THE BISHOP OF BATHURST ON THE ANGLICAN CHURCH.

Auckland Star, Volume XXX, Issue 7, 10 January 1899, Page 2

THE BISHOP OF BATHURST ON THE ANGLICAN CHURCH.

The Anglican Bishop of Bathurst, Dr. Camidge, has replied at considerable length through the columns of the- Sydney press 'to the aspersions cast on the Anglican Church by Cardinal' Moran' in one of his Advent sermons, referred to In a recent issue. Dr. Camidge says that 'had any other person than the Cardinal made such charges they might have remained unnoticed, but when promulgated by the head of the Roman Church, they assume an official character.' Dealing with the authority c-f the Church of England, which the Cardinal said is 'derived from Henry VIII:, who licensed the bishops to teach,'' the real fact Is, says Dr. Camidge, 'that the Church of England remained the same church, minus the Pope and certain doctrines and prao tices. of Rome. She reformed, herself through her own convocation; and aa Fuller, the .well known historian remarks, 'Nothing was done In the reformation of religion save what was acted by the clergy;, in, .theip.fion,v,ocation, or grounded upon some act of "theirs precedent to-it, ■With the .advice, counsel, and consent of these ,bteiiops. and- most eminent churchmen, confirmed On the post fact, and not otherwise, by the civil sanction according to the usage of* the best and happiest times of Christianity.' The next part bf the attack of. the. Cardinal beginning with an . assertion, that 'there are-persons in-high position In-the Church of .England who are unsound in the faith* and hence 'that the Anglican Church had departed from Holy Church, and had no apostolic authority.' To this the Bishop replies that as to the assertion Itself, 'we have only the Cardinal's word for it,' and With relation to the argument, 'it is a dangerous two-edged weapon, for surely he must know something of. the history, of his own church.' He supports this by. referring to the characters of such Popes as Callistus, Zephyrinus, Ltberius, Zosimus, and Honorius. The statements he makes respecting them, he says, 'are all historical facts regarding the Popes of Rome; if, therefore, the Church of England is to be cast out from her true position as a branch of Christ's Holy Church because there are—we have only. the Cardinal's' word for it—certain persons in high positions untrue to th* Catholic faith, what shall we say for the Church of Rome, which if the Cardinal's argument is valid, must long ago have lost its apostolic authority from having such unorthbdox Popes as those named?' Bishop Camldge then briefly deals with the 'Cardinal's sneer at the Lambeth conference,' and passes on to remark that 'at the conclusion of his address the Cardinal has accidentally stumbled upon a great truth regarding which I am in full, agreement with him when he says: 'The Anglican Church from its very origin, rejected the authority of St. Peter." By 'the authority of St. -Peter,' I presume he means the authority of the Pope; although what the Pope has really to do with St. Peter more than otner portions of the Catholic Church have, I am at a; loss, to discover, seeing that it is exceedingly difficult to prove that St. Peter was ever at Rome, and still more so that he was ever Bishop of Rome.' And then, after maintaining this statement, the Bishop says that 'taking the Cardinal's words to mean the authority Of the Pope of Rome. . . . We have 6hly to look into the history of the Church Of England through long centuries ... , to see how, in spite of most strenuous efforts made by the Popes' of Rome constantly, to bring England fully under the power of Rome, kings, archbishops, and bishops, priests, and Parliament as constantly resisted this, until at last, under GoS's good providence, this resistance culminated in the Reformation, the final act of a Jong struggle, and the Church of England emerged from the conflict purified strengthened, and invigorated for her work in the ages to come, holding as firmly as ever she did to the Catholic truth as expounded in the three great creeds, having 'reformed herself because she loved what was old, and did not love what was new.' The Bishop of Bathurst concludes his letter by expressing regret 'that the Cardinal has chosen this particular season of the year, when peace and goodwill should prevail, for his attack upon the Church of England, so utterly uncalled for, and so entirely unprovoked.'