Newspapers / The Star of Zion … / Oct. 20, 1898, edition 1 / Page 1
Part of The Star of Zion (Charlotte, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
ORGAN OF THE AFRICAN METHODIST EPISCOPAL ZION CHURCH IN AMERICA. f . _____ Volume XXII. Charlotte, N. C., Thursday, October 20, i8g8. Number 44. ZION IS IMP REGNABLE. • I Cannot Assent To Bishop A. Walters’ Admissions. BY BISHOP J. W. HOOD, D. D., LL.D. Mr. Editor: I have kept out of the denominational controversy whihh was been going on for some time, because I have felt that what I have said in a published his tory will stay said, in spite of any attempt from without to gainsay it. But when a distinguished man among us, who is likely to be quoted as authority, in his com | mendable desire to promote peace and good feeling, makes an admis ! siob, which is not warranted by the record, duly compels me to call attention to the record. Should I be silent now, it may some time be claimed that I assented. Bishop Walters will do well to read Bishop Payne a little more carefully. I am going to let, not only Bishop Payne, but also Bish op Allen speak for himself. Bishop Allen, according to Bish opt Payne’s History of the A. M. E. Church, (vol. i, chapter xi,) made no attempt to organize an independent ^Church in 1793. And what he did attempt, proved a failure. This is what Bishop Allen says: * j‘We intended it; for an African preach ing house or church. But finding the elder stationed in the city was such an opposer of our. proceedings, of erect ing a place of worship, though the principal part oi1 the directors of the churfeh belonged to the Methodist Con nection, and thitt he would neither preach for us, no r have anything to do with us, we held an election to know what religious denomination we would unite with. At this election it was de termined. There were two in favor of Methodist; Kev. ibsolom Jones and my self; and a large majority in favor of the Church of England. This majority carried.” ! Thus it is seen that Bishop Allen had no thought of forming an in dependent A. M. E. Church in 1793. What he did attempt at that time, according to his own statement, was to erect a preach ing place for the African people tvho belonged to the M. E. Church. He says the principal part of those with him belonged to the Metho dist Connection. There was no Methodist Connection at that time except the M. E. Church. They would have erected their house of worship and remained in that Church Dut for the opposi tion of the Elder who would have nothing to do with them. 1 j Now Bishop Allen tells us that only he and Absolom Jones voted I j in favor of remaining in the Meth i odist Church. Bishop White, of | the Protestant Episcopal Church, accepted this congregation, and ordained Absolom Jones as its pastor. And thus Mr. Allen, who said he could be nothing but a Methodist, was left alone. This statement of Bishop Allen is in full acowd with the history of St. Thorims’ Episcopal church in Philadelpt ia, and there can be no doubt of its correctness. > • The year 1793 was a bad one to select. *^And the man who asserts that Bishop Allen organized the A. M. E. Church in that year must have very little regard for his rep utation as an authority on Negro Church history in Philadelphia. The movement, in which Bishop White, of the Protestant Episco pal Church, took advantage of the refusal of the Methodist Bishop to ordain a colored man for a congre gation of colored people and thus formed the St. Thomas Episcopal Church in 1793, is too well known. Absolom Jones was their first pas tor. That church with its history stands to-day as a witness that Bishop Allen’s statement is cor rect. According to Bishop Allen’s statement, he began again in 1794 to build up a congregation under the Bishop of the M. E. Church. He says he bought a bldbk smith shop and had it fitted up for a house of worship. Bishop Asbury accepted it as such, preached in it, and thus encouraged the work. If it is true, as they tell us, that Mr. Allen was ordained a deacon in the M. E. Church in 1799, it is evi dent that he had not formed an in-s dependent A. M. E. Church up to that time. There is one other statement which I cannot accept, namely, that our itinerant system was first formed in 1821. It is true that the first Conference of which we have any record was held in that year. But there have been Con ferences held long since that time of which no< record can be found. Is it not quite likely that there were some held before that time of which there is no record ? Now there are two facts which indicate that our itinerant system was formed before that time. First, there were