CHURCH CONTROVERSY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19779, 28 October 1927, Page 11

CHURCH CONTROVERSY.

REPLY TO ARCHBISHOP. DR. BARNES* FRESH LETTER. A. and N.Z.-Sim. LONDON. Oct. 26. The Bishop of Birmingham, Dr. E. W. Barnes, lias written another open letter to the flrehbishop of Canterbury. He points out that the latter had tacitly acknowledged the truth of evolution, which he (Dr. Barnes) had emphasised in his "gorilla" sermons, for the Archbishop had smilingly labelled them as "not so much a doctrine as readjustments of the Christian dogma consequent upon its acceptance." "I note that.you repudiate transubstantiation," says Dr. Barnes. "I ( also fail to find in your letter a repudiation of my sacramental teaching. I am sorry you say I have offended some members of the Church, but some pain is inevitable, as the truth pierces like a sword. "I cannot agree that any experimental test of sacramental dogmas must be inadequate, nor that the dogma of transubstantiation only differs from that of the objective Real Presence in the consecrated elements, in that the former rests on a discarded philosophy and the latter has no philosophical basis. Both belong to a religious psychology in which experimental tests can be made. "It is fair, even if it be undesirable, to suggest that such tests should be reverently carried out in a suitable place. As the tests will show that nobody, by spiritual capacity, can distinguish between conseorated and unconsecrated bread, we can assume that the consecration of material objects causes no spiritual change in them. "Spiritual grace is given, not to the elements of the sacrament, but to the worshipper who eats or drinks them as he comes with faith, prayer and love to Christ. There is no objective Presence of Christ attached to the bread and wine of the Communion. From the belief that the consecrated wafer is really Christ the Saviour most of the irregularities which have crept into the Church in recent years have naturally followed."