CHURCH CONGRESS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 10125, 7 May 1896, Page 6

CHURCH CONGRESS.

AFTERNOON SITTING.

The Church Congress held under the auspices of the Auckland Diocesan Synod, which was opened on Tuesday night, was resumed

ssterday afternoon at the Young Men's

Christi&u Association Rooms, the Most Rev. Dr. Cowie, Primate, presiding. Mr. R. Udy,

Chairman of the Board of Education, was to have presided, but he was detained by other duties, although he arrived subsequently and

took part in the proceedings. Heavy rain had fallen just before th.a hour of meeting, but notwithstanding this there was a large though not a crowded audience, and amongst those present were the' Revs. -6. B. Monro and T. F. Robertson (Presbyterian ministers) and a number of representatives of other churches. The proceedings were opened by all present joining in the Lord's Prayer. RELIGIOUS EDUCATION.

The subject for the afternoon's consideration was "Religious Education," and it was divided into three sections, a lay and a clerical speaker being allotted to each.

IS THE HOME. - The subject of religious education in the home was introduced by the Ven. Arclio sacon Dudley, who said the subject allotted to me is " Religious Education in the Home.'' Now, education has been defined as " the formation of life's habits under direction or, again, as " teaching to bear responsibilities and laying on responsibilities as the subject is able to bear them." And religion is " that which binds" the sense of obligation, or responsibility, which must have an object; that object is God! But man is a social being; he finds himself in relation to his fellows ; thus our definition of religion may be expanded into a sense of responsibility towards God and towards man, " mv duty towards God and my duty towards my neighbour.'' Proceeding from this basis, the speaker went on to point out that " religious education" involved the inculcation and development of a spirit of reverence and a spirit of fellowship. Christianity has purified and created the conception of God, and expanded enormously the scope of human fellowship. God is under it revealed as "our father," through Jesus Christ, and all men are called in Christ into one fellowship as brethren. Religious education begins iii the ho ire. The home begins when man and woman are joined together in marriage. The first purpose ot their union, according to Holy Scripture and the Church, is for the sake of the children, who are to be brought up "in the fear and nurture of the Lord, and to the praise of His holy name." Christian marriage should always be between those one iu principles, for this reason: better " crucify the flesh," and remain single, than be " unequally yoked with an unbeliever.' 1 In discipline of married life before the children con#is an excellent preparation for the constaut self-sacrifice for the sake of the children that their welfare demands. The speaker proceeded to point out the respective duties of the lather and mother; the practices, the duties, the recreation, the training from earliest infancy, the rules and discipline, and above all the spirit that should breathe through the ideal home; the superiority of example over precept, aud concluded by saying, " Gradually, but surely, as the experience of the children enlarges, the names of father and mother and homo will be felt by them to be the sweetest names on earth. Where duty, informed by love, has been the reigning spirit, where reverence and fellowship have oeen constantly inoulcated by word and by example, these are the best conditions for the development of a strong and pure and healthy manhood, and of a sweet and modest and gracious womanhood, the promise of the Old Testament will surely be fulfilled. Train up a child in the way in which lie should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it; and if under strong temptation, or as the result of recurring difficulties arising from inherited tendencies, there lis in one here and there a grievous and i ->longed lapse from the path of life, the ' -ming received in the home iu childhood is the Lest earthly

ground of hope that the wanderer shall sooner or later be brought to true repentance. The motnory of the earthly home and of the e.irfhly parents who ever pointed to a larger home an] a more perfect love will constrain the prodigal at length to cry out, " I will arise and go to my father." Mr. S. Luko followed 011 the same subject. He said 110 had jotted down a few thoughts from his own observation and what he had read. He quoted Matthew Arnold to define religion and education. Religion was that which binds and holds us to the practice of righteousness. To educate was to unfold nature, to draw the affections, to strengthen good and to conquer evil. The influence that cultivated the heart and draws the young soul to God must begin at home. Family life was, he said, the true foundation of natural greatness, and if family life languished or decayed so would the country. But as long as family life keeps healthy, their country would endure and prosper. The great duty of religious education rested with thb parents, and to them they must look for the future of the country. They aro the main factors in making this country a great and good land; and without godliness in the family there can be no greatness in the nation. The education which shaped a child for his or her dutioa as a man, or a womau, or a citizen, is that which he or she received from home. It was in the home, not in the public school, which moulded the child's nature. He

