CHURCH UNION

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 124, 26 May 1923, Page 8

CHURCH UNION

SEVERE SETBACK TO MOVEMENT

PRESBYTERIAN VOTES IN AUSTRALIA. (FROV COR OWN CORRESPONDENT.) SYDNEY, 16th May. _ The consideration of the proposed basis for the union of the Presbyterian, Methodist, and Congregational Churches, which has been approved by the Federal Courts of the three denominations and remitted to the State organisations, was undertaken in several States Assemblies of the Presbyterian Church during the past week, and has resulted in the most severe set-back that, the movement has yet received. All along it has been considered that the Presbyterians might wreck the movement owing to the strong section which was uncompromisingly hostile to it. The narrow victory for union which was obtained in the General Assembly for Australia was the outcome of the most strenuous battle of the cloth yet waged by Presbyterians in Australia, and it was a sufficient indication that the fight would be carried to the last ditch, as represented by the State Assemblies.

Of 'the six States of Australia, it was necessary for affirmative votes to be recorded in four in order that the proposed basis o£ union might be ratified, and this the supporters of the movement, have failed to accomplish,. but it is still possible that the assemblies may .bo equally divided, in which case the Federal Assembly of the Church will have to consider what action should be taken. The first trial of strength, so far as the State bodies were concerned took place in South Australia, where the opponents of union prevailed. In Victoria and Western Australia the result was the same— narrow victories for non-unionists. Then the tables were turned, and in the Queensland Assembly the proposals were endorsed amidst a scene of enthusiasm. There yet remain the Assemblies of New South Wales and Tasmania, and supporters of the movement are confident that they will be successful in each of these. : -

The contest in the Victoria Assembly was remarkable for its extraordinary closeness end its. freedom from bitter-, ness. Eight up to the announcement of the result, 148 against union and 140 in favour, neither side was sure how. matters would go. Victoria, however, is the horns of the greatest opponents of the movement, and, as expected, Dr. Kentoul made an eloquent and memorable oration in favour of maintaining the individuality of the Presbyterian Church. The motion favourable to union had been moved by the Eev. John Mackenzie, who said that the sectional churches had fulfilled their mission, and should now come into a great Catholic Church. It was not optional for them to regard union as a matter of personal choice; there was no such thing.in the teaching of the Church as tin divine right of denominationalism. There could be only one justification for separation, and that was irreconcilable differences of doctrine. Repeated conferences had proved that these differences did not exist, and the proposals submitted contained all the elements of Christian faith. Refusal would impose a heavier burden on their people than, tliey could bear. They must face the question of the revision of their doctrinal, standards unaided. The way of safety was the.forward v/ay.

Dr. Renoiil, in moving his amendment against union, which was carried, said that the manifesto contained amazing statements to the effect that denominational divisions had become religiously unhealthy j and in consideration of their state of unhealthiness they were to be bundled into one room and one bed—an antiquated method of treatment. He believed that if the negotiating churches were in an unhealthy conditiol, the advocacy of union was the cause. There was neither time nor use in discussing the . doctrinal proposals. With 800 Methodist and 200 Congregational ministers, mostly of poor parishes, where would their 576 ministers be?

■ A leading unionist' remarked after flfe vote had been taken that he felt that the disposal'of the Church properties was one question that had had a vital,bearin j on the result of the debate.