12 AUGUST 1905, Page 15

Sra,—In the newspaper correspondence on this subject is there not

some confusion arising from not distinguishing between the clergyman's humanity and the clergyman's pro- fession ? As a man in search of truth, who would wish to fetter his studies ? But as a teacher his task must be to preach according to the doctrines of the Thirty-nine Articles of his Church, or be is disloyal to her. The question at what point he must resign her mandate is, of course, for his own conscience. But both the Bible and the Church of England have wide patience with earnest sincerity, and a good man will always be careful not to disturb the faith of those "who cannot bear it now," and whose simplicity may, after all, be nearer truth than his own projected reflection on it. Surely it is on this distinction between the individual and his pro- fession that rests the duty of appointing a Royal Commission to investigate Ritualistic practices in the Church of England.

[We do not wish to intervene editorially in this correspond- ence, for our own view has already been fully stated. We must, however, remark that, in our opinion at any rate, our correspondent greatly overstates the obligations of the clergy in regard to the Thirty-nine Articles. As we pointed out a month or two ago, "the better opinion" in the Church has always been that those Articles are "Articles of Peace," rather than a rigid confession of faith to which all who have subscribed are bound in detail. They neither are, nor were designed to be, a categorical creed.—En. Spectator.]