THE BISHOP OF BIRMINGHAM.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19142, 27 October 1927, Page 11

THE BISHOP OF BIRMINGHAM.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE PRESS. Sir, —Mr Norris undoubtedly scores one against me. Bishop Barnes evidently did not neglect to speak of the holiness of St. Francis. I had only seen the cable about the vermin of the Saint, but Mr Norris had the whole sermon. The words we hear now from the Archbishop of Canterbury are sufficient reply to the last part of his letter. .

As for "Anti-Humbug," it is only after much hesitation that I notice his letter. If he thinks his words of any value why does he not put his name to them? And what a "nom de plume" to choose! Are humbugs only found in the sphere of religion? Your contributor, Mr Editor, in ; his most amusing and instructive Obiter Dicta, has often made us chuckle over the assumptions of Science. There are plenty of humbugs and quacks in that world. I hope your unknown correspondent will not take it amiss, but he really should use his name.

I will not ask you, Sir, for so much space as he, but I would like to repeat what I have said elsewhere, that the whole idea of the conflict between Science and l?eligion in which Science is depicted as always winning more ground and Religion always retreating in dismay is, to me, utterly false. It belongs to the age-long but never successful anti-Christian propaganda. The Church is the guardian of revealed truth. Discovered truth is quite another thing, though it never can conflict with revealed truth. When, then, a scientific theory is propounded. tho Church never rushes forward to gush over it. She knows better than that; she has had too much experience and is most a.nxious that her childreu should not be misled. So. she waits, and she finds very often that tho l.fceorv explodes, for history is strewn with the wrecks both of philosophical and scientific theories. _ So she hesitated to accept the teaching of Copernicus and Darwin, but in the one case came to see that his discovered truth did not conflict with revealed truth (which is not the literal interpretation of Scripture) and in the case of Darwin is. I believe, slowly but surely coming to the same conclusion. Bishop Barnes is helping her in this. .The Archbishop of Canterbury has no quarrel with what he calls "his gorilla sermon." but he strongly objects to his teaching about the Sacraments. That is the point to which I would keep, and which T thank yon. Sir, for allowing me to make as plain as I could in mv article. —Yours, etc.. CHARLES PERRY. St. Michael's Vicarage, October 26tli.