CHURCH UNION.

Evening Star, Issue 13092, 27 October 1908, Page 7

CHURCH UNION.

A»PBESS BY BISHOP NE"vTLL.;' Th* Primate of New Zealand (Bishop Nevijl) dealt with yie important subject of Church union, especially as affecting tha Anglican and Presbyterian denominations, in his addles at the opening of the Diocesan Synod, which via,t deliverd at St. Paul's Cathedral last night. In the course of his address the Bishop *»id: '''There is a movement, very observable to-day, which is intimately connected with the very life of Christian so-ciety-r-one which has been silently, mysteriously, yet powerfully and universally at work for some time past within the Church herself—l mean the movement towards the reunion of Christendom—hidden, indeed, from the view of the many because hitherto this has been little more than the cherished hope of the individual soul: _To this great movement towards Christian unity—now too manifest to need apology—l wish once more to direct vour earnest attention. The AH-commanding Voice seems to be addressed to us again : Can ye not discern the signs of the times?' Would God that my poor voice in such a matter might reach beyond my bynod, beyond my communion. "I spoke just now of the universality of the sentiment of unity, and we need •0 further proof of this than the report of the proceedmgs of the Lambeth Conference recently held. A committee consisting of no less than fifty-seven archbishops and bishops gathered from almost every part of the world was appointed to consider and report upon the subject of reunion and intercommunion between (a) Episcopal Churches and (b) non-Episco-pal Churches, and these great divisions embraced in their immense scope the seven following subdivisions, each in itself opening out a theme of the utmost vastness-viz., (1) The ort h o dox Eastern Church ; (2) the separate churches of the East; (3) the Latin communion; ™ r ße rt churches of the West; (5) the Umtas Fratrum or Moravians; (6) the Scandinavian churches; (7) Presbyterian and other non-Episcopal Churches. It is manifestly out of my power to give any account within the limits of this address of the recommendations of the Committee on each of these great subjects, tnough I shall touch on some of them. ine bishops commence their report by a restatement of the principle asserted'bv ♦ui L,ambeth Conference of 1897—viz" that the Divine purpose of visible unity among Christians is a fact of revelation and they append to that report no less than twenty resolutions which were adopted by the Conference, resolutions which were sympathetic and wise, and which are sure to be studied with interest throughout a very large part of .Christendom. One very important fact is brought into prominence by the statements contained in this report—viz. that the utterances of former Lambeth Conferences on the subject of reunion have not fallen unobserved and fruitless, but that on the contrary approaches towards intercourse with the Anglican communion have been more frequent and more friendly during the past decade than at any period since the Reformation. . We of the East may naturally take an interest in Eastern communions, "for Jerusalem is the mother of us all; but with the Western-meaning thereby the Roman Catholic—there is obviously no prospect of union under existing circumstances. -

nffJr f u a I ? 0Slt!0n to turn vour attention to a branch of this subject of leumon which has a more direct and imt"io e ,l la !!l an u? Up °r n our local ecclesias-alrlatmhips-I mean the prospect, which has somewhat unexpectedly presented itself of late, of the welding into one powerful, historical, and evangelical or ganisation the Anglican and Presbyterian communions. When one contemplates th« almost irresistible influence for "ood which Mich a consummation would ensure, and the emphatic answer which an action involving so much of self-denial on both sides would afford to the envenomed accusations of the Church's foes; when added o all this one is brought face to ace with the waste of material resources, the undesirable schemes which have times to be resorted to for the maintenance of religious agencies and the terrible loss ot spirituality which these things involve eading many, alas ! to learn to justify lect of divine worship itself, because they can see that all things are not as they should be within the Church herself ; when oil these things and more are brought to VZ' thmk the servant of God must address to himself the question: Is this sad condition of thin"s without remedy? For surely nothin- less than a conviction that this is so" can justify its continuance !

„.-T he . S r eat value of certain negotiations which have recently been carried on in the neighboring colony of Victoria between the representatives of the two communions is that they have pretty clearly shown that reunion is feasible. *I do not say that all difficulties have been removed but I do say that the admirable spirit which has hitherto been displayed augurs well for a successful issue in God's good time. the resolutions arrived at by this Conference and a scheme prepared for a solemn, formal and public consummation ot the proposed union are, I believe, in the hands of leading Presbyterian divines m this city. I have held conversation with some of them upon the question, and also with some of the leading laity, and the ST u f h t art , and bread * h of view with which each and all have met the subject here in this centre of privileged Presbytermnism has, I thankfully record it, filled me with hope. I have chosen this sub! dear brethren, in the hope that it may engage your attention, and perhaps it may be thought desirable to constitute a permanent committee or commission to utilise any opportunities for conference and intercourse which may occur. It is probable that the ™S; rs ., of m - v and possibly some ouUide it, may desire to have a more fn^i? 1 Stot * em t e u , - t ° f thc P resent situation m relation to this question, together with some expression of my own views upon it A?Jm,M? Slt £ at T' th c en - r understand thai Archbishop Clarke, of .Melbourne, was approached by some leading Presbvteriins and asked whether he would presiJe over joint meetings of committees duly elected to represent the two churches with 1 Sew to ascertain what propositions or fundamental question could be accepted on both rintl'i °r resolutions accepted by the committees were then to be submitted to a conference of delegates an pointed by each Church, and should he resolutions of the committees find accent ance by the Conference they were then finally to be submitted to the supreme legislatures of e, : h body in Anstraliaf The subjects upon which agreement was eventu ally arrived at, both by the committees and the fcilrt T° ' Thc foundations of IS "fi 'a J"* & ««ncnts of Salvation,' and Tne Authority and Grace of the Chrisjan -Ministry,' specifying on this sublet that ordination should be ministered with prayer and fastmg and imposition of hands on the part of those who had authority eo \L m Z rec °S ni "d that up to the time of the Reformation there was one common success™ of orders carried on through bjabons, and it was decided that in the United Church this method should be continued With reference to those cr darned before the consummation of tffe imion it is proposed that during the performance of the very impressive* ceremony prepared for that occasion? should it arrive the Primate of Australia on th" one hand and the Moderator of the General \l sembly on the other should, in a very ne7 sons, manner confer upon the presbyters of each body all the rights, powers, and autho rrties pertaunmg to the office of a priest in the Church, as set forth m their respective ordinals It 15 probable that this bold proposal will be the subject of much discussion but if corporate reunion is ever to take place it appears to me to be difficult to devise a more solemn and sui'table scheme than the one proposed, and I think it far better than the careless manner in which so many non-episcopally ordained ministers at the restoration of the monarchy were allowed to officiate lis priests of the Church, on no other condition than that of conforming to the powers which then had come to be. At this point I will endeavor to set tefore you my own feeling in reference to this movement, so widespread and so little looked for. And first I would say that I believe it to

