NONCONFORMISTS AND CONFORMISTS.

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2488, 15 June 1915, Page 8

NONCONFORMISTS AND CONFORMISTS.

Sir,—Dr. Gibb, in his letter in Saturday's Dominion, refers to the error, very common with Episcopalians in New .Zealand, of speaking of members oi ether Protestant denominations as "nonconformists." He did-not 5 however, explain why it is an error. A coniorinist. in the limited meaning oi the word, is one who conforms to the .tenets of the State Church. As there as no State church in New Zealand, there are no conformists; and there axo no nonconformists. Hero all denominations are on the same footing, so it is mere arrogance for any one sec! to speak of others as nonconformists. Another instance of Episcopalian arrogance is the designating of theii bishops as "Lord Bishop/' and addressing them as "My Lord." Those bishops in England who are entitled tc tie prefix are entitled to it not because they are bishops, but because they have a seat in the House of Lords. Similarly, there are no parishes in New Zealand. _ In England and Scotland a (parish is a geographical district ■ recogJtused by the State. Here it is merely a;a ecclesiastical term, and has no meanirg legally or geographically. Another common error which appears daily even in your columns. Sir, is speaking of members of the Cabinet as (e.£.) the Hon. James Allen, The cor-

1 r . e s M e is "the Hon. Mr. James AJlen, for only the sons of barons are 'honourable" without the "Mr." lo leave off grumbling, and apropos to the instructions from the War Oiico c- poly two chaplains, a Roman j. Catholic and an Episcopalian one, be y appointed to the Hospital Ship: Somo d y e;l rs ago the War Office decided that tho maaagoment. of tlio Garrison Churches throughout India was rather outBldo its province, so it entrusted the management to the Metropolitan of Cal(j outta, i.e., the principal Anglican bishop in India. It should be borne in ie U . a ' l these churches wero built by io tho military authorities for tho uso of is troops; anel tho form of service j iii them varied with tho regiments r _ which happened to form tho garrison Is "f English troops were ~ there, tho service was episcopalian, if Scottish, presbyterian. The MetroDolitan at once bad the buildings "consecrated," then turned round and said . only episcopalian services can be held ■ , in these "consecrated" buildings. This u saused considerable stir at the time (it , was the early nineties), but lam sorry l , I do not know how the matter was ■ ultimately arranged; perhaps Dr. Gibb , can tell us. The War Office admitted ; that a surprise had been sprung on . them; -for though the possession of the •" churches had not been transferred, English ..troops were at the disadvantage ■ that their clergymen would refuse to officiato against the Metropolitan's der eroe. Perhaps the War Office has '' blundered again—l am, etc., is ~ CANTANKEROUS.. 1- Our correspondent is in error in some j, of. his statements as to the use of titles. ,0 Historically, every bishop was addresseel y as "Lord Bishop," not bv'virtue of any i 0 special giant, and still less because of I his place'in Parliament, but simply be>i r cause of his episcopal character. "Wbit- -- takor's Peerage" states: "As far as the ir matter of right is concerned, the title ■I 'Lord Bishop' belongs not only to English diocesan prelates, but to those also in our own colonies, since such of these tatter as possess patents (a form now 3 disused) had it therein expressly con--6 ve.ved; and even as to the English e bishops suffragan, when a small number q of. these wero created in the 16th cenx tury they "were addressed precisely as ,t bishops in general." Whftaker adds d that the matter at the present day is (j really one of custom rather than right, p We can find no evidence in support >. of our correspondent's contention that r- the Hon. James Allen should he addressed as the "Hon. Mr. James lj Allen.'.' No peerage we have consulted ,e makes any distinction of usage be;t tween the title"'Hon." as borne by the jf younger sons of earls, and ali sons )f and daughters of viscounts and barons, le and as borne by persons who hold or is na,ve held certain official positions in the 10 United Kingdom and the colonies. In 1- the "Colonial Office List" and other offip. cial publications-which we have looked ie UP- the usage is invariably the "Hon. i- J°hn Smith,."; etc. —Ed. Dominion.] le