PAPAL INFALLIBILITY SIR,—Pharos's thoughtful comments on the possi- bility of
an (Ecumenical Council make heartening
reading for those who have the interests of a united Christendom at heart. But I wonder whether he does justice to Anglican comprehensiveness when he itigamatises as 'regrettable' Leo XIII's Bull A posto- Rae Carte. There were many Anglicans in 1896, gild there have, been many since, who saw it in a very different light: I do not doubt that the present Bishop of Rochester would be prepared to say, as did a former Bishop of Manchester (Dr. Knox),. that 'the Pope from his point of view was unquestionably right' And, no doubt, the present Bishop of Sodor and Man would gladly echo the sentiments of his predecessor at the time the Anglican Archbishops published their refutation of the Bull : 'The Reply of the Arch- bishops can in no wise be considered as binding on English Churchmen.' Would not the Bishop-elect of Southwark agree with the now defunct Anglican newspaper The Rock in saying, 'We are fully in accord with the Pope'? Would not -the Vicar of All Souls', Langham Place—whatever his next-door neighbour, the Vicar of All Saints', Margaret Street, might say—agree wholeheartedly with a former Vicar of Hexton, the Rev. R. C. Fillingham, when he says, 'We are only ministers like our brethren in the Noncomformist Churches'? Perhaps these right reverend and reverend gentlemen, as Anglicans no less representative than Pharos, would let us know what they think of A postolicte Cure.—Yours faithfully,
Previous page
