Newspaper Page Text
RITUALISM CONDEMNED. A LARGE MAJORITY AGAINST IT. CTOSE OP THE DEBATE IN THE PROTESTANT ?VMOO PAL (1KNKKAI. CONVENTION?TltE ?NAL VOTE ON TnE ADOPTION OP THE CANO*. Nearly the whole of yesterday's ???sion of the General Convention was occupied in the discussion of the question of Ritu*liam, iu which debat* Geo. C. Sliattu? k. M. D?. of Boeton ; John \V. Amlrew? of Columbas, Ohio ; the Ber. Dr. Bolton of Weat Che?. tettr. Penn.; th? Rev. Dr. Beer? of Albany ! the Rev. Dr. Garrett of Nebraska ; the Rev. Dr. Lewin of Maryland ; the Rev. Dr. Clark of New-Jersey; Jacob Thotn|?Bon of Memphis, Tenn.; Isaac Hazlehurst, LL D., of Philadelphia ; tbe Rev. Dr. Norton of Vir? ginia ; J- Pringle Smith of South Carolina ; E. W. Blaucbitrd of Haltimoro ; the Rev. Dr. Charles H. Hall of Brooklyn, and Hill Burgwin of Pittsburgh, paiticiiiau-d. The vote waa taken at 4 p.m.. by Pioe.se? .nnl Onlert?. and resulted aa follows: Cler? ical vote?Yeas 08. Nays 2, divided 1, total 41; Lay vote-Yeas .34, Nays 8, divided 1. total JW, Three of the dimesHS were uot represented by the laity. The remainder of the busiue-s was comparatively uuiiu purtaut. TnE PROCEEDINGS. When the Cliuirmau's gavel fell yesterday nioruiug at the opening of the session, It was very probable that a count would bave shown that there was not a Quorum. The religious service? do not appear to tie a? attractive to many of the delegates as formerly, though this week they havo had au excuse in the early hour. The Committee on Elections also furnish a aaily excuse lu th? r r? ports of departing depatlca. They are all auxiou* to get through with busiuess. for the usual three week?' session Is nearly over; they are tuakiug every ?ffort to Oaiah by Saturday, with a rt-vy ?i urti i chance In their ta vor. Tb? proceeding? opened with a long discussion about the various paper? lead during the secret seaslon. Some appeared to be In the bauds of the Secretary, others In the pocket? of the delegates. Those who read them wanted i: ? m back ; Prof. .-" ? niour wanted a copy of all of thom; several of the members wanted copies, and so did the re-porters. It wa? finally atrreed to hand them to the Secretary, who should edit them and hare printed soples made, and then return the originals to the own era. For tt.e present no copies will be given. The Rev. E. M. V?n Hetisen of Central New-York read a long report on the state of the Church, referring taalhly to more improved methods of collecting statis? tics. This was ord? red to be printed. The Committee 30 Canons asked to be discharged from the consideration of a resolution requesting tbo opinion of the II ouse of Bishops In vi gard to the use of postures In the com? munion service, as the subject would more properly come uuder the notice of the proposed Commission on Revision. The Committee on New Uioceses reported in favor of the proposed new diocese in Wi-cousiu, and tbe report wa? adopted without debate. An attempt was ciado to hav? action taken upon the resolution lu regard to the Centennial, presented on Monday, but the House decided that It had no time at present to di-eiiM? so unimportant a matter as that. The aaiue fate befell (he election of Vice-President, which bad been set down as a special order for 11 o'clock. Mr. Iiurgwin ot Pittsburgh, moved to.take it np. and Dr. Clark of New Jeraer. moved to postpone li until the next Convention meets. Several nominations wet made, however, before the last motion was carried. These maude the Hon. Lucius B. Otis of Illinois, tin? Rev. Dr. E. E. li.-ar.l-.iey of Connecticut, Judge O. F. Comstock of Central New-York, Judge II. W. Sheffey of Virginia. Thomas C. Montgomery of Western New-York, and the Rev. E. M. Vau Deuseo of Central New-York. Judge J. W. Stevencon of Kentucky, Gov. II. P. Baldwin of Michigan, and Oeorge Vi. Kace of Louisiana, were nouiiuated, but declined. TEE DEBATE ON RHTALISM. Hl'MAN KKROR8 WILL COMK TO MADOR. The debate on Kitualism waa reopened by Dr. O'orge C. Shattuck, of Massachusetts, who con? cluded hi? ad.lre?? of the day before. The first portion of his remarks tended to show that such secte as had < becu at one time banished from Boston, as the Baptists aud Roman Catholics, had returned and now occupy some of the largest aud most Imposing buildings in the etty. He also ?.poke of the disfavor and persecution wbioh met a clergyman who only offended in hanging a holly cross in his church. Tho conclusion, he said, to be drawn fn.tn these attempts to drive awsy so-called error, was that It was tlie intention of the Head of the Church to allow th? wheat and the tare? to grow to? gether. In the words of Gamaliel. "Refrain from these men, and let them alone, for if this work be of men, it will surely rome to naught." AN EVIL THAT MCST CEASE. John W. Audrews of Ohio was the next speaker. The main points of the arguments advanced by him were thtsc. The discussion, be said, under the report, was limited entirely to tbo symbolizing of erroneous or doubtful doctrines in the administration of the Lord's Supper. Thl", it was admitted, ought to be stopped, and the canon wa? acceptable in this view. The best thing about it. lu that it gets rid of ?*wl?_Mastie*_l trial. Every lawyer knows? that in such trials tberetnedy is generally worse than the dlsoaoe?. The meaning of th? word " doubtful," was referred to. To the speaker, that word me mt the same as "strange." This ?ymbollcing of doubtful ?li'i'tt in?- Is what wo aim at. If a man wishes te preach ?loutitrul doetritie, let him do II op*nly, and not lii-.li.ii.it.. it bj ??> ii.lx.i?. The cliK-f i'<?tiit of diacumnloo Is as to iii'*, specifications. Ttie gentleman from Wis? consin snld there was no hann in Incense. But incense is external, material ; we deal in the cuchan?.! with an Internal mutter. In tbe RoiBiaband Jewish c?r?monie?, the in? > -IIHI- symbol i z<?<] th? presione of Guda Now, as regards the rntritlx, Christ sald, He must gira way, that the spirit might come. Therefore Ile withdrew his glorious presence that we might appreciate the spirit. But we use In the eucbarlst a caricature of our Lord to draw away the hearts ni His children. If the use of In? cense were followed, if boy? were to come Into church during the Holy Cointnomoa ?winging ?-ensera. It would break up tbe whole church west of New-York. It is very ?-trail??- te mo thal our Church is n?t known to be a Reformed Church. The name of Protestant is very fireciou? to u??. The names of the martyrs are vii!.ti. ?I d this Church. This Convention meet? under the shadow of the principles for which these men died. I am amaied at the course gentlemen take In conslderiug the condition of religion In this country. Are not the majority of the population of cities, ?be matwrlty in the wealthy and learned classes, out of Uhp reach of vour influence 1 They seem tobe taking ?Went.tie rather ih tu religious truth as tneir guide. These gentlemen will say, looking at these peo? ple, "you oniv ne??d te give them a few more types and symbols." Tlie effect upon the Jewish people of their types and symbols was to make them scribes and Phari? sees and h> isxrltes. It bos been auppoKsd that this Church ha?i no conviction? upon tbe subject. Have not we ma 1? up our minds that the evil at which this cauon anns must cease I I think you will ooine to the conclu? sion that this church w.ll to-day have to put its seal of condemnation upon this evil. THE CANON NOT BBOAD KNOUGn. The Rev. John Bolton of Pennsylvania followed Mr. Andrews, presenting, tetero he addressed the Home, the followiug amoodrnent to the Canon ou Ritualism : Keon'mt 'tbe Hoot? tt Bishop? r-.itx-ornni), Tiwi Um fnilovtnr ?i di tim?. emotion b* ?iji-nl to l ki. vu 20. lill* I-, ul tin Ik at lb? Book ot I '(?nn.uD Prarer: McTi.i.m 11. (1 ) If sar bishop bar* ??a ?on ia beHer? that ten Bouiee vr pree no? ? unrikft ihr ??? .i-?ir?ti.?n of it?- Uolr ( oiihi.i?in't. or ?I ?sr ?-Hier tb??- -omi? Um re I? ?>r?tion sf Iiiru.? mrrice. uot vriaiucd or ?albor tea id to? Book of Common Priver, and i?-ttliit? forth or ?/lal'ulii.i.f 'tr.u'oos or atrat.gc docuuee, har? bes? lutrocucntsi into a ytrt?\ wi?iiD Ha jiui?_euui?, u, vrtti a, TIM ??? of tonne*. b, I'm piano? m oar?tog, or retaining a er-ei.x In an? mart of the piliee ot ? -ni. ?i ?, Th? aleratioi of tb? ?Morfitt? in tb* Hoir Coaaan'an in ?arti aei uer as to erpo?? ltira to Um tic ul tb* p??opl* m obj?-cle towards winch adoration 1? Is? ?.?? uumU. ?I, Bonringa, prostration?, reanl'ilmi?, and all ?a<-h ?.leads nat aylhoriol or al...??si hr the Rtil.nre of the li?-al of ( o?mon l'ra?rr e, TLe ?se of nnrat? at?.fe??ii.n oiherwMt Ihan ?a allowed b? th' Kui? -?-a if the Book of Coiuiiion Pra.er /, Hrar?ra ?JUr?