2 THE DAILT cvlSNINO TELEGRAPH PHILADELPHIA, FRIDAY, MARCH 24, 1871. st. cLn running. CmtlrwitA from th irtt Fajt. ucta action was sent to me, and the Information cam from a person no known to the Toslry. MUCH OF TBI DIFFICULTY which exists in the uilnds of these gentlemen bas grown out of an absence of any clear and distinct statement of what was. or was not, taught at St. Clement's, or of what part of the teaching or ritual they, on their part, objected to. I may have been In part to blame for this, and hope it is now remedied by the following paper. Bowings, prostrations, and genufl'-xlons to the altar have never been Utii;ht. lieverence for the places and things made sacred by holy nee Is tauirht and, I hope, practised. I wish it distinctly to be understood that nei ther of the clergy of St. Clement's Church has ever taught one word on TUB SUBJECT OF CONFESSION other than that contemplated by the "Exhorta tion to the Holy Communion," and as allowed by our standards. The whole system, as taught and practiced by the Roman Church, has by long UBige confined the term, "uricular con fession," to a technical sense. If by this term these gentlemen mean the use of confession as taught and practised by the Cburch of Rome, I emphatically deny the teaching or practice of any such custom. The Roman Cburch says, "you must." The Anglican C lurch, say, "yon may." The clergy of St. Clement's Church hold and teach the Anglican practice, and no other. This, and this only, they are prepared to defend as primitive and scriptural. Beseeching you, one and all, to avoid all un charitable and harsh expressions, to keep in subjection that "unruly member," th tongue, and to "set forward, as much as lieth in you, peace and quietness among all men," I am, dear brethren, faithfully yours, II. G. Batterson. Clergy Rooms. 8t. Clement's Church, Phila delphia, March 20, 1871. THE PAPER READ TO THE VE9TRT OF ST. CLE MENT'S, FEB. 16, 1871. Gentlemen: I have read the letter of Bishop Stevens, directed to Mr. P. Pemberton Morris, and a copy of that letter has been placed in my bands. The Bishop writesiinder an entire misappre hension of the character of the papers submitted to him by Mr. Morris. The paper aliudcd to by the Bishop, as marked "M," be seems to understand to be a report to the vestry of St. Clement's Church from a com mittee appointed by the vestry at a meeting held on the 18ih of Jauuary, 1871. The paper marked "1" be seems to understand to be an answer to that report by the rector, defending his teaching aud practice, in opposition to the tenor of the report, and the ex pressed wish of the vetry. I coma to this conclusion from the words of the Bishop where be says: "The decision of the report is evaded;" again, "not a point was conceded," etc. The course pursued by Mr. Morris in this matter, from the beginning to the end, has, to my mind, been unwise, injudicious, and, in this last act, injurious, not only to the vestry and himself, but to the Bishop and myself. TOE FACTS IN THE CASE I may perhaps be allowed to rehearse. The whole subject of ritual, doctrine, and practice had been discussed in vestry meeting upon many occasions previous to the meeting of January 18, 1871. At that meetiug, for a second time, I expressed my willingness to abandon any practices in matters of ritual which the vestry would say were detrimental to the interests of the parish, or which, in the opinion of the vestry, might be a cause of scan dal to the Church at large. All the points In the ritual in St. Clement's Church were disenssed or enumerated, and not one member of the vestry raised a word of ob jection to a single poiut. I then announced that in the future, should I desire any change, I would consult the wardens before making it. (I add, by way of parenthesis, that on Tuesday evening of the week previous to the 13th ot Jauuary, 1871, Mr. George N. Allen and Mr. John Lambert called at my house, and expressed their satisfaction with my propo 'sltion, aud their readines to defend the services as at that time conducted ) I beg leave to call attentiou to the fact that, at a meeting of the vestry previous to the one held on the 18th day of January, a resolution was offered to the effect that the whole matter be REFERRED TO THE BISHOP and Standing Committee. This resolution was unanimously tabled, or postponed, the mover of It not voting. I come now to the meeting of January the 18th, 1871. At that meeting, after my statement, before alluded to, it was unanimously resolved that "the whole matUr be referred to the rector and the rector's warden," as a commit' ee who were to Investigate the whole subject aud REPORT TO THE VESTBT. This cammittee, of which I was chairman, beld a meeting. No conclusion was reached. The first dratt of the paper spoken of by the Bishop, as marked "M," was read and discussed. I then prepared a paper, which was substan tially the same as that spoken of by the Bishop as marked "B." These papers were simply expressions of nnlnion bv the two members of the committee, preparatory to a final report by that commUtee to the vestry. These two papers passed Into the bands of Mr. Morris. lie then prepared a letter to the Bishop, which letter is alluded to in the Bishop's paper. Mr. Morris expressed an anxious desire to lay the whole matter before the Bishop. I was entirely opposed to It. as not authorized by the vestry, and