New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-12-18
REPLY TO MIR. WIDDEMER
HIS SUSPENSION IN THE PROTESTANT EPGsCOPA
CHURCH-THE SEPARATION AND DIVORCE
ERDN Ills EIRST MIEE

CHCRCH-THE SEPARATION AND DIVORCE
FROM HIS FIRST WIFE.
To the Editor of The Tribune
Sir: A statement recently given to reporters and
pub ishers I'm THE Evening News" Of Asbury
Park. by Mr. Howard IT. Widdemer. assailing the
action Of the Presbytery Of Monmouth and the
Presbytery of Newark in rejecting his application
for membership. requires candid reply
1t IS true that Mr. Wid1emer came 10 certain
members OF the Monmouth Presbytery a sus-
pended member OF the Protestant Episcopal Church
with specious statement OF the cause which led TO
his suspension in that church. and with an appica-
ton for admission into the Presbytery They
listened respectfully to his statement but gave him
no assurance to the result OF his application. ad-
nonishing him in writing that the Presbyery was
4, the habit Of respecting the judicial acts of sister
denominations When the case came before the
Presbytery they appointed committee TO lnvest-
gate the whole matter. comparing his statement
with the facts they appeared In the puoilshed re-
MORT ~ hls trial before the Episcopal Court. The
result was that the Presbytery rejected his applca
ton for membership 1t was not the province or
the Presbvtery to reopen the trial pass upon the
facts or set aside the Judgment pronounced by a
court OF another Christian church. 1t was sufficient
for them to know the facts as they were set forth
I'm the record.
In like manner after several years. Mr. Widdemer
applied to be received into the Presbytery of New
Northern Conference OF Congregational Churches
1t was referred to a committee before which Mr.
Widdemer opened his case recting his grievances
and wrongs in the Episcopal Church The commit
tee without thorough investigation recommended
his reception into that body, and he was received
In a recent deliverance OF the Newark Presbytery
they confess that II done without adequate
the facts as set forth in the trial in the Episcopal
Church. and published they reconsidersd tne'r ac-
from the roll
What are some of the facts, as they appear in the
published records OF the trial which Influenced the
action OF both Presbyteres? They are simply these:
first wife. gave her a writing OF separation in
virtue of her remuneration of all Gains upon nun
ward he sued for a divorce in the courts of Con
necticut. on the ground OF his wires desert9n, AZ
separation was not made known TO the court the
divorce granted. ,.
not before them when he was received INTO ni9
their body, and when they were dscoEerea IL leo leo
nection with them. ~,
ssr T RT is TO- sas a'h
was ba sed on his own request TO avoid delay and
further contention The Of b mr. wbsb
the Presbytery dd and in view of their dsSoyeres
ana on the sro1nS dc Of MS GyoiS re- them 'ney "a
Some time ago Mr. Wddemer Tenounced ms con on
nesp8 S with the EDsyoDih he now an"
ia virtue OF theory OF ordination held by the
ister on It's interpretato Of deposition he is de,
pryeJ by that act OF all rights. privileges and
functions OF the ministry. All that he has ~ the
actual impress of the Bishops hand which he as
serts can never be erased Though he has never
been record aimed. without which other things being
equaD he never would have had a standing In our
church he still claims that he is a minister; but
II all which characterizes minister mas been
taken away by deposition IT requires more dis
cernment than has fallen 10 our lot to perceive
The value OF his clam When = Judge IL stripped
OF his ernne and degraded from the Bench, IL he
a Judge s;ill? ~.
XII We affirm az the basis OF our action is that
the cause OF his suspension and deposition in the
Eriscopsl Church was sufficient and that he has
no status as q minister OF Christ until duly re-
stored by ecclesiastical authority. after repentance,
amendment and a sufficient season OF probation,
either in the church which deposed him or with
its concurrence and approval
Mr. Widdemers course IN imposing himself a
supply OF the First Presbyterian Church or As
hurry Park without the sanction OF the Presby-
tery and his persistent defiance or their prohibit
lion arraying the members against one another
ana encouraging them IN contumacy to the lawful
,he dIsr,Iption o. the church. needs comment.
II stamps him as "A who sets at naught all
,,hurch authority and confirms us IN View OF
his unGtness for the Presbyterian ministry
In view then. OF his appeals TO the public for
s,,mnsthv az a persecute1 man. submit the
EnIsconal diocese OF Pennsylvania and OF the large
hoiy ~ ministers and laymen IN the Synod and
prsshvtsries OF \ew-Jersey nne-tenths OF whom
80 ,,nacnua n ed with Mr.. Widdemers name
hc;ore his case came before them. and were there
fore abgolu,elv unbiased In the r Judgment. should
not nullifv all his sspersions ana specous state
ments IN his own defence 49,,
a MEMBFR or THE PRESBYTERY or MON
Iakewood Dec II, 1896.