The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-09-16
TIE RESTRICTIVE RULES.
ELI f. Ritter Insists the Conference
Can Change Them.

Can Change Them.
Ell F. Ritter's paper on THE Restrictive
Rules was carefully prepared document
and received much commentator He re-
viewed briefly the history of the General
Conferences from the time of the first con-
ference in Delaware in 1884 to the confer
ence OF 1903 showing hat the precedents
were all against the assumption of the
right by the conference of 1903 to bind the
action of all subsequent conferences. The
restrictive rules adopted by the conference
of 1903 under any settled rules of construc-
ton applied to the question were never
binding and the next General Conference
will have power to strike out or ignore any
one or all OF them by a mere majority
vote"
Mr.. Ritter then took up the question as to
whether the restrictive rules were part of a
| constitution. He said "They read as
though they were. If they had been found
among some archives in the excavation of
Troy, we might well say they were frag-
ments of some system of government But
| these are only restrictions to prevent ac-
| ton, are mere brakes with which to stop
| the wheels. The great church was organ
lied to move. She was organized, set in
motion and ran tWenty-fouP years with
amazing success without these restrictive
| rules. If there Is a constitution we must
| ind 1T and find all of it. A General Con-
| ference would have as much power to COM
| pei specific action by a subsequent session
| of that body as to restrict action. A con-
stitution to be effective to be a constitu-
| ton at all, must command action by it's
| legislative department and provide a meth
cd of action before restricting specific ac-
| tion.'
CONSTITUTION AS A WHOLE.
Mr. Ritter then showed that part of a
constitution separate from the whole can
not be a constitution. The restrictive rules
were adopted exactly as were all the other
provisions enacted by the conference Of 1S0S.
and If the six rules were part of a. consti-
tuition, then all the other enactments of
that conference are in the constitution as
well as all the provisions of the Discipline
Continuing, Mr. Ritter said:
The restrictive rules stand in a different
attitude from all the other provisions an
pear1ng in our Discipline in this that these
rules nave never been acouiesced in in
any sense of that term as constitutional
provisions or as binding upon subsequent
sessions OF the General Conference There
nave always been denialS and dissents from
the claims that these rules are parts Of
the constitution, differing from any other
instrument, and this denial has always ncen
by respectable number of ministers and
laymen and men of prominence in the
church and men of intellectual force There
has been no distinct adoption or acquies-
cence in constitution for the Methodist
Episcopal Church or of the General Con-
ference"
Mr.. Ritter then showed that there has
been and is great confusion Of assertions
upon the subject of the constitution in the
church. Continuing he said THE General
Conference of 1878 exercised great liberty
by its action in matters of government
even over the restrictive. The record of
this conference shows that the body act
ed upon the assumption that its power was
unlimited as to organic or statutory laws
of the church. Now, a constitution that
has never been accurately defined nor
deter mined, nor so adopted by the proper
authority to make it constitution, nor ac-
guessed in as a constitution, cannot be a
constitution at all, if you will permit this
way of expressing il. The commission ap-
pointed in 1885, after four years of search
and struggle, did not find constitution
but reported a proposed system of govern
ment. This report was postponed and the
commission continued by the General Con-
ference of 1892. This commission made sub
stantially the same report to the General
Conference of 1896 The report was reject
ed and the commission discharged by the
General Conference OF 1896.
EXPLORING CHURCH ARCHIVES.
Bishop Merrill was president and T. b.
Nicely, d. D., secretary of this commission
than whom no ADLER men for such service
can be found in our church: in fact, the
whole membership of that commission were
our very strongest men. Eight years of
service by these men and nothing settled
shows the great difficulties u be overcome
in the case A commission is now in exist
Conference, exploring the archives TO find
the constitution already existing, or trying
to construct a system for the government
OF the Methodist Episcopal Church. Let US