for other reasons which he very well knew. I proposed that he should submit them to the Rev. T. F. Davies, the rector of Bt. Peter's Cburch. To this proposition Mr. Morris as sented. I consented (seeing bis determination) that they might also be laid before the Bishop. This decision I reeonuldered, and said to Mr. Morris, "Rerd both papers to Mr. George N. Allen and Mr. Walter 11. Tilden, and if they say send them to the Bishop, then you may lay them before him." I am aware that MR. MORRIS CLAIMS that no such declaration was made on my part. I simply ask, Why should I have requested that these papers be read to these two gentlemen if their counsel and advice were not to be asked in the matter? I will pursue this matter no further, save only to say that it was my wish that the papers should not go before the Bishop without the coneent of both Messrs. Allen aud Tilden. Mr. Allen I have not seen. Mr. Tilden bas told me that be advised Mr. Morris not to present them to the Bishop, and that Mr. Morris gave hlni to understand that he would not send them. But the papers did go. And they went with out the knowledge or consent of the vestry. THEY WENT IN BPITE of the unanimous vote of the vestry against such reference. They went before the commlt tee had made a report to the vestrv. as they were directed to do. They went with no au thority irom anyoocy. Let me here ask why, at a meeting of the vestry, at which I was unable to be present, Mr. Morris Dresented aud read both uanur as th report of this committee? I was aot consulted in the matter, nor bad I any Intimation that such, was bis intention. As chairman of that committee, the - report should have been Dresented first by me: Mr. Morris would afterwards have been en title 1 to present bis paper, but not until then. The ffhola proceeding lias neen UNPARLIAMENTARY and irregular. I come now to THE BISHOP'S PAPER. The Bishop discusses, first, the subject of au ricular confection. In response to my statement that "the touch ing of the American Church upon this su'iject is contained in 'Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity;' " that "this book is one of the list pre scribed by the House of Bibhops, and by the Generat Convention, for the study of every man I previous to bis ordination to the priesthood;" and that "having received the sanction and au thority of the ) louse of Bishops and General Convention, without any proviso or qualifica tion, may be said fairly to speak the mind of the American Church. The Bishop says: "I need not point out the fallacy of the argument of Dr. Batterson. that because an author is mentioned In the list of books prescribed by the House of B '.shops, to be read and studied by candidates for holy orders, that therefore, such author or work bas the sanction and authority of the House of Bishops, and may bo said fairly to represent the mind of the American Church; for it Is too evident to escape notice." So, then, the House of Bishops deliberately sets forth a list of books which they, in union with the General Convention, by canon require to be studied by candidates for holy orders; and vet "cannot thereby be said to give to such books their sanction and authority !" tub "fallacy" of this argument Is "too evident to escape notice." The Bishop apparently proceeds upon the-suppoBltion that the compulsory confession of the Church of Rome is that which is spoken of. He is mistaken. To no man is compulsory confession more abhorrent than to myself. But, to the "troubled minds contemplated by the exhortation to the communion;" those with an "oppressed conscience, bona fide, seeking re lief in that way," the Church has always coun selled and encouraged confession as a means to "quiet the grief," and for the "removal of all scruple and doubtfulness." The Bishop says in effect that the "whole drift" of Hooker's teaching is against private confession. "What, then, Is Hooker's meaning, when he says in Book vi, chap, iv, 7: "Our Lord Jesus Christ bath left in His Church spiritual and ghoBtly physicians, guides and pastors of redeemed souls, whose oilice doth not consist in general persuasions unto amendment of life, but also in the private particular cure of diseased minds." The quotation from Bishop Jewel's "Apology" Is entirely foreign to the subject. Bishop Jewel is speaking of the subject as taught and practised in the Church of Rome. When he speaks of the practice of the Church of England we get at his teaching on the sub ject under discussion. in the homily on repentance, in arguing against the compulsory confession of the cnurcn oi Home, msnop Jewel says, "that every man should be bound to their (i. e. the Roman) auricular confession, it Is no command ment or ordinance of God." So say I. This same Bishop Jewel, in bis defense of The Apology, says: "Touching the third" (private confessions made unto our brother), "if it be discreetly used, to the greater com fort and better satisfaction of the penitent, without superstition or other ill, It Is not In any wise by us reproved. The abuses and errors set apart, we do no more mislike a pri vate confession than a private sermon." The quotation from Bishop Jewel, used by Bishop Stevens, is foreign to the question under discussion. Used as he uses it, he makes Bishop Jewel say what he never did say. In the Homily on Repentance, Bishop Jewel discusses both questions. Of