ID4r Qtnutrnurrsy ~rtwrrn - Samford University Library

~rtwrrn
tqr i!\t. i!\ru~ QI. fl. T&rrkwitq1 i. 11.1
au~ tqr ]Jrstry nf tqr Qlqurrq nf
tqr A~urut T&irmiugqam1 Alabama
ID4r Qtnutrnurrsy
..I
1Junr .9, 1904
R0 8fRT8 . 8 0 fll , P RINTf ftl, ' " ""'·
Samford University Library
\
In view of wid e-spread misappreh ens ion, ,the time has come when we fee t
tha t we could not. without sad neglect of dut y to the Parish we represent
:tnd to the Church people of Alabama, refrain longer from making a statement concerni ng the causes which have operated to bring about the strained
reiRtions that have exis ted for some months between the Bishop of the
Diocese, and the Vestry and Congregation of the Church of the Advent.
We issue this statement in no s pirit of bitterness, in no mood of reckless
disregard for any s acred intere>t which it is our privilege to conserve and
defend , a nd with no desire to revive a disagreeable controversy that has been
The step we now take we
finally reckoned with the things o'f the past.
would avoid if in conscience we could. But it has been forced upon us in
such :t way, that righteous avoidance of it has been rendered impossible.
As offi cial represen tatives of t he Church of the Advent, we believe that in
what we haye done and left undone in our dealings with the presen t Bishop
we a re j us t ly entitled to the cordial sympathy an d approval of all fair-minded
Ch'u rch people in t his Diocese. If a ny be disposed to withhold such sympathy
and approval, today, we are en tirely confident that tomorrow will a mply
jus tify the wisdom of our course, and that, without seeking it. we shall be
atcorded the g ratitude of our fellow-churchmen t hroughout the length ana
breadth of t he s tate.
We submit for t heir cons ideration the following record of 'facts:
On the 29th day of August, 1903, we elected the Rev. Quincy Ewin g, of
Greeu ville. ~iss. , Rector of our Paris h, and notified him by letter of his election. About t wo weeks later, the Rev. Mr. Ewing-having in the meantime
visited the Parish and conferred with the Ve: try- signitied to us h is acceptanee of the call extended. W e promptly sent notice to the Bishop of the Rev.
:-.rr. Ewing's elE>ct ion and h is acceptance; and, very greatly to our surprise,
we re<"eived a letter from hi m informing us that our mode of procedure in
lhe aforesa id election was not in accordance with a canon o f the Diocese. We
had been guil ty of th e same mode of procedu re, a 'few weeks previously, in the
elec:tion of the R ev. P . G. Sears, and the Bis hop, having notice of this elecThe
tion, s uggested no irregularity whatever in connection therewith.
partic·ular ca non to which he called our attention bad been simply overlooked,
hy us in each case, as it has been overlooked by probably nine-ten ths of the
ve!>tries who have elected Rectors in t his Diocese. We had no intention wbat<>ver of wilfull y di.: regarding it. T herefore, on receipt o t' Bishop Beckwi th 's
letter, we met, without demur, and undertook to follow in our procedure t he
provisions of Title 2, Canon 3, to which we had been refer red. We nominated the R ev. Mr. Ewing for the Rectors hip of our Parish, notified the
Bishop of onr action , and requested whatever communication it was necessary for us to have from him in order to proceed to a canonical election. R eplying to t h is notifl<·ation and reques t, the Bis hop thanked us for the prompt
manner in whic·h we had conformed to his s uggestion; but, instead o'f sendin~ us the ''sufficient evidence in writing" as to Mr. Ewing's qualification as
a clergyman , h e expressed his des ire to meet the Vest r y In conference at
an early day; and Septem ber 27th was appointed for such conference.
On
that clay WC' met the Bis hop in Birmingham; and not unti l that da y did
we have knowledge of any s erio\l.:l ground of difference between ourselves
Samford University Library
3
and him.
Our conferen ce w ith h i m las ted for near l y f\v (' hours. \\'(' w r.r('
appric:ed by him f or .the first t ime of h i :> objection to lh(' Rev :\l r Ewlt1 ~
becom ing R ('ctor of the Ch u r ch of the A d v ent, on the ground, as al l('~cd.
that Mr. Ewing had o fficia ted in the Dioc·ese o f :\fissl~s lppl at the marrla~:<' ot
the R ev. Charles Morris, a divorced man .
It was no n ews to us that t h e R ev. ~r r. E wi n g had offidatl'd at th is marriage, several years b efore we extend ed h i m t h e eall to our Parish . Dut.
knowing t hat t h e act complain ed of by B ishop B eckwith was clone I n th('
Diocese of Missi ssi ppi , w h er e M r. E wing bad been f or mor <' than eight consecutive year s R ect or o:f St . J am es Chu1 ch, Greenville, W(' felt qu it(' su r ('
that the constituted E ccl esiastical A uth orities o f th<' :\1issi <sippi Olor('s('
m u st h aYe tal{en cognizan ce o f the said act , ancl duly passed upon liH' qu('stion as to wh ether the Ma rriage and Di vor ce Canon o f th e C'hurr h had. or
had n ot, been v iolated by l\Ir. E win g. B e fore we elel'ted hi m ou r R('(·tor, W I'
had the besl r eason to bel iev e tha t his stan ding a• a tlerg y man i n t h(' Diocese of Mississi p pi was absolutel y u nquestioned.
ll'l' h ad m adt· dut· i ntlur -
ries, a11d had received inform ation directly from a m em ber of/he ,1/issrssrpp z
Stmrd i 11g Committee.
But w e list en ed patien tly to B ishop Bec·kwith 's al legecl ohj<'l'lion to ~t r.
E wi 11g. and a ccept ed in good h umor the s tatem en t o f his r eason f or cll'lay in
sending us t h e "sufficien t evidence i n writing" w e had as l\ecl for.
At the
same time, w e showed n o si gn of w avering i n our desire to have :\lr E win~
as R ect or o f our Churc h. T he Bishop, u n d er stan di n g t hat w e l-'hould I nsist
upon electing Mr. Ewing, dec lared that he w oul d put no obstarl!' in our way
by tal<ing advant age of any tedwicali(t'.
" I am goin g," he said. " to Dr.
Bratton 's eonsecration , and will go to Gr eenville to sec ~l r. !~w i n g, and haH'
a talk with him.
If h e tells m e that he officiated at the :\[orris marria.e;f'. I
will say to him , ' Broth er , I prefer t hat y ou do n ot ro me t o A lahama.'
It.
a f t er I h ave said this to him, h e i s willi ng to co me, I will make no furthPr
object ion . And, gentlemen , there will be n o after math to thi s matter , so rar
as I am r oncerned."
'I'he Bishop d eclared furt h er. that w h il e in ;\1ississ ippi. h e would d iKcul-'s
Mr. Ewing's connecti on w i t h t h e M orris marriage with n o on<' bu t -'lr. E w ln~
himself, and w ould permit no on e else to discu ss it with him. lie a ppear NI
to Ja:v sp ecial emphasis on what h e declar ed to be his duty-to "go to ~l r.
Ewing. direct ."
