mischievous or erroneous proceeding, decision or judgment, and including a statement of the reasons therefor. [VIII. 2.] 1. The Right to Protest for the Relief of Conscience. That any member or members, for the exoneration of his or their conscience before God, have a right to protest against any act or procedure of our highest judicature, because there is no further appeal to another for redress; and to require that such protestation be recorded in their minutes. And as such a protest is a solemn appeal from the bar of said judicature, no member is liable to prosecution on account of his protesting. Provided always, that it shall be deemed irregular and unlawful to enter a protestation against any member or members, or to protest facts or accusations instead of proving them, unless a fair trial be refused, even by the highest judicature. And it is agreed that protestations are only to be entered against the public acts, judgments or determinations of the judicature with which the protestor's conscience is offended.-1758, p. 286. 2. The Dissent or Protest must be Entered before the Rising of the Assembly. Any member who may think himself aggrieved by a decision of the General Assembly, shall have his dissent, or protest, with his reasons, entered on the records of the Assembly, or filed among their papers, if given in before the rising of the Assembly.—1822, p. 44. 3. A Protest Arguing the Case is Refused. Dr. Martin presented and read a protest against the decision made in his judicial case, when, on motion of the Rev. D. J. Waller, it was Resolved, That Dr. Martin's protest is only such in name, while it is in reality an argument of the case which the Assembly has refused to hear, as not regularly before it, and that he therefore have leave to withdraw the same.-1865, p. 592, O. S. 4. The Protest must Confine itself to the Reasons on which it is Founded. The appropriate business of the protestants was simply to give the reasons on which their protest was founded, not to answer the arguments of individuals in debate, for which the Assembly is not responsible.1844, p. 378, O. S. CV. If a dissent or protest be couched in decorous and respectful language, and be without offensive reflections or insinuations against the majority, it shall be entered on the records. [VIII. 3.] 1. Protest Admitted to Record without Answer, Dr. Stuart Robinson read a protest, signed by himself and others, against the adoption of the paper of Dr. R. J. Breckinridge on the state of the Church. This protest was, on motion, admitted to record without answer. Another protest, signed by Rev. A. P. Forman and others, was likewise admitted to record without answer.-1862, p. 636, O. S. 2. Protest refused Record as being Disrespectful. A protest was received from Dr. Boardman and others against the action of the Assembly in the matter of the Louisville Presbytery. After discussion, on motion, it was Resolved, That it be the sense of this General Assembly that the protest of Dr. Boardman and others is not respectful in language, and that it be returned to the author.-1866, p. 104, O. S. 3. A Protest should be Recorded only by Order of the Judicatory. Exception to the records of the Synod of Albany. A protest on pp. 323, 324, which was handed to the stated clerk, and by him recorded, when it does not appear that he was directed by Synod to make such insertion.-1828, p. 242. 4. Protest Received and Put on Record. a. In the case of the complaint of Nathaniel West, against the Presbytery of Cincinnati, in the case of West vs. the Rev. B. P. Aydelotte, the Committee recommend that, as no sufficient reasons for direct complaint to the General Assembly have been presented, the complaint be referred to the Synod of Cincinnati. The following protest against this action was presented, and ordered on record. [See Minutes 1877, pp. 576–580.] The committee appointed to answer this protest reported: "That in their judgment no answer is required."-Adopted 1877, p. 580. b. A protest was received from Rev. Josiah B. Bittinger, D. D., Rev. Henry W. Ballantine, and Rev. George L. Kalb, D. D., against the action of the Assembly in the adoption of the report of the Committee on Bills and Overtures, in the case of the Sewickley church against the Synod of Erie, and ordered to be put on the records of the Assembly. [See Minutes 1877, p. 582, 583.] c. A protest was presented by Rev. Royal G. Wilder against the action. of the Assembly in adopting the report of the Special Committee on his paper relating to the Board of Foreign Missions, and ordered on the records.-1877, p. 583. d. The Rev. John G. Hall, D. D., in behalf of himself and others, offered a protest against the action of the Assembly in reference to the report of a minority of the Committee on Publication, which was received. and ordered to be put on record.