Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1818-06-23
Resolution Of the Episcopal Conrentiop.
NO. 2.

NO. 2.
To the Editor of the Enquirer.
SIR....I think | have shown satisfactorily.
that the resolution of the convention will have
and must have beenirtended TO have the effect
OF Keeping away from the communion table
such as permitted themselves TO eDoy certain
amusements-and is an attenpt TO produce
uniformity of conduct and opinion among
commandments, by a formal and authoritative
denunciation III the nature OF Papal Bull If
any clergyman more liberal and enlightened
thnn the rest, pnis different construction on
the resolution, it will not weake Ell my argument,
because, since il is fairly susceptible of the one
i have given to il, all the fanatics and bicots
of the church will quote il as conclusive antho
rity for their denial of the eucharist 10 the
frequenters OF balls, races and thcatres-and
really do not well perceive how anv one wko
was present, however liberal, can saw TO the
communicant. / am willing to admit you to
the hottest mystery of the church. notwith-
standing yourlate conduct is calculated to stain
the purity of the Christian character, to give
offence 10 your piOus brethren. and bring your
own soul INTO danger, and Notwithstanding il is
my duty to inform you that We should come
holy and clean to such a heavenly feast and
that there IS the greatest peril of the uawortby
receiving thereof"
Considering tie subject then in this light I
afirm that the resolution isiu opposition 10 the
principlesand practice of the Episcopal Church
from It's foundation to the present time By
this. do not mean to say. that no members ba.
longing TO that church have heretofore express
speak only OF the large majority, constituting
what may properly be termed the church-and
ct It's characterize tenets and doctrines as nm
derstood BY all the world. 1t nag be true, as is
stated by writer in your paper &" that not a
single canon Of any christian church in any
manner countenances or excuses The amuse
ments which are diSapproyed by the conyen.
tion; VI he means by the assertion, that they
are not therein expressly mentioned and APP.
proved-but IL is true in no other sense. Every
thing which is not expressly condemned by a
church and is not contrary to the practice of
lis founder or its most eminent leaders and
supporters, may be fairly affirmed TO be coum-
tehanced Ell at least c-cnsed by il. If the Old
pOsite rule were to prevail, we shonld have 10
look in the canOnS ola CburchnO for whatthey
forbid, but for what they allowed, and every
child knows that by such construction many
OF our most innocent qualifications and laudable
pursuits would be denied 10 u.s. The absurdity
OF the notion must at once strike every one
capable OF rejecting at all and am persuaded
II has no place any where bnt in the head of
the LAYNAN." In tile canons OF the EpiscO-
pal Church there is nothing TO forbid the
Inducements dsapprOved of by the convention,
unless those who are addicted to them NAV be
termed" open and notorious evil IiveTs " am
not disposed to deny, that professed gamblers
and horse racers may come under these general
expressions. But even yonr coTrespondent
LUCIUs, as warm an advocate as he is for the
convention, asserts, that II is scarcely to he
cOntended that person whose cOnducf is zen
orally moral aud religions, can with propriety
he designated an open aud nOtorious evil liver
merely for visiting the theatre or bail room"
From this admission draw two important
lnierenoes-lst,t that visitors ofthc theatre and
Dali room may, IN general, be moral and rel.
gious and I'd, that thew do net come within
the expressions Of the Rubrc unless their
conduct is in other respects reprebcnsible.-
Inc authority OF LUCIUs, however, is not ne
cessary TO this point. rs long as the canon has
been in force, il has never received such an in.
depreciation, as would prescribe the ball room
or theatre. Some of the brightest ornaments
aud sinceTest disciples of the church. have on
tie contrary, recommended these amuSemeuts
by their preCepts, and sanctioned them by
their example. The most pous ceTgymen of
| Inc Church OF England have openly approved
them-and SO far frsB It's being made test of
| EpSeopai'anism for any one to refrain from
| them, It has been esteemed in Others n mark of
| SectQTiSm and heteTOdOry " The .........r
| says one of the disciples and champions of tile
| Episcopal Church, " hate pleasure and amuse-
| ments no theatre, no cards, no dancing, 10
puuchiDeliO, no dancing dogs, no blind liddlers !;
| all the amusemcnts Of the rich and poor must
| disappears heTever these gloomy people get a
| footing ii is not the abuse of these which they
| attack, bnt the interspersion Of pleasure, how
| ever much II is guarded by moderation and
| good sense il is not only wicked TO hear the
| licenti0us plays Of Congreve but wicked TO
hear Henry V. or the School for Scandal II is
not only disSipated to run about TO all the par.
| ties IN LOuden and Edinburgh. buf danciny is
| net TT for being tcho is preparing himself for
eternity" These doctrines have been contrast.
cd with the enlightened liberality of the Epis
copal Church, Which in truth is its most distin.
| gushing aud characteristic feature, as well as
principal recommendation. Its government
| and discipline, in their nature highly aristo.
| cratica, would never have found favor with
| the plain republicans Of this country if ontbem
| had been founded its only claims. Ithad other
higher ones. 1t was free from tie fanatical
| cant of superstition. 1t did not confound vice
with pleasure. 1t did not wage war with all
! the eiegancies and gaietes of life. 1t did not
| ask from its disciples that they should be
righteous oyeImuch." 1t did not make reli