On being t hus assured by the B ishop as to his attit ude and pu r pose. w r
snpposed that an amicable, final, and satisfact ory settlement or t he matt<'r at
issue between him and u s h ad been r each ed.
H e declared to u s- at tach ing to his p r om ise 110 tomlrl wll of 1111_1' (rl//"1 will give y ou a certificate t h at :\[r. E w ing is a qualifi<'<l l'ler .e;ym an; for
h e is a qualified cler gyman. I would giv e it to you. no w , but r haven't t hPpen , ink an d paper .''* ( A s h e sai<l thi s, he looked about f or writi n ~ mat er ial s.) " I will send i t t o you a t on ce."
Having already nominated Mr. Ewi n g at a f orm<'r m<'eti n~ and asl<NI fo r
the Bis hop's "certi f i ca te," befor e this con ferenc<' acljournPd , wP passl'cl a
r esolution in the Bi<h op's p r esen ce to el ec t him agai n forthwith , and procePdl'rl
to d,., so.
The con:Ceren ee came to an end with m utua l ex pressiOn!! of <'or dlal aym•Th is Confere nce was he ld in the ,·acant Rectory.
Samford University Library
. ,;,
"'-'
(
pathy
an1l
good will , after
W(
had appoi nted a com mitteee, viz.:
Col.
R . 11. Pearson and Dr. E. P. Riggs . to go to Green ville wit hout delay, in-
form \1 r. Ewing of our complete understanding with t he Bishop, assure him
o f our fu ll l'Ontidence and regard, a n d u rge him to abide by his deci.sion to
h<'C0!1le our Rector, in spite of the objection to him tha t the Bis hop had expressed.
At thE' elate of th is con fer ence. September 27, 1903. the Vesti·y of the Chur ch
of the Ac!Yen t was composed of t he following gentleme n , a majority of
whGm tool' part in th e discussion t hat the re occu rred: R . H . Pearson,
Senior \\"arden; Robert Jem i.>on. Junior Wa r den ; E. M. Tutwiler , Rufus N.
H h0cl<.'"', Judge Samuel E. Greene, Dr. E . P . Riggs, Robe rt A. T errell, T . 0 .
Smith. J . B. Col>bs, Charl es Roher ts, S. E . Thompson, H. K. Milner; John V.
Coe, Se<·reta r y.
On Tuesday. Se ptember 29th. our comm iltec returned from Greenville, and
r"I>Oned that :\!r. Ewing, being fully appris ed of what had occurred at the
<·onfe re nce l>et ween the Bis hop and t he Vestry, and assured by them that his
,l ~<·'inatio n of our call at that time would pr oduce discord between the Bishop
1:111 the Ycstr y a nd Congregation instead of healing it, had declared himself
wi lling to abide by his decision. and named the second Sunda y in October as the day when he would be a ble to ta ke c ha rge of o ur Parish. Not
haYing a ntidpated any serious obstacle whatever in the wa y of his removal
to Birmingham . :\!r. Ewing had then resigned h is charge in Greenville, and
his household good;; we re being packed and prepared :fo1· s hipme n t-so we
were infor med by the committee.
\\"hile :\lessrs. Pearson and R iggs were in conver sation with l\lr. Ewing in
:\Ioncla y, September 28th, he received a telegra m from Bishop
Ued\w ith . sayi ng:
"Importan t t ha t I see you. Meet me in J aci\SOn tomorrow. Ans wer."
J us t before the receipt of this te legram , Mr. Ewing had me ntioned to our
<"Ommittee hi> regret at not being a ble to attend the Consecration of Bishop
Bra tton. a nd of having written to Bis hop Bratton expressing t his r egret, and
rxp laining that personal affa irs absolutely rcquin·d his presence a t home.
li e. t herefore, in t he presence of Messrs. Pear.'On and Riggs, t elegraphed to
l3ishop Betk with:
" Regret, impossible to meet you in J ackson."
These gentlemen e xpressed to :\lr. Ewing the opinion , that Bishop Beck··
with would certa inly Yisit him in Greenville before returning to Alabama.
On September 29th, the Rev . Dr. Bratton was consecrated Bis hop of Mis :-:h;sippi in J ackson. The next day, Bis hop B ratton a rrived in Birmingham on his retu m from J ackson, :\liss., and s tated to our Senior Warden;
.. Bishop Bratton is not going to give :\1r. Ewing a letter of t ransfer in the
lonn laid clown in the Canon : But I will give you that 'certificate.'"
T he reacle r is as ked to recall her e Bis hop Beckwit h's promise to the Ves t!,., that he would not while in Mississ ippi d iscuss t he matte r of Mr. Ewin g's
connection with the ).!orris marriage w ith a ny one but Mr. Ewing hi mself! He
di1l ·lisc·uss that matter with Bishop B ratton , before the latte r had been Bis hop
ol :\l ississippi lwdz·c !tours, a nd before h e ha d had an opportunity to in form
h imself fully c·on<·e rning the stat us of t he cle rgy or his Diocese. Beyond any
rlou))l . Bis hop Bratton was tal<en a t unawares, a nd gave a promise, or· expr"sl-<ed a resolve, which we have good r eason to believe, he would not h ave
G reenYill~>,
Samford University Library
given, or expressed, had h e been allowed more time for consideration aml
investigation.
We do not charge that Bishop Bec-kwith exac·ted, or received, a specific
promise from Bishop Bratton not to give the Rev. :\Jr. Ewing a letter dimissor:v in the precise form s uggested (but not required) by the Canon. But we
do assert, without hesitation, that there was a discussion relati\·e to ~I r.
Ewing's election as Rector of the Church of the Advent; that this discussion
was engaged in by Bishop Beckwith; that in the course of it he mad e clear to
Bishop Bratton his unwillingness to receive Mr. Ewing in the Diocese of
Alabama, and that he left Jackson knowing that Bishop Bratton was committed to a certain course; viz.: not to issue to :VIr. Ewin g a Jetter dimissory
in the form which would compel him (Bishop Beckwith) to accept it within
s ix months, or demand an inquiry instituted in the ?llississippi Diocese, on the
bngis of rumors he rpight have heard affecting Mr. Ewing·s character as a
cler-gyman.
We assert that, to the time of this discussion, it had never occurred t o
Bishop Bratton to withhold 'from Mr. Ewing a letter dimissory in th e u~ ua l
f0rm. Beginning the said discussion, or after it was begun by some one
else, Bishop Beckwith said to Bishop Bratton:
"Are you going to give Quincy Ewing a letter dimissory to the Diocese
of Alabama?" To this question Bishop Bratton replied: " V.'hy. I suppose
so; I know of no rea>on why I sho uld not.
I haYe jus t had a letter from
Mr. Ewing in which he says that he will soon have to as k to be t ransferred
to Alabama."
It was then that Bishop Beckwith made known t he grou nd
of his alleged objection to i\Ir. Ewing. ( We insert the word, " alleged." advzsedly :
for in conversation with an intimate friend of his on or about O.::tober 6, /903 , B1shop Beckwith stated that the Morrris marn'age was a " minor mat ter ," and that his " chief ob;(:ction · ·
to Mr. Ewing was "on the ground of his theology.'·)
On October 1st, the day after his statement to our Senior Warden. l\Ir. R.