asked whether parents fully recognised their responsibilities and privileges. Parents often complained about their children, and how they were corrupted by bad associates in the public schools, but the question arose: Were not the parents as much at fault us the children? A belief in the fatherhood of the Living God must be. He lamented the growing neglect of the teaching of the Church catechism in their homes ami in their Sunday-schools, for it was strictly educational. It made the child speak for himself, and recognise that he or she is a responsible soul, and the character of God taught them duty and the meaning of the two words " I ought," and as the child grow he would learn that obedience in childhood was the' parent of the power of governing. They should be taught at home that truth is their birthright, that there can bo no greater evil than falsehood, 'ho greats blessing than truth, that truth is of God, and that all powers are in their Hetvenly Father's gift. Mr. Luke also inculcated ' the importance of the class of literature placed ill the hands of the youna, and recommended such as Kings ley's 11 Water Babies," Dickens' " Old Curiosity Shop," " Tom Brown's Schooldays," and others, alter whioh they would come to appreciate Shakespere and Milton, Tennyson and Wordsworth, who would teach them that nature was not dead but peopled with the life of the Deity. The modern yellow book, the degrading sex novels, would then be cast away as unclean things. After further reference to the paramount importance of home teachiug, he said the ohiidr?n | were rendered fit for the use of their Merciful I Saviour for such purpose as He thought fit I either in the Kingdom on earth or in Heaven. As Birrie beautifully expressed it, "The gates of Heaven are so easily found when we arc little, and they arc always standing to let children in, and then we ourselves shall know that He owns us and our childreu as part of His Holy Church, whose head Ho himself is, and of whom the whole family in Heaven and Earth is named.'' (Applause.)

IN THE CHURCH.

The Rev. Canon Nelson read a paper on the subject of religious education in the Church, and he referred to what was beiug dona'in the old land, and in other British settlements in the good work of religious education. They wero not, however, in congress to consider and discuss their own peculiar circumstances to see how far and in what measure they failed, and how far and to what extent they may be improved; He would point out (Ist) some hindrances in the way; (2), means of remedy, and if they had iii mind the way in whioh religions education in the Church may be promoted they would not be far wrong in formulating these three divisions: (a) The pulpit, (6) the training at our theological and kindred, schools, and () the Sunday-school. In regard to the pulpit, he said if they did not regard pulpit utterances amongst the first factors in religious education in the Church, is his opinion they mistook one of Us

