THE LATE BISHOP OF RIPON.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXI, Issue 6998, 22 April 1884, Page 6

THE LATE BISHOP OF RIPON.

! .■ ■'• TOTHE ED1T08.,".■..> ~-;! .*••■■ I' ; Sib,—The comments in. your "issue , : of J tne T7th inel. , , ori'the character anet "attainments of the late Bishop i of Biponj are somewhat UDJait, a,ud I hbpe.yop wm al}ow-one;ywho has resided, for many years in huMaigeese to take exception to them. The Jfiehop.wasnot, I admit, chosen for the posfc'M celebrated for hie University? attainments; neither was he a aucoessfnl schoolmaster as bo many of the bishops have been, but Ihave yet to learn that there is any force in' the argument that a man who has gained a reputation as a pedagogue is the fittest man to administer the spiritaal affairs of a bishopric. He was an eloquent and forcible preacher, and in his early days attracted large congregations to his ohuich at Clnpham Rise; he subsequently beoame reotor-of St. Giles,'a large and • densely populated parish ia London: : From thie place he was appointed by Lord Palmerston—at the advice, it was said, of Lord Shaftesbury—to tho see of Eipon, and was ' the youngest bishop on the Bench. Tbe diocese is a large one, contain- ! ing several manufacturing towns with populations five times as large ae Auckland, and his duties were somewhat onerous, bo mnoh so, I believe, as to seriously under, mine his health, for about five years ago, after a quarter of a century «f diocesan work, be found ■ it necessary to appoint one of hie archdeacons as suffragan bishop. I must demur to your statement that "the tenacity with which he ; clung to his bishopric long after he had ceased to discharge the duties of the office was a constant source of dissatisfaction in the diocese." He was, I have every reason to believe, universally respected in the sphere of his labours; the suggestion, too, that every man should retire from office if illness overtake him and prevent him performing'* the ..more ardnous duties of his post is a ; new and startling one, &nd I am »fraid we must not look to the Bishops to initiate the custom.—l am, &0., Hγ. Waucbr, L.F.P.S.G., and L.M.

Grey-street, Auckland, April 18, 1884.

[Dr. Walket has evidently misread our remarks. We said nothing that can he properly described as unjnst or inaccurate. Wβ used no suoh foolish argument'which the writer in his opening sentences suggests we did, nor did we say that the late Bishop' was not " universally respected," which Dr. Walker has " every reason to believe " he was. Neither did we suggest " that every man should retire from office," &c, &c. Dr. Walker says the late Bishop, was '• an eloquent and fqroible" preacher." Wβ said nothing about bis eloquence or his force," but this description of his preaching will be news to those who were accustomed to hear the late Bishop. Dr. Walker's notions of what constitutes eloquence and force in a preacher must be peculiar to himself.—Ed.)