New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-08-29

love"-an ooinion in which even the uugodly might
concur. 1t is pleasure to be able to say that the
Archbishop of Canterbury showed as much good
sense as his brother of York He wrote Mr.. Keet
that he would not undertake to say whether the
Rev. G.. E. Smith in making the objection kept
within his legal rights. but he certainly considered
that the objection that ought not TO be
made. His Grace added that he should be surprised
if the Bishop of the diocese did not take the same
view.
Armed with this archiepiscopal missive, Mr. Keet
again addressed the Bishop of Lincoln, inclosing q
copy of it, and explaining further that the vicar
refused to communicate with him on the subject he
could only beg His Lordshp's kind offices. The re-
ply of the Bishop ought to immortalze him. lie re-
Dukes Mr.. Keet for mixing M his claims to the title
of Reverend with the question of paying tribuseto
his deceased daughter. He then informs Mr.. Keet
that "his own coreligionists may give him what
title they please" Then he goes into an inquiry as
to the meaning and significance of the title, and
whether it would not imply that the person bearing
it was duly qualified to preach the Word of God and
administer the sacraments in church. Then he
tells Mr. Keet that there some Wesleyan preach
ers whom he hopes before long to have the happi-
ness of admitting to Holy Orders in the Church OF
England after due training and trial. but" adds
the Bishop, should be chargeable with equivoca-
ton and duplicty toward them and with dishonesty
and treachery toward the Church of England, II L
were now 20 designate them by the title of Rever-
end to which they will have just title after ordl-
nation and by its means" The pTiestly chuckle over
his proselytes does not seem particularly wel-man
nered in a letter to minister of the Church which
they are abandoning. Bnt the point the Bishop
makes is that it is for the sake of the lein question
that his Wesleyans are coming over. Then he
hon1, 10 fbn Ornh of -Tnh I'm
the Bishop regarded his preachers as aymen, and to
the Wesleyan Conference of 1898, which forbade its
ministers to assume the title of Reverend for which
there were reasons good in those days. That they
are not good in this appears from the fact that the
ministers Of the Wesleyan Conference now sitting
have protested strongly against the insult offered
them, and have referred the matter to the Commit
tee of Privileges who are to inquire into the law
and demand reform of it, if necessary. The Bishop
concludes his epstle by the remark that if he gives
title to person to whom it does not belong he is
liable to the charge of attering him and of wrong
ing those to whOmlt does belong This sort of argu-
ment, which consists in assuming the truth of the
proposition to be proved is not unknown in ecclesi-
astica controversy. To prove that he does not wish
TO atter his correspondent he addresses his letter
to Mr. Henry Keet Wesleyan preacher. The Arch
bishop of Canterbury addressed his to the Rev.
Henry Keet. As the Bishop of Lincoln had copy
of the ArchbishOps letter, we must presume that his
remarks were intended at least as much for the
Archbishop as for Mr.. Keet. 1t remains to be seen
whether the Archbishop of Canterbury will relish
being told by his inferior officer that he is charge
able with dishonesty and treachery to the Church OF
which be is the primate. Some other things remain
to be seen: for one whether churchmen in general
will approve the good breeding and good sense
shown by the Archbishop of Canterbury. or the
other qualities shown by the Bishop Of Lincoln
q. W. S.