Year: 1868

or otherwise, In the parish, or within the pa
roca cure Of another noa apes ssose se
the minister OF the parish cure, or In his absence
from the church warlens and yestrymen, or trustees
goes on to declare On reference to previous para
graph In reference to parish boundaries and suDai-
vhrcS vsos o. @ that bn 4 lnfFe fhe Di s @ oa Of
such village, town. township, borough, city OF
such divisions Of . city or town as herein pro,
the minister having charge thereof II there be TWO
or more congregations or churches therein IL snaii
be deemed the cure of the ministers thereof and the
assent OF the majority Of such ministers small DC
necessary


Now in the city Of New Brunswick, where the acts
or congregations, and minister in charge OF eacn
OF them. BY the terms OF the canon nothing can De
all the purposes of this canon the joint parochai
of these two minister's SO that no clergyman oi
this Church could rightfny oflciate in any part OF
that city without their consent. II Is obvious Dotn
the terms Of the canon and from the reason o!
the thing that if clergyman OF another place desired
Brnnswck the assent Of the minister Of that church
would be sufficient; but II he desired to oftciate In
some other place within the city OF New BrunsWlck
which not one OF the parish churches nor an edl.
fee especially appertaining to the charge OF one OF
those ministers, but place wholly unrecogniZed Dy
this Church, then he must have the assent or Dotn
the ministers in that city. The canon law OF this
Church s for the ministers and people OF TINS Church
and has no relation whatever to the ministers anu
people of other religious bodies. To say that the lit
eral natural, and usual Interpretation OF the canon
in question, ascrbing to the two ministers OF this
Church in New Brunswick Jurisdiction over the
whole Of that city, for the purposes OF the canon,
to claim for them an absolute jurisdiction over all
the people and over all the religious houses
Of that city, Ii to say something so ma
grantly unreasonable and unfOunded that only
persons who wish to be deceived can be
deceived by it, AS well might say that the canon
law OF this diocese, because 1t extends over all the
territory Of this diocese, 80 far as the clergy and
parishes Of this church are cSncerned IN must There
and people Of other religious bodies within tho geo.
graphical limits Of this diocese. Such perversion
of plain facts may possibly answer the purpose
of an appeal to headong popular prejudice and
passion; but surely 1t is unworthy OF considera-
ton before an intelligent Board OF PTesDyters o. ts
the law of this Church and into the conduct OF one OF
her ministers. The canon in question Is designed to
cure OF another 1t is intended to prevent disturb
from rivalry and conflict and from the oliciating
Of strange clergyman under circumstances cacn,
interfere with the quiet and order Of his parish We
know from history that this was the design of the
In its present form, and that Its later modca-
tions suggested by the rude action OF minister
of this Church in another diocese, who refused the
invitation of the parish clergyman to preach in his
STRANGE, in going to preach in neghboring place Of
worship Of another religious body.


But il this canon be designed to AFFORD protection
from intrusion and disturbance how could 1t do 80 II
It allowed minister Of this Church to go into city
find open to him, in spite Of the protest OF the two
rectors. and III spite also OF the kindly warning OF
the bishop, provided only he did not push violently
into OF the parocha churches or into one OF the
houses Of one OF the recognized parishioners.


Suppose that young clergyman, with the rashness
row views Of Christian TRUTH should determine in
his own mind that the two ministers in New Bruns-
wick were not preaching the pure Gospel OF CHRIST,
and that his duty to go into that city, and re-
gardless Of fear favor to lift up the true standard
of the cross. Suppose he should betake himself to
Methodist meeting house in the near neighborhood
Of the two ministers OF that city, for the pur-
pose of using that edifce from time to time as
secure citadel from which ne might launch iortn ms
words to destroy, II possible the confidence OF the
people in their to turn their heads with new
and in time to stir up and organize violent opposi
ton against the peaceful steady going ministers OF
Gods Church would suSn tnng be proper AZ 70 De "f
human nature and OF certain phases phase Of
religious opinion and character, ;SS could we we
foresight which provided no safeguard against sucn
a peril-which did nothing In advance to check and
restrain turbulent and neady tempersY II there were
be her duty to enact one with the least possible de-
lay. SO long she should continue without It she
one Catholic and Apostolic Church since the time
OF the apostles. She would be leaving both her
@ ah aa res as q
tr o s 70 which
needs be regarded as intrusive disturbing and i'm
pertinent towards his brethren.


Had q clergyman OF this Church a hundred times
the amount OF talent and energy usually found In
any man he might yet expend all his talent and
all his energy to the EXTREMIST bounds OF his power,
In recognized and lawful fields Of effort and duty,
without once violating any canonical law or over
passing any one limit OF fraternal courtesy or Chris
tian kindness.


The apostle exhorts us to be courteous" to 'look
not every man on his own things but every man also
on the things Of others"-.to let nothing be done
through strife or vain glory and may fully recog
nize any plea Of zeal and sefdevotion and yet affirm
that there is nothing In the gospel which requires or
nuco Christian ministers he rude and In
trusive toward each other. But II we have canon
which In the most express terms meets the peril just
referred to and provides safeguard against
it-a canon which has history, explicit phrase
olOgy and cogent reasons, all pointing TO
e % sSuk o e cor with wncs
that Interpretation has been assailedS What are we
to think of the Christian Judgment and temper OF
those who have chosen to denOunce bishops and
clergy and all In both dioceses connected with these
neutrality-suspicious. entered upon with much
sns ana 'r oder Of
Churchf What we say, are we to think OF those
who denounce bishops and clergy, complainers and
aM and order 'he sas Sr tSes
had no conscience, no recttude-and as II
s@ IL
case would be little credtabe to the rude conflicts
OF secular court Coming from clergymen they
excited our special wonder When the letter OF the
law and the and necessity OF the case supply
very obvious justification OF the action OF Chris
tian men the imputing Of evil motives simply implies





ment II they have not done something still worse.


1t is no doubt true that offences against this canon
have sometimes been allowed to pass without notice.
Such offences may be committed through inadver-
tence and reconsideration, and form no part OF
settled design purpose. They may not be dOue in
defiance OF protest and warning, or they may occur
at q time when the individual OFFENDING stands
almost alone In his disposition to trihe with the
settled law and order OF the Church.


The law may have been thought difficult OF
application In great city such as this,
where parish boundaries are almost obnterated,
ha feet nf a n
turbing the peace OF neghboring parishes Is almost
lost In the vastness Of the crowd OF ministers,
churches and people, In such cases, aud In others
like them, presbyters may not have cared to com.
plain, and the authorities Of the Church may not
have thought 1t necessary to intcrpose But no one
had any right to infer from such omissions to com-
plain or to prosecute, that the law was regarded as
obsolete, or virtually abrogated. There Is abun.
dant evidence that the law was not generally looked
upon In the Church nulity, and that II was con-
sidered as intended to apply to precisely such cases
wick.


But II some Irregularities may be borne with and
allowed to pass without notice In times when there