OPEN LETTER No. 1 TO THE PRESBYTERIANS OF OTAGO AND SOUTHLAND.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 10731, 20 February 1897, Page 6

OPEN LETTER No. 1 TO THE PRESBYTERIANS OF OTAGO AND SOUTHLAND.

j TO THE BDITOR. Si*-., — Your nameless correspondent who published an open letter to Presbyterians in your issue of Saturday last gives as a reason for his wriMhg the fact that the basis of union was considered by the synod ia committee, and owing to that the debate was not reported. The non-reporting of the debate was much regretted by the friends of union, for there was a general feeling that the weight of argument was strongly in favour of. union, and we felt that a full report would have enlightened the church and done the cause of union ranch good. A proof of that is found in the unexpectedly large majority who voted in favour of union. The figures were 77. for and 26 against. Quite a number who came to the synod undecided on the subject were cpnv--*-<?d by. the discussion and voted for union. It should also be pointed out that the way in w!.;ch some of the opponents of union seek to make the elders jealous of the union movement by speaking of it as if it were a clerical movement is utterly unwarranted. In our lasfc synod 34 elders -oted for union and only 12 against it; and several years ago Mr Stobo,- who was then convener of the Committee on Union, to make sure that we were not moving against the feeling of the church, 'sent queries on the subject to- the various sessions of the church, and reported to the synod that the returns were overwhelmingly in favour of union. In the face of these facts it is distinctly cool of anyone to appeal specially to our elders on this question. The elders of the church have a good right to regard such appeals as an insult— as impugning either their intelligence or their honesty. But as _ the opponents of union have raised this qtfesfcion in your columns, with your leave I will examine the arguments advanced in open letter No. 1. Your correspondent begins by admitting that the principles of Presbyterianism imply and "lead to the union of churches, but pleads that the circumstance? in which we are placed warrant a divided Presbyterianism in New Zealand. He is extremely unfortunate in big attempt to prove this by reference to the history of Presbyterian Churches in other countries. He refers to the churches iv Canada and Great Britain, but in each of those cases the size of the churches was decided, not by convenience for travelling, but by national boundaries. For information on theie and other churches of our order, I would strongly urge your correspondent and other Presbyterians to read the Guild Text Book on " The Presbyterian Churches: Their Place and Power in. Modern Christendom." Ifc would correct a number of misapprehensions. Iv Canada, churches in connection with the Established and Dissenting Scottish Churches were formed in different provinces. There were separate churches in Eastern and Western provinces, and in the succession of unions which led in 1875 to the formation of the Presbyterian Church in Canada, geographical and provincial, as well as sectarian difficulties had to be overcome. In this matter the Canadian Church is" a splendid example to us, and the splendid results of .union in Canada should encourage the friends of union here, The geographical difficulties in covering the vast Dominion of Canada were enormous compared with ours in New Zealand, but ths fathers of the Canadian Church were not so easily daunted as aoma Otago Presbyterians seem to be. Nor is your correspondent more fortunate in his references to the Presbyterian Churches of the United Kingdom. In Great Britain there are three separate nations, and therefore there are English, Scottish, and Irish Presbyterian Churches. It was certainly nofc convenience for travelling that determined this division, as' your correspondent seems to imagine. Ifc would be far more convenient for the Presbyterians in Northumberland to have their headquarters iv Edinburgh than in London, and th3t fact alone should have shown your correspondent the absurdity of his argument. But if the English Presbyterians had their headquarters in Scotland it would mark their church as an exotic in England. This would be fatal to its success, and in her whole policy she is, to use the language of the Guild Text Book above referred to, "doing her utmost to identify herself thoroughly wifch Eogland and the English people." The cost and ease of communication of which your correspondent makes so much has really nothing to do with the matter. All these countries give us the example of churches thafc are national and not provincial in their character and operations. New Zealand stands alone in ths Englishspeaking world as a country where geographical difficulties are allowed to make the Presbyterian churches provincial rather than national in their character. In the United States the division of North and South was caused by the question of slavery, and not ease or difficulty of communication. The great American church 'tretches from the Atlantic to the Pacific. In the vast Dominion of Canada and in the enormous colonies of Queensland and New South AVales geographical difficulties have been overcome, and Presbyterian churches, national in character, are working through and influencing the destinies of these youug pations. The same state of matters exists in Victoria and. Tasmania, and in the United Kingdom. New Zealand alone has upon its ;scutcheon the blot of a divided Presbyterianism md provincial churches, and all because it ;akes a day and a night to travel from acre to Wellington. And the disgrace belongs exclusively to Otago. The Northern Church s not provincial. It covers the whole of New Zealand but Otago and Southland, and in its readiness for union displays a catholic and lational spirit. The whole blame for this state )f matters rests with a handful men in Otago, 'or whom Otago would seem to be the universe. Your correspondent seems to me to exsgjerate the difficulty about the attendance of jlders afc the assembly. Those familiar with ;he Northern Assembly assure us that there