bo of Gotf, »p4 II «o, it follows that wo njust be very cjirofrtl l&t by any mere prer judice or preconceptions we-place a hind-' ranee or stumbling-block in the way of the accomplishment of the Divine purposes. Yqu say, perhaps, 'Wemust adhere firmly i to what we believe to be true principles of Church order,' and I say: ' Yes, but may not those principles—however true in 'themselves—be pliable of a nuiph, application than hi cases which arc ordinarily presented to ua?' ' To 'put the matter as plain-y as I can, I do not doubt that many of out people would experience some feeling of perplexity if, after, the suggested union were accomplished, the element* of tHehcjly"' Eucharist were presented to thorn by a" clergyman who had been presbyteriaUy. ordained. I present such a case as containing tbfi crux of the whole question, The body of Christ is ever actuated by the Spirit of, Christ, ajid though ordinarily acting through arrangements which are at least of' apostolical authority, these ore not to be held so to bind and limit-the operations of that Divine Spirit as that He may'not, upon some worthy occasion, as when the body itself, is putting forth all its vitality fo? the! healing of its wounds, efficaciously bestow the needed gifts of order and life for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, and for the edifying of the bodv of Christ under arrangements of exceptional character. Aro we not justified in regarding an event so unique, so absolutely without parallel, as the one under contemplation, as a fitting occasion for a special bestowal of spiritual giftsT "You see from ail" this that in what is contemplated I fear no breach of those church principles which we cherish as wc have been taught, but rather an exceptional mode of their application. Writers on ecclesiastical polity—such as Bishop Hcoker—have abundantly justified abnormal action under circumstances of necessity, arguing that even a layman may ad : minister the sacraments where it is impossible for a priest to be had. But the plan and theory which T am commending t-j your consideration is such that if it found acceptance hy our Church, say, throughout this province—and if in the long run it find -acceptance bv our Presbyterian brethren—it means not that onr pulpits only will be open to them, but that they may stand by our altars. It moans, too, that dioceses must be divided and bishops appointed over them, just as in the Australian scheme it is proposed that the day of the consummation of the union shall witness the consecration of several Presbyterian ministers, per saltum, and their induction to new sees. And I have lived to say all this in Presbyterian Dunedin, hut I know that all T have said will pass but as the topic of a fleeting moment unless there be deep down in the hearts of all a desire to hasten the fulfilment of the .Master's prayer, a courage to take practical steps for its accomplishment, and a willingness to make all sacrifices which may lawfullv be made to bring earth so near to paradise. If I have been bold in speaking in such a citv of such a union, T justify myself by the remembrance that Knox, and not Melville, is the coryplueus of this place—Knox, a vehement denouncer, indeed, of all which he held to be tyrannical and corrupt, but no inconsiderate opponent of the Church's anient regimen. Unable, on account of failing health, to take part in the 'Leith agreement' of 1572, which recommended the continuance of episcopacy, he nevertheless showed that this was in accordance with his desires bv sending a letter some month.? later to the General Assembly, calling upon that body to carrv out the agreement by filling the vacant bishoprics, which hitherto it had neglected to do. It may be true that the rapacious nobles sought in the '• agreement of Leith " to appease the Church bv the continuance of her offices and titles while they laid violent hands upon her property, as it is also true that later on—viz., in 1580—those same nobles, having seized almost all there was to take, voted the extirpation of episcopacy, as thereby they rid themselves of the rightful owners of the property, and so made themselves secure. But John Knox had nothing to do with this. He had long before been removed from the tumultuous scene, but not before he had sent his two sons to England, who each received episcopal ordination there, and quietly carried on the work of beneficed clergymen— the one at Cambridge and the other in Essex—to the day of their deaths. I cannot but believe that were John Knox with us here to-day to witness the altered state of things—the absolute removal of corruptions against which he justly inveighed, the peaceful government of the Church bv the harmonious action of her constituent elements, the purity of her ritual and liturgy (superior to that liturgy which he himself prepared, and which was in use for over seventy years)—if, I say, he were witness oi all these things, he would surely lift up his strong voice to his followers, and say: 'Sirs, ye are brethren; why do ye wrong one to another, weaken the Christian cause, and paralyse even the power of love by remaining apart, when united ve might evangelise the world?' "Brethren, this gTeat movement will shortly be brought before the authorities ot the respective Churches in Australia. Let not New Zealand merely look on in profitless amazement, but let us, with a faith equal to their own. be prepared to respond to the impulse of the spirit which is once more moving upon the face of the waters."