functions, and. that by no means one of the least importance. .With regard to theological colleges and their training, if the teaching • of the pulpit is to be what it ought to be, then the preparation and training of those who were to teach in such responsible positions as pulpits should be of the best. Fortunately they had in New Zealand great provision for this necessity in St. John's College and kindred institutions in the South. When, howerer, they came to the third factor, the Sunday-school, much j more required to be said. Rightly or wrongly it had come to be regarded as the main agency in the work of religious education in the Church here. Biehop Wilberforce described Sunday-schools as a necessary evil. Evils they were, because the work which they tried to undertake might and ought to be better done it- .he home, and necessary because in most cases it is not done in their present circumstances and surroundings. The cause possibly was because the conclusion was arrived at—however erroneous and fallacious that conclusion might be— the whole of education was comprised in the State school system. Far be it from him to decry that system, which is admirable; but far also be it from him to maintain that any system of education oould bo complete when the foundation, the basis of true education, morality and religion, were excluded. A hindrance which educationists of the Churoh had to face was that they had little or no foundation on which to build. The State declined to lay it, the parents for the most part were reckless about it, or indifferent, and so religious education in the Sunday-school was hampered and hindered by the mistake of the system on the one hand, and the woful indifference of parents on the other. Were they, he asked, always to have the Bible, God's book, pat in the background, banished and ignored from their secular schools ? As a means to remedy some of the defects which they admitted, and generally to improve the character and .quality of their work in religious education, be .submitted for_ consideration whether the time had not arrived when the supreme counoil of the ohurch, the General Synod, should not take this work more particularly into its care, and by wise enactments direct the Diocesan Synod to lay clown a scheme ot action and method worthy of such a cause. The Board of theological studies was doing splendid work in one direction. Was it too much to hope that their labours may be ex' tended in the way of devising plans for the better equipment of teachers, their regular supply, their increasing fitness for the work, A licensed lay-reader held deservedly an honoured position amongst the labourers .n the fold of Christ's flock. Had not, he asked, the time come when they may have working side by side in every town and diocese another faithful, earnest, well-equipped, and well-prepared band of licensed teachers. Such a body need not replace or supersede workers such as they now had, but act rather sit first as the little leaven leavening the whole lump! Was, he asked, the idea, too crude, too Utopian, or was it worthy of some serious consideration? (Applause). Mr. V. E. Rice, followed on the same subject, pointing out that the Church enjoined that each baptised child should be brought up in the Christian faith. Under the compulsory system of education the opportunitiealor affording re igious instruction were largely curtailed, bu 5 the child was furnished with the elemental'!' intellectual training which rendered him more capable of receiving and comprehending instruction in religious truth. He said that instruction must necessarily be dogmatic. He did not undervalue the study of the Bible, the greatest of all boots, but the Prayer-book was the syllabus of the Bible, and the teaching and reading of the Prayer-hook would be found to be the best preparation for tbe study of the Bible. He referred to their duties as elders, and urged that children should be invited to use God's house for private prayer. Upou the subject of Sun-day-schools he offered two words: (1) Could not some of the time devoted to learning and repetition of hymns be more profitably oocupied in teaching the construction and use of the Prayer • (2) Is there not in the Bystem of competition for prizes a danger of encouraging an undue desire fir pre-eminence and distinction? After further remarks, Mr. Rice concluded his paper as follows While it belongs to the ordained clergy specially by Divine commission to teach the truths of Christianity, to the laity also belongs the duty ot spreading and upholding the truth. Is this duty remembered as it should be? Is it an' uncommon thing to hear of all shortcomings | being charged upon the clergy! Can we reasonably expect a clergyman to undertake, single-handed almost, the task of instructing some 400 or 500 children in his parish, to say nothing of those older members of his flock, who often need to bo reminded of the very elemonts of Christianity? Besides those who are qualified to giro and do give pood active help in the Sundayschool every adult lay member can help to promote religious training of the young. Nay, every adult is either helping or hindering it. We may not delude ourselves with the notion that what we are and what we do matters to no one but ourselves. The religion of the Gospel is an open not a secret thing. The influence of our words and ftotions upon the young who hear and see us is immense. Should we then wonder if the habitual levity and irreverence of some, the arrogant intolerance of others, or the careless indifierencc of a third class ot persons, should sow the seed of like habits among our children? If the Church of England is to survive, it must be by the love and loyalty of its laity as wall as by the exertions ol its clergy. IN THE PAY SCHOOL. The Rev. Percy Smallfield, Principal of St. John's College, confined his remarks principally to what may be distinctively called church schools, and the system of religious instruction in them which he would recommend. Summarising what had been aaidubout religious education he said the teacher must aim at making his lessons attractive. He must not be dry; he must nuke his words both strike and stick, and to accomplish this he must illustrate. As to the lessons to be taught, he thought /the answer was Bible history and the catechism. Lay, he said, a good foundation in the history of the Bible, and then use the f icts to illustrate and lead up to the essential truths so admirably set forth in the Catechism. He then illustrated and defined how the lower classes should be taught, recommending that historical portions ot the Bible should bi chosen in preference to any other. He saiid emphatically that in these days when one hears constantly of sentirasntalism, one cannot call it a charitable saying, "It's no matter what a man may believe so long as he is sincere.'' Well in these days of sentimentalism in religion it was more than ever important that children should be taught definite truths by the Church. Mr. Smallfield alluded to the difficulties in which teachers were placed and the discretion to be exercised. Mr. C. J. Parr read a paper for which Mr. Theo. Cooper was responsible, and which he had forwarded from Wellington as he could not be present at the meeting. It was a lengthy and elaborate protest against the introduction of the religious element into the public schools. Concluding, Mr, Cooper said, "To my mind one of the worst things that could happen to our children would be the separation which would become manifest if Bible reading or religious instruction were introduced with a conscience clause. _ _ How natural at once would be the division, The children from one family would not attend because their father was a Tbeosophist, from another because lie is a Roman Catholic, from a third because he does not believe in the authenticity of the (Juspels, from a foivrtli because he is a Jew. aud so on. And so there would be engendered in the minds of the children sectarian prejudices and ill feeling. Some would i point the finger of scorn at others and the schools would be separated into aajmany divisions as there were sects. What, heasked, would all this lead to ? He said emphatically denominationalism, State aid to private schools, and State aid to denominational schools, and for his part he could conceive of no greater injury to the community than a destruction of the present system of State education, aud the erection of a system of denominationalism. He believed the vast majority of the people an against denominational education, and be also firmly believed that upon a full consideration of the proposal for religious instruction in the Stale schools the vast majorit; l of thinking people would reject such a proposition, (1) because the State has no such duty to perform, (2) because no system of free and compulsory State education can be otherwise than secular, and (3) Bible-reading in schools must inevitably lead to denominational education. There was no necessity for the agitation. The schoolmaster had the children only for 25 hours out of the week. Let, he said, parents do their duty to their children. Let those whoso duty it is to supervise the spiritual interests of the young do their duty, and the cry that our children are without religious knowledge, that their future is imperilled by a godless system of education will cease. The ijry is a false one. I believe a grave injustice is done to our children ana to their teachers. Their children are not godless, they are not in the main : reverent or irreligious, and by far the greater number of them have, I believe, ! either by home training or through the Sun-day-schools, the Christian Endeavour Society, or other agency, sound and sufficient instruction in the Scripture and in the teachings of Christ. Discussion was invited. Archdeacon Willis dwelt on the Importance of having a foundation laid by the facts and literature of the Bible being taught in the public schools, and then in the Sundayschools they would have something on whicui -to build thehi Sunday-school instructions. I

