New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-10-31
JOINT COMMUNION.

To TIE Right REQ. GEoRGB DAVID CUahiss, d. d., Assist
ant bishop Of kentucky
Right Rev. SIR: In your letter OF the 10th
inss published In TIE TRIBUNE, you furnished oertaia
references 20 authorities for the statement which yon
had been called upon prove and said that II moro
were desired they would be given As soon ~ saw
your letter wrote nskng you 10 puoish all tue evil
dence you could find that tho whole matter gnt be
dealt with at and also requested that you wond
not put OF with nero references, but PRINT
your authorities IN extens0, that our readers
might DO able to follow us iDteligiblY, and
that might not hold you responsible for
anything less or more than you Intended TO quote. But
the signed Hstorieus had contained much more
10 the way Of evidence than yours did, and as tho quota
lions in It given at fun length, thought "oud
time and trouble you would assume II as your own
This suggestion made, Right Reverend Str, from
any dcsre 10 embarrass you, but the contrary. ]
wished TO draw the correspondence to close and con-
sidered this good way Of saving time and preventing
your being unnecessarily troubled. And felt that
could make the suggestion fairly. but those who agree
with you the general question. TO regard the
letter OF Historieus satisfactory IN fact rs Ina-
swerable.
Up to this time you have made no reply whatever and
as 1t is very important that the question between IFS
should be decided without further delay feel at liberty
10 act on the supposion that you have nothing further
10 say proceed therefore, 10 examine your case as
presented In your two letters and In that OF Jsor
Gus As TO the document last mentioned wish II un-
derstood that its beng noticed at oil s due only to my
earnest desire to avoid the appearance OF unfair
ness do not want you to lose the benefit OF anything
that will strengthen your but as You The only
person with whom have any debate, and as no good
effect can be produced by controversy with an
anonymous dsputant, 1 must regard you as re-
sponsble for whatever Is thus admitted ON your SIDE
offer here IN lmine explanation which, it 10 hoped,
will prevent any one making the objection that have
desired TO impose upon you terms TO which do not
bud myself. Your statements and authorities being
the subject OF discussion it IL necessary that they
should be set forth plainly and In fun IL Is not 80
necessary in the other case shall have to make many
references, and II all wore printed at length, our read
ers would be wearied, what ia even more likely TIE
TRIBUNE would refuse TO publish my letters. Conse-
ouently shall give reference where tnat ought ~
suffice, and full quotation when It seems TO be It.
CURED And now. Sir, to the point ut Issue.
Your assertion was that for many years after the
begnning OF the Reformation Presby terian dtynes
were received In England and admitted To parishes
without reOrdnaton" aud your warrant for say Ing
go YOU point Peter Martyr and Martin Bucer, 10
held seats a. Professors OF Theology in the Universities
Of oxford and Cambridge" But did It not Occur to
YOU Right Reverend Sir that even II these were cases
that would justify what you said you had not 80 stated
them as 10 make their connection with It eyidont IL is
not 10 be supposed that all your readers know enough
about Martyr and Bucer 10 supply ont OF their own
knovledge the defect OF your reference. IL
WAS incumbent upon you, then, first TO chow
that these were Presbyterian ciylnes"
IN The sense OF having had only Presbyterian ordina-
aton ana them second. TO gyo the names OF the par
shes to which they admitted, and OF tue persons
0bo amounted and licensed them. You have furnished
touothIng OF this kind Sir; and that which you added
your general assertion, as II 1t were tulcleht 'lncl-
ton OF A. proves useless Your case breaks down IN the
very first stage. might here dismiss the aluson 10
Martyr and Bucer, aud pass on to the o1aminauon OF
yonr second letter. but that readers may see how
willing am to gave proper attention TO everything that
even looks Ike evidence, viii devote some space TO
this.
Iii very clear Sir. that you believed the Resormcrs
you mentioned only Presbyterian diyincs." but
when you undertake to subsahtiate an assertion you
should entail upon yourself the trouble OF proving
,our proof. In Ia opinion tho eeclesiasticsl
standing Of Martyr and Bncer you are not alone The
Rev. r. IL. Newton published In Philadelphia in 1868
sermon in which he referred to them as Presbyteans
and SAID they were wholly without Episcopal ordina-
ton" but at that part Of his discourse the reverend
gentleman forgot his text, which was Prove all
things" Others have dealt with these names in the
same manner, asserting confidently, but giving no
authority. Here then the facts: the men you
mention were both economically ordained priests Their
right 10 minister word and sacrament was precisely
the same as that possessed By John Huss and Mart II
Luther
Peter Martyr vermls born in Florence A. D. 1890, en-
tered the order sAugustine at Fisco thence he went
70 Padua spent eight years in the monastery there
lie was then appointed Abbot or Spoetto, afterward
Abbot OF St. PeteradAram." Naples, aud then Prior
at ucca an honorable situation which invested him
with Episcopa powers" After being noted preacher
for ls years. he renowned his allegiance to Rome.
Martin Bucer born in Alsace A. D. l49) was Jaco
bin" or Dominican frar man OF great learning and
prominence lis was time chaplain to The Elccfor
itrfItg lnF a.Ht "a n
doctrines Bucer was favoraDly impressed aud two
wears aftervard ho jolnei the Reformera. Zee
D,Aulignes History of the Reformation, VOL Edin-
burgh edition, ls47, page 100: McCres Reformation
in Italy, page III. &C.; MidGlleton's Evangelical
biography. Vol H.
such then Sir. the men OF whom II Is said that
they we're wholly without Episcopal ordination" And
vet II such were the fact you could not mud 10 their
case any for assertion for these men were
never admitted to parochia cures in England You say
they held seats Professors at oxford ard Cambridge
and this is gganted-but what thenf DO you maintain
that professorship and parish are one ana the same
thing II not, what is your reference worth Striving
10 defend you this point Hstorcus raises new ques
uons He says: "Dr McCosh is no less true minister
because he presdes at Princeton ia the office OF Dr.
VIM Sparrow at Alexandria Seminary below that OF the
Rector OF St James Bristol" TO this reply that the
man who true minister does not lose his eeclesl-
stical character by becoming Professor or President
OF a college but the fact OF mans being Professor
or President not prove that he Is true minister
sill less doe prove hm the rector OF parish Tine other
instance ia just LITTLE to the purpose The venerable
Dr. sparrow holds office that may be considered
much more important than that which unwoTtily MI
but he Is not ONcio pGrochia minister Ana permit
me to remind you, Sir that that s what You must prove
PRESBYTERIAN 81 vines 90 have been In tho Chnrcn 81
England II your had been that the Engiish
Government gave employment In the universities 10
certain European reorncrs. or that professors char
and a parish are identical, or that professor OF diiy
is a more important person than mere WORKING pres,
byter verify Sir shoud not have wasted my time aud
yours in discussing II.
Historcus seems ready 70 yield the point concerning