<aMid lo Um Vir?,.n Mar?. 0 Pnftn tot the ilnsaii. ? Tbe u?e ot Tuairoetita other ?han the raaaock, mrolic? and atol?, btti'l? aud Iba black ?own with th? Oiford cap. li ?bal? !??? Um dot? d mu. I, liahop to Ki?mon the Standing Com at-.tae aa bia cov-oJ of ?dTiee, and ?nib then, lo tureen??? tbe Ballar. Clauses 3 and 3 are exactly the same as reported by the Committee, and have already beeu pub.ished. His address was substantially as follows : It will be seen that this amendment makes changes In very utucli the manner of thoee suggested by the delegate from WlMMMB. In addition, I make ?peciflca tions of pi i vate eonfn ?M'?n otherwise than ss allowed in tb?; Book of Com ni ou Prayer, Prayer addressed to the Virgin Mar-, and for the dead. W? are going to allow the ?rentlem?n to have as nue a church as be want-, within the limit? of the Protestar* Church. Bul we aro going to look after bim ; he is toe iroo?l a man to lose. We are not going to take away hu opportunity of work? ing among the poor, and of giviug th? tu a handfouie ritual, if he obooat?. We ought to deal with this in a couiuiou mum; w_y. We all foti ?t? importance. I pro? pose to ? li ?r away one or two obstruction?. Now, we ?re hu H .in.,! ?is. Who does not love good music und ?\ crythii.it that lifi? Um- limn to <iod I It is not Ritual? ism, it la Rouiautaui u-tt we ooud-tDCi. This Mune ol an ?uvauced party la wrong, uki. Those who are receding can ?c*r?st)y t?e ?aid to I?? in advance. There I? an iuipa???U? t?_rr;?-. beiweoo Protestantism and K-Uiaiiisiu, tv k-owietigod ?o by each. Wo Uud the " ad? vanced" cburehuieu trying to pull th.s wall down. They are ?ouKUiaa? on one ?Mlf ojitX M-Mtf-MI ou the other. At tim? Belunuauoti, ob)?<>uo_ ?na made to the use? a? well a? th? ?ibu??-?, In the Church vi Rome ; and that I? ahern? the CotiuoiMe? ha? ttuieU; ,_<?., have not gone to Ui- roou of thing?. Y?>u ?ut m.a th?t priest -raft i? at the root of all this evil. Hut the Kpiscopai Church ha? no priest In the s< &?? of a ?acntlclng prie?t. 'in? cauon is such that the world will be (L?t.?u?fled with it. It doe? ??sem to me that li only gue? holt way. It 1* tun? for the General Convention to ?i??-.,k, aud ?p??ak Dlmiuii-. bull I don't twiisve taat th? i?>iss,oi??l CUuivh Is going to in* Romanised, but she will be greatly scau d.i i/. .I, 'nut retarded ni her irroulh. THR lOOn OF UM?BUTIOl... The Rev Dr. II. W. Bt*ers of Albany spoke nett. 1*he question, he said, appears to be. Is It policy to have .?ny legt-?!,lion ou ritual I If so, I? the proposed canon or are any of tba substitute? ihe proper legislation, Tbe canon is certainly a monument of good will, of the brotherly kindness In the Ocmmlttee?the aame spirit which I think pervades this Honae. But In my opinion it will not be wine to legislate npon tbe subject at all. ir anything is done, it should be a carefully drawn loint resolution, setting forth the truth. There ia, at leaat, a shadow of doubt whether this House can legislate upon the sulject of ritual except by rubric. If remedy I? nee.i.'d, does not the remedy already exist in the rubrics of me Frayer-Book I Does the canon do more than to ?bow to the Bl.bot?? that they already have the power to apply the remedy I Tho canon will not armedy the difficulty at all. There can ha no greater evil under the ?nu than unnecessary legislation. Then the canon does not give as much as the Anti Ritualist? want and give? more than the Ritualists desire. That is a good sign. Whether this Church can afford lo give so much time to so small a question, as whether we ?hall use Incense or place a crucifix upon tho altar, Is another question. To all these men of science, to all these men with mildil persuasions, who ask for something from this Church, we answer. "We will bave no incense: we will have no enieiflx." The true answer is hearty, earnest, self-sacnttoing work ; freedom and toleraUou, though not as a concession..in ibis question of liberty, as far as liberty is compatible with the integrity of the Church, the great cre??d should l?e the great touohstoue of faith. With this .le the ?luire!, work with vestment? or without, ihe Liiurci should hold out all eno.iuragoroent to all ??*_2_* ??S cause of Christ, be be Ritualist or Low &______ J have waited In vain for any evldence that a state ?f thm ?s exists toca;.for|tliis?leglsl?tloD. This Ritualism is on the wane, perhaps through public opinion, perhaju through the Vood wnse of the Ritualists themselves. Many good people bold those doctrines. Ihe Church having condemned tbo?e things which do not exist, we thluk will henceforth be as fair as tho moon, clear as the sun, and terrible as an army In battle. A DIVIDED CHURCH FOR CONVERTS. The Rev. Dr. A. C. Garrett of Nebraska next took up the argument against Ritualism. I submit, he said, that there is a necessity for legislation upon this question. The Joint resolution or the last session failed to bring the agreement which was promised. It Is necessary on account of the anxiety which prevails throughout the iengtii and breadth of the land. It Is ng.it that we should meet the demands of that anxiety and satisfy it. In so doing we are not meeting trivial things. It is right, too, because these Ritualists are hlnderers of the work of the Church. You havo been oalled upon to n press approval of them for prescblng the Oospel to the poor. But I will not admit tbat the Rituali?t? have a monopoly of that work. In your large etty, where sin iier??, are plenty, the Ritualislic churches ma*? overtake some of them. But in our new country the evil states ut in the faoe. We are sent there to prcaob the gospel of peace, and a system of worship which can command their respect. When these Ritualists do come in with their ?hows of pictures and genuflexions, they distract these people, and teach a divided church. Then, again, this Church is a teach? ing Church. How can she teach if she have no defluite system to commumcat?! She must lay down some law which intelligent people can understand. I Imbi there? fore that legislation is neoessary. But I oppose the canon proposed because- it entera Into spectfleatious. No ii!?i of bin":,nestii.'ii? can be so complete a? to reach wit inn a hundred milos of the neces-slties of the Case. Then, again, these apeerflcations Bre wrong, because noue of the practices spoken of are now allotted lu the Church. You need not a cost-iron syntein, but a living voice to Interpret those things winch aro doubtful. The amendment submitted by the delegate from Wisconsin I ii.n k is right. It omits the specifications, recognize? the Bishop as authority, and gives bim power to exer eise that authority. It is neoessary for you to put yout selve? on record, and to confess to the world that you are Protestant, and, far bolter, Episcopal. Make it the duty of the Bishop to settle thone question?, aud ilicu you will have quieted those disturbantes. THE CANON INCOMPLETE. The Rev. Dr. Meyer Lewin of Maryland satd he was thankful that there were men in that Convention wLo by their voices could stir up the hearts of the members. He agreed lu part with both Dr. De Koven and Dr. Oar retLaudjet be regretted that he was bound todiff.r with them on some points, ne was opj-ased to the cannu us reported by the Committee. Some had sp 'ken against it on the ground that it was special legislation; but special legislation bad alromly been had, and what was wanted was adjudication. The highest court of the Church in it? pastoral had alre.dy decided that ?l?va? tion?, adoration?, prostrations, geinitl xi?n?, .vc., were unlawful, and now it depended on the Oeueral Conven? tion bv legislation to say that these word? lind a mean? ing. The Convention had not met merely to do some? thing to satisfy an outside panic?it had something tiiore than that to do or the resolutions of the various Diocesan Conventions meant nothing. The canon cer? tainly specified what were offensive, but this had been said before by the House of Bishop?, although the bishops did not then think the time had oome to enforce the law. Tbey had hoped that the paternal advice of the bishops would have been sufllcieut; but as it wa? not ?uni? fient the Church wanted positive legislation. He would ut ti e proper time offer an amendment thai should de? nne poaitively what was prohibited, which the Commit? tee's canon did not positively do; but would at the same time make provision for the singing ot an anthem dur? ing the Offertory. The bishops should have the rightful authority to suppress forbidden act? unembarrassed by ?taudii.g committee?. Should the two bodies disagree, what authority would Ihe Bishop have under the ranon I And if they did agree,what guarantee would there be that the agreemeut would hold for two year?? Wbeu the Standing Committee cuiue to he elected the next year after such agreement, some would be for removing the members because they bad goue too far, while other? would be for retuiumg them on nic-oiiut of their action. Trouble would then anse. By giving the power solely to the Bishop, the Convention merely declared that ne should exercise a power which he already had. This plan would provide lor both side*??those wbo exceeded the limit?, and tboso who did not come up to the limits. Legislation lu the Convention wus not for one section, but for all the clergy?those who were in eice.?? of ritual and those wbo boil not enough. If the Bishop and ?landing Committee agreed, then the Bishop could uct and the clergyman must obey or be punished us he ?l?? ser-, ed to be. But then, this was lu opposition io the Constitution, of which Article C defined that presbyter? might be tried by the dioceses. Toe canon proposed provided for trial, nnd was therefore unconstitutional. The exisliug canons already provided that in the event of a public rumor, injurious to the Church, it was the duty of the B. ?hop, or if there were no Bishop, then Wie clerical ministers of the Standing Committee, to investi? gate the matter. But the proposed canon did not do this, and therefore he objected to it? MISCHIEF CATl'SED BY tmttVAXmWAu The Rev. Dr. Samuel A. Clark of IS'ew-Jen-ey read a paper which he said had been placed in the pews of a church for the edification of the congregation, explain? ing the meaning of the bowing, prostration?, genu? flexions, light?, flowers, dec, and showing that the eleva? tions and adorations were acknowledgments of Christ's presence on the altar. H>- asserted that such teaching was false doctrine. He bad attended service in a church where there were actions that he could not un? derstand, and where be could not hear the words of the nu m-1.