WANTED—A SIMPLIFIED RELIGION. [To rex Eamon or xes " SrEYAres."1
SIR,—I have read with much delight the timely letter of " Expectans" in your last issue. On some such broader and more liberal lines the Churches will have to proceed if they wish to regain the working and other classes of the community —for more than one class are sick of the "miserable squab- blings of ecclesiastics." The Churches themselves, however, as well as the ecclesiastics need to learn the lessons of brother- hood. But there does not seem much hope of bringing this speedily about while some regard exclusiveness as vital to their existence. I refer particularly to the Church of England, the Strict Baptists, and the Plymouth Brethren. If only the Church of England would create a brother- hood of the pulpit much good, in my view, would be accomplished in breaking down the barrier. During a recent visit to Canada. I learned that some of the Episco- palians there fraternize in this interchange. The words "Dissenter" and "Nonconformist" are never used in the Dominion, for the democratic instinct of the people will net tolerate any indication of " side " neither from ecclesiastic, whoever he be, nor from layman, and one can detect traces of such resentment creeping into the mind of the laity in this country. Even "Expectans " himself shows traces of it in his letter, although I think he does so unwittingly, for he says "I ant a Churchman," 8:c.; and with the capital letter too. I answer, so am I, but not of his ilk, for I tun a Presbyterian. By what right or by what notions of brotherhood can the Church of England claim the monopoly of "Church" or of " Churchman " ? Even the "man in the seat" is beginning to question it. My name, too, carries no weight, but it is as good as any nom de plume, and therefore I subscribe myself
HENRY G. COPELAND.
Previous page
