ference of 1808, for a few days, is attributable to the death of John Wilson, the secretary of that General Conference. It has no invalidating effect upon the record. 4. The book editor, Rev. John McClintock, D.D., who edited and published these Journals, vouches for the fidelity of the reprint, as a true copy of the manuscript Journals of 1808. 5. The printed Journals show great care and pains by the secretary to keep a correct and intelligible record of the proceedings. The minutes were approved at each session. The failure of the third restrictive rule needs to be accounted for. Note the following facts: The Journal shows that after the report of the Committee of Fourteen had been read and discussed through two sessions, the morning and afternoon sessions of May 16, its further consideration was postponed "to make room for the consideration of a new resolution, as preparatory to the minds of the brethren to determine on the present subject." Thus, for some days, the regulations of the proposed General Conference were laid aside until the burning question of the election of presiding elders by the Annual Conferences was disposed of. It thus seems probable that the friends of the delegated General Conference regarded the passage of the regulations for the delegated General Conference as quite doubtful, if not impossible, until the mode of appointing presiding elders had been definitely settled. Is it not a reasonable hypothesis that Jesse Lee and William Burke, who took the third restrictive rule out of its place among the six restrictive rules, as they were reported by the Committee of Fourteen, and offered it to be binding on the next General Conference, concluded that if the next General Conference were thus estopped from infracting the episcopacy and itinerant general superintendency its permanent validity could not probably, and would not afterward, be infracted by succeeding General Conferences? If Lee and Burke so held it is not improbable that others would hold a like view. The probability of this theory is enhanced by Bishop Soule's resignation in 1820-the second General Conference thereafter-who, on being elected a bishop, declared that if he were ordained he would not regard the resolutions adopted six days before, providing for electing presiding elders by the Annuai Conferences and making them the bishop's advisory council in stationing the preachers. Two days thereafter he declined the office altogether, and his resignation was accepted by the Conference. This shows that in Bishop Soule's judgment there was an irreconcilable antagonism between (1) the election of presiding elders and their being made an advisory council of the bishops in stationing the preachers and (2) the third restrictive rule. Dr. Nathan Bangs gives the same rendering of this action of 1808 as we have recited.* * Unless there is a copy of the records of the General Conference of 1808 other and different from the one we have here considered, the third restrictive rule was never adopted, in manner or form, as the others were. If Lee's and Burke's motion inhibiting "the next General Conference" from infracting the episcopacy and general superintendency was deemed or intended by them adequate to preserve the superintendency and episcopacy unimpaired, and if that view was probably held by enough others to pass the motion, would not that state of facts render the motion binding also upon succeeding General Conferences? It has been erroneously claimed that during the action in the General Conference of 1808 upon the proposed delegated General Conference six of the representatives from the New England Conference and two from the Western Conference became dissatisfied with the proposed restrictive rules, especially the third, and withdrew from the Conference to return to their homes. Yet the bone of contention, according to Dr. Elliott,† was not the restrictive rules at all, but was the provision reported by the committee on the General Conference in favor of representation by seniority and not by electing delegates. To conclude, we can see no evidence of attempted tampering with the Journal of 1808, nor with the Discipline relating to the restrictions. The printed Journals bear prima facie evidence of entire fidelity and accuracy. At the same time, while giving full credit to the documents reviewed, we maintain the equal validity of the third restrictive rule with the other five restrictions, for the following reasons: (1) From the unchallenged recognition of the third restrictive rule in the practice and administration of the Discipline for the last eighty-eight years, since it was reported from the Committee of Fourteen, * Bangs, History of the Methodist Episcopal Church, vol. ii, pp. 229–233. and since it was discussed and in a certain form adopted. (2) Ever since the organization of the Methodist Episcopal Church in 1784 the third restrictive rule has been the fundamental law of the Church, unwritten from 1784 to 1808, and from that time the written law of the Church. But if, in the judgment of a respectable minority of the ministers and laymen of our Church, the theory of this paper as to the full validity of the third restrictive rule, or any other theory put forth and held, is deemed inconclusive, the General Conference of 1896 can safely and wisely submit the third restrictive rule for adoption, or readoption, by the ministry and laity of our Church. The constitution of the Methodist Episcopal Church and the General Conference, already submitted to the next General Conference through the Church papers by Bishop Merrill and T. B. Neely, would, if submitted