- r because of the " intoning," and his bock being toward the congregation. De had seen all -tort? of posturing, and had even seen a man take him? self to pines before the congregation. These practices were doing a great mischief, and hindering the growth of the Church. In a short time there would be few men left to protect the right? of the Church. During the next three years there would be few ministers added to the Church ?honld these practices be continued ; for, no one except thofe who were fondor millinery and toy?, tying ropes around their waist?, decorating their i-ersous with crosses, Ac, would Join the Church. Then what was the remedy for this I He thought Dr. De Koven's amendment wa? the best, a? he did not approve of presbyters turning spies, vrclergvmen being at the mercy of a few laymen. It was evident that Dr. De Koven wanted to stop Rituulism [laughter], and he knewjbe.t what the situation required. THE TRAI-R-BOOK GOOD ENOUGH. Jacob Thompson of Memphis, Tenn., ?aid he had for many years received from the pulpit the teachings of the Church without comment; but since be had been elected a lay deputy, he had read papers on this subject of Ritualism. He, personally, was neither High Church nor Low Church, and he certainly was no Ritualist. He was a churchman who desired to se? the Prayer-Book carried out in nil Its purity. It was evident from the report of the Committee on Canons that the Committee had made an effort to do som? thing, and yet keep within bounds. It was also plain that there was a sentiment against anything extreme in religion ; there was a strong sentiment in that House against Ritualism. When the report w as first pre.?eoted, he could see nothing li? it to object to; but after the explanation? which ha?! been mode, he could see a great deal. Whan .be hr ?t saw the candles on the altar he thought it was because they wanted more light. A? for lnceuse, he did uot know what It wa?. But it is sold that these things bad a Liddeu meaning, aud if they preach false doctrine, tbey should not be In the Church. The oanon was, he thought, In the negative, and the General Convention should not legislate in the negative. It should be posi? tive, like the Mosaic law. The Church had laws, and by the law they should live. He thought the canon was intended as a compromise. He had never known a com? promise proposition that satisfied any one. He wanted the talk stopped in the church, and gava notice of a proposition for the appointment of a committee composed of three clerical and three lay depu? ties, to act In conjunction with three Bishop?, wbo, with as little delay as possible, should ?lt|tro_u time to time and consider the whole question, ho as to report at the ii?-At Oetieral Convention what changes and what law would be necessary. The Prayer-Book nad stood for over ' 200 years aud had bad the teat of lime, lie warned the (burch of Christ kept pure, ando? the guardians of the Christian vestal fire he wanted the matter well con. k1 cred and not hurried. He wa? confient with the Prayer Book as it Stood. 'Ilo- l.-i'-huii.?i ???? mud to be th? .iilil culty. uot in the thing itself, but What other? made of It. He then fore favored a special comuulttte to give the matter proper consideration. SYMBOLS KUI MU TO THF VATICAN. Isaac Hazelhnrst. 1?L. D , of Philadelphia ?aid this was the first opportunity tbo lsity had bad to say any? thing on this sub)eet. He did not wish to be considered as ?peaking only for Philadelphia, but for the whole American Church, which was as broad a? the American Union. Men had said there was no Ritualism. The very air waa tilled with it. The beautiful church they were then lu had been made more beiiuuful because of it, a? the galleries would testily. H? had beeu asked by what law the difficult? should be met and the remedy found. By the old-fashioned Prayer-Book of. 17h. was his ouly answer. The presbyter at hi? ordination promiMd to conform to it. If the puruplieruttlla of a j aggUr ?as in? troduced into a church a remeuy would lie soon found to -top such pruetice?. If a lawyer failed to do his duly a? sworn to he would be stricken from lb* roll?, and so should eviry pre?byter. If the cl> rgvuieu did I not perlorin their duty, the laity could. No Ritualism, uni. .d ' li waa wriu.li ou the bells of the hornes, and a i._,___ tui-H, be bad. Ut aid uvt baloy _ any .larg* -? man would willingly violate a canon if it were passed. As for adoration, he had been taught that there wa???niy one ?arrtflce and that completed. Teaching by sjmbols waa-oarr? Ing Mt? tx ugregat lo? ?>v?t a maa-liU*?! If???? ment to thu Vatican. It wa? a matter that all were in? terested lu , and he cotild answer for the lally that the would ?tan- finn for the Church If every clergyman left ft. If the strtiggl?) had to come b#twecu the ciergy aod lally, the lally would lake the Ark and preaerv?? it. The Church bad the Prayer -Book and would lay It on the Altar, looking to the Most High Uod, who. alone, waa to be adored. VIKWA OF HOtmilCBM*B1. The Rev. Dr. Norton of Virginia ?aid Be did not pro pose to discuss RitualUm, but the canon before them. He wa? free to sar the ranon did not coins up to the needs or the Churoh ; but he had such a respect for the Committee, oompoeed a? it wa?, thal he would bow to their Judgment. There na?t b? something In It or Dr. I?eKoveu would not have dlsoUye-l an much, oloqt.eM? and energy lu oouibating It. The word ?? ?a??-???' '?*' ?i*?n ohi?ct?d to? but he considered any doctrine? wtok_ n? rise t? doubt, even if not positively erro neons, were ?? doubtful." especially if tbey cause uneasi? ness In the minds of churohmen. They might not contaiu the Romish errors, but If they were under a form or lu word? that might he misunderstood they were doubt? ful. Thev might only arise from the vanity of younger clergymen; but such young men should beoautioued not to us? expressions that had a doubt? ful meaning. He thought the word a good one. Home objected to the specification?; hut If the specifications were lost tbe virtue of the ranon ws? also lost. The Church might not agree on all the point? of difference, hut it was gaining something to secure these four points. It bad i?e?-n aald that the law of the canon could be evaded, but he felt sure that every true son of the Churoh would observe the law, and that was the feeling of every sound churchman In every diocese. J. Pringle rsmitli of South Carolina sal?! that the Church wuk a bo?ly with many member?, and If one memlner were offended, the whole body wa? hurt. If a roliilsier Introduced foreign practices he offended. He would assail no maa'? tenets, but would stand on a com? mon gi ouud. ''When two or three are gathered to? gether" them should be nothing but love. If foreign rites were practiced the common ground was cut away, and impediments introduced that were not under? stood. He had heard of Calvlntstio Episco? palians. It such doctrines were introduced into tho speaker's church, it would be an invasion of his right?. He plcailed for the Prayer-Book ; and that, no matter In what bnlldlng be attended church, or where, he could be sure of a fair rendering of It. Lay? men bail experiences which did uot come in the path? way of the clergy. He believed in "one Lord andona faith;" but not a faith of chameleon hue?, both con fu-ine and perplexing. He was iu favor of the ?