New-York tribune., 1895-10-17
CoNTENDING FOR A NAME.
THE EPISCOPAL CONVENTION REFUSES
TO ADOPT THE DESIGNATION
"PRIMATE."
-,,v ,,,pop-Axce OF A CHANGE FROM sINGuI-AF
TO PLURAL INTERESTING FEATURES
Or THE DEBATES

OF THE DEBAIbS-
vinnespo,is. Mimi, Oct i6 (SpeciaD-Ihe spi'i.
Of change which first seemed to possess ,ne ''"o
., tho convention has not yet carried all thihgs
S<-s q, &C was 60 confidently prophesied 1t IL
a,a,cun To know Just what has been done ou' one
,h,rg A. iesst has not been done, namely the SUD-
stitution or .'Primate' for presiding n'S"op'
rbis was one OF the changes whlch hau pee" 'e
esrded az a foregone conclusion But IL mas no'
Sou,e 10 pass and will not come to pass during the
r-..,, convention: and this is almost the only i'm
sor<snt thing in the way of church nomenclature
Mai has been definitely settled. Some or the oepu
hes think the name of the Church mas peeh cna"seu
BY the adoption of an article In wh'cn these "oiu'
occur: THAT portion of the Catholic Cnurch known
IN law as the Protestant Episcopal Church IN the
United States of America This seems not ohy 10
not. no change in the name OF the Church. but
m the contrary to reaffirm the old name with re-
pewed emphasis. The words. that portoh Oh '"e
Catholic Church" certainly cannot De taken as any
thing more than a descriptive phrase Anu !o'
there is an impression that in some way OF o'hei
these words give a new title by which the Episcopa
Church will In the future be popular.y known NO
hodv has vet heard the title, whatever 1t may
he used on the floor of the House OF Deputies, ana
many are a little curious to know exactly what II H.
7, can hardly be Proportional Catholic Church. and
vet this seems TO be the only name which can
logically be derived from the words quoted.
This same article carried with IT, however
most important amendment to the report OF the
Joint commission-an amendment which alters COM
pletely the whole scope and character OF the COM
missions report. 1t changes Constitution ana
Canons" 10 Constitutions and Canons.' The
Church has no longer, then a constitution put
constitutions" which is equivalent 10 saying that
the Church has constitution at all. That Is the
most radical change that the Episcopal Church IN
this country has made and yet 1t was allowed
to pass without one word OF debate. This is re-
markable. in view Of the fact that the word 'Pri-
mate brought ont such a long discussion Can IL
be that the deputies not aware OF the real sG-
nlficance of this little change Of singular TO
plural noun?
Two things may somewhat explain this matter.
First of all It was OF the changes which the
doctrinaires had placed upon the cards, or ABOUT
which they cared much; and second, there can pe
10 doubt that the able articles which have been ap-
pearing in THE Churchman' for the last rev
months this subject have made distinct i'm
preston throughout the Church. Dr. Mallory has
taken the original position, that the Church IL us
own constitution, with inherent. and not derived
authority and cannot he defined bound except by
Christ. its head. and the Holy Ghost. His vicar
This view Of the constitution of the Church has
now been almost universally accepted as the true
church idea and destroys al one blow the reason
for existence of the Revision Commission so far as
the constitution is concerned.
IT cannot be expected, however. that the two
houses will al once in the somewhat humiii-
atng admission that the appointment or the JOINT
Commission on Revision mistake. This is
more than can be asked OF human nature though it
be in the form of bishops and other clergy. And
perhaps it not wholly a mistake. so far at
least. the "canons" were involved Still it
seems after ten days debate that the changes
which the doctrinares wish TO bring about
could have been better consideredhat is TO say, in
a more direct and immediate manner. original
articles or amendments TO the present canons
rather than in the awkward form Of amendments TO
the report of the Joint Commission
AMENDING THE DECLARATION.
One hour spent the second day OF the
convention in amending the declaration which
appended 10 the report, and then the whole
declaration as amended rejected. Again it
seems unfair that the burden Of discussion should
fall upon those who no. asking for these
changes. This strange state OF things Is brought
about by the fact that amendments have TO be
made TO the report of the commission in order
10 retain the they now exist. In other
words. the present articles have 10 be offered as
amendments TO the proposed articles. This may
not have been intended. but 1t is, nevertheless.
skilful tactics.
In the present constitution and canons pre-
siding bishop is the ;it.e given to the chairman
of the House of Bishops In the report OF the
commission the word "primate" is substituted for
presiding bishop and those who do not ask or
desire legislative action this point COM
presiding bishop for the word "primate.' The
conservatives naturally complain that this course
OF things is unnatural as well as unfair and hoid
that those seeking to introduce innovations should
be made bear the brunt of the debate by show
ing why the change should be made
The party which opposes certain changes has
been called conservative. and yet their opponents
would hardly be willing TO grant them that re-
spectacle title nor. in fact would they themselves
for the most part be willing to accept it, One
could hardly call the Rev DR.. Parks OF Boston,
. conservative without some qualification, and yet
this Is the attitude he has been forced 10 assume
In regard many of the questions just now before
the convention. One thing. however. Is true OF the
present conventon-perhaps one had better say
House OF Depues-there has been thus far little If
any party spirit manifested That is. of course,
on the old lines of high and low and broad Church
nanship
An effort was made on the second day to intro
duce some party spirit into the convention by a
resolution thanking the House OF Bishops for the
now famous pastoral letter. discussion of this
resolution would have opened the foodgates OF
party spirit But wiser councils and better feeiines
prevailed and the resolution was laid on the table
and will never again the light OF day. But
perhaps the best Illustration OF the absence Of the
old parsy lines is to be in the fact that the
Rev DR.. Huntington and DR.. Greer, of New-York.
faced each other opponents in the animated
debate the question of the 'primate.' This
may seem to many small matter to have kinded
such blaze of discussion. Its Importance how
ever. is considerable both on its own account and
for the reason that it has been taken as sort OF
test case In regard to the many changes which the
younger members Of the house are trying TO bring
about In the ecclesiastical nomenclature Of the
Church.
THE RULE OF THE LAITY.
The defeat OF this innovation Is good example
Of what has been frequently stated-that the Prot
estant Episcopal Church is ruled, not by bishops
and other clergy. but by laymen. The House OF
Bishops is not permitted by It's masters
the laymen-to name its own presiding officer.
Not only did the House Of Bishops ask tnat its
president might be called "primate," hut large
majority OF the clerical members Of the House OF
Deputies Joined in that request. But the lay MEM
hers would NJ that renuest There were