, 1875-02-14

Ills fEn8 our QEEaH1B 10 4oAAe7s AVkNA
"confosA1 or TEE GUARD"
oAK PARE, Ill.,, Feb. Il. 1875.
THE De kOVEN QUESTION.
HIS soUEDSEss IN THE FAITH.
To The Editor If The Chicago Tribune:
CHICAGO, Feb. 12.-Prior to the General Con.
vention Of 1874, there Was q widespread fear il
our Church that Rituaiistio practices and the
doctrines taught by and with them we're gradu'
alIy sappiug the Protestant foundations of oul
Church, and the action Of the General Conven-
ton was anxiously awaited The Canon On
Ritual passed By the Convention allayed thosa
fears in great measure, and ali true Church
men thanked God and took courage. The action
Of the late Convention Of Illinois in elccting DR..
De Koyen has reawakened those fears. It is not
question of DR.. De koyeu's manner OF
living, Of his talents, or Of his elo-
quence, but it is question Of his aoundness
IN the faith and Of the propriety Of eleyating
him to the Epiecopate. While there may bo no
question as to allowing individuals to believe,
and to teach others to believe, in prayers for the
dead, in promoting the culsus Of our Blessed
Mary, in confession and fasting, as necessary to
the due reception OF the Holy Communion, and
in ador1ns Christ present in the elements, there
can be no question in our minds that the
Bishops ought NOT to consentto the conservation
OF Or. Dc Koyen, the champion OF those who
hold these views, qnless they are prepared them
selves to indorse them, and indoraement they
will give by asserting to his consecration
Dr.. De Koven has NOT held his views
coyertly. Wherever he is known in the
Churches he is known as holding ''advanced !"
views, and upon the determination Of the ques-
tion whether bis views do or do not rightfully
represent the Church of which he is an houored
ptasbyter, must the assent OF refusal to his con-
seoration be given. The fact that he has great
charm ps manner, personal magnetism, So
called, And ia cultured aud eloquent, is only
additional reason why those who oppose him on
octnnal grounds alone should continue their
opposition till the question Of his conservation
is determined By majority OF the D'shopa.
As Dr., Locke saws OF Bishop Whitehouse in his
sermon memorial OF that learned Bishop 'and
only inde1lble where the faith was involved"
80 We say We arc indexible in thls opposition be-
tied by our Church among Protestant bodies as
the keeper and defender ot the truth to ba seri-
ously t6reatened. Let the qualities which DR..
De Koyen possesses in remarkable degree &C:
company want ct souudness IN the faith, and
he ia ali tho more dangerous as leader. Many
now support him, though not agreeing with HIM
doctrinallY, because Of admiration, and because
they think he will do credit to the Church (as
though the object Of our Church we're TO appear
well before men rather than to be Jealous for the
many who would refuse assent to hie conclusions
would yet be won by his charm of manner and
persuasive eloquence-
But should We not be::drst right and then go
ahead7 IN seeking only hrst-class man,
and in selecting Dr.. De Koven, taking. if we
may believe some OF his admirers the only
~ 4first.class" man, except DR.. Seymour, in the
Church. arc We not in danger Of forgetting that
if We first found as strong . man intellectually
as We could who rghtfully represented the
able to grant such additional blessings to his
laboEs as to more than compensate for tka de-
fciency OF intellectual gifts He had himself
withheld? We hare too much of this frst-class
business, frBt.claas churches which the poor
man and man of moderate means cannot enter,
f1st-clasa preachers, and now no one but first
class man ls thought by some competent under
Gods blessing to be Bishop OF the great Diocese
Of Illinois, a Diocese which, numbering $780,
600 Of souls, gathered only sl1ty-seyen clergy IN
. Convention called specially to elect Bishop.
We believe God can 80 bless tho labors OF q
s'second- class " man as to make his efforts re-
suit in building no and not pulling down. St.
Paul would have been called in our Convention .
= second-class "! man, for men OF his time said
Of Of him. bin ns bodily is weak
influences the Church to this day. Now, Dr..
De Koyen is not in bodily presence weak, nor in
speech contemplate, hence no dony him the title
Of '' the St. Paul of the American Church" aud
look for some s. second-claas man who, though
be may not By silver-tongued and straight as IN
arrow, may yet prove st. Paul in his influence
on the Church.
II asked what ne propose to do we say we are
not yet determined. Dr. De Koyen's friends
may say, IS was said OF the Chancellor Of the
Diocese IN Convention, possession is nine points
OF the Law, ergo the Chancellor was in, constitu-
ion or no constitutiop,-what are you going to
do about it? DR.. De Koven is elected By the
Convention whether Alteration is sound
chu1chly teaching or not, what are you going
to do about it As the question Of his conse-
Grafton IL an open one til! decided by
majority Of the Bishops, We can rightfully uso
all honest and legitimate efforts to defeat bis
conservation till the Bishops decide the question
One thing re do not propose doing and that is
accept the polite invitation given us in Conyeu-
ton to so out. There is yet too much work to
be done in the Church, and too much love for her
left IN US to allow of our going out on mere in
yitation. In addition to our objection to Dr.. De
koyen On account Of error. as we believe, 10 DOC
triue We object on account of the injurious uf1u-
ence his conservation will exert on the Church
a. large as we'll as on the Church in this diocese
At the outset we stated the fears Of many in the
Church, and tho belief that those fears would be
revived, aud justly, too. By bis consectation.
We believe the great falling-or in the last few
years in the numbeT Of candidates for the min
istr5 to be largely due to the evident reproduc-
ing in our Church Of the principles held By
Pussy, Newman, and Mackonochie, and which
would receive fresh impulse BY the consec,a-
From 1923 to 1889, the increase in the ministry
was so per cent; 1859 to 1871, 70 per cent; 1841
TO 1850. 48 per cent; 1850 to 1859, 50 per cent;
1853 to 1853, 29 per cent; 1868 to 1877 (next
two years estlmated). q per cent; net
increase in the number Of ministers r in