-?non, and when it became law he boped tbe law would bo heeded, and every one be made to obey it. ?. W. H.:m.?haul of Baltimore, Md., said the Conven? tion li.i?l decided that a clergyman who pructlced euchar? istie adoration, auricular confemtiou, and private abnolu tlon was not tit for the Episconaie. When that decision was made, there was uot a voice raised to say the Church lit-llbvcd In or allowed them. The General Con? vention was i .impuse?! of representative tuen, und must give expression on this question. In Maryland there was a deep disappointment felt when the Gen? eral Convention of 1871 adjourned without dcflu ing this matter of Ritualism, standing then as he did with the knowledge of the popular view, be asked whether the legislation should be detluite or vague. The proposed c.mon ehjolurd nothing, prohibited noth? ing. It was nd led to that refer? hur lo the " Use of the Book of ( .?mint ii Prayer" lustead of being appended to that " Of Ofl-DSM Committed by Miuiisters." It left the Bishop and Standing Committee to decide whether or not otfeimes were committed, and this was too vague. The un i ii'iiii?m bo bud oflered on Mouduy prolilbite<i certain things and put Into the tiaud-s of tho ecclesiasti? cal atithoiiiy ti.?' power to punish for violating the pro? hibition. NECR8SITY FOR ACTION. Ibe Rev. Dr. Chas. II. Hall of Hrooklyn ?.-?Id the Gen? eral Convention had started at Baltimore to do what it was now trying to have ?lone, and was shipwrecked. If th ? Convention passed the canon it meant something or nothing. The outside world knew what It meant?the death or victory of Kltnallsm. The Bltnaltsts bad ?sid, if the (?euernl Convention condemned Kltnallsm, they would go where it wa? practiced. This was rebellion, ami those who put forth such arguments were to the Church What Benedict Arnold was io the ?tate. The cauon of im?? declared that (?owing In a church, except iu adoration of Almighty God. was forbidden, ami that denied to the Church all the radical princi? ples now adopted by Hiittallnts. As to tho two presbyters being witnesses, the canon Was so worded lu ord? r that two respou?H?lc p? mons should make the charges before they could la- eiitertaiin-d. This was c.Minion s? use. The mest certain way to defeat legisla? tion on the subject wa? t" offer amendments. The Church ii' 'o nu!? ?I action, not words. God had placod the ?'oiivention there to control such matters. Th" Con '. n-iit mil must uot leave ?n li matters In ?Iouht. so as to deceive other men Uko Dr. rteyiuour. It would be nu ii.jii-in o io him to hcsitutf now aud refuse to uufurl the i_?. Mi. Burgwin of Pittsburgh, on behalf of the Commit? tee ou Canons, dosed the debate, and explalucil the proposed camm, with Its Intended ?cope ami ? II. ct, if approved. He then explained that the specltlfutloiis were Intended merely to guide, nnd If the practices or eeieiii'ni.i ? there out forth symbolized doubtful or erro? neous doctrine, the bishop wurt to investigate, und if on Investigation he should lind them to best?, It wa? his duty to admonish. The offense of tbe presbyter would really be lu his refluai to obey the udmnuitiou. For such refusal he could bo tried. The canon did not foi lu I the at I - or cert inoiii.il? ; that question was sacred to the i none-?, ant the ( .minuit, o hud no right to luterfcrc. But the li ?hop had, by tb? canon, the right to forbid any munster from practicing anything that wa? er? roneous or doubtful, and thereby likely to disturb the peace of the Church. To make the niattorclear.it specified i ? rt.nu things, but did not say tbey are un 1,iv. ful Ant thing that svinbollz.-?! doubtful or er? roneous doctrine? could be prohibited. The canon merely said that in the opinion of the Committees of the House of Deputu-s and of the House of Bimhopa such and such thing? wcro symbolical of doubtful doc? trine, and ni? rely gave the weight of their opinion thereto without deciding the question. The pro? visions of the proposed cauon would run side by sid?; with -MOD ?, Title II. and hail set aside certain things as doubtful to the iieace of the Church. The trial would have to come after. The Bishop aud Htaudlng Commit? tee did not try the offender, but only saw that he was ii-,? ?I by the piocese. The Committee on Canon?, be? lieving their cauun to be the best, uud thut amendments would endanger the ?mire measure; and ulso believing the whole Convention could unite ou one propoeiuon, had instructed bim to move that all atuentliiieiit.-i be? laid on the table and a vote be taken ou the original proposition. -? THE VOTE ON RITt'ALlSM. Mr. Burgwin made a niotiou to that effect, aud it was earned by a large vole. The vote was then taken upon ?he rollowltiir: FRetolied. (Ibe H.oe? of Binliep? eoncnrriogl. That the following add! tioi.ai te. ? i,n I.* added to < inn 'Jo. Title I., ? Of ibe nae o? ti.- ,Bool ..' I . 1I,.'...I, I'Ta" r Sac -? 111 If an? blahop baee rea?>n to bel.ete or if complaint be h, ..-.?... ?,-.-. ? .? I.? two ... u ? ??? of I.? 1'rfhl.nur?, that cere niot.le? or practice! .innng the celebration of tie Huir Communion, nut uni?.t...: or aulhonied id tbe H ki? of Common I'raj-er, and ?eii.ng lortb or ?TOibo.iiim/ermueou? or di.rit.iful doctrine? bare been Intro dueed into a parish wubin lu? juritd ? i uo ?l. ?i tj-mpie? tbe follow ii.,- art declared to be rontiderrd a? ?aub) : ?i Tbe nae uf incense. iV Tbe plae ug.i.r carrying, or retainir-g a cmcini in an? part of tbi place of i..-. ' worabip. c. Tbe eli-Tat,. not tbe clemant? in ?be Hole OmMsIm in ?neb n.aDi ? i al to iii.,.?? tbeia to Uie ne? of ibe people u objecta towards wb cb adoration i? to 1* made d. Anr act of adoration of <>r toward? the Klemer.U In Iba Hole ?'..it manion, ?ucb a? l.owiiiga. prostrat; n? genufleiiuL?. ?r.d ail ?acb lila an? not aniboriied, or allowad by Ibe Knlinci of tt? Book of Cotniaon Prater). It ?ball lit the dut? of ?neb B-.?t.?p to ?onunon the Stamtiag ('.?mmlttee al bi? ('?.une.I of ?dt.ce ?Mi milli then, lo ir??n-.,n? t|,e .nttter [-j If aft*? tneeangation, ti ?ball ?t.pear lo tbe Biabap and the Standing ('ouimttet tliat erroneotu ar doubtful doctrine? bair ia fact keen ?et forth or ??mboliied Im cerem? me? <r gmt tie?, mi ?rJaiuad ?r aniboriied a? afore?a,?1. It ?ball be ti e lute ?I Um 111,1.. r. bj in??rurnen? of ?nt.na under bit band, to altooninb the minuter of th? pariah to ?I.? ti.tii:!.?. ?.?I. practice? or cereao?aa?. and If the n.inlite, ?ball dia.-pgtrd ?ucb admonition, it ?ball be Ibe ?.nts of ?be Standing Committee to canee bin lo be tried for a breach of bi? ordination M gernrelVii tba? nott ng bemu comillie?! ?bill preieut tb? Dre?entmrt,t u,,| knd pur, Inhmeat of an? minuter amkr Ibe prosiiiou? of SecUua 1 of Canot. ? Title II of the Pigeit ' [31 In all Investigation? under the proeiaioni of th!? ri?on tbe min iiter who?? act? or pracut-i ?re tbe ?utjaet nutter of it,? iaeeatigatlon ?ball b* tintifir 1. and hine 01 norlanit. to b? beard In b.? delenae. Iba cbaifea (relerre- ?nd ?lie Indinga ef tbe H.*h ?;? at. : Standing ("in a,ur* ?iii. be ia ? nut.,', and a record ?ball ti? kept of tb? proceeding? in tbe ease. The vote having been taken by Dioceses and Orders was found to be as follows : HIKXll VuTI I'm' li'??.? Arkana??, filiform?, ?Central Kew Turk. Central ?Vi ? ? ?a ? 1 ..m ?-i,? nt Delaware. Ba?ton. Pioriia. ?????rgi?. lill, nala, Iowa, kan???. Kentock?. Long Uland. Loniiiana. Mi uc Mirt land ?!?-?....?? 1:? M.??.??.i'i 1 M.iaour?, .Net.ruka. .Ne? ll?mp.bir? New-Jeree? Mew-To.k. North Carolina. Obi?, Pent?ilTan.? p st,.' Ii.ra-I. H-.i.'ir li.aad. S Mb ( ari.l u?. 'I ?nn-?fee, I en? V?'_,.;.| ?,,. gm.a, ?? ?lern Ht* Turk. Witconiin?38. N.lV Si' .1 ? Mieblgao? 'i. ??itnlcU?In-asi-l. m TOTS. TViM?Alabaita. CaVfornla. Central ?few-York. Centra! Penr??'. ran.a, ( .....?-,.ii Pelaware. Kaatoa. Kloiil?. (leorgia, I ted? low? Kim?-. KiLi'icki _ong lalaod. Louxana, Maine. Mart land Ma??a' ehuaett? Michigan. Mlnneauta Mi ??:?? ipi Mi??ogri. Jl.w Himpah re N-.rtn ( ar'lina. Ubio, Penna.Ttaia, Pitiaburgb. KboOe Inlaai South Carolina, Tanncaaee, Teiae, Virginia, Weal?rn >. ? i_ ?TiMM? ?111?54. aVop? -Albin? ?lewTork, V?rmost?3. /??i-lcd?New JerMT?1. JtSSttX?OtamOamXu, Indiana lfebruka?3. ??(AeiIUt_TIO-. Clerical rute? Teaa. 3S, H?J?. '?, dirided. 1?Total II Loy I 1 \r?. 34, Nat?, 3: Dteided. 1 Absent :(-Tolal 41 TV.lii. Vot*?\tu, li, 9*1*, .'. PiTidcd, || .?'.,. 1 J-Total H'i, Five ine?i?agee were received from the lloue?- of tlishdPB. The first provided lor a dlvaion of the Dlo oese of California, m? follows : Wktrea*. Iba l'i?"?ua of Califorei?, hr deliberal? ?clio? of tie Bitbt p an?I C.'LTenU'.n ttereol. ha? for urgen? and >u_eiet,l rcaeoti? declared it? deair? I?. eetahl>?b it? nortbern lu. .1 ?.?, the eoutbem I ne 3 Sonoma, .Napa, fulano, Sacraartnlv, ?mailor, and k1 horado ( oanlia? and ' Wktreo*. Thl? Hnuae I? ?trfteienl'T ???ore?! of tb? ennaant of the t?ar i?:. ? Iring north of Iba aald Ihiui dar? liue . and IFiWeua. While griee doubla ?re . r 1. r?? ....: bj miar of the noe??f order our (onttitotion to i-errnar em:? s ter ibe ?cir.tertil citant ni a ii.ee?. In it. ? form, >?t impieaaed tf ?t?< great - ?.-,??.,.?? ?f ;t, ( 1 ur t ::, that i!...tn-?e, and of iii e juiK* at be? claim for prompt ?chef therefore ' ?tif-liatt. Ob? Hosiae of Cleric?l ?nd Lae bet??!.?? eo?cnrr1ng). That tbe C fis . . ?1, ? ... '.co ???? ?ignite? Ita ? -tt- t ?nd agrea^enl lo the liiaitatiua ?f the lartadicllra of th* Ht?h. j aod (??Meit, un of ti? Pioceae of ('?liiomi? wilbla tb? limita aboea indicaled, ?nul ?acb coaititutronal ? u ? ..... 