' Mr.- Templar said Mr. Cooper's paper contaioed tSe eternal recapitulation against the introduction in the public teaching of Scriptures in the day ' schools. A great deal had been said on this subject, but in nig (Mr. Templar's) opinion denominational education, and that alone, would make their children Christian children. ~ , The Rev. Mr. Curzon-Siggers addressed the meeting. He said that he had read the congress reports year by year as they were held in other countries, but he had now to congratulate His Lordship in having presided over a congress at which papers were read which could not be excelled at any congress, and he should make a few remarks in regard to the last paper read. He was thankful for i the remarks of Mr. Theo. Cooper. He said that it was alleged that the churches could not seal clergy to teach in the present condition. Well, it was done in Now South Wales to his personal knowledge, There opportunities were afforded for certain hours, and the clergy availed themselves of them: and why could they not do so here? In Victoria the regulations were different, and the same facilities were not afforded, for only tile one half hour in the week was allowed; but they made good use of this half hour, for the clergy of the different denominations used to meet and decide what school each should take, and so they afforded religious education in the public schools. He objected to the term sectarian education. There was sectarian instruction, but that was only a small part of education. They were told by Mr. Cooper that no sensible man would object to his children receiving the instruction furnished to his childreu by the State schools. But, he asked,> could anyone object to the higher education? Then they were told that the Catholics objected. Well, he as a Catholic of the Anglican Church did not object to the introduction of religi9us education. (Laughter.) It was said that no book could be made which would meet the case, but the Irish Text Book was, at all events a partial success, and it was surely possible that it might be improved; but, for himself, he had been astonished, and gratefully astonished, in listening to the papers read and the remarks made one after the other of the manner in which the Catechism was put in its proper place,Jand if. Mr. Lube would lend him his paper, he would preach it as a sermon, next Sunday, and r#commend the congregation to inwardly digest and practice its principles, and he hoped they would continue to rase up congresses able to produce such excellent papers. (Cheers.) Sir. Eugster said he experienced heartfelt gratitude for the spiritual treat he had received from thegentlemen who had brought up the papers which they had just listened to. He had had considerable experience in regard to Sunday-schools. He was not & member of the Anglican Church, but he was a member of that Catholic Church spoken of so frequently that night, and they were all one on the subject of religious education. He coincided with the remark of Bishop Vyilber-forcetbatSmiday-schools were a necessary evil —he thoroughly coincided. He spoke from experience, as he was a visitor of the schools of the Sunday School Union. To help Sundayschool work they should foster home life. They should endeavour to take stray children off the streets, and endeavour to obtain legislation to take them away. He also approved of tho introduction of the Irish Text

