to take as axioms those truths which the Church clearly maintains, however they may be doubted or denied by those out of her pale. Among such truths are the following: First-that Bishops are successors to the Apostles in the ordinary powers of their office, though not in the extraordinary qualifications and endowments of these first ministers of Christ. Secondly-that as such, the apostolic commission embraces them, and that they too are enjoined and anthorized to go into all the world and teach or disciple all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Thirdly-that consequently Bishops, as such, have the right to preach and administer the Sacraments, as well as rule in the Church. Scripture, the moment the consecration is complete she takes them away by the rubrics and canons which she has enacted, and which the Bishop is bound to observe? Such a conclusion any one who loves or honors the Church will be slow to receive. On what ground are we asked to receive it? Mainly on this, that in the ordinary communion office the minister is usually described. as Priest, and that when the Bishop is specially spoken of, it is in contra-distinction from the Priest in giving the absolution. An obvious reply to this is, that every Bishop is necessarily a Priest, and that the word here means only an officer distinct from a Layman or Deacon, and that the effect of the Rubric con cerning Absolution in the communion office, as compared with the other rubrics of that office, is, that Absolution, while he may or may not perform the other parts of the Office. But that the term Priest, in the rubrics of the Communion Office, is used inclusively and not exclusively of Bishops, appears to the committee indisputably certain, from this conEngland, in the Ordination Service, the Bishop is required to administer the Communion Office, and the only form provided in that Church is the form containing the same rubrics with our ordinary form. Consequently these Rubrics in the English Liturgy must be so interpreted as that the term Priest includes Bishops as well as Presbyters. But as we have adopted these Rubrics with a fixed interpretation, we have necessarily adopted that interpretation. If it be said in reply to this, that our Church has a Special Communion Service to be used by the Bishop on occasions of ordination, this must be remembered in connection with that service, that there is no rubric in it, and certainly no canou confining it to any special occasion, but that it is just the office which a Bishop might naturally and properly use whenever he administered the Communion, and that in this, none of the Rubrics which have perplexed some minds are to be found. Fourthly-that their Episcopal rights are to be exercised in their Dioceses, these being their ap-when the Bishop is present, he must pronounce the pointed fields of labor. Fifthly-that consequently every Bishop has a right to preach and administer the sacraments in bis Diocese independently of any parochial cure which may be entrusted to him, and in every part of bis Diocese, for if there be any part of his Dio-sideration, that in the Liturgy of the Church of cese in which he cannot exercise Episcopal rights, then in that part he is not Bishop. On these principles the committee found their clear conviction of the general right and authority of a Bishop to preach, to administer the sacraments, and to rule in his whole Diocese, and in every part of it. It would seem a necessary conclusion that if there be a Church in a Diocese in which the Bishop can never preach nor administer the sacraments and the like, without being in each particular instance previously authorized by another perthat he really has not Episcopal power in that Church. It may be asked, is there no limitation to these principles? Can a Bishop at any time, in any part of his Diocese, perform any ministerial act he pleases? The committee will not keep back their belief that in the beginning it was even so. That in the earliest ages of the Church, Presbyters did bot preach when Bishops were present, and that, as we are taught by the learned Bingham, it was a notable event when St. Augustine, while still a Presbyter, was permitted to preach in the presence of the Bishop. While on these grounds the committee are of opinion that on occasions of Visitation, a Bishop generally in our Church, has, and ought to have, the right to preach and administer the Sacraments and perform other ministerial acts in any parish of his The institution of the Parochial system has, how- Diocese. They consider that the question as to the ever, produced a mighty revolution in the relations Law of this particular Diocese, was settled some of Bishops and Presbyters. Presbyters are now three years since, by the decision of the only Ecclemade responsible for the spiritual state of the soulssiastical tribunal before which it could judicially in their parishes, and their power must bear some relation to their responsibility. come. Of course this decision might be set aside by a declaratory Canon, and perhaps otherwise, but The committee, consequently, conceive that the until superceded, the committee consider it as havmere presence of a Bishop, does not, by the existing a binding force on all who belong to this Dioin established system of the Church, take away the right and duty of a Presbyter to teach in his own person, and administer the sacraments by his own hands to the people of his charge; and yet the Bish p, on the principles first laid down, must also have the right to teach and administer the sacraLents in every part of his Diocese. These appa rently conflicting rights, are, as the committee beLeve, perfectly reconciled in the admirable system of the Church, by confining the Bishop in the exercise of his to those comparatively rare occasions, on which he goes officially, in his very Episcopal character in Visitation of a Parish. cese.