700 



PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH. 



as Bishop of Illinois, they having been chosen 

 by Diocesan Conventions of those dioceses 

 within the year. The committee, to whom the 

 cases of the two bishops-elect were referred, 

 reported in favor of confirming the action of 

 the Diocesan Conventions in both cases. Sev- 

 eral memorials were presented against the 

 confirmation of Dr. Seymour, alleging that he 

 entertained or tolerated ritualistic views, and 

 that he had permitted ritualism to be advo- 

 cated in the General Theological Seminary, in 

 which he was a professor. 



Preparatory to entering upon the consider- 

 ation of the cases of the bishops-elect, the 

 House of Deputies adopted a rule that " when- 

 ever the election or confirmation of a bishop 

 is under consideration, this House shall sit 

 with closed doors." The questions involved 

 in the case of Dr. Seymour were discussed for 

 several days in secret session. The vote was 

 then taken by dioceses upon the report of the 

 committee on the consecration of bishops, ap- 

 proving the testimonials of Dr. Seymour, and 

 resulted as follows : 



CLERICAL VOTE. Dioceses represented. 41. 



Tea. Albany, California, Central New York, Eas- 

 ton, Georgia ? Illinois, Indiana, Iowa ; Long Island, 

 Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, 

 New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, W estern New 

 York, Wisconsin 19. 



Nay. Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Kansas, 

 Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylva- 8 - 

 nia, Virginia 10. 



Divided. Alabama, Arkansas, Central Pennsyl- 

 vania ; Massachusetts, Nebraska, New Jersey, North 

 Carolina, Pittsburg, Khode Island, South Carolina, 

 Tennessee, Texas 12. 



LAY VOTE. Dioceses represented, 40. 



Yea. Alabama, Albany, Illinois, Maine, Mary- 

 land, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri. Nebraska, 

 New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Vermont 

 13. 



Nay. California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, In- 

 diana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Long Island, Min- 

 nesota, New Hampshire. Ohio, Pennsylvania, Khode 

 Island, South Carolina, Virginia, Western New York, 

 Wisconsin 18. 



Divided. Central New York, Central Pennsylva- 

 nia, Connecticut, Easton, Louisiana, Massachusetts, 

 Pittsburg, Tennessee, Texas 9. 



Failing to receive the approval of the ma- 

 jority of all the dioceses voting, the report of 

 the committee was rejected, and the election 

 of Dr. Seymour was not confirmed. It will be 

 seen, however, by the following recapitulation 

 of the individual votes of deputies, that while 

 Dr. Seymour was opposed by a majority of the 

 lay deputies, he was sustained by a majority of 

 the clergy, and by a small majority on the com- 

 bined vote : 



RECAPITULATION*. 



The election of Dr. Wells as Bishop of Wis- 

 consin was approved without objection. 

 Several memorials and resolutions were pre- 



sented, asking legislation to restrain the excess 

 of ritual. The subject was broadly discussed 

 in both the House of Bishops and the House 

 of Deputies, and the following canon upon the 

 subject was agreed upon by the two Houses, 

 and enacted : 



The following addititional section is to be 

 added to Canon 20 of Title I., as follows : 



Section 2. If any bishop have reason to believe, or if 

 complaint be made to him in writing by two or more 

 of his presbyters that within Ms jurisdiction cere- 

 monies or practices not ordained or authorized in the 

 Book of Common Prayer, and setting forth or sym- 

 bolizing erroneous or doubtful doctrines, have been 

 introduced by any minister during the celebration 

 of the Holy Communion (such as 



a. The elevation of the Elements in the Holy 

 Communion in such manner as to expose them to 

 the view of the people as objects toward which ado- 

 ration is to be made. 



5. Any act of adoration of or toward the Elements 

 in the Holy Communion, such as bowings, prostra- 

 tions, or genuflections ; and 



c. All other like acts not authorized by the Eu- 

 brics of the Book of Common Prayer) 



It shall be the duty of such bishop to summon the 

 Standing Committee as his council of advice, and 

 with them to investigate the matter. 



[2.] If, after investigation, it shall appear to the 

 bishop and Standing Committee that ceremonies or 

 practices, not ordained or authorized ns aforesaid, 

 and setting forth or symbolizing erroneous or doubt- 

 ful doctrines, have in fact been introduced as afore- 

 said, it shall be the duty of the bishop, by instru- 

 ment of writing under his hand, to admonish the 

 minister so oft'ending to discontinue such practices 

 or ceremonies ; and if the minister shall disregard 

 tiuch admonition, it shall be the duty of the Stand- 

 ing Committee to cause him to be tried for a breach 

 of nis ordination vow : 



Provided, That nothing herein contained shall pre- 

 vent the presentment, trial, and punishment of any 

 minister under the provisions ot section 1, Canon 

 2, Title'II., of the Digest. 



[3.] In all investigations under the provisions of 

 this canon, the minister whose acts or practices are 

 the subject-matter of the investigation shall be no- 

 tified, and have opportunity to be heard in his de- 

 fense. The charges preferred and the findings of 

 the bishop and the Standing Committee shall be in 

 writing ; and a record shall be kept of the proceed- 

 ings in the case. 



Petitions were offered, one of which was 

 signed by 501 clergymen, asking such altera- 

 tions to be made in the phraseology of the 

 baptismal office as would permit the clergyman 

 to use or omit the words in that service which 

 were considered to imply a recognition of the 

 doctrine of baptismal regeneration. No defi- 

 nite action was taken on the subject. 



Petitions were presented from ten dioceses 

 asking that measures be taken to secure "for 

 use in divine worship " an English version of 

 the Creed, commonly called the Nicene, as 

 conformable as may be to the original text." 

 The petitioners sought particularly the omis- 

 sion of the "filiogue" clause. The conven- 

 tion took no action on this subject. The com- 

 mittee to whom it was referred reported that 

 the Church ought not to enter upon the con- 

 sideration of such a proposition till the revision 

 sought can be effected "in some united coun- 

 cil of all those autonomous Churches using this 



