NEW PRIMATE OF NEW ZEALAND

Dominion, Volume 32, Issue 234, 1 July 1939, Page 8

NEW PRIMATE OF NEW ZEALAND

National Leadership Of

Church

FULL SIGNIFICANCE OF OFFICE “The triennial general synod to be held in Nelson in February, 1840, will be called on to choose a successor to Archbishop Averill as Primate of New Zealand,” says a leading article in the July issue of the “Church Chronicle. “As the title signifies, this is the leadership of the Church in this province. It may be doubted, however, if the full significance of the oflice is recognized, even by church much less by people who are not of the Church. “In part, this is due to custom, and in part to our provincial system of government. The primacy has never been a separate oflice. Each archbishop who. has held it has been responsible also for the work of a large dioces, and no man under such conditions can give full time and attention to national Church leadership without neglecting diocesan duties. In these days when diocesan work is increasing, it is even less possible to make greater demands on the primate. “Yet there are many people who. would wish to see a national church leadership recognized by the public in New Zealand as it is in England. As primate of all England, the Archbishop of Canterbury speaks for the Church in England. The bishops may also express their views and often do so —for there is no dictatorial leadership—but on national issues the Church has a national voice. How far it is possible, or desirable, to create a similar condition in New Zealand is a matter for serious consideration. In England, tradition, the permanent association of the primacy with the See, of Canterbury, and the commanding position of the archbishop in the House of Lords are factors contributing to the result. “It would not be easy to reproduce such conditions here. One condition at least, the creation of Lords spiritual in the Legislature, could not be introduced. Another factor, that of tradition, must be gradually built up. Permanent association of the primacy with one see, is however, possible though not simple), and has much to commend it. Permanency Desirable. “We do not wish to overstress this, since Wellington, geographically central and the seat of Government, is naturally thought of as the most convenient centre. Permanent location of the primacy either in Wellington or elsewhere, however, would be made, not to please a city or a diocese, but by general consent of the Church as a whole. Permanency in onO see is desirable from the public viewpoint, both Church and non-Church, because it accustoms the people to look for guidance to a fixed point. Also it has administrative advantages in making possible the establishment of a’ headquarters with continuity, ’which is ficult to achieve in a primacy transferred from see to see, even at long intervals. “There is, however, a difficulty in arranging permanent association. The Auckland ‘Church Gazette’ referred to this in pointing out that the existing bishop of a diocese converted into a permanent archbishopric might not be the right man for Primate. That is bo, and any permanency would have to be combined with a method of election on a General Synod suffrage (as at present) so that the bishop oest fitted could be chosen. “At present the Primate is chosen by the bishops, subject to confirmation of their choice by the clerical and lay sections of General Synod sitting separately. If the first choice is not approved by both sections, the bishops are requested to submit another name. If there is a final deadlock, the bishop who is senior by date of consecration becomes Primate. It would be impossible to apply this method of election if the Primate were to become also archbishop of the diocese to which the Primacy was attached, for that would mean that the diocese would lose its right of choosing its own .bishop.. In England, where bishops and archbishops are appointed by the Crown, this difficulty does not arise. The Archbishop of Canterbury was, before his appointment to that see, Archbishop of York, and prior to that, Bishop of Stepney. The Archbishop of York was formerly Bishop of Manchester. Our system of Church government in New Zealand, where the church is not established, may be more democratic, but it presents its prob- • Jems also. Separating the Primacy. “One way in which the election difficulty could be overcome would be to separate, or partly separate, the Primacy from responsibility for a diocese. The Auckland Church Gazette suggests that, whatever bishop succeeds to • the office, he will have to consider the appointment of a shffragan bishop to assist in matters that are purely diocesan, so as to relieve him for duties that have a Dominion-wide significance. This certainly appears necessary if the work of the Primate, as Primate,- is to be extended, and not, by growing pressure of diocesan duties, to be further restricted. •

“It is felt that now, more than at any period since the Great War, there is an opportunity for such an extension. People see a dreadful drift into a great crisis, which human organization and human agencies—leagues, pacts, and armaments—have been powerless to stay. They see human systems, negligent of God or even opposed to Him, failing to establish a perfet .■ order of society—and, indeed, provoking conflict between different systems. They now, in the words of Francis Thompson, ‘cry, clutching Heaven by the hems.’ They wish the Church to go out to them. Church leadership, which would become national spiritual leadership . was never more opportune. “Considering these tilings, can one doubt the momentous character of the decision General Synod will make—not merely in the choice of a Primate, but in establishing such conditions that he will be able to discharge the duties and seize the opportunities of his high office? Our bishops, not of their own choice, but because there is no present alternative, are ‘cumbered about much serving.’ “A Primate should not be more cumbered, as now, but should be freed, If this were done, what leadership, inspiration and encouragement the Church and the nation would receive from a man of mature wisdom, deep spirituality, energy, and fearlessness in utterance! And we anay be sure that a man of this character would be found; for God has never yet given an opportunity without giving also the means, under His guidance, of using it”