COVER PHOTOGRAPH: Dr. Fred Pierce Corson as he
appeared when elected
the episcopacy in 1944. For more
details, see the back cover and the article
beginning on page 70.
THE CHRONICLE is published by the Historical Society of the
Central
Pennsylvania Conference of the United Methodist Church, PO Box 2053,
Mechanicsburg PA 17055
THE CHRONICLE
Journal of the Historical Society
of the
Central Pennsylvania Conference
of the
United Methodist Church
Milton W. Loyer
editor
Volume XV spring 2004
Editor's Preface .....................................................................................…...........2
Francis Asbury and Freeborn Garrettson
Struggle with Wesley, War and
Warfare…………………………………..3
by Ken Loyer, 2003
Two Separate Unions Formed One United Church……………………….…....20
by David
Oberlin, 1979
Two United Methodist Churches of
Williamsport PA (1968-2002)……………43
by Edward
Hunter, 2003
Behind the Scenes: A Document Concerning the 1968 Union………….………70
Editor’s Introduction: by Milton Loyer, 2004
First Thoughts on Reading “Plan of Union”:
by Fred Pierce Corson, 1963
Contemporary Comments on Unions within United Methodism………….……78
from various primary sources
1.
Early Methodist-United Brethren
Correspondence: 1809-1813
2. United Brethren Unions that Weren’t:
1903-1927
3.
Central
Pennsylvania’s 1939 Non-Union
Inside back cover:
The following appeared on page 7 of the March 10, 1923, Religious Telescope, a
weekly news magazine of the United Brethren Church. It gives an outsider’s view of
the negotiations between the two Methodist Episcopal denominations that
eventually broadened to include the Methodist
Protestant Church and produce the
1939 three-way merger that formed
the Methodist Church.
Methodist Negotiations
The commissions of the Methodist Episcopal Church and the Methodist Episcopal
Church, South, had a meeting recently and made more progress than at all previous
meetings combined, so it seems. The conclusions reached by the two commissions are
brief, sensible, and apparently workable.
They are as follows:
“Whereas, we hold that the Methodist Episcopal Church and the Methodist Episcopal
Church, South, are essentially one church, one in origin, in spirit, in belief, in polity, in
ministry, and in purpose, and believing that they should become one in name, in
ritual, in terms of membership, in administrative activities and bodies in the home and foreign
field, and, in order that this essential unity may become effective, the following plan of
union is presented for adoption by the processes required in each church:
“That a church be organized by uniting the Methodist Episcopal Church and the
Methodist Episcopal Church, South, under a constitution with a general conference and
two jurisdictional conferences.
“The name of the church shall be…”
“Jurisdiction No. 1 shall be composed of those annual conferences in America and
various mission fields now constituting the Methodist Episcopal Church.
“Jurisdiction No. 2 shall be composed of those annual conferences in America and
the various mission fields now constituting the Methodist Episcopal Church,
South.
“Each jurisdiction shall have a jurisdictional conference with the full powers now
possessed by the general conferences of the two respective churches, except in so far as
those powers may be limited by the constitution of the general conference hereinafter
provided for and by such other powers as may be delegated to the general conference by
the jurisdictional conferences from time to time.
“There shall be a general conference, composed as the general conferences of the two
respective churches are now or may hereafter be constituted. The powers and limitation
of this general conference to be as hereafter defined by this join commission. Every vote
in the general conference shall be by jurisdictions, and shall require the accepted majority
vote of each jurisdiction to be effective.”
The whole religious world will await the outcome of these negotiations. Many
members of both big branches of Methodism do not see adequate reason for continuing
these separate organizations. Most of the pre-war questions now are settled, so that the
cause of division should not continue operative. Much sentiment remains, and there is
difference in the theological tendencies of the two bodies, and the Negro question intrudes
its bothersome presence. The future course of these churches will be both interesting and
influential. Ever since the separation, almost, the two branches have had commissions on
union. The commissions have had a good time while together, but their efforts to this time
have proved abortive.
Back cover:
Bishop Fred Pierce Corson
Fred Pierce Corson was born April 11, 1896, in Millville NJ and
died February 16, 1985, while a resident of Cornwall Manor in
Lebanon PA. He graduated from Dickinson College
in 1917 and
Drew Theological Seminary in 1920, served as pastor and district
superintendent in the New York East Conference, and was
elected President of Dickinson College in 1934.
In 1944 Dr.
Corson was elected bishop – much to the surprise and displeasure
of Dickinson College, an event which strained the relationship
between the college and the denomination.
His connection to our Conference is two fold.
First, Dr. Corson
transferred his membership to the Central Pennsylvania
Conference in 1937 and became, among other things, an active
member of the Board of Trustees. It was
as a member of our
Conference that he was elected to the episcopacy. Secondly,
during his 1944-68 tenure as bishop of the Philadelphia Area, he
was the episcopal leader for the former Methodist congregations
now within the Harrisburg District of our Conference.
In this issue dedicated to the unions of United Methodism, The
Chronicle is pleased to publish Bishop Corson’s insightful
reflections on the original draft of the 1968 Plan of Union and to
claim him as “one of ours.”