H. Pearson, quoted above, in regard to the giving of the •·certificate," Bis hop
Beckwith wrote a letter to l\Ir. Pearson from whic: h we take the following
sentences:
"J regret to notify your Vestry that I returned from l\Iississippi. wi th
the fears expressed last Sunday afternoon. confirmed.
.T he term.
'Qualified clergyman of this Church,' as used in Title 2, Canon 3. Sec. 1. of
the Constitution and Canons of the Diocese of Alabama. and a ~ deseript i\·e ot
the clergy of the Diocese of Alabama and of those who s hall successfully seek
entrance into the Diocese of Alabama. signifies. in the mind of the Bis hop ot
Alabama, a clergyman 'in regular standing. who is not known or believed to
have been justly liable to evil report. for error in religion or l'idous ness of
life, for three years last past.'"
''This language is quoted f rom the Canons of the General Chureh. and
your Bis hop has neither the power nor the desire to alter its wording...
This letter was written by Bishop Beckwith to excuse himself for withhoJ,]ing the "certificate" which we had asked for, and he hacl tlltt•quh.'orai~J'
promised to give. In it he clearly claims to have discoYered while in
Miss iss ippi that Mr. Ewing was known ot· belie1·ed (by the .\liss iss ippi
Ecclesiastical Authorities, of course) to be justly liable to •·e,•il report for
error in religion, or viciousness of life," wi thin three years last past! Yet.
l~sco. than three days before this letter was written to our Senior 'Varden,
Samford University Library
---\
6
Bishop Beckwith had approached the Rev. George C. Harr is, D. D. , P resident of the Mississippi Standing Committee, in J ackson, with t he question:
"Dr. Harris, what would you have done, if l\lr. Ewing had applied to you
for a letter dimissory to Alabama?" and had gotten from h im the reply:
··r would unht·silalingly have given it."!! !
In :Mississippi, the Standing Committee plays the part of a Grand Jury,
and any charge against a clergyman must be investigated and passed upon
by that Committee, before he can be proceeded against. As P r esident of
the l\lississippi Standing Committee, Dr. Harr is could not but have k nown
of any charge against Mr. Ewing affecting his character as a cler gyman :
could not but have been thoroughly cognizant of Mr. Ewin g's standing as
a clergyman in the Diocese of Mississippi; and it is 111/crly incouccivable t hat
Bishop Beckwith could have been ignorant of the Rev. Dr. H arris's
familiarity with the facts! Yet, on October 1st, within three days of his
conversation with the President of the Mississippi Standing Com mittee,
Bishop Beckwith notified us that, while in Mississippi, his "fears" concerning Mr. Ewing's standing as a clergyman had been "confir med"! !
October 3d, 1903, Bishop Bratton gave l\lr. Ewing a letter of transfer in
the following language:
"The Bishop's House.
Battle Hill.
"Jackson , Miss., October 3d, 1903.
"I hereby certify that the Rev. Quincy Ewing, who has signified his
desire to be transferred to the Diocese of Alabama, is a Presbyter in good
standing in this Diocese of Mississippi; exercising a useful, Godly, ministry
as Rector of the church in Greenville, and, so fa r as I know or believe, he has
not been justly liable to evil report for error in religion.
"The well known and widely-published fact of his having married a
divorced clergyman (not divorced for the cause of adulter y) about two years
and a half ago (in June, 1901) renders it impossible to give a letter in th e
c;monical form.
"This act was brought to the attention of the then E cclesia stical
Authority of this Diocese, and the matter was, an d has been since, sus pended so far as Mr. Ewing was involved ; and, believing in Mr. E wing's
purity of motive (mistaken as his judgment was) and in h is own moral
rectitude, I have no desire to, nor shall I, take any step in the premises, but
accP.pt him as a qualified clergyman.
" I am also persuaded and assured that the Bishop's constr uction of
thr Canon of Marriage and Divorce will regulate his acts in future cases.
" THEODORE DUBOSE BRATTON,
"Bishop of Mississippi."
::-;oT J~.-Inusuat form the tetter of transfer would ha,·e been : " I hereby certify that the
Rev. Quirtcy Ewing, who has signified his desire to be trans ferred to the Diocese of Alabama, is
a Presbyter in good sta nding in this Diocese of :Mississippi, and has not. so far as I know or believe, been justly liable t o evil report for erro r in re ligion, or viciousness of life, within three
years last past.,.
Inasmuch as in the le tter given by Bis hop Bratton. he certified to Mr. Ewing's good
standing in the Diocese of Mississippi; to the usefulness and Godline~s of his ministry, h is
purity of motive, his moral r ectitude. and had imputed to him nothing worse than a n error of
judgment, it is clear that nisho p Bratton omitted the phmse, ·•or viciousness of life,'" onl y to
avoid followiug fill' usual form ...
Samford University Library
7
(It is but fair to Mr. Ewing to insert here, that when Bishop Bratton used
thfl word "suspended" as above, he misinterpreted the record of the Standing Committee, and had not sought information from that Committee.)
The letter of transfer was sent to us at on ce by Mr. Ewing for delivery
to Bishop Beckwith. It reached us October 4th, and, appreciating the
necessity of haste, in order to avoid the embarrassment to ourselves and
the entire congregation of the Church of the Advent of having the second
Sunday of the month come and go, and Mr. Ewing absent from the services
of our church, we immediately did all within our power to get into communication with t he Bishop.
Learning that he would be in Carlowville the evenin g of October 4th,
or t he next morning, we telegraphed him to that point to know when and
where he could meet a committee of the Vestry. A copy of this telegram
we sent to him by mail. We received from him no reply, though we understood, later, that he received both telegram and copy. The next day, :\1onday,
0<'t.ober 5th, we telegraphed to Selma and other points in an effort to Jearn
where the Bishop could be found. On the night of this day, the Rev. J . A.
VanHoose left for Carlowville, to bunt up the Bishop and present to him
a copy of the letter of transfer. :\1r. VanHoose was successful in his search,
but returned with the information that the Bishop declined to accept the
said letter. He was unable to tell us where the Bishop could be found,
th<' next day, or the day thereafter, having learned only that he would be
in Mobile "the latter part of the week." We telegraphed repeatedly to
different points, and, though we were reliably informed that some of these
messages were delivered, we received no reply. Thursday, October 8th, the
Senior Warden went to Mobile, and th ere found the Bis hop. Thursday night.
He positively declined to accept the letter of transfer given by Bishop
Bmtton on the ground that it was "irregular," thus clear ly disregarding.
it seemed to us, his pr omise made to the Vestry to take advantage of
no technical ity.
T h e second Sunday in October came and went. W e endured ou r embarrassment; we were still without a Rector ; and, apparently, unable to
get within close range of our Bishop, or to wir; from him any response to
our appeals other than the unfeeling answer: ·'I am not responsible for
it; you are responsible."
Wednesday or Thursday following, Bishop Beckwith addressed a Jetter
to the Secretary of the Vestry, to the effect, that. in conversation with
ex-Governor Johnston, the latter had intimated that possibly the Vestry did
not understand fully his (the Bishop's) position, and that he wished to meet
the Vestry to explain it. Thinking that an explanation on the Bishop's part
w!\s certainly in order, we invited him to a conference with us. the next
F r iday n ight.
