New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-10-28
JOINT COMMUNION.
TIE CANYONS AGAINST IT.

TO me Edttor Of The tribune.
SIR: The arguments in defense of Joint
communion service, that Is, communion service adj
minlstered by Episcopal and Presbyterian ministers
Jointly have been two; first, that the administration
may be performed by aymen; second that the oriins
ton Of Presbyterian ministers Is valid Now, as 10 the
first, Article IS Of the 80 Articles says:
al mot lawful for any man to take upon bin tho
office Of ministerng the sacraments before he Do law
fully called and sent TO execute the same"
II that means anything. it excludes laymen from tho
administration Of the Lords supper As to the second.
the preface the ordination service OF the Episcopal
Church says;
mo man shall DO accounted or taken 20 bo lawful
execute anv OF the said functions 1.-THE functions OF
isers Chrsts church, except he be called tried eI
hereinafter following, or hath had Episcopal consecra-
ton or ordination"
Surely that regards a minister except he be
epscopay ordained From these two assertions OF tho
Episcopal formularies perfectly clear that
but Episcopal ministers administer the Communion
Joint service their part with Presbyterans Is prac-
teal contempt Of their own standards The truth
be that Christian love IL 30 working in the hearts
Of Episcopal ministers that their standards will
have TO give way this point Good faithful men have
broken the settled law Of their Church under the i'm
pulse of the Chrstly heart and shall not this impulse
ultimately and forever burst the that not In
accordance with iti We must not believe that our
Lords bond Of union for Is an external one IL Ia
spiritual that unites TO another aud to Him.
Ye,c- York Oct Is. 1873. nc.
THE DISCUSSION PRODUCTIVE OF GOOD RESULTS.
To the Editor OF The Tribune.
SIR: The discussion in your columns upon
Joint communion has led to much good. No one person.
nor one party possesses the sole truth An interchange
Of ideas TO channels Of thoughG and new COZ
efusions. The communication OF W. A NJ in Tuesdays
TRIBUNE upon the subject OF joint communion, suggests
entirely ideas upon the subject OF the Lords Sup
per- and hits the nail right upon the head He says
rightly, that. according TO the New Testament, the
exhibition OF this sacrament Is simply social aot
among feowdiscples OF Christ. II requires min
not necessarily minister" This view OF the subject
upon, not only to mtercommunion. but to open com
munlOD.
The only objection that be offered 10 this view
the subject is that It will tend To familiarlIe this
holy supper reducing II too much 10 bread aud butter
level might lead much 10 social aud rreverent
ideas. due appreciation OF the Lords supper must
depend upon the iOns custom and faith OF the par
ticpants. There still some so peculiarly organized
that they object open communion II required 10 AT
tend other houses OF worship These honest scrupes
be favored by selecting some public hall where al
at the Lords table. We are all seeking Tor
the TRUTH let down TO the bottom rock and upon
a common platform. Let us adjourn the Futon-st
prayer-meeng to Stenway Hail. and all unite In one
Spontaneous outburst or prayer for the millennium,
Nsr. YORK, Oct. %, 1873. ANTIRITUALISr.