compulsory confession as used in the Roman Church, be says: "It hath not the war- rani oi uoa s wora. ' ui voluntary comession, he says: "I do not say but that if any do find themselves troub led in conscience, they may repair to their learned curate or pastor, or to some other goaty, learned man, and show the trouble and doubt of their conscience to them, that they may receive at their hand the com fortable salve of God's Word." The whole drift and teaching of Bishop Jewel's works on this subject are at utter variance with the statement of Bishop Stevens. Dr. John Donne, Dean of St. Paul's. London. In the time of James I, says: -"Men come not willingly to this manifestation of themselves, nor are they to be brought in chains, as they do iwthe Roman Church, by a necessity," etc. Again he says: "We enjoin private and par ticular confession if the conscience be op pressed: and if any man do think that that which is necessary for him on his death-bed Is necessary every time be comes to the Commu nion, and so come to such a confession, If any thing lie upon him, as often as he comes to the Communion; we blame not, we dissuade not, we discounsel not that tenderness of conscience and that safe proceeding in the soul." Wbeatiy on the Book of Common Prayer is very clear on this subject. His book is one of the list authorized by the house of Bisnoi's and the General Convention. He says: "No argument sure can be drawn, that because a pructice bas been abused, it should therefore cease to be used. The abuses of it should be re formed, but not the practice discontinued." "Aud therefore the Church of England at the Reformation freed It from all the encroach ments with which the Church of Rome had em barrassed it, aud reduced confession to its pri mitive plan." "Every one is left to bis own discretion; all that was absolutely enjoined, was only a mutual forbearance and peace; for the security of which, a clause was added in the first book of King Edward, requiring such as shall be satis fied with a general confession, not to be offended TV ItU tUtlU fcUWV U V UOUi UI At I tllvt DC IB lj iDg, the auricular ana secret confession to the priest; and those also which think it needful and convenient, for the quietness of their own consciences, particularly to open their sins to the priest, to be oil ended with them thai are satisfied with their confessions to God, and the general confession to the Cburch. But in all things to follow and keep the rule of charity, and every man to be satisfied with his ovn con science, not judging other men's minds or con sciences; whereas be bath no warrant of God's word to the same. "What could have been added more judiciously than this, to temper, on the one band, the rigors ot those who were too apt at that time to insist upon confession as always absolutely necessary to salvation; and to prevent, on the other band, a carelessness in those who, being prejudiced against the abuse, were apt indis criminately to reject the thing, as at no time needful or useful to a penitent." "So that we may still, I presume, wish, very consistently with the determination of our Church, that our people would apply them selves, oftener than they do, to their spiritual physicians, even in the time of their health, since it it much to be feared, they are wounded oftener than they complain, aud yel, through aversion to disclosing their sore, suffer it to gangrene for want of their help who should work the cure." "TheS xposltlon of the Thirty-nine Articles" by the Rt. Rev. Harold Browne, D. D., the present Bishop of Ely, is another of the books authorized by the House of Bishops and by the General Convention, the Bishop oi uonaecti cut bas edited an edition of this book for use in the American Church, and it is used in all our Divinity Schools. Bishop Browne snys: "The Church of England provides for all troubled consciences the power qi relieving themselves, by making confession of guilt to their pastor, or any other discreet and learned minister, and an e'wut them comfort and counsel: but does not bind every one of necessity to rehearse all his private sius to man, nor elevate such useful con fession Into a sacrament essential to salvation." l'nire 587. Martin Lnther says of private confession: "It Is useful, vea, necessary; ueltuer would I desire that It bad no existence, nay rather, I rejoice that It exists in the Church ot jurist. Aam he says: "I would rather lose a thousand worldi tiian suffer private confection to be thrust out fcf the Cburch." I urn uuJ.lo to find a single word In the writings ot Lulber, Calvin, Ridley, Craumdr, Hooter, or any of the Ketortner against voiun laiy eoiifetbiou. They are almost uuaulinjus on the bui'jtci ot compulsory confession, and equally uuuuimous on the subject of volun tarv eonfesblon. l'bave examined with patient care the writ lug of the great aud good of tuo Angllcm com mnnlon, from the days of Ridley and Cranraer to the present time, and at every stop I find a condemnation of compulsory confession, and an equally strong commendation of voluntary confession. Tbe present Bishop of London (Bishop Jack ton) who cannot be said by anybody to be favorable to what is called the '"Advanced School" says, "As ministers should be. by their profession, usually the best advisers ia cases of conscience, and are or ought to be every peni tent's ready and sympathizing friend: so