T he conference with the Bishop of Friday, October 16th , lasted on into
the early morn ing of the next day. It resulted in an agreement between
the Bishop and this Vestry which seemed to leave nothing more to be
desired. At the Ves try's suggestion, he wrote next morning, October 17th.
several letters; two to B ishop Bratton , one of which was dictated by a
mem ber of the Vestr y; and one t o Mr. Ewing. These letters are here copied .
They were read by this Vestr y as a body, shortly after they were
w ritten , and were satisfactory to us, save as to one par ticular, viz.: we were
Samford University Library
8
not dis posed to insist t hat t he Rev. l\lr. Ewing s hould bring with him from
:\lis!'issippi a letter dimissory in what Bishop Beckwit h was pleased to call
the ··c·anonical form;'' bein g well assured that the Jetter already issued by
Bis hop Bratton j itljillcd ez•ery 1·equireuu nt o.f tile Canon. In this letter,
;~i:::ho p Bratton had certified th at the Rev. Quincy Ewing was "a Presbyter in
good s ta nding in the Diocese of l\Iississippi," an d was accepted by him as "a
1111alified cler gyman." T his was suffi cient fo r us, and we so informed Bis hop
BC'c·kwith the night of October 16th.
Letter No. 1. (Dictated by a member of the Vestry.)
"Birmingham , Ala ., October 17th, 1903.
" Rl. Rev. T. D. Bratton, D. D. , Jackson, Miss.:
'':\1y Dear Bis hop Bratton: I have had a full , free, and frank conference
with the Yestry of the Chur ch of the Advent, Bir m ingham, and they, with
thP enti re Parish, are extremely anxious to have the Rev. Quincy Ewing
c·ail~>c! to the Rcdors!tip.
If Jou can see your way clear to give Mr.
Ewing t he l ett~r dimissory in canonical fo r m, I will welcome hiJ? into this
Dic•cE-se.
Faith fu lly,
"C. l\1. BECKWITH,
"Bishop of Alabama."
LE•tter 1\'o. 2.
l
I
(Same place and date.)
":\ly Dear Bis hop: I am sure that you w ill r ejoice with me t hat all
mi!"unclerstandi!1g between m yself as Bishop, a nd t he Vestry of t h e Advent,
has been remo ved. I wen t over the whole g round with the Vestry las t
uigh t, and a more splendid set of men I never met. We differed hones tly,
hnt when our differences were understood, each sympathized wit h the
ot her. I do not believe that the Bishop is a ny more anxious t o keep out
of the Diocese what s hou ld not enter it t han are t h ese gentlemen. T he man
wlJ.o cannot bring with him the Letter Dimissor y in Canonical form , I do
not belie,·e one member of the Vestry of the Ad vent desires as his Rector. I
(>J1 vy the clergyman who s hall have twelve s uch men co-operating with
h im. It is a matter of g reat r ejoicing t hat I ca n wor k together with the
gent lemen who compose t he Vestr y of t he Chu rch of the Advent, and
I <>a rnestly hope that the Rev. Mr. Ewing will take s uch -steps as will
rmtoz•t• .from you all obstacles, both real and tech nical, that have pre\'<'lHE.'d you from giving h im 'The Letter Dimissory in Canonical Form.'
"I accept your judgment and conclus ions regarding Mr. Ewing's
•h~>ological views, and I yield a ll objections on this score.
":\ly heart is light this morning, and I k now you w ill rejoice with me.
"C. M. BE CKWITH ,
" Bis hop of Alabama.
"I enclose copy of letter written Mr. E wing."
Letter N o. 3 (Same date a nd place.)
" Rev. Qui ncy Ewing, Greenville, Miss.:
" My Dear Mr. Ewing: I attended a meeting of the Vest1·y of the
A<l,•ent las t night. I thoroughly unders tand these gentlemen now, and they
thoroughly unders tand me. The enclosed lette1·, which I have this day
Samford University Library
9
mailed to Bishop Bratton, will explain to you the result of our conference.
My letter to Bishop Bratton leaves the matter just where it was. sa,·e
that with it goes the perfect understanding and sympathy of the Bishop
of Alabama and the Vestry of the Church of the Advent. They want no
more t han I want; and I want no more than they want. I have said to the
Vestry that from all I know of you, I did not believe that you either desited to or would leave Mississippi, until all matters there, either real or
technical, were cleared up. The moment Bishop Bratton can give me the
Letter Dimissory in Canonical 'for m, I will welcome you into this Diocese.
"Very sincerely,
"C. M. BECKWITH,
" Bishop of Alabama."
It will be observed that tecltnically Bishop Beckwith had not receded
from his former position. In a sense, the "matter" was left "just where it
was." But, reallJ', there was all the difference in his attitude between
facing east and facing west. Formerly, he had said to Bishop Bratton. or
made him understand by manner clear as s peech: "I s hall be offended if
yol! give Mr . Ewing a letter dimissory in a form which will compel me to
accept it." Now, he had said by implication : "I shall be pleased if you
give Mr. Ewing the letter in obligatory form." He had formerly been opposed to Mr . Ewing's coming into the Diocese of Alabama, and Bishop Bratton
was well aware of this opposition. Now h e was "earnestly hoping" that the
Rev. Mr . Ewing would take such steps as would remove from Hisliop /Jrallon
"all obstacles, both real and technical," which had pre,·ented the gh·ing of
the letter of transfer in a specified form!
Oct ober 23d, 1903, t he Standing Committee of the Diocese of :\Iississippi
mrt in Jackson, at Mr. Ewing's request and ins istence, to take action coneerning ch arges "affecting his character as a clergyman," which were being
circulated in consequence solely of Bishop Beckwith's objection to his removal to
the Diocese of Alabama.
Specifically, Mr. Ewing had been represented
in the public prints as a clergyman who could not get "clearance papers"
from one diocese to another. The committee met, be it understood. not at
Bishop Beckwith's request, nor at Bishop Bratton's, but at Mr. E111Iizg's. reinforced by a loyal and vigorous appeal from the Yestry of St. James
Church, Green ville, fo r justice to their Rector.
That this committee did not meet for the purpose of taking final actiou,
action 111hatever, upon any char ge against ~lr. Ewing in connection
with the Morris marriage, is certified to by its President. the Re,·. George
C. Harris, D. D., as follows:
or any
" Rolling Fork, l\Iiss.. No,·ember 23d, 1903.
''Tc Whom It May Concern:
"I hereby cer tify that t he meeting of the Standing Committee of the
Diocese of Mississippi, held in J ackson, October 23d. 1903, was not called
fo r the pu r pose of dealing further with any question that had been left
su!'lpen decl by this Committee, as t o the liability of the Rev. Quincy Ewing
£or presentment on the charge of having violated the ~larriagc and Divorce
Samford University Library
10
Canon of t he Church . The charge agains t the Rev. Quincy E w in g was
passed upon finally by this Committee at its meeting February 26th, 1902.
(Signed)
" GEORGE C. H ARRIS,
"President Stand ing Committee, Dioces.e of Mississippi."
