-draws near
The articles that have appeared in The Star
indicate some differences of opinion in re-
gard to the probable action of the conven-
ton. With the hope of harmoniZing views
and facilitating the business of the conven-
ton, an invitation has been sent to the
clergy and laymen entitled to seats in the
body, for an informal fraternal conference
touching some proposed features in the con-
stitution Of the new diocese. These refer to
the rights of the laity to be represented on
the standing committee, and to have con-
current vote with the clergy in the election
of bishops. 1t is claimed that there are
only two dioceses out of fifty-three in which
this right is denied to the laity.
Another question Is whether bishop
shall be chosen by majority vote; The
law of the diocese of Maryland requires a
two-thirds vote. Here. too, 1t is said, with
the exception of one other diocese, Mary
land stands alone among the more than
fifty dioceses of the country.
The conference will be held in Trinity
Parish Hall the evening before the conven-
ton. The ministers and laymen who have
signed the call represent, it Is said. very
different views, so that 1t Is claimed the call
commits no one to any particular action.
1t also leaves untouched the disputed ques-
ton of the power of the convention to form
Its own organic law.
The following Is the call:
To the clergy and laity who shall be mem
bers Of the primary convention of the
diocese of Washington.
Dear Brethren: We, whose names are ap-
pended to this paper, respectfully invite a
conference Of all the members of the APP
preaching primary cohvent ton, to be held In
the Parish Hall of Trinity parish, corner of
Sd and c streets, on Tuesday evening, De
cember 3, at o'clock, for the purpose OF
considering the wisdom of introducing into
the organic law Of the new diocese the fol-
lowing features:
1. The laity to be represented on the
standing committee.
2. The laity to have concurrent vote
with the clergy in the election of bishop,
the two orders balloting separately.
3. The election of bishop to be deter
mined by a majority of the votes of the
clergy and a majority Of the votes of the
laity.
Signed-For the cIergy-Thos G. Addison,
Jno. A. Aspinwall. James w. Clark, Neil
son Falls, Richard Lewis Howell, Thos.
Alex. tombstone William H. Laird, Alex.
Mackay- Smith. r. H. McKim, Edward NJ.
Mott, Albert r. Stuart, William V. Tun-
NELL Gilbert F. Williams.
For the laity-Wm. d. Baldwin, Chas. c.
Glover, Charles King. Blair Lee, VIM. A.
Meloy. Henry E. Pellew, Seymour w. TUT
lock, f. N. Waters. Samuel E. Wheatley,
The Question of "a Constitution.
There is considerable discussion in church
circles, as readers of The Star are aware,
of the question whether the coming con-
vention shall be governed in its proceedings
by the constitution of the old diocese of
Maryland or whether 1t can make at the
outset a constitution of its own. A brief
summary of the arguments of those who
contend for following the old constitution
was presented in The Star last Monday in
an interview with Mr.. Albert The contrary
said to be an influential element in the
church, is submitted by an authority on
ecclesiastical law
THE whole question hinges" said this
churchman to Star reporter today, upon
article v of the constitution of the Protes-
tant Episcopal Church in the United States,
as follows,
Whenever the division of diocese into
the general convention, each of the dioceses
shall be subject to the constitution and
canons of the diocese SO divided, except as
local circumstances may prevent, until the
same may be altered in either diocese by
the convention thereof
1.-The question to be elucidated is this: Is
1t the purpose of the said fifth article in
making the new diocese subject to the con-
Stitution of the old diocese, to give it an
organic law from the outset, which can
only be altered according to the terms of
that law, which in this case would require
the action of the two ensuing conventions;
or Is 1t only intended to give the inchoate
diocese law by which to organize itself,
so that the organization shall take place in
an orderly way, and upon recognized and
accepted rules, but not to deprive it of the
inherent right of creating it's own organic
law after it should be organized? In other
words, has the primary convention the
power, after having organized under the
conditions prescribed by the old constitu-
ton, and so become one of the sovereign
an organic law, unfettered by the condi-
lions prescribed in the old constitution for
Its alteration?
The Logic of 1t.
Now. in the first place, 1t will be OBJ
served that unless the primary convention
be indeed clothed with this power of max
ing its own organic law, 1t Is absolutely
precluded from making any alteration in
the old constitution, however vitality i'm.
portant 1t may be. There may be proyis-
ions in the old constitution obviously and
seriously injurious to the life of the newly
born diocese, but, unless they are such as
local circumstances prevent 1t from OBJ
serving, 1t has no remedy; it must obey
them to Its own damage, until they can
be changed in accordance with the terms
OF the old constitution, whether it take
TWO years or ten years For it is possible
that some diocese might insert in its con-
stitutfon requirement that any proposed
change must be approved by ten success
sive conventions before 1t should have the
ccse should be divided, then under this
view, the new diocese must work under
CHTPCu NOTTrES