The Sun.
London, England, 1868-01-22 00:00:00

711 E BISHOPRIC OF NATAL.

The following letter has been addressed by the
Bishop of London to the Bishop of Capetown

" Fulham Palace, Jan. 20.

"My dear Lord.-1 feel myself constrained by a
sense of duty, much against my inclination, to ad-
dress your lordship publicly on the subject of a
letter which you sent to the newspapers last week.
You announce, as I understand you, that it is your
intention forthwith to consecrate a new Bishop for
Natal. Ilad Parliament or Convocation been sit-
ting, I should have asked in my place for an answer
to the following :

"1. Whether, considering the words of the 26th
of George 111., cap. 84, and other statutes, the law
officers of the Crown, having been consulted by the
Government, have declared such consecration to be
lawful?

" 2. If you are not acting on the authority of
the law officers of the Crown, has a legal opinion
been taken justifying the step you propose, by whom
sa t a
pr
re ipt
os see xc p
tr
he
as st
tt eh re m s ?
i t
,a3s been When
i vaennd,
where
con-
secration is to take place, and who are to be the
officiating bishops ?
"But neither Parliament nor Convocation is in
Session, and, as it seems there is no time to lose, I
take the only means open to me for asking you,
before you proceed further in this matter, to give a
public answer to these questions. It was only last
week that I learnt accidentally, but from the most
undoubted authority, that you proposed to hold the
consecration on the 25th inst., and in Scotland. A
vigorous protest against this proceeding has been
made by persons who are among the most attached
members of the Scottish Episcopal Church. The
Scottish plan is, I now learn, abandoned, and it is
stated that on Saturday next you propose to conse-
crate in England.
"Meanwhile, your brother bishops in England
may well be thrown into great perplexity. We
know not in which of our dioceses an act, which,
to say the least, is of most doubtful legality, is to take
place. We may read in the newspapers any morn-
ing that the thing has already been done, and we
may be left in the disagreeable position of being
called upon by others, as well as moved by our
sense of public duty, to visit some of our clergy
for taking part in proceedings contrary to the law
of the Church and realm; when, had we been pro-
perly informed beforehand and the matter formally
investigated, we might have prevented them from
committing themselves.
" I am sure you will see, my dear Lord, that the
Church of England is entitled to a plain and imme-
diate answer to the questions I have asked.
" You remember, from your recent presence at
the Lambeth Conference,

1. That the assembled bishops, under the direc-
tion of the Archbishop of Canterbury, deliberately
abstained from affirming that Bishop Colenso's
deposition was valid, either spiritually or in any
other way.

" 2. That at the adjourned meeting of the Con-
ference the report of the Committee recommending
the consecration of a new bishop was, by the wish
of the Archbishop of Canterbury, as well as of the
Bishops of Lincoln, Ely, Chester, and myself, with
others, deliberately, not approved, but only re-
ceived.

"3. That many of the English bishops, feeling
strongly, like myself, how dangerous is the teaching
of Bishop Colenso, still hold that his see is not