When the Committee met, however , it was quickly perceived t hat the
o:tly charges in circula tion ·'affecting Mr. Ewing's char acter as a cler gyman " appeared to r est upon a mis inter pretation of the Committee's
p:u t and fi nal action relative to the Morris marr iage; a m is inte rpre tation
which would have been im possible, had information a n d advice been
"O•ll!;ht from that Committee by either the Bishop of Alabama or the Bishop
of Mississippi. T her efore, the following Preamble' and Resolution , introduced by Judge Brame, and voted for by the seven mem ber s of t he Committee prese nt, was promptly adopted:
" Wher eas, This Committee, on February 26th 1902 after due con sidera' ion of the men"ts of the complaint agains t the Rev. Qu incy Ewin g in r e~ pec: t of an alleged viola tion of Title 2, Canon 13, of the General Convention
of the Chur ch, in officiating at t he marriage of the Re v. Cl_larles Morris on
JnnE' 3d. 1901, adopted the following resolution: 'Resolved, That it is the
!'ense of this Committee, that the re shall be no presentment made of t he
t{<> \ ' Quincy Ewing for t h e celebration of the marriage of the Rev. Ch a r les
:\!orris and :'\Irs.
, in June, 1901, under Title 2, Canon 13, Section
2. of the Digest, because of the settled inter pr etation by the Bishop of this
Dio<·ese of the Canon of :\Iarriage and Divor ce:
" And, Whereas, A question has now been presented to this Committee
as tc whether its action in adopting this r esolution on Februa r y 26th,
1902, was final;
" Therefore, Resolved, That the action of the Committee at said meeting was final, on the
menls of the case, and that it was, and is , the judgment of this Commzltee, that the Rev. Quincy
Ewing was not liable, and is not liable, to presentment or tn"al on the said charge."
''1 certify t hat the above is a true extr act from t he m inutes of thP.
Standing Committee.
(Signed)
"WALTER C. WHIT AKER, Secretary .
''Jac kson, Miss., November 23d, 1903."
On the Ye ry day of the meeting of the Mississippi Standing Committee,
Uishop Bratton, though he had formerly insis ted that he could not "embat rass" Bis hop Beckwith by trans ferring to Alabama a clergyman whom
Bis hop Beckwith did not want to come into his Diocese, an d h ad mor e
recently declared that he woulu not " recede" from his pos ition, wha tever
might be the action of t he Standing Committee, mailed Mr. Ewing
a lt>tte r dim issory in t he "Canonical form" from Washington, D. C.
At th is time, Bishop Bra tton !;lad doubtless learned from Bish op Beckwith
whc was also in Washington, that th e latter was not dis pos ed to main tain
! on ~Pr his opposition t o Mr. Ewing's r e moval to Alabama.
The " L etter Di missor y in Canon ical For m" was sent without delay t o
Bis hop Beckwith . Under date, November 4th, 1903, he wrote to Mr . E wing
aclmowledgi ng r eceipt of the same, informing him that his name would be
placed on the list of the Clergy of Alabama on this day, a nd h oping he
would "find h imself equal to the responsibilities he h ad assumed."
Mr. E wing took char ge of the Church of the Advent, Sunday, Novem ber
Samford University Library
j
),
11
11th, and has been ever s ince fulfilling the duties and " respons ibilities" of
th<> Rectors hip, with entire sat isfaction to us and the congregation.
W e s upposed, and ssuredly had good reas on to suppose, that all t rouble
with the Bishop was at an end, so far as the due settlement of the Rev.
Mr. Ewing as our Rector was concerned . In J anuar y las t , the Bishop
vis ited our Parish and con firmed a class. While in the city, be was called
on by Mr. Ewing, and offered enter tainment by a member of this Vestry. He
had nothing to complain of in t he measure of courtesy extended him on the
oocas ion of his visit.
II.
May lOth, 1904, some days after the adjournment of the recent Diocesan
Coun cil, which our R ector atten ded, an d where our Par is h was represented
by a full lay delegation, Mr. E wing received a letter from the Rev. Dr .
Cobbs, Secretary of the Council, the purpor t of which was that Mr. Ewing
could n ot be enrolled as Rector of t he Church of t he Ad vent, because at the
date of his election, October 27th, 1903, t he Bis hop claimed not to have furn isbed evidence to this Vestr y t hat he was a " qualified cler gyman." The
BiElJ.op's memoran du m s howed, wrote Dr. Cobbs, that such evidence had been
·
f urnis hed by him, N ovem ber 4th, or 5th.
A few days later, the Bishop's pos ition was made k nown to the Vestry
in a com munication received from h im, which was : That be would decline
to per mit the enrollmen t of Mr. E wing as Rector of the Church of the Ad\·en t,
until the Vestry s hould again elect Mr. Ewing to the rectorship o f this
Church, and n ot ify him (the Bis hop) of t heir action .
The Ves try met on May 24th, th e Senior Warden by request of :VIr.
Ewing presiding at this meeting, a nd unanimously resol ved, after reciting
at s ome leng th their reasons for so doing, that they had al ready done everythlng required of them by the Canons in the election of Mr. Ewing, and t hat
the Bishop's contention for s trict complian ce with Title 2, Canon 3, Sections
1, 2 and 3, was not, in their opinion, made in good faith. We believe t hat
these resolutions were forced upon us; t hat we were amply justified in
adopting them, and that no fair-minded man will take a different view of
the matter, having given the following summar y of fact s careful and unbiased consideration:
It will be recalled that we first elected Mr. E wing in August,
.1903, and gave the Bishop notice of t he election. Upon his reminding us t hat
we had not proceeded in a ccordance with the requirement of Section 1, Canon
3, Title 2- that the election of a Rector mus t be preceded by nomination,
and that, a fter n omina tion and before election, "sufficien t evidence in
writing" mus t be had from t he Bishop that the nominee is ''a qualified
clergyman of this Chu rch"-we promptly a nnulled said election, by n ominating Mr. E wing on September 21s t ; im mediately informed the Bishop of
what we had don e, and as ked for the necessary certi ficate of qualifica t ion.
September 27th, Bishop Beckwith promised, without condition, or any
manner of reservation, to give us the said cer tificate at once. October
17th, not having fulfilled his promise, he wrote letters, hereinbefore quoted,
to Bis hop Bratton and to Mr. Ewing, in which he stated that the Vestry
were extremely anxious to have Mr. E wing called to t he Rectorship of the
Church of the Advent; that he had had a "full, free, and franl< con ference with
the Vestry;" that " they wanted no more than he wanted, and he wan ted
Samford University Library
,
12
.-u.
rw mor"' Umn thvy .wanted:" tbat ..he tboroaabiJ uadenUod U...