1 ? and .? a,..?n. 1, tberaonder ran be ?ernred aa ar? wetmttt to lerntet Hie donbu ???,.??. ,1 ??,.1 ita?I In th? meactim? the lerntor* .. uti otto* lino? ?foo??..I and with tl?c Mat* of I alifornia be r.?k-i and treated aa ?.??iona?? termer/ and ?a'ject to miaaioaa/; jana?.cuou The second relaUsd to the rej?orting of delinouonl lolnuters to the Ctiurrb in Cauada, and pre?erib?d thal the nulli?m of inmut?is wbo were ruerelv under temporary mi?-|?? iifion etiouitl not be reported. Tb? thinl informed the House of Deputies thal a Committee, I'uiin-iMitig of the Ulshop? of I>elaware, I._-?,,,, _h,i 1'it te tin m t?. iiiul in?? ii appointed from the Himae of Uisboi?) to nsoti--i.it r and report what action, If anr. wa? demil,i,i,< In relation to tbe matter of godly diariptlne of .??u.ti.ni o rtut member? of tb? l'roU?t_iit Kpi??-<val Church. Tbo fourth deflueil Utat th? n.,.* _iid order? of i-.?. li li.?um- was lu the power of ???ni lion???, and that no Joint action wa? e_p*?du-nt ; and the titth informed the lionne uf Deputies that the lii-iioj.? of ?Ohio, In? diana, and I'eiiti?.? iMiiii.i bad been appointed a commu? te?, to ? ?...ournie with |a committee of the Iaower Houms in tb? matter of relieving the orentding HiMiop of .-Hi? nt his duties on account ?vi his advanced m, aud intlim ?tie?. j THE BAPTIST SCHISM. VIEWS . OV LrEALHW* PAfiTOR? OP CLOSE COMMUNION CHURCHES. TOR NKW-YOIIK CllfBCHW? NOT SERIOUSLY DIVIDKD O* AOITATBIl OH THK QUESTION?FOUR BROOK? LYN CHURCHES IN FAVOK Of OPEN COMMUNION. The action of the I ?oin. Inland Baptit.. Asao olatlon In the eaaa of the Leo Aveane, Marey A venn?, and Oethaemaae churches of Brooklyn doea not appear to hare oa lined aa amah agitation arnon? the Baptist churches lu New-York aa among thone of Brooklyn. Baptist pr-tor? in New-York claim that the chun Ins bera are more united in sentiment upon the queation of communion than thoa-? of Brooklyn, and that lu thin city there Is no church which Is likely to take the atti? tude of the Lee Avenue Church. While there may be lu some bodies a considerable portion of. the member chip inclined to favor open oommuolon, there are nono in which these are numerous enough to form a majority, or at least there are none In which a large part of the members have endeavored to commit their church to opposition to close communion, and none of the Baptist pastors in this city take a direct poniiion lu favor of the practice of opeu communiou. although there uro a few who are understood to look upou the action of the Long Island Association as illiberal. A .'nun .?o: reporter called yesterday upon the Rev. Dr. Thoa. Armitage, pastor of the Filth Avenue Baptist church, for Information concerning tho position of New York Baptist Church?)? upon this question. Dr. Anui tagesald: To comprehend the effect of tb*? action of the Long Islund Association. It is necessary first to un? derstand that by Baptist polity, each church is Inde pen lent and left to manage its own affairs. Associa'iou? formed by Baptist churches are for missionary purposes, and they have no ecclesiastical authority whatever, no legislative or executive functions. The action of the L<>ug Island Association does not chance the status of the Lee Avenue Church to the world. to Itself, or to the d?nomination. It simply determines that it is imposslole for the churches of the Association to work together in harmony with the Lee Avenue Chnrcn, for the oi'Jerts to further which tho As? sociation was formed, ft was necessury that all the churches of tbo Association should be agreed entirely as to what kind of churches they should plant. I'eaee was i!nl]?peii? ltd', and the independence of the Lee Avenuo (.'horeb was not infringed upon hy the act of the Asno elitiniu In withdrawing of fellowship. That flinn ii could form a u?*w association with other churches lr it wished, and could make o en cotnmnnion ii test of ad? mission. Tlie state of things Is entirely different In the Baptist denomination trnui the Episcopal, I'reahvteriau or othi-r churches. Tue aciion of tbo (Jeuoral Assembly governs all Presbyterian churches, and tt.e action of Convocation governs the Episcopal. In the Baptist deuoiuiuation each church is a law unto it? self, and If au a-sociatiou declares that, peace will not bo promoted hy working with any Individual church and withdraws fellowship from it. It in no sense pet-ecu.?'? or oppresses that church ; lhere is nothing illiberal In the net That, I think, is the general sentluieiit of Ne* - York Baptist?. There is no discordance among them such aa hu? appeared among the Brooklyn churches. There has not lu ?-n even u ripple of the ?ort lure. No Baptist church and no Buptlst pastor in this city is avowedly In favor of opencoinmtini<?n, ana I do not think lhere is n large proportion of uienil-ers in any ?.ne church w ho desire lo place their church on that gin und. Tnere are probably two or three Baptist pastois in New-York who sympathize with the Lee Avenue and Mare) Avenue Churches, but l( Is not probable that they have the pur? pose or the wish to take Hie same attitude as the pastors of those churches have taken. I bave the warmest friendship for Mr. Smith and Dr. Jeffrey, and while I think they are mistuken iu their views I wish that they lie grahie.I ttie same liberty to bold to th. Ir in.?taken viens as I should claim tor myself in a similar case. The _if. Frederick Evans, pastor of the Central Bap? tist Church, expressed the conviction that the New' York Iiaptlst church were united un this questiou of coiuinuiilcn. and none of them showed a disposition sim? ilar to that of the "open communion" Brooklyn churches. The action of the Long l-l,mil Association could not Im* considered intolerant, for the L "D'Avenu, Church, by departing from the practice and teaching of the other churches of the A??ociatlon, had already separated itself in spirit from the Association. A prom? inent tiiemtier of one of the best-known Biptlsf chinches In New-York, whose views were understood to agree with those of the pastor of that ohun-ii, said that m my N.w-York Baptist? looked on Ihe p')sition taken by the Long Island Association as Illiberal, and sym? pathized with the Lee Avenue Church, but they hail no desire to avow themselves '* onen com inuiiioiilsts" or to make agitation In their churches. If nu "open-communion" Baptist Church were started In New-York with au esteemed pastor, there would proba? bly be considerable accessions to it from several New York churches of members who leaned toward " opeu communiou" opinions, but who did not consider th? question ?utllcicmiv a matter of conscience to mik? a stand upon it. and that they were uot violating princi? ple lu retaining uieintn-rship in strict-comuiiiiilon churches without proclaiming their views. There had lu eli no cull ii p ii them for avowal. There appeared to lie no prospect of dis8eu?ions in the New-York ? burches, but the unwise mid intolerant position of the Long Uland Association would soon bring a reaction which would be deeply HU in Brooklyn. A RADICAL VIEW. The Rev. Justin D. Fulton of the Hanson-place Baptist Church, Brooklyn, oue of the most zealous opposera of '?open communion " in the denomination, told a Tri ii On reporter yesterday that he had no hesitation In m,iking a statement of his views on the communion ?luestion, and of his relations to Dr. Jeffrey. It is not true that he lias ever demanded that Dr. Jeffrey should withdraw from tbo Baptist denomination. He had no right to make such it demand. On the contrary, he hail always beeu on terms of friendship with Dr. Jeffrey, who came from Cincinnati about a year ago to be a professor In Dr. Ta I m age's Lay College, and afterward received a call to the Marey A w-nue Church. In October, 1872, Dr. Jeffrey wrote n letter to The Examiner in favor of the Rev. (i. F. Pentecost. Dr. Fulton also wrote to The Examiner, and the only thing he said with regard to Dr. Jeffrev's leav? ing the Church was : "This Is not a timo for trifling. Duty demands that Christians should stand by Christ, even if doing so cuu?es them to part with brethren beloved." He also wrote a letter in bebulf of Dr. Jeffrey to The Chicago Standanl, and when rumor said that Dr. Jeffrey til loose in his views on oomniuhiou, refused to believe it. In order to obtain a recognition of his church Dr. Jeffrey avowed himself to be a Baptist, but in less than a week The Brooklyn Union stated that " Dr. Jeffrey is 11't.