Christendom's Reunion

Auckland Star, Volume LXIX, Issue 66, 19 March 1938, Page 14 (Supplement)

Christendom's Reunion

The reunion of the Churches is in the news just at present. Some weighty pronouncements have been made by the Archbishop of York, and these have been commented upon by leaders of the free churches in Britain and overseas. We must confess that, in our ignorance, we are a little puzzled as to just what is being aimed at; neither can we work up any real enthusiasm upon the subject. We are inclined to believe that men are incurable problem hunters. That it is as natural for man to be searching for problems, as it is for an ape to be searching for fleas. We cannot conceive the idea of a proßlemlese world. A friendly argument provides a most popular masculine diversion, and as much *U3 we deplore the party spirit in politics, we do not believe that democracy could exist without euch divisions, because they are the logical outcome of political freedom. The reunion of Christendom is just another of these problems. Except in relation to the Western Church we fail to recognise the disunity, and even in that direction the differences are not quite so formidable as at first they appear to be. If unity means complete unanimity- in matters of doctrine and ceremonial, then such * unity utterly unattainable outside an ecclesiastical autocracy. Unity and discipline go hand in hand under & spiritual dictatorship, and, providing that dictatorship is benevolent and uncorrupt, we have nothing whatever to say by way of disagreement. Unity in diversity Is the way of nature. Outside my study window there is an oak, a plane, a beech, a totara, and a pinua insignis. Their differences are obvious. The bark, the leaves, the limbs, and the branches are all so distinct in shape, texture and size that, in external appearance we fail to see a single outstanding resemblance. There is, however, a unity of princfple in the matter of growth, beneath these superficial differences. Sap, roots, trunk, I

5 Specially written for ; Week-end Pictorial

: -hy--1 The Rev. C. W. Chandler i

branches and leaves constitute each and every tree, hence, beneath the external dissimilarities there is that which governs the life and growth of them all | which makes for a deep and fundamental unity. Thus it is with Christendom. Modes of expression are almost as diverse as human temperament, but underneath these varied religious expressions there is a solid sub-stratum of truth which is universally accepted. Belonging to | this sub-stratum is the Fatherhood of God and the Sonship of Christ. A common impulse animates all truly Christian people, an impulse which has found and' which still finds expression in hymiiology and prayer. Whether we have been "sprinkled" during ' infancy or "immersed" in later life, we can still sing "Lead Kindly Light" or "Sun of My Soul." Whether we incline towards the idea of a Presbyter rather than a bishop, we can stilT blend our voices in singing "O Love That Will Not Let Me 1 Go," and in reciting the Lord's Prayer andvthe Apostle's Creed. It is variety that makes for distinctiveness, and distinctiveness which lends such interest to life. Outside a solidly united single Church, marching in step with Constantinople, Canterbury or Rome, we cannot conceive or imagine what is implied in the often repeated catch-cry of reunion. In poetry there is, shall we say, the lyric, the epic and the ode. Emotional expression demands variety of form. So, too, in music there probably is as much difference between Bach, Beethoven and Mozart as there is between Shakespeare, Francis Thompson and Rupert Brooke.

In art there are the various schools, Buch as the Flemish, the Pre-Raphaelite and the post-impressionist. Artistic expression cannot be confined to any one medium or method. Every artist or sculptor betrays his own individuality in his work. As in poetry, music and art, so in religion there are a variety of ways in which men give expression to the faith that is in them, and to their common instinct for worship. Within each of these spheres there is a comradeship. Poets, musicians and artists move in circles which are cornprised of those holding widely divergent views as to the best medium to be employed for the fullest expression of their varied gifts. Because art and religion deal with the qualitative rather than the quantitative, they are closely allied. Therefore, it is to be expected that in religion, as in art, there must be greatly varying mediums through which to express eternal concepts. At the same time there inevitably must be a deep spirit of fellowship between all earnest seekers after God. Nothing but narrow-minded bigotry can keep all from seeing the good in each, and anything in the nature of a spiritual monopoly is contrary to our conception of the Diety. "The wind bloweth where it listeth," and no one trefr can boast that the wind which has blown through her leafy tresses has left the rest of the forest undisturbed. We each have our own distinctive contributions to bring to the common storehouse, and although, as is only human, we may consider that our approach to God is the best approach, we must leave others free to think the same with regard to their varied allegiances. If we are as divided as the advocates of reunion would lead us to believe, why on earth do we continue so frequently to sing "we are not divided, all one body weT" Our contention, therefore, is that our divisions are more apparent than real. That beneath the diversity of form there is unity of principle. That so long as we cling to the ideals of freedom and democracy we must expect these political, economic and spiritual divergencies. That unless we are willing to sacrifice this hard-won heritage, which allows

liberty of expression to every individual, in favour of an ecclesiastical dictatorship under which every serious expression of a contrary opinion will be punished by excommunication, then we must continue to rejoice in that freedom, even though it frequently verges on the anarchic. A report on the Archbishop's Doctrinal Commission was recently published. This was a commission set up by the English Church in order to discover just how real the supposed divisions in that Communion really were. They have found that "in the profounder regions of fundamental religious thought they are united to a degree of which the world at large is wholly unaware," says the "Church Times." This, we contend, would be jusrt as true with regard to the varied denominations within Christendom were a similar commission set up with a determination to find the common basis of doctrine upon which we are all agreed. There is not complete unanimity between the members of any single congregation. There are varying shades of opinion. The emphasis is variously placed upon this or that aspect of Divine truth. But, despite these minor divisions within the narrow confines of each respective Christian body, each congregation ae a whole is as united as is ever possible among people of varied mental and physical make-ups. "In the first place (among Englishspeaking Christians) the reason for division, which seemed once to be based on spiritual principles about which no compromise was possible, have grown fainter than they were." Our contention is that they will grow still fainter beneath the searchlight of vaster issues associated with our common humanity. As presumptuous as it may seem for us to be venturing the opinions w® have above set forth, we do so under a sense of inward compulsion. Knowing that the question of how many angels could eit upon the point of a needle was once a hotly contended proposition amongst learned theologians, we cannot escape from the conclusion that upon the present question of reunion a great deal of our thinking is entirely out of accord with what we have been pleased to call a natural law, namely, that unity of principle is expressed through diversity of form.