METHODISTS. 



tin 





The commissioners appointed by the Gen- 

 eral Conference of the Methodist Episcopal 

 Church, and by the General Conference of the 

 Methodist Episcopal Church South, to remove 

 all obstacles to formal fraternity, and to ad- 

 just all existing differences between the two 

 churches, met at Cape May, N. J., August 16, 

 1876. All of the members of both Boards of 

 Commissioners were present, as follows: M. 

 D'C. Crawford, Enoch L. Fancher, Erasmus 

 Q. Fuller, Clinton B. Fisk, John P. Newman, 

 Commissioners of the Methodist ' Episcopal 

 Church; and Edward H. Myers, Robert K. 

 . Hargrove, Thomas M. Finney, David Clopton, 

 Robert B. Vance, Commissioners of the Meth- 

 odist Episcopal Church South. The result of 

 their deliberations, and the conclusions to 

 which they arrived, were given to the public 

 in the form of an open address to the bishops, 

 ministers, and members of the two churches, 

 the material points of which are as follows : 



After a written communication from the Commis- 

 sioners of the Methodist Episcopal Church South 

 was received and answered by the Commissioners 

 of the Methodist Episcopal Church, both boards met 

 in joint session, the labors of which were continued 

 during seven days. 



We have had a full and free conference and inter- 

 change of views respecting the important matters 

 that claimed our united consideration. 



If any in the churches entertained the fear, pre- 

 vious to our meeting, that we could not attain com- 

 plete harmony of sentiment touching the momentous 

 questions to be determined, they will be rejoiced to 

 learn that, having given due attention to all ques- 

 tions involved in the proper construction of a plat- 

 form of complete fraternity between the two great 

 branches of Episcopal Methodism in the United 

 States, we have arrived at the settlement of every 

 matter affecting, as we suppose, the principles of a 

 lasting and cordial adjustment. 



We nnve the satisfaction to declare that our aspi- 

 rations for harmony of views on vital points have 

 been realized. By divine guidance, as we trust, we 

 have been able, after a frank interchange of views, 

 and prayerful endeavor, to harmonize all differences, 

 and to arrive at the desired consummation of a 

 unanimous agreement of complete fraternity. We 

 believe that no principle of honor on either side 

 has been invaded. We struck the key-note of broth- 

 erly love till it sounded high ana clear, and so 

 have been enabled to reach the elements of perfect 

 harmony. No divergence of sentiment mars the 

 complete unanimity of the joint commission touch- 

 ing the essential principles of fraternization. 



At the beginning or our consultations one great 

 question seemed to overshadow all others. It con- 

 cerns the relation of the two churches to each other 

 and to Episcopal Methodism. To this important 



matter our most earnest thought and prayerful de- 

 liberation were first directed, and the result attained 

 occasioned the interchange of rejoicing congratula- 

 tions between the members of the joint commission. 



We adopted without a dissentient voice the fol- 

 lowing declaration and basis of fraternity : 



As to the status of the Methodist Episcopal Church, 

 and of the Methodist Episcopal Church South, .and 

 their coordinate relation as legitimate branches of 

 Episcopal Methodism, each of said churches is a 

 legitimate branch of Episcopal Methodism in the 

 United States, having a common origin in the Meth- 

 odist Episcopal Church organized in 1784 ; and since 

 the organization of the Methodist Episcopal Church 

 South was consummated in 1845, by the voluntary 

 exercise of the right of the Southern Annual Con- 

 ferences, ministers, and members, to adhere to that 

 communion, it has been an evangelical church, 

 reared on Scriptural foundations, and her ministers 

 and members, with those of the Methodist Episcopal 

 Church, have constituted one Methodist family, 

 though in distinct ecclesiastical connections. 



It was next incumbent on us to consider the ques- 

 tion concerning conflicting claims to church prop- 

 erty, and some special cases that could not conven- 

 iently be referred to the operation of a general rule. 



There were two principal questions to be consid- 

 ered with regard to the church property in dispute 

 between local societies of the two churches: 



1. As to the legal ownership of said property. 



2. As to whether it will consist with strict equity 

 or promote Christian harmony, or the cause of reli- 

 gion, to dispossess those societies now using church 

 property which was originally intended for their use 

 ana occupancy, and of which they have acquired 

 possession, though they muy have lost legal title to 

 it by their transfer from the one church to the other. 



We have considered the papers in all cases that 

 have been brought to our notice. These arose from 

 the following States : Virginia, West Virginia, Mary- 

 land. Tennessee, Louisiana, North Carolina, and 

 South Carolina. In respect to some of these ca*e 

 we have given particular directions ^ but for all other 

 cases the Joint Commission unanimously adopted 

 the following 



BULKS FOB THE ADJUSTMENT OF ADVKB8K CLAIMS TO 

 CHURCH PROPERTY. 



RULE 1. In cases not adjudicated by the Joint 

 Commission, any society of either church, conMf- 

 tnted according to its discipline, now occupying the 

 church property, shall remain in possession thereof; 

 provided, that where there is now, in the same 

 place, a society of more members attached to the 

 other church, and which has hitherto claimed the 

 use of the property, the latter shall be entitled to 

 possession. 



RULE 2. Forasmuch as we have no power to annul 

 decisions respecting church property made by the 

 State courts, the Joint Commission ordain in respect 

 thereof: 



(1.) In cases where such a decision has been made, 

 or in which tin-re exists an agreement, the same shall 

 bo carried out in good faith. 