A clergyman present said, in reply to Mr. Cooper's paper, that although he may not know it, and said it was impossible, religious instruction was given in the State schools of England, and even in Whitechapel, where a large proportion of the children were Jews, not 7 in a thousand withdrew when religious instruction was being given. The Rev. F. Larkias said that he was glad the subject of cathechisiug had been introduced, for he had two of these classes a month, nod he had uo happier time in his ministerial experience. Mr. K. Udv first excused himself for being absent at (be opening of the meeting, explaining that he was detained at another meeting. He said there was nodoubt that at present religious education in the public schools was a burning question, but it was a stumbling block, and the difficulty was such aait was impossible to get over in scattered districts. He had read the Irish text book, and he had a very strong objection to certain passages in it. They had 7.10 teachers, who no doubt represented all denominations and some belonging to 110 denomination, but he believed if this agitation was pursued it would : end in the introduction of denominationalism, ' and it would have been better that it never

was started. It would split up the schools. They had now 100 country schools, the average attendance at which was 25, and as a rule there were at least three denominations in these schools. In centres of population this system might be introduced, but in outdistricts it could not be done without serious injury to the children. He noticed thatevery speaker and every paper read had missed the fact that religious instruction can be given in the public schools out of school hours. It had been done in several schools with success, and he did not see why it should not be done in other cases, but if it resulted in cutting up the schools it would be a very serious disaster indeed. The present system was not perfect, but it was doing a large amount of good, and His Lordship and others must have seen children in country districts wending their way to their schools under difficulties. Without the present system they could not have such teachers to instruct them as were available.

The Rev. P. Walsh gave his own experience. He said in Taranaki he had been able to pivti religious instruction in the schools under the discipline of the schools, and there was no disturbance with regard to conscience. During that time he had made lasting friendships with the scholars, but in Auckland province he had not received the same privilege of being able to instruct under the discipline of the school. The Rev. Mr. Lush also spoke, stating that if they wore in earnest thry could have what they professed to want, either in the way of religious education in the public schools or otherwise to have denominatioualism.

EVENING SESSION.

The evening session was held io the Choral Hall, at which, considering the weather, there was a large attendance. His Excellency the Governor, the Earl of Glasgow, presided. He was received art the door by the committee, and, accompanied by the Primate and the Bishop of Wellington, he walked to the stage, the audience and the choir performing the National Anthem. The Most Rev. the Primate opened the proceedings with prayer, and His Excellency then called on the Right Rev. the Bishop of Wellington.

BIBLICAL CRITICISM. THE OLD TESTAMENT.

Bishop Wallis at once responded. Com-! mencing, His Lordship referred to his subject, " Recent Criticism of the Old Testament, termed Higher Criticism." The questions were: (ft) were the books written by the men whose names they now bear ? (6) have they gone through previous adaptation, compilation, revision, or editing ? (c) what is the true form of the text—their actual words—in which they reached their final form. These iiujiiries were perfectly legitimate, provided they were conducted on sound principles, and that they were limited to their proper province ? After a reierenco to the subject generally, His Lordship said that he had no independent study of his own on these matters, and perhaps ho had been asked to address them because for many years he had been on wrma of almost daily intercourse with soinu cf its foremost representatives. His Lordship's address was an exhaustive and learned treatise, and it was delivered with great earnestness.

He concluded by saying that the Spirit of God was guiding His Church into all truth. What these inquiries may lead to they may be unable to see. They had already learned much from a thought more familiar to them, and the permanent value of the Old Testament was to be most carefully considered.

THE NEW TESTAMENT.

The Hey, W, S. Ourzon-Siggers, acting vicar of St. Mary's Cathedral, then read an exhaustive paper on " Biblical Criticism of the New Testament," covering a great scope, and manifesting profound study of the subject, but as it was of a highly technical character, it is only necessary to summarise its salient (outlives.

