THE CHURCH AND NATION BUILDING

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 2987, 26 January 1917, Page 6

THE CHURCH AND NATION BUILDING

g; r) —From tho outset the Eev. Mr. Whibley's arguments against Father Lockington seemed weak, and tho more he develops them the weaker his case becomes. He is endeavouring to show that the Church responsible for Magna Oharta. is identical with the National Church of England at the present day. The only identity he can fairly claim is that "of place. In matters of doctrine and worship, what the pre-Refor-mation Church considered is'vital, and revealed, the civil power flung away, or cut out of tho new establishment by Act of Parliament, so that practically nothing remained but tho bare walls of the religious edifices for the new church I "by law established." For instance, the Mass was dono away with, penance also, prefers for the dead, and other cherished praqticos and beliefs. I have no concern with tho merit or demerit of theso changes; my object is merely to show that they were made and that of course tho sameness of doctrine or worship was destroyed. Nor is it identical in church government, for the Church in England once admitted in the Bishop of Koine a primacy or order, a jurisdiction, throughout tho Catholic Church, and consequently in England; the Church at the close of Edward's reign had abjured the spiritual supremacy of the pontiff as a usurpation, and a tyranny, and had transferred it to tho Crown, whosoever might wear that crown, young or old, male or female, infidel or believer. For authority on these points I would refer Mr. .Whibley, to some of I

the most distinguished of modern historians, men who have made a special study of the subject from tho original documents, as Davis, Brewer, Dr. dairdoner, Dr. Maitland. The Church, of England dates her freedom and consequently her sopara- 1 tion from Komo from the reign of Henry VIII, and I am sure that. Mr. Whibley will find no authority of any; standing to show otherwise. The Council of Lardicer referred to by Mr. Whibley I have never heard of; the decree quoted has no bearing on. the issue at all; and the presumptuous reading of Stephen Langton's mind is merely amusing.—l am, etc., C-.F. [This correspondence is now closed.]