New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-10-06
PRAYER-BOOK OHURCHMEN

There has been a great range for claSslhca-
ton respecting churchmanship IN the phglouS
communion now represented by Its tnennlaI
council in this city. High, low, broad, Anglo
Catholic. evangelical conservative rtualStlc
Bishop White and Puseyite have been among
the many cha acteristc words used to denote
the shadings Of belief and practice in the Prot
estant Episcopal Church but the commonest
and most oldfashiOned designation that mas
prevailed among the main body OF the laity has
been that of Prayer Book Churchmen. When
ever staid conservative Episcopalian has been
at loss to discriminate between the claims OF
factions and to define his own preferences and
associations within the fold, he has had re-
course to that convenient phrase and compla-
Gently proclaimed himself to be Prayer-B Book
Chuchman. The proceedings of the c0nVen-
ton have already reached a stage where the
comprehensiyefesS and practical utility oil this
well-worn designation may be discerned After
wears of agitation and controversy over revision
and Htmgcal enrichment the great body of the
membership Of this communion is shown to be
recruited with Prayer Book Churchmen. One
series Of trivial notifications has been sane
toned by two General Conventions and ma
jority OF the Diocesan Conventions, and an
other series, equally innocuous, has been
brought forward for final action in 1892 but
the general effect of all these changes in rubric
and Offices, whether cOnsummated or proposed
is to leave the Prayer Book substantially the
same and only TO impart greater tleXlbllty to
the liturgy AS whole
This answering adherence TO all that is
in Draw is ha
evidence Of ecclesiastical conservatism that
could be furnished by religious body The
result seems most remarkable when one bears
in mind the diversities Of opinion respecting
fundamental doctrines and the sacraments
within the Protestant Episcopal Church but
it is eXplicabe on the theory that extremists
On both sides the Evangelical Low Churchmen
and the RitualistS alike, have common in
terest in retaining the Prayer Book without
essential change To the Low Chuchman
needless notifications of the liturgy seem to
involve a risk Of impairment of it's Protestant
character as a Payer Book Of the Reformation.
BY the Rtualst the same prayer-B Book as a
compilation Of ancient and medieval uses and
rubrics is regarded as sanctioning either by
implication or by direct phraseology the ex
IRENE views OF the SdCfdmeDtS WnlCn are Oh
the fin importance in his sight; and he is ua-
willing to admit the necessity for radical re-
vision in the order of public worship. So it
has come about that after twenty years Of
Evangelical remonstrance and High Church
propagandism all factions unite in guarding
the Prayer Book against innovation and in
restricting changes to minor points not involv-
ing questions of faith or doctrine.
One of the causes tending to produce this
result has been the steady growth of com
rrehensve spirit Of tolerance within the Church.
There is perhaps no other religious body where
more radical differences of opinion and prac-
tce are allowed than in the AnglO-Episcopal
communion. Both forms and doctrines are
essentially different as practised and taught
in St. lgnatius and the Church of the Ascen-
sion in this city, or in the Church of the Advent
and Trinity in Boston; yet the most flexible
federation is shown to and the widest liberty
is enjoyed by clergy and congregations. This
catholic spirit is evidenced by the resistance
offered in the convention to change in the