n.•n flOW, nnl'l lllf!T tho roulhly uDdf!f'ltOOCI btm;.. tlaat lie wu ~ •
~
u th~+ n~v Mr P.wlna lato the Hlocete of Alabama " U. _ , . " be
" 11 lfiYttn • llll t" r dlmluory In "canonical form:" ud tbat wltb tbe V-'17
hn t 1! ''K"II" !l'llr the wholt' around .'' Ooe of tb. . lettei'J, be It retDellll..-.r d, '~'•• dlrtar ·~ hy a mttmbtr of the V•tl'1, ud all of tbeaa bore tiM
alr.naturr. ur th• fkml or Warden alon• wltb tbe Blabop'a, Tbe ...un VeRI'1
111 1 li urowl,.,! ,. of t hr.m ' "rf IJOOn afte r th•y were wrlttea. Had we DOt ben
111 th• " I• U• rw "au rfklr.nt fl \ l•le nrfl In 'l'' rlllna" fnJm the Blabop, tbat to bll
• uo" lrn1n• 111111 l.wll,.r" t h•, Rftv. Mr. Ewln1 wu a qualified elerumaa of
fll l"'f 1141tl to IM't P.lfl<' tNI to the Rectorshlp or tbe Cbureb of
"'''' 11111 fu ll oonaent to proceed to eleetloa, ~
'!:!I'd 011 '1• I~ (ntrr dulffiJID')' UUI USII'd by 8/sltop 8ratt011 br tM IISIIII/
11t 111111 I ur Cannn 3. Tltlo 2. doe~~ not r~ulre that tbe "aulfleleDt
• ih1rnc 11 In wrltlnJt'' r u rnl t~hr.cl by the Ul11bop aball be ID any partleular
I 11d1r 1Ja!s Can ll lff3}' N bt a11y fonr~, $0 10111 as It d«lafYS, ilf f•w wonls or
"'· d:1 t y cr
~tly, t/:Qithi' III'IDif lfOIIIUfl'rtl'd lor a rtetorsJrlp ill A/abalfll(l is "II qwU(fiN
~'71' 11 o/ tltlJ rku"dt," to tl:l BisJo.op's ht,dtdJt altd lwlil/. Hod 111'11101 1M ril/fl lo u m, ,:-,, -.us It r.« t:n assumptiott COMpllltd by cltoriltlbl' fa/Ut ilf tlw ltoltor Qlll/foir d«<hhfr
ttl tlu lliV;:>p tlu!, bJ t~ wrub:,t of til# lrt, rs abovtl q110tl'd, lw Utt11tdl'd to ftJffll tlw pt'OIIfiu
~r. ~, t us on S#fUtr:blr :J'ltlll-brtrlfdl'd to /11.r11Wt rlw nifkiiCI wltod aslc«J for as far b«lc
S,pt,r.Mr 2 I st!-lr.undr.! lo rt.~iw tl" "''r' fonr~, o/1,,. all tllat ltDd oce~~rnd b«IIWII luM
"' u , l st
rlt p wuA.s, of sfttbrr dowtt olfJ Slndi'q liS a ~liM statnt"ll of t•sdiiiiOIIy
1 1 , mea! "A'('rat
Rt~v. Ortl11cy Eu{nz?
of'"'
\\'Ill It llfl IIIIIUCcl!t•••l that on ()(oto!Mlr 17th, Blahop Beckwith eould DOt
It \n lnt•ndrd '" " tlf.) thllt Mr. Jo:wln• waa a qualified clerumao, becauM
ltfl t •d rfltu&e•n tu clnuht lhiU aur h wu )lr. Jo:wlns'• atatua before tbe meetJDI
nf lhfl 11 I IJIItl HIAIIII hiiJ Unmmlttet-. ()(•tuber 23dT He bad DO re&IOD wlaat0\ • r 111 •lflu llt thAt
•wh " '"• Mr. Ewln1f• atatua. and eYei'J reuoD to know
nnf. '" II• '•• tlatal l'lll"h It tltHIIlflt!tlonably wa~t. He had ret"elYed a letter from
l ll•ht•l• llrAII•m urutM ''"' ~· (k'tobctr 3d. r@rtlf)'IDS that Mr. ICwlas wu "a
l'r•'1ll) IN 111 K•iOd ' " '""" " In the I>IO<·~ rlf Ml•t.lppl," and tbat bJ Blabop
'lmuon hu "'" Rl'r."t•h ld • • "a quallrtf.ld r.leruman." He bad, u alreadJ
IHA "f'c'l, v.hll• In J•• kaon, II .• 8(!1•t~ml~ r 29th. approaebed tbe ReY. Oeorp
,. II r-rl11, II U . Pr t.lt!nt of thP. l'll• lu lppl StandlDI Committee, wltb tbe
t1Ut"allnn " llr llarrt•. • ·hat would you baYe done. bad llr. biDS applied
1' ''"for a l111tcr dlm luorr tn AlabamaT" and bad 10ttea the nplJ, ' 'I would
"
J loll~ttly ha\'f! tch"" lt. "
Ue ba•l no eauM to doubt tJae 8004 R&Ddlaa
n I QU 1Uicatlou Ill! a t'!l ~':~)' man of tM Ru. Mr. I:WIDI: for eauee dlcl DOt
r'l•t
t thn (Jal
uf l r. Jo:wl n«'• flr11t election to tbe Jt.c:tonblp ot tiM
\ th nt f'tum:h1 hlllllta n dlnl l n the DloceM of Ma.t.tppl WM u , - u 11w
d
11
nr. :If
Mususlppl.
If Blabop BeelnrltJa ba\'tq ''Mud
r H'tm• afft'd1111 Mr t:wtna·• eharade r u a cJeruaau, aD4 belq r.&l7 ,._
l'f 11 d br tbnm, bad lltlen d lt!pOMd to d•l falriJ wltb tbla V•trJ aa4 wWI
h tt111h15, II~ 'llluUid al Onct', M fon ~- lft)l. laaYe . .t l a l - Ia
f'Ontmu ulntlon .. llb th• MlMIMlppl 8tandlq Oota_.U.. ... ....,_.
"t1ntbnr 11'""' W'al o r wu noc llD7 au'bltaoc. to ta.. ..W ......_ He . _
ouiUI ! I•J lbl11 \ 'e.ll)' ol Mr. Ewl..-. aoaai..UO. .........., U.. ... M
Nlttll1 ta\ 1ott•n a ll nH!ded hatonaaUoD fro. t1ae omo.n e1 t111e Ill nl • •
ndlnt OommlttM wl tbla twn(J·Mr 1aoan. If• .,...._ ... Ud ..,.
Samford University Library
13
neteat ~. Bteltop BeckWith alaaply c1»u 10 a•mf
d.ubl ron min~ th..
qullftc:atloa aad sooct alandlna u a c1~110 man, In a ncl &bbotln&; dl
• u1
KeY. llr. Bwlnc. who will be found to •Patro\c and dr.f nd hb mufW! In
plt'adlq aucb proft!Med doubt by W1l.J' of Ju•tUicatlon of h!A rallur 1o flamt•h
tbe " eYiclence In wrttJns:· u ked for by t hl \' tr, StltJtl!ml r tiel . 111111 h
blaa unconcllllonally prom lied. ~ l•teal bt!r ~7th 1'
.
