THE Wellington Independent

Wellington Independent, Volume X, Issue 1248, 2 December 1857, Page 3

THE Wellington Independent

Wednesday, December 2, 1857. THE THIN END OF THE WEDGE. We said, the other day, that the barefaced attacks which had been reiterated in the columns of our contemporary, against an honored christian rninister of this town, served only to "clothe a bitter spirit of religious intolerance." We had sufficient reason for the assertion. Did it require confirmation it is supplied by the Spectator of Saturday last. We have no difficulty in identifying the writer - the style; the phraseology and the spirit of them are too palpably those of the Episcopal clergyman who occasionally edits that journal. We deem it superfluous to add another word either in reply to the "very grave charges proved" (?) or in order to uphold the reputation of the reverend gentleman who is the selected object of so much sectarian bile. Mr. Buller does not need this at our hands, and possibly may not thank us for again making use of his name in connexion with these attacks in the Spectator. We think we have reason to believe, however,- that that the aim of Mr. Buller's detractors is directed not so much against him personally as to that form of evangelical Christianity which he represents. An intense dislike to what the Episcopal writer calls "dissent," gives birth to the article in question. We profess not to be the organ of any religious denomination. Our pages have been, and will continue to be, equally open to all, in the cause of truth, of justice, and of liberality, but against the spirit of ultra ecclesiasticism, we feel called on to protest. It is not because we consider the discussion of religious questions or ecclesiastical systems, the best suited for a general Newspaper that we advert to this subject, but because we know it to be an element greatly affecting the public interests. The acrimony engendered by a spirit of sectarian intolerance is unfortunately, not inferior to that of political hatred, and we need no dry sticks to add to the lamentable disunion which politics have created in our social circles; The Spectator would have its readers to believe that we are opposed to clergymen of the Church of England, as such. This we deny, but at the same time frankly allow that as such, we cannot admit their right to claim superiority over clergymen of other Churches, whether Roman Catholic, Wesleyan, Presbyterian or Independent. We entertain a profound respect for the office of the Christian Ministry, and can acknowledge special claims of individual clergymen only as they rest upon moral worth; upon personal excellence. It is because of this profound respect, that we ever feel extreme reluctance to parade the name of any Minister of the Gospel before the eye of the public; in connexion wiih anything discreditable to his official character., The Spectator calculates on this forbearance when indulging in an affected bravado against us for hinting at that which is well known to him, but is compelled, in the same breath to admit that certain clergymen of the Church of England have used their political influence for party purposes aud thus, in their behalf, pleads guilty to the charge of "Political Partisanship." For the present we are satisfied with having drawn forth this admission, and refrain from pursuing the matter further by alluding in detail to some of the modes in which such influence has been exercised.

Our particular object, in noticing the Spectator's article was to point out the animus which it displays. By the sneers ing appellation of the "dissenting pulpit" its spleen is directed, not less towards the many influential denominations that refuse to bow to Episcopacy; than towards the excellent ministers who labour among them. Language too strong cannot be employed in denouncing this miserable and contemptible piece of priestcraft. There is no "dissent" in this country; simply because there is no "establishment." It is a duty we owe to the public to place them on their guard against the introduction of the thin end of the wedge. In the Electoral Roll for the present year, we find the name of "Arthur Baker, Golder's Hill, Minister of the Established Church:" In the Spectator we meet with the terms "dissenting minister," and "dissenting pulpit." Doubtless the wish is father to the thought; Neither an established church nor a dissenting pulpit is found in New Zealand, unless it be the morbid imagination of such ultra ecclesiastics as Mr. Baker. We denounce all such Jesuitical attempts to establish even tbe semblance of a church ascendancy, and we caution those who have a priestly desire to make the trial, that, if they continue to do so, they will alienate from themselves the most intelligent and liberal minded of the Episcopalian body, while they will stand confronted by the combined talent, energy and influence of the ministers and members of all the other churches