New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1878-08-14

even venture to recommend any scheme
for Synod of the Anglican churches. In
faint hearted way they cite the experiment
now twice tried, of holding a conference OF
Bishops at Lambeth, as offering the nope
that the problem, hitherto unsOlved, OF
combining for consultation representatives
"of churches so differently situated
"and administered, may find in the Providen-
"tial course of events its own solution" They
can find no means of investing the decisions
of these conferences with ecclesiastical author
ity. The most they expect to do is to enlarge
the range of discussion by allowing committee
representing all the churches to arrange In
advance q scheme Of debate, Certain prlncl-
pies of order, which are set forth as OF great
importance, Will promote an exchange OF
neighbOrly courtesies rather than the mainte-
nance of organic union among the churches.
Although there is no hope of an Anglican Synod,
to say nothing of General Council, the reunion
of ChristendOm is to be kept in view, and a
day of special intercession for that object is
set apart to be observed wherever the Prayer
Book and its ritual are used. These results,
so frankly and unreservedly stated, VIII
disappOint few American churchmen. They
are in no haste to accord the
Archbishop of Canterbury a new title, and
the scheme for q permanent Pan-Angncan
Synod is clearly impracticable. The WIDE
spreading branches of the communion are
bound together in faith if not in ecclesiastl-
cal organization. and diversities OF climate,
race and nationality can never be overcome.
Concerning confession the Bishops have this
wholesome utterance " 1t is their deliberate
"opinon that no minister of the church is
"authorized to require from those who may
"resOrt to him to open their grief particular
" or detailed enumeration of ali their sins OF
" to require private confession previous to re-
" ceivlng the Holy Communion or to enjom
or even encourage the practice of habltuaI
" confession to priest or to teach that such
practice of habitual confession, or the being
subject to what has been termed the direc-
" ton of a priest, is a condition OF attaining
to the highest spiritual life" At the same
time, as the Bishops do not limit in any way
the provisions of the Prayer Book for the
"relef of troubled cOnsciences," ntualistic
priests will feel at liberty to encourage prac-
tce which is, to say the least, repugnant to
English instincts.
Another passage in these reports merits
consideration. Concerning the unhappy
" disputes on questions of ritual, whereby
" divers congregations in the Church OF
England and elsewhere have been seTi-
"ousIy disquieted," the Bishops simply " af-
a" firm the principle that no alteration
"from long-accustOmed ritual should be made
CONTRARY to the admOnitiOn Of the Bishop
of the diocese" 1t is one of the anom-
alous features of English Rltualism that
a faction that lays great stress upon
the doctrine of ApOstOlical Succession and
the spiritual grace of ordination plays
fast and loose with episcopal authority.
Take the case of Mr.. MackonOchie, which
was decided in the English court few
days ago. He had taken two Oaths
to obey his Bishop-one in the ordination
service and the other as incumbent
of his parish. A year ago the Bishop
of London called his attention to n pic
ture of the Virgin Mary at st. Adams,
Holburn, and also to a large crucitix that
hung opposite the pulpit; and directed him
on his oath of canOnIcal obedience to re-
move them. Mr.. Mackonoehie refused to do
this, arguing that the picture and the erueifx
impressed upon the poor the doctrines OF
the Incarnation and the AtOnement, and it
was his duty to preach the gospel to the
poor rather than consult his own interests.
The authority of the Bishop, supported by
two oaths, was of no avail, and the case was
carried by the lawyers into the courts, where
Mr.. Mackonochie has finally triumphed. This
instance shows that in England, at least, the
authority of the Bishop is a feeble barrier
against Ritualistic excuses.