THE BISHOP'S CHARGE

Waiapu Church Gazette, Volume XX, Issue 5, 1 November 1929, Page 8

THE BISHOP'S CHARGE

(Space does not permit of our publishing m full the Bishop's presidential address to Synod.) Brethren of the Clergy and Larby. — Before commencing my address 1 would refer to the election of Archdeacon Herbert Williams as my successor m office. The Archdeacon is, as you know, the third of the family to be Bishop of the See of Waiapu. His father,. Leonard Williams, was the third Bishop and the latter' s father, William Williams, was the first. The Archdeacon is a man of wide learning, ripe experience, and an expert m canonical law and m procedure of synodical assemblies, so that Hie will enrich the counsels of the Bench of Bishops, while long experience of the diocese and his knowledge of its internal affairs will be of great help to him m the administrative work of the diocese. In your name I ask him to accept your Best wishes m the life and work before him. The diocese will extend to him that spirit of loyalty that so marks it, and I can assure him of our prayers. It is with feelings of deep .thankfulness that we meet to-day m this new Hall. It has meant postponing this Session to a somewhat later date, but all will agree that it has been worth while. The fine proportions, the lofty roof, the spaciousness of the buildingall help to make this Hall attractive. The seats, you will notice, instead of running at right angles to the platform, as m the old Hall, where spacewas limited, now face the chair, so that discussions can be carried on with some approach to dignity, and should be well within the hearing of all. Visitors will no longer be relegated to the back but will be accommodated m the galleries, where there should.be no difficulty m following discussions. The new offices are commodious, and they have been planned with a view to efficiency and labour-saving. The building as a whole is one of stability and beauty, and is m keeping, both m structure and dignity, with the Cathedral. 1 now extend a special welcome Jo my -brother the Bishop of Aotearoa, who though a member of Synod since 1905, sits with us to-day for the first time as Suffragan Bishop of Waiapu. 1 welcome, too, new members of this Synod. Dean, Mayne, who, for some time, had shown the strain of working the Cathedral Parish for so long single handed, was compelled, early m the year, to seek rest. It was hoped that a change to Taupo would have proved sufficient, but he returned no better.

A long illness followed, causing the gravest anxiety to his parishioners and many friends. On returning to Hawke's Bay there was considerable improvement and hope was entertained th; further rest, and change to a warmer climate, would complete his recovery. With this m view a visi.t to Australia was arranged, but he was not strongenough to undertake the journey. There was a relapse, and on the morning of September 3rd, he passed quietly to his rest. Our sincerest sympathy goes out to his widow and family m their, great sorrow and bereavement. The Dean was appointed Vicar of the Cathedral Parish m 1906 and' Dean m 1918. During the 23 years of his incumbency he won many friends. His strong personality will be much missed here m our assemblies, as m the parish he has served so long and faithfully. He was a most lovaflMe man; he was seen, perhaps, at his best m the sick -loom, where his quick, spontaneous sympathy found full expression. He passed away as he would have chosen, a3 Vicar of the parish he loved so well, after months of suffering and weakness borne with great fortitude. It is hard to realise that he is gone from us, so closely was he associated with us and with the life of the place. The Rev. H. T. Bawnsley, who resigned the cure of Patutahi owing- to ill-health, to the deep regret of all who knew him, did not long survive his retirement. He passed peacefully away after several months of suffering and weakness, which he bore with .the fortitude that so marked his whole life. Mr Itawnsley was a faithful Priest of no mean ability, and a man. His bright cheery ways won for him many friends and made him delightful company. He was loyalty itself. His. courageous spirit is now at rest . m the paradise of God. His life and character are an inspiration to us all. The Church Army. — Owing to my resignation, the question of a Column of Church Army Officers coming to New Zealand for the purpose of holding Missions of Witness is m abeyance. But it is hoped #hat this may yet be arranged. We are grateful to the Headquarters of the Church Army for sparing us another officer to work with Captain Ball. Captain Squires, who arrived from England on September 6th, is at present at Tuai Camp, thus setting Captain Ball free to work m the camps of the Napier-Gisborne Bailway Extension. Hitherto Captain Ball has done what he could for other Camps as opportunity occurred. We rejoice with him m having a fellow-labourer m his difficult work.