seven churches represented in that Conference. When were they formed? Four of the churches were formed at least 8 years earlier—Zion, As bury, and two churches on Long Island. This shows that some kind of work had been done, in the way of forming a Connection, long before 1821. It must be borne in mind, too, that 'only one of these seven churches had been served by a white preacher. The entire affairs of six of the church es, had from the first been man aged by our own preachers. Is it not likely that they had Confer ences to arrange these appoint ments? But the other fact is that the first Discipline was published in 1820. By good fortune, Rev. W. T. Biddle, D. D., came across a copy of that Discipline, possibly the only one now to be found. This shows that there must have been a General Conference as early as that year. I, therefore, cannot accept 1821 as the beginnning of our Itinerant System. ' With these two corrections I am quite willing to unite with Bishop Walters in favor of peace with all who want peace. I am not suing for peace, nor will I accept peace on any terms not based on truth a/nd righteousness. Zion has come up through great tribulations, and I do not know that she is any the worse for her scars. She has gotten used to as saults and dan stand a lot of them’ yet. .\- :r. .v" » '’L Y. P. SOCIETY OF C. E. i - Why The A. M. E. Zion Church Adopted The C. E. Society. BY BISHOP A. WALTERS, D. D. CHRISTIAN UNITY. We are in favor of the Chris tian Endeavor Society because it stands for, Christian unity. If there is one thing above another that has weakened the Christian Church in: its work of soul-saving and development of Christian character, it is the denominational strife which has been kept up in one form or another for years, but is now rapidly disappearing be fore the ! flood tide of Christian unity putlin motion by the Chris tian Endeavor Society. Our Lord - in His memorable prayer recorded in the 17th chap ter of John, prayed “That they all (Christians) may be one; as Thou, Father, ajrt in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that Thou has sent me.” I do net believe that the unity prayed for nr the foregoing by Christ Jesus is*an external organi zation, but a spiritual unity of be lievers. An absolute external unity never was and never wiy be. The doctrinal difficulties which separated Calvin and Arminius will perhaps ever exist. The main pillars which are to support the visible Church are liberty of conscience and liberty'of opinion. This is why the Christian Endeav or Society uses the term “Inter denominational.” The unity prayed for is a spirit ual one. | It is the being encom passed by the Trinity, and the dwelling in the unity of that Trin ity of all believers. This com plete oneness of believers with the Father, J*>on and Holy Ghost, is the end; of Christ’s coming into the world. I am cf the opinion that so far as faith is concerned, the formals of faith axpressed in the Apostles’ creed come nearer than any to the unity of faith prayed fer by Christ. ’ * I also believe that the Master had in view the unity of affec tions of believers. Our sentiments, desires and affections are to be influenced, directed and controlled • by a feeling of friendliness and good will: that the one all-pervading, all-con trolling and predominating spirit which disposes us to deal prudently, friendly, kindly, and even magnanimously with each other f)t all times, and under whatever real or imaginary provo cation, shall hold its ascendancy over every other feeling that would sleek to antagonize it, with its banner joyfully thrown to the breeze,, floating in triumph over all human selfishness, emblazoned with “Good will to men.” How ever widely we may differ in opin ions, our creeds, pur views of Church polity, our modes of ad ministration; however diversified our gifts, graces and calling in life; whatever may be our denomina tioral divergencies, we may be firmly and harmoniously united in a spirit of fraternal love. Again, I believe our Saviour in this prayer had in view a unity of purpose or concert of action in the advancement of the Redeemer’s kingdom on the part of His follow - ers. The one aim of all Christian Churches is to make the world better and happier. It is to de velop mankind from zero to com plete spiritual manhood. All evangelical Churches are strug gling to present their »worshipers holy and unblamable in the sight of God. And if they are not, they ought to be doing so. IJsTER-RACIAL. It is our lot to live amongst a people whose laws, traditions and prejudices have been against Us for centuries. Some people dis like us because we were