[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] SIR,—The perverse and ill-tempered
letter of Mr. Fawkes in your last issue really demands an answer. Failing someone of more weight, may I be permitted to make the following comments ?
(1) It is grotesquely untrue to suggest, as he does, that the Revision of the Prayer Book has been forced on the Church by the extreme School of Anglo-Catholics. They have not, as a' body, been enthusiastic ,for Revision at all, deeming the time quite unfavourable, for a satisfactory result. Many of them would be quite content with what could be accom- plished by common agreement, leaving over for the present such contentions matters as the reform of the Communion °Mee. Naturally, since Revision has been undertaken, they have been anxious to secure that, as far as possible, it shall be in a Catholic direction. But to represent them as prime movers in the matter, exercising " pressure " on all and sundry, is contrary 'to- the facts.
(2) Who are -these mysterious lay Churchmen (" clergymen in another form ") who, 'thus disguised, are so ubiquitous and potent for harm'? I thought it was notorious that the majority of the laymen in the Church Assembly and the Diocesan 'Conferences are either Evangeliaal. or "safe" Onirchmen of a type that Mr. Fawkes should thoroughly approve. Surely they represent the "genuine lay mind"
he so -much admires ? I should have imagined that, if there were, any ground for looking on the Church Assembly as unrepresentative, it would be that, as far as laymen are concerned, Anglo-Catholics are much too heavily outnumbered.
(3) Will it ever be possible for Mr. Fawkes (and some of his friends) to cease making the crudely offensive suggestion that no one who does not share his views has any claim to intelligence ? (" The intelligent layman does not road the Church Times.") This pharisaic attitude is deplorable enough as a state of mind ; doubly so when it finds expression in gibes worthy only of a schoolboys' debate, (4) It is much too late in the day for Mr. Fawkes to threaten Disestablishment as a penalty for, those who arc not followers of the Modern Churchmen's Union. Establishment, to Mr. Fawkes, is clearly "The Church's one foundation." (" The Church is not strong enough to stand the strain.") But many people are beginning to think that the strain of con- tinuing an unnatural and vicious system is much worse for the health of the Church than anything Disestablisluneut could entail.:7I am, Sir, &c.,
I IF.AD
Previous page
