THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF OTAGO AND SOUTHLAND DEFENCE ASSOCIATION.

Otago Witness, Issue 2293, 10 February 1898, Page 19

THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF OTAGO AND SOUTHLAND DEFENCE ASSOCIATION.

(Pvblhhed un*er arranc/sment with the Association ) In the problem of Presbyterian union in New Zealand one of the most important questions is : "What are the place -and the use of fche iSynod of Gtago and Southland? Synods havo no place in the constitution and government of the United Church, and yet tl.o Synod of Olago and Southland is to exist in some sense and for seme purpose. Ifc is to retain " its separate name and existence as a church court/ but it 13 to be limited in its functions to the administration of certain trust properties. In the course of last year the Rev. James Gibb, in a letter published in the Daily Times and afterwards distributed in separate form among ;be <\*fße<?-bearera oi the church, mad'j the following extraordinary statement. Kepljing to the objection " that the Synod of Ofcago will cease to exist as an ecclesiastical court,'' he said, " In a sense thh is trap, in another . sev^e ii is not true." According to Mr Gibb, the basis ml union as it then | existed was capable o£ two opposite I interpretations on the point now under consideration. If it be said that by the words added by last synod, and I quoted above, this ambiguity is re- < moved, and the synod is clearly to , remain a church court, ive assume | that the words added by last synod must be read in connection, first, with the limitation of the synod's functions ; and second, wnh the clause in the proposed bill which says that " after the | said union the said synod shall cease to exist for the discharge of ecclesiastical functions.' 3 The basis and the bill contradict each other. Ihe one or the other must be altered. ■ Th^ position we propose to establish j is, that it is essential that the synod conj iimic rrs a provincial synod, a real chvrch court, having jurisdiction tuithin its bounds and subordinate to Hie General Assembly. I. The provincial synod is a necessary part; oli a perfect Presbyterian j constitution. The Form of PrcsbyUrial Church Government, after treating at length of the presbyter), 1 , goes on to speak of synod ical assemblies, " which may lawfully b'j of: several sorts, as provincial, national, and oecumenical." In a small church, of course, a j presbytery may be the supreme j court. For J2 j'ears — from 1854 to 1868 — the Presbytery of Otago was the supreme court o£ the Church of Otago. i When a church is, or becomes, too I large for its ministers and elders to meet i frequently it is divided into several ! presbyteries, and the presbyteries together form a synod, which becomes the supreme court, as was done in Otago in 1866. "When a church is, or becomes, gull larger, so that it is impracticable for all its ministers and representative elders to meet even yearly at one place, a national assembly is formed of representatives of presbyteries. This is what is usually known as a General Assembly. If the supreme court could bo a synod — i.e., an aggregate of tiie presbyteries — -as- in the United Presbyterian Church of Scotland and in the Presbyterian Church of England, th^va would bo n^ \ need and no place for ;i provincial j synod. But in the proposed union for j Wow Zealand this is recognised a« im- j practicable. An idea seems to exist in j some minds that the Provincial Synod j o£ Otago would in the United Church be a rival to the General Assembly. This idea rests on a complete misnnderstanding. Such a synod might be numerically large, but constitutionally I it is subordinate to the .Assembly. : There would always be the right of appeal from its decisions, and the Assembly would have the right to review all its proceedings. j Tnow, the synod proposed in the basis j is in no proper sense a church court at all. It has no jurisdiction over presbyteries, and is under no responsibility j to the General Assembly. It is not | empowered, for example, to examine ! | presbytery records, and it is not re- '' j quired to submit, its own records to the : Assembly for revision. It can take up ' no case of appeal or reference from a presbytery. These may seem small matters, but they are sufficient to phow that the so-called synod of the basis is a misnomer, and that those who apply this term to it either do not understand • the historical .meaning o£ the nams or

are misleading the church by offeringa shadow instead of .the substance.