to them tbe stricken or perplexed soul will often have recourse. Thus, there is a sense in which those dreaded words "Confession to the Priest"' may express an edifying prac tice, and even at times a duty." I may add, that in all the recent trials and troubles In the Cburch ot England, in no in stanre bas the subject of confession been totirbed, while It Is well known that Puey, Keble, Bennett, Carter, Sadler, and hundreds of others of the English priesthood have been, or are.ln the constant habit of hearing these volun tary confessions. The same statement is true in tbe case of many priests in the American Church. The Bishop proceeds: "Where the English Prayer Book in the first of the exhortations to the holy communion has the words, 'that by the ministry of God's Holy Word, he mey receive 1HE BENEFIT OF ABSOLUTION, together with ghostly counsel and advice.' in the American Prayer Book the reference to absolution is left out, and the passage reads, 'that he may receive such godly counsel and acivice. Does the Bishop mean by this paragraph to Sav that tbe Amcripnn ('.linrnh rnnniHates a1!- solution ? It so, I call your attention to the preface in her Prayer Book, where she says: "Tbls Church Is far from Intending to depart Irom the Cburch of England, In any essential poiDt of doctrine, discipline, or worship; or otner man local circumstances require. I CALL ATTENTION to the declaration which she nuts in the mouth of every priest on all occasions of matin's or cven-fong, viz.: that "God hath given power? arid commandment to His ministers, to declare and pronounce to His people, being penitent, tne aDsoiution and remission ot their sins. The Bishoncoes on to sav: "Where the Eng lish rubric before the confession in the holy communion reads: "then shall tbe general confession be made in tbe name of all those that are minded to receive," the American rubric Lays, 'Then shall this general confession be made by the priest and all those that are minded to receive,' i.e., that the priest Is to confess as wen as the people. 1 am at a loss to under stand THE BISHOP'S MEANING, for it is obvious that in either case the priest is to confess. For is not the priest to receive as well as the people ? So then, in both cases, the "confession" is by priest and people. The Bishop s allusion to this rubric Is to my mind UTTERLY MEANINGLESS in this discission. Again the Bishop says: "Where the English rubric directs alter this general confession, 'Then shall the priest (or the bishop beinir pre sent,) stand up, and tnrulnu himself to the people, pronounce this absolution: the Amsrl can rubric. leaves out the words, 'pronounce this absolution, ana substitutes the single word 'say.' " Is there, then, no absolution? Are not the words which the priest is to "say" (the very same as uiose in me .ngiisn rrayer noon t . DOES THE BISHOP INTEND here to say that the American Church conveys 10 ner priesiuooa no power to "pronounce ab salution" iu the communion office ? What means she, then, when she uses the words which were used by the Bishop at mr own ordination, viz.: "Receive the Holy Ghoit lor tne omce ana woric ot a priest in the Cburch of God, now committed unto thee by the imposition of our bands. Whose sins thou dost forgive, they are forgiven, and whose sins thou dost retain, they are retained. Aud be thou n lalthlul dispenser oi tbe W ord of God, and of His Holy Sacraments: In the name of the Father. and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen." ARE THESE WORDS A MOCKERY? Do they convey no power ? No authority ? Or are they merely a high sounding phrase, re- Seated over tbe kneeling man, at the most solemn our of his life? The Bishop alludes to the omission In the American oflice for the visitation of the sick, of the particular ana special comession, and abso lution. Why tbls was done, when we remember the Preface to the Prayer Book, heretofore men tioned, It Is hard to explain, unless It be for the reason that the English office compels a confes sion, and commands the priest to give absolution. if the penitent desires it. Still, in the visitation of tbe sick, when the noiy communion is cele brated, the very words of confession and abso lution, contained in the oflice for the public celebration, are directed to be used. Again: THE AMERICAN PRAYER HOOK has a rubric which reads as follows: "Here the minister may use any part of the service of this book, which, in bis discretion, be shall think convenient to the occasion," etc. By this rubric. the priest is no longer a machine, but a map. and supposed to have some "discretion." In the performance of bis duty in visiting the sick, be may (by this rubric) move the sick person to confession; and by the same rubric, be may, "in bis discretion," use the form of absolution con tained in the communion office. Tbe Bishop proceeds to the oflice for the visi tation of prisoners, and admits that THE FORM OF ABSOLUTION in tbe communion office may be used "when a prisoner is confined for some great and capital crime. The Bishop goes on to say that "the only con fession which the minister la to exhort the pris oner to make, is a particular confession of the sin for which he is condemned." The Bishop must have overlooked a previous rubric in the same oilice, which says: "Then shall the minister examine whether be repent him truly of bis sins, and be In charity with nil the