•jo Separation or Continuity, Which?
to the bitter end. They would not wait until the General Con¬
ference of 1896 either. But they would defend the Church now.
How many of the sixteen general Superintendents have publicly-
denied the charge ? How many of the thirteen editors ? How
many of the nine corresponding Secretaries, the agents of the
Book Concerns ? The answer is, comparitively few. The asser¬
tion of the bisihop seems very severe. Can the Church afford to
allow it to stand before the world unprotested? The colored
man has never charged the Church with hypocrisy, but one high
in authority has. He has never been requested even to apologise
for making such statement about the Church. Is it the ungar-
nished truth that has locked the mouth ol the Methodist Episco¬
pal Church ? Has the Bishop taken her breath away so that she
has no power to speak ? He has hoisted the "Flag Deception"
over the Church throughout the world. It has been hoisted not
in some remote place but unfurled at the Book Concern at New
York. From such a centre it can be seen all around the globe*"
*Drs. Moore, Hartzell, Hamilton, Crary, Thirkield and a few
others have tried to arouse the Church to see the danger of the
book "Union of Episcopal Methodisms." The only reply they
get is, the new book of Bishop Forster is now ready. Most
any one would get an impression from the attitude of the Church
that the Bishop has told the truth. It is bad enough when an
individual is charged with hypocrisy but far worse when a branch.
of the Christian Church is thus charged—a Church that has been
formost in recognizing all men equal in rights and privileges.
the interpretation that the Bishop gives is that the law concern¬
ing equal rights and immunities is intended to include all of the-
members of the Methodist Episcopal Church, the black man ex¬
cepted. Hence the charge is not general but extends only to>
the 250,000 colored members.
Permalink: http://pid.emory.edu/ark:/25593/p2zt1