once slaves and have not been able ip these few years of freedom to rid ourselves of all the baneful effects of slavery; others are against us because of our color, notwith standing some of us have only one-sixteenth part of Negro blood in our veins; still others hate us pimply because we exist and suc ceed in spite of all their efforts to “down” us. If we enter a hotel, restaurant or places of amusement, we are told by the proprietor that he has no objection to accommodating us, but that certain guests object, hence we cannot be accommo dated. In this case we are the victims of caste prejudice. In other words, he refuses to accom modate us because he thinks it will injure his business. If a white man stops to hold a conversation with a colored friend on the street or in a public place, or invites him tc his home as his guest, some of his white friends are indignant be cause he dares to practice what he preaches. In this instance the white man becomes the victim of caste prejudice. We are hedged in on every side by prejudice. It is carried on ad infinitum. A series of articles are being published in a Chambersburg pa per by Rev. G. C. H. Hasskarl, E>. C. L., pastor of the second Lu theran church, Chambersburg, Ea., asserting that we (the color ed people) are not human, but beasts; that Adam and Eve were not our foreparents; that we were created prior to them, on the day taat the beasts of the field were created; that we went into the ark as monkeys, and by a system of evolution through the ages have developed into the semblance of men. He deprecates all efforts to develop the Negro morally and spiritually because he has no soul. He declares all this in the face of the fact that we look like men, lalk like men, walk like men, love like men* worship like men, have a liuman, anatomical construction, and possess all, tbfii attributes of a human being. ' , [continued on fifth page.] 1 i SOME ODDS AND ENDS. | Some Things Which Had Better be Considered in Time. BY REV. J. H. MCMULLEN. In his “Searchlight Scenes, ” the Rev. J. Harvey Anderson had better reflect over his sayings in these words: “No man who is delicate in the exposure of his ig norance will think of mentioning the matter of woman ordination in the General Conference, or he may find that “the exposure of ig norance” will be manifested, or rather the cowardice, on the part of those, and those only, who try to cater to the bishops, not know ing how they stand on the subject, by refusing to “mention the mat ter.” Dr. Anderson may find some of these days that men who have the courage of their conviction will re ceive as much at the hands of our Church as those who are fearful of a supposed “unit”(?) to which he refers. The reference made to the igno rance of men who offer “resolu tions not to ordain any more fe males, to confirm the ordinations already made, to limit the ordina tionjfco deacon'a orders, etc., would only spring from that body of ig norant thought, ” we think was un timely and very unthoughtful in Dr. Anderson. The majority of the ministers of Zion are against woman ordination. And the Gen eral Conference will be composed of delegates largely opposed to it; and when Dr. Anderson refers to these gentlemen as an “ignorant body,” he may be building a sub marine mine under his own ambi tions. * * * * With most of the men with whom we have conversed on general topics of late, all are agreed that the manner in which our general fund is disbursed is unfair to Zion and her institutions. ^ For example: Two-thirds or nearly so, of the general fund nev er passes through the treasurer’s hands only in receipts, and these receipts not until the end of the year, or the first of December. This gives those collecting and using this money about five chances to the other departments’ one. This is bad enough, but by order of the Board of Bishops the General Secretary shall not pay out a single dollar in December to anybody, or department, of the Church until the Bishops who have been collecting the general fund all the year are paid up in full, therefore depriving the other departments of their just dues. Now it seems to me that the Gen eral Conference should so amend the financial plan, that every dol lar of the general fund be sent to the Steward; that collected by Bishops as well; and then prorat ed out monthly, giving every one an equal chance in the distribution of the funds. In my next I shall tell why the general fund is not collected. I Harrisburg\ Pa.
The Star of Zion (Charlotte, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Oct. 20, 1898, edition 1
1
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75