11. The geographical formation o£ Kevf Zealand is such that it is impracticable for each of its congregations to be represented bj its minister and an elder in any one assembly. This is so patent as a fact that it "is really beyond argument. The inference from this facb is to our mind equally patent — yiz., that between tho local presbytery and the national assembly there must be the provincial synod. Without this there is a missing linl-. Something might be done to supply thih link by conunifctees of assembly, as is proposed in connection with certain matters in the basis ; but ; this can nover bo so satisfactory as the [ ordinal y and approved way of it proper | intermediate court. 3n the interests of tho good government and N Trellbtfing of the church we there- ; fore insist that our" synod shall not !be abolished. The .Northern Church lias neTer .explicitly said that it i 3 a condition sine qua non on their part that there phall be no provincial synods. We know that somo of the leaders ia that church do not approve of the continuance of our synod, but we know that others have no objection to it. Let it be tried, and if after tho experience of a number of years it be found either unnecessary or in any way injurious to have a synod in Otago, then lee the wisdom of the church find a better way. Our belief is that after a few years' experience ifc will be found desirable to form provincial synods throughout the whole church and so relieve the G eneral Assembly of a great deal of administrative work. But be this as it may, we are persuaded that ifc would be a rooldess and ruinous policy to abolish a court which has been undoubtedly useful, merely because there are n» similar courts in other parts of the church, or because, as is alleged, the other parts of the church neither desire nor approve them. HI. The so-called synod of the basis» which is to take the place of the present true synod, is a delusion. Whether it may be possible for Parliament te legalise the arrangement so far as civil consequences are concerned is a questioa for lawyers, and whether it is likely that Parliament would pass into lav/ the proposed bill in the face of opposition is a question for politicians; but we think very decidedly that it would be a "gre^t mistake on the part of the church io ask Parliament to do so. Whether tt c so-called synod be regarded as the present synod continued or a ne^v I synod created, its functions ai*e limited to the administration of trust proper- | ties. A body with filiations so limited |is not a synod. The Confession of Faitli t eh. 31, defines a synod as " ministers of Christ, with other fit persons upon delegation from their churches " ; and defines the functions of a synod thus : "It belongeth to synods and councils ministerially to determine controversies of faith and cases of conscience ; '" and again, " synods and councils are to handle and conclude nothing but that which is ecclesiastical." The Form of Government says : "It is lawful and agreeable to the Word of God that all the said assemblies [sessions, presbyteries, and synods] have some power to dispense church censures.' 7 The basis of union changes all this so far as concerns this so-called synod. It is to retain its separate name and existence as a chvrch court, but is to bo deprived of all that is distinctive of a church court — the right to deal with controversies of faith and eases of conscience, tho right to meddle with anything that is ecclesiastical, the power to dispense church censures. There is nothing left but the name. We have not space to discuss the question whether it is wise or right to place the administration of trust properties iri the hands of a body which is nofc a church court, a body whose powers and duties, if not its yery existence, are made to depend on acts o!" Parliament, We trust that every candid reader perceives that ovlv pla» for the continuance of the synod as a true church court rests on a strong and solid basis, and is capabl® of being sustained by weighty and convincing arguments.

The homestead at M*Bgatarata, Blr Spencer Go Han's estate in Hawke's Bay, wsw totally des^.toyed by fire a couple of aignfcs ago. At a meeting at Invercavgill attended by«otaa 300 perfitms on tb« 4-th it was r^soivad lo form a. br&neh of the New Zealand Natives' Association.

Tbe Hoh. A. J. Cadcnan left Auckland on Friday for Te Kuiti. Mr Hujrathou*D, surveyor, will accompany tho Mintsfcsr to Waitarft. and expects to rnach thora en. Monday night. The party will require to camp on the journey. Mr Csdniau anticipates being in Wellington this day weekRepreientativos of several English mining companies and others interested found it impossible to arrange a deputation with. th.« Minister re Sunday work in batteries »od fcax*^. tion imoassd on tha mininsr comnauies.