The Colored Man in the Methodist Episcopal ChurchHagood, L. M. (Lewis Marshall)
History
The Colored Man in the Methodist Episcopal Church
Hagood, L. M. (Lewis Marshall)
African American Methodists; Methodist Episcopal Church
“It is due to the Baltimore Conference to say that the cases
referred to as evidence of their improper application of their
rule, are stated in terms too vague and indefinite to
authorize the inference drawn by the petitioners. It is
represented that a young man applying to be received into the
itinerancy is prevented by application of this rule; that it
is in vain for him to urge upon a majority of the conference
the impracticability of his complying with the rule, in
consequence of the laws under which he lives, or any other
consideration in favor of his being received; because he will
not comply with the rule, he must be rejected. The same, it is
assumed by the petitioners, is done with respect to those who
apply for ordination. And it is inferred by them, that if the
conference act consistently, stewards and leaders may be
expected soon to be called upon to comply with the rule, or
forfeit their official standing in the Church.
“Your committee view this subject in a very different light. In
admitting a preacher to travel, or electing one to orders, a
conference must have the right to act freely; and in cases which
are not successful, it is wholly an assumption, on the part of
the applicants or their friends, to say what particular
considerations dictated the vote, unless such considerations be
distinctly avowed by a majority of the conference. And it is
known to all conversant with the transactions of an annual
conference, that no person applying to be received or ordained
ever enters as a party before the conference, pleading his own
cause, and hearing and answering the objections which may be
urged against his application. Any act of conference, then, in
these cases, can not be justly urged as evidence that the
conference denies the party concerned the benefit of the special
provision in the rule. A conference or other deliberative bodies
possess, and in the nature of the case must possess, the right
to determine its own course, and vote freely in all such
individual cases. Your committee, therefore, can not see that
the privileges claimed by the petitioners have been contravened
by an act of the Baltimore Conference.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account