Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

rative wants of the Church; of Ministers who must be supplied from their body; of money, which is more needed than ever, to meet the increased expenditures of the Church; of earnest and holy zeal in the cause of Christ, which is needed most of all, and which, if aroused to its proper tone, will insure the supply of the other two needs referred to."

The following persons were appointed to constitute that Committee:

"Messrs. S. B. Ruggles, of New-York; Alex. Duncan, of Rhode-Island; Sam. H. Huntington, of Connecticut; Washington Hunt, of New-York; J. C. Garthwaite, of New-Jersey; Robt. H. Gardner, of Maine; Simeon Ide, of New-Hampshire; Edward A. Newton, of Massachusetts; Isaac H. Redfield, of Vermont: Wm. Welch, of Pennsylvania; S. F. Dupont, of Delaware; J. Mason Campbell, of Maryland; D. H. Conrad, of Virginia; Thos. Ruffin, of North-Carolina; R. F. W. Allston, of South-Carolina; James Potter, of Georgia; George R. Fairbanks, of Florida; Robt. F. Bunker, of Alabama; George S. Yerger, of Mississippi; W. N. Mercer, of Louisiana; E. B. Nichols, of Texas; F. B. Fogg, of Tennessee; A. H. Churchill, of Kentucky; Bellamy Storer, of Ohio; James Morrison, of Indiana; Daniel Hough, of Missouri; H. P. Baldwin, of Michigan; A. L. Pritchard, of Wisconsin; H. B. Richards, of Iowa; H. F. Wells, of Maryland; Ed. Stanly, of California; Judge Otis, of Illinois, and David Hunter, of Kansas."

Increase of the Ministry.

The following resolutions were adopted:

"Whereas, the rapid, growing demand, in all parts of the country, for the services of the Church, and the present impossibility of supplying regular Clerical services in parishes and congregations already in existence, make it imperatively necessary that the Church should, through this General Convention, adopt some measures promotive of an immediate increase of the ministry, therefore, "Resolved, That the Parochial clergy be earnestly requested to bring the Church's pressing need of additional laborers before their respective congregations at least once a year, or oftener, if thought expedient; also to solicit offerings for the education of indigent candidates for Holy Orders, and at all suitable times, and in all suitable ways, to impress the Church's want upon the minds of the young.

"Resolved, That it be recommended to the clergy to urge upon their congre. gations the duty of bestowing upon the training schools and colleges of the Church a more liberal and effectual patronage, and that the heads and teachers of our institutions of learning be invoked to lend their aid in such forms as their judgments may approve, in the great work of supplying pious and well-educated candidates for Holy Orders."

The Memorial.

The Special Committee on the Memorial reported the following preamble and resolution:

"Whereas, The preamble and resolution adopted by the House of Bishops on the 18th day of the last session of the General Convention, in relation to the use of the Book of Common Prayer, and published in the Journal of the said Convention, has disturbed the uniformity of worship which should prevail throughout our Church, and have been received in various parishes as lawful authority for deviating from the Rubrics.

"And Whereas, in the opinion of this House, no such change can lawfully be made, except by the joint action of both Houses, in General Convention, made known to the several dioceses, and adopted in the manner prescribed by the Constitution of the Church: therefore,

"Resolved, That the House of Bishops is hereby respectfully requested to reconsider the said preamble and resolutions, and instead of any separate action upon the subject-matter, to send down to this House such proposals for any change of worship as it may deem expedient, to be acted upon in the manner required by the Constitution of the Church for making alterations in the Book of Common Prayer.

"The following are the resolutions adopted by the House of Bishops at the last General Convention, on which the above preamble and resolutions are based:

"Whereas, The use of the Book of Common Prayer, as regulated by custom, has special reference to established parish churches, and to a population already incorporated with the Church.

"And Whereas, our actual work is, or should be, among many not yet connected with our congregations, or where there are no established parishes, and where said parishes are yet in their infancy.

"And Whereas, there are, or may be, in different dioceses, peculiar emergencies arising out of the character or condition of certain portions of the population, which demand some special services.

"And Whereas, the Book of Common Prayer should be so used as most effectively to cherish true devotion, and set forth the Gospel and work of Christ, and contribute to the extension of His kingdom among men.

