[TO THE EDITOR OF THE "SPEOTAT011.1
Snt,—I am no subscriber to the Church Defence Association, and have some laisgivings about the line of defence it has taken
up ; but I beg leave respectfully to submit that your correspondent, "A Layman," has shown no good and sufficient cause why such an association ought not to exist. To argue that the Church is bound to respect the teaching of its Divine Master, "that ye resist not evil," and therefore that no portion of its members are justi- fied in attempting to ward off an attack upon the whole body, is surely a most extraordinary perversion both of logic and of Christianity. On principles somewhat similar the Quakers would have us disband our army, if we are a Christian nation. But no one supposes the Church of England will take up swords or muskets to defend her rights, and it is a step beyond Quakerism to insist that she should not employ such means as are perfectly legitimate and peaceful to prevent interference with those con- ditions under which she can best discharge her mission.—I am,
Previous page
