CHURCH UNION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26773, 17 May 1948, Page 7

CHURCH UNION

Sir, —Two references to the question of church union in the Daily Times of Friday and Saturday have somewhat confused the issue. Your leading article on Friday morning discusses the question of church union in general, whereas the question to be decided by the vote of members of the Congregational, Methodist and Presbyterian Churches is whether they are prepared to unite on the proposed basis which is a very different thing It is too early yet to say as you do, that the basis contains no insuperable difficulties. On Saturday morning vou publish the report of a motion passed bv the Wellington Presbytery, stating that the " open letter ” of the Presbyterian Church League is. not an official document, and should be regarded with suspicion. The “ open letter ” is the outcome of a motion passed by the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church of New Zealand last November, requesting this document, and appointing a committee to draw it up, of which I have the honour to be a member. It was published by the Presbyterian League because somebody had to take financial responsibility. At the last meeting of the Dunedin Presbytery a letter from the Presbyterian Church League was very cordially received. The letter intimated that the statement was being circulated, and requested the help of the presbytery in this matter. Your readers will see from this that the motion of the Wellington Presbytery, as reported on Saturday morning, was most misleading.—l am, etc., C. L. Gosling, Publicity Convener, Presbytery of Dunedin. Sir, —The Presbytery of Wellington has expressed concern at an “ open letter ” issued by the Presbyterian Church League. The presbytery, having heard that this document is being circulated, has asked local church courts to examine it carefully before distributing it, should they decide to do so. The presbytery also states that if it is decided by the local courts to distribute the “ open letter " it should be made plain that it is not an official document of the Presbyterian Church, but a statement of some of those opposed to church union. On making inquiries from a Presbyterian minster, 1 was informed that- such a document could be distributed to all the congregations as the Presbyterian Church League had the authority to state its case against the proposed union of the Presbyterian, Methodist and Congregational Churches, and that such authority was given by the Presbyterian General Assembly of 1947 In view of these facts there can be only one conclusion, that there is something which the Presbytery of Wellington in its wisdom, or otherwise, finds unfit for Ihe ordinary church member to see, or that such information in the “ open letter ” is embarrassing for some members of the presbytery. However distasteful it might be to the gentlemen concerned—and it must be very distasteful indeed if they find it necessary to disobey the instructions of the General Assembly—in a free country no institution or individual has the authority to set up an index of prohibited reading matter. This, however, is not the Middle Ages, and if such a document can pass the Government censor, I as one of the youth of the ctturch demand to be able to see the ‘ open letter ” of the Presbyterian Church League.—l am, etc., Bible Class Member. Sir, —You are to be commended for your leader of the 14th inst. on the above. It. is good to see a secular paper of your standing giving prominence to this subject. In spite of the letter of such dyed-in-the-wool Presbyterians as your correspondent, “Always Presbyterian,” the fact remains that church union in Canada has proved a success, notwithstanding that some Presbyterians, like our friend, relused to come into the union, and preferred to cause the split in the church by continuing Presbyterian Church services. I have spoken to many persons who have visited Canada during the past two or three years, and have been told whereas the United Church is a live and virile church, that of the continuing Presbyterian is cold and lacks the spiritual warmth of the other. The opinion of our recent visitor, the Rev. Dr John Baillie, on church union is worth referring to. When speaking to a large audience during the Dunedin celebrations he said, inter alia: “ He believed wholeheartedly in the need for churches to combine into a world church. He was not now as ardently pro-Presbyterian as he had been. He still belfived that the Presbyterian form of worship was the best, but he suppressed that feeling because that was not the most important thing at the present time. The important matter was the removal of the weakening agent of competition between the churches and the substitution of co-operation and unity in faith.” What a difference in the outlook of this distinguished leader of the Presbyterian Church and that of “Always Presbyterian.” The latter, in spite of the benefits that would accrue from the union of the Presbyterian, Methodist, and Congregational Churches, is evidently determined to oppose union whatever the cost. —I am, etc., Christian.