Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1912-05-21


been grieved and some worldly minds have been en-
couraged in their worldliness. The impression has
gone out that the Northern Bishops in their epis
copal address, advised relaxation of the weknown
opposition of the Methodsts to such worldly amuse-
ments as dancing, theater-going, etc. This impress
sion is not justified by the contents of the address
by the history of the matter under discussion.
Not being a member of that church. l have no
right to speak with authority for it, and claim no
such authority; but it is we'll that all who may be
interested in the subject should get the exact facts
of the case. I have before copy of one of the
official periodicals of that church. and from it
gather facts which the writers of the press
dispatches seem to be entirely ignorant If did
not have this paper before I would know, never
theess, without such that it is erroneous
to suppose that the Bishops of the Northern branch
of Methodism in the United States give any counte-
nance or approval whatsoever these worldly diver
sions. The facts are about as follows:
Among the General Rules of universal Methodism.
which have come down from the days of Wesley and
which not be changed by the General Conference
without the concurrent recommendation of two
thirds of all the members of the Annual Conferences
and two-thfrds of all the Lay-Eectoral Conferences
the next ensuing General Conference" there is the
rule which forbds the taking of such diversions as
can not be used in the of the Lord Jesus"
From the first this rule has been understood, always
and in every branch of worldwide Methodsm to ap-
ply to theater-gong, dancing, cardplayng, and the
like In a pastoral address to the Southern Meth
odst Church, written by the lamented Bishop George
F. Pierce of our and adopted by the General
Conference of 1874 the position of universal Meth
odism was forcibly declared in these words: "An
explicit utterance was given, by order of the last
General Conference in pastoral address, on the
subject of worldly amusements. We repeat that
utterance We abate none of it's teachings with re
spect to either the manifest Inconsistency of such
indulgences with the spirit and profession of the
gospel or the peril which they bring to the souls OF
men. Their multiplied and insidious forms are
source of perpetual temptation and damage and are
denounced by the word of God, and by that part of
our General Rules which forbids the taking of such
diversions as can not. be used in the of the
Lord Jesus This denunciation is explicit and COM
prehensive The name of the Lord Jesus in this
connection is decisive test and content to
leave the issue to its sovereign arbitrament Amongst
those indulgences which can not stand this solemn
is the modern dance, both in private and pub
lie exhibitions, utterly opposed to the genius OF
christianity as taught by us. When persisted in, it
is ustihable ground of judicial action by the church
authorities"
oe 1t can scarcely be doubted that, if the recent
recommendation of the Northern Methodist bishops
were adopted by the General Conference they would
unanimously stand upon this Interpretation of the
General Rule made by the bishops and General Con-
ference of the Southern Methodsts. What then is
the meaning of their action?
Northern branch lof American Methodsm adopted
paragraph now grown famous paragraph 260"
of their book of Discipline, by which certain
ments were specifically named forbidden by the
rules of the church. This specification of particular
diversions was by some wise men opposed at the
time on the ground that if certain things were
specified by name other things, not thus specified,
would be allowed Since then there has been more
or less debate the subject, some alleging that
paragraph $50" was never legally adopted by the
General Conference Of 1872 because no quorum was
present when the vote upon the paragraph taken
Others have affirmed that if quorum had been pres.
emit, its adoption illegal and unconstitutional
because it passed contrary to the restrictive
rule which provides that the General Conference
shall not change the General Rules of the Church
except by the constitutional process which have
indicated.
The operation of the paragraph has not been what
was desired and intended; it has, as many believe
weakened rather than strengthened the force of the
Church's opposition to these worldly amusements
Hence the Bishops in their quadrennial address
advised its repeal but they did not recommend any
change of 'the general rules" Evidently the Bishops
feared the very misunderstanding of their recon-
mendation which has followed; for in connection
with the subject they say in their address:
THUS far the General Conferences have feared
to repeal the action of 1876 lest the Church be
accused of reversing its teaching. AS to this
soning may be said Cd that sister Churches
will misunderstood us; CD that our wellin-
formed friends outside all Churches will not so
concude CD that the decent, intelligent and real
ly influential public press will not thus misrepre
sent us. what the sensational press may
men or Churches should be ashamed TO care. FL
nally the Holy Spirit of God will misunder
stand any Church that trusts him to ead-instruct-
ed people where its legislation, however well meant
failed to drive them
These words of the Bishops make it quite clear
tho Isnr-- of