is a fair attendance of elders afc it The assembly of the united chnrch will meet every second year ,n Dunedin, when the Ofcago eldew will attend as at present, and a number ol elders from the north will also be with us • when we meet in Wellington the northern elders will attend, and a fair number of Otago men will be there. Our difficulties in that matter areas nothing compared with those of the churches in Canada and the United States It is scarcely honest of your correspondent to speak of the assembly meeting afc Auckland when he knows that the proposal is for the assembly to meet sltems-tely at Dunedin and Wellington.

Ifc is difficult to treat seriously your correspondents argument that Otago will be outvoted, in the united church. Does any one suppose for a moment thai in the assembly men will be ranged as north aud south ? Is thafc how 2 UfuxT H-? *• "c dsvi<led in -Wellington? In both Northern and Southern Churches, ss elsewhere, men are of progressive or conservative tendencies, and in the a-ssembly* they will b« divided according to thes.e tendencies jusfc aa they are in both churches afc present. I believe that up north they are as eohservative as we are in Otago, and when the union comes the debating on the conservative side will be much stronger than it is with us at present.

It is, unfortunately, impossible to compliment your correspondent on his generosity when he points out the difficulties the Northern Church has in espying out the principles of Presbyterianism in the present stage of hei development, and then gives that as a reason why we shoald remain comfortable apart with the compact Presbyteriani 8 m ol Otago and allow the Northern Church to sink or swim as best she m%y. It is hardly an argument that will appeal to generous men, and I do not think so meanly of the Presbyterians of Otago. as to believe they will bo influenced by it. If in the north they are somewhat scattered, and therefore in soma Tpe^ tl Weak ' sul' ely that is a reason whF we should hasten, to join our compact forces with theirs that Presbyterianism in New Zealand may be strong. And this compels me to say that 1 have;, observed with regret that both in the synod and in the newspapers the opponents of union have been perpetually appealing to the selfishness of tne Otago people 'on this question. I believe, bir, that nobler motives than those will determine the conduct, of our minister* and elders, and that generous impulses will prompt them to seek to strengthen the hands of our brethren in the north, and that the Otago Presbyterians will remember our Lord's prayer that His people may be one, and in the spirit of that prayer will accomplish a union with the Northern Ohurch Your correspondent objects to union because the Northern Church has nofc adopted the sustentation fund. He should have observed tbat the proposed-of union states that "tha principle of tha sustentation fund—namely,' that every ordained minister in a charge is the servant of the church and is entitled to aa adequate maintenence from the collective church—shall be recognised as determining all arrangements for the support of the ministry ">' What more can we ask for than that ? Your correspondent speaks of union by-and-bye, when difficulties will have removed themselves. He ought to know that if they remain separate the churches will harden on differentr lines, and union will be far more difficult in the future than it is now. This statement of his is important, however, as conceding the point thaf there ought to be one united Presbyteria* Church m New Zealand.—l am, &c February 18. Veritas.

CUT AND DRIED, TO THE EDITOH.

Sik,—" For ways that are dark and tricks that are vain" some of the Dunedin corporations are certainly peculiar. I refer chiefly to the City Council and the Education Board burely the gentlemen comprising these bodies can find some better means of diversion than by inserting bogus advertisements in the daily papers calling tor applications to fill positions fill d *Ie ' '° aU mtents and PurP°ses, already

■«, J- Council call for applicants.to fill the poss or assistant inspector of nuisances when they have a man already appointed and acting in that capacity, and are only waiting tor a subsequent meeting of members to confirm his appointment. Then again, the Education Board call for applications for a janitor for the Normal School, while they have fully determined to amalgamate the offices of janitor of School of Design and Normal School, and offer the position to the janitor of the lastnamed school at an advanced salary. Now, Sir, it is quite bad enough for a man to look month aft«r month in the advertisement column, vainly hoping to see some opening suitable to his abilities, without being ulti.' mately deluded into writing an application and copying testimonials that the advertisers have no intention of seriously considering.—l am, kc,

Dnnedin, February 19.

A Victim