BISHOP JENNER.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 2542, 26 February 1869, Page 3

BISHOP JENNER.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LTTTELTON TIMES. !?ir,—The letter of '• Protestant Presbyter" assume* that the correspondence between the late Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archdeacon of Winchester proves that Bishop Jenner has been twice " censured for encouraging high ritualistic practices," But this is doubtful. The first point touched upon in the Archbishop's letter is that of the breach of discipline committed by Bishop Jenner in preaching in a diocese without leave or license. As regards the accusation of preaching unsound doctrine the Archbishop pronounces no opinion, but says that he shall recommend Bishop Jenner to publish a verbatim report of his sermo.i, if he wishes to vindicate himself from the charge of using the languHge imputed to him, When we remember that the Archlishop himself chose iJoctor Jenner for the Bishopric of Dunedin, and chose him out of his own diocese where he had laboured for fourteen years, it seems natural to conclude that the Archbishop felt fully persuaded that the publication of the sermon would clear him of the charge of preaching unsound doctrine. " Protestant Presbyter" passes outside the bounds of grammatical accuracy when he says that the Bishop has been continually taking part in various ritualUic practices, Continually means without interruption, incessantly. . Now, Bishop Jenner said the other night that if he were to show his diary it would be seen that he had attended churches of all kinds and descriptions. In a letter to the John Bull, written in January, 1168, the Bishop says:-" in point of fact I have accepted invitations to preach in all kinds of churches without troubling myself about the opinions of their clergy, and if numbers go for anything in such a matter, my ministrations In churches where a moderate ceremonial prevails have outnumbered by at least twenty to one those occasions on which 1 have officiated in what are called ritualistic churches" It may not be out of place to quote from this same letter an extract there given from a letter to a friend in 1851, in which the principles held by the Bishop then ami now are enunciated. " On the whole, then, my theory is this: I consider none of these things (certain details of ritual) essential in themselves, but the principle of obedience and of doing one's best that the English ritual should lose none of its Catholic character I do consider essential." ' Dr Jenner's appeal to be judged by the practices of his own parish church Beems very fair. ■ ~..>. 1 As" Protestant Presbyter" does not seem to attach value to the Bishop's words qf ex-

pjanation and denial, Jet lijm join with the . members of the'tauten of England attending St. Pauj'a Church, Dunedin, and implore the Metropolitan to accord to Bishop Jcnner a license to preach. If be should preach false doctrine, has not the Church of New Zealand power to expel him ?' We seem to have forgotten that we have no need to mako doetrine a subject for newspaper controversy or for discussion at public meetings. The Church of New Zealand baa a freedom of action which should enable her to cast out from her midst any false toacher: we are not fettered as the Church is in England. Have we confidence in ourselves ? Let us act. But whatever is done, let it he done in an orderly manner, aud with judicial calmness. Our system of church government is on its trial. What confidence can churchmen feci that the Church of New Zealand. is br md enough to contain a tribunal of lis,own jf they see among members of theSyjioda.d.is.-, position to condemn a. man unheard, if ono dignitary of the Church, a member of the Gqner.al Synod publishes a one-sided, sjf'y toeasing the prejudice against a njahMtot to be placed on 1 his trial before binY, and a " Presbyter"' refuses to believe the Bishop's defence, It may be urged that even without positive false teaching the practice of ritualism is 'in itself Roman. Let the General Synod say so, and prohibit ritual. I am' not an advocate for what Mr Coleridge calls "ecclesiastical millinery," but I think the fear of its taking hold of New Zealand congregations is not warranted by experience. Vestments are costly, hitherto our difficulty has been to raise enough money for the ordinary expenses of divine service; the purchase of a new surplice would ruin any vestry in the place. But perhaps" Protestant Presbyter" thinks the Bishop has brought a Bet in Mb carpet bag. Are these the"gifts" against which he warns us in such eloquent Latin. By the way, it is not a little inconsistent in such a sound Protestant to hive given us his peroration in an unknown tongue ? The following is a quotation from a note appended to the Import of the Royal Commission on liitnal. It is signed by John Coleridge and Arthur P, Stanley, " The Church of Kngland has always contained witbin it two parties-one caring much for outward observances and ceremonial; the other careless about, or even hostile, to them; and these two hisiorical parties represent two classes of minds, which always have, and probably always will exist, and proclaim their existence in a free country. If, therefore, the Church of England is to remain the national establishment of a free country, room must' be found in it, as far as is consistent with general uniformity, in such matters as may be deemed essential." Your obedient servant, A PROTESTING LAYMAN.