Wft bad no remedy to com l)ftl rumpllanc:-a • 1Ut our tt'QU t, " h n • Alt" t
for the Ol1bop'1 ~rtlfleat~ If be failed tu romt•l)' •lth our r~u t ,. h• u ll
wa11 hie duty to do 10. he .... I~Ct /<~~tt¥r ,.·itbt '14 10 tdt~ ltd.c ~ t(
"
t1i11rw 011 /tis pan to 011r ,,ba,.,sslflttrt.
l.et dfatlncllon be f'learly ma de. bet ween th Ulfl hn&l'l canonh 1 riJI'.: to
to ree~lve In hl1 OIO<'f!l'e a cl••r•u•man "hn •lhl not ltrln,; •lth him "
le Ut'r dlmluoriln a c~rt.aln fo rm, ancl t h•• llls huJI'K ditty '" I'NIU> 1u tt ' t'
a d fl reyman·• qu ~llCir':u ton and aood BIAn•tlng, If, a a mau ..r ur fAll, hn l..,
llh•lmt•
uttllltfled and In lood e landln c In th~ l>rO<'m~e of his c'tlnonlt> '' tt'1!1dott
J~kwlth mlaht we ll have declined to NM!eh«) t r. t:•·lng In thlil Ul•te
, •lith.
o ul a tettu of trus te r ln the fo rm 11u u ~ t~l hy th~ C'ano n Ho diJ'CIInln£, hr
would have been c learly within hla lawful r•r~ruKath'l. Antl "'"ll ha•l th
l~tter ~n preaented to h im In thf! uaual fnrrn, h ntiKht h"'" drelln 1 to
ac~JU It ror elx months. or until lut·h t lrnc u an In'' tlg tlon hunltutrd In
thr. lllocese of Ml• ln lppl upon his dt>mancl ha•l l.een c urna•lt•too
d~llne
Rut . In bealtatlna afte r a ~o abl~ tlmo, to c fl rtlty tu ua tlallt Mr ":"lrllc
was a qualified clerl)•man or t hll Churrh, IIJIIC'II h htR OO)'nlld Qlletillon hi
Rtatlll ), Blabop ~kwltb wu jul ll)' ll&hl ~ 111 r.cntnarf'! for fa llur tu JK'rfunn
hi.- f'anonl<'al duty, and ror unwarrallh!tl &BI"-' r'illun ,. t IILJOII M r. l!~lnR '~-'
<'harac ter u a c ltrl)'man.
It Bishop Beckwith htJd the rl1bt to ln siBt, urach r Tiel•• :!, ,~,.,wu 1. thttt
Mr. Ewlnl mul l be recularly tranat«>rt("(l frum Mlll&IMIIIJII tu ,\ 1 lmna • hc•f•Jr•
he (Ill shop Beckwith) could C~'rtl fy to u" Mr. t:• lnlc'li ra uallf lr~ll .. u u A
t•lergyman, tbua enabiiDI ua to proceed tn clr!C't Inn : unduuhlcNII)' he Ius 1110
rls ht to ln1l1t, that any c le rJymao. any • hrm,, wanted fur tb" ItO! tnlllhh• ur
the ir church by any Veetry In thla l>toc• • na111H be r • 111larly tra n!if~rr· J to
this Dloceae, before he Ia e lected to a R4M·tol'llhlp •·tthha II A un..-11) IIIICh cu1
• tu a dt'JCr !
tnterprelatlon of tbe Alabama Canon wer~ I''"IIJ(JIIlN'OilJj
Plainly &ad empbatleallr. It Hlah OJI lk!ckYdth did n o t
,
t o furnl~th
u lde nce In wrlllnc tbat Mr. Ewln~~t wa a qualified " ' rgyman. ooforc hi!!
third election to tbe Rectorahlp or our Pari h: lhf!U w tb flllt nt. th at
tlrm
J or C&Don S, Title 2. <»Dfen a preropthe upon thr IJillh o&•, b
a hcd cbBt
preroptiYe: and to the extent, tbat tho ld
tlota of th~ u ld ' anon nd
'ntle bu In Yle w the protection of V trl and Con,;rea.atlona, lUi nl(Julrn·
mat wu amply met by t.bll \"eAtry, Ia tbal w waltt"d till nlaho p llraHon hAd
ct YeD Mr. Bwlq a letter dlaaiMorr In the rqular form OOfnr el t h11r him
• tblrd UDHt: banns In aahad B labop IJoeockwlrh'• .-nuw • tatl!mttnt to lll•hoJt
Bratton: ••Jt you c:aa ... your way eJqr to ~~tlve ,.,, •:w1n1 th IMter dlml•·
•n" Ia auaonleal form, I will welcome blm Into thb ut
", 101t hbti t unh"r
dat...,..t Ia wrttJq to llr. .Bwtaa.-"Tbe momttnt IIIJ!bop lln~ttoo ran l ft'n
11M tbe lettM dlmlelor7 ID eaaocaleal fo rm, I will w loom,. )OU Into t bl• Uk•·
........
Samford University Library
14
after Bishop Bratton wrote the letter dimissory in "canonical" form. This
letter was written, as we have already pointed out, in Washington, where
Bishop Bratton and Bishop Beckwith wer~ together, attending a Missionary
Conference. As stated by him in a telegram to the Vestry, dated October 23d,
1903, Bishop Beckwith knew at once from Bishop Bratton of the action of the
:\1ississippi Standing Committee, and he could not have failed to know at
once that Bishop Bratton had written the. letter dimissory. Why, then,
did he not send us the "certificate" at once, being fully aware, as he was, of our
anxiety that Mr. Ewing should take charge of our Parish at the earliest possible moment, and knowing, as he did, that the only obstacle in the way bad
heen removed ?-if he was of the opinion that the "certificate" was necessary
to a valid election, after the exhaustive conference between him and this Vestry, October
16th, and tile writzng- on his part of the letters of•October I 7th?
On December 26th, more than three months after we had first asked for
the "certificate; " more than two months after the conference of October 16th,
and more than two months after Bishop Bratton wrote the "Canonical"
letter dimissory, Bishop Beckwith wrote to the ·vestry as follows: " From the failure of the Vestry of the Church of the Advent to send
me Canonical notice that an election has been held to fill the vacant Rectorship of the Church of the Advent, Birmingham, I conclude that my acceptance
o~ the Letter Dimissory into this Diocese of the Rev. Quincy Ewing was not
1 egarded by them as sufficient certificate of the fact that he is a qualified
clergyman of the Church; and that they are, therefore, waiting for me to
send said certificate, as required by the Canons of the Diocese of Alabama. I
oeg hereby to certify to your Vestry that the Rev. Quincy Ewing is a qualified
clergyman of the Church."
This, more than seven weeks after he had written to Mr. Ewing, November
·lth: " I hope you will find yourself equal to the responsibilities you have assumed!"
Comment would seem to be unnecessary, but we may pause here to
;nqnire, if it is possible that the Bishop intended to express the hope, that
:\ir . Ewing would find himself equal to the responsibilities of simple canonical
residence, at larg-e, without specific duty assigned, in the Diocese of Alabama?
--and to point out that evidently the Bishop did not consider it necessary for
the "certificate" to be in any particular form. If his acceptance of Mr. Ew:ng's letter dimissory was sufficient "evidence in writing" as to Mr. Ewing's
qualification as a clergyman, why was not his readiness declared in writing,
October 17th, to welcome Mr. Ewing in the Diocese of Alabama, the moment
snch a letter should be given, also sufficient evidence that he considered Mr.