In opening, the Re?. Lecturer, undressing His Excellency, said it was fitting that he should preside in Auckland over a meeting of a Congress at which a paper on " Biblical Criticism as Regards the New Testament," was to be read, seeing that it was when Captain Hobson was fixing Auckland as the seat of Government of this colony, that the remarkable movement in New Testament criticism took its riso. H« would liavo to sketch the history of nearly 60 years, during which national beliefs had been attacked, but not destroyed, shaken momentarily, only to be placed on a surer basis. Nothing had been lost of value to the faith, and much had been gained wherewith to elucidate that faith. The higher criticism concerned itself with the genuineness and authenticity of the New Testament books. He started with Strauss, who, rejecting the possibility of the Incarnation, explained the [ supernatural in the Gospels as due to the j evolution of legends. His own countryman, Baur, ol Tubingen, slew Strauss's theory and set up a rival ono, namely, that the New Testament, representing the results ot an assumed conflict between Petrine and Pauline parties, the Paulina party won and wrote the New Testament. They could pass over the successive theorists, each being proved unreasonable and impossible by his successor, and acknowledge their indebtedness to the calmness ot English scholars. He warned them to bowato of such English writers m the author of " Supernatural

Religion," whose scholarship was unequal to the translation of a simple Greek sentence, and whose authorities were so misquoted as to show that -he could not have consulted them. The rev. Gentleman then dealt exhaustively with the Epistles of St. Paul and the Acts of the Apostles, showing the work cone by the critics and that which still regained to be done. Referring _to the disputed authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews, he said it seemed possible to reconcile between the two remaining claimants — St. Luke and St. Paul —by a theory which has not yet been thoroughly threshed out—namely, that St. Paul was the primary author, the author of the thoughts ; and that Sc. Luke was the writer who clothed St. Paul's thought with language, St, John's Gospel, he said, no longer prei sented a problem as to its authorship. That has been settled in favour of St. John for the present and future. There is, however, the question as to its mode of thought so different from the synoptical Gospels, though this is met by the idea of translation. He illustrated his meaning by a number of references. The problem concerning the system of the synoptic Gospels was fully discussed, and the • conclusion given in the words of the scientific theologians of Germany, and supported by Dr. Sandy, was that the two document hypothesis held the field. The reconciliation of differences in the Gospels by an Aramic basis are illustrated by the Lord's Prayer, etc. It was suggested that Luke iii., '23, could be translated "Jesus being the son of her that was betrothed of Joseph" by a mere change of letters of one Aramio word so making the genealogy of St. Luke to be that of Mary. The lower criticism, that is to say, a textual criticism of the New Testament in its present accepted results was due to the patient labour of fifty years when the Vatican MS. 8., until then a sealed book, was found. The history of this manuscript was reviewed by Mr. Curzon-Siegers at some length, and Westcott's and Hal's theories wore explained. The lessons which govern the criticism of the New Testament were given, and it was shown that many apparent errors in the New Testament could be explained thereby. The recent find of Mrs. Lewis was examined critically in the light of the history of the Creeds, ana an adoptionist origin waS assigned to it, or at least to some of its statements. To illustrate this, use was made of the translation of an epistle ot Gregory Thaumiturgus, for the first time published in M .rch this year in Europe. A list of early Christian books and their relation to the New Testament was passed in review, and the Creed from the Apology of Aristioes, AD. 124, was read, showing its confirmation of the New Testament teaching. The Apotelygne of Peter and the Gospel of St. Peter were neit dealt with in relation to Christian Faith, Practice, ami Art. In conclusion, the lecturer said-With all our discoveries we have have nothing Eusebins does not mention. We have not all he names. We may never find anything of which the title is not already known. All we do fiud will confirm the truth of our New Testament as being the maximum of divine thought for this superstition in the minimum of divinely chosen terms. We need not be sorry if we never construct a perfect text of the New Testament. No principle of Christianity loses thereby. The Holy Ghost who inspired the writers still secures in His Church all that He inspired them to teach. Thank God the Church 01 England accepted the inspiration of the Scriptures, but never defined inspiration; hence no critical views can shake her position. The Holy Ghost guided the most suitable man in each age for the purpose He had in view to select or record out of materials or revelations what was needful to be preserved for the good of mankind, ensuring accuracy for the messages He desired men to receive. The accuracy of that message is secured to us by His guiding Presence in the Church. The forin in which it is clothed is of lesser value. Critics have saved us from worshipping a book and sent us to worship Christ Incarnate as the Word of God. That the originals of the Gospels should be lost may be part of a Divine plan for exercising our taith and for witnessing to the ever-abiding Guiding-Presence of the Holy Spirit, as against the danger of book worship in which Christianity might repeat the Jewish error of saving the letter aud losing the spirit, or of making God's revealed will of none effect by a multiplicity of interpretations of words and phrases—the Scribes and Targums over again. The Holy Spirit, which guided the Church to accept (without formal discussion, save the Council of Laodicea be reckoned) the books of the New Testament ■ a canonical, because the same Holy Spirit in them caused their authority and weight to be evident to her. is the Person whose aid must be sought by all who profess to deal critically with the work of men who were influenced by that Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit will always aid humble-minded workers, but has nowhere promised to aid those who are so ignorant that they are too satisfied with their ignorance to learn. In the pre*eut state of criticism we may safely say that Christian men who love to pray to the Holy Spirit are the ablest, and yet not necessarily the most conservative of critics of the New Testament. Let us not ignorautly suppose thAt the leading critics are anti-Christians, or that they do not reverence the work of the Spirit of God. Be well assured, that because the Person of Jesus, God Incarnate, was none less than the Person of (Jot! the Eternal Son, and that the Person of the Human nature was the Person of the Divine Nature, therefore, whatever A'eiwsw may mean, it can never be true that Christ could deceive us accidentally, nor could He b. deceived, nor could He teach for fact or use, as fact what was uot fact. The hypostatic union is our anchor in criticism of the Gospels. The battle of the documents is fought, and is won all along the line. Our books are authentic and genuine. The conflict is now between Christians about the mutual relations of the documents in whole or in part of their doctrines. Such doctrines as the Resurrection, the Ascension, Session, and second Advent, we are confidently told, may be taken as admitted. The centre of interest is the doctrine of the Incarnation. This is the central truth of Christianity, the key by which the problems of the universe and of life are alone soluble. Upon the Incarnation, net only Christianity, but the ! world, stands or remains an inexplicable meaningless absurdity. The Incarnation is being discussed, to use the words of another, less in relation to its being a fact in history than to its being a belief in the pre-'xistence of our Lord before the Incarnation took place, and upon this must depend the acceptance or rejection of the Trinity of Essence as opposed to what is practically accepted—the Economic Trinity, the Trinity of Revelation. Here is the interest of New Testament criticism. Finally, ail criticism leads to one result, viz., the clearer manifestation of the guiding presence of One Master Mind, revealing to toiling soils by His indwelling, the purposes of God, finally Self-revealed in the Person of Jesus, Who is God begotten before the worlds and Man born in the world—a truth which New Testament criticism has for ever firmly established—in Whom the criticism of the New Testament will more aud more help us to see the self-manifestation of a God of Infinite Love, standing by those who shall have faith in Him in the dark days, for which the storm clouds are gathering last. When those days come we shall be thankful to the critics and their work, for we shall know that reason and history, as they have shown, support one faith in Jesus our Redeemer and King,

