Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SOLEMN WARNING BY ANGLICAN BISHOPS

British Israelism Beliefs A PASTORAL LETTER In a pastoral letter published in “Tbe Church Gazette,” a warning to the people of the Church of England in New Zealand against what is described as ‘‘the views which arc being widely propagated under the name of BritisbIsraelism” has been issued by Archbishop Averill and the six bishops in New Zealand.

The signatories to tbe pastoral are Archbishop Averill and Bishops WestWatson (Christchurch), Sprott (Wellington). Cberrington (Waikato), Williams (Waiapu), Fitchett (Dunedin) and Hilliard (Nelson). “We, the Archbishop and bishops of the Anglican Church in New Zealand, desire to warn our people against the views which are being widely propagated under the name of BritishIsraelism,” the bishops state. “Without reflecting on tbe sincerity of those who are pressing these views with such earnestness, we must nevertheless record our conviction that the views jn question are founded on grave misinterpretations of Scripture, of history, of ethnology and of language. c “Fact, Not Assumption.” “While the holding of them as a speculation may not be incompatible •with loyal churchmanship, yet the adoption of them as a cult or as a master-key to tbe understanding of the Bible and of God’s plan for the world does, in our opinion, seriously upset the proportion of tbe Christian faith. “A question of this kind is a question of fact, not of assumption. The British-Israel theory appears to us to begin with the assumption that the British are Israel, and then to go on to interpret Scripture and to seek for or assert facts to support the assumption. When brought to the ‘acid test’ of facts the theory fails.” In outlining their reasons for this statement, the bishops state that they believe that historically the theory rests on a misconception, as there was no deportation of the ten tribes en masse. They freely acknowledge that Jewish exiles and Jewish merchants •wandered far and wide, and add that there is nothing, except lack of evidence, to prevent them believing that Jews had travelled as far as the British Isles, though as a race Jews had no love for the sea. “Throw-back to Old Ideas.” . “But,” the bishops continue, “we believe it to be historically impossible to accept the British-Israel belief that in less than 100 years the comparatively small band of disillusioned and scattered Israelite exiles should have changed their religious, racial and cultural and even facial characteristics, and have then appeared as the vast nomad horde of expert horsemen and bowmen known as Scythians, who terrorised Eastern Europe and Media in turn. “And yet this is tbe keystone of the British-Israelite theory. “We believe that, subconsciously, the passionate desire to prove the British race part of the so-called lost ten tribes’ is largely inspired by a sense of racial destiny, and a desire to claim permanence for tbe prominent position in the world now held by the British people,” state the bishops. “The British-Israel belief is, in our opinion, * a ‘throw-back’ to the ideas and aspirations of the old Covenant and a failure to realise that in Christ all things have become new. It does not explain, but rather confounds, the Bible message of salvation. “We issue this solemn warning because we are convinced that many of our people, and notably some of those most devoted to the Scriptures, are being induced to accept an interpretation of those Scriptures which is quite at variance with the ‘good news’ proclaimed by Our Lord and His Apostles.”

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19351228.2.40

Bibliographic details

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 80, 28 December 1935, Page 10

Word Count
580

SOLEMN WARNING BY ANGLICAN BISHOPS Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 80, 28 December 1935, Page 10

SOLEMN WARNING BY ANGLICAN BISHOPS Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 80, 28 December 1935, Page 10