ONLY ONE CHURCH

Otago Witness, Issue 3510, 21 June 1921, Page 25

ONLY ONE CHURCH

ARCHBISHOP AND BAPTISTS. PU LPIT INTERCHA NG E. (From Olk Own Correspondent.) LONDON, April 29. In tlie course of an address at the annual Baptist L'nion Assembly, on “ Christian Unity,'’ the Archbishop of York said that until some form of ordination that Free. Churches could accept were found he did not think there could bo an interchange of pulpits such as Nonconformists desired. He went to the Assembly (where he was welcomed by the Rev. J. C. Cariile, the preident) on his own responsibility to show that the Lambeth appeal was a personal plea from the heart of brother Christians. That he should have been invited to come, and that die should have come, was a striking sign of the time. The appeal must not be regarded as a scheme of union to be accepted or rejected. It was simply an invitation to all Christian peoples to come together, pray together, and think together. The word Church was a rebuke to all sects, for their could be only one Church. No one church could claim to be "The Church ” to the exclusion of the others. They were all parts, and, at present, broken parts. The bishops wished to confess to their share of the guilt in dividing the Church, and believed that the time had come for all groups to forgot what was behind and reach out for the reunited Catholic Church. “ The appeal leaves groups free to keep to what is characteristic and appealing tio them in their own methods of worship and organisation. There will bo three links that keep us loyally together—the community of faith, sacrament, and ministry.” There was one question that had caused the most division of all in the past, that of episcopal ordination. —(Laughter.) The Anglican Church did not wish to impose it, but only to appeal, in no spirit of superiority, to the Free Churches, to consider whether it was not necessary to have one common recognised ministry. ITo agreed that this new church must be so built up that in the future nothing should be found therein to disquiet the conscience, but. he pointed out that lo conform with the principles of the Anglican doctrine some form of ordination that the Free Churches could accept must be found L’ntil this was done be did not think that there could be an interchange of pulpits such as the Nonconformists desired. A SINN FEIN MOTTO. Tlie Rev. \V. Y. Fullerton besought the archbishop to appeal to the bishops to discover some other avenue of approach. It was appalling, he said, (hat. even to-day Christians could not pray together, and that the churches should possess a sort of Sinn Fein motjo, "Ourselves Alone.” A resolution was passed " That the Assembly of the Baptist Union feels that the present movement towards Christian unity has received a great impulse from the fraternal and sympathetic spirit of the Lambeth Conference, and requests the Federal Council of the Evangelical Free Churches to continue their work with a view to a better understanding between the churches and the removal of such obstacles as still remain.” INTERCHANGE OF PULPITS. In Convocation cf Canterbury the Bishop of Chelmsford moved that the approval of the House be given to the resolutions adopted bv the Lambeth Conference with reference to reunion. The first of the resolutions justifies a bishop in giving occasional authorisation to ministers, not episccpally ordained, who. in his judgment, are working towards an ideal of union such as is descril'ed in the appeal, to .preach in churches within his diocese, and to clergy of the diocese to preach in the churches of such ministers. The second resolution stated “it cannot approve of general schemes cf intercommunion or exchange of pulpits.” The mover S3id they should fry to remove the prejudices which undoubtedly existed on both sides. His motion did not provide for anything like interchange of pulpits. He knew that it was held by some outside that the words of the Lambeth Conference appeal were altogether too vague. His own opinion was that if any definite test had been imposed the whole idea would be absolutely unworkable. It was not a permanent authorisation that was proposed, but simply an occasional authorisation. Each bishop would be practically make his own regulations, and make his authorisation apply to extra services, or ordinary services, or to both. The less tho matter was hedged about with regulations and restrictions the better it, would bo for all concerned. Their Nonconformist friends were waiting for some token of their good will in act ion. Movements of that k’nd eoidd not be rushed. The rank and file of both Churchmen and Nonconformists were not yet ready for a general scheme of reunion. Tlie R sf> ap of Lichfield, in seconding the motion, said there was a good deal of ignorance a? to the ideal of union set forth at the Lambeth Conference. They had not put forward any request for re-ordina-tion. Their scheme had regard to conditional ordination, and lie should not, feel perfectly lumpy unless he believed that a nor.-eni-copally ordained mitrsler was willing to tike the same attitude on that subject as he would himself. LON DON DI FIT CL’ LTIES. While not opposing the resolution, for he was on the most cordial relations with Nonconformists in London, and already in his diocese on spce : al occasions had done something of the kind which was proposed, the Bishop of London wanted to point out that it was -roing to be extraordinarily difficult to carry out such a resolution in a huge diocese like London. The Bislion of Worcester sa : d that since the Bamheih Conference the temperature find been steadily falling, and at present n-anv people were far loss hopeful about the s'heme than they would like to be. Tb. B'shop of Lincoln considered the resolutions were the very least that they could bring themselves io accept. They did nor want to invite Nonconformists into their churches to t dk about reunion, but to me cb tlie Gosncl. The Bi h >p of Peterborough v.-ns anxious to go as far as possible as quickly ns possible. Tlieir paramount ditty was to promote the spirit of fellowship. The Bishop of Bf stol j'nought confusion would arise if the Convocation of Canterbury took a different line, refusing resolution i which York had adopted. The Bishop of Winchester hoped they roil l • ! >ow the. s-uie Rniiit '' Inch animated the Lambeth Conference. TTe was opposed to anything like a federal resolution of their divisions.

The Archbishop of Canterbury thought it would indeed be strange if they did not pass the resolution. They all assented to it at Lambeth, and their position would be an odd cne if they now resisted it. The resolution was carried item. con.