-ral lu his views, and does not mnke a belief In what is k?owo as ' clono com mutilen' a test of membership In a Baptist Church." To this Dr. Fulton replied lu his paper, The Christian in the World: "This cannot be true. Dr. Jeffrey made the most positive and unequivocal declarations in favor of baptism being a preliminary to commuulou. . . . We believe lum. and still think that whou wo took his offered hand as a Baptist minister, who was to be 'tbo pastor of a regular Baptist church,' we held the hand of an honest, upright, and honorable man." Thi? waa lu I), i riiii" r lusl. Prom tins time Dr. Jeffrey became more and more in favor of open communion, aud was more and inore opponed by Dr. F.ilton. The latter has l.?s'il trin tu tin- principles of the Bupttst ( him li. but has noted with pleasure every step of progress made by the Marey Avenue Church. The general opinion, ho says, is that Dr. Jeftrey is behind the whole open com? munion agitation, and is tho author of a tract published by the Beeret Baptist Union. This, however, has been deuted. Dr. Fulton ?aid thut the li. v. J. Hyatt .-uni li has acted an honorable, fair, open part. He is whut ho professe? to be, and professes to be what be Is. A? to the other Baptist churches of Brooklyn, they are all sound on the communion question, except U?*tbsemane, the Rev. A- B. Walsh, pastil. and It is doubtful whether they will persist lu their withdrawal from the Associa? tion. It is also rumored that the Rev. J. B. Cleaver of the Hi x1 h Avenue Church will withdraw and Join with the Uethsemane Society, but nothing definite can be ascer? tained. STATEMENTS OF LSDF.PENDENT PASTOR.*?. The Rev. A. 8. Walsh of the Uethsemane Baptist Church stated yesterday, that all but a very small pro? portion of the member? of his church agreed in the advisability of withdrawal from the Association; that there were ten In favor of It to one against It, and that a chnroh meeting would be held Immediately, at which the withdrawal would undoubtedly be ratttled, and a committee ol Uve would be appointed to prepare ?au address tor publication which would define the position of the church. The reason of withdrawal was that the Association took the grouud of mt'?r?en.ne with Baptist principles in trying to represa liberty of conscience, and attacking the In? dependence of individual churches. A few per? sons conirol the Ass*." latlyu and try to con? trol all the churches belonging to it, and wish to put out of the Association vi hat they do not like. We deny the Association's claim to supremacy, and while claiming to be strict baptist?, and iutendiug to remain such, we don't Intend to submit to dictation from the Association, and. retiring from ita fellowship, propoae to draw our doctrine? and definitions from the New Testament. I defended only Indirectly the Lee Avenue Baptist Church at the recent meet? ing of the Asoociatlou, but nrged fair play. The question of open or cloee communion li not at issue with us ; it is .lunch Independeuc-e that we in? sist on. The Association has still a large and strong membership, bul many of It? members are at heart op? posed to it? recent action, and Us condition maybe iuu.li changed before long. Nevertheless peaot) aud unity might be restored If two or three reactionary pastors should make themselves less prominent and the Asoo? na! ion should " nu. to interfere with the private .iii.iir? of the churches. The Rev. J. Hyatt Smith of the Lee Avenue Church . said that no steps had yet been taken for the formation I of a new ^association by the churches which were now outouie of the I.oi.g Island Association. It Is best to wait a abort tliu<| und let tbe disturbed element- udjusl themselves a little. The uew aeaoelatlou will be likely to come In good time. At auy rate the Long Is? land Association ha? hurt itself very seriously by it? action. It ha? beau run by a ?ort of ring for nome years, the memoers of which "cut and dried " matters, and work?- to drive out those wbo did no1 agree with them. Mr. tltiiltb ?poke at leugth of the previous movements In the Association toward ex iM ding the Le? Avt.uue Church und Dr. PeuU-eo?!'? Church, and as-serted that these movements bad beeu inarki ?I by m.(.m ties-, bitterness, and " ring " methods of manipulation. But ha claim?-?! thal advaucw lu lil-erty of thought und church in de penile uro is now ?-'lug on admirably, and tbare are a great many who have not yet publicly avowed their sent?, m.-n?-, wbo lu privat? tiuve e_pre*?ed h__?rt*y sym? pathy -iili'itiKsn?'-, iiml tit? warmest approval of our opinion? ni"! pr.o i let- The Oet boen,taue Church take?-) a fli-ui stand In favor of Independence. Thal la what w? want. We have not made this _s?u<> so much one of open communion a* of independence. While we have not ex eluded fellow Christiana, not Baptist?, from the Lord'? bupper. we havo uot eilend ed au iu-.ua . UvU W kh.iM. ttWi, ?Ula. U.U. i um In m-.a communion, wa do not trr to keep close oom niimloiilst? from our communion table. lu ?several of the Brooklyn churches there is a strong open communion ?I? ui? ut. Jn the Fiant Church, which was formed by lb?? union of the Ile v. II. M Uallaber'? church aud the I'lerr. (...ni Street Church, there la a very largo liberal element, the in em bera of Mr. Oallaber's obtirrn having been nearly all broad and tolerauc In opinion. The pastor of the First Church, I am Informed, preaohed a vigorous sermon In favor of church independence on Sunday. Ia th.? Ht nmg 1'luce Church thcro Is o considerable epeo commnnlon element, but I don't think it is nearly ss large as that in the First Church. In the Sixth Avenue Church there are po?ltivo elements of both kluds?close communion and open eoromuulon?and they seem to be arrayed airalnat ??acb other to nome ?stest, in other cJiim h? ? our position is not without pleutvof sympathy. In New-York there are pastors of lii.eral disposition and churches with a considerable part of their membership holding ojien communion view?, but no church or pa?tor openly advocates or praclluc? open communion ?o far a? I kuow. _______________________ AMEIiWAN MISSIONS. M-ETINO Of THE AMERICAN MlfWIONART r-WClWTY? KKPOHTA FOR TIIK PAKT YKAR?WORK AMONO TIIK ?JM_M__-MPAOKHNK88 OK THF, OM0MB ?MM TO I.EARN?INSTITUTIONS UNUIR TIIK CARR OF TIIK SOCIETY. The 38th annual merrin?- of the American Missionary Boeloty (Congregational) opens at Clinton, Iowa, to day. The Association was organized In 1RKJ, for the "education and religious Instruction of the peo? ple of the South," on an ' anti Slavery basin." Four roiMlonary soeietlcj, which had been previously formed, were merged Into it. By tliM consolidation the Awo<:la tion received under its care and conducted missions In Africa, In the West Indie?, and, among the Western In? dian*. lu addition to t?ese, missions have also been established In the Sandwich Inland? and In Siam, but the chief work of the Association Iles In the South among the Fr?-udmen. The persecution to which the early missionaries of the Association in the South were subjected Is part of the history of tho Slavery content. At the beginning of the Rebellion the. agents of tho Association wore, of oourso, driven fr?*n the South, but they returned again ?n tho wake of the Northern armier?, and soon had plenty to do In teaching the fugitive ?lavo*, who rushed by thou emiiii- to the Union army for protection. Since tho clone of tho war tbo Association has been doing a large and Important work among the Frceilmen, s? shown by It? i. ii ii u il reporte The prerieut condition of this work, and what has been donn the pint year, may be learned from the following synopsis of the reports to bo presented at tlio prenout meeting of the Association. Tno Treasurer's report shows an aggregate expendi? ture In Its work of ??i,"?ii 05. of which much the latfMt share, fiao.?*? ?37, has been expended In tho South. Its receipts ure reported at $319,723 75, or W 1.275 30 loss thsn Its expenditures, Increasing the Society's debt In that nmonnt. lu it? foreign missionary work the expendi? tures have been $9,031 1? for Africa, 94 15? 20 for the Ja? maica mission, pi 967 ?31 for Blain, and $0i 67 special for the Sandwich Inlands. In it? foreign mlnnlonary work. In accordance with the vote of the late annual meeting. It? musions lu tho 8-iulwlch Iaitmis aud iu Siam havo both been relinquished. It has not been found possible to transfer its Jamaica mission to any other or? ganization, and the people themselves will not bo ablo to sustain it without additional aid. The difficulty of supplying the Avery nilssiou with white laborers Is very great, and thocouvlctlon in strong that tho providence? of God point to tho freodnieu, of whom so many aro now being educated in the South, a? the source of tho supply for the mission field ou tho Western coast and lu Central Africa. Kight lieu ni asrcncies have been asslgniMl to the asso? ciation, lie side? six agents and throe mlsslonar?