THE FUNDAMENTAL CLAUSES.

Waiapu Church Gazette, Volume XIII, Issue 6, 1 December 1922, Page 424

THE FUNDAMENTAL CLAUSES.

(To the Editor).

Sir, — I- have read with much inter- . est your article m the November number of the "Gazette" on the so-called "Secession" of the Australian Church. Needless to say lam m entire agreement with the general tenor of the article. There is, however, one paragraph on which I personally want some further light. You say, "If the Church of New Zealand wishes to cast away its self-imposed restrictions it can do so by the same, authority by which it imposed them." What ' ' same authority V What authority imposed the "Fundamental Clauses" of the Constitution? Not General Synod, for it was itself constituted under the Constitution. The original Constitution, according to Purchas, has upon it seventeen signatures, the first four being "G.A., New Zealand; H.J.C., Christchurch; Henry Williams and William Williams." My belief is that Bishop Selwyn personally visited all the principal centres of European population and secured the assent to the Constitution, and especially to the "Fundamental Clauses," of all who claimed to be Church of England people. If I am wrong m the above statement I hope that some one with more accurate knowledge of early New Zealand Church history will correct me. I certainly understood this to have taken place from my father, who at that time took an active part m Church matters, and was m a position to know the facts. If this did take place it would seem that only a vote of the whole Church of the Province could annul the "Fundamental Clauses." Such a vote could, of course, be taken, e.g., special meetings of parishioners could be called for the purpose under the authority of General Synod. If no such general assent of the Church people of New Zealand has ever been given to the Constitution, the only authority for the "Fundamental Clauses" would appear to be the seventeen who signed it, together with its subsequent confirmation by the Synod of the Church of New Zealand, practically General Synod. There is much need for a little more light being thrown on the history of this subject. What authority exactly did impose the "Fundamental Clauses" upon the Church m this Province? On the answer to this question depends the nature of the procedure necessary to get rid of the "Fundamental Clauses." G. D. WILSON. Woodville, Nov; sth, 1922,