Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1868-10-22
RITUALIssL.
Rev. y. w. Rogers Sustained by
Bishop POtfery 6rNew York.

4 ~ SAA6ASo -
promptly and peremptorily refused, by a
large majority, to confer he power
claimed 6y our Bishop and resisted 6y
our feeble pdyish, be has low forwarded
to Memphis 8 letter signed by the Rev.
| DR.. Wheat, to be circulated for other
signatures, to forbid my preaching and
| disperse my congregation, under q canon
| which requires the assent OF q majority
| of the ciergy-refeFred to In my former
| communicatious as q mere technieglity-
with which / had nevertheless complied,
II the clergy would all stand to their
tCord. This letter was shown me this
morning, and 1 hasten, before other sig
natures may be obtained, to ask the very
great favor Of you to insert the following
Just delivered by Bishop Potter, OF New
York, that the clergy may have this
great divine's view Of the matter before
they condemn noe.
You win be struck with the fact that
my illustrations of "Ritualism y from
the nIflHdTy Uiea0, published by your re-
porter five weeks ago, seems to have
suggested the Bishops more splendid de-
fense. You will also observe that we
have never had the " excessive Ritual
ism" which the Bishop p~ronounces lar
fuI, but not suitipg his tastes. Those
AAoAAA 6AO "A H9oib6 N8AACS ~
introduced IN so poor q congregation as
". ROGERS.
RESTRICTIVE EGIsLATION o NEEDED.
Isay restrictive legislation in regard to
Ritual Is not required in the Church In
this country, and for two reasons: 4
First-Exeessive rEt1alfsm (so-called)
IS it is seen in sonae places in England,
has not transferred Itself to this country
to any extent worthy of notice. II has
never from the first had vitality enough
On this side OF the ocean to propagate
Itself. It is ten years or more since the
first alarm was rsised, since certain fes-
lures appeared for the first time in one
or two small churches In this Diocese.
These ten years have passed away, and
still everything that can possibly be
charged IS real excess is confined to two.
or three small churches. Fol- to speak
E1f such services as those Of Trinity
Church ss worthy OF grave censure, Ito
treat choral services and Slsrpticed chosrs
and professional psalms and hymns as
things perieus to the Churcb,-is q puer-
lity hardly entitled to serious coasidera-
ton. We can hardly presume to cut
ourselves of from all reference to the Gu
hOr5tyG and example Of the mother Church
from Which lGe are descendsdj aud in
the Church OF Engfsrd most people
know that choral services and supplied
ehoirs snd PROFESSIONS have been familiar
things yer since the Reformation. Par
.ticuIEr individuals, being unused to these
things, may net frd them helps to de-
v2tiOn, and asy prefer to attend 8 wor-
ship whioh is differently ordered. This
they are perfectly at liberty to do; but
for them 70 attempt to deprive others Of
the services which they do not choose
for themselves, for them to denonncs
those services rs unlawful and wicked
aud perilous to the souls OF men, and to
seek TO have them put under 3 ban
throughout the whole Church, is scarcely
consistent with Christian moderation and
chsrity-searceIy consistent with the
comprehensive character Of the great
Communion to which they belong. l
say, then, that real excuses in Ritual
ha e appeared in this country only to
an extent which ia insignificant, that
they evince 10 power to propagate them
selves, and therefore call for N restrict
i've legislation, for, u
In the second place, such as they ara,
they may be safely left to the authorities
OF the Diocese in which they occur.
EAAAf II LAAOGD dAL1tLAhlCS hIO Ht-Ey kilcI
will act in all sueh matters with great
reserve and moderation, whatever their
own individual views may happen to be.
The real limits TO which services may bs
carried without yiolStion Of what msy
be called law aud usage ia the Church,
and without symboliziBg false doctrine,
are somewhat Vagina. IL is some eight
or ten years since I remarked in a con-
ventionRl address, that iin the discharge
OF my duty | visited q church where the
services we're somewhat peculiar, and if
| did so without special remark upon the
services, 1t was not TO be Inferred that
they were altogether to my taste, or that
l entirely approved them; that IL those
services by liberal construction could be
brought within the limits of the Law and
usage OF the Church, it did not seem TO
noe 80 become a Bishop to ATTEMPT to rule
them 6y the measure of has oa0a iadSvid
uGk idi0syRcTdstes. / think so still. Aud
/ think, moreover, that 3 Bishop had
better, Ia such things, be slow to act.
Many evils are Of q nature to cure them
shd 3 microscopic vision and
hasty aud SBtperioas action are 6y no
Means the best securities for ecclesiastical
order.
Enough has been said in the preceding
part of this address to show that the
Bishop OF this Diocese Is very far from
being friendly to excessive Ritual, as, on
the other hand, he Is eguslly far removed
from Partially to q narrow and restrict
i've system ia regard to the worship Of
the Church. That within thelsst twenty
years there has been, upon the whole, 5
great change for the better ia the form
and style OF our holy places, in the treat
ment Of them, and in the more careful
ordering OF the services, especially in
many Of the smAfter parishes, few a q
did and well informed persons win be
inclined to deny. And II these changes
have tended to the incresse OF visible
reverence for everything pertaining to
the public worship OF Almighty God, II
in MANY respects they have been Of a
nature to interest ana engage the young,
and g these changes (changes not in sub
but 10 a few particulars Of msn-
ner-of outward expression), if these
changes have in no Wsy interfered with
the preaching of the truth as it is in
Jesus" or with Church work, 1t seems
to me that it need not greatly alarm US.
AGRICULTURAL FAIR-MEMBERS TAKE
NOTICE I'm consequence OF the change
il the programme, deferring the exhibi-