world; and further admonish him, particu larly concerning the crimes wherewith he is charged," etc. Again, in the exhortation to the prisoner, the minister is directed to say-. "I require you to strictly examine yourself and your estate, both towards God and towards man; and let no worldly consideration hinder you from making a full confession of your sins," etc. After this is done, then the minister Is to ex hort him to that "particular confession of the sin for which he Is c mdeuined." THE BISHOP'S INTERPRETATION of this oflice may fairly be paraphrased thus: "Tbe man who outrages law, who commits mur der, robbery, or, in the pursuit ot hlslust, out rages tbe purity of woman this man, upon con fessior, may receive the absolution given to all penitents in the communion oilice;" but the bumble penitent soul, who Is bittling with bis sins, and who comes in his sorrow for guidance and consolation, shall be turned away with no word of peace from the Church which our blessed Lord bas placed on the earth to that very end. IT IS MOSSIROUS! Does not the greater Include the less ? If the great criminal may receive absolution upon making a confts'iou, why may not the penitent fiiiuer, whose sins may not be an outrage upon society, and yet arc an outrage upon the law of God, and Lis own couscieuee; why may ho not ricelve tbe sanio hlesciug and the same "whole some salve of God's Word?'' The Bishop proceeds to say:1-"! repeat, there fore, that the Auieib au Church has tpoken for hertelf. tbe recoir:iz:s no inherent right in the minister Jo liear c !ifes.-lon aad grant abso lution outside of tiio f.ruis ami way specially provided; and by er legislation, direct and in direct, la j.rotei .tfd &!int piivato coufeseiou ala m1 private absolution." I BEO LEAVE TO DISSENT IN TOTO fiom the Bib p'a statement. The American Church, so fur as I can k'aru, has never ' lugls latert" upon tbls subject, "directly or ludl reetly." The American Church has given to her priest hood an absolute, unqualified commission to do this very tning. Bhe restricts the newly-commisslond priest by no word or hint, in tbe use of the Divinely de scended powers. If the "power and command ment oi God to "ills ministers to "declare and pronounce to His people, being penitent, the absolution and remission or tbelr ems, be not a part of the "office and work of a priest In the Church of God," what Is it? Beyond tbls the Bishop s whole argument Is directed against the compulsory system of the Cburch of Rome, which system I abhor as deeply as it is possible for him to do. THE BISHOP CONCLUDES this dlscnsslon by saying: "l require me otiieiattng ministers m at. Clements parish to discontinue all teaching and practice which leads to or countenance such private confession or private absolution." Are we to suppose the Bishop here to say that be will forbid the clergy of St. Clement's parUh to bear a private confession, or to give a'olu tion in such a case? If so, I am b ld to sav that be will do that which tbe Church uowhere gives bim authority to do. The Ameilcan Cburch has given me authority without restriction in this in titer, a id u ir.it fn by her legislation shall take away that authority, I MUST USB MY LIBERTY. Tbls whole question touches tbe private duties of tbe priesthood. No subject can be more sacred. It is a matter outside tbe direction of a vestry! and one with which as a vestry, they bave no right to tnteriere. ere this conceded every action of the ministry would be subject to tbe direction of a vestry. The same will apply to a Bishop. 1 be exhortation of the Communion bids the troubled penitent to go to the priest and "opeu bis grief. How that is to be done it Is not in the province of Bishop or layman to decide. No men in the American Church have a higher "reverence for authority than the clergy of St. Clement's parish. No men more deeply "loathe and abhor an autocracy." Whatever tbe Bishop may command, counsel, or advise, within the limits of his rightful authority, shall, "with a glad mind, be reve rently followed and obeyed" to the letter and in tbe dirlt. Tbe question of "prayers for the dead" need not be discussed in tbls paper Tbe vestry having unanimously declared that not one oi them has ever heard me say one word, in the pulpit or In the chancel, which they c mid not heartily endorse, It noeds no words to prove that we are heartily in accord so lar. I DECLINE TO ACCEPT THE BISHOPS DICTUM, that I am responsible for the sentiments expressed in tbe sermons oi those who preach lor me, and who are my peers, responsible uot to me but tbe diocesan authority uuder which tbey labor. (What follows was not in the original paper). A more careful reading of the bisaop'a paper seems to call lor some examination. "Tbe opinion that prayers for the dead are efficacious has never betn"taught or preacVed in St. Clement's Church by anybody. To my knowledge tbe subject has never been alluded to more than once or twice. The Bishop says: "The two passages in the Prayer Book that are usually relied on by tbe advocates of this doc trine are found In the Prayer for tbe whole state of t hrlst s Church .iMmtiut, and in oue ot the Dravers of the Burial Service. The first sentence is, "And we also bless Thy lioly JName lor 1 by servants departed this lite ill 1JJJ iUHU II1IU 1CHI, b. The Bisbop knows (or perhaps I should say. he ought to know) that this