THE BISHOP OF PRETORIA'S DEFENCE OF DOGMA
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] Sin,—In answer to the letter which appears in your issue of June 6th, in defence of dogma in religion, I should like to point out that many Broad Churchmen such as myself do not object to dogma as a whole, but rather to the elevation to the rank of dogma of doctrines which were never taught by Christ and which are nothing more than pious opinions of the High Church party.
We see no harm in persons holding definite views which cannot be proved from the Gospels ; and, indeed, may hold such views tentatively ourselves, but it seems decidedly objectionable to us when Catholics insist upon the acceptance of such opinions as necessary to salvation, and, indeed, regard them as more important than the simple truths of the Gospels. Still further do we object when our Catholic friends insist with startling vehemence upon doctrines in direct opposition to the teaching of Jesus Christ : I refer to such doctrines as com- pulsory confession, compulsory fasting, Communion, the duty to hear " Mass," Reservation and many other extraordinary ideas. We hold fast to the bedrock principles of Christianity— viz., the Universal Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of Man ; and while believing in the use of public worship would leave our neighbours to worship in the way most helpful to their individual requirements.—I am, Sir, &c.,
Previous page
