"PARMA" AND TEE ANGLICAN CHURCH.

Tuapeka Times, Volume VI, Issue 290, 21 August 1873, Page 6

"PARMA" AND TEE ANGLICAN CHURCH.

(To tU Editor.) Sib, — I was not a little amused at the snobbery and pseudo dignity with which your correspondent "Parma" rebukes the alleged vulgar language and untruthful criticism of the " Bruce Herald " on the recent lecture of Bishop Neville at Port Chalmers. He sets down the article as beneath his notice : then why notice it, and thereby import the controversy into your columns ? I have taken the trouble to read the article, and fail to see either vulgarity or untruthful criticism in it, and certainly no language "gratuitously insulting" either to the Church of England or the Bishop. I could wish that the writer had not alluded to the Bishop's reputed wealth as the reason for his election, but beyond that, there is nothing to complain of in the article. May I ask if the members of the Church of England are so very thin-skinned that they cannot bear criticism ? Is it so immaculate that it cannot bear improvement? Is Bishop Neville's position of basing church union on the recognition of Episcopacy as the true apostolic succession so conclusive, that those whom it places in the cold shade of what some designate "uncovenanted mercies" have no right to do what the writer of the article has done, viz., call it in question? It may be very well for " Parma " to lay the flattering unction on his conscience that he lives within the catholic enclosures to admire the Bishop's conclusions; but he ought not to expect those whom it so unceremoniously places without the pale of the Church Catholic to accept it with equal gusto. As this was the position in which the writer of that article found himself, "Parma" would have shown a little true dignity of charae, ter had he been more patient with it. May I further ask : Is this cornerstone of Christian union, as set forth by Dr. Neville, so very scriptural, or patristic — using that term of the first two centuries of the Christian era — as to place it above criticism ? Is it sacrilege to touch the divinity that hedges in a bishop ? Bishop Neville himself does not think so, or I am much mistaken. At all events he replied as if he did not to an article in the " Daily Times " on his lecture. "Parma" overlooks the fact that the Bishop's position virtually unchurches all non-Episcopalians. I suppose that " Parma " thinks that as the Bishop has taken the trouMe to show us his opinion, we ought to be very grateful, or at least be mum. I 'would not have noticed this letter but for the "touch-me-not" claims put forth by "Parma" on behalf of the Church of England and her bishops, and to Bb ow that the other side had really a call to speak. If there is anything strong in this letter, I wish it to be understood that it is more directed against the bumptuousness of your correspondent than against the church which he champions, widely as P differ from the position of the Bishop. — I am, &c, Cathowo.