CONVERTS TO CATHOLICISM.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 10531, 30 November 1895, Page 8

CONVERTS TO CATHOLICISM.

TO THE KDITOB.

Sin, —Some time ago a letter appeared in your columns from oae signing himself " Lay Brother," ia which the writer charged the Church of Rome with " straining every nerve to advertise her communion," fc;., and announced that the Romaward movement had been " disproved again and egsin," "Lay Brother" was.invited to give some proof of this sweeping statement, but though a week' has passed-he has made no reply. He has apparently deemed it prudent to retire from the ditcussion, and this is probably the wisest course he could pursue. "Lay. Brother" is perfectly at liberty, of course, to believe whatever he reads or is told concerning the Romeward movement, but he is not justified in repeating these sweeping statements in print unless ha has at hand the neee&ary proof to establish hie position.

In your issue of Tuesday another correspondent makes a mild attempt to come to the rescuu of bis friend. He writes, he sajs, to ".correct a misstatement" of mine, but as a matter of fact he makes uo correction whatever. ;Thf> statement referred to was that" clergy connected with St. Paul's taught the doctrine of the Beal Preaeuce." If that was a misstatement the natural method of cor/ectiug it, would be (1) to si^ithat it was not true, and (2) to explain what St. Paul's cltrgy really did teach. Instead of adopting this natural oourse, the only "correction" which " Layman" ventures on is to mention tbat they "have had a course of seimong to show that the teaching of St. Paul's is the teaching of the Bible and the Prayer Book." This is a most transparent caw of begging the question. The question between ua is not whether the teaching of St. Paul's acoords with the Bible or not, bnt simply this, What is ,the teaching ot S*. Paul's? I am still of opinion that my statement was correct, and if "Layman" really wishes to correct it I would ask him—(l) Will he explicitly deny the itaterneDt that the doctrine of the Real Presence is taught at St. Paul's (I made, and I make, no reference whatever to the Romith view, of it) ; and (2) will he kindly explain what the doctrine taSght at St. Paul's really is? I may explain that my point in referring to this doctrine is to show that bo far as the Anglican Church mikes any approach whatever to definite dogmatic teaching that approach is in ; the .direction of Rome. It is true that earnest and sincere clergy in the High Church party who have learned to love their church manage by some ingenious subtlety to pereuade themselves that their doctrines are quite distinct from those of Rome-; and by tho strength of their assertions and the fores of their own personality they may for a time carry a section of thedr hearers with them. Bat earnest souls who hava any regard for consistency c*nnot locg. remain satisfied with the theological hopscotch and jumble of inconsistencies presented in the doctrinal position of tbe Anglican Chnrch. Aud so long a« the High Church party continues to exist its eleegy will find, as Newman found long ago, that they are leading others to Rome whether they wish it or net.—l am, &c., ■ November 29. A Catholic Layman.-,

If King Solomon was alive ho would now say, "Go fco.the travelling man, learn his wajs, and be wise." Mr C. W. Battell, a Cincinnati travelling man representing the Queen's City Printing Ink Company, after suffering intensely for two or three days with lameness of the shoulder, resulting from rheumatism, completely cured it with tyro applications of Chamberlain's Pain B»lm. This remedy is gaining a -wide reputation for its prompt ceres of rheumatism, Ume baric, sprains, f^eJHnes, and lameness. For sale by all leading Chemists. 1 6*OKlt "EOYAL COLOBS" TOBAQCfIc •*