New-York tribune., 1870-08-06
THE LORDS TdBLE.

Il is not very pleasant to read OF the
wrangles and contentious in England over the
Holy Eucharist. On the 9Th inst. the Bishop
of Rochester presented to the ConvOcation a
petition from the English Church Union, which
drew the attention of the Right Reverend
| House TO the service recently held in Henry
VU,s Chapel. L. The memorialists complain
that the Holy Communion was administered,
without distinction, to members OF the EstaD-
lsbed and Free Church of Scotland, as well
as to Independents, Baptists, Wesleyans, ana
Unitarians The Union processes TO DC ex-
ceedingy delighted to find that these HeretlcS
should have the grace to approach the LORDS
Table at all. But--alas there is always But
in these Matters" that the most sacred PRIV
d" ileoe of the Church n-the Communion
" should be conceded to SOcinians, as beng
" Socinians and without any difficulty being
" raised ON behalf of the Church the peti-
tioners feel this to be q dishcssOr to our LOrd
and Savior I" of the gravest and most en-
"phatic character ia scandal fraught WIN
possibilities of danger"
Then came much episcopal debate. Inc
Bishop of Gloucester explained. There was 10
be revision of the text of Scripture A
learned Unitarian was invited to assist Gel
ebration of the Holy Communion before enter
ing unon the great work was determined upon,
and the learned Unitarian was invited to be
present. The Bishop saw no harm IN this'
"We VENT he said, as Christian men TO re-
ceiye the solemn Communion of the BODY
&" and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, to
strengthen us for the responsibility OF our
great work. at was" continued the
Bisbop. ga solemn act of holy charity, con-
trasting very strongly with the unhappy and
i'll timed petition that has just been read"
"When we knelt reverently," said he, around
Edward Wis tomb, we did not trouble our
"selves to ask pharisaicaly as to who might
Z" or who might not be kneeling around U.S."
1t seems to us that these were noble words TO
come from a dignifed prelate Of great and
powerful church. The Bishop of Salisbury
! followed in q similar strain. The Bishop OF
Llandaff-Dr Watson's old diocese it will be
remembered "he did not know who was
present y for he had, we presume, something
| else to think about The Bishop of Ely had
I" not been in the habit of thinking that Nom
conformists were not Christians" The
Bishop Of Bath and Wells did not regret
(" their presence.n The Bishop of Hereford was
| OF like MIND. 30 was JHe DIsuOp VI LOhuVh'
Only the Bishop of Winchester seems to have
thought that the Savior had been dishonored
by the administration of the sacrament to q
Unitarian; and by common consent the sub
iect seems to have been suddenly dropped.
This is an incident which, as laymea, we
may be incompetent to discuss; but we venture
to remark that at the institution OF the Eli
charist by the Redeemer, there were present
| ST. Peter and Judas IscariOt-the one about to
deny the Lord and the other to betray bin.
We have right to suppose that the weakness
of the one and the treachery of the other were
equally well known to the Savior yet neither
the unfaithful nor the traitorOus disciple was
driven from the sacred board, as they prOba-
bly, would have been if, with full knowledge
of coming events, the Bishop of Winchester
had been presiding. As we consider what vast
differences still keep asunder the believers in
Christianity, we cannot be sufficiently grateful
for the complete disappearance of physical
torture in behalf of orthodoxy. Sharp words
are not to be desired, but they are infinitely
better than bloodshed and burning.