, 1875-08-22

XTEEN PAGES.
and the Chancelors OF tho Diocese md Of Tho
| Cathedral being allowed to cast thnir yotes,
| without which there would not have been eyoo
the Appearance OF majority for Dr.. De Koven.
! Ine n result IL well kporn: Al the predictions
Convention were fulfilled to the tetter.-more
than fulfilled Dr.. De KoYen did not receive
| one-thtrd OF tho votes OF tne Standing Commit
tees neceesary for his confirmation and election
as e. Bishop Of the Episcopal Church OF the
heard-of e1ertions BY his friends, both in the
diocese and In all other parts Of tho Church
where they could be found. the R1tualist,c
party, and IT'S organization known aa
''Ihe Confraternty OF the Blessed 8acrament,' -
being eVerywhe active and unscrupulous IN his
support Notwithstanding all this, Dr. De
koven received oulv twelve out Of the forty five
votes OF Standing Committees thirty-three votes
being either cast against him or wishhsd from
him That is the decision Of the American
we'll more decided or en ohatic. It refuses to
receive Dr. De Koven Is one Of it's Bishops,
What. now. do DR.. De Koven's friends in the
Diocese OF Illinois propose to do under these
Tunes (Aug 15). and the circular Of Messrs.
Judd i Co., already referred 20, indicate the
Of these gentlemen. However carefully dis
go1seo, and with whatever fair prete1ss urged, it
amounts SIMPLY to this: That the Diocese Of H.
linols shall refuse to submit to the decision OF
the whole American Church, shali insist upoa
the election OF DR.. De KoVsn. refuse to elect
any one e1se aad 30 maintain state at chronic
feoeliion until the General Convention or the
Standing Committees can be forced into accept
ing aud confirming DR.. De Koven, Prof. Sey-
nour, or any one else whom they please TO NOM
mate to them. In word, these gentlemen pro.
pose to inaugurata revolution in the Govern
ment OF the Episcopal Church in the United
states, TO make each diocese independent,
and thus to destroy the unity and
solidarity Of tho Church in this
country. a presentation OF the main points ia
these two articles, which evidently have CON-
mon origin, will make this plain:
f1rst-Ihe circular commences by saving :
- We arc satisfied that it IL the very general de-
sire OF those who supported DR.. De koven for
Bishop At the Special Convention in February
last, ana or some who did not then support him,
70 secure hls consscratlon II it be possible"
From which It is plain that, though the great
oodY OF the cnurch has declared Int it does not
wish to have Or. Deh- among ita Bishops. they
are detcImlned' II they can IN any way effect it,
10 pace MN a. ~ Ina 1nas posl1lon:
oecond-lne i1Mes editorial argues that there
Is no mnn 10 tne Ameflcan Cnn,ch worthy to take
kno p1aeo Mu1ca u INSISTS snai1 De reserved
- N-~~1 -.1A.' sc""As:
soe osugpl1c H VI tiIi1os' II says IL Is argued
s'lat LIZ O4oc9se euuelo !ol VAIL o. an EplscopaI
hea3' 1rue, nut nlgos It 9ot sa1ee more WITH
an an Eplscopal aeaa wno "oula % 1eeoie' atstaste-
~. aua uaa..eu tor uls "oKn IL TO- tnsn pa
.lent "1t;og VII 70 9s oo LOSE. htsenslon IL caueo
GO tne tplacooa' 1a4lufea OF ane Cnatcn' "nefe
BISHOPS nave oaeo elected 10 haste, and both
uocoso anu olsnop naso repeutea very soon aud
very ions. mete 6!saop 1s pos Ine oesioera-
san.' os one WHO ~ niee iof the IT, once ana mofk M
BISHOPS .a IN sne american Gnolcn 1es De peer ior
some tne eAnaunsea' ~ No1 oh} ~ ,! or: 10 AoSen
the only one teat tne Diocese OF 1lnno1s can no"
OBTAIN ior this purpose, out other qoceees have
suffered terribly because 20 e. taey a.a not take the
IN 70
snaken "nen w. s.a tememoer 10" ereau7 lt ainets
from tnat OF inc great ooog OF the Aner1can
Ghnrcn. T Luz "I1te1 seems 90 sn,nk taat Or:
De hoVen Is tne only man tna1 tne ul4cese OF
nAno.s can nao "oo - Ss a. ~. q ~ o9 btshop.
put lne amefcan cnurcn mas through It's
Stanaing Comm1ttees. .? majority OF nearly
thtee % one. aecloed tnas II. Oe ho7en Is aito-
eetneI unnt'ea lol tnle oince' auu tnas tne 10
cese n'a"e 'ef5 st@ve n''ss&Ae ~ Ae'ec''nR n'1n
LUZ II. ......,
that, In all HE eelect1oDs there ought to 30
more than ordinary care. Very true lndead.
But who does not understand that the Diocese
Of Illinois could make no greater mistake in
tois uost 1nPoEsaut mater taan oy se!ectlng as
l!s Bishou man who does not enjoy the conf
deuce of the Church generally, OF whom the
representatives OF more than one-halt. nearly
three -fourshs' OF our dloceses have sad that he
should not be Bishop, and that the Diocese OF
Illinois committed . great mistake IN electlns
him
FouTta-But Mr. Judd, and the other gentle
men who have undertaken with him to dictate
the course that the D!ocese OF Illinois SHOULD
pursue, proceed to tell us that the Standing
Committees we're mistaken IN their judgment,
and that they may DO brought to TAKE different
view Of the matter reconsider their vote. and
confrm Dr. De hoEen as Bishop Of Illinois.
They say, There is no doubt that
the failure thus far to secure the
necessary consent to his consecration
is due to 8 Misunderstanding OF the views held
by our Bishop-elect in regard to the Holy
Eucharist. 4 proper conception OF those views
can be gained only BY careful examination OF
what he has said in somewhat lengthy speeches
and writings; and this fact may account for the
continued misunderstanding that exists. There
is little. it any, question that brlat, pointed
e1plauation OF those views BY the Biahop-elect,
in reply TO \ request to that cad from the Con-
vention OF the Diocese, would secure his speedy
That is certainly very remar kable vie" OF the
c3ka DR.. De kQyeQ. 1t Is declared, Was rejected !