passage is not the one "relied on by the advocates of this doc trine." This passage is referred to, but the strong part of their argument is ia the prayer which follows theCajou of C mseerailoo.viz.: "And we earnestly deBlre lhy Uatherly good ness mercifully to accept this our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving; most humbly beseech ing Thee to grant that by the merits and death of Thy Son Jesus Christ and through f tith in His Blood, We, and all Thy Whole Church, may obtain remission of our sins and all other bene fits of His Passion." The argument is, that "Thy Whole Church" comprises threo parts: ine (Jtiurcn Militant tbe Church Expectant, and the Church Triumph ant. Therefoie say tbey. the praver reaches be yond those still in the fiesh. The Bishop then alludes to tne PRAYER IN THE BURIAL OFFICE, and gives a quotation as follows: "And we be seech Tbee that we, with all those who are departed in tbe true faith oi lhv Holy iSam. may bave our perfect consummation aud bliss in lby eternal and heavenly kiugdom. Let us now have the quotation just as it reads In tbe burial umce. "And we beseech Thee that we, with all those who are departed In the true faith of Thy Holy Name, may have our perfect consummation and bliss, both in body and soul, In Thy eternal and everlasting glory." Why Is it that the words "iijth in bidv and soul" are omitted? These are the very words upon wnicn the "advocates ot this doc trine" hang their whole argument. They say that tbe "periect consummation aud bliss can not be until tbe soul is reunited to the body, and that this is a supplication that the "bliss" of that day may be granted to those souls now separated irom the Doay. I now return to the original paper. Tbe remainder of tbe discussion is upon mat ters of ritual. THIS WHOLE SUBJECT having been settled by tbe vestry, requires but llllie COUBlUCrBUUIl. AUD tcoii tUUD lull Well that the rector is not strenuous upon these minor points, as (for the most part) they in volve no principle. He would probably differ from both Bishop and vestry in some points, but a man may do that without loss of confidence, trust, or affec tion. Tbe question oi MIXING WATER WITn THE WINE, at the time of placing the oblations upon the altar. 1 bad promised to abandon it it was an offense to anybody, aud it was unfair to take that question before the Bishop, especially as no person (in the vestry or out ot it) had ever raised one word oi objection to tne practice. In speaking oi vestments, the Bishop says: "There is no authority for the UBe of colored vestments In our Cbureh, etc. It is pretty generally known, IJbelieve, that there is no authority tor the use ot auy vest ruents in our Cburch, except that of common ecclesiastical law. There Is not one word of law in our canons, nor has the American Church legislated upon the subject In any way, "directly or indirectly. A BI&HOP'S OPINION, however wise, learned, or pious he may be. surely cannot be elevated to the position of law. The Bishop of New York, in his recent action, took good care to recommend, not to command; nor did be toucn me question oi coiorea stoies He simply requested the clergy who had u3d tbe colored chasuble to substitute white in place of it. Tbe use of the colored stoles the rector and vestry agreed should be continued, and await tbe action oi the next uenerai uouvenu.m. Not one member of the vestry raised a word of objection, per e, to the use of them. The Bishop concludes his paper by saving: "It would certainly be a mockery of Episcopal autboilty, and bad faith towards the vestry of St. Clement's Church, sfter agretlug to submit the controversy to the ordinary, etc. Tbe rector aud the vestiy have never agreed to "submit the controversy tothe ordinary." On tbe contrary, tbe rector bas steadily protested against It; and the vestry by an unanimous vote, ou the lllh oi January, aecioea not to ao u, IT HAS BEEN THE AIM of the majority of tbe vestry to settle the matter among themselves without sucn a reter euce. This was the reason for the appotntmeut f a committee to report upon tbe subject. But Mr. Morris, in bis buste, has rushed the question before the ordinary, with no authority what ever; and bas placed the ordinary in a false ixisition bv elvinir bim to understand that the uintlerwas referred to bim for art judication, which was not the case. Had Mr. Morris com to me Uefore the Introduction ot hu first resolu tion all the paluful discussions which bave fol lowed roteht have been avoided. The clergy of St. Clement's STARED THEIR REPUTATION upon their work there, believing In the truth and good faith of the vestry. The work has been a triumphant success, but this action may result In defeat and disaster, if not in dishonor. 