New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-10-23
COMMUNION AT FUNERALS REJECTED.
SOME STATISTICS THAT SHOW THE STATE OF
THE CHURCH

Morning prayer read in ST. Georges Church yes
terday by the Rev. DIR. benjamin Franklin, of New
Jersey Bishop whitaker of Pennsylvania pronounced
the benedction.
In the House OF Deputies the Standing Committee
| on Canons presented a report recommending an
| amendment providing that until another standard
| prayerbOOk IS issued. all issues Of the Prayer
Book shall contain an appendix duly certified, showing
the alterations adopted by the General Conventions OF
1886 and 1880, and their effect the structure Of
the Prayer Book it before 1886 TIL report and
! resolution in accordance Herewith were adopted
The following some of the statistics from the
| port presented by the Standing Committee On the
| state OF the Church:
Number OF dioceses 81; missionary jurisdictions, II
bishops and assistant bishops 60 priests G32 deaeons
$50 candidates for holy orders 431 lay iers 896
communicable 4s 10y increase. 63743 church buildings
3,7o4 chapes and missions 1883 academies 149; col
eges 15 theological schools 10; orphanages 40 homes
60; hospitals 81; total offerings sSS 36 514
Of offerings 1886 s2.5334G2 1G; bapIsms 17L7O0
Increase 16 25 combinations. 1873 increase 10 73i
marriages. 40G6s burals, o. ia sundayschool teach
er 4o,120; Sunday-school scholars, 233.423; parish
schools 1874 teachers $50 pupils 1886.
The report Of the Committee Of Conference recon-
Hendng the insertion in the evening service Of tho
yersiclcs rejected 10y the House of Deputies few
! days ago caused debate. Ex-Governor
! Prince Of New Mexico ard the Rev. Dr. Phil lps
Erools spoke against the adoption Of the recommends
ton. and the Rev. DR.. Gibson, of Central NewYork
spoke strongly ifs favor. The vote taken by do
ceses aud orders, with the following result; Clerical
Yeas, Al nays, 8; divided, 1; Lsy-Yeas, . :;
nays 8; dyid d, g.
The House then went on with the work of Ltngical
Revision, the Rev. DR.. Hart, of Connecticut moving
the concurrence Of the House in the various altera-
tons adopted by House Of Bishops, and of which
the House Of Deputies had been Informed by messages
from the House OF Bishops. That which removed
the rrayer of Humble Access In the Communion
Office with its rlbic, to place Immediately before
~, t1.Vfo IIcrn In
sung hymn was rejected after some debate. The
ground which several Of its opponents took was that
Il ,rcnched on a question Of doctrine. The vote was
a sensational one. the motion was lost by the
nonconcuncnce of the two orders. The clergy wcro
for t. but in tho laity there was majority of one
against IT,
IN THE AFTERNOON SESSION.
In the afternoon the proposals providing for com
munion celebrations in the solemnEalion OF mai1-
mopy and the burial Of the dead prov oked all earnest
and hard-fghting opposition, led by DR.. Huntington.
of New York The resolution providing for this adj
dition 10 the marriage service was first considered
The Rev Dr. Huntington, speaking o. It, said In
part: ave all know what weddings are-occasions OF
esiyity-and the spirit in which people 20 10 we'd
dlncs II Is nv deliberate judgment that tho ten
dcncy Of this would be 10 turn the celebration OF the
Holy Communion into a spectacular ceremony.
The vote was taken By diOceses and orders. 10
lay 10 Divided clerical o. lay l.
In regard to tho proposed addition to the ofaef OF
tie burial of the dead DR.. Huntington sah II 'he
first proposition Objectionable THIS proposition
IS more Objectionable stn. Nc one can lie sHghtiy
ACQUAINTED with ecclesiastical history without Knowing
that some Of the grossest supersutions that nave
grown up in connection with the doctrine OF the
Eucharist have associated themselves with the hual
Of the dead so much 50 that at the Puritan reacuon
the Puritans were driven to the false eAucHo ="
eschewng all 1ites for the dead Whatsoever Inv
Church Of England took a middle coufse' "u''
that VIC win abide by It. who expected 10 receive
the Holy Communion at tie burial OF inc
dead1 Those in deep sorrow? Mourners Hardly
that Several cries OF 'Yes.D Gentlemen say
Yes' Wei we differ about that; but certainty, IN
some cases. there Will be those VINO sca3reiS WISH
to receive tina communion in presence Oh i"' 20 'on
gregation In these circumstances. IL 'heS uo ho'
who dor Will the rest Of the congr CATION be |
ready to 60 forward 10 receive holy communion III
these circumstances think not. have SEEN
Sir, In public prints in this city the announcement
mat Oh certain day requiem mass Wouln DC sung
iof the soul OF or NJ, a deceased clergyman Now
SIR IN the face of that fact ask the House 10 dis
sent from This proposition"
ADVOCATING THE PROPOSITION.
me Rev. Arthur e. a. Hall, of Massachusetts
SAD The clerical deputy from New-Yoik asks VINO
arc 10 receive tie communion. 1t may be aciuaS 81
- VI 'hc funeral serVlce. IL in"' W ~
o"'"or hour say first Of all those who nc Ihoushl
"oud scarcely be likely TO be ready 10 receive-tose
i'o' oio'ey related to the person departed. nave
ocen asAed again and again By those most Closely
connected with some one departed that they might
nave Ae opportunity Of receiving the sacrament
on the occasions Of their friends burial IT Is not
question Oh theory. il is question OF practice Then
there are occasions not only OF the burial
OF private PERSONS but OF persons high In ecclesiastical
authority and position, distinguished clergyman, heads
perhaps Of large educational instifuions their pupils
and those who have been working under them have on