New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-05-11

hieahs VI y" ~
complications and in questions as. TO citizenship In
this way the hordes Of Europe, who constantly seek
and the portals of American citizenship properly guard
ed from those who might seek to wreck or adyasens
Ncw-Yorh, April 81, 1891 ~,
DAILY PAPERS AND CHRISTIAN UNITY.
IMPORTANCE OF RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION IN THE
SECULAR PREss-THE HIsTopro
EPIscoPATE
TO the Editor OF The Tribune.
Sir: was glad to see in a recent issue OF The
Tribune an editorial on the practcabllity Of Christian
union. II is TO be hoped that the discussion may DC
extended to other branches of the subject One Of
the difficulties, perhaps the chief difficulty, III the way
Of union among Christians lies in the fact that no free
and fair discussion Of the points at Issue between the
denominations is allowed. Each party is careful to
show its side to its own adherens. but is equally
careful to keep opposing articles out Of their way.
Many readers Of The Tribune will remember that two or
three years ago. in Church congress supposed to be
convened for the purpose of discussion, Episcopal
clergyman was silenced by the presiding bishop when
attempting to express sentiments unfavorabe to the
prevailing theory.
Now, If the Episcopal Church or any other church.
says You must accept theories without question
discussion why 1t is plain that there can be no hope
OF union far as that church is concerned. The
assumption implied would be to cause aversion
and distrust. No reasonably be expected
to adopt position which would not bear investigation
or which cannot be defended In discussion.
II remember correctly, the Presbyterian General AS
sembly of last year met the Episcopal propositions
with proposal for discussion to be continued until all
the questions at issue should be finally solved. But,
far as am aware the discussion has not yet begun.
Nor Is this reluctance 10 submit to discussion at all
confined to the Episcopal Church. The Southern
Baptist Convention proposed that committees of rep
scholars fhp different
denominations should meet for conference and dis
cussion, in the hope of reaching basis upon which
union might proceed But the proposal not even
even noticed by the religious papers of the other
denominations, except. believe, by "The Inde-
pendent" in which 1t was noted without comment.
Now there is no reason why questions of religion
as well questions Of politics, philosophy morals
may not be helped to their final solution by free dis
CUSTOM II there were any weak points in the armOr
of either Of the parties to such discussion that fact
would not fail to appear, and the Christian sentiment
Of the people would in time adjust itself accord
ngly Thus owOr after another would be
eliminated the interests of truth well of union
would be subserved, the lines running parallel
would begin to converge and the conveyance once
begun might proceed TO consummatlon more rapidly
than is commonly supposed possible. At any rate it
would not wise we'll to despair Of union until
there shall be frank interchange of opinion and
parison of views between the denominations and until
the Christian public shall have an opportunity TO
decide which of two or more opposing views has the
most reliable foundation.
Now there is no medium through which the discus.
sion of religious questions be conducted except the
secular press The religious press is bounded by de-
nomnatlonal lines. What is said in a Baptist paper
never gets to an Episcopaan, and what is said in
Church paper never gets to Baptist But the secular
press goes to all religious parties and might be
medium of communication among them all, and it Is
not controlled by those whose supreme interest 1t is 10
keep mp and strengthen religious parties In the places
they at present occupy. The secular press can do
greater service to religion In this respect than the
gous press ii is agreed all hands that there
Is question vital to the success of Protestant
Christianity than that of union. The Sunday editions
great daies would thus become moro acceptable
TO religious people than they otherwise could be, and
that without trespassng upon the sphere OF the re-
ligOus papers, since the latter cannot or will not, oc
cupy the field of interdenominatlona discussion. Es
peclaly The Tribune which is probably read by
larger proportion of religious people than any other
Journal render an important service in this direction,
and l that very many OF its readers would be
glad TO see in its columns frank and earnest but
courteous discussions of the questions at issue between
religious bodies far at least as they are involved
in the subject of union.
As an illustration of the necessity Of such discus
son we may take the subject of the historic epsce-
pate proposed by the Episcopal bishops as one Of the
conditions of union. The position of the bishops in
this matter certainly to- need explanation, II not
defence. An Episcopal authority so eminent as the
late learned Dean of Westminster, Dr. Arthur Penryn
stanley says in his Christian Institutions: " IL Is
certain that the officers Of the Apostohcal or OF any
subsequent church not part of the original IN.
stitution of the Founder Of our religion. IL
certain that they THAT Is orders OF ministry arose
gradually OF preexistng institutions, as under me
pressure of local emergencies. Is CERTAIN
that in no instance the Apostles called Bishops
IN any other sense than they wse b saSf can Sd
any pattern or platform of It's government In those
early tines (fiarper's Reprint PIP. 17l-172.l
IL would seem from the above that the ceTUdth?
which the bishops assume and wish others to accept IS
on the other side. But 1t Is not clearly apparent lv
the form Of the Episcopal propositions whether he
bishops insist upon the historic episcopate a. hater
of Obligation resting upon Apostolic authority or script
obIigation should be made to appear as clearly as
form into which the Church would most IeaM} ian,
since is historic, and since the majority OF ~
from very early times have lived under some FORM o
episcopal government, in which case 10 should DO
remembered that the Papacy with greater a0ros, -
words Of the Lord Himself, and being unquesuonaoiy
in its nature ard constitution, better e2pohche Vi
organic unity than the eplscopate cap be. a., ....
worpg model for the Church. the form under which II
can most successfully carry forward its Work ms
American Methodists seem To- nave toam ntt Se AID
mitted that they have made reInarRaole success "
il. and that without any claim of succession indeed
the experience of the two episcopal bodies
in this country il would seem that voluntary cps
copacy is preferable to an epSopacy VI poIit".olt
And IT, as Dean Stanley asserts there % neCe a., np
rI nrecept nor precedent for any existing form OF
church government then why may not the whole sub,
iect be regarded matter OF choice rather than o.
Obligation Why may not zach congregatlon De iei,
free TO adopt the form of organization under which
believes it can best accomplish lts WORK anu why
should the exercise of such choice be regarueo as
violation of any essential principle OF unity BSoprrp
Waterbury Csnh., April IA, 1891.