1 be whole congregation, with not more than halt a dozen exceptions outside oi tbe vestry. are brartily in accord with the rector, If they were noi i would resign at once; but Knowiog as I do that they are, I shall bold my position as reetor ot the parish. l hope and pray that the vestry may have the grace and the wisdom to stop before they bring St. Clement's Into disrepute and dishonor, if not into niter ruin. REMARKS. It w ill be very plainly seen that in the above paper I bave not discussed the wisdom, the desirability, nor the necessity of private coufes- sion; oi prayers lor the dead, nor ot any matter of ritual. As' neither of the clergy oi St. Clement's bas ever asked auybody to jcouie to confession, as they have never said it was a duty to pray lor me dean; as ttiey Dave never insisted on any matter of ritual under discussion; it has not bren necessary t defend, or even explain, their teaching or practice, the only question in the matter Is this: Does the American Church permit private confession ? I give here no opinion in the matter, but simply state facts Again, do tbe praters of the Church extend in any sense beyond the Church militant? I f ive no opinion on- this subject, nor is such my nteutlon here. 1 bcre bas been no teachlnir in St. Clement's Church on the subject ot confession, other than the plain statement of the fact that "the trou bled minds contemplated by the exhortation to tbe communion those with an oppressed con science, bona fide seeking relief in that way," were entitled to the privilege. 11. G. BATTERSON, Rector of St. Clement's Church. Philadelphia, March 20, 1871. SPECIAL. NOTICES. jjh REDEMPTION OF STATU BONDS BTATB OF CALIFORNIA. A, ) 8NT.V rt. ) TRBA8CHY DftPARTMKNT, Sacramento, Feb. 1, 1ST Whereas, there Is on this day in the State Treasury the sum of two hundred and fifty thousand (S2SO,ooo) dollars, which, under the provisions of an act of the Legislature of said State, entitled "An Act to pro vide for pa ing certain equitable claims against the State of California, and to contract a fuaJed debt for that purpose," approved April 83, 1867; and a' so under tbe provisions of an act amendat rv of said act, approved April 87, I860, Is set apart for the re demption of I lvll Bonds of said Mate, issued under tbe provisions of said first mentioned act, notice la hereby given that SEALED PROPOSALS for the surrender of said Bonds will be received at this Department for the amount above speclded, until the IOTP DAY OF APRIL, A. D. 1811, at 11 o'clock A. M. No bids will be entertained at more than par value, and a responsible guarantee must accompany each proposal, which must be marked ''Sealul Pro posals for the Redemption of Civil Bonds of 1S5T." Paid bonds must be surrendered wlthiu ten days after the acceptance of the proposals for their re demption. A.F. CORONKL, 8 14 eod 1 4 10 State Treasurer. REDEMPTION OF CIVIL BONDS Oif' lseo. State of California 3rnia, y TMKNT,) Tmeasuky Dkpatm Sacramf.nto, February 1, 18IL Whereas, There is en this day in the State Trea eurj the sum of twenty-eight thnusand (82000) dol lars which, under the provisions of an act of the 1 eglslature of sold State entitled "An act to pro vide for the paying certain equitable claims against the State of California, and to contract a funded debt for that purpose," approved April 80, 1300, Is set apart for the redemption of Civil Bonds of said State, issued under tbe provisions of said act, notice Is hereby given that SEALED PROPOSAT.8 for the surrender of said Bonds will be received at this Depurtnient for the amount above specified until the 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 1871, at 11 o'clock A. M. No bid will be entertained at more than par value, and a responsible guarantee must accompany each proposal, which must be indorsed "oei'ed Proposals for the surrender of Civil Bonds of 1880." Said bonds will be redeemed and interest paid la gold and silver coin of the United otatos, aud must be surrendered within ten days after the acceptance of tbe proposal for their redemption. A. F. CORONEL, 9 14eod t4 10 State Treasurer. gf OFFICE f IKK C t)MVIISSI.NKI, S. E. I'liii.AiiKi.ruiA, March 15, IS70, Til F VCLUNTEKR F1KE DEPARTMENT having beeu retired from service aui lae placed in operation at 6 o'OlAICK THIS RVENiNG. the Beard respectfully asks the co-operation of the punnc to assist mem in itieir endeavors to make tne Dei hrtmeut a success. The board would return their sincere thanks to the Volunteer Di-parrmeut for their assistance and uniform good conduct while they were engaged In organizing. JACOB LAUDENSLA'JBK, Prcsic eut. Attest John R. Caktlin. 8 16 iv?- OFFICE OF THE LOGAN IRON AND I'uiLADKLpniA. March 13. 1871 The annnal meeting of the Stockholders of this company will be held at the oihce, No. 230 SOUTiI TlilHD street, ou TUESDAY. March 2-, at ill o'clock til., wnen an election win oe nwia ror v ivo uireccor. and such other business transacted as may then be presented. By order. 8 14 12t Secretary, fav- OFFICE OF TUB NATION L RAILWAY COMPANY, No. 218 8. FOURTH Street. PtiiLAnhi.PHiA, March 8, 1371. Au Instalment of Five Dollars per share on the subscriptions to the preferred st tck or th national Railway Company will be due and payable at the omce of the Company, no. vis . ou it i n treei, rnnaaeinnia, on or uerore uie ihiii oi aiarcn, isii, hy order of the Board of Direerora. 