"NOT PROMOTING TRUTH."

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19140, 25 October 1927, Page 11

"NOT PROMOTING TRUTH."

INCIDENT IN ST. PAUL'S. ARCHBISHOP REPLIES TO DR. BARNES. (DT cabli— prbss association— coptright.) (ACSTBALIAX AND K.Z. AMD SUN CABLT.) LONDON, October 23. The Archbishop of Canterbury (Dr. Randall Thomas Davidson), replying to Dr. Barnes, condemns the unseemly incident in St. Paul's, as not promoting truth, and adds: — ''But I think you misinterpret the vehement reprobation of cultured people of some of your recent utterances. I do not attach great weight to the denunciations of your gorilla sermon. I do not think many of your listeners hold the opinions you satirise. "I do not think they would recognise themselves as, wistful agnostics. "Nobody desires to drive you either to Rome or to Tennessee. The words causing indignation are those with which you deal with the Communion. Many intelligent laymen and clerics have approached me on this matter. I intensely dislike Press discussion of such subjects, and I purposely refrain from discussing in this letter the doctrines involved, but I am ready to go into the question with yourself. "One or the first steps to help those fitting the Church to be the nation's spiritual guide is very careful language I when dealing with doctrines. In your legitimate desire to denounce a few Anglicans holding the doctrine of transubstantiation you so spoke of the Sacrament as to give real offence to devout Churchmen and Churchwomen. "Your words may be interpreted as reprobation and almost contempt for tho great mass of Churchmen. I think, if you considered their implications, you would modify the scope of your negative and destructive statements. We bishops can lead only if we walk with all lowliness, meekness, and long suffering, giving diligence to keep unity of spirit in tho bond of peace." [Prior to the commencement of a recent service in St. Paul's Cathedral, at which the Bishop of Birmingham, Dr. Barnes, was to preach, the Rev. G. R. Bullock-Webster, vicar of St. Michael, Paternoster Royal, London, publicly denounced Dr. Barnes and accused him of heresy for his utterances on the Church and the theory of evolution. Dr. Barnes, in an open letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury, relating to the subject, reaffirmed his opinion that there was no truth in transubstantiation, and said that nobody could discriminate between consecrated and unconsecrated bread. "No man shall drive me to Tennessee or to Rome," he said. "The officers of the national Church must not fear, but welcome new knowledge, and maintain all that is sound in the ancient doctrine."]

DR. BARNES CRITICISED. CONTROVERSY REACHES CLIMAX. (AUSTRALIAN AND »•»• CABLE ASSOCIATION.) (Received October 24th, 9.40 p.m.) LONDON, October 24. The Barnes controversy reached a climax on Sunday evening, when the Archbishop of Canterbury issued his rebuke to his brother. Bishop—an incident, almost unprecedented in Anglican Church history. Sermons on evolution and transubstantratTon were prea'ched throughout the country, and Dr. Barnes was defended in a few cases, but generally he was sharply criticised for not seeking to understand the viewpoints of those whom he condemned. Practically all the newspapers approve of the tone of the Archbishop of Canterbury's reply, quoting the passago in which the Primate accuses Dr. Barnes of ignoring and belittling the teaching of such Bishops as Andrews, Lightfoot, and Westcott, or in our day of Dr. Edward King and Charles Gore. Dr. Barnes is considering a reply which will be a private communication to the Primate. Several sympathisers called at the palace at Birmingham, but Dr. Barnes did not see them. The Archbishop of York, Dr. C. G. Lang, in an address to tho men of York, said: ''lt is humiliating that around the gracious and wonderful gift of Divine condescension there should arise an embittered controversy.. It is distasteful to criticise a man for whose ability and earnestness I have the greatest respect, but I deplore the methods whereby Dr. Barnes conducts the controversy. He seems almost obstinate in his inability to understand. He seems to me to impart into the discussions methods whiob may be appropriate in mathematics or physics, but are quite inappropriate in the sphere of spiritual experience." Cardinal Bourne, preaching in Coventry, caustically referred to a certain 'Prelate of an EliEabethan establishment" who made reference to the Real Presence in terms grossly offensive to millions who believed that doctrine. He had been sufficiently rebuked by members of his own communion, but he should make himself acquainted with the teaching of the Catholic Church on the subject of transubstantiation which Be wholly travestied.