The Bißhop of Aotearoa, since Ms consecration, has visited the centres. in both Islands, addressing large gatherings of both, pakehas and' Maoris. The wonderful receptions given him where ever he has gone, must have been gratifying not only to the Bishop himself, but to all. the people of his race, as well as to us who claim 'him. It is gratifying, too, that each Bishop of the Province invited him to his Diocese and organized gatherings for him to address. All this augurs well. It does not mean, as some fearedj the raising of a barrier between the two races, but rather a closer bond of union. May this be so m God's good Providence, and may the Bishop, the first of his race, be the means, through God, of winning back to His flock many who have wandered. Co-ordination of .the Maori Mission - This has long been before the .mem)bei's of the Executive of the Board of Missions, who have given it considerable time and thought. The difficulty has been the lack of any central authoritative body with which the Board of Missions can deal. It is impossible to co-ordinate with each separate Doceae; any attempt to do tins might lead to untold difficulties and confusion. The Board of Missions must have some recognised central authoritative body with which to deal. With this m vieAV, the Board of Missions, at its annual meeting held m Wellington on August 14th, passed the following resolutions: — 1. "That a representative of each of the Dioceses of the North island (appointed by the Bishop of .the Diocese) with the Bishop of Ao.tea<roa,' form an Interim Finance Committee to act on behalf of the- ■four Northern Dioceses m the co-ordina-tion of the Maori Mission needs with the Board of Missions." 2. "Subject to the approval of the Standing Gonuniittee of General Synod's appointment of the Finance Committee, the Board's Executive 'be instructed to proceed with tbfe co-ordination of the Maori Mission." These resolutions were passed by the Standing Committee of General Synod whidh met the following day, August 15th, so that this interim finance committee acting on behalf of the four Northern Dioceses has been set up. It will he the first step towards the unification of the Maori work m fche Province which is so much needed, and will lead on to further development m the direction of unifying Missionary work amongst the Maoris and the establishment of a Maori Mission m the Province, m the place of the several

separate units which deal, for the most part, with like problems, but; hitherto have acted independently. The Missionary Budget for 1929-------------1930. — This is fixed the same as last year, viz., £18,000, and the Diocesan Quotas are the same with ihe exception of Nelson, Dunedin and Waiapu. The position is this — Nelson took over ail extra 1 per cent, last year, 'but is unable to continue this owing- to Jbhe severe financial losses caused by the earthquakes m the destruction of Church property. I therefore took upon myself to make this offer on the part of the Diocese, tKat Waiapu would be responsible for half, viz., £90, if another Diocese would meet the other half. To this the Diocese of Dunedin immediately responded. I mention this to explain why our Diocesan quota is £2790 for this current year, as against £2700 last year. Our sympathy goes out to the Diocese of Nelson m their financial losses, caused! by the earthquake, and m the consequent disorganisation of parochial work m the affected parts. It also means delay m the building of their. Cathedral. I have made no appeal m the Diocese for help for Nelson to meet some of the losses to the Church properties, which are estimated at not less than £2000, but sympathy expressed m some practical way would cheer and help our Church people m a sister Diocese. A Supplementary Budget. — The Board of Missions at its annual meeting passed the following resolution:— "That a Supplementary Budget be prepared by the Board! m which the special need of Melanesia be put forward and £2000 additional be asked for Melanesia." In not including this m the annual budget, to which I ihave referred, the Board of Missions has expressed its opinion that the giviiaig power of those who are now keen to extend the Kingdom of Ohrist beyond our own shores has been reached; not the giving power of the people of the Church of this Province as a whole. That is almost unlimited— but the giving power of those already interested m Missions is limited. For anotheareason it appears as a supplementary Budget. It is an extra ; an urgent ,need to meet debts incurred m the running expenses of the Mission that should be paid immediately. I feel sure that when .the appeal reaches us, the Church people of my Diocese will respond as they have ever done. The Melanesian Mission holds a special place m our hearts. It is linked up with a wonderful past, as well as with the, lives of Bishops, Clergy and Lay workers, who, to-day, . claim our admiration and re-