"And Whereas, the House of Bishops have heretofore expressed opinions as to usages which may be allowed under existing rubrics and Canons; therefore, "Resolved, as the opinion of the Bishops,

"1. That the order of Morning Prayer, the Litany, and the Communion Service, being separate offices, may, as in former times, be used separately, under the advice of the Bishop of the diocese.

"2. That on special occasions, or, at extraordinary services, not otherwise provided for, ministers may, at their discretion, use such parts of the Book of Common Prayer, and such lesson or lessons from Holy Scripture as shall, in their judgment, tend most to edification.

"3. That the Bishops of the several dioceses may provide such special services as in their judgment shall be required by the peculiar spiritual necessities of any class or portion of the population within said dioceses, provided that such services shall not take the place of the services or offices of the Book of Common Prayer in congregations capable of its use.

4. That in view of the desirableness of union amongst Christians, and as a pledge of willingness to communicate and receive information tending to that end,

and in order to conference, if occasion or opportunity should occur, this House will appoint by ballot, a Committee of five Bishops as an organ of Communication or Conference, with such Christian bodies or individuals as may desire it, to be entitled the Commission on Church Unity.

"5. That in making the above appointment, it is distinctly understood that the Commission is clothed with no authority to mature plans of union with other Christian bodies, or to propound expositions of doctrine and discipline."

The above preamble and resolution were referred to another Committee, by which the following majority and minority reports were submitted.

The Report of the Majority.

"The Special Committee, to whom was referred a preamble and resolution relating to certain resolutions adopted by the House of Bishops respecting the use of the Book of Common Prayer, have had the same under consideration, and respectfully report:

"That by the 8th article of the Constitution of the Church, the Book of Common Prayer, as adopted by the General Convention, is directed to be used in all the Dioceses which shall have adopted the Constitution; and no alteration or addition shall be made to the Book of Common Prayer, or other offices of the Church or the Articles of Religion, unless the same shall be proposed in one General Convention, and by a resolve thereof made known to the Convention of every Diocese, and adopted at the subsequent General Convention. The effect of this article is to make the whole Book of Common Prayer, with all its Rubrics and Ritual, as authoritative as any article of the Constitution; and we are not remitted to tradition or ancient usage to ascertain the form of worship thus sanctioned, but the express words of the Constitution point us to the Book established by the General Convention.

"We therefore have as a starting-point a written document, unalterable except by the General Convention, after communication with the Dioceses. The General Convention is a body composed of two Houses. It follows of necessity that the concurrence of both is necessary to effect any lawful change, and that the separate action of either must be submitted to the other, before it can have any legal efficacy.

"It appears to your Committee, that written law is chiefly valuable, in that it can not be changed, saving by interpretation or new enactments made by lawful authority. Interpretation of the law in cases that come up for adjudication, is the office of a court. Any more general interpretation is only another name for a legislative enactment, and like an enactment, would require the sanction of the lawmaking power.

"Your Committee have most carefully considered the preamble and resolutions of the House of Bishops, which form the subject-matter of the resolution referred to them, and can regard them in no other light than as an exercise of legislative authority. They possess none of the characteristics of a judicial act. No case is

made, no parties appear, no court is organized. There is not a single feature which professes to be judicial.

"Here, then, is a general interpretation of the intent and meaning of a Ritual and of Rubrics, by resolutions of one branch of a legislative body. Such resolutions, if they have any legal force, are, in fact, declarative statute. Of course, the other coördinate branch of the legislative body must have the same right, and may pass resolutions contrary to those of the other body. These, too, must have the same legal force, and we are thus presented with the anarchy of two statutes in the same government, in direct conflict with each other. The only alternative to this anomaly is to consider the action of each body as inchoate legislation, having no binding efficacy until transmitted to the other body, and adopted by them.

"The action of the House of Bishops in the matter under consideration seems to your Committee to be a legislative proceeding. Without entering upon other considerations, there is one which seems to your Committee to be conclusive. The resolutions assert that the Services of the Church being separate Services, may, as in former times, be used separately, and then adds, under the advice of the Bishop of the Diocese.