-?, thero aro an aggregate of 116 teachers and employes, A few of the latter are Catholic?, who received their appoint? ments before the agencies were put under tho caro of the Association. Two churches have boen formed dur? ing the year. The report? of the agents and missiona? ries are all encouraging, showing a very general im? provement of the linli.m-, aud their readiness to labor In any way that promises suitable compensation. The report quotes the Commissioner of Indlau Affairs as expressing his surprlso at the indications of pros? perity continually pouring in from all quarters, and his conflileut h*llef that a continuance of tho present policy and (IT rta for a single decade will deteruiiue the re? moval of Indian barbarism and preserve the In?lians either a? a dmtlnct class or a corporate part of our (iein ral uovernnn-nt. WOB! DI THE SOUTH. Immediately after the war the Association began to lay foundations for it? higher institutions, the aim being to provide for the most advanced wants of the people by i?.linn.- such department? of instruction as would furnish thom complete facilities of business, normal, and especially theological education. This hus involved the necessity of holding land? and buildings of considerable value. The re?ult has been a diminishing number of primary nchooli, aud consequently of ti-acber?, sup? ported by the Association. lu most cases, however, tho relinquished schools have passed under the care of those who have been educated by the Association. They have not been suspended, but are ?till carried on lu s>mpathy with our general work. An anticipate?! ?lltllciilty has been more strikingly developed during the past year than before : the inducement offered to young persons partly educated to turu aside and accept remuuerative positlous has prevented tbelr pressltig forward io the fuller preparation which they need. The number, therefore, in tb?? higher departments Is propor? tionally le-?? Utan It ought to be. It Is gratifying, how? ever, to ?tate that a very large number of those who have prematurely gono out from our schools are engaged lu teaching. The whole number thus employed thin year Is not glvon. Fisk University alone reports 113 of Its pupil? an having taught more or loss during the year. Of these, 87 have taught 7.043 scholars iu their ?lay-schools, aud had 6,4M lo their 8 ibbath-schools. The tlnaiicial embarra??ui?;ut of the South has somewhat af* I'l'ii-'l tbe work of the Association, and diminished the number of students. Families who have heretofore been In a comfortable condition bave been compelled to ?.?ittiii.ii i tlielr clilldren from school. The year lia*. however, been a prosperous and successful one io IMMOl to all the great interests, eduoatlonal aod re? ligious. The most important points have been firmly beld. and the year closes with nearly all the churches and institutions lu bettor condition than at the begin? ning. The agents and teachers of the Association bear witness to "ibe anxiety and capability" of the freed men for learnlug, ami many Interesting exam? ples are giren of the efforts of t_e colored people to obtain an education. The children frequently take their books home to study, and ?the stranger may often meet little urchins with their ?lutes who will hold them out with a " Please set me a copy." Instances are given In which tho alphabet has Is-i-n mastered in a singlo w?x-k. It is not uuusual to see in the schools such scenes as this: A middle aged mon studying arithmetic, his wife engaged with the primer, a mother Just beginning to read, her son learning the multiplication table, anti a man In a class of five-year-old children learnlug with tbem the alpha? bet. "To-day," say the agents, "we need a thousand added to our corps of teachers. All around us the .'reeiimi-ii ure struggling hurd agalust poverty, some agit'n-it actual starvation, vet they beg harder fora Behool than for food o. clothing." some of the scholars are very dull, but their pers?-verance Is wonderful. One mun 40 years old has attended school every Dight for the pi?-' five years. Ile v. di k* daily on his farm and walks five miles at night to ana from tbe school. In one plue? two young lady teachers have had a class of ministers under instruction. Tbey proved ter? ribly deficient in spellmg, and made some curious blunder? in reading from the Scriptures. One of them whispered to one or the ladies, asking her to give him a Bible lesson, "for" said he, "they call up?in me to preach sometimes, snd I'm mighty tight up on the words," Some of the colored men who have learned their letters bluoe tho war are studying Creek aud Oeometry. Nine ne? churches have been organized during the year. These are generally in the neighborhood of the older ones, and are a natural outgrowth of them and of our Institutions? The nitMt marked revival of the year occurred at Chattanooga Term early In the Hummer. Iii.) estimated number of ailuitlon? to the churches is 615. an in? nan? of 76 over last year. tKltnilERN AND TACIFIC COAST CHURCHES AND tjCII(X)I_i CUPO UBI -AUK OF HIE A-JOCUUON N-mW et mm**tomtm*Ai?.?. 53 Namti?r of cliurtL tae-oer?.T.'.TTTt,T.*3,177 Number ?ildcl ilurx* th? feat. s?15 t'liarternsd irntitatiuc?. 7 Hillier ??hool?. 17 ( .ll.tLil. ,. I .... ?. J ^ Total iituntinsr of tuinUter?, tui.s.ouar.ei. and teach*?... 273 Tulal ?.matter uf jopll? ?urolJ??l.10 4jj (U_?ii?< .1 aa follow? : Ttn-ologl??!. 7J Medical. J_ 1*?. 15 t'ollaftal?.. 4,j Callafiata preparatory. gji *om?l. iJH (iramaar. 1,6?0 luiernaiiial?.,. ?} gb'i rtimatj. -?.',-j.i)-j ToWl. ti.DVti ?lo-rlii? to tar? g-ra?!??. l8 ToUl. Kt?78 CkuMM pablla.. 1.5J1 Tula!.10,41HI MBW?acholar? io Church ?lui M;??...uSuu.la? richon- ?i.o.in * Bapuria fr.? Wa .-?art..-? no1 r. .?...J, number Mlioiatod : . r?. port? ??f the linn... ye?/.1 NAMES AM? LOCATION Off PKINC1FAL SCHOOLS. ( HAkT?H?o Innrinti .?> li?.H.i,,r. Nuraal ?ad A?;ric?!iur?i lu ?t u.U. list?n Is?. V?., BU.rl.ci ol papila. ?*,40i buamtiu. ?c.oitnuonl? Hoy fur 1M> Modem?. Ri-rea C.lk.e. Uerea. Ki., buioU-t of puriun ??*7, hMrdint acr.i-iiiodatioB? for ?DO ?in . ni* V\,g IM,, .?ii,' Kaabrill??. Tan?., um?.,- r of pntila, ??HO: baai-iaf acooaimodat?o?- tor 100 ?ludwiU. AtlaaU Ibltaralt?, Atl?BU, (,a, DUBtnii of papila l'J7 Ui.h-b? ?????oii.iai.laiK.ti? for IM ?lu-cala. T?llau?^a Collage lal laJ???, Al?.; ktimtter of paull?, 1 'j*? i boanliBf aoe?i?uio?l?uiia? for Uki ?tad.i.U Tuoxalnio linouir, Tootaloo, Mia?; uustkar of pupila 'iii lioardluij anceui'iiixlsiiuii? for UKI ?liadn-i.??. Mr?.uti? l'in??r?it? ' Ma? Urlaaaa, La. i Limber uf yupiO, ?Mil, boardman *.c?^i_i?Jau?/iaa' for ?U ???deina. II mu?? iViKKi-.?Willaroo A?*Via?, Wttoioften 1 (? . i.?, lnMiluiv?_?rle.l..?, ti C ; Ure???? Mumal vl????.|, 0?n?o???K?i 8. C .Nurina! School, A?der?n?i?ille. ?Is, ; tntn.rr? Hcbo.il. AH.?*. Im ' t. ? , II.?I. Maboul. Mm_d, (In; Utteb li-Uiot.-. hanui.afk ?la "t.isii. School. AW??. Ala , laiiKsulD -.-?-I, _.ro?. Ala., Kacca.? _M?_5 M.tak.. IhlSMm Scli^l, MoBlfouierj Ah, Bo,?|| hk^? SS (VkM llot.iltith.ml.t-imiuoo.ittn. UWmt? Mo,?, ?eh*,!, MtrnZ.', Teal?., Morui.l bch^l, L..to?i~o. tj, (JWm Atammf, t?l?i?b-. i U ?n., barut? fiiiUUile, ?JalfMlou, le?a? vv,?u.um. The Itev. Dr K N. Kirk of Ma??aehusetU Is President of the Aaaoc-Utlou au?! ina It??v. Ueorge \Vhii?i?le of \.i Mllte.de ?t.. New Yor?, CorrospouUmg ?f & k um?;ers axe slectea n-munlly. * wmmtnmw* Abe building riiosrECTs. 8TAONATION OF THE TRADE TiU.FaATT.Nl..*> A UREATKR PaVBT OF TU? WI_.TER W??K1_ MBht) BETTER UNDKUHTANI?!*.? BETWEI.N litti'lAlYKKt AND m EMPI/lYED HEC?*MMK1.t>KD - Till TRoUlKS' UNION . ___?_______. Tho Hcvcnil branche? of the .?uildin,. trail? In tbia city have not been before in so unfavorable con? dition as now since the beginning of th? panic ?? i__. year. The experience? or last Winter to all who wera In any way connect??! with tbi? business wer? ?ort. M to discourage many even of the larger builders, ?ntl were a practical lesson to many of the skilled and un? skilled laborer?, who came to the conclusion that It waa better to work for reduced wage? than t? depend upon the Union? and aonp-honses for sustenance, and ac?_ ure habits of Idleness. Th_ building Improvement? for the first half ni this year were greatly lea? than for the ?ame tim? of is:., ?ni the _r;i in.ti decrease In the trade ?mc? the txv gluuing of Hummer has been a? well in the direction of cheaper houses, as fewer of them. If or? tenement houses, no.re stores and torements, and more " French Hats " are buill in proportion to the whole number of houses than formerly. Liuring the ?tuarter ending with r*ept. 30, the report of the Superintendent of I'ublio Buildings shows that while les? than half as many buildings were planned a? In the three preceding months, there were only one-third as many first-ela?? dwellings, but three-fourths as many tenements. Th? Superintendent calls attention to the fact that the char? acter of the tenements I* gradually improving-, ami speaks of the French flat? as "architecturally and hygleuically creditable to the city, being spacious, con? venient, well-lighted and well-ventilated." The plan? submitted for the quarter represent MT new buildings, of which only _T are flrst-closs dwellings and the remaining lu tenement?. The estimates for these buildings reach f i .".it.', ?o. The highest estlmata for any ou? building is I-f.'Mi. for that of The Ertning Pott, at Broadway and Fulton st. This Is to be tea stories, or 115 feet, In bight, a frontage on Broadway of 61.10 feet and on Fulton st. 