spect. It is a part of God's Vineyard especially entrusted to us, and we shall respond .to this appeal, I am confident. At the same time we trust that those m authority m the Mission will endeavour to make expenditure correspond with the income at its disposal, so that special appeals, save for nnforseen circumstances, are not; needed. Before leaving the subject of Missions I would express my deep thankfulness that my Diocese exceeded the amount of our Assessment by £525. To me this is a matter of great rejoicing for I know of no truer indication of the spiritual life of a Parish than the share it takes m Missionary work and enterprise. It is one of the tests, if not the main test, of the life within a .Parish. In saying this I do not necessarily cast reflection upon the Vicar of a Parish that has failed to reach its quota. I know how difficult it is m some parishes to stir up or create missionary zeal and enthusiasm, and I know too that this cannot be done suddenly; at the same time the general rule holds good, that a Missionaryhearted Vicar makes a Missionaryhearted ipeople. Einthusiam is a rare thing m these days save m sport } but when you get it, the real thing, it is not easily resisted, especially m the Missionary . cause. I would congratulate those Parishes that have come up to the quota and those who have exceeded' it. In some cases it is due to the real personal effort of the Vicar; m most cases, I think, to the adoption of the Duplex System. It is to the parishes that have exceeded their quota that' we owe our premier position. While dealing with Finance I would express my indebtedness to the' Finance Board of the Diocese. I am able to do so because, though a member of it, 1 am unable; to attend the meetings often. The Diocese is m a sound financial position and, given good years of moderate prosperity, and a not too overtaxed runholder, it should continue to dp so. , I would here mention the valuable work done by the General Secretary, Archdeacon Brocklehurst, on behalf of the General Diocesan Fund. He is a "persona grata" m the Parishes he visits, both with the Vicar and Parishioners. You will see on reference to the returns of the General Diocesan Fund ending March 31st, that the amount) raised m Church Collections, Subscriptions, etc., for this Fund was £4553 11s Id. One noteworthy fact is that the number of subscribers has increased from 361 to 512, and the Subscriptions are £520 more than last year. On the stability and strength of this fund the finances of the Dio-

cese greatly depend, so that I view with satisfaction the increase both m subscribers and m the amount subscribed. Social Work. — St. Mary's Home continues its good work under Nurse Carter, with an able Staff. You will see from the report that the debt on the Building Fund is now reduced to £3000; this is due to legacies, subscriptions and to the grant of £882 made from the General Diocesan Fund. Since the close of the financial year Miss A. L. "Williams has generously reduced her mortgage, by £500, thereby bringing the liability on the Home to £2500. 1 hoped that we should have been relieved of the burden of debt before this. Such an Institution should claim the interest and support of our Church people. ' St. Hilda's Home has been full the whole year and continues its high standard of efficiency under Miss Waller's loving and capable supervision, Abbotsford Home, under Nurse Jones, is doing well. The discipline and tone are excellent. These Homes are worthy of our fullest support. We shall be m a position very shortly to put into the hand of the people an illustrated booklet compiled by Canon Maclean, dealing with the social work of our Church throughout' the Dominion. There is a prevalent idea amongst our own Church people, that our Church is doing very little m the way of Social Work, m comparison with other religious bodies. A study of this book will reveal the fact that m Social work our Church holds the premier place m New Zealand. It is not only doing the work but doing it well. Such a book should enlighten the public and call forth new interest. The Deaconess House There have been this year two trainees under Deaconess Esther Brand at the Central Deaconess House, Gisborne, both for work amongst the Maoris. A third will enter next year for training as a Deaconess. Deaconess Isabel Sanders continues her work m the Cathedral Parish, and Deaconess Mabel Holmesin the Parish of Hastings. Their work is much appreciated. WhaEarewarewa Mission House.; — Continues its work under the loving care of the Misses Bulstrode, with an assistant. With the help of a car they are able to cover a large area and so keep m touch with the distant Maori Settlements, where Sunday Schools and classes are regularly held. Improved roads have facilitated travelling. The Manutuke Mission Houso.--Under Miss Price, with two assistants, is the centre of sound Church life and