"If indeed, the Services are separate, and might be used separately, then as there was no Rubric or Canon limiting the discretion of the Minister, the clause in the resolution which subjects the matter to the advice of the Bishop, is entirely new, and gives an earmark to the whole enactment; and the third resolution authorizes the whole Book of Common Prayer to be set aside in certain cases, of which the Bishop of the Diocese is constituted the sole judge.

"Your Committee consider it the well-established order of this Church, that no law can be enacted or changed without the concurrence of the Bishops, the Clergy, and the Laity. In the worship and doctrines of the Church, they all have an equal interest, and for the security of each, the Book of Common Prayer, the administration of the Sacraments, and other rites and ceremonies of the Church, the Articles of Religion, and the form and manner of making, ordaining, and consecrating Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, were made part of the Constitution of the Church. If the Bishops can in any manner change these particulars, then the rights of the Clergy and Laity are infringed; and even should the Clergy make a change, with the advice or consent of the Bishop, the rights of the Laity are infringed, and the change can not have the force of law until they all consent.

"Upon the whole matter, then, it seems to your Committee that the separate action of the House of Bishops, as published in the Journal of the Convention, is an infringement of the privileges of this House; and that it becomes a solemn duty which we owe to ourselves, to our constituents, to the Church, and to our posterity, to take appropriate action upon the matter. Such an infringement even in cases of ordinary legislation, would present grave considerations. But in a case like this, where the Prayer Book and the Constitution, where the rights of Clergy and Laity, where the order and good government of the Church are involved, the matter assumes the gravest importance.

"Believing these views to be founded on truth and justice, your Committee entertain the hope that they will have weight in inducing the Right Reverend Bishops to reconsider their action. The preamble and resolution referred to your Com

mittee are conceived in that Christian spirit which directs us to apply in the first instance to our brother to correct what we think an error, and therefore meet our approbation. No opinion whatever is expressed upon the expediency of the measures proposed by the House of Bishops. All that is asked for, is the recognition of the just rights of this House as a coördinate branch of the General Convention, and each member is left free to act as he shall see fit, upon any measures that may be proposed.

"The Committee, therefore, recommend the adoption of the preamble and resolution referred to them.

FRANCIS L. HAWKS,

WM. COOPER MEAD,
J. H. MORRISON,
C. G. MEMMINGER,
J. MASON CAMPBELL,
EDWARD A. NEWTON.

Mr. Wm. Welsh, of Pa., from the same Committee, presented a minority report upon the same subject:

The undersigned, as a member of the Committee appointed to consider the preamble and resolution offered by Mr. Memminger, respectfully reports:

"That he can not unite with his colleagues in asking this House to pass the preamble and resolution referred for the consideration of the Committee, for the following reasons:

"1st. Because the preamble and resolution of the Bishops is not officially in possession of this House, and therefore should not be considered by it.

"2d. Because Mr. Memminger's preamble and resolution asserts that the House of Bishops adopted the preamble and resolutions, implying that the action was by that Ilouse as a coördinate branch of the General Convention, and consequently, subject to revision by this House, whereas it is to be viewed as merely a concurrence of the Bishops sitting at a Synod or Council, answering a memorial of various presbyters addressed to the Bishops, only asking that a commission of Bishops be appointed to consider whether some means could not be devised to better adapt the Episcopal Church to the social necessities of the day, etc., etc.

"3. Because there was no adequate testimony presented to the Committee to substantiate what is asserted in the preamble, that the uniformity of the worship in our Church has been disturbed by the action of the Bishops, whilst my own observation and the testimony of impartial witnesses, lead me to believe that the efficiency in the ministrations of our Church has been greatly promoted in the true spirit of the first Christian Council, where it was charged 'that it seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things.

"4. Because the proposed preamble and resolution is aimed at one of the prerogatives of the Bishops, as invariably acknowledged by this House, that is, of interpreting the Rubrics and regulating the worship in accordance with the Book of Common Prayer. When decisions are asked for by this House, an answer is sent to it not for revision, but for information. When questions are submitted by others, no notice to this House is required. It may be seen in the Journal of 1847, that similar questions may originate elsewhere.

« ElőzőTovább »