New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-11-22
ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION.

ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION
orrRx VICTORIA PARrAKEs OF CoMMUNIoS 0UI OF TIE
CHURCH or ENGLAND
70 the EdftOr OF The Trt6Une.
SIR: The inclOsed extract from Inc Du'deo
Cscoend Aduertsr Of Nov 4may interest your reauors
NJ the present state Of the Potter and Tozer controversy
oueen Victoria the head of the Episcopal Church OF
England, seems to have no scrupes in following the
example OF the Dean Of Canterbury.
GOD SAVE THE QUEEN.
Ne,r- York, Nor. II, 1873.
sAcRAMiNTAL SERVICES IN oRATHIE PARISH CHURCH
HER MAJESTY PARTARING OF me oosMuNios' A.,
Another correspondent writes Her Majesty the
Countess Of Enroll the Hon Mary Put ana the non on
sermon At the commencement of the Communion
service Her Majesty and The aboyenamed iadies l n
the Royal pew, walked down stars, ana entered III.
Taylor's seat, which was covered as communion
table aud partook of the elements OF the Lords supper
tended on Her Majesty and party. the Queen handing
hm her token along with the other ladies, DE. l{ot
to the Rev. Mr. COwan this assistant for the day ana
then the Queen out Of his hand ana thon hahea He
the cup MI Sahl also partOOk of The Sacrament at he
second table, and several others from Bamora: meT
Majesty kept her seat until the two verses or the l1
Psalm were sung after DR.. Taylor had addLe sea the
comnudcants, when Her Majesty left Tor the PALACE
"DIscRETIoN TIE BETTER PART or vALoB''
TO the RAZOR Of The Tribune.
| SIR: Your paper is most commendablc Tor
its freedom in all points OF Interest on religious SUBJECTS
Giving TO Bishop Cummns the benefit OF his wlthdraW-
ing from the Anglican Catholic Church, OF whch ne mas
so long been member, bis move IS one Oh discretion
After % years struggling with his ordination VOWS at
last violating them by his indiscreton, he has wisely
concluded to supersede his peers by not giving them
chopce TO take the compulsory step Of dealing with him
according 10 the laws that bind the Church together
and by constitution that every clergyman knows and
| fully understands before he takes those solemn
| VOWS that hold him responsible. y AS an
| old /, member Of this branch OF tho Catholic
| 49,. ~ ST Al ypa ~
ent moves the Church, years Drought dround te
various controversies regarding ITS worship discipline.
| aud among differing men, L look upon the move OF
Bishop Cummns OF peaceful discretion, prevent
would arise public canvass of hfs act before his
withdrawal Yet u seems TO ine 10 saVo' e VI
claiming 4" | hOler than thou" Oh Two eVlis ne hdh
chosen Inc least; quiet departure lrnsi, ior CON
%eio- YoTk Nov II, 1873.
LOSING SIGHT OF THE QUESTION.
| To the Editor Of The Tribune,
| SIR: In the communications which have
lately appeared your journal in reference to tho law
or laws Of the Anglican Church in respect to the validity
| of nonE Episcopal ordination, as held by tho said
| Church. the writer's pro and con seen to have
! lost sight Of the realaqueston which Is az ISSUE
! They refer 10 the personal opinions OF individual
members of her communion instead Of appealing TO the
universal authority of the Church, as given III her
articles canons and laws, which clearly define her doc
| nd
ascerained position which the Church holds IN tho
question at issuenot by the Catholic faith Puriani
cal error Of certain members of her faith which may be
gathered from the pages OF history here and there
whether true no 10 satisfy the cravings OF those
who to love error more than truth, ana take de
LIGHT in the evolution Of ideas 70 SUIT their own
habits inciinatons, irrespective OF and anagonsc
tOhc letter and WORD of the fatn once delivered TO the
II is true that the mode in which Prof. Fisher and
HstOrcus have conducted the discussion IS cousonant
| viii
toc succession course deny Catholic truth" and
seer to lind some invention OF mans creation %
satisfy him in that which he lackcth" Nevertheless
that does not make the Anglican Church responsible Tor
All its I1emberI have said OF may say. Nttlor the
personal opinions OF these TO be received as author
ty in respect to That which She does or does mol hold
0Louch ii seems that both OF the persons aioromen
toned have stated their historical acts). But what
in all this should cndeAvOr 10 ind out Is whether the
Anglican Church N her tormulares, canOns articles
and laws recognizes tho validity Of u1n-Epscopal ord
nation whether she holds the truth rs SIT forth
in great Councils Of tic primitive church or not
whether conform, IN her discipline TO that set forth
IN the canous aud actS OF taese tOnncno OF hoI anu
lastly whether she holds Catholic truth or Is In error
! Ncig- York, Nov. 10, 1875 L.
| TUN THAT Is INDIGENOUS.
| 70 me Rdttor Of me TrtbuHS
| SIR: As former parishioner CT Prof
Fisher venture respectfully to suggest that he does
not do entire justice to his opponents position Almost
in hs opening sentence he speaks Of the fact that the
founders Of the AM can Church in the reign of Henry
VIII" did not do aud The position OF bis oppo
nents is that tho founders of the Anglican Church"
were certain Christian missionaries, not certainly
known who came to the British Isles in the first OF
second century of the Christian Magma Charta,
he must remember long before the reign oi Henry VIII,
assumed viudcate the rights and privileges Of the
| Church Of England (Eeclesia AngtcanaJ.
Very many cburchmen, high as well as low, VIII go
with him every step in frank acknowledgment that
persons episcOpaly ordained have been Admitted
now and then, 10 parish III the Church of England
! But considering that these have only occurred
| during one century OF the nearly eighteen
| centuries life of tho English Church. they
would conclude very reasonably with him, think, in
| his Latin quotation (ony with reverse application,
ercepo grob4t re0uldn. Their position, right wrong,
| is this For 800 years there has been an English
Church In II the law has always been to effect;
but for brief period, and for motives less OF Church
than State the enforcement OF II has been imperfect
They wait with considerable composure for proof that
this mot the right common-senso view OF the whole
| matter.
Prof Fisher, the conduct of your newspapcr Is the
protest that churchmen feel themselves bound 10 make
against the personal and offensive however witty
marks that several evangelical newspapers nave ill.,
duged in relative TO Bishop Tozef, tho undeslgning
originator OF the whole discussion Instead OF overthrow
ing, attacking the position that he took they
| name. finding indefinite amusement therein.
| Is this altogether COURTHOUSE
Episcopal logic Of tbe period The Very Reverend
the Dean Canterbury, u appears from the evangelical
ennrcb of England" At the recent Alliance but the
aueer DR. TOzer, It seems represented-not Epissopacy
not the Church of England, nothing at all In actunes
IL be ridiculous sDar for the Alliance people 20 make
fun Of lie there not flaw In this logic. newhere
else m the hunOri Are not "unsectarian" friends
forgetting their creed just Bit and becoming little
oyermirhful aud illiberal toward their Episcopal
/ DrethreDf" NJ
/ Milford, Conn, Nov. II, 1873.
DEFINITE EXPRESSIONS OF THE CANON LAW,
| 70 the Editor Of The Tribune.
SIR In your issue of the 18th inst, Theo-
ogcIls" hits nail the head exactly. WHAT is the
law of the Church OF England in reference TO nonEps
copa bodies, OF Christsns In 1868, King James as
sembled his Parliament and the convocation OF the
Church OF E1gland to take action In governmental and