work. Here again a car has made it possible to open Sunday Schools and hold classes where before i£ was impossible. The lluatoki Mission House. — Is^ under the charge of Nurse Bartrum, with an assistant. The number of children boarding m the Mission House has become considerably . reduced of late from various causes. Tokomaru Bay Mission House. — Is under the charge of Miss Davis. With improved health she is able to keep m. .touch with the chilaren m the township, and at the Waima endj holding classes m each. Te Hauke School.— This school \va:> built by the late Archeacon Samuel Williams as a Church School for .Maori* iv the District. It was opened m 1905. Passing through various vicissitudes, it was closed, and re-opened m 1918. Since 1919 it has been under the charge of Miss Aipliu. It has now been decided to close the school, but Miss Aplin will remain as Mission Worker. It practically becomes a Mission House. The school when first built m 1905 met n real need. Since then, two State schools have been erected m the near vicinity, so that the continuance of the school is no longer justified. Miss Aplin, now freed from scholastic work} can give all her time to other direct Missionary work. I regret that the Mission Houses at Porangahau, AVliakatane, and Hauiti are still closed, but 1 hope soon to place a worker at Hauiti. Hauiti still feels the loss, by death, of Deaconess Ada Carter, and would welcome another worker. The Maori Mission does need these women workers. All who know these Mission Houses can bear testimony to their spiritual influence and usefulness. Here is splendid scope for women who wish to take up direct work for God, and where can they bett&r find it than m working amongst the women and children of our Maori people. We owe .them much) and Ihere is a debt that can be paid m service and sacrifice. Pensions for our Women Workers.--I have frequently spoken, m my Synod addresses, of the need of providing pensions for our Women Workers who are giving up so much and are receiving so little m return, of this world's goods. The members of our Pension Boaxd Ihavle given the matter their closest attention. The problem as to how to meet this need is not an easy one. There are real difficulties m the way of their joining any existing pension scheme with any satisfaction. We are now attempting to solve the problem by building up a Pension Fund of our own. The General Diocesan Fund

has made a grant, you will see, of £100 for this purpose. It is a beginning. Surely some of our Church people will, when thinking of making- bequests, let their thoughts turn m the direction of a Pension Fund for our Women Workers. 1 should indeed be thankful il such a fund . could be strongly established. A Bill to establish the fund is coming before Synod this Session. Oyr Maori Church Schools. — I ani refraining from making reference save m passing to our Native Church Schools. They need no word of mine to commend them. Te Aute College} and Hukarere School are something more than names; they stand for something solid and sound' beyond the confines of the Diocese. Waerenga-a-hika College. — Though smaller, is more than a school — it is a Home, with a real sense of family life. It is important that our Institutions should have their Chapels ; especially our Church Schools. Te Aute has its Chapel on the hill, built during the lifetime of Archdeacon Samuel "Williams as a .tribute to (his work. Waerenga-a-hika College, the beautiful little building originally the Chapel of Te Rau College, Gisborne, built as a memorial of the' work of Bishop Leonard Williams. It is most desirable that Hukarere School should have its Chapel, too. The sum of £1170 has been collected for this purpose largely through the zeal and energy of former Hukarere pupils. In addiition to the amount received for the Building Fund, the sum of £110 has leeii raised for Maori decorative work by the Napier Thirty Thousand Club, but, of late, interest has flagged and very little has come m." The amount still needed is from about £1000 to £1200. The school was started by Bishop Williams, assisted by has sister, Mrs Heathcoto, m 1875. From the opening' of the school andi onward till the end of her -life, Miss Maria Williams did all m her power to make the school as effective as possible. The school's interests were her interests. Till health failed her, Miss Maria Williams kept m closest touch with the pupils and the old girls. In this way the influence extended beyond the confines of the Diocese. She was both Mother and friend, to the children of our Maori people, and many owe much of what they are to-day to the strong, quiet influence and kindly guiding of. Miss Williams. Miss Maria Williams passed to her rest on May sth m honoured years. I can conceive no better memorial to her life and work than the erecting of the Chapel for tRe School to her memory. I would strongly recommend this to

all, especially to our Maori Brethren, m and beyond the Diocese. It would indeed hs a fitting tribute to one who loved much our Maori sisters, and who never spared herself m their service. I will now turn from the Diocese and refer to some of the problems that • confront the Mother Ghurch :— Prayer Book Revision. — This has been so misunderstood owing to snatchy and garbled accounts reaching New Zealand that I feel constrained to review the whole position with a 'view to getting a better understanding. The position practically dates back to tlio passing of the Enabling Act of 1919. It is easy to criticize this Act m the light of subsequent events. It might have been wise at the time to have asked that matters spiritual should be determined by the Church Assembly and Convocations without reference to Parliament. Such action, had Parliament accepted it, would have saved the Church from the .present impasse, and the control of the Church over its own spiritual affairs would have been safeguarded. Unfortunately this was not done. Doubtless the framers of the Enabling Act thought, not unreasonably, that Parliament would be content with asserting its legal rights to interfere with the proposals of Ecclesiastical Assemblies but would refrain from exercising its right of dealing with, oofr f in any way interfering with the spiritual concerns of tho Church, though the actual right to do this has never been questioned . It was within the power of the Act. However Parliament took the course it did, and the Church has to face the situation. There are those amongst the leaders at home, who consider that the Church can only be saved from this impasse m which it finds itself, by disestablishment, m other words, that disestablishment alone can give her that freedom to deal with her own spiritual affairs, which is the Church's inherent right. The question is, can the Church at home have that freedom without disestablishment ? One thing is quite clear, it is impossible for the Church to acquiesce ift the present state ofaffairs. THiat Parliament, with the varied religious beliefs of its members, should dominate the Church m her internal and spiritual affairs, is intolerable. It is hoped, and I believe expected, that a Commission will be set up by the Church Assembly m November to undertake an enquiry into the ways m which the evils of the situation may be removed. But m the meantime, and it is just this I want to stress, the worship of the Church

