Two days ago, in 1883, the following was published in the New York Times: CHICAGO, June 29.--The Rev. Arthur Ritchie, Rector of the Episcopal Church of the Ascension, having given offence to Bishop McLaren by an extreme ritualistic form of service, the Bishop criticised him at the last diocesan convention. Two weeks ago Mr. Ritchie tendered his resignation. His church unanimously declined to allow him to leave it, and a committee was appointed to prepare an address to the Bishop. The address is made public to-night. The committee declare that there has been nothing in Mr. Ritchies course intended to wrong himself, the parish, or the church. They claim to be devout and loyal churchmen, and insist that Mr. Richie has been a faithful, intelligent and devout priest, whose piety, purity of character, and uprightness of life, have made him dear to them all. The committee then remind the Bishop that he has not visited the church, but has accepted hearsay as fact. They sharply criticise him for remaining away from the church, and declare that as to their real church situation he is profoundly unadvised. After claiming that Mr. Ritchies work has been progressive and of pious fruition, the committee prove by statistics that the advancement of their parish has been healthful and steady. After defending the ritual used in the Church of the Ascension the committee remind Bishop McLaren that he has made no formal accusation against Mr. Ritchie, while he has punished them by neglecting to make the visitation which the canon so explicitly enjoins. It is thought that the outcome of the difference will be an independent church.
Posted on: Tue, 01 Jul 2014 14:18:07 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015