New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1913-10-18
Dr.. Rogers an Advocate.

The Rev Dr. 3. Talbot Rogers, OF the
diocese Of Fond du Lac, referred yester-
day to the case Of DR.. Crapsey, but not
10y name. in his advocacy before the house
of the proposed canon constituting the
House Of Bishops the final court of appeal
in heresy cases.
THE question now before u.s." he said,
is not whether we shall establish a
judiciary and courts but whether we
shall complete the system the Church al
ready possesses. Formerly there were
only diocesan courts, and no courts Of
review and IN the early days many de-
cisions by the diocesan bishop were re-
versed by the other bishops, so that much
confusion resulted. More recently the
Church has established courts OF review
in each department. but this still leaves
the system incomplete.
AT present the standing OF a presbyter
of the Church is in the hands of one
bishop, three presbyters and three laymen
(the court of review. Such tribunal
does not seem sufficiently representative
10 guarantee the position Of the Church
on important questions liable TO come be-
fore IT,
The fear has been expressed that the
proposed canon would place too great a
burden of inconvenience on the House OF
Bishops. But there are very few trials
involving the question Of doctrine, faith
or worship. In the last nine years there
has been only one in one department. The
other seven courts Of review have not
been invoked at all during that entire
time.
This proposed canon would perfect and
complete our system, so that any clergy
man accused In matter OF faith may
know that II is a subject TO be decided by
the mind of the whole Church as ex-
pressed through the House Of Bishops.
at has been proposed that these ques-
tons might be voted on in open house at
the general convention. This would be
like allowing Congress or the electorate
TO decide those questions which now come
UP before the Supreme Court II would
be barking back 10 the days of Athens
when Aristides the Just was ostracized
because the people became tired of hear
ing him called the Just
Every clergyman when ordained a
deacon, and again when ordained to the
priesthood, and again when consecrated a
bishop, takes a solemn oath that he Will
Loyalty teach the faith of the Church as
expressed In her creeds. and he takes this
oath before a bishop. The bishops by this
process become peculiarly fitted to decide
what is the faith Of the Church The
presbyter. on the other hand, is protected
~ he united actiop NJ 10 Ush
Of Bishops.
las the bishops meet frequently their
decisions could be easily obtained, and
submit that much as l love the House
OF Deputies, should prefer decision by
the House of Bishops to a popular one
by this house. because the bishops, by
their apostolic commission as teachers
and guardians of the faith form the
natural court of appeal.
They should decide whether | had
broken my ordinatioon vow, and whether
they should relieve me of my ordination
contract. And any clergyman or layman
whose son was about to enter the min
istry could take comfort in the assurance
that his son could not be unfrocked gave
by vote of the whole House Of Bishops"
Chief Justice Concurred.
John II. Stiness Chief Justice OF the
Supreme Court Of Rhode Island, who was
associated with counsel for the Diocese
OF Western New FORK in the prosecu-
ton OF DR.. Crapsey. was a member I'M
iii his death Of the joint committee, app
pointed by the general convention of
1910 TO frame the canon now under con-
sideration. He concurred with the ma
jority OF the committee as to the ex-
pediency OF establishing court of ap-
peal
The only dissenting member Of this