WESLEYAN METHODIST TRUST BILL

Evening Post, Volume XLIV, Issue 46, 23 August 1892, Page 2

WESLEY AN METHODIST TRUST BILL

« TO THE EDITOR. Sik — I have no intention of interfering in tho correspondence on thiß subject as between the Rev. J. J. Lewis and '' Protest." Mr. Lowis is quite able to' take care of himself. Bat in your issuo of this evening your correspondent "Protest" bo gravely misstates the facts of the case, that I ask pormission for a few lines in reply. First, a» to the publication of the intentions of the> Conference through tho annual minutes and by tho Methodist— Within a week of the last Conference's rising, several hundred copies' of tho minutes were distributed through all tho circuits of the connexion, and the officials became acquainted with their contents. In the "minutes" the steps to be taken aro explicitly stated. Notwithstanding what "Protest" calU "the ridiculously limited circulation " of the New Zealand Methodist, nearly 2000 copies of it, with the report of Conference, were circulated and read in tho Methodist families of the country. I may also add that the action of the committee charged with the duty of drafting tho Bi 1 was duly reported in the issue of 21st May. What other steps the Church could have taken to make it known, it is difficult to sec. With reforenco to the supposed contrast and opposition betweon tho action of tho Genoral Conference and the Now Zealand Annual Conference, the very terms of tho clause in the Bill which your correspondent quotes shows there is no such opposition , and that the Annual Conference has not/ exceeded the permission given. That olauKO concludes by saying, " For any such number of years ac the Conference exercising supremo jurisdiction in the colony shall by resolution permit." Tho Conference " exercising supreme jurisdiction in the colony" is the General Conference. That clauso binds us to obey the resolution. Should the General Conference hereafter enact that the maximum term of a minifiter's residence bo .four years, three, two, or even one, that clause would still bind us. It is, in fact, self-adjusting, but leaves the supreme governing body of the church to determine what is desirable from time to time. " Protest " refers to a " comparatively small number of ministers ' ' aa constituting the Wesleyan Committee of Privileges. If he is an well acquainted with the Wesleyan Church in this colony as he represents himself, he must be perfectly aware that on that committee there are twelve ministers and eleven laymen, the laymen being gentlemen whose names and character command universal respect in the different parts of the colony in which they live. Tho attempt to thus mislead the_ public as to the composition of this committee is certainly unworthy. I am, &c, Wm. Morlkt. Wellington, 22nd August. TO TELE IDITOB. Sir— Permit me briefly to reply to " Fair Play." The Wesleyan Trust Bill will not touch the pockets of " Fair Play," or of any of those who, like him, are troubled about the provisions of the Bill ; neither will it curtail any of their liberties. But it will permit, when occasion requires, a minister to remain longer in a circuit than has been 'permissible in the past, but this will only be done by the express wish and desire of a large majority of our people, through our representatives assembled in our Church Courts. Surely, sir, after being approved of by a unanimous vote of our Conference, it should satisfy any reasonable person that the Bill will bo satisfactory to all our people. The opposition to it, to my mind, betrays a dieordered imagination, and certainly does not redound to their good sense. When "Fair Play" says that many persons doubt as to the wisdom of entrusting Conference with tho liberty the Bill will give it, he simply says that we, the Methodists of New Zealand, are a lot of children, and mnst be kept in leading strings for another century. By that time we may hope that a wiser set of men will have come to judgment. Sir, in this case our foes aro those of our own household. I am, &c, W. Clabk, Wesleyan Trustoe. P.S. — Since writing the above I have read the letters of " Protest " and " Weßleyan." I again repeat that "Protest" does not represent the Methodists. He is a wolf in the fold. There is venom in his letter. He dare not disclose his name, as he is well aware that his effusion would carry no weight with it. As to "Wesleyan," he is plausible but shallow. He should not try to build a reputation on his martyred relatives, and, despite his assertion to the contrary, I do

not regard him as an honest doubter. If splits take placo in onr Church, it is caused by mon of the " Wosloyan," " Protest." and ' Fair Play " tempcramont, who, to my mind, aro fit candidates for tho Cave of Adullam. Personally, if I were sni-o that they represented Methodism, I, for ono, would refiro from tho fold.— W.C. •23rd August.