New-York tribune., 1885-01-16
vows IN THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH.
ASSISTANT BISHOP POTTER EXPLAINs HIS ACTION
TIIR VOWS REVOCABLE.

THE VOWS REvoCABLE.
JHR TRIBUNE printed an exc uslve article re-
Gently on the discussion which has been caused III
the Protestant Episcopal Church by the adlnlnls-
tratlun of monastic VOWS 10 the son OF Bishop
Huntington by Assistant Bishop Potter, aud gave
several interviews with lea ling Episcopal clergy
men upon the subject. DIR. Potter was at that rime
in Florida, and 1t was impossible ~ obtain any
statement of his position: He has published III Ihe
ChurchBap of January II the correspondence be-
tween himself and Bishop Lee, of Mary and in
winch he states the motives which influenced his
action. The correspondence is Prefaced by a short
note from Dr. Potter, III which he states that the
letters ale published not to invite an expression OF
opinion III regard TO the act to which they refer
but simply to Indicate his entire wilngnessto sub;
mt his action IN the matter to bis fathers and
brethren of the eplscOpae. Bishop Lees ei ter ex-
presses the "astonishment and distress"
witn which its writer heard of As
s,stant Bishop POtter's action, and characterlzes
this action a sanction OF the whole m0nastIc sys-
tenn, which was utter repudlated by the Church
of England at the Reformation" and which in the
countries where it has Ueep tolerated, has been
source of shame. suffering and sln." 81 l'hoD
Lee concludes his letter by appealing TO the Bishop
OF New-York to pause before any repetition Of
Assistant Bishop Potter replies in q friendly and
moderate tone. He admits that the ceremony, In
more, than one particular, was not such as com
mcnded itself 10 his taste or Judgment. He how
ever defends his action and that OF Mr.. Hunting
ton by tile analogy of the sisterhoods which
"Laye received the implicit, If not explicit recog-
milton and sanction of the C u ch." While admit
ting that monasic orders were condemned az the
ti,ue of the Reformation. he deprecates the Icon
Oclasfic spiri " by which the Reformation was
cbaract cterized and expresses his opinion that the
Reformation was mot fnahty." Dr. Potter then,
with much force defines the position OF pr. Dodd
and Mr.. Huntington and the motives which led
them to take monastic VOWS. They did So not to
lead q cOntempative life, but the moro efectually
TO work among the dwellers in the tene-
ment-houses Of New-York. "They said and
saId rightly as believe, If we are to reach these
people we must first of all lire among them. And
then too they said, IL we to do the work we
had n red of and interest that
can hinder embariass us. We must be willing
TO be poor and to obey fixed rule Of life, 80 tha
we may give ourselves wholly to the work. There
was time when our Master said, Carry neither
purse, nor scrip There was time when Ills
Apostle said lie that is unmarried careth for the
things OF the Lord tnat he may please the Lord
and AGAIN 'Obey them that have the rule over you
and submit yourselves" DIR. Potter then explains
that the vows are not irrevOcabe, but can be
Ilm who took them lie also states that his action
was not an official one, and that any presbyter
might, with equal authority. have administered
Dir Morgan Dix of Trinity was asked yesterday,
whether he is in sympathy with tho Assistant
Bishops action 10 this matter Entirely &c"
said he al consider the Bishops course emi:
nv the greater part of the church"
DIR george H. houghtoD, rector OF the Church OF
the Transfguration expressed the same opinion
and thought that in view of the fact that the vows
administered are expressly revocabe, the matter
had not merited the attention which IL has To-
DR. Henry Y. satterlee of Calvary Church. de-
clIned to mako any statement OF his opinions on
the subject