Imágenes de páginas

political expediency or modern undenominationalism. Most of their arguments begin at the wrong end, and seem more concerned with the supposed grievances of women, than with God's revelation and the faith and practice of the Church.'

[ocr errors]

Mr. Olroyd examines this plea on the basis of Democracy. No such plea can have any standing in the Church of Christ, he points out, as that Church is not a republic, but a Kingdomthe Kingdom of God. Its authority comes not from the people, but from its King, Jesus Christ, the Son of God. In the Church the authority of the ministry is based on the Apostolic Succession from Jesus Christ; and the Faith which the Clergy teach is derived from the same source. The claim, then, that because a woman may be as clever as a man, therefore she has the same right as a man to be a minister of God has no standing; and, if allowed and carried out to its logical conclusion, would destroy the Apostolical Succession. Further "the Church is not of the world, but called out of the world. It is the business of the Church to Christianize the world, not of the world to democratize the Church."

One basis of the argument thus disposed of, Mr. Olroyd turns to the place of the layman in the Church. We American Churchpeople are certainly astonished to learn how meager are the rights of English, as compared with American Laymen. It appears that they have little, if any, voice in the government of the English Church. The author is of the opinion that this has always been so, and that while occasionally, in the Ancient Church, laymen may have attended the Councils, yet they had neither seat nor vote. To an American Layman who has sat and voted in our Conventions, Diocesan or General, or has voted for the delegates to these bodies, the following paragraph will sound strange:

"When the Bishops learn to govern their dioceses in and by means of the Sacred Synod of their Clergy, and not as so many autocrats wielding papal sway, then it will be time to erect in each diocese a House of Laymen to co-operate and advise in such matters as rightly belong to their sphere. But, as things are, any attempt to label a Diocesan Conference of mixed clergy

and laity with the name "Synod," will not ipso facto invest it with any spiritual authority, whatever legal powers it may obtain from the state."

Outside of this failure of the laity to hold any position in the governing bodies of the Church, the functions of the English laymen appear to be similar to those of our own laymen. It is these functions of the laity that the more sane and moderate of the ecclesiastical feminists are anxious to share. And they base their claim on the alleged equality with men. Mr. Olroyd insists that this basis is wrong. "There are no rights," he says, "either of men or women, as distinct from duties." He insists that the whole matter is a question of function, and not of right; and the function of a woman is not the same as that of a man. The oft-quoted text: "In Christ Jesus there is neither Jew nor Gentile, male nor female, bond nor free," cannot, he insists, "by any stretch of the imagination be made to cover the abolition of the differences of nationality, or sex, or class; for that is simply, and as a fact, impossible."

As an example he takes the distinction between a Deacon and a Deaconess. The latter, he argues, could never take over the exercise of the powers of the former, because-in case she wished to marry-she would have to be released from her vows. The character imparted by Holy Order is indelible, and cannot be laid aside. Yet the Deacon may marry and still exercise his functions. St. Paul, we are reminded, excluded "the younger widows" from the Order of Widows, just because they were expected to remarry. The whole matter is summed up, to the writer's mind in the fact that "the highest office of womanhood is motherhood, and the highest office of manhood is Priesthood, and that the two offices are not interchangeable."

It is at this point that I desire to point out a distinction between our women and the women of England. Despite the fact that, in some of the American Denominations, women do exercise the functions of ministers, yet our Churchwomen have never claimed the right to enter the Sacred Ministry.

Our writer sees no reason why women should not have some part in the government of the Church, and share, to some extent,

in the work of the Laity. He says that he cannot see "why there should not be a House of Laywomen, as well as one of Laymen in every Diocese, provided that there be first of all a Sacred Synod of the Clergy, and that the spheres of the Clergy and laity are carefully demarked according to Catholic precedent and order."

In our own Church, women occupy rather a different place than in the Church of England. As far as I know only a few women, in the Mission Fields, have acted as Lay Readers, yet many in small Missions have been compelled to do the work and hold the offices that in fully organized parishes rest on the shoulders of the men. And our women have taken up these duties very reluctantly. In our parochial organizations, in some of the Dioceses, women have an equal vote with men; though here, again, they seem rather slow in availing themselves of the privilege. One of our late General Conventions has passed a canon permitting the passage of Diocesan canons allowing this practice. Only a few Dioceses have availed themselves of the permission. California has led the Church in the experiment of a House of Laywomen; but the success of this plan is problematical; and no other Diocese has followed the example.

Our women are content to work in the Woman's Auxiliary which meets triennially with the General Convention, and whose Diocesan and Archdeaconry Branches often meet at the same time and place with the Convention and Archdeaconry Meeting. The great and blessed missionary work of this organization keeps women happily busy, especially as it makes it possible for women of special talents to lead and address meetings or to teach Mission Classes. The spiritual work of the Daughters of the King engrosses the attention of women with a special gift for spiritual ministrations. The social labors of the Girls' Friendly Society keeps those busy, who are interested in social betterment. And, finally, the Sisterhoods of the Church and the Order of Deaconesses offer such ample fields of congenial work to women who have a vocation that few have time or occasion to seek for any extension of their labors and influence beyond

the spheres allotted them. It is for this reason, as well as for the reason that our women have ample opportunity to influence the men of their own families, and are not considered as inferior beings at home, that they are not anxious to take away from the men those Church duties which custom and the practice of the Church have put upon the shoulders of the Laymen and the Clergy. F. C. H. W.


"Sir:-I am an old man and a soldier and I have never written to a Bishop in my life, but now something has happened. I was brought up in Scotland, a Presbyterian, but since my marriage I have always received the Holy Communion here in the Parish Church. Last week in talking to the Rector I said I had never been confirmed, and he said that unless I were confirmed, or intended to be, he could not administer the Holy Communion to me. I was very angry. Then he showed me the rule in the Prayer Book: "There shall none be admitted to the Holy Communion until such time as he be confirmed, or be ready and desirous to be confirmed.' Now what I ask is, why were we never told of these rules before? Do you think, sir, that an Army man is going to disobey orders? The upshot of it is that I am learning the Catechism (knowing only the Shorter Catchechism) with a view to being confirmed. You will know my name. Some say I blundered in South Africa, none can say that I ever disobeyed orders; and let me, as an old man, give you a word of advice (though from what I hear you hardly need it): Tell your officers to make their rules plain, and let the people know they are meant to be obeyed, then men will respect the Church more than they do. There is an Army rule that no soldier who has committed suicide has military honours at his funeral, and the way that is kept is not by making exceptions.

Believe me to be,

Your obedient servant."

And then came the name of an old General, known to the whole world for gallantry and valor.-From The Archbishop's Test.



President: GEORGE A. ARMOUR, Princeton, N. J.

Vice-President: GUY VAN AMRINGE, 31 Nassau Street, New York
Secretary: THE REV. CHARLES C. EDMUNDS, D.D., 6 Chelsea Square, New York
Treasurer: HALEY FISKE, I Madison Avenue, New York

Business Manager: EDWIN S. GORHAM, 11 West 45 Street, New York

EDITORIAL COUNCIL: Charles S. Baldwin, Ph.D., Professor of Rhetoric, Columbia University; the Rev J. G. H. Barry, D.D., Rector of the Church of St. Mary the Virgin, New York; the Rev. Charles C. Edmunds, D.D., Professor of New Testament Literature, General Theological Seminary; the Rev. Hughell E. W. Fosbroke, D.D., Dean of the General Theological Seminary; the Rev. Francis J. Hall, D.D., Professor of Dogmatic Theology, General Theological Seminary; the Rev. Arthur W. Jenks, D.D., Professor of Ecclesiastical History, General Theological Semimary; the Rev. William T. Manning, D.D., Rector of Trinity Church, New York; the Rev. John Mockridge, D.D., Rector of St. James Church, Philadelphia; the Rev. Ralph B. Pomeroy, B.D., Instructor in Church History and Polity, General Theological Seminary; Chandler R. Post, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Greek and of Fine Arts, Harvard University; Robert K. Root, Ph.D., Professor of English, Princeton University; the Rev. Hamilton Schuyler, Rector Trinity Church, Trenton, N. J.; Chauncey B. Tinker, Ph.D., Professor of English Literature, Yale University; the Rev. Lucius Waterman, D.D., Rector of St. Thomas Church, Hanover, N. H.

[blocks in formation]


E have long been familiar with the call of the Church to make sacrifices for the love of God, the salvation of souls, or the conquest of self. Our people everywhere have often made sacrifices to support their parish or mission church; young men have sacrificed brilliant worldly prospects to enter the priesthood; zealous souls have given generously toward the work of extending the influence of the Church into every corner of the world; and those who have been in earnest about their religion have year by year obeyed the Church's Lenten call to self-denial and fasting, and have thereby attained to greater self-control.

Our country is now likewise calling upon us to undergo heroic sacrifices for the defence of our liberties, and the liberties of mankind, against the insolent aggressions of a barbarous military despotism. In the face of the supreme sacrifice which the young men of America are making without a murmur, and the

« AnteriorContinuar »