Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1892-10-10
THE EPISCOPAL COUNCIL.

IN seS ION Baltimore, rev. LIE. Alien,
chairman OF the committee On The new
dioceses, reported favorlbly OF ihe res
olution TO erect new diocese within
the Diocese Of Virginia. The question
was then presented to the house, and
was passed unanimously. The coun-
ties it will comprise are Accomac,
Northampton, Princess Anne. Norfolk,
Nansemond, Isle of Wight. Surry,
Prince George. Sussex. southampton,
Greenes,ille, Chesterfield. Powhatan,
Amelia, Nottoway, Lunenburg. Neck
lenburg, Halifax, Charlotte, Prince Ed
ward. Appomattox. Cumberland, Buck
ingham, Nelson, Augusta, Highland,
Bath. Allegheny, Rockbridge. Amherst,
Bedford, Pittsylvania, Campbell. Henry,
Franklin, Patrick Carroll. Floyd. Mont
gomcry, Roanoke, Botctourt. Craig,
Giles, Pulaski, Bland, Wythe, Grayson,
Smyth. Tazewell, Buchanan. Dici:ir-
son, Russell, Washington, Scott. Wise,
Lee, Elizabeth City, james City, York,
Brunswick, Dnwidd;c and Warwick.
The division was stated by the Nir-
gnia delegates; to be desired by the
bishop and the great majority Of the
clergy
In the new diocese OF Virginia there
will now be 10 cler2yneD, 9,1S9 com
municants. l-i2 congregations ana -
self-supporting parishes. The contri-
buttons amounted to SlG7 ,GS9.47, OF
which Sc, 70602 went to the contingent
fund, thus assuring ample provision for
the support OF the new bishop. IN the
diocese there will be IS cicrcymen,
1886 commitments, 100 congreGa-
tons and so self-supporting parishes.
The contributions from this section
were S149,093.G4, of which $5,534.30
went to the contingent fund, thus en-
surfing ample provision. for the support
of the bishop In tYe new diocese
there was in 1880 :. population Of 1,0Sl-
079, while in what will now be the do
cese of Virginia there was q population
of 572, Az
DR.. Hart, chairman of the committee
on the standard Prayer Book, favorably
reported the resolution for a uniform
system of pointing the canticle, gloria,
patrie and the whole Book Of Psalms.
The resolution was adopted with the
additions that five suitable persons be
appointed to conduct the work that
they report at the next general conven-
ton, and that no expense be attached
to the work.
DR.. Hart then called for the order OF
the day This was the proposed change
in the Prayer Book. No. 10 was the first
taken up, and it, with the two follow
ing, was soon adopted. \ snag was
struck, however, in the No. Is. in
which new rubric is proposed. The
rubric reads. The Decaloeuc may be
omitted provided ii be said once on
each Sunday. But note that whenever
it is omitted the minister shall say the
summary of law. beginning. Hear
what our Lord Jesus Christ saith" This
occasioned considerable debate,i in which
DR.. McKim, of Washington, and others
took part. At one time the debate was
rather sharp and the lines were evil
IDENTIFY clearly drawn between the va
rious schools.
Rev. DR.. McKim, of Washington, d.
c., thought that to adopt the resolution
would result in permitting the reading
of the Decaloguc too frequently, ut
principal service. BY request Of a de-
putty from Virginia, DR.. Hart read the
rubric adopted in 1886, which provides
that the Decaloguc shall be read at
least once day.
DR.. Robert, OF Missouri, boldly de-
clared that he would much rather hear
the words of Christ than those OF
Moses. Rev. Kinlock Nelson. of Viz
ginia, took a sly whack at DR.. Roberts
willingness to dispense with the read
ing of the Commandments, BY remark
ing that the late Bishop Nottingham,
of Maryland, had said i'll reply to a
minister who wished to shorten up 4
service, "Sir, you had better leave out
your sermon than the words which
come from Holy writ" Rev. Mr. Mel
son, in discussing the resolution, caught
the house when he said II trust the
bishops, / trust the priests and | trust
the laymen, but trust them under the
law
Layman Temple, of Rutland, VT,
said he was willing to trust the clergy
on this question, and had no fear Of the
Decalogue in their hands falling into
''inocuous desuetude." Laughter.
There was we'll defined objection to
what several of the delegates called 4
continual pumping Of the Decaloguc
into the congregations. One ofthc old
Puritans would have expired had he
heard the Ten Commandments treated
so lightly. The sentiment of the con-
vention was clearly against the COM
pulsory reading of the Ten Command
ments, and when put to vote, the res
olution was adopted, the clergy voting
43 ayes, noes and 8 divisions, and the
laity 80 ayes, 9 noes and > divisions.
The succeeding proposed changes
were adopted until No. - was reached.
This provides for an amended rub.ic in
the communion service. 1t appears
that q number of high church men have
been in the habit Of taking holy COM
rlunion themselves in the service with
out administering it to the cougrega-
ton. The low church men proposed
the resolution emitting any of the con-
gregation present to receive the holy
mystery whenever the priest admins
tered it to himself. The debate was
rather sharp ON this resolution, the two
schools in the church standing up solid
ly for their opinions.
The low church men carried the day
and the amendment was adopted.
A memorial on the subject of the
death of the late DR.. Hanckel was
submitted by the Virginia delegation
and referred to the committee on mem
l.. a lnnnncnd N, ON bo,.s.