REPLY TO " HOLY CATHOLIC."

Kaipara and Waitemata Echo, 13 July 1916, Page 2

REPLY TO " HOLY CATHOLIC."

TO THE EDITOR

Slß,—Though I hold no brief for " Holy " Catholic," I must thank him for the straight-forward, sensible criticism of Rev. Lamond's sermon. He expresses ' views which, I feel assured, are held by a big majority of thinking people. Too long have we been shackled by creeds, which to many are only a name. How' many so-called Methodists, Baptists, etc., can clearly define their essential differences one from another? In most cases they say they are of such and such a -' sect, because they have been brought up, in that sect. Mr Jones, in his reply " rather begs the question "Holy Catholic" '." raised, or rather he proves the latter's ' contention, It is admitted that all worship together. "Why then the anxiety '. of the Presbyterians to renovate their ' Church, while "the sister one on the hill" ' meets all demands ? No one more than myself welcomes the spirit of co-opera-tion shown by the respective Ministers - in exchanging pulpits. Why not go further, and have one good service a week, rather than two poor ones? If unity is really the -object, let the sects organise and workUiecclhomically, and more efficiently^ ■ _onp^ building would easily accomm6dat;iE^:the congregation, and one, Minister;efficiently do the work in his own diertinct;;without over-lapping ; into another, or having another Minister

coming into his preserves. Christianity, not ChurchianitjßP^ counts, such an arrangement shoulasuit

all. In war time particularly, our resources should be husbanded, not dissipated in renovating a building for which there is. no need, and show practically, and not. by mere words, that " the " tinpot *' sects are really unitebm Christian fellowship.—l am, etc.,

F, R. KOLLBR. Kaukapakapa, July 10th., 1916.