PRESBYTERIAN MOVE

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 112, 12 May 1923, Page 13

PRESBYTERIAN MOVE

TO TH BDITOR.

Sir,—The -Rev. George Gflfillan, of literary fame, was once stopped in a street in Dundee by a half-witted' man who said, "Mr. Gilfillan tell the Dundea U.P. Presbytery that they are a terror to well-doers and a praise and protection to them that do ill!" The Wellington Presbytery is very rapidly qualifying itself for such a judgment of condemnation. Nearly every meeting ' has its sensation, and the man in the street is more and more amazed at the" way clerical leaders wash their dirty linen in public. Last Tuesday's .meeting was quite as unedifying as any that has been' held for some time. Mr. Orr and St. Andrew* Church were again on the grill, and the Eev. James H. Mackenzie was one© more busy stoking the fire of prosecution. I have no interest in the .fantastic rigmarole that Mr. Mackenzie ha* persuaded the Presbytery to send on to the, Assembly to the detriment of Mr. Orr, save in one point. Mr. Mackenzie, in donning the mantle of prosecution, charges Mr. Orr with an ,uhtruo statement, thus:—

"This reason is contrary to fact, *as Mr. Orr ought to know. The clerk "of the Presbytery holds a letter from the clerk of St. Andrew's session under "date 12th March, 1923, in which he describes Mrs. Evans as an adherent; also Mrs. Evans voted without challenge at. the above congregational meeting, when Mr, Orr was in the chair, and the vote waa taken by standing up." Now, this statement is pettyfoggery, pure and simple. Mr. Mackenzie ought to. know that Mrs. Evans is not, and never was, an adherent of St. Andrew's congregation in the sense set forth in'the law book of the New Zealand Presbyterian Church. Mr. Orr was perfectly''accurate in his statement that Mrs. Evans was not an adherent and the respected session clerk of St. Andrew's erred,- as the Eev. James H. Mackenzie errs, by not knowing the law. I recognise that the law book of the New Zealand Presbyterian Church is not easily obtained.. I got a 'copy after correspondence, and at a ridiculously high cost. I have already informed your readers that the subordinate standards of the New Zealand Presbyterian Church, according to the head of the Wellington office, art not on sale anywhere in New Zealand, and up to a recent date there was not a copy in the office. I have, however, shamed the conductors of the office into obtaining a copy. Here is the definition of an adherent in the "Book of Order," dated 1918:—"Persons above 16 years of age who lead - a consistent Christian life, who unite statedly in the worship of the congregation, who, if able, contribute to its support, and who, applying to the session to be received ac adherents have been so received." The Rev. James Mackenzie' is no doubt profoundly, impressed with the' consistent Christian life of the Udy whose cause he has espoused, but that lady's name is not, and never wag, on any adherents' roll in St. Andrew's Church.- lam quito prepared to believe- that the lady did' vote in opposition to tile motion that ] moved at. the meeting. Nearly all tlw audience rose to their feet in enthusiastic support of my motion. About a dozen rose in opposition. _ I only know one of the dozen, and this man had toldl m« that he was connected with St. John's.: The opposition was such a fiasco that I never thought of challenging th« St.John's man or any. of the dozen. The action of the St. John's people at this meeting did not make them adherents of St. Andrew's, nor did the action of the lady make her an adherent.'

There is something more to be noted id the Eev. James H. Mackenzie's championship. In the Apostolic Church the action of Christians fighting each other in the secular law courts -was looked upon with moral loathing and religioui horror. Paul, in first Corinthians, chapter six, denounces such outrages on the. idea of Christian brotherhood. The Key.James H. Mackenzie seems .to hay no sympathy with, Paul's views, ■ andlhe seems to say by his action that an alleged adherent may attack in the law, courts a Presbyterian minister, and then find a warm welcome from a Presbytery to continue the prosecution in the courts of the Church. Mark Twain,on one occasion said an opponent's views were like the peace of God. I don't agree with his irreverent use of Scripture, but I must say that Mr. Mackenzie' 3 practical revolt from the Christian ethics of the apostle Paul , "passeth all understanding." I learned some time ago that one or more members of the Wellington Presbytery were quite prepared to make use, of the secular lawyer in order to hnsh up a religious matter. Within the last two years a prominent clerical member of Presbytery hired a lawyer to write me a threatening letter. I invited the lawyer to go on with the case. But he did nothing. I then returned him his letter. And still he did nothing. ' I then called upon him and told him that his letter was a moral outrage, and that I was tempted to report him to the Law Society. I reported this clerical hiring of a secular lawyer to the Wellington Presbytery; they had nothing to say and they took precious good care to withhold from the Press the story. Presbyterianism in Wellington has become nothing less than a tragedy. The Government Statistician informs me that at last Census there were 19,000 Pre«byterians in Wellington and suburbs. The Presbyterian Church attendance in Wellington is about 3000. Every fresh scandal in the Presbytery means an exodus from the Presbyterian Church. The one church in Wellington that during the last five years has been, aggreisive a,nd successful has been St. Andrew's, and it has been the, victim of attack upon attack. The Rev. James H. Mackenzie called upon me three ye»r« ago and told me Mr. Orr had saved th« Presbyterian cause at Wadestown from extinction, and later on ho told me of the substantial assistance found by Mr. Orr for him as minister at Wadestown."Hans Pfaal" before hie went to th« moon settled with those to whom ha had_ owed his living by an explosion which he ignited at a safe distance in his balloon. Is Mr. Mackenzie imitating ''Hans Pfaal," and is he trying to extinguish the minister to whom, according to his own statement to me, hi» present congregation owes its preservation! —I am, etc.,

ROBERT WOOD.

Karori, 10th May.

P.S.—Mr. Mackenzie is proud of the fact that the lady he champions voted against my motion. My motion consisted for the most part of a declaration o£ acceptance of the Presbytery's finding that Mr. Orr was without moral fault in the whole prosecution. The vots he ie proud of was an attack on a Prefc bjfttry decigion.^-R_.W. . . • . .