103.5 feet, and Is to be con strm teil wholly of brick, ?tone and iron. A four-?t??ry brtek building at ?roadway and Twentv-thlrd-st. with a frontage on Broadway of vu feet, and on Twenty .bird ?t. of TI feet, ia ?atimated to cost tluo.iMO. The Fifth Na ti..nil Bank .building at Third ave. and Two i> tim.l-l., Is estimated at tso.ooo. mata* tb? October report was made plan? for 60 now building? bave been filed, or as many as during the same portion of September and or August and the whole ot July. Among these the bl?hest estimate is ?300, is) for .hotel at Fifth ave and Nlnth-st. Most of this number aro ordinary brick houses, the most valuable of which Is estimated at 135.000. The greater part of the building for this WlntT is already begun. Builder? almost Invariably dee'aiw that when their present lobs are finished tbey have no further plans. "There are no prospects," said on?? builder, "either near or remote. We cannot count on 3 lier cent upon our investments now, and no one will im foolish enough to extend operations." Said an? other: "The outlook In the building trade is otter stagnation. Those who have houses on their bunds must hold them or sell at a sacrifice, and tba laborers havo nothing before them pxcept the luwest wages, and lona" hours, or Idleness." The cost of bulldiug has been sreatly lessened by the reduction in the cost of material. This reduction 1? estimated to average from l8 to 30 per cent. Laths are selling at only a little higher figure than before the war. Lim?- is l? per cent less than last year. Brick are bringing only I* uow which brought 110 to IU last year. Day laborers aro working 10 hour? and receiving fifty cents les? for th? day's work than last year. lu the stone line the price of material is unchanged as yet, but is expected to tall be? fore the season ends. The number of unemployed men In the city li already very large, and the willingness of thousands of Union men indicate that the working classes have profiled immensely from the seventies of last Winter. Then th? Union men were easily counted wbo were either willing or dared to work under tho established rates. Now, if report? aro to be credited, half the workmen in New York are willing to labor for what they can get, ant a fourth part dare? to accept terms thut are offered them without consulting the powers that direct the _ll.tr? of the societies. This Is said by the authority of emplo) i r. rather than of the employed, since many of the latter prefer to havo their rates of wages a matter of on li'letice between the parties to contract?. Certain of the societies, however, recognz?*, as societies, the difficul? ties which surround and threaten the laboring man, and are intelligently allowing their rules to be as dead let? ter?, and their members toexerclse their good lodgment in the light of existing circumstance?. Should this good aeuse extend Into nil (he labor orgumzatioii?, the capi? talists express their belief that it will greatly aid a restoration of business, ami prevent very much suffer? ing that mu* t otherwise come a little later m the season. 8aid oue who is prominent In an Important brauch of the building trad?: 'The arbitrary 'awsof tbe various unions must be broken down, or eve y part of t';o work lth.it can posciblv be don?' out of the ? it y will be. In all of the Slates around New-York wat-?--? are low and men work ten hours instead ot eight as here, aud the result must be a diminution of l>u?iuc?s here and it? removal to surrounding ?tates. N. arly ?lithe 1 trgoji'bs in stone-cutting, for Instance, are worked out? side of New-York. The paine is true ot otln-r depart? ment?. The difference of wages aud hours of labor m ike? a difference of 15 to 30 per cent lu the cost of production lu favor of neighboring ..tates." Said another, a well-known member of the Mechanic?' and Traders' Exchange: "Builders are generally des? pondent. There are two ot the neaviest build, r. iii tho city, (pointing to them) each of whom has a Urge J ib on haud partially or nearly completeil. ami they tata noth? ing further in view, and are not doing one-fourth the busiuees that they ought. The same i? tra.-of trott builder iu the city. In my opinion the labor unions _r ? very largely responsible for this state or things. They have been so iiiir.-it.?t>n:i?,l.? aud ovirbeariu?- that ilia capitalists are thoroughly discouraged, au'l buslues? will never revive to any marked degree uutil thi? labor prob? lem is settled. Tho increasing uncertainty a? to the cost of labor is making builder? more and more cautious about investing, Should times improve now within a few months the un: -tu would douiitle?? renew their demands with increased persistence, and do all ia their power to create another reverse. If the la tM?rers should bo ont of work for a few years, and a por? tion of them are likely to be. they will become con? vinced that the union.? are a nui.sauc?-, und a better un? derstanding between employers and employed wiii re? sult, to the advantage of both." The carpeuter? appear to be the first to accept terma independent or the rate? established by their -o. lety. Thev are generally a more lutelligeut class of ne n than Is found lu many other branches, aud when not able to do as they would are willing to do a? they eau. Tho greater part of the carpenters now employed are work? ing for ?_ 50 per ?lay, wheteas they received last Winter |?i 25 lier day. Now th? y are uot only glad to \tork at th? se reduced rate? but even to ?treteh eight hours into nine or ten. The rules of their Union are inoperative, apparently no eil'it b? itig _o?io to enforce thtm, The bricklayer? are working t? ti hours, and Instead of ti W iier day tbey receive only lu. The Union ha? little to -*a>. 'he oto?e cutters' Union, however, is determined to en? force its rules to the letter; .4 90 for a day's labor ia the fixed price and uone of the members dare to have It known that they work for anything le-j. Where i rival* terms are made as lo some ca-.es they hare .ii,? ?(one-cutter trusts to his employer to keep the secret. Untier no circuoiatanres can they work io hours. Kach yard Is of course observed, and reported lu case th? fixed hours are overrun. This is all e<*ually true of the l'losterer?' Union; ?4 Is the price and eight hours th? time, am, no deviation l- endured. " We can cbauge a.I this," fiaidon? man, "nut to do It we must unite, ami that seems tobe impossible. We should have to close our yard? until thev would accept our terms, und thi? would be done at a great temporary sacilrtee, which few are willing (to mag*, even with a prospect of per? manent relief. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ WORK OF THE SUNDAY-SCHOOL UNION. To the Editor of The Tribune. Sir: lu The Tuiuune of tut _ih inst. Col. Il.iiiiuioiiil of Chicago is reported to have said before lh_> i MBMil at New-Haven: The work or the Society wa? admirable, and wa? In marked contrast with the atreut process or Sunday j__,_*ol establishment, M carried on hy the American Bamtaf ?cu. i Union, the agent? of that rtociety r?-gar?l lng their wort wen I**?" 10 P*' 9aw% *-*- the ?vhooU established survived. ~ *"' Or- J t -V Over against that statement, p?sate plaee the follow? ing foeta from a docmm*nt published by agents of th? American Sunday-school Union: Careful canvass-s are ofteu made by the missionaries of their several Held?, to o-._ert.un what proportion of their schools have failed. Their reports furni-h a reliable basis of estimate for the entire work. Of _-__ schools organized by one i_ls?lon?ry lu eight year., M continued in operation. Of i?i schools forme.! i>y another missionary lu seven years, lw were at the end of tbat time In existence. Another missionary reported the forming of nearly .so schools In bis nine y.-ar? c4 service, of which nearly 90 per ceut lived,and jo uew churches baa beeu organued on (their beginning*. K.?rely, if ever, within the past ten year? has a i_is?i?>u *_-.. '"_",0 reIH)r* ?,-?-n three-fourth? to nlne-teuths of all his schools lu open-tiou ou u re? xaniiuattou of Ina flelil. Doe? any spiritual, or eveu secular, ?gem? - n eur(h show o larger ratio of satisfactory result? to (ha amount undertaken I am Aukkt ?j? rug Uno?. Hartford, Conn., t)_t. IB, is-4. ??-? nm The Hillej-ass Family, a. dfscribed in Th? Fort Wayne tlud.) Sentinel, seems to be " willin'." J. I> Hill ?a<*s wa? nominated for tlieofl.ee of I'roaecutor of the ('mutual Court J .?(_?!? IMlegaw I? now Couuty Commissioner, Jerry Hlllega?? 1? a County Superiu tentlent of Holtooht. Ife?. utah Hlllega-?-? wa? nominate*! for Trustee of lerry Township. John utah', who ti*?u led a HaUegaaa, ho? boeu miming for Deputy I'roseoutor. There Is also the youugest Hillegi?*? ; and it wa? the iii t? ntioii of the family to run bim for Constable of 11 uti tur? ton* a Township; but, n? he 1? not yet ot a_re, it dm cou? eluded to withdraw him for the present. We (um that a passion ror public aervlca? runs lu the U.li?-*. *??? blvvd. \v? h*?_ kd*)\*it t-W*. ****? '-"kivl0.