The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1903-02-18
Rev. G. D. Andrews Says Ed
ward Everett Hale Had No
Right to Participate in
Holy Communicates. R.
W. Boynton, Unitarian,
Declares There Was Prec-
edent for Action.

Or. Edward Everett Hale, the
greatest of New England divines,
by the Leading Light" an organ
OF the Episcopal church, for hay
ing Deen communicate at the ceIebra-
tlon OF the Lords Supper in Trinity
church, one of the most noted of Ros-
toms Episcopalian churches, as told i'm
L q b e of yesterday, IS creating
much local comment.
st. Paul Episcopalians and Unitas
rIans are inclined to utter direct senti-
ments indicative of their several at
utudes in the matter. When seen yes
terday Rev. Charles D. Andrews, rector
OF Christ church, said:
There is this to say: I am sur
prlsed, very much surprised, at Rev.
Edward Everett Hale taking the course
ne did in this matter And am equal.
~ surprised at Bishop Lawrence in
allowing the reverend doctor, a man
who must be well known to him bv
sight, to partake Of the sacrament
especially as it is a matter OF CONT
mental notoriety that Rev. Hale
mas, SO to speak, defied the Episcopal
doctrine of the Trinity which neces-
sar1ly implies the divinity of Christ.
You know there are certain we'll
Defined rules or laws by which to go in
all things. The established church of
course recognized the fact that order
is heavens first law and gave it's SER
wants certain Well-defined cIearIy-c11t
laws by which to govern themselves.
We cannot go beyond them or aside
from them; and l unhesitatingly say
that If had been the officiating clergy
man at that sacrament, and knoWitg
Rev. Hale, L should most decidedly
have had to refuse to administer it to
him.
Mr.. Hale Was inconsistent.
Either Mr.. Hale believes in the di-
vinity Of Christ or he does not; and if
ne does not, as he is wont to affirm,
and as | am disposed to believe, he
has no right to expect to receive the
sacrament of the Lords Supper at the
hands of clergyman officiating in be-
half of creed that states distinctly
that that sacrament is celebrated be-
cause of the divinity of Christ. AS a
divine of the Unitarian church, which
by its very name, if nothing else, de-
clares it's unbelief in the Trinity, he
could not consistently receive the sac
rament at the hands OF a bishop of the
Episcopal church.
1T may be that he desired to do so
in a spirit Of bravado, in order to have
1t to say that he had received the sac
rament of the Lords Supper at the
hands of a bishop Of the Episcopal
church; but from what I know of the
man, as man, 1 can not think this
possible. l have nothing more to say.
except to repeat that I consider Mr..
Hale's conduct in this matter as being
strangely inconsistent with his pro-
fession of faith"
Precedent for DR.. HaIe's Action.
Rev. R. w. Boynton, Unitarian. as
serted that the situation was not
wholly new one to him, and told of it
having occurred once before as follows:
'The criticism by an Episcopal paper
Of Rev. Edward Everett Hale, for
partaking of communion in Trinity
church, Boston, is the repetition Of an
old story.
when Trinity church in Boston was
consecrated in 1877, with Phillips
Brooks as rector. two Unitarian min
listers were among those invited to
partake of communion. This fact was
used against DR.. Brooks by his critics
In the Episcopal church some years
after, but without the desired effect Of
preventing his election to the bishopric.
Ii DIR. Hale, as Unitarian, partook
or the communion in an Episcopal
church, he did so not as a member Of
that such, or as seeking a membership
IN 1T, but as a member of the Christian
church, of which Episcopalianism is a
small fraction.
''The Unitarian churches of New
England, growing naturally out of the
their ancestors, have almost univer-
sally retained the communion service.
They do not, however, consider that
this service implies the deity Of Christ,
but that it was instituted by him as a
simple memorial for all his disciples,
among whom Unitarians would wish to
be counted.
Upon the Unitarian principle of
private judgment, and the use of rea-
son in religion, the communion is not
obligatory upon any individual or con-
gregation; thus many of the newer
Unitarian churches, especially in the
West, have given up its observance,
but remain in full fellowship with all
the older churches of the East
'It is pure assumption that the in
terpreation of the Lords supper given
in the Episcopal prayerbook is the
only possible one. If 1T were so Uni
tarians believe that He who enjoined it
upon his disciples could not have par
taken of it Himself; as they do not dis
cover in His teachings any of that dog
matte or priestly exclusiveness which
would restrict it now to a small class
of believers