must be carried on, and at present there is great disorder. The Bishops have a great responsibility and cannot wait till the Commission is set up and reports. They have to act now.; The Archbishop of York m his Presidential address to Convocation m July last makes some important points. He says : — ' 'It is of the first importance to remember what the action of Parliament was. It was a refusal to act. A Measure was 'presented.' The House of Commons did not accept it. As far as the Law is concerned, no change at 1 all took place. To judge by the comments made m some quarters, ib might be supposed that a new law had been passed which it was proposed we should ignore. No new law has been passed. The only law that exists m this department is the law which the .Royal Commission itself m 1906 pronounced too narrow for the spiritual needs of our time. This is scarcely anywhere observed. But if there is a spiritual necessity to go beyond the legal limits, it is certainly not desirable that there should be no such limits set upon the variety of practice as will at. once represent the responsibility of the whole Church for what is done m its name. In such circumstances, it becomes the plain duty of the Bishops to do their best to regulate the Public "Worship of the Church with these ends m view. They are bound to dp this, m the . circumstances, by administrative action, as part of their pastoral care for the several Parishes which ; entrusted to their oversight. The responsibility for every particular decision must be that of the Bishop who makes it. Consequently there is proposed nothing that remotely resembles Synodical legislation. The Bishops will not reach a conclusion and ask lor the concurrence of the Lower House. On the contrary they desire first to inform the Lower House what are the proposals which they intend to' consider, m order that, m their consideration, they may have the benefit of any comments, 01 advice, which the Lower House sees fit to offer. They will then, m their own House, seek to express their general mind so that each of them m the discharge of his own responsibility may know that he has the support) of his brethren m following a certain line of 'administrative action." I have quoted this m full because it presents to us the statesman-like policy of the Bishops. Put' briefly, it is this: — The Church is not setting at defiance a Law. No new law was passed. Parliament merely refused to act. The Bishops have to face the facts. There is a . spiritual necessity to go beyond the legal limits, and yet there

must be some limits jf there is to be order and not lawlessness m the Church. The Bishops would therefore, do their best to regulate public wor* ship m the Church, iiot by synodical action or legislation, each Bishop acting independently, but by laying their proposals before the Lower House with a view to getting advice, and then m their own House (of Bishops) seeking to express the general mind of the' Church so that each Bishop, m discharging his own responsibility, may act m accord with the other Bishops. Now if there were m the Church at home adherence to the existing law, it would not be right or proper to permit now the introduction of deviations from it for which legal sanction bad been sought m vain. But such is not the case. A great deal of what was proposed m 1927 and 1928 had then .already boen m use for a long time. Again lot me quote the Archbishop of York . He says : ' 'What the Compilers of the Revised Prayer Book had to do was to distinguish between those deviations and enrichments which seemed tobe m principle loyal to the Anglican tradition and those which lay outside it, and to adjust the law to that distinction. It is a complete mistake to suppose that the Bishops were, m their prolonged sessions on the Prayer Book, mainly occupied m considering various kinds of outside pressure, and surrendering what they felt unable to maintain. No doubt individual Bishops often surrendered their individual preference to the general mind.' But, as a body, they quite steadfastly set themselves to judge what ought to be recognized and what ought not, and their judgment has been confirmed by the one result that 1 stood out quite clearly from the Votes m the various Dioceses last Autumn, namely, that the Bishops would have the support oi Clergy and laity alike m requiring that deviations from, and additions to, the Prayer Book Services which are not-, covered by the Book of 1928 shall cease. As the Bishops approached the matter m the manner I have