Brodie-Innes J.W. - The True Church of Christ

335 I have no intention of again inflicting myself on the readers of Lucifer, indeed it is unnecessary, for neither Mr. Mead’s scholarly article nor the two letters in the last number have touched my position. But I ask the right of reply always accorded to an opponent to say a brief word on Mr. Mead’s article. He challenges my analogy to the cells and the body; and insists that the next unit after man is the whole perfected humanity – but why? Between the cell (which is still found free and uncombined) and the human body are many units. If it were not so, where would be evolution? Even the Hydro-Medusa, lowest of known combinations, is a unit. And so between the man and perfected humanity must be many units, not failures but links in the process of evolving Mr. Mead’s unit of humanity. I claim that the Church is one such link.

As to Mr. Mead’s authorities, I thank him; and I hope that not only he but all his readers will study, not only the cited passages but all those authors. The writings of the learned and saintly Dr. Neale, whom I had the honour to call friend, will refute all his theories; and at the other pole a study of Dr. Momerie’s writings will not, I think, increase respect for one whose grievance is that he cannot enjoy the income and prestige of Church endowments and appointments while trying to persuade his hearers that that Church is wholly false and vile. Ask not if this is right or wrong – 336 merely is it consistent with elementary honesty? I might challenge Mr. Mead's historical accuracy – which seems to me more than doubtful – but I simply dismiss all that part of his article as irrelevant. However the decrees of Nicæa were arrived at, or whoever drafted the creed, that creed is by all acknowledged now to be the outcome of that Council and to be the voice of the Church Catholic.

I carefully guarded myself from entering into any questions of truth or falsehood of doctrine, of goodness or the reverse of men. All I desired to demonstrate was that the voice of Œcumenical Councils accepted by the whole Church constituted the teaching of the Church. Anything else is the teaching of an individual churchman, right or wrong. If then, hereafter, Mr. Mead, when he has occasion to say “the Church teaches”, will tell us how and when, my object is accomplished.

I have shown him the voice of the Church: he replies he dislikes that voice. Very good; neither he nor anyone else is compelled to listen – but let us all be honest if we can and not pretend a doctrine which does not exist.

One further word. Will Mr. Mead apply the methods of historic criticism he has used concerning Eusebius to Simon Magus, Valentinus, and others of his beloved Gnostics?

J. W. Brodie Innes.

Footnotes