—1884, p. 110. CVI. The judicatory may prepare an answer to any protest which imputes to it principles or reasonings which its action does not import, and the answer shall also be entered upon the records. Leave may thereupon be given to the protestant or protestants, if they desire it, to modify their protest; and the answer of the judicatory may also, in consequence, be modified. This shall end the matter. [VIII. 5–7.] 1. No Answer deemed Necessary when the Assumptions have been Refuted. The Committee appointed to answer the protest against the proceedings of the General Assembly on the "memorial complaining of sundry grievances abroad in the Church," made the following report, which was adopted, viz.: That after a due consideration of the whole subject, and believing the protest to be founded on assumptions which were fully refuted and proved untenable in the course of a long and thorough discussion of the several resolutions adopted, they deem it inexpedient for the Assembly to assign any further reasons for the course pursued in relation to the above memo. rial.-1834, p. 450. 2. The Answer Denies the Imputations of the Protest. a. The Assembly deems the following a sufficient answer to the protest against the action of the Assembly upon matters connected with the "Declaration and Testimony." 1. It is apparent upon the face of the protest, that its signers deeply sympathize in principle, spirit and action, with the signers of the said "Declaration and Testimony," in opposition to the General Assembly. 2. The paper imputes to the Assembly, in several particulars, that which does not appear from anything contained in its action in the case; but the Assembly is disposed to pass over this infirmity, and the disrespectful language employed in the protest, attributing these to an apparent inability, on the part of these brethren, to divest themselves wholly of prejudices which have grown out of the unhappy contest in which the country and the Church have been engaged during the last several years. —1867, p. 365, O. S. [See chap. ix., sec. ii., sub-sec. lxxviii., a, b, Book of Discipline, 1841 p. 449, O. S.; also chap. ix., sec. iv., sub-sec. lxxxiv. (6), 1844, pp. 380–383, O. S.; and chap. viii., sec. lxx., 1858, p. 609, N. S. In many cases the answer of the Assembly to a protest gives the fullest explication of its sentiments. See Form of Government, chap. i.; Digest, pp. 84-86 (26), b, 1869, pp. 658-665, O. S.; and Book of Discipline, chap. ix., sec. iii., subsec. lxxxiii., 1844, p. 383, O. S.-M.] b. A protest of Francis B. Hall and others against the response of the Assembly to the overture of the Women's Christian Temperance Union of Wisconsin was received and admitted to record.-1885, p. 649. The Assembly answer as follows: The Committee appointed to prepare an answer to the protest of the Rev. Francis B. Hall and others reported an answer, which was amended, adopted and is as follows: The action of the Assembly is a reaffirmation of the action of former Assemblies, on the subject of communion wine, to the effect "that the control of this matter be left to the Sessions of the several churches, with the earnest recommendation that the purest wine attainable be used." We find nothing in the alleged protest that has any pertinency or application to this action, and therefore no further answer is needed.-1885, p. 685. CVII. No one shall be allowed to dissent or protest who has not a right to vote on the question decided; and, in judicial cases, no one shall be allowed to dissent or protest who did not vote against the decision. [VIII. 8, last clause new.] 1. Protest will not be Received from those not Members of the Body. A paper of the nature of a protest was offered by the Rev. W. G. Craig from persons not members of the Assembly, which was read, and on motion, returned to Mr. Craig.-1867, p. 359, O. S. 2. A Protest can be Brought only by the Minority of a Judicatory Itself. The Committee on Minutes of the Synod of Sandusky report that they have examined these records, and find them correct, and recommend their approval, except that the Synod has entered upon its minutes, on page 75, a "formal protest" against the action of the last General Assembly. Your Committee judge that remonstrance or complaint, for the reopen ing of a question, may be made by an inferior judicatory to a superior: but that protest against the action of the General Assembly can be made only by a minority of the body itself.-1864, p. 307, O. S. CHAPTER XI. OF JURISDICTION IN CASES OF DISMISSION. CVIII. THE judicatory to which a church member or a minister belongs shall have sole jurisdiction for the trial of offences whenever or wherever committed by him. [V. 2, X. 3.] [See under chap. vi., sec. xxxvii., Book of Discipline.] 1. If the Presbytery Dismissing have become Extinct, the Presbytery to which one Charged as above comes may Refuse to Receive him; in that Case, the Jurisdiction is in the Synod. [See Form of Government, chap. x., sec. viii. 17.] 