LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
ANGLICAN AID TO ITALIAN REFORMERS.
[TO TIER EDITOR OF THE " EFECTATOR.1
SIE,—My attention has been called to two letters in the Spectator, which contain a somewhat vehement protest against the action taken by the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of Salisbury, and myself in particular, with regard to a work of Church reform now being carried on in Italy.
The writer (who signs himself " Catholicus ") represents this work as an aggressive endeavour on the part of Anglicans to proselytise the Italian people. He designates it as "a singular attempt to convert the Roman Catholics by an organised mission in Umbria, thundering at the Vatican almost with the old cry, The Celt is at your gates.'" He describes those who have seceded from Romanism as "our converts," and asks whether it is "our business to convert them." In the heading prefixed to each of his letters, he entitles the movement "An Anglican Mission to Convert Italy."
May I be permitted, as one cognisant of the facts, to say emphatically that such a description of this movement betrays a total misapprehension of its true character, and that any protest based on such a misapprehension must fall to the ground ? Let us see how the matter stands.
If we look to the source from which " Catholicns " professes to derive his information (viz., a letter recently published in the Times), we find, as he, indeed, admits, that this work of reform is being carried on in Italy not by Anglican proselytisers, but by Count Campello, an Italian priest, formerly Canon of St.
Peter's, Rome. We fled, too, that Campello's secession and subsequent labours are described not as the result of any external missionary pressure, but as the outcome of a wide- spread craving for more liberty and light within the Church of Rome itself. We find, moreover, that the aid which has been extended to him has not been offered to him in any meddle- some or intrusive fashion, but has been given in response to his own urgent solicitations. So far as I am concerned, I can bear my witness that this has been so. Never, until Campello (having travelled from Italy for the purpose) unexpectedly entered my room, and earnestly pleaded for sympathy and help, had I taken any part whatsoever in furthering his work. Whether with a clear conscience I could then have turned a deaf ear to his pleadings, I shall now proceed to inquire.
Ten years ago, the very question which Campello's visit com- pelled me to decide, was submitted to the hundred Bishops of the Anglican communion assembled for Conference at Lambeth. They were asked to express an opinion as to the attitude which we should assume towards those who, having renounced their allegiance to the Church of Rome, might seek our sympathy, counsel, or aid. The reply was given in words drafted by the late Bishop Wordsworth, of Lincoln, and unanimously adopted by the Conference. The words are as follows :—
"We gladly welcome every effort for reform upon the model of the Primitive Church. We do not demand a rigid uniformity ; we deprecate needless divisions ; but to those who are drawn to us in the endeavour to free themselves from the yoke of error and super- stition, we are ready to offer all help, and such privileges as may be acceptable to them and are consistent with the maintenance of our principles as enunciated in our formularies."
Once more. " Catholicus " seems to think that whatever an Archbishop of Dublin, or even the present Archbishop of Canterbury, might do towards aiding Count Campello in his work, the late Archbishop (Tait) of Canterbury was far too able and tolerant a man to have identified himself with any such movement. May I then quote, in reply, some words spoken by this noble-hearted prelate in 1879, when Convocation was asked to deal with the action of certain Scotch Bishops who had made a tender of provisional oversight and episcopal ministrations to Pre Hyacinthe, of the Reformed Galilean Church P His Grace then said :—
"Is there, I ask, such a thing as an inherent difference between the Church of Rome and the Reformed Churches ? If there is, are we to it still as Bishops, and never to stir a finger in favour of those who are imperilling, sometimes their lives, and certainly their positions and prospects in life, for that truth which, thank God, we have in- herited from the Reformation ? We have a great deal in common with those who are resisting the aggressions and tyranny of Rome throughout the Continent of Europe. Therefore, that we should for a moment appear to give any sanction to an opinion which would go forth that we are not entitled in any way to assist those who are in such difficult circumstances, I should have very much regretted indeed."
I respectfully submit these two utterances to" Catbolicus " for his dispassionate consideration. He may hold any opinion of mine in very light esteem. But if he be a faithful member of the Anglican communion, and an admirer of the late Archbishop of Canterbury, he ought, I think, in candour to give some weight to the voice of the United Anglican Episcopate, and to
the counsel of one amongst those Bishops who, "being dead, yet speaketh," and whom he ("Catholicus ") regards, and rightly, as so deserving of special honour.
I have only to add that the goodwill I have thought it my duty to show towards the work of Church reform in Spain and Portugal has been due to solicitations similar to the appeal which more recently came to me from Italy. That work (in the Spanish peninsula), let me say, is not a "total failure," as " Catholicus " supposes, but, on the contrary, a movement of great and increasing promise. It is, let me also remark, a-work in which the late Archbishop of Canterbury not only felt, but publicly expressed, a deep interest. But I now refer to it in order to state that it was not until a memorial came before the Irish Episcopate from the reformers of Spain and Portugal, asking us to help them in their efforts to reform themselves upon the primitive model, that I became aware of the move- ment, and began to take an interest in its progress. Both in that case and in the case of Italy, the duty set before me was not of my own seeking. In each instance I found, as it were, a wounded brother lying helpless in my very path, and crying to me for aid. Whether, under such circumstances, it would have been right in the sight of God for me or any other Anglican Bishop to have heartlessly "passed by on the other side," I leave it to your readers—I leave it to " Catholicus "—to
Previous page
