NEED OF FELLOWSHIP.

Wairarapa Age, 16 May 1935, Page 5

NEED OF FELLOWSHIP.

ADDRESS BY THE BISHOP OF WAIKATO. DEMAND FOR INDIVIDUAL > EFFORT. i Addressing the Dominion Conference of the C.E.M.S.. ini the Parish Hull yesterday on “The Need for Fellowship,” the Bishop of Waikato, the Bt. Rev. C. A. Cherrington, B;M,. made a wide historical survey of ’the attempts that had been made in early and in modern times to promote fellowship in accordance with the Christian ideal. . The difficulties standing in the way of fellowship in communities and in arid between men and nations sometimes seemed so overwhelming, said the Bishop, that to work in any manner for this fellowship seemed an impossibility. How could a Christian ration have any truck with a nation that had set itself to work out its salvation without God at all? Again

how could a t Christian nation have any truck with another nation which, because Christ happened to . hav-» been born a Jew, had cast out Christianity and reverted to pagan gods? Declaring that he was second to none in desiring the unity of Christendom, the Bishop went on to admit that he personally felt bound to distinguish between those who, like himself, were members of a church they believed to be a divine institution and those who were members of other communions. Many who belonged to the Church of England might not think about these things as he did, but there were also many who did, and so they arrived at the difficulty of bringing about fellowship between the various church bodies. In matters of trade and business, how could they bring about fellowship if it were felt that your very life depended on your being able to beat the other fellow? It seemed to him, the Bishop observed, that a free interchange of goods was indispensable to the fellowship of nations. A reproach brought against the Church of England was that, in comparison with other churches, it was as cold as the icy north or the frozen south. Was this true? (Voices: “No”). The Bishop said he did not himself plead guilty to this charge, though it was often made. There was great need, ; he declared!, of an extension of fellowship from parish to parish. Many parishes were far too parochial—like a well brought, up family, which did not desire to have anything to do with other families round about it. Was it true that in the Church of England

there was more nasty spite and bickering and slander than in any other communion? He hoped it was not true, but even in the C.E.M.S. he had seen brethren take offence at nothing at all and leave the fellowship they were trying to build up. In the concluding part, of his address. Bishop Cherrington urged that it must be the aim and endeavour of every Christian man, in spite ,of all difficulties, to build up fellowship in international life (if only by studying and supporting the League of Nations) and also in national and in social life. No human problem was insoluble. Encouraging progress had been made in forwarding church unity in England and Scotland and elsewhere. Let them go on working for unity. It might not come in their day, it might not come before the end of the century, \ but it would come undoubtedly in some way. The Bishop developed at length an appeal for the extension into the walks of everyday life of the unity of the communion of the church. The C.E.M.S. was faced by a great opportunity for constructive work. The Group movement showed a desire on the part of many that fellowship might be revived. The ultimate outcome must depend on the individual efforts of each one of them. Let them help individually to bring about conditions in which not only their society, but the whole human race would find themselves in one. (Applause). In the course of a brief discussion, Archdeacon W. Bullock observe! that the promotion of organic church unity was ir«»r-j neglected in New Zealand than in any other Ebipire country. ■ Even when they started to do something, they might still have twenty years iri which to'think about it. Mr. J. Snell, who presided, said that the achievement of unity depended much less on the clergy than on the laity. .