SATURDAY, AUGUST 19, 1899.

Waimate Daily Advertiser, Volume II, Issue 36, 19 August 1899, Page 2

SATURDAY, AUGUST 19, 1899.

7 - ICveiix day now we see sotne- ' thing. ill the cablegrams about , > the Ritualistic movement at Home.: -tytattejs . seem to .have . come-jtp a pass lately, anti Parlia- , jnevit-has ,b s een asked to intervene, j ■I*o a = great 'manx people, Kifcual- 1 : i (t^aj/and Jtojnaii [seem,

convertible terms, but this is not so. The position of the High Church party in England cannot well be understood without knowing something of history, and of the movement in England known as the Reformation. Everyone knows that the Romans governed almost all the whole civilised world. Their empire was' practically world-wide, and even when the Roman power was overthrown by inroads of the savage nations of the north, it is a very remarkable thing that thG conquerors, instead of imposing their habits and customs on the conquered people, actually adopted or attempted to adopt the ways and manners of the vanquished. Thus the Gothic leader proclaimed himself the Roman Emperor, and as a matter of fact, all through the middle ages the theory of a Roman Empire was preserved in Europe right down to reformation times. There was always one of the European sovereigns called ' the Emperor' who in theory was greater than the others, xlnd as there was always considered to bo a secular head of the worldwide, empire, so there was also supposed to be an ecclesiastical head, who .was supreme in spiritual affairs. This was thought to be the order of things divinely ordained — the Emperor ruling the world in all secular matters, the Pope governing it on the spiritual side. What the reformatton did was to break up this unity of Christendom in respect to religious affairs. As far as temporal matters went, it had practically been broken up long before,, though the theory of the Emperor was still maintained. England was the first nation to openly sever herself ecclesiastically as well as temporally from the European confederacy of nations. But the Reformation proceeded on two lines, one political one or secular, the other religious_ As far as Henry VIII and his share in the movement is concerned, it was purely political. Henry wanted a divorce from his wife to which the Pope, for various reasons was unwilling to consent. The king accordingly persuaded Parliament to declare him — and not the Pope — head of the Church in England ; and practically as far as this king's reign is concerned that was all that was done. Henry all his life remained a Catholic, as far as doctrine wag concerned, but he declined to acknowledge the Pope as having any authority over the church in England, or to allow any of the large siims of money that had annually been sent to Rome by the English people to be remitted any longer. The church was to be the Church of England. Its doctrine was to be catholic just the same as before, but the King and not the Pope was to be its ■ liead. Afterwards certainly, what

were called the reformed doctrines, as expounded in Switzerland and Germany, were preached and taught in England, and were generally adopted by the people, but this was not till many years afterward. Now the position of the modern ritualists is one, we believe in the main, just similar to that of Henry VIII. They are Catholics in doctrine, practically, but not Roman Catholic. They claim that their church is properly called the " Church of England" — that it has always been so — that the reformation was for the most part a dangerous heresy as far as its main distinguishing doctiines are concerned, and that although claiming to be independent of Rome, and not acknowledging the supremacy of the Pope, they have a perfect right to call their church Catholic, and to claim that it is the identical church and form of Christianity toat was introduced into England by Augustine, about 596, A.D. It is not our business — not being an ecclesiastical journal — to offer any opinion on the question whether the ritualists are right or wrong in their aims or contentions, but whether the principle laid down by the reformers of the right of private judgment in matters religious can be said to have conduced to the unity or-strength qi their church is very much a matter of opinion. We shall have attained our object if we have made clear to our readers exactly how the matter stands, as it seems at present to be agitating all Britain.