RE 'THE BAPTISTS AND THE CHRISTIAN ENDEAVOUR SOCIETY.

Auckland Star, Volume XXIX, Issue 227, 26 September 1898, Page 2

RE 'THE BAPTISTS AND THE CHRISTIAN ENDEAVOUR SOCIETY.

(To the Editor.) Sir,-I regTet that 'A True Baptist' has not proved himself true to his colours, and supplied me with his name, that I might have had an opportunity of setting him right on matters of which it is evident he knows but little. Although tempted to defend myself and others through the medium of this letter, I think it wiser to forbear, remembering that the Savour, although 'reviled, reviled not again.' I hope, however, that our critic, who professes his deep attachment to the C.E. Society and the Baptist denomination, will take the trouble to make fuller inquiries before ho writes to the press on this or any other subject.—l am, etc..

JOHN GRAHAM, President Auckland Provincial C.E. Union

(To the Editor.)

Sir,—As the letter which apepared in your Saturday's issue headed as above is to say the least of it, very misleading and contrary to facts, I trust you will allow me space in your valuable columns to reply to same. Having been closely connected with the C.E. Union since its inauguration, and been its secretary for over two years, I am thoroughly cognisant' with its whole working.

Re charge No. I—'lt seems . . . . . the Baptists are determined to capture the Endeavour movement.' If your correspondent had said 'Determined to lead in the C.E.movement,'l could have understood him, for the first C. Endeavourer in New Zealand was a -Baptist; the first society formed (Ponsonby), Baptist; and in all good works undertaken by the Union, the delegates of the Baptist Societies have ever been to the fore. Whilst occupying the following positions in tho C.E. Union, namely: As delegate, general secretary, convener of the Tent Evangelistic Committee, and Convention secretary, I always found the most willing and helpful workers among the Baptist delegates—to the shame of my own (Wcsleyan) and other denominations be it said.

Tie charge No. 2— Concerning the nomination and election of the president for the ensuing year—

(a) The elected president was nominated by the Pitt-street Wesleyan C.E. Society, and not by a Baptist as stated.

(b) The Baptist layman who was in the chair (being President) on the eve of the nominations had no voice in tho matter, as the only gentleman whose consent had been obtained was the one nominated and since elected.

(c) The holding of the annual business meeting and social in the Baptist Hall was only in accord with the usual custom of the retiring president inviting delegates to hold their last meeting at his society's quarters. (d) As a further proof of the unreliableness of the statements made by 'A True Baptist,' I beg to state that tho Execu tive of the C.E. Union for the ensuing year is not yet elected, whereas he state 3 that it is formed principally of Baptists. When you consider that out of a possible 132 delegates there are only 14 Baptists, the idea of the Baptists having things all their own way contrary to the wishes of the vast majority is absurd. In conclusion, I must state I consider your correspondent would have better shdwn his 'well wishes' to the C.E. Society and the Baptist denomination if he had directly approached their representative bodies, and not have hastened to give expression of his .opinion in the public press, and that too on mere hearsay information. As I see no reason for replying under a norn de plume, I subscribe myself, yours, etc., STANLEY NEWCOMB.

(To the Editor.) Sir,—Having been a member of the Christian Endeavour Union since its formation in Auckland, being well acquainted with its history, and also a Baptist, I cannot allow the ridiculous screed or 'A True Baptist' (?) to pass unrefuted. It is a fabrication of gross misrepresentations and cruel reflections upon the body with which he claim's to be connected, and displays a deplorable lack of knowledge on the subject. He says: 'Not c6ntent with a predominate partnership, the Baptists are determined to capture, even in the most doubtful and ridiculous fashion, the Endeavour movement.' Now, sir, the fact that the majority of office holders during tne past year have been Baptists is the result of the voting of 2449 Endeavourers throughout the Auckland Province, and not the work of any particular set. That j the Baptists are determined to capture ; the Endeavour movement is incorrect, J and as impossible as it is absurd. With regard to President, any Society, through its delegate, may nominate its own minister, or any other person, provided he is willing to stand. Now. I believe that next year's President was not nominated by a Baptist, but another society in the same district, and according to the constitution of the Union, as no other person had consented to stand, the chairman could do nothing else but declare him elected unopposed. Your correspondent complains that 'the Baptist President gives a social in the Baptist Hall.' This is calculated to mislead the public. It has been for the last five years customary to t hold the annual business meeting in the President's church, and this is what was done. That 'extraordinary minutes were ratified chiefly by Baptists, and a Baptist Executive elected, is altogether wrong, as the Baptist delegates form1 but a verysmall portion of the Union, and the officers are elected by the delegates, as j directed by their respective societies, and as out of 66 societies, not one tenth are Baptist, I fail to see how they can dominate the Union.—l am, etc., RICHARD HUGHES. P.S.—lf 'A True Baptist' is dissatisfied with the state of things, why does he not come to the Union to express himself, and not hide under a norn de plume.— R.IL

[Two other cprrespondents, each writing under the name of 'A Christian Endeavourer,' and Mr Fred. Souster, express their views, which are generally similar to those enunciated in the letters published above.—Ed. 'E.S.'l