Imágenes de páginas

position of the Church which restricts the ministry of the Word and the sacraments in our congregations to men who have received episcopal ordinations"; what it did enact was to restrict to the bishop the right to grant permission to those not members of the ministry to address an Episcopal congregation on special occasions. This interpretation of the bishops, evidently, does not close the door of the pulpit but leaves it ajar. They admit the Canon may have been misused in a few instances but see in it nothing to disquiet the peace of the Church.

This interpretation, the unanimous voice of the bishops, seems the only one in harmony with the Prayer Book and the Ordinal. To the High Church position it was absolutely essential. Nor do we think it at all unwelcome to the members of other parties in the Church for they, too, like to think of their orders as different from the self-originated Protestant ministry, and as a link with all the Catholic Churches of the world and with the Church of the Apostles. Though we do not recognize any distinction in validity between Episcopal and Protestant orders, still we are glad the Episcopal Church does not abandon or diminish its claim; for it is the necessary foundation of the Catholic doctrines still preached by many of its clergy.


In all this there is, no doubt, much to please one who seeks for traces of Catholic doctrines and principles. Merely noting, on our way, the strong denial of the sacramental character of Extreme Unction, which does not take us by surprise, we pass on, to the most warmly debated question at the Convention—the proposal to change the name of the Church, now officially styled the Protestant Episcopal Church of America. "We must be Catholic and Protestant," said the chairman of the House of Deputies in his opening address; while everyone who is not a member of that denomination and many who are, would say they must be either one or the other. One deputy suggested that the Church be called the Protestestant Catholic Church of America; but another objected to that name as appealing too strongly to the American sense of humor. The situation of the Church is indeed peculiar and difficult. It claims to have suffered no break of continuity with the Catholic Church at the time of the Reformation and to remain to-day one of its branches; but the churches in

communion with the See of Peter and the Orthodox Catholic Churches alike refuse to acknowledge this claim. Denied the Catholic name by the Catholics, they are claimed as Protestant by Protestants; so that a good High Churchman feels himself in a very cruel situation, not unlike that of one disowned by his own kith and kin and claimed as a brother by men of another race and darker color. Now, no party in the Episcopal Church objects to having it considered a part of the Catholic Church; this is the essential belief of the High Church party, while to the members of the other parties, the idea of a Catholic Church is too great and too beautiful not to be loved and too vague and harmless to raise any objection.

The battle wages then around the retention of the name Protestant. It is an ugly name, all agree, and a merely negative one, though we Catholics feel it describes well the one element common to all Protestant Churches on which they could unite the spirit of protest against the Catholic Church. The effort to drop the name came in the form of a proposal to change the title-page of the Prayer Book. The High Church party had unsuccessfully contended in the last Convention for the name of "American Catholic Church." At a Pre-Convention Conference representing all parties in the Church, a compromise form was adopted which reads as follows:

"The Book of Common Prayer
and Administration of the Sacraments
and other Rites and Ceremonies of
According to the use of that portion thereof
known as


in the United States of America.

Together with

The Psalter or Psalms of David."

The question was debated long, earnestly and warmly, but in excellent temper; we believe an analysis of it will be interesting, among other reasons, for the light it sheds upon the opinions and sentiments of the delegates.

The ultra-Protestant party contended for the retention of the Protestant name because they gloried in it and its associations; it stood for protest for the truth of God against the error of man; was a necessary safeguard against hierarchical domination and marked the freedom of the Church, as "episcopal" expressed its authority; meant an open Bible, a free people and selfreliant character; expressed the real nature of their organiza

tion, for Protestantism is its very backbone; would not separate them from other Protestant Churches and would afford effective opposition to Rome, towards which, at present, there was no prospect of approach. Moreover, there was nothing contradictory between "Protestant" and "Catholic," and the name Protestant Episcopal expressed best the real catholicity of their Church. To drop it would offend the great majority of Episcopalians and drive away many; it would mean the surrender of the name to the Reformed Episcopal Church and consequent damage to their own. To adopt the new title page would put them in a ludicrous position, as theirs was not the prayer book of the Catholic Church.

The High Churchmen, who were rare among the speakers, favored the title page because it expressed the historic continuity of the Church through the episcopacy; it might open the way to those who wished to withdraw from Rome and help the Church's relations with the Eastern Orthodox Christians. They pleaded that they had made great concessions and ought to be met half-way. To retain the name Protestant would merely prolong the controversy, for the fight against it would go on and was bound to win; to drop it would bring peace, and help on the true work of the Church.

