ANGLICAN CHURCH SYNOD

Otago Witness, Issue 3556, 9 May 1922, Page 58

ANGLICAN CHURCH SYNOD

BISHOP JULIUS ELECTED PRIMATE. AUCKLAND, April 27. The General Synod of the Anglican Church was opened this afternoon, the Acting Primate (Bishop Julius) presiding. Bishop Julius was unanimously elected Primate. Bishop Averill, as senior bishop, congratulated Bishop Julius on his elevation, which unanimous election was proof of tho confidence of the whole Church in him. He mentioned that Bishop Julius was the thir tee nth bishop, according to the consecration, in the whole Anglican communion. He thought the Church should fall into lino with other oonjjnunitiee and call their Primate archbishop. Dean Fitohett (Dimedin), on behalf of the clergy, and Mr C. A. de La tour (Gisborne), in behalf of the laity, congratulated the Church of the province and: Bishop Julius. “ M.y brethren of the clergy and laity,” said Bishop Julius, in reply, speaking with some emotion, “I do not find it very easy to speak. You can understand that after 32 years’ connection with the province of Now Zealand, I feel very deeply, in not only the confidence you have shown, but the kindly, sympathetic, and hearty way in which you have done it. It was oheering to an old man, conscious of his mistakes and shortcomings, to know that he possessed something of their love, esteem, and confidence. There were times when one felt the Church wanted leadership, strength, and youth, and all he could bring was love of Church and devotion to their cause.” CHURCH UNION QUESTION. May 1. At the session of the Anglican Synod the debate on Canon James’s motion with reference to the Bible in schools was resumed, and progress was reported with leave to sit again. The Synod resumed next the debate on Bishop Sedgwick’s motion regarding church unity. An amendment by way of addition was proposed by Bishop Averill, who moved : —“That copies of the Lambeth appeal and resolutions on re-union he sent to the leaders of the Christian churches in New Zealand; that those churches be invited to co-operate with the Anglican Church in prayers, study, and conference, with a view to the ultimate realisation of the Lambeth vision.” Bishop Richards, who supported the motion, said that 99 per cent, of the people did not grasp the fact that the differences between the churches were fundamental. They did not want to combine all churches into one big Anglican Church, but wished thit the conception of one Catholic Church should be understood. Bishop Sedgwick believed that the great obstacle to unity was failure to grasp what was meant by the Church of Christ, which was one visible Church of God. After further debate the motion, with the addition laid down in the amendment, was carried unanimously. Bishop Sedgwick’s motion was—“ That the .Synod express its thankfulness to God for the great movement made towards unity by the Lambeth Conference of 1920, and associate itself with the resolutions passed by the conference on this great question.” MARRIAGE PROBLEMS DISCUSSED. May 2. The Anglican Synod discussed the resolution of the Lambeth Conference dealing with problems of marriage and sexual morality. Bishop Averill moved that the synod associate itself with resolution 67 of the Lambeth Conference of 1920 as follows: “The conference affirms as our Lord’s principle, and the standard of marriage a life-long and indissoluble union, for better or for worse, of one man with one woman, to the exclusion of all others on either side, and calls on all Christian people to maintain and bear witness to this standard. The conference, while fully recognising the extreme difficulty of Governments in framing the marriage laws for citizens, many of whom do not accept the Christian standard, expresses the firm belief that in evei’y country the Church should be free to bear witness to that standard through its powers of administration and discipline exercised in relation to its own members.” At Bishop Averill’s request the following clause was added to the motion: “In view of the fact that the conference admits the right of the national or regional Church within our dominion to deal with cases which fall within the exception mentioned in the record of our Lord’s words m St. Matthew’s Gospel, under the provisions which such Church may lay down, the Primate he respectfully requested to appoint a Recess Committee to consider the matter fully and to report to the next session of the synod.” Bishop Averill said he moved for reference to a committee because he thought that in two or three years scholars would come to conclusions more definite than at present. The controversy revolved round the difficult position of the so-called innocent, party, and the Church’s attitude depended on the interpretation placed on the passage in the Cospel of St. Matthew where fornication was mentioned as an exception to the Lord’s definition of adultery. The Lambeth Conference gave no advice as to the interpretation which should be placed on this important exception. Thus we could so amend our custom as to allow remarriage in our Church if, that is to say, \Ve thought fit. He reviewed the theories of Christ’s teaching on divorce. Archdeacon Charles had maintained that it was the act of adultery itself, and not the . Divorce Court, which broke tho bond of matrimony. “I am not ashamed to confess,” concluded Bishop Averill, “that it would give me the greatest joy and comfort if we had permission to remarry the innocent party in our churches. This would not be done, however, until the truth was established that, the act of adultery itself destroyed the bond. If this was proved it would he possible for the Church to issue a decree of annulment.” The debate was adjourned. A proposal to centralise the Anglican primacy in Wellington came before the Synod this evening. The Primate moved the second reading of the Bill. Bishop Julius said he was not, altogether satisfied with the conditions of tile Bill, and was doubtful whether it would work properly. The feeling at present was reflected in the decisions of the diocesan synods, three of which had accepted the principle involved and three had rejected it. In these circumstances he would not press the Bill. The Bill was lost by one vote on a division.