Questions were invited, but there were n me put. 0

The Most Rev. the Primate offered on behalf of the audience their thanks to the Bishop of Wellington for the instructive address they had just heard from him. After the retirement of Bishop Hadfield from the See of Wellington, very great anxiety was felt, not only in Wellington but throughout the whole province of New Zealand, for they all felt what a disaster it would be if his successor was not a scholar. In Bishop Abraham and Bishop Hadfield they had distinguished scholars, and they were all pleased to recognise in Bisbop Wallis a worthy successor to these distinguished men. It was not an easy matter to make the acquaintance of a diocese for a new man, and it was not always a matter of pleasure to come through a gale in a small steamer on the coast of Mew Zealand , and less to his wife, who was present, but they were all "lad to see Bishop Wal'is here, and all glad to thank him for his paper. If His Excellency would permit him to say so, he wished to say that they were pleased to see him amongst them again. Owing to the fact that his term j of office would soon expire, they could not expect to nee him frequently in the future, but they recognised the interest which he had always taken in the welfare of the country, and were glad to see him amongst them now. They all regretted the absence of Lady Glasgow, and felt the deepest sympathy with her on the death of the lady who was no recently delivered from the burden of the flesh. The Most Rev. the Prifhate then pronouueed the benediction, and the proceedings terminated. to day's proceedings. The Congress will meet at the Young Men's Christian Association rooms at halfpast three, when papers will be read on the "Church in Relation to National Life," and in the evening the subject will be "The Causes of Neglect of Public Worship."