The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1907-01-02
BISHOP RESTAR|CK ON
THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND
A Historical Treatise on the Origin and Growth
Of the Anglican Communion Father
Beissers Statements Examined.

| Rev. and Dear Sir: In my first let
| ter I asked you to state the Act o
Parliament by which, you said, "th'
Church of England came into exist
ence."
You replied by naming an Act which
made Henry the head of the Church
You also assumed that the Church was
then established by law. In my reply
I showed that the Church of England
had been established centuries before
1884 and that Parliament for genera
tions had passed laws affecting it.
also gave a clause of the Act of 1884
to show it's intent, which was to leg
islate for the Church already in exist.
ence. and that Parliament disclaimed
any intent to vary from Catholic faith
and ancient usage of the realm.
You now abandon your former posi-
ton, not disputing the historical facts
I presented, as indeed you could not.
another question entirely. I expected
this would be your course, for I was
aware that with you it all came back
to this: There can be no Church
without union with Rome, therefore
the Church of England was founded by
Henry VIII" Your first proposition
can not be sustained by an appeal to
the history of the primitive Church,
and your conclusion, therefore, is
worthless.
Before I notice the matter of St.
Peter, let me say one thing more about
the Act of 1884, which Parliament as
serted conferred no new power on tha
King, and explained that the King had
no spiritual power whatever; that rest
ed of necessity with the ministry.
You argue that the Church, immedi,
ately after the Act of 1884, was a new
Church because it had changed it's be-
lief. Let us see. After 1884 the Church
of England went on as before, with
the same bishops, the same priests, the
same deacons, the same lay people, the
same service books in Latin, the same
rites and ceremonies, the same faith
expressed in Catholic creeds. All that
was changed was, it withdrew from
obedience to the Bishop of Rome by
the action of the Convocation and Par,
for years. 1 was born an Englishman,
but when I renowned obedience to thu
English sovereign I was the same body
and person as before. I did not losa
my identity, nor did the Church Of En-.
gland in 1884 or in the following years
in which she gradually put off things
domination. In all matters the Church
Of England appealed to history. Shs
affirmed that the Pope or
the Bishop of Rome, did not in the
Primitive Church claim or exercise the
power which in later centuries he
claimed and exercised, and she clearly
power. The Church of England has al,
W aS llIdl SLlS NUNS tAlC
faith of the Primitive Church, and is a
true part of the Catholic and Apostolic
Church. You object to this and say
she is not in union with Rome, there T,
fore is new Church.
Now to the matter of St. Peter the
Apostle. 1 entirely agree with you that
Christ founded the Church and en-
powered the apostles and sent them
INTO the world to teach and govern. I
gree that He promised to be with His |
Church and that 1t should be guided by |
he Holy Ghost unto the end of the |
world My dear and reverend sir, We ,
have in common all of original Chris !,
ianity and both of US at the altar ex-
press our belief in the words of the .
Nicene Greed.
Now to the point of disagreement
You say: ITO assure their unity of ac- /
ion, Christ made Peter the leader, |
president, the head man of the whole
I am not going into a |
ong argument on what these claims are
,ased; that is an argument known to
10Th of us. I am aware that the Coun>
Ill of Trent declared that 1.-The Pope
5 the Vicar of God on earth and must
,e acknowledged and obeyed. All who
10 not believe this shall most 1nfaiIably
re damned" Let me ask you few
questions.
1. Could the bishops of the Roman
catholic Church send the Pope from
Rome to Florence to administer the
aging on of hands?
Acts viii:14 reads: Now when the
Apostles which were at Jerusalem
eard that Samaria had received the
yord of God they sent unto them Pc
er and john
2. If the Pope took action on GER
ain matter could people call him to
ccount and contend with him? Acts
j. :1-2 we read that after St. Peter
ad baptized an uncircumcfsed man.
len in Jerusalem commended with
i'm.
g. If a Church Council were called
oday who would convoke it and pre-
ide over it, and who would set forth
he DEGREES? In Acts XIV. we read ,
here were mo small dissensions" con-
erning certain conduct Of Paul and I
'arnabas. They went for decision not
D Peter. but to the Apostles and |
.lders," who, we read in verse six. |
ame together to consider this matter. I