CHURCH UNION

Evening Star, Issue 17329, 17 April 1920, Page 5

CHURCH UNION

[By the Bisnov of Ditvrdix.] It ■was said some time ago by. the Bishop of Peterborough that “the union of the churches would do more to convert the world; than all their separate missions put together.” If this is so, and probably it is not an overstatement, then it is the duty of all who love the Lord Jesus Christ to promote the ca iso of Christian Unity by all the means in their power.

It is a matter for thankfulness that for some time past thare has bet n a growing movement ’n this ducction, a notable 1 illustration, of which is furnished by Scotland. > For more than 20 years past there has been a linking up of some of the ■Presbyterian Churches, the latest development, being the proposed union of the • United Free Church with the Established (Presbyterian) Churhh of Scotlard. This has been actually approved by the General Assemblies of both these bodies; and no . douhv in due time it will be carried into effect. Then there is the proposed union •of the different branches of the Methodists while the writings of the Rev. J. H. .Shakespeare (Baptist), of Professor Cooper (Presbvterian), and the published utterances of t)r Horton (Ccmgregational•ist), and of other leading members of the • National Council ox the Evangelical Churches nt Home point to the possi- ■ bility .of the ultimate union of all these • different- Churches. with the Church, of 'England. Nor are tho Archbishops ot • Canterbury and of York and others of the Church of England unsympathetic with the movement, nor behindhand in helping it j while the Bishop of London has proi posed a definite scheme by which he con■ceives the union of the Methodist Church with the Church of England may be , effected.

It is possible, of course, that in this matter the leaders may be ir, advance of -the rank and file of the clergy and of the ■laity, anti without co-operation of the ■ rank and file the consummation of the unity which we all desire, and for winch we pray, will be impossible. In any case -the difficulties in. the way are very great, and cannot be lightly brushed aside. Thus tile differences which separate tiie episcopal from the non-episcopal churches arc ref aided by many as fundamental, and must e dealt with in their deepest and most ■(spiritual principles before M-e can hope for - a possibility of reunion. Such a thing, therefore, as an interchange of pulpits, ' which is sometimes advocated in good faith and with the best intentions, looks liks beginning at the wrong end, as though we could expect the ripened fruit from a plant which at present is in a tender and embryonic stage.* This is not the place iu which to discuss the causes which led to the expression of these fundamental differences in the sixteenth century—the Church of England must acknoM-ledge her full share herein—nor is there space to discuss principles of succession in the ministry and valid administration of the Sacraments. It is sufficient to point to the fact that on these subjects serious differences exist; that they are regarded as vital, and that many -devout Christian people regard them from diametrically opposite points of view. Nor is this all. The question cannot he confined to the various churches of the West. Thus, what about the ancient Orthodox churches of the East? These, through centuries of persecution and suffering, have borne faithful; witness to our Lord, and must be considered in any scheme of reunion which is really 1 true and comprehensive. Nor must we adopt any measures amongst ourselves by which unity witfe these Eastern churches would be imperilled. In other words, we must try to face the question from a supemational point of view if M-e are to promote a unity in Christendom which is at once evangelical and catholic. , From what has been said it vail be clear that the problem is not at all so simple as it appears at first sight; indeed, in some ways it is so complicated and certain factors which enter into it, are in some respects so antagonistic, that a soluit may seem to be well nigh impossible. And yet this is not the final word. Something can be done; only at the outset we must accept facts as they stand and not create a false situation by ignor Ing them; No good end would be served by minimising differences as though they did not .exist, and it would Ipe the extreme of unwisdom to adopt any .measures in the way of promoting unity in one direction and at the same time to produce schism in another. In this connection a manifesto which has been recently issued and signed by nearly 700 Wesleyan ministers at Home is not wit-hoot significance. In this manifest-3 it is stated in effect that while the said ministers “are not in any sense hostile to union with the other Methodist Churches or any other branch of the Christian Church, and are willing to do all in their power to pro mote union,” they are unwilling to take any step^which would cause defections and would hinder ultimate union on a much wider scale. This obviously suggests a principle which may well fce ‘kept in mind in any steps which may be taken.- And no doubt from time to time steps of a practical kind will be taken. For the situation, although beset with difficulties, is not hopeless. For. one tiling we ali desire unity, and on all sides the subject is being considered in a sympathetic way: again, there is a drawing together in real spiritual fellowship on tho part of many who are divided in the outward body of their belief : while if the present_ movement is inspired by the Holy Spirit, then if we keep our hearts open and sensitive to His guidance, our partial blindness may he removed, and we may come to see a way by which our Lord's prayer for unity—“that they all may be one”—may be fulfilled. We should not forget that while things often are impossible with men, with God all things are possible.

