The record-union., 1892-10-14
IN RELIGIONS REALM.
Expressions From the Various Re-
ligiOus Newspapers.

Expressed I'm the SectarIan Press
Some Matters of Interest to Both
Ministers and Laymen.
The New York CRatrchmdn P. e., in
the course of a long discussion of the
question of Roman Catholicism and the
public schools, says: speaking of Arch
bishop Ireland's compromise and the
tlmid and delusive action of the Papal
See IN regard to it, the Catholic Herald
says: 1t is therefore silly to think that
the tolerant poteSt has altered anything in
the policy of the church in the United
States regarding parochial schools. 1t is
absurd to say that the educational chart
has undergone any modification. There
we have the light religion Of the Catholic
school and the dark continent" OF the
public school; and between them lies the
penumbral section, which may be termed
the land of COMPROMISED Can anything
be palmer than this? 1t can scarcely
mean less than that the Roman Catholic
Church is pledged to the utter destruc-
ton of public schools. The State is to be
forbidden to teach her children anything
whatever, unless they are to be taught
everything that that church believes.
w hat does the State teach2 Mathematics,
the English language, and literature,
grammar. history and the like. Are
these wicked and 'godless?' Why does
the Roman Church object to them? Be-
cause they are incompatible with her
claim to control the whole life of every
human being, from the cradle to the
grave. in every detail. From the Roman
Catholic point of view, the founders of
our commemorative were irredeemable
heretics. How can she teach the true
history of the Reformation or the Puri-
tans without condemping the right of
private judgment?"
Of the open letter which Bishop Sey-
mour has addressed to Bishop Doane
with regard TO the conservation Of Bishop
Brooks, the Christian Union remarks:
This letter seems to us to be an extra
ordinary breach of ecclesiastical order.
1t is impossible to maintain an organiZa-
cation II there be not some tribunal in it
whose settlement of any specific question
will be loyalty accepted by all its mem
berS as authoritative and final. In the
Episcopal Church no man can become q
Bishop unless he is first elected by his
own Diocesan Convention and by the
votes OF both houses; nor then unless
that election is approved by majority of
the House Of Bishops of the entire church.
DR.. Brooks views on the subject of apos-
tolic succession, catholicity of commun-
ion, baptismal regeneration and the ma
ture OF man were perfectly well known
before his nomination, and were very
thoroughly and extensively canvassed
pending his election. Great pressure was
brought to bear upon him, among others
by this same Bishop Seymour, 20 retract,
or at least explain, his views in such a
way as to make them reconcilable with
the views which Bishop Seymour hold.
In response DR.. Brooks referred to his
written and published utterances, and to
his public acts, absolutely refusing to
make any utterance of faith or pledge of
purpose while the question of his election
was pending. With these views fully
known he was elected, and despite the
protest of Bishop Seymour and two other
Bishops. was approved by the majority
OF the House of Bishops, and duly con-
tirmed. TO appeal from this decision
thus regularly arrived at, and to make
this appeal by a letter nominally adj
dressed to one Bishop, but really sent to
all the Bishops of the church, is practi-
cally to refuse TO the church the right to
settle a question by definite decision,
and to enjoy that peace and quietude and
opportunity for aggressive Christian
spect for such decision when it is finally
reached"
On the same subject the New York En-
aDliner (Bapt.) says: Bishop Seymour's
act deserves this praise, at least: it is a
manly and open attack, differing greatly
from the secret and dishonorable meth
DDS taken by both bishops ana presby-
tiers to secure the rejection of DR.. Brooks
by the standing committees of the do
ceses. Those methods were appropri-
ately characterized in public discourse
by Bishop Potter Of New York, and the
guilty parties probably still feel the sting
Of his words. But it must still be said
that the Illinois prelate'S attack Is most
! unwarranted, that his charges are untrue.
and that he himself deserves to be pre-
Sented for trial on charge of SANDER
| The utterances and actions of Bishop
Brooks, on which the opposition to hin
rests, all antedate his election and conse-
Grafton. Since he became bishop, the
worst things alleged against him have
been that he sometimes writes to his
clergy on paper bearing his Individual
instead of his episcopal monogram; that
he has appeared in public services with
out his robe; and that he went to a mis-
cellaneouS meeting on one occasion wear
ing "a coat that was not black These
ofienses against ecclesiastical etiquette
will appear serious only to people who
have very slender intellects and great
deal of leisure to talk about trifles. The
most sharp-eyed critics have been unable
to find greater flaws than those in the con-
duct of the new bishop. 1t is not probable
that Bishop Brooks has any different
ideas about the episcopate than he had as
presbyter; he accepts it as human in
stitution, having in it possibilities of
great usefulness, and he is trying to actu-
alize those possibilities. He no doubt
feels that in accepting the Office he has
pledged himself to conform to its tradi-
tons, and thus far he has done this. The
complaint plainly lies back of his official
conduct"
"a union, by common consent, of the
multitudinous Christian societies or
churches which rest upon this theory;
with mutual concessions as to what shall
be required as matters of faith, with an
organization devised or adopted by a
general vote, seems to be at the present
time the dream of many" says the Lie
ing Church Up. E. of Chicago. st is safe
to say that it is impossible of realization
so long as men retain any strong convic-
tons of truth. No such unity is possible
in the first place, except in Difference to
an authority to which all feel If their