Ewing a qualified clergyman, the said letter being given? Why was it not
evidence on which this Vestry could lawfully and regularly proceed to elect
::\1 r. Ewing, October 27th?
Not until May 14th, 1904, did Bishop Beckwith by word or syllable, written
or s poken, intimate to Mr. Ewing that he-the Bishop-regarded his election as
Rector of the Church of the Advent as invalid or irregular. Was this fair treatment of a clergyman of the Diocese, who, since coming in:to it, had dealt genPrously with the Bishop, and extended him every courtesy? Mr. Ewing attended a session of the Diocesan Council in Tuskaloosa, Wednesday, May
:.!rd ; met there both the Bishop and the Secretary of the Council, and by
neither of them was he informed that his status there was not that of the
llector of the Advent Parish. Nor was this information g-IVen by the Bishop, directly 01
Samford University Library
15
indirectly, to any one of the five members of this Vestry who 'were present at the Council as
delegates.
We are reliably informed, and do here state as a fact, t hat several clergymen now serving as Rectors of parishes in this Diocese, called to their r~c­
torships during the administration of Bishop Beckwith, were not elected and
cal~ed in strict compliance with Sections 1, 2 and 3, of Canon 3, Title 2. Yet
th~ Bishop has permitted and ordered their regular enrollment as Rectors of
the parishes in which they are serving. The Bis hop was reminded of t his
fact by our Rector in the following written s tatement, May 23rd, 1904:-"1
would call your attention to the fact, that the requirements of Sections 1, 2
and 3, of Canon 3, Title 2, were not met in the case of several cler gymen who
have become Rectors of parishes in this Diocese during the past twelve
months. The validity of their rectorships, I understand, you are not disposed
to question."
Of this reminder the Bishop appeared to have taken n o note, in his reply
to Mr. Ewing, dated May 24th, 1904.
It is already a part of this record, that Bis hop Beckwith did in J anuary,
1904, v is it our Parish and confirm a class presented to h im by Mr . E wing,
thus clearly confessing Mr. Ewing's right to present t o h im such a class in
t.he Church of the Advent. He has by s everal communica tions addressed to
Mr. Ewing, between November 4th, 1903, and May 14th, 1904, recognized him
as being lawfully in charge of this chu rch. Did th e Bishop suppose that he
was violating a canon of the Diocese in so recognizing Mr. Ewing? It would
be interesting to learn what Mr. Ewing's status in relation to the Church of
the Advent was by the Bishop supposed t o be, and on what was based Mr.
Ewing's lawful right to have charge of this Church, between the da tes above
-mentioned. For Section 1 of Canon 3, Title 2, which requires that before
electing a Rector a Vestry mus t have procured from t he Bishop s ufficien t
evidence in writing that the person nominated is a qualified clergyman, lays
down this same procedure as necessary to be gone through with by a vestry
in secun'ng for their pan'sh a Pn'est-in-charge.
In other words, t he same
Section of the same Canon and Title· on which Bishop Beckwith relied
in his contention that Mr. Ewing's rectorsh ip of the Church of the
Advent was invalid, would compel him to asser t t hat, for more t han six
months, Mr. Ewing had been unlawfully Priest-in-charge of the Church of t he
Advent; and to admit that he knew of, a nd not only passively condoned, but
actively sanctioned, this unlawful relat ionsh ip between a cler gyman and a
parish in this Diocese. Is the Bis hop prepared to make such an asser tion
and admission! !
Monday, June 6th, 1904, this Vestry met and for the fourth time elected
Mr. Ewing to t he Rectorship of the Church of t he Advent, after adopting
certain resolutions which explain this action , and are h ere copied :
"Birmingham, Ala., June 6th, 1904.
"Whereas, This Ves try at a meeting held May 24th, 1904, to take action on
a communication from the Bishop calling in question the regularity of the
election of Rev. Quincy Ewing as Rector of our Parish, October 27th, 1903, did
resolve that we had done all that we were required by the Canons of the
Diocese to do, to Insure the legallty and regularity of the aforesaid election
of Mr. Ewing- reciting our reasons for so resolving; and did make known
to the Bishop our action at the said meeting, May 24th ; and,
Samford University Library
-;-"'11- - - - - - - r.aus uno -
10
''Whereas, The Bishop stil l declines to order the enrollment of Rev. Mr.
Ewing as Rector of our Parish, on the ground that he had not at the elate
or :'llr. Ewing's election, October 27th, 1903, fumished evidence in writing to
tlli>· Vestry that he was a qualified cler gyman; and,
"Whereas, 1n a communication addressed to our Senior Warden by the
Scnetary of the Council, it is stated by the said Secretary that he h without
discTetion in the matter, and cannot, unless so directed by the Bishop, enroll
;\II'. Ewing in the Journal of the Diocese as Rector of the Church of the
\d\·ent:
"Therefore, In order to remoYe from the Secretary the obstacle which
prevents him from enrolling Mr. Ewing as Rector of the Church of the Advent,
and to avoid further strife and dissension as between ourselves and the
Uishop (which it was never our will to bring about);
''Be it Resolved, (1) That we proc:eed at once to go through the form of
again electing :\l r. Ewing to the Rectorship of our Parish ; and,
"Be it Resolved, (2) That this action in again electing ;\lr. Ewing is
positively and emphatically no admission on our part, that we question for
one moment the legality and regularity of his election, October 27th, 1903, but
bon the contrary taken with full assurance on the part of this Vestry,
t~nnnimously, that the said election, October 27th, was in all r espects legal
8ltd regular, and that the validity of Mr. Ewing's acts as Rector of our
Parish, since November 4th, 1903, is on no ground open to doubt."
We thin!< we have shown beyond question that the Bishop did furnish
us sufficient eYidence in writing to meet the requirements of Section 1, Canon
3, Title 2, ll'~fore :\lr. Ewing's election. the third time, October 27th. But, if
any shaclowly technicality is relied on to the conclusion, that such evidence
was not furnished by the Bishop prior to the above-mentioned date, there
rPm::tins not even the shadow of a technicality with which to repel the cont ention, that he ought to have furnish ed it prior to the said date; and when
it was fumished it properly related back in legal effect to the lime when it
should have been furni shed.
/Ve are safe in saying that no intelligent court in the land
would take issue with this proposition.
At this date, June 9th, 1904, the Bishop has been notified in due <·anonical
form of :.rr. Ewing's fourth election as Rector of the Ad,·ent Parish.
\Ve conclude our statement with the hope, that we ha\'e now exhausted
the chapters of a very disagreeable experience, entirely unsought and
u n~n tici pated by u s.
SIGNED:
\\'. T. ARCllER,
R. II. PEARSO::\, SJ·::'-IJOR WAR]) J•:;o..-,
ROBERT JEMISON, )l'NIOR \\'.\ JWE;o..-,
s. E. 1'IIOMPSON, TRI•:.\S.
E. l\1. TUTWILER,
RUFUS :--1. RHODES,
E. P. RIGGS,
S.-\..i.\IUEL E. GREE::\E,
CHARLES ROBERTS,
ROBT. A. TERRELL,
]. B. COBBS,
H. K. 1\liLNER,
JOliN V. COE,
S~-;cv.
Samford University Library