Of practical suggestions that have come already put forward we have a srmmarv In two interim reports which have been issued by a ■ sub-committee of the World Conference on Faith and Orderf. The conference itself is to meet in .America in 1921, at which representatives will be gathered from all the Churches throughout the world, with the sole exception, I believe, of ' the Roman Church; and the question of_ reunion will be discussed in all Its bearings. In the meantime a vast amount of information has been collected, and a sub-committee, consisting of leading men of different denominations and of widely different schools of thought, have issued a report, in which they state, inter alia;

' “Looting as frankly and widely as possible at the whole situation, we desire, with a due sense of responsibility, to submit for the serious consideration of all the parts of a divided Christendom what seem to us the necessary conditions of any possibility of reunion: “1. That continuity with the historic Episcopate should be preserved. 2. That, in order that the rights and responsibilities of the whole Christian community in the government of the Church may he adequately recognised, the Episcopate should reassume a constitutional form, both as regards the method of election of the bishop as by clergy and people, and the method of government ftLer election. It is, perhaps, necessary that we should call to mind that such was

.♦■Since the above was written the fol<lowing, pronouncement by the Archbishop k as keen received from England ; • I cannot imagine any method of dealing with a great and important subject (interchange of pulpits) less likely to accomplish. the end desired. Such individual action, however high the motive may be which prompted it, must, stir up a controversy necessarily one-sided and ill—informed, because it is ignorant of what ttiay ultimately be the proposals laid be- ' Church., and will certainly prejudice the ultimate decisions which may be reached. It may well create confusion and misunderstanding, in which the good hopes of greater unanimity among our Fellow _ Christians _ may be shipwrecked. In a matter involving issues so momentous ind hopes so high, just because we ail care bo intensely about it, our whole lotion must be guided by a spirit of >atience, purposeful and strong.” These reports are published, by thr Dxfofd U-Siv<«£ity Press. Price, 2d. . 4

the primitive ideal and practice of Episcopacy, and it so remains in many Episcopal communions to-day. “5. That .acceptance of the fact of Episcopacy, and not any theory as to its character, should be all that is asked for. ...

“The acceptance of Episcopacy on these terms should not involve any Christian community in the necessity of disowning its past, but should enable all to maintain the continuity of their witness and influence as heirs and trustees of types of Christian thought, life, and order, not only of value to .themselves, but of value to the Church as a whole. . . .

‘‘Within such a recovered unity we should agree in claiming that’ the legitimate freedom of prophetic ministry should bo carefully preserved; and in anticipating that many customs and institutions which have been developed in separate communities may be preserved in the larger unity of which they have come to form a part-”

It is possible that the above suggestions may bo modified at the actual comerence, which is to meet nest year; but in the meantime we shall do well to bring them into our thoughts and prayers. Perhaps we cannot do much more than this noM r , for it would not be wise on our part to try to anticipate the work of the Conference of Faith and Order of 1921, nor of the Lambeth Conference, at M’hich the "'hole question will be considered next July. If I may offer suggestions which might be of use, and by which no one would be compromised, I "should say: 1. Let all the different den emulations act together as much ns possible in connection with the great moral and social question _of the day. .We should be brought into sympathetic touch with each other, and our united witness for Christ would__ he greatly strengthened. 2. Would it be possible to adopt Bishop Gore's ■ suggestion of forming a study circle, consisting of ministers and laymen of different communions, for the sake of studying together tho original principles of the Church, the Ministry, and ’ the Sacraments? At such meetings the reports of the sub-committee referred to above might be discussed and suggestions made.

3. Might there not, be also meetings for united prayer? The prayers might be extempore and uttered, if so desired, but preferably in silence. After the reading of a feu- verses of Scripture and tho recitation together of the Lord's Praver, M-e might kneel together in united, silent intercession.

Led by the Spirit of God, M’e nwv learn that we shall all have to give up things M-hich M-e cherish ; but this would not matter, in view of the eternal issues which are at stake. Sound principles must always remain, but we must be prepared to give up prejudice and pride and obstinacy and seli-M-ill, and all other things which are not in accordance with the Will of God, and would hinder us from attaining the outward and organic unity, in which alone the Church Mull go forth “conquering and to conquer” to win the kingdoms of this world for our God and for His Christ.