May 3. The Synod resumed the debate on Bishop Averill’s motion regarding divorce. Bishop Stenard (Melanesia) drew attention to the difficulty of introducing a more lax marriage bond among the primitive people of his diocese. Dean Fitchett (Dunedin) said marriage belonged to the race not to the church. He deprecated th© attempt made to disput© the authority of particular passages of the Gospel. » Mr N. Burton said there was a tendency on the part of the State to treat ministers as servants of the State as far as the administration of the marriage law was concerned. If the State allowed for the remarriage of divorced persons it was sheer rebellion to refuse to officiate at such marriages. He had been told that if legislation, legislating marriage was strictly enforced it would be an offence for ministers to read in public ■ those portions of th© Bible referring to the Lord’s _ teaching. He strongly denounced the ignorant and reckless tinkering with the marriage institution on the part of the State. Ihe mouon was carried unanimously. -the Synod passed a resolution commemoratirig the life and work of the lat© Primate (Bishop who sustained, to an advanced age, with self-sacrificing New Zealand energy, the duties of his high office. The Synod recorded an appreciation of the life, character, and work of the late Archdeacon Harper. May 5The Synod resumed the adjourned debate on Mr De Latour’s motion urging the appointment of a commission to inquire whether the constitution of the church had developed to make the fullest use of the capacities of' members for service. The motion was carried. t Canon Wilford (Christchurch) moved — “That the Synod, recognising the great need of formulating sound public opinion among church people on religious and social questions, welcomes proposals to hold the T'hureh Congress in Christchurch in May, 1923, for the discussion of the most urgent problems confronting the® church at the present time, and urges upon the clergy and the people of the province the duty of supporting the movement by all means m their power.” The motion was carried unanimously. Proposals intended to bring the church in close and immediate touch with immigrants arriving from the United Kingdom were submitted by a select committee. The report stated that at one time representatives of the church were permitted to visit ships in the roadstead on the health officer’s tug, but the authorities no longer permitted this, the Salvation Army representative being the only accredited agent. The committee did nor recommend an appeal to alter this. The Army was doing its work well, but the committee did not think this particuhu work of great value. The agent had little time at his disposal, and passengers were busy and excited. The committee recommended the appointment of chaplains to accompany immigrants to New Zealand on ships, and that each bishop appoint a small Immigrants’ Reception Committee responsible for welcoming.immigrants, giving them counsel and advice, and when necessary pecuniary aid The appointment of an honorary central organiser to keep in touch with the various diocesan eemmittees and organise the whole movement were also recommended. Mr Sedgwick gave notice to move inglyThe congratulations of various Frotestant denominations on the decision in support of the principle of church reunion was accorded the Synod by a deputation representing the Ministers’ Association and the Council of Christian Congregations. Archdeacon Chatterton (Waiapu) moved—- “ That in view of the fact that alcohol is recognised as responsible for many of»the moral and physical evils that- are in the world to-day and that it is the bounden duty of the church to definitely associate itself with the efforts to combat those evils, this Synod calls upon members of the church (a) to exercise the sacred duty of voting at the next referendum in such a way as Lo place the moral interests of the community before any interest or consideration, and (b) to recognise the duty of combating the evil of intemperance by personal example and willing self-sacrifice. The debate was adjourned. The centenary of the arrival in New Zealand of the Rev. Henry Williams was commemorated by a synod resolution which was carried expressing thankfulness to God for th© fruits of the work he "was enabled to do. The Rev. IT. Parata (Dunedin) moved: “That the synod, recognising the valuable services rendered by lay renders, deem it desirable that provision be made for the supply of sermons for their use, and that a commission be appointed to prepare suitable sermons.” Bishop Averill moved an amendment substituting for the second portion of the motion that it he a recommendation to the Standing Committee of Dioceses to take the matter into careful consideration. The motion as amended was carried. The synod recorded its regret that Bishop Mules, one of the oldest members, was unable to be present, and conveyed appreciation of his life and work.