by the General Conference in an overture to the laity and ministry of the Church, be adopted by an overwhelming majority. The great body of our Church, ministers and laymen, trust and venerate our bishops. They believe in the plan of our itinerant general superintendency and in our episcopacy. They will not allow our episcopacy to be shorn of any of its vested powers. They do not want, nor will they accept, a districted or diocesan episcopacy, unless as a counterpoise and safeguard in such an arrangement the presiding elders are elective and coordinate with the bishops in stationing the preachers. We are, and we prefer and intend to remain, an episcopal copal Church. Practically we have been such for a hundred and thirty years. For all that period we have had an itinerant general superintendency. We believe our system has been demonstrated as the best form of Church polity. Beyond all precedent we have prospered, outstripping all other Churches and even the increase of our general population. We warn all profane, intermeddling iconoclasts, who would sap and subvert our Church foundations, to beware! Hands off! "Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm." Thomas H. Pearne حمد не ART. XI.-PHASES OF FAITH. THE VISIBLE. FAITH accepts the testimony of the senses to the reality of the material world, and is inspired to worship. It holds no theory as to "processes," but believes that monad and man, plant and planet, were born of a "spirit," and not evolved from the universal "space." Reverentially agnostic, it sees nature and says, "God"—not because, according to theosophy, the all is God, but because nature suggests God, as the Sistine Madonna suggests Raphael. Reverentially agnostic, it admits the inherent limitations of intellect, and is not egotistically defiant of that revelation which supplements thought. Seeking to understand, it masters all true sciences-chemistry, biology, astronomy, geology, and mathematics-and regards them as bibles or records of divine teachings. And having cultivated chastity of the eyes it sees the glory of Jehovah in the heavens and the earth. This vision of the visible being undistorted by error of head or heart, faith sees the cosmos as from the standpoint of God himself. Such a spirit delivers from a cynical and sinful contempt of the world on the one hand and a sensuous submergence in its physical delights on the other. The flower that blooms in the garden, the fire that flames on the hearth, the stream that flows from the heart of the rock (without touch of a Moses's rod), the river that furrows its course through the hills, the mountains that tower in majesty above man's tiny home-these and the great realm of which they are types front the soul and awe it, if there be faith, into that spirit and act of prayer which by a glorious ministration of the Holy Ghost puts the adoring heart in accord with the heart which beats at the center of the visible world; into union with the everlasting life of the Creator, whose fiat began those motions that we now discern to be the indices of his presence. "By faith we understand that the worlds have been framed by the word of God, so that what is seen hath not been made out of things which do appear." THE INVISIBLE. The invisible is not the unseeable; it is apparent to the pure heart, its essence being divine. Yet there is an evil invisible from which faith shrinks or which it antagonizes, so identifying itself with God in his antipathy to the maleficent agencies of the spiritual realm. This attitude is the core of life's reality, normal and eternal. Evasion of it, is the death of spirit, animalism dominating men and they becoming as "brute beasts," "without understanding" of the inherent distinctions between the "ought" and the "ought not." That sense which is called "conscience" takes cognizance of the unseen realities of purity, peace, truth, justice, benevolence, loyalty, and righteousness-these, and not merely "persons," constituting the invisible world. Faith not only sees these, but rejoices in their beauty, and lives in them, for them, and by them. Unfaith discounts these, sneers at their dignity, spurns them. Hence, in practical life, men are divided into those who subordinate the invisible to that which is expedient and those who, like Moses, endure "as seeing Him who is invisible," judging themselves by him and conforming themselves in the conduct of life to his image. And so, in the invisible world is a Person-and persons. We will not say what knowledge of the "persons" is possible to us who remain in the body, but surely there is a "communion of saints." All holy souls are "one family," and maintain inviolate unity despite death. To preserve this fellowship it is not essential that there be gatherings in graveyards, or séances, or materializations, or rappings and tabletippings-but only rapt, ecstatic prayer to the Saint of saints, the Holiest of the holy. To see him is to see and to realize the invisible world; and to realize the invisible is to complete the sphere of life, to balance the hemisphere of sense life by that of the ideal spirit life. THE ACTUAL. In some of its aspects the actual is mysterious, repellent, and disillusioning. To taste, see, touch, and know it is to lose faith in the wisdom and benevolence of that some one or somewhat named "God." Nature, in the merciless operation of its laws, in the pitiless play of its power, in lightning stroke, excess of heat or cold, cyclone, earthquake, flood; man, in the animal phases of his external life and the groveling deeds of his false loves-these are tests of trust. Faith is not unaware |