A middle course seemed to please the majority of the speakers. While the name "Protestant Episcopal Church" was objectionable to High Churchmen, "American Catholic" was equally or more offensive to the ultra Protestant. Either name was likely to cost the Church dear in loss of members. Hence the necessity of a compromise. The proposed title page expressed the note of Catholicity, which is a doctrine of their creed accepted by all; its Protestantism is guaranteed by the accompanying resolutions. Nothing then is surrended and a rock of offence is removed. The new title distinguished them in the eyes of Rome from the many Protestant bodies of America, yet did not shut off approach to them. The Protestant name was not used by Protestant denominations; so why should the Episcopal Church cling to it? It had come to be recognized as no longer big enough to express the Christian idea. It gave a wrong emphasis, for it was not their chief business to protest against Rome. Its purpose had been served in its day; but now a name was demanded that would harmonize with the broad religious tendencies of the day, its yearning for unity and catholicity.

When the question came to a vote, a large majority of the clergy favored the new title; so, too, a majority of the laity, yet one less than the number required to carry the measure. The Church remains, therefore, the Protestant Episcopal Church of America; but an analysis of the vote and the trend of opinion seem to indicate pretty clearly the success of the measure at the next General Convention in 1913.

In our summary of the reasons advanced for the change, we omitted one that was certainly most influential. It was pleaded by several speakers that the dropping of the Protestant name from the title page of the Prayer Book, which would then appear as the Prayer Book of the Holy Catholic Church, would be a most powerful help in foreign mission fields, particularly among Roman Catholics. The question was no longer academic or partisan, but practical and pressing. The danger lay in not realizing how much the change of name meant in the foreign missions; a great missionary bishop is quoted as authority that in his field it made the difference between success and failure.

The measure had been defeated; but many of those who saw the value of the name abroad could not rest content. It was proposed by the Committee on Constitution that in editions of the Prayer Book in foreign languages any missionary bishop be authorized to alter the title page and the preface (which is quite Protestant in tone). Many of those who opposed the change at home, one speaker tells us, were just they who called most loudly for it in Latin America. Others disapproved of the plan of having one title at home and another abroad. The proposal was laid on the table by the close vote of 162 to 156.

The advantages of the proposal hardly need to be pointed out. If a missionary among the poor Cubans or Brazilians declares himself a minister of the Protestant Episcopal Church, and offers them a Prayer Book of the Protestant Episcopal Church, he will probably meet with a cold reception or perhaps with one unpleasantly warm; but if he declares himself a Catholic priest and offers them a Prayer Book of the Holy Catholic Church, his chances of success are certainly greater. Poor, half-instructed Cubans and Brazilians will probably be slow to discover that they understand the terms in a sense quite different from that of the missionary.

Will this appeal to the American people as quite straightforward? We think not. And though we regret exceedingly to give offence, we will not conceal our opinion, which we are sure was shared by many at the Convention, that the willingness of half the delegates to allow their church to appear as Protestant in a Protestant country and Catholic in Catholic countries wears a very ugly look.

The Protestant Episcopal Church sends bishops and missionaries to convert, not only heathen, but the people of Mexico, the Panama Canal Zone, Brazil, Cuba, Porto Rico and the Philippines. Their success has been rather slow but appears to be growing.


The debate on the name makes this quite clear; the desire to drop the Protestant name and appear as Catholic springs from no yearning towards Rome, nor is it greatly influenced by any hope of closer union with Eastern Churches. Catholic ideas found little expression in the debates; perhaps they would have found more, were it not for the prudent fear of irritating Protestant susceptibilities and defeating the proposal. The chief reasons for desiring the change appear to be a dislike for the Protestant name and the limitations it connotes; the love of a beautiful and historic name which might give a sense of communion with the Church of all the ages; the hope of being distinguished, like the Church of England, from the host of Protestant sects; the vision of a Catholic Church in the future which will unite all Protestant Christians and rival the Catholic Church; lastly, practical reasons of expediency, chiefly looking towards the success of missions in Catholic countries.

Facts are facts and must not be blinked. We grieve over the turn of affairs in the Episcopal Church, for we cannot delude ourselves with the belief, most welcome though it would be, that true Catholic principles and doctrines are being firmly held, much less that they are progressing. None of us with Christian charity in our hearts can help a deep feeling of sympathy in this crisis for loyal High Church clergymen, despite their too frequent expression of harshness towards us. Their situation is certainly a hard one. They cherish most dearly the belief that they belong to a branch of the Catholic Church; yet the Catholic Church pronounces their orders invalid and themselves heretical, a judgment with which the Orthodox


« AnteriorContinuar »