-They consequently regard the Bishop as fully authorized to issue his notice of Visitation to Christ Church, Baltimore, in the form used by him, and when he had received notice in reply from the Rector, that he could not consent to his exercising these rights, the committee consider that the Bishop acted wisely, gently, and properly in revoking his notice the alternative being his sacrifice of what he believed, and what the Judicial authority of his Diocese had decided, to be his right; or, by attempting to enforce it, involving one of his Presby ters in an Ecclesiastical offence, and exposing him to a presentment. If he has it not then, he never has it, and one of In all times, but especially in troublous times like two conclusions must follow: Either the Bishop, as these, the committee approve of that course, which, tach, is not authorized to preach and administer the without sacrificing principle, will most probably sacraments, or that being thus authorized by his avoid strife and scandal. In conclusion, the com very office, this authority is afterwards taken frommittee recommend the adoption of the following bim by the rubrics and canons which regulate that office. Are we to believe that the Church has so tultified herself? And that having in the consecration office given these powers in obedience to resolutions: 1. Resolved, as the sense of this Convention, That a Bishop, in order to the exercise of his Episcopal functions, possesses the right, on occasions of canonical visitation, to control the services and to take to himself such portions of them as he may think proper. We have only to add that, to the great credit of the brethren in Maryland, as Christians and Churchmen, and the well earned comfort of their devoted and excellent Bishop, the resolu Votes: 2. Resolved, that this principle was recognized and settled as the law of the Diocese of Maryland, by the decision of the tribunal which the law of the Diocese had constituted for the decision of ecclesi-tions were passed by the following triumphant astical questions, and from the decision of which tribunal no law of the Church recognises any appeal. 3. Resolved, That the course of the Bishop of this Diocese, in revoking his notice of a Visitation to Christ Church, Baltimore, was the wise and judicious exercise of a discretion canonically vested in him, in a spirit of Christian prudence and forbear ance, which does him honor. THOMAS ATKINSON, First Resolution-Clergy, Ayes 61, Noes 17. Laity, Ayes 50, Noes 20. · Second Resolution-Clergy, Ayes 60, Noes 17. Laity, Ayes 43, Noes 12. Third Resolution-Clergy, Ayes 56, Noes 11. Laity, Ayes 41, Noes 10. BOOK TABLE. of twenty-four of the most Eminent Citizens of the Republic, since the death of Washing ton. Daguerreotypes by Brady. Engraved by D'Avignon. Edited by C. Edwards Lester. Assisted by an Association of Literary Men. Published from Brady's Daguerrian Gallery, by G. P. Putnam; D. Appleton & Co.; C. S. Francis & Co. 1850. A LETTER TO THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, FROM THE BISHOP OF EXETER. Pamphlet, 80 pp. New-York: Pudney & Russell. 1850. Our readers doubtless know that this pamphlet is connected with a controversy which is now deeply agitating the Church of England, and producing a very natural correspondent interest in the American Church. We had intended noticing it somewhat at large; but want of space compels us now to confine ourselves to recommending a general serious perusal of it, as very able in itself, and discussing, in a sound and Christian manner, the great principles involved in the controversy, as one touching the system of the Gospel in its integrity, and im-ornament for the drawing-room or parlor. It is portant doctrines and duties set forth in the Book of Common Prayer. THE GALLERY OF ILLUSTRIOUS AMERICANS, containing the Portraits and Biographical Sketches We have received No. 6 of this magnificent work, containing a splendid engraving of Cot. FREMONT. It is published on imperial folio drawing paper. It is altogether the most costly and elegant work of the kind ever issued from the American press. Every engraving is large enough to be framed, and to make a beautiful published at the price of $20; to be completed in 24 numbers. A number of book notices are necessarily laid over until our next number. CALENDAR FOR JULY. 7. Sixth Sunday after Trinity. 14. Seventh Sunday after Trinity. 21. Eighth Sunday after Trinity. 25. St. James the Apostle. HE present number is em- is constantly offending against his Maker, bellished with an engrav- violating His commands, and opposing ingrating appropriate to the itude of the basest kind to a love which is season. In the good pro-ever active in works of kindness, that love vidence of God the time which is infinite in its nature, never wearies. of harvest has again come around. Though for a time it may seem to be withThe former and the latter rain have drawn and the sons of men be afflicted with been sent to refresh and reinvigorate pestilence or famine, yet these calamities are the teeming earth. The sun, with sent in mercy. They come to warn man of beams of life, has caused the germ to his sins; to destroy that presumptuous selfunfold itself and expand into first the blade confidence which prosperity is so apt to fosand then the ear, until fit and ripe for the use ter; to teach the lesson that man's dependof man, it yields at length to the sickle of ance must be rested upon his Maker and not the reaper. upon himself. And when this fact is realized, What more glorious sight than the fields, and man brought back to a sense of his own stretching themselves out before the eye, their weakness, the rod of chastisement is withgolden foliage flashing in the sunlight, or drawn, the fountain is again unsealed, and waving and bending like plumed warriors health, happiness, and prosperity once more beneath the breeze, as it passes gently over spring up on every side. them! What sight more calculated to elevate the soul to the contemplation of Him who is the Father of Mercies and the God of Love! Where can we find a surer or more certain token of His protecting care and never-failing providence? Helpless ourselves, we are dependent upon Him. One single word spoken in anger, and blight and mildew would desolate the earth, and famine, with her hollow cheek and sunken eye, would drive plenty from the land. And yet, though man We look upon the harvest-field. We see with what prodigality nature rewards the labor of the husbandman. The song of the reaper, as his heart rejoices amid the plenteous return, falls in glad tones upon the ear. Everything conspires to produce contentment and to give promise of a happy future. The heart is happy, but is it always thankful? Is it pervaded by a deep sense that this abundance is the free gift of God to sinful man, and does it pour itself out in gratitude to Him VOL. VII.-NO. VIII. |