The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1897-11-08
TWO BISHOPS in ONE CITY.
n COMPLICATION ENTAIL ED BT THE
CONSOLIDATION

AFTER San. \ Greater New York Episcopaiians
VIII ne Conr rented By y state OF Anhirs In
Vislntten OF the Constitution OF the Church
Two ntoeoscs In One City Exprcssiy Forbidden
Members Of the Episcopal clergy In this city
and Brooklyn arc much interested in tho solu.
tion OF the Issue raised at the recent convention
OF the diocese OF New York by the Rov. William
r.. Huntington. ID. D.. Of Grace Church es to the
effect OF tho consolidation Of the two cities upon
tho ecclesiastical relations OF the dioceses of
New York and Long Island. in view Of tho ex.
istenco in the constitution of the Protestant
Episcopal Church In tho United States OF q
clause which forbids a city to form moro than
one diocese. This question was discussed In.
formally soon after the passage Of the act Of
Legislature which authorized the consolidation.
but DIR. Huntington's resolution, adopted by tho
convention. makes the question one Of official
record and OF great Importance. It was as
follows:
Resolved. That IL DO referred TO the on
canons to consider, and to report to the next conven.
tion, whether the proviso of Article v. OF the consti.
tuition OF the general church " that no city shall form
moro than one diocese does or does not Affect the
clergy and parishes OF that portion of the diocese OF
Long Island which ia about to be Incorporated with
the present city OF New York, and what action. IL
any. Ia desirable in the premises.
At first, the matter was treated lightly by the
majority OF tho clergy, for 1t was thought that
no contingency could arise whereby the richest
and most important part Of tho jurisdiction Of
Bishop Littlejohn must be coded the diocese Of
New York through the establishment Of new
municipal boundaries. such people wcro COM
PEELED to admit, however. upon a closer study Of
the subject, that the case In reality presented n
side toe, serious In its possible consequences to
DO wholly ignored.
Article V. of the constitution Of the Prot.
cstant Episcopal Church In the United States of
America deals chiefly with the admission Of new
sion, the limit of Presbyters and parishes per.
mitted to form new dioccses, and closes one of
Huntington: Provided. that no city shall form
more than one diocese"
s, 1t was argued g BY those c who say c nothing him de,
Of DR.. fHuntington's resolution that Ar:
new dioceses and that tho trainers Of the
constitution did not contemplate that tho
article should apply to dioceses long in exist
ence whose conditions ought not TO DO affected
BY the obliteration of municipal lines through
state LEGISLATION. 1t was also held that q sui;
in London, whcro thoro are more than one do
cese and more than one Bishop Of the Church of
Those who recognized q special pertinence in
the resolution. while admitting that tho .situa-
minds of the makers Of the constitution. and
that tho article in question probably refers only
to the formation Of new dioceses. held that there
was sufficient doubt in the matter to raise q
F, question which should DO settled by tho highest
authority of the Church. In answer to the OBJ
lection that the same condition OF affairs exists
In London, 1t is said that the constitution OF the
Church of England differs materially from that
OF the American Church in many respects, and
could not be applied here.
The Judgment OF the Diocesan Convention, as
recorded by the adoption Of the resolution of DR..
Huntington, was that the matter should be ad
Indicated upon by the next General Convention
Of the Church, ana that the constitution should
be revised so as to leave all element of doubt as
to the meaning OF the article out OF the question.
The Committee on Canons will report to the
next Diocesan Convention on tho subject, and
the decision of the local body will be laid before
the body of the whole Church in October, 1898.