8 8 Bw JAbOB RIEEL, Treasurer. ty BATCH KLOK'S 11 AIR DYES. Tills SPLKN- did Ualr live is the best In tho world, the only true and periect Dye. Harmless Keuaote lnsiau tatieoua no disappointment no ridiculous tiota "VoeK: itontam Lead nor any vualte rouon to n jurein liairor Smttvi." Invigorates the flair and leaves It soft and beautiful : Black or Brown. Bold by all Druggists and dealers. Applied at thu raotory, no. 10 tiuwunrreei, we lorn. i i ui THE UNION FIRE EXTINGUISH KK COMPANY OF PHILADELPHIA ' Manufacture and sell the Improved, Portable FUc Extinguisher. Always Reliable, D. T. UAUK, 1 80 No. 118 MAKK.KT Bu. General Agem. gy- DR. F. R. THOMAS, No. H WALNUT STn fnmiarlt niwrutnr at titA Pnltnn nunlul Rnmna devotes bis entire practice to extracting teetn with out pain, witn ireBq nitrous oxide gaa. 11 n mi,S- JOUVIN'S KID GLOVE CLEANER restores soiled cloves eaual to new. For sale by all druggists and faucy goods dealers. Price 80 cents per oouie. n urniwi feV DISPENSARY FOR SKIN DISEASES, NO. " 81 8. ELEVENTH Street. Patients treated gratuitously at this Institution oaiiy at u o ciocx. FUKNITUHt. Joseph II Campion ('ate oore 4 Oampl n), WILLIAM KM1TH. KlCHAdP K CAMPION, SMITH & CAMPION. Manu a -tuiers Of FUSE Fl'RNlTUhE, Ur110l.STERINQ3, AND IN TERIOH HOUSE DKi'OHATloiSM, WO. 849 MJUTti THIRD 8 riet. Manurae ory, Mos. 815 aud 817 LE ANT S r.et, FINANCIAL. THE FEU N SYLVAN I A COttPAK FOIt INSUKANCES ON LIVES All GRANTING ANNUITIES OfQce No. 304 WALNUT 8treei. INCORPORATED MARCFI 10, 1813. CHARTER PERPETUAL. CAPITAL 1 .OOO.OOO. BTJBPLTJS UPWARDS OF S750.0 ffPCPtVi tTtOTlPT nn rtpnnfttt rotnrnahla nn tamo jur men imereHt is b now en. - J m uu VJ VU M S UIO nfl under appointment hj inmviaaali, corp EAECl'TOKH. ADM INISTKATORS, TRI STE R teal VERS, AOPNTS. COLLECTORS, ETC And for thp r<hful nprfnrmnri(n tt Ita rintlaa such all Its assets are liable. CHARLES DUTILH, Pjesldenf YV II. 1.1AM v. ihlu Actuary. DIRECTORS. Charles Pntllh, Joshua P. Lfpnincott. Henry J. W llllams, Charles II. Hutchinson! winiHm n. vbux. Lindier BniTth. Jchn R. Wuclierer, (leorge A. Wood, Adoiph It. Unrip, Anthony J. Antelo, Alexander Diddle, Chanes 8. Lewis, iienry Lewis. Bowles Brothers & Co PABIS, LONDON, BOSTON. No. 19 WILLIAM Gtrod N "w Y o i It, issue Credits for Traveller IN EUROPE. Exch&tge on Paris and the Uni Bank of Loudon, j IN SUMS TO SUIT. 17 8 QUI OF BALTIMOB 11,200,000 six per cent. Bonds of the West Maryland Railroad Company, endorsed by the d of Baltimore. The nnden Igned Finance Commit of the Western Maryland Railroad Company oil through the American Exchange National Ba 11,800,000 of tbe Bouds of the Western Maryla Railroad Company, having 30 years to run, prlnclj and interest guaranteed by the city of Ealtlmo This endorsement having been authorized by act of the Legislature, and by ordinance of City Council, was submitted to and ratified by almost unanimous vote of the people. As an aa tlonai security the city has provided a sinking fund f'200,000 for the liquidation of this debt at matur An exhibit of the financial condition of c shows that she has available and convertible ass more than m trident to pay her entire Indubtednes To Investors looking for absolute security no lo offered In this market presents greater tndncemen These tonus are offered at 87 and accrued In rest, coupons payable January and July. WILLIAM KEYSER, JOHN K. LONGWELL, MOSES WIE3ENFELD, 1 6 ott Finance CommitteeJ EDUCATIONAL. II A R V A It D UJMIV1SKSIT CAMBRIDGE, MASS.. Comprises the following Departments: Harvard College, tbe University Lectures, Dlvln School, Law School, Mo Ileal School, Dental Schol Lawrence Scientific School, School of Mining si Practical Geology, Buasey Institution (a School Agriculture and Horticulture), Botanlo Garden, Af tronouiical Observatory, Museum of Conipiraul Zoology, Feabody Museum of Archeology, Eplscori Theological School. The next academic year begins on September 18T1. The first examination for admission to Harva College will begin June V9, at 8 A. M. The seco examination for admission to Harvard College, a the examinations for admission to the Sclenti and Mining Schools,; will begin September 83. T requisites for admission to the College have beJ changed this year. There la now a mathematd a'teruatlve for a portion of tbe classics. A circul describing the new requisites and recent examltf tion papers win ue niauea on application. I. N 1VERSITY LECTURES. Thirty-three CourJ In 1870-71, of which twenty begin In the week Fe ruary 12-19. These lectures are Intended for gradl aies oi colleges, leacners, ana ouier compete adults (men or women). A circular describing tbeJ will be mailed in application. TUB LAW SCHOOL bas been reorganized til year. It bas seven Instructors, aud a library I6,i oo volumes. A circular explains the new cour of study, tbe requlMt.es for the degree, and the cut of attending the school. The second half of t; year begins February 13. Fcr catalogues, circulars, or Information, a dress J. W. HARRIS, S 6 8m Secretary. E 7 D B H I L L 8 O H O O, M ERCH ANTV1LLB, N. J., . Fonr Miles from Philadelphia The session commenced MONDAY, April ii 1671. for circulars apply to Rey. T. W. OATTBX.L. UGVBTUS K1NKELIN, TEACHER OF PIAN cau be engaged t(r Dancing, Parties, Euti- taiiiments, etc. Orders by mail f mm suburban reH (Ui.ces punctually aueunea 10. ueKiaeuce, ino. i K 1 1.EVEN1 11 ttrei t. below C'hesnut. 8 13 liu WHISKY, WINE, ETO. yf?TAIRf A PJcC&LLj No 126 Walnut, and 21 Granite Ctr IVPOKT'CBK OP Brandies, Wines, Gin, Olivi OIL Et WUOLKHAIJI DKALKK3 IU p u ft e it y e w h i a k i ii t IN BOKD AND TAX PAIIX. trS i. T. BAriTON. M'MAEOM. T?ArvrJN WCJW AIIOPI, SUirPlHG ASD VOMMSHWil MKfiHAiiT8, No. V COKNTIKS HUt. hew Vorl, No. ISfcoU'J H WHARVES, Philadelphia No. 4b W. PRATT STREET. Baltimore. We are prepared to ship every description f Krelgiit to Philadelphia, New ort, wmxuiirion, aoj lutertiierilat points wlt.h promptness and Ueopatoij aouoc
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers