Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1874-05-30
PROTESTANT ,EPIsCOPAL.
Convention OF Diocese Of Maryland
Ritualism piscusset

Convention OF Diocese Of Maryland
Ritualisnn Discussed.
After our report of the proceedings OF the
Diocese Of Maryland OF the 2. L. Caurch closed
Tnursdsy, debate on the question of granting
permission TO the Church of the Holy Com
muuiOn, OF this city, to organize, was continued
by DIR. SOUthgs ate, Hon A. b. Davis, and Others.
In his remarks, Mr.. Davis stated that the petit
uODers do not, in their application, make
acknowledgment or recognition to the Protest
ant Episcopal Church.
Tins was contradicted by DR.. Nelson.
DT. Davis said no one could tell from the
application whether IL was to be a Roman Gain
OliC church Or
Here he was cautioned by the chair to make
Continuing, he said the committee would
have been dereiict ia it, duty had 1t not re-
ported against tue petitioners. Tue reports OF
The workings OF this society were unworthy OF
an Episcopal organization; so many confessions;
high and low masses, and other strange prac-
tees unknown TO them, that tine committee
could not do otherwise. lApplause and Kisses. /
Several members appealed to the chair, who
reminded the audience that such demOastra-
tons we're out OF place, aut if continued. all
except members would be excluded from the
church.
Mr.. Davis continuing said, he knew no other
church bat the Protestant Episcopal, aud ne
could not witness what he had witnessed and
hear what he had heard without entering his
solemn protest against recognizing this as a
church organization; TO ask him to report in
favor OF such practl was an insult to his iudF-
iuSIt VI " uaI ie SIL Anu wrong. lie n AL never
heard such teachings before in his church. aud
he would be recreant to his church u sanction
them.
Rev. Dr. Watkins, of the Episcopal Church.
sald he desired to enter his protest against the
request Of this church He here read from
Canon law upon the IL iunctiou OF strict con-
forntty by the Episcopal Church To the liturgy,
which thls church is charged with overriding
DIR. Nelson cited cases where churches had
been admitted to the union, where the liturgy
was almoet entirely ignored by the clergy a1l
congregation, but in this case it is not a dues-
ton as to admission to the church union, out
simply permit TO organize.
Dr.. Levin argued that permission to organize
a coDgre CATION was al enttaely different affair
from admission to the union; he suggested that
the question be held IN allegiance, and the church
be allowed to 20 on until the next sitting OF tbs
convention. Admission then could be denied
the church should not their record DC a salts
factory one. Another important point was IA 1t
there il nothing In the laws or c4nOns 70 pge-
vent tins congregation, when duly organized.
from migrating to some other parish, where il
mig ht ind more friends.
Mir. Bernard Carter, laym3n. OF Baltimore
made extended remarks In favor OF the II ,iJri-
~ report, ard desired to know how it was IA A.
the rector OF Epiphany church took 50 much
interest in the afairs of st. Johns parish, Chc
rector Of which IL alone responsible for what
IanspiTSs within his own metes and bounds.
The committee should not have gone Gus OF
their way IN hunt for rumOrs and second hand
stories shOat
DIR. Levin insisted that the committee should
circumstances OF the case.
Mr.. Carter, of Baltimore, took the ground
that the convention has no right u pass
on this matter-the test really being one OF
Titual.sm, which the general convention alone
should take cogDizance OF. Ii is simply a ques-
ton OF church organization. He denounced all
such efforts to crush out a free church. Tue
assumption Of his friend, DR.. Levin, that this
church could migrate to another parish after
being orga liZed was absurd. He cited the Ian
guage OF the canon applicable to such cases,
showing that 1t would not be permitted, the law
being explicit.
The teilers appointed to count the votes for
delegates TO tne general convention reported
the following as elected: Rev. Orlando Hutton
ID. D., Rev. Meyer levin, ID. d., Rev George
Leeds, ID. D., Rev. Il. U. Dudley, jr., Frederick
w. Bruno, Il. Wyatt Blanchard, Montgomery
Blair, DR.. Daniel X. Magruder.
Rev. j. Vaughn Lewis, rector of st. Johns
church, got the floor, and said he did not intend
20 be crawn Into the position of an advocate of
the entire practices Of the minister OF the
Church OF the Holy Communion. He had been
abused and criticised BY all sorts of people for
his action in connection with this mission cha
pei. He desired to state the reasons which led
him to take the course which has led to the
much-eOmplaiBed-of results. He had been Ia
boring IN st. Johns parish for nine years, aud
felt the need OF some assistance. He felt that
theie was great need OF another church in his
parish; his congregatio WAS large aud his
church accommodations limited; starving souls
were most abundant round and about him, liy-
Ing without The means OF grace, whom he could
not reach for want Of assistance. His parish
was rsputed to be wealthy, yet their means
however large, were all absorbed by their out.
side dependants-chapeis, schools, asylumns,
&c, that he bsd never been able to have any
help in his labOrs. He related circumstantially
the line of conduct he had pursued in engaging
the services Of missionary for this church. Hs
vas astonlsbed TO see gentlemen from other To-
cslities come here and say that he could haye
no RELIEF Ia his laDors. This assistant had been
engaged By him TO take charge OF the welfare
of this chapel; the consent OF the Bishop had
nsllQ ffs.uE hat
be keep within the rules OF the church, which,
in his own judgment, he had done; but his la
bors had.been made the subject of comment by
newspapers, which had created alarm In the
minds Of the clergy of other parishes, and an
Investigation had been demanded by one.
Here DIR. Lewis was interrupted in his explain
aiion by DR.. Watkins, of the Epiphany church,
who denied having asked for an investigation.
He related his part in the drama; how he had
been amazed on seeing the article in the paper;
had clipped 1t out and dispatched it to the
Dr. Lewis went on to say that when dean
does such an act it was an OFFICIAL act.
Dr. Levin, interrupting, said he was the per-
son referred to. He came to the city to hold a
convocation. He bought paper and found sd :
yertised there that the ofiertOry of the blessed
sacrament, with low and high mass, was to be
transmitted IL to the bishop, and asked If this
form Of worship was likely TO be for the benefit
and promotion Of the church.
Resuming, DIR. Lewis said the communica alton
beirg signed by the chairman of the standing
committee, gave 1t additional weight with the
bishop. He knew nothing about tue advertise
ment at first, but it having been brought to his
knowledge, he went to see Mr. Hobbie, the rec
tor OF the Church Of the Holy Communion, and
told him that be must go to the bishop and IN AXE
an explanation. Mr.. Hobbie also promised tn at
be would not offend again-a like promise had
|been made to the bishop. HIS next trouble was
ABOUT newspaper report, written by reporter
VINO does not seem to have had much knowled xe
ot What nc Was writing about. This report was
fabrication, or 50 distorted that it' ainoun ted
70 .s asorieation; No one could bring any evi
dence mat Dr. Hobbie had Violated the estab-
ished csages OF the church or canon Law
Another member Of the standing Committee
hsd visited this chapel, attended Service and
nad said that while not strictly In Keeping with
usage, stll the services were earnest. simnle
and warm. IL IL possible that much miobt bs
done in this chapel which would startIe cf,urch-
men IN Maryland, but he must say that he knav
Of nothing which was objectionable to himself.
lay delegate here Interrupted Dr. Lavis 10
ask him II the services In this church ware in
his opinion conducted In accordance with the
esta blished rules OF the Protestant Epis,onsI
church Of the United States, and IL ha en-
Dr. Lewis replied that he had never seem ANY,
thing In the conduct OF AFFAIRS that he coutd