The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1882-11-28 00:00:00

CORREBPOMOENCE.

BISHOP JENNEB AT WEYMOUTH.

To Ae Edam.

Sir,—lt is with mach regret that I bare read the
letter signed "Anti-Confirmation' in the Tcfcgram.
I cannot help thinking that the writer, who is
evidently an earnest man, will, on consideration, be
sorry that be wrote it.
Letters on religions questions in newspapers require
to be written with groat care and oonsiderstion. It
should be remembered that the readers for whom they
are written are for the most pert people who have no
moans of investigating the statements they contain,
but are on the other hand easily led away by rhe-
torical phraess in any direction that a writer may
desire.

It is therefore mach to be regretted that the writer
of the letter in question should, as it gems, have
written somewhat beefily and intemperately, and
without consideration for those who may talcs a
different view from his on the very important subject
to which he refers. It seem, to me that his words
are such as to inflame religions animosity between
men of diverse opinions, to arouse distrust of their
religious teachers among the Ignorant sad unlearned,
but not—even admitting that his view may be the
right one—to further the advance of Charity or
Truth. . _

The saying, which be quote. u • well.known one
about the work of the Church of England, would on.
doubtedly be a harsh and uncharitable one to what-
ever religious iigly it referred—and, unfortunately, It
seta the tone of the whole letter.
The writer assumes, without any attempt at demon-
stration, that no "enlightened man" can differ from
himself on this awfully important matter. He gnu-
tions the belief of the teacher, who spoke to the boys
at their Confirmation, in the doctrines which he taught
them. He questions the belief of the boys In the
teaching they received. This is • grave • to do
without very careful consideration, and a «inite
statement, of the groan& on which this questioning
I. made. Nor can it be considered that in this letter
any sufficient ground is even for theme unkind re-
marks. It id not enough to assigns that if 10 people
In Weymouth believed the Bishop's teaching they
would be removed from the category of sensible
people. It is not enough to auk whether experience,
Scripture teaching, and common sense we not at
variance with the doctrine. against which the writer
is inveighing. It is not sufficient to soy that those
who continue to believe these doctrines "inset be
finally undone," or that those who teach them are
"making men believe a lie." These are the kind of
statements which would have equally little value on
whichever side they were made.
If serious charges, or insinuations amounting to
charges are made in • public print, they should be
accompanied with • mrehl and temperate Estsment
of the grounds on which they are made. And as the
writer of the letter thought it his duty to say what
he did about the Church ot England, the Bishop, and
the oonfirmess, he should have accompanied hill re.
marks with • demonstration from "Scripture, reason,
and oommon-senee" of the propositions he advanced.
It is quite true that this could not be adequately done
In • letter to • newspaper—bat that Is a remota for
keeping out of the newspapers in the discussion of

rue& mittors. . .
I trait I have said nothing uncharitable in this
letter, and that the writer of the former letter will see
reason to regret that he hu given a somewhat hasty,
euperficial, and arrogant expression to his feelings on
so great • subject.
Yours, b.c., X.