THE LAMBETH CONFERENCE.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 20092, 22 November 1930, Page 16

THE LAMBETH CONFERENCE.

!'0 TK*5 eDITOS OF TUB PRESS Sir.—The Bishop of Christchurch hns spoken in glowing terms of Lambeth. That there is much of importance in the findings rf the three hundred Bishops no one can deny. That there is an element of retreat, and of disunion. is also plain. The gulf between Anclicnn and Free Churches lias been widened and deepened by the 1930 Conference. The English Bishops, or tin- section of them which conferred with Free Church leaders, put on record their recognition that these ministries and Churches are of God and that those who serve them are true ministers of the Word and the Sacraments.' The 1930 Conference did ' not

adopt the declaration. It had nothing hopeful to say. It turned its face to the East and fulfilled a tendency which Bishop Hensley Henson had deplored. "Given episcopacy, no superstition is too gross, 110 discipline too lax to disqualify a Church for the fullest recognition; wanting episcopacy, no Church however apostolic in labour or rich in- spiritual gifts can be tolerated." . . British Christians will have to face the issue whether the Church is created by its officers, or whether the officers are by the Church. "No Bishop, no Church," seems to be the Lambeth choice. The Free Churches l>clieve that the validity of the Sacraments depends, not in something that has been done to the minister bv a Bishop, but 011 that unrepealed word. "Where two or three are gathered in My Name, there am I in the midst." —Yours, etc., J. J. NORTH. November 21st, 1930.