2. Reception of a Member on a Qualified Letter is Void. [See Form of Government, chap. x., sec. viii. 21.] 3. Jurisdiction over one Charged with an Offence is in that Presbytery of which he is a Member. Overture No. 25, from the Presbytery of New Castle, asking the General Assembly to determine, whether that Presbytery, or the Presbytery of Cleveland, has jurisdiction of Rev. J. F. Severance. The facts in the case, appearing in the overture, are as follows: Mr. Severance was a member of the Presbytery of Wilmington (which was succeeded by the Presbytery of New Castle), but left the bounds of that Presbytery in 1868. In 1870, he was within the bounds of the Presbytery of Cleveland; and, after the reconstruction, twice sat in the Presbytery of Cleveland as a corresponding member from the Presbytery of New Castle. In September, 1871, he was received a member of the Presbytery of Cleveland, under the operation of Principle 5, adopted by the Assembly for the purpose of reconstruction. Before the Presbytery of Cleveland adjourned the sessions at which Mr. Severance was received, that Presbytery obtained information, that rumors affecting the Christian character of Mr. Severance had come to the knowledge of the Presbytery of New Castle, and said Presbytery had appointed a Committee, to inquire into the facts, and correspond with Mr. Severance in regard to them; and this Committee had not been discharged, when Mr. Severance was received by the Presbytery of Cleveland. After the Presbytery of Cleveland had received this information from the Presbytery of New Castle, they reconsidered their action receiving Mr. Severance, and declared said action null and void. The question is, To which Presbytery does Mr. Severance belong? The Committee recommend the following answer: . The decision of the Assembly, made in 1816, settles the principle that membership in any church judicatory is an entirety, and is not divisible. The judicatory is the judge of the fitness of an applicant for membership in it. The vote of the judicatory invests the applicant with all the rights of membership, of which he cannot be divested except by due course of discipline according to the Book. Hence, Mr. Severance is a member of the Presbytery of Cleveland, and that Presbytery has jurisdiction in his case.-1872, p. 72. 4. The Presbytery within whose Bounds an Offence is Committed fulfills its Duty in Notifying the Presbytery to which the Offender Belongs. When it is alleged that a minister has committed an offence in the bounds of a Presbytery of which he is not a member, the Presbytery in the bounds of which it is alleged the offence was committed, has performed its entire duty in the premises when it notifies the Presbytery to which he belongs, of the allegation and the grounds on which the allegation is based. The report was adopted.-1869, p. 922, O. S. CIX. A member of a church, receiving a certificate of dismission to another church, shall continue to be a member of the church giving him the certificate, and subject to the jurisdiction of its Session (but shall not deliberate or vote in a church meeting, nor exercise the functions of any office), until he has become a member of the church to which he is recommended, or some other evangelical church; and, should he return the certificate within a year from its date, the Session shall make record of the fact, but he shall not thereby be restored to the exercise of the functions of any office previously held by him in that church. [X. 1, last part new.] [For the jurisdiction of the Session over members non-resident, see Book of Discipline, chap. xii., sec. exvii.; over licentiates, see Form of Government, chap. xiv., sec. xi.-M.] 1. A Suspended Member may not be Received on Profession by another Church. If Received without Knowledge of the Facts, his Name to be Stricken from the Roll. Overture from certain members of the Presbytery of Madison: A person is (we will suppose) under suspension in one of our own churches. He removes, and unites, on examination, with another of our churches, the session of the latter one being wholly ignorant of his former membership, and, of course, of his suspension. The facts are, however, afterward discovered. Would this discovery, of itself, vitiate his second membership, and leave him simply a suspended member of the former church? Would unworthiness for church membership, clearly manifested, while in the latter church, and before said discovery, rightfully add any efficacy toward producing this result? To the first of the above questions the Committee recommend an answer in the affirmative; to the second, if the question mean whether the session of the second church has jurisdiction in the case of unworthiness manifested in the second relation, the Committee recommend an answer in the negative; but if the question mean whether the unworthinesses manifested |