The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1903-05-24
NO CHANGE OF NAME
Vote Against it by the Epis-
copaI Council.
Clergy Generally in Favor Of 1t at Some Time
in the Future, The Laily More Con-
serVatve.
(Fayetteville Observer


There are twenty-five ministers and for
tyseven laymen in attendance upon the
Council. This does not include the dele
gates to the Womens Auxiliary, the
Brotherhood Of st. Andrew or visitors.
At yesterday afternoons session OF
Council, the first done was the introduc-
ing and adoption of the following resolu-
ton:
Resolved, That the members of this
Council desire to extend the revered and
beloved Bishop of the Diocese the assur-
ance OF their respectful tender sympathy
for him in his enforced restraint from the
full performance of his episcopal duties
by reason of his recent attack of illness
And they would further express their
great Joy that he has so far recovered az
to have given the Council the pleasure Of
his presence and the benefit of his father
" counsels and spiritual ministrations,
and they assure him of their sincere hope
that he may be restored to such measure
of health and strength as will enable him
to resume his accustomed labors for the
church with comfort to himself and that
nc may long continue his fatherly over
sight of the Diocese"
resolution presented by the Finance
Committee, to exclude certain parishes
fol neglecting or refusing to comply with
the requirements of Council, as to con
tributions to the funds Of the Diocese,
was defeated, though only three parishes
voted against it. This was due to the
fact that it required a majority of the
parishes to carry it; and, though this is
the largest Council with more parishes
represented held in seven or. eight years,
still a majority We're not represented.
VOTE ON CHANGE OF NAME OF
CHURCH.
The two leading questions which it was
thought would engage the attention of
the Council were % the choice of a
Coadiutor Bishop, and ~ the reply to
the inquiry Of the last general convention
concerning a change in the Church's name
The greatly improved health of the
Bishop. however, enabled him to dispense
with the assistance which. it was under
stood, he once intended to ask for; and
therefore there remained but one ques-
ton out of the ordinary for determine
tion by the present body.
This subject Of the change Of name
came up at yesterday afternoons session
upon the report of the committee appoint
ed to consider it, viz: Rev DR. Car
michael, Rev. DR.. Drane, Rev. L. L. Will
hams Rev n. G.. Hughes, Mr. w. G.
Lamb Col. DeRosseet, Mr.. S. G. Bragew
IT.
The action of the general convention at
San Francisco in 1901 upon this subject
and of the several dioceses which I'D to
this time have responded to the inquiry
Of the general convention and the status
Of the matter generally. were described
in Thursdays issue Of this paper The
reader will from that be able to under
stand the bearing Of the committees ac-
ton which was divided. There was
majority report, signed by five members
and a minority report signed by two
members
Following is the majority report
Resolved That in the Judgment of the
Council Of the Diocese of East Carolina.
the name of the church be not changed
at this time"
This was signed by Rev. DR.. James Car
michael, Rev. DR.. r. B. Drane, Rev n
G.. Hughes and Messrs. Wilson G. Lamb
and Stephen c. Bragaw.
The minority report was as follows
Resolved, That in the Judgment of the
Council of East Carolina, it is expedient
that the name OF the church be changed
at such time as the General Convention
may consider it advisable
This was signed by Rev. l.. L. Williams
and Col. w. l.. DeRosset.
In the absence of Rev. Dr.. Carmichael.
chairman of the committee, Mr. Wilson
G. Lamb read the report of the majority.
Reg Iioy
minority An interesting discussion en-
sued, the remarks of Messrs. Lamb and
Bragaw in favor of the majority report.
and OF Rev. Mr.. Williams in favor Of the
minority report, being especially note
worthy. The council adjourned in the
midst of the debate, which was resumed
at this mornings session after the routine
business had been disposed of. Mr. Calder
moved an amendment to the majority re-
port that the words at this time be
stricken out, so that the mind" Of the
council might be directly sounded upon
the point whether or not its members fa-
yored change of name at ALL Rev. NJ
c. Hughes and Mr.. w. G. Lamb hoped
that the amendment would not prevail
because it would lead to an interminable
discussion, whereas the majority report
categorlcally answered the question ask
ed Mr.. Calder pointed out that the form
of the question, including the words '.at
this time" was the form used by the
committee of the general convention and
not by the convention itself, which had
directed the committee simply to ascertain
the mind of the several dioceses on
the subject Of changing the church's name
Mr.. Weldon Huske made strong appeal
for retention of the old name and the
Rev. Mr.. Hogue made an able and clear
cut statement of the views of those who
believed that a change ought at some
time to be made, though not thinking it |
expedient to do so "at this time" The
discussion developed the fact that the
clergy generally were in favor of change
at some time in the future, while the laity
were at least more conservative-in large |
measure. it was suggested, because of
inattention to the historical reasons for a
change. The difficulty of finding an APP
propriate substitute for the present name
was mentioned as an obstacle on the
Threshold of the question. In our Thurs
days issue, the names which had been
proposed four in number, We're The