National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1874-01-26
RITUALISM Is ROIANISM.
TIE ISSUE IN THE PROTESTANT
EPISCOPAL CHURCH..

LETTER FROM REV. J. T. HUBBARD hEo-
TOR OF THE CHURCH OF T'!f : "a Ndf'hs
HIS VIEWS ON THE - = III - HIGH
CHURCHIsM sYNoNYMou- y til RITUAL
ISM. ... 4
10 IA. Editor Of the National Republicans:
SIN. Attention has recently been called in your
columns to the issue between the two opposite
Schools Of belief In the Protestant Episcopal
3hprch. The great importance Of this subject,
he necessity for the thorough discussion Of It ct
his time, and the harm done by any misconcep.
ZION As tc the real nature Of this issue, arc my
apology for asking your courteous permission To
say = few words in regard toit. t.t :
have the utmost respect and Christian regard
sSadamsnsaly V 70 dis1. VITA some Of tie ss
lreme Ritusiists have had very delightful
Chrfsean intercourse, which hope again to re-
but 6 principles. The very excellencies OF eher-
these %eR a. giving weigh. 50 sne 10
1t has been we'll said in yeuf cesamss Snst thc
conflict is between the Protestant and the anti
sehe line TO be drawn between these connietiag
elementsf Is Il between Rtaaiasn on the one
hand and High ChuIchis@ - Nv Church
ranked with Ritualism as On the Protestant
sfdef what, then, lie High Cherchtsaf Various
81 4 ha e.
scteristic of High Ohurchsm 10 the doctrine Of the
erciusipe validity Of Episcopsl OF diasfiea. Thus
,fshoot and logical Developments Of High Church
ism, and that the resi- issue h between Low
Cburchism and High Ohurchtsm. Ritualisn
ieadiy influence Of High Uhurchisn Is more
subtle, and 80 moro dangerous
Only last week, i'm milking with Dr. Sparrow
and DIR. Riley on this subject, repeated to DR..
Sparrow what had already been saying to DR..
Riley, that he ltDr. Sparrow considered High
shese errors " Dr.. SpsTrcW resrsrmed what said
with added emphasis, and went on to unfold and
establish this position at length. 81
In o commencement address, delivered at tho
Fairfax Theological Seminary juno p, 1859, Dr.
Sparrow said:'fThis notion, now so incessan.iy
Impressed upon 'ss, of what h called unhroken,
tactHaf succession, deserves to be called the tap
root Of saeerdotalssm. Its the cause which, CON-
bning the lialpabieness of matter with the sub
:lety Of msns acts as an eliectsai gnderpimiDg
and practicen = .In = reformed church
that theory is in a most uncongcnial suil and can
lend to the ssubversion of that church. The in
congruifyis such as must, moreover, ever make
1t q trouble to- the Protestant mind. If they
would have peace, true, internal peace and real
stability, they must rid themselves Of II some
hing foreign TO the body, like an irritating motc
20 the eye oran enfeebling poison in the veins
In an article wrote not long since for the Epic
-,opdlidR, entitled -'What is Our Real Danger"
took the ground that eur real danger WAS from
article read to DIR. Sparrow, and he entirely as
vented to 1t. i1quote thus largely DR.. Sparrows
opinion on the subject because Of his very high
Butgwe are pointed to the strong protests which
Ire being made by High Churchmcn against |
Rituaiism 1t has been said, NO heavier blows
ists' than by pronounced High Churchmen." That |
many High Churchmen are frightened by the de- |
Telopments of Ritualism is indeed true; and no |
wonder for tits the logical Development of their |
,wn principles: tits further advance on the same
road on which they themselves are travelling: it |
brings discredit upon High Guardianship. But
after what fashion are they contendng against it?
What weapons do they employ?
Our leading High Church paper, the Church |
Journal and Gospel Messenger, Of New York. in !
It's issue Of January Is has a most vehement pro-
lest against Ritualism expressing its alarm at its
weeks before. ID it's New Years salasaton 70 its
readers and statement of its own position. occurs
this sentence: ""While believing and teaching that
the Church is the Catholic Church Of this land,
and as such dominant Orer the conscience ~
ask what is this utterance but essential Ro-
mauism?
But yet more, in an issue, If remember rightly,
Of July, 1872, of this same Journal WAS an edito-
gal rebuking the assumptions Of the Ritualists
or asserting that certain doctrines amohg them
tween. High Churchmen and the Rituahsts was
narrowed down to this: are these doctrines Gath
olic2 If they are, We acknowledge ourselves as
Catholic ehurchmen bound to receive them.
Thus 1t is only an Interpretation of Catholic
tradition which keeps them back from accepting
these doctrines of Ritualsm and also the worst I
teachings of the Church of Rome. How long will
such barrier keep men back? What utter ig
noring Of the Protestant position that the word of
God is the sole rule of faith and practice!
Can men holding views like these deal any
effective blows against the Ritualists' Are they
not building up with one hand what they pull
down with the otherf As q Protestant Episco-
palian utterly disclaim aal alliance with such
views and such teachers; and, for myself and for
many Of my brethren, 1 must afirm our convic-
ton that the issue now impending in our Church
is between Low Churchism and High Cnurchism.
To put the issue anywhere is to mslcad, 1t may
be 70 mislead fatally. JOHN P. HUBBARD.
Pastor of the Church Of the Strangers. L
.WAsHINGToN, Jan. n, 1874