The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-06-16
METHODIST POLITY.
Reply to DIR. LathrOp's Remarks Con-
corning the Laymen's Convention.

corning the Laymen's Convention.
To the E litor of the Indianapolis Journal
OF course we understand that the jour
nal cannot be given over wholly to the dis
cussion of Methodist polity, but as it is
newspaper and the preachers seem deter
mined to make the issue about the Invest
one of the day-quite as interesting to the
public as the baseball and bicycle move
ments are-it will hardly be considered an
imposition upon your readers to mark the
progress of the discussion by an occasional
paper.
And now comes Rev. DR.. Lathrop, of
Shelbyville, with his budget of advice. OF
course there is nothing acrimonious in his
allegations that the papers of the laymen
have IAN acerbity not conducive to har-
mony." Well, let us keep sweet. The gtst
of DR.. Lathrop's advice is for us to be more
faithful to class meetings and prayer meet
ings, and that Will cure all the ills we COM
plain Of He is greatly mistaken If he sup
poses that all who attend these meetings
are content with the economy of the
church. And then comes the cheap logic
that the church has grown wonderfully I'M
der this economy. 1t reminds one of the
dying words, as it were, of the ever-to-be
lamented Buchanan In his last message to
Congress he summed up the increase in the
population and commerce and wealth OF
the country in the thirty years of Demo
cratic aScendency and said, in substance:
See what has come Of Democratic policy,
carefully concealing the empty treasury
and the fact that the government had to
pay II per cent. for money to meet current
expenses in a time of peace; and that the
seeds of a most formidable rebellion had
been soWn by the destructive Democratic
dogmas of these thirty years. The pat an
swer of the people was: These groWths
have been in spite of your policy, not in
or Of 2 b6 nnpa re
rebelled against the will of the people and
did their best TO prevent the carrying out
of the Republican policy the developments
or the last thirty years have shown that,
untrammeled by Democracy, the country
mas proSpered at a rate which makes the
boosted prosperity of the preceding thirty
years look insignificant. 1t seems not i'm
probable that an attempt may be made by
the party in power to resist by every posi-
be means this demand of the people, but
it will be as futile as the Democratic move
ment thirty to forty years ago, and whoever
lives to see the CLOSE of another century
OF Methodism will laugh at DR.. Lathrops
logic, as the world now laughs at Presi-
dent Buchanans
OF course, as Dr. Lathrop says it is no
desire on the part of the preachers to re-
tain that power that makes them hold fast
to it, it is only their fear that laymen are
incompetent to govern wisely. Methodist
laymen make good enough presidents and
legislators and judges and the like but
they are lacking in sense or grace to con-
duct church affairs. The theory presents
this singular paradox. To-day Or. Lathrop
is an hOnored and able pastor, among the
very foremost | am told, of his conference;
but if at his next conference he should for
any reason take a location he steps down
and out forever from the governing power
of the church. Is that wise? Is it Ameri-
can? Assuming that ministers alone are
the proper rulers of the church, this de-
prives the church of some OF her wisest and
best men. DR.. Abel Stevens, our d1Stin-
guished church historian, one of the ablest
ministers in the church, when he found his
literary work would not allow him to take
n he a hiGhOn n church
editor, pursuing his book-making, while
drawing a salary he did not earn, like an
honest man located. This turned him out
of the ruling. guild in sharp contrast with
the course of a dozen or more members of
this conference who never could preach,
and for whom no place could any longer
be found, though they have physical
strength enough TO make first-class insur-
ance agents and other kinds of business
men, who are on our huge superannuated
list of fifty or more, still with q potential
voice in the government of the church, and,
lay representation. But we need not go out
of our own conference to find cases equally
strikng-Dr. Stemen, of Fort Wayne, the
late Thomas Rogers, of New Castle, and
several right here in Muncie, the peers of
any of the pastors in native and acquired
ability and as abundant in labors as any
yet without pecNniary reward. Not a word
has one of these to say in governing the
church. They go to prayer meetings and
class meetings, yet they are so in sympathy
with this movement that they will, many
of them, be at that convention. They and
their lay brethren do not propose to avail
themselves of the right accorded to them
by Bishop Andrew in his discourse in New
York, May 49, THE ministers and the
churches may at any time remove them
selves from the system Thank you, dear
bishop; we are here to stay, and to reform
and Americanize it. If anybody removes it
will be the minority. AS in duty bound
we render humble thanks for what the
bishop says: The ministry, with notable
self-abnegation, voluntarily and without
extreme pressure, surrendered it's exclusive
authOrltV.' but fail To
render of authority while the preachers
elect the laymen as we'll as the ministers,
and only one layman to two preachers at
that we will hold the convention.
THE LAYMAN.