New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1913-10-17

are going to also tie up all other kinds
OF progressive legislation with regard to
| the Prayer Book.
"As II now stands, with our system OF
representation in this convention, / have
figured out that under such an amend
Inent to the constitution one out Of nine
communicates of this Church, II they
want, can absolutely obstruct any legis-
lation looking toward the enrichment OF
the Prayer Book.
II am entirely in sympathy with the
plea for peace and harmony in this con-
vention. but | don't think it Is so vital
as some OF the gentlemen would represent
AS for our appearance Of harmony to the
outside world why. what We are doing to
bring about world conference is enough
evidence that we are seeking harmony.
"As for ourselves. we don't want har-
mony at too great cost. / have enough
Irish blood In me to say that I'd rather
keep on scrapping over this In friendly
way rather than tie up everything we
could do to improve our Prayer Book. as
| II is proposed to do"
Amendment Defeated.
Dr.. Marquis offered an amendment TO
DR.. Manning's amendment, practically
eliminating from its provisions all of the
| Prayer Book but the title page. This
amendment little later was laid on the
table by great shout of ayes.
| DIR. w. o. Waters. Of Chicago. agreed
with DR.. Marquis. He said:
II don't believe We want to live in an
armed camp. with cannons to right OF US
and cannons to left of us to make us keep
the peace. l don't believe the members
of this house can't look each other hon
estly in the face and trust each other.
don't believe we are going to have to Tie
everything up so that we can't unite 1t.
! I'VE don't want to see many changes IN
that Prayer Book, anyway. and the con-
servatism of this house is an adequate
safeguard against too many. But we need
some elasticity of action, and 1t is indeed
short-sighted policy TO make any change
at all practically impossible.
LAS for the change of the name or the
Church. am glad we have reached the
stage where We can allude to 1t without
n general panic. Some people in TINS
house think that because they have been
doing It for about three years, everybody
else in this house is at loggerheads ana
pulling hair over this question or the
change of name. | believe we have seen
the very last vestige OF partisanshiP
stamped out in this convention In Ne"
York
| DR.. Mann had to put down with stern
tattoo of the gavel the applause whlch
burst out at this point. DR.. r. l.. Parsons,
! of California, followed the restoration OF
quiet with a plea for the passage OF the
measure. pointing out that important
questions before the house almost. ~
variably ELECTED a two-thrds vote one
WAY or the other, and that Dr. Manning's
resolution simply would serve as a safe'
| guard, without obstructing charge f
But DR.. McIlvaine would not have II 30.
J I'VE are not afraid OF change OF
name" he cried The name oil the
Church will never be changed by MAJOR
| fly vote or two-thirds vote. ~ VIII
never be changed until there is practical
uranimity In the Church In its favor.
am no more afraid OF the name OF the
Church being changed than l am OF my
own being changed, and as / don't belong
10 the sects or sect that makes practice
of changing names, am not much In rear
Of that.
but we are proposing 10 hand over this
beloved Church OF ours TO the conserva-
tive element within ito tie II hand ana
| foot against progress. With all due re-
spect to It's originator. / must say that
consider this the most dangerous resoiu-
ton presented to this house In the nine
wears i've been connected with IL.
Or. Mekim Explains.
DR.. McKim cared little about the reso!u-
ton, he explained, but he took occasion to
! make clear the position OF those who
cling TO the word Protestant" In the
| Churchs name.
1--WE do not believe" ne said. that the
present name OF the Church Is a sectarian
name. We know It's history. We know
that 1t was first applied in England In lo6i
and in the colonies in 1906. We use the
word Protestant not In that sense IN
| which II was used there and here In the
United States in the nineteenth century,
but I'm the historical sense-the sense IN
which il has been employed by q long
line of most illustrious divines OF the
| Church of England.
'In clinging TO the present name we DO
not say, either, that we are less catholic
than our brethren who wish II changed
We believe, dear brethren. in the Catholic
Church Just as much as you, but we are
not willing to stultify ourselves by call
ing a part the whole. We are only part
of the Catholic Church To arrogate the
name to ourselves might serve to undo
all the splendid work already done toward
Christian unity"
Mr.. Pepper. being a lawyer, objected to
| this discussion Of a change OF name In
considering DR.. Mannings resolution. He
entirely sympathized, he said, with those
deputies who already had risen in vain to
points OF order
1T is almost the only question we should
not consider at this time" he said THE
danger is that we will legislate something
into the constitution TO fit particular
case"
lie favored the measure, however.
william Allen Irwin, lay deputy from
North Carolina, gave the wrought up
nerves Of the body splendid outlet In
laughter by his protest against any char
acterization of the house as an armed
camp" and his plea for 'brotherly love"
He also objected TO what he called the
"allegory about the boyle in the box and
10 the presence Of canons "and other fire.
| h Ani had t1yft n