THE ANGLICAN CHURCH.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIX, Issue 11871, 24 January 1902, Page 6

THE ANGLICAN CHURCH.

- ' TO THE kditob: Sir,—" Anglican," •in his letter , published this day, contends that the Church of England has existed in unbroken continuity from a date previous to the ; signature of Magna Oh art a. . He quotes the historian Freeman, who assorts that "no aoi) was done by which legal and historical continuity was broken," although Henry VIII. revolted against tho Pope, and was himself declared by Parliament the only supremo head 'of the. Church in England, which position was previously held'by tho Popes of Romo for many centuries.; ' " ' Regarding • this contention of Freeman's, it appears to me equally as reasonable to assert that the people »f the United States have preserved in unbroken continuity l their status as Englishmen, notwithstanding the revolution," by which they declared themselves for ever ; absolved from ■; all allegiance to the King of Great Britain. " Anglican" asks this question concerning the declaration " that ' the Bishop of Rome hath not, nor ought to have, any jurisdiction in this realm of England, ' Did the old Church of England die, and did a new Church como into existence?' " and 'ho answers the question by saying: " Surely the old Church I merely asserted her independence of outside j interference, and practically said she would manage her own affairs in'future." • This is,precisely what the English colonists of. North America did . when they asserted their independence of Great Britain, and having; thus acted are thoy still to be considered Englishmen, or did they < become a separate and distinct nation , from the time of the signature of the Declaration .of Independence?a question which -to my , mind appears not more puerile - than the question, "Did the old Churoh of England die?" The race of Englishmen who won their independence from Groat Britain did not die, but tho authority of Great /Britain; wo* extinguished in those 13 States of the Union. The race who ' formed that branch of the: Church of Rome which existed in England previous to tho Reformation did not die, but the authority of the Pope as spiritual and temporal lord of the Church in England' as by law established ceased to exist. . " Anglican" rays that the Greek Church has nevor called in question :• the validity , of j Anglican orders. But although this is true, it would' appear that the Church of England has herself confessed the invalidity of those orders by the admission contained :in - its Homily on tho Perils of Idolatry, : which says that "laity and clergy, learned and unlearned, all ages, sects, and degrees, hav-e been drowned in abominable idolatry, most detested by God and damnable to man, for 800 years and more." .• 7. In tho face of this official declaration by the Church of England respecting the apostate condition of tho Church in England there are many who still contend for the validity of apostolical ? succession, for the ' legitimacy of a priesthood confessedly tainted by eight centuries" of idolatry. » " Anglican" further quotes Freeman as saying that "Pole succeeded Cramner and Parker succeeded Pole;, yet nothing was done to •break _ tho uninterrupted succession, of the Archbishop of Canterbury as a corporation solo in the eyo of the law." But this doos •not alter the fact that the source of authority assumed .by tho Archbishop .of Canterbury was changed from the Pope to tho King, or that other fact that if tho Pope ever had the legitimate and divine right to invest tho Archbishop of . Canterbury and other officers of the Church with authority ho had the right to annul the same. In the United States; after the declaration of independence, as previously, one civil officer succeeded another in unbroken succession. To the present day the common' law of England is the foundation-stone of American jurisprudence. To the; present - day: the decisions of the English Courts aro quoted in the American Courts as authoritative precedents. Yet this does not alter the fact that the source of authority has been changed from English Parliament to American Congress. ' :V The difference which exists between tho condition of the English Church under, tho dominance of Rome and its state as an independent entity is a divergence so great as,: in my opinion, to utterly blast all pretences to unbroken continuity. If I have thus contended against the assumptions of " Anglican," it is not because of bias on my part towards tho Church of Rome, for, on the ' contrary, the convictions of my mind lie in tho opposite direction. am, etc., Oh as. Hardy. ■ Mount Albert, January 21, 1902. '7

. TO THE EDITOR. • Sir, Your correspondent ," Anglican" in to-day's issue asks me to quote I. Eliz., cap. 1, for him. Had he read . that Act ■ with its sections I do not think he would set 'me such a gigantic task. Besides, I must keep my eye on the editorial waste-paper basket. If "Anglican" will secure a copy of this Act and. carefully weigh every sentence from the title to last? section he will discover that tho object of tho Act war, the augmentation of, the power of the Grown. It lies most ' impudently when it speaks of "restoring, the ancient jurisdiction of the Crown over tho Estate Spiritual." Every English King, on his accession, repudiated such jurisdiction beforo this Act be cam o law. "Anglican" will" be surprised _ when he reads seotion 35, whereby Parliament confers upon itself infallibility in matters of faith: "Be it enacted that no manner of Order, Act or determination for any matter of religion or cause ecclesiastical had or made by the authority of the present Parliament shall be accepted, ■ deemed, interpreted or adjudged at any time hereafter to be any error, heresy, souism ■ or ■ schismatical opinion." I may mention -that this Aot was passed in spite c>f the bishops, the convocation and the two universities .—I am, etc., ' Owest Alueet. TO THE EDITOR. Sirj—" Anglican "in your issue this morning asks: " Has the present 'Anglican Church maintained an unbroken continuity with the pre-Reformation ' Church, with the Ecolosia ; Anglicana of :Magna Charta?" The first'l name we see in Magna Charta is i a Roman Cardinal. Tlie charta is J granted _ " per consilium Step&ni 5 Cantuarius ■■ Archiepiscopi totius Anglicae - primatis et Santae Romanae ecclesiao Cardinalis." In 1 it the independence : of the Church was pro-: vided for, i.e., it was intended to make any- ' thing in the shape of ;■ a Royal supremacy impossible. In 1534-, 26, Henry VJLIi., cap. L. "The King and his - 1 heirs;, shall;? be "ken and reputed; the only supreme head :of the Church of : Eh gland, c&llecfiEeclesia'An-5 glicana.'' Edward YI., cap. 11, " All authority j

jurisdiction, spiritual and temporal, rf. J 5 ijunadiotaon.v. spiritual r rived and deduood from the ■ King's ft -. as supremo head of the churches and '", :J ' ' of England and Ireland." Elisabeth 1., canT 1 ' MPP declares her to be.possessed of the fulness o?l ■tl ft spiritual jurisdiction. || In tho oath taken W : - ; l her clergy she is declared " The only -I , governourof the realm, as well in all I tlungs or causes as temporal."« OranaiP> >*?! J maintained: "All Christian prints Ei -'I 1 i committed unto them immediately from God ' I the cure of all their subjects. ,A bishop jW rf ,r mako a priest by the Scripture and so mar 11 princes and governours also, and that, by the '' ■;I authorityj of God committed to them."i /rS "Any lawyer knows that Polo suocoeded SI Cranmer." r But Polo did not, like Craniaer'T? s M | » perjuro himself to „ f gain the v archbishopric* -fe-iS - Cranmer took the oath of S canonical ol«l» 'ft dience to the Pope. Previous to doinw so '• || he read a protest before five-' witnesses f| Erivatoly in ■ the Chapter ■ House;' attended' f"'fl ■ by those witnesses he proceeded to the high - ; ''i ■ 1 altar and took the oath of obedience to the "11 ! Popo. Then followed the consecration; his " ' . ; next : act was to reiterate his oath to the Pope, thus deliberately confirming his perjury/ after Vv' which ho received the pall from the Papaf . - k :S delegates.l am, etc., -* S.S. "41 Helensville, January 21, 1902. ' - i, 1 / I }.