The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1871-05-16

thing. Chicago is composed of the former,
and it is astonishing that any ecclesiastical
proceedings whatever should have excited
opposition or even remark on the part of q
population which goes on its way rejoicing,
caring for none of these things Philadel-
phia is of the latter, and it is equally aston
ishing that the first manifestation of religious
dissent or other form of mental activity,
should not have been suppressed by popular
indignation, and the dissenter forced by the
chill contempt of Philadelphia to seek more
congenial Cline Nevertheless Cheney has
plunged himself into hot water by out
Chicagoing Chicago in the looseness of his
theology, and PATTERSON made himself the
target of Phi(adelphian scorn by out-P -Philadel-
phiaiDg Philadelphia in the scrupulosity of
his adherence to forms. OF the two it is
more intelligible that man should be per-
secuted for practical piety in Chicago than
that he should be despitefulIy entreated in
Philadelphia for ritualism never so advanced.
The shepherds who are thus despitefully
entreated for the sake in the one case OF
righte BUSINESS and in the other of ritualism,
represent the opposite poles of the body in
whose communion they both profess to be.
The one has provoked the indignation of his
flock and suffered extrusion from his sheep
fold, and the other, in spite of the fidelity of
bis flock, has attracted the animadversion of
secular arm when the ecclesiastical decision
to which it is to be assumed that they have
beforehand agreed to submit themselves goes
against them. Mr.. Cheney appealed to the
civil courts to keep him in the position from
which the decision of an ecclesiastical court
had removed him. And now Mr.. PATTERSON
appeals to the civil courts to keep him III a
position in which majority of his con gre
cation have strongly intimated to him that
l,o - ,Ax1 L.. ha1 Hna
convicted of violating, and furthermore OK
presses bis intention to keep on violating,
what there is no doubt is an express regula-
lation Of the Church of..which he still insists
that he is priest. The charge against Mr..
patterson is not SO specifically made nor so
fully proven. The objection to him may only
be that the Philadelphian, in the interest of
his own ease, declines to go through the vio-
lent exercise which is demanded of him in
public worship according to the practice of
Mr.. Patterson But it is at least clear that
his congregation do object to him. And it is
also clear that Mr.. Cheney's usefulness as an
Episcopalian clergyman is ended with the de-
cison of the proper body that he is not an
Episcopalian clergyman, and that Mr.. Batter
son s usefulness as the pastor of the particular
flock to which he ministers is ended
with the determination Of the flock that they
have o further use for his ministry. Yet the
one persists IN clln8lDg to church which
has rejected him, and the other to congre-
cation which dislikes him. This teracty, to
the secular mind, furnishes a much more in
furious imputation upon the character and the
lf-respect of the inculpated clergyman than
any possible looseness in doctrine on the part
of the one or any possible rigor of ritual on
the part of the other. For the sake not less
of the tenacious rector of st. Clements than
of his vindctive vestry it is to be hoped that
the courts, ecclesiastical and lay, will arrive
at a decision whereby the wicked Patterson
may be made to cease from troubling and the
weary Philadelphian be put at rest.