The Evening critic., 1883-06-02
THE SUNDAY QUESTION.
An Interesting Discussion in the
MnrYlRnd Diocesan Canxenfian .

The Sunday question was brought up
again yesterday in the Maryland Diocesan
Convention on motion of the Rev. Mr..
Bacon to reconsider the vote which con-
signed the resolutions to committee A
lively debate ensued, lasting several hours,
and finally ending in the passage of the
resolutions. They were offered by the
venerable Mr.. VIM. Woodward, and are as
follows:
Whereas the increasing irreverenco and
open contempt for the sanctity OF the Lords
day commonly called Sunday, shown In null
eg upon BY railroad and
land and water, publication, patronage and
use OF sunday secular papers, are directly op-
posed 10 the Divine designs OF the Lords day,
the rights OF employees to Its benefts, attend.
ance upon church and Sunday-school and the
training of youth I'm the fear OF God and re-
gard TO the Fourth Commandment; therefore
Resokged, That 1t solemnly devoIyes upon ali
connected with this convention and the mem.
bers OF the Protestant Episcopal Church gen.
orally in religious regard for tho sacred instl.
tuition to avoid all unnecessary secular employ
ment on the Lords day, and to discourage
whatever tends to increase such employment.
=. Resolred, That the members Of this conven-
uon exert their influence to induce managers
and stockholders of railroad companies to re.
duce railroad operations on Sunday to the
ing their employees the much needed priyi.
leges OF the weekly rest day.
The Baltimore Sun gives the following
report of the discussion: ''The Rev. Gill
bert Il. Williams took the Rev. James b.
Purcell to task for saying that the resolu-
tions were tainted with Puritanism. 'On
the contrary said he, they breathe the
very life Of moderation He thought Mr..
Purcell had been unjust. Mr.. Purcell dis
claimed any intention of acting unjustly,
and insisted that what he said was from an
honest conviction that he was right. The
Rev. Messrs. Meyer levin, John H. Elliott
Julius Z. Grammer, John Y Gholson and
Thos. Duncan, and also Mr.. VIM. Woodward
and DR.. p. G. Williams argued that desecra-
tion of the Lords day was increasing. Mr..
levin instanced the practice of Washing
ton bicyclists in riding through Prince
Georges County on Sundays, followed by
ladies and gentlemen in handsome turn
outs, and attracting grown persons as well
rs children from church and Sunday
school. Mr.. Woodward said that Barnum,
whom he called great humbug, had shown
no respect for Sunday when he came to
Baltimore with his last circus, as he had
travelled and worked on that day Just as he
would have done on any other day. 1t was
further argued that the resolution did not
ask for an entire discontinuance of rail-
road travel and other Sunday work, but only
that nothing unnecessary should he done,
SO that employees could obtain needed rest.
The Rev. Mr.. Grammer read an account of
a Western railroad president who had limi-
ted the running of trains on the Lords day
for the purpose of allowing his employees
rest and time to attend church. Mr.. Gram
mer then pitched into the publication of
Sunday secular papers,. He said that they
I'LL the mind with worldiness or else with
so-called Scriptural sermons, which do more
harm than good. The Rev. Mr.. Elliott
ole aff bod ha
several other clergymcn repeatedly warned
their hearers against the evil thought
lessly done by patronizing them.
Tho other side of the question was ar
gued by the Rev. j. S. B. Hodges, the Rev.
George X. Warner, the Rev. A. f. Steele,
General Afford. MI. Daniel NJ. Thomas
David s. Briscoe and others. 1t was urged
that the proper Observance of the day
rests with each individual Christian, ac-
cording to his or her Interpretation of what
is right, provided the simple and clear
teachings of the church are lived up to,
and furthermore, that as the Lord is asked
to incline our hearts to keep this law,
there is. no necessity to try
to go beyond it with reso-
lutions which, even if passed, would
have no effect. Relative to the publication
Of Sunday newspapers it was alleged that
It was the Monday, not the Sunday issue,
lhat dOeS tne most work on the Lords
day, but that whether this is true or not,
the reading Of the Sunday paper should, ii
was said, be left to the conscience of the
reader. The Rev. William L. Hyland
was not certain that the state of affairs
described in the preamble was strictly
correct Secretary Packard was certain
there was not an increase of desecration.
Bishop Pinkney closed the argument by
declaring that there was an increase and
that he had observed it himself. Our won
derfully progressing civilization, with its
extravaganza and inpouring immigrants
had much to do with changing habits and
customs and was the cause of the increase of
irreverence for the Lords day. He thought
the best thing to be done was TO return to
the good old times.
The resolutions were passed without
many dissenting votes, but the preamble
was stoutly protested against. The whole
matter was gotten through at last. During
the debate DIR. p. c. Williams said that Il
was only within few months that a Mary
land clergyman had advocated making
Sunday holiday. The Rev. DR.. Hodges
said that never in his life had he heard a
Maryland clergyman say aught that could
be justly construed as meaning other than
that the day should be kept holy. The
Rev. VIM. Kirkus did not take part in the
discussion.