CORRESPONDENCE.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXX, Issue 406, 4 July 1908, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE.

[TO THE EDITOR.]

We do not hold ourselves responsible for opinions expressed by our correspondents.

Sir, —Will you allow a poor sinner to express an opinion in regard to the wordy warfare that has taken up so much of your space by some of the local clergy, in reference to doctrinal points ? I can’t quote Latin or the early fathers, but, thank God, I have sufficient intelligence to be able to grasp the truth of Christ’s teaching as set forth in the Scriptures, and it is so simple that even “the wayfaring man though fool,” can understand it. - Let each one read and satisfy his own conscience. according to‘the talents he possesses. God often hides from the “wise and prudent,” yet is revealed to “babes.” It entirely depends on the way we search for truth. Forms and ceremonies, wailing chants, blazing altars, may satisfy some people in their mode of worship, and I say, let them Allow their own particular form of worship to their heart’s content, if it satisfies and improves their spiritual life. Others again feel that they come into closer communion with Christ in the quiet of their own room. In my humble opinion, the Real Presence is in and overall, and manifests itself in the life and actions of every true believer, without resource to formalism of any kind whatsoever. What we want is more practical Christianity in every-day life, and not only for one or two hours during church time on Sundays. Apologising to the clergy and for the space I am taking up,—Yours etc.,

A Sinner.

Pro the editor.] Sir, —I am sorry to see from a letter hi your issue of Tuesday last signed “J. Young-Wood ward.” that he is aggrieved at the criticism bis recently published sermon has provoked. I think he might at least have waited tor an authentic, report of my criticism before c.'.urging me with bitterness. I can assure him that my feelidgs on reading his sermon were not bitter, but rather sad. I think he should now either show, wherein I have displayed bitterness towards him, or withdraw such an accusation. As to my right to criticise his sermon, I should like to inform him that I claim my right to criticise any statement made publicly by any person whatever, as I extend the same right to every other person. I had a further right to criticise his sermon, nay, I would have been wanting in my duty to my church and myself if I had not done so. Mr Young-Wood ward cannot be so ignorant of terms as not to see that by the language of his sermon he unchurched every body of believing Christians outside the episcopacy. Now, lam not of an aggressive disposition, but when a man throws out the statement that my church is no church, and my faith is no faith, I am be uud in self-defence to repudiate such an unwarranted and unmerited accusation, which I have in a measure done by the sermon I preached last Sunday morning. In reference to Mr Young-Wood-ward’s challenge to meet him on a public platform and discuss the subject matter of his sermon, I may say that while I am doubtful that any really good purpose will be served by such a proceeding, I cannot afford him the opportunity of saying that I declined to meet him in fair argument. I therefore accept his challenge, and will be prepared to discuss the three important points raised in his sermon either on a public platform or through the medium of the local newspaper (if the proprietor is agreeable) on fair grounds. In seeking common ground for debate I find it in the sixth of the thirtyninth articles of his church, which reads : —“ Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation ; so that whatsoever is read therein, or may be proved thereby is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation.” Here, then, we have common ground, namely, “ Holy Scripture, laid down by his own church in her articles, and a ground. that I accept. I agree then to discuss the following subjects with Mr Young-Woodward on the grounds of Holy Scripture—and Holy Scripture alone, not the prayer book, or his church cannons ; to me these carry no authority, and I cannot in ' any sense recognise them as bearing on the subjects to be discussed, and the sixth article already quoted renders them unnecessary. On the grounds of Holy Scripture, then, I submit the following subjects, as embracing the vital points raised in Mr Young : Woodward’s sermon, (i). Did the Apostles establish in the church as their successors an order of Bishops distinct from the Presbyters ? (2). Were the ministers of the church in apostolic times an order of priests ? (3). Are the sacraments of the New Testament —Baptism and the Dord’s supper —necessary to salvation? If Mr Young-Woodward is prepared to take the affirmative in these subjects, I will accept the negative. But let me reiterate that, the only grounds on which I meet him is that of “Holy Scripture.”—lam etc., ' Geo. K. Aitken,