Waterbury evening Democrat., 1895-07-29


 versaty of the discovery of America by Columbus, he preached a sermon before the president of the United States and his cabi- net in the course of which he denounced "plutocracy' in almost unmeasured terms and declared that of all dangers to the re- public it was perhaps the worst. This ser mon created no end of talk, though it was not more outspoken than many others de- livered in the hearing of less prominent auditors from time to time.
 Bishop Potter is of very distinguished bearing and of strong though comedy oountenance. With the exception of rather modest side whiskers his clean cut face is shaven smooth, and were it not for those little hirsute appendages he might readily be taken for Catholic prelate. He wears the conventional attire of the high church Episcopalian priest and it well sets off his tall and excellently proportioned figure. In many ways he resembles and recalls his deceased brother, Clarkson M. Potter, who was so prominent in congress about 90 years ago.
 Although the bishop is radical in some directions, he is very conservative in oth- CTS. He does not believe it to be special ly conducive to the good of the church or of the community for clergymen to be as prominent in social affairs as they are in England. He believes there are times, however, whom 1t should not only be con- sidered the privilege but tho bounden duty of the clergy to take part in public mat ters. This does not mean that he favors what is known as "politics in the pulpit, but it does mean that he believes the spir- itual leaders of the people ought to take part in any reform movement of impor- tance when it is clear that they can thus help along the proposed reform. At such tIe-,- ~nI~S if preaching that makes 0 sensation may be properly known by that term, and this is shown conclusively by his own occa sional sermons that make sensations one of which has been specifically referred to above. He holds very pronounced views as to the duty of the citizen at the ballot box and believes that when all good men go to the polls at every election, if that time ever comes. thorough and permanent reform will be practically accomplished.
 Bishop Potter holds strong and we'll de- fined views upon the duty of the clergy men of his church toward that organiza- tion. In charge which he delivered to the clcrgymon of his diocese three or four years ago ho made clear to them just what his views are upon this and other subjects of vital importance to EpiscopalianS. This document was issued during one of the earlier periods of excitement over the liberalism of Professor Briggs of the Union Theological seminary and its bearing upon tho Presbyterian church. The Briggs OK citcment had brought about very general discussion of the essentials of belief not only among his own denomination, but also among communicants of other churches, including the Episcopal.
 The first point brought out by this charge of the bishop was that the clergy lie under different obligations to their l church than do the laity. When ordained they are sworn to teach "the doctrine of Christ as this church hath received the same, ' and the bishop said the notion that | after such an engagement they are at lib- | erty to renounce the doctrines of the | church and yet continue to hold place and emoluments to which they are entitled | only by reason of that promise is "an i'm moral one." If a clergyman concludes that | he can no longer continue the propagation l of tho faith ''as received' by him, there Is no course left to him but withdrawal | from his clerical position. At the same time the bishop was very careful to draw | Q clear distinction between vital matters l of faith and matters of opinion, articles | of belief and personal views of those arti- | c1es which must necessarily differ In the l cases of different men. No clergyman is | at liberty to deny the divine inspiration of tho Scriptures, but every clergyman frank
 ly accepting tho reality of inspiration is at liberty to hold any theory concerning 1t which comments itself to his conscientious l judgment.
 l In illustration of this point he said con- l corning the since deceased Phillips Brooks | of Boston, who was made bishop before his death, that because such q man as Dr. l Brooks did not fully indorse the doctrine l of the apostolic succession was no req l son whatever for the believers therein to | deny him any of the rights, privileges or l courtesies that should be extended to any | Episcopal clergyman of approved doctrine | and good standing. Indeed Bishop Potter
 went further. He said that to suggest that
 such a man be excluded from even the
 highest office of the church for any such I nonessential difference of belief was a l piece of ''partisan insolence. Through
 out the whole of this charge Bishop Potter
 showed himself to be an extremely broad | and strong man. It was called out by cer-
 tain tendencies displayed by various Epis-
 copal clergymen of New York and probably
 fostered by the fight against Dr. Briggs to
 prosecute one another because of differ
 ences of opinion, and it not only added
 greatly to the bishops prestige as well
 balanced ecclesiastic, but it reduced i'm
 mensely the differences in the Episcopal
 church in New York.
 Bishop Potter determination to person,
 ally help in work among the poor of New
 York will undoubtedly prove a great stim
 ulant to such work on the part of the
 Episcopal clergymen in the future and is
 therefore greatly to be commended for its
 general and farreaching tendencies as
 well as for the immediate benefit that may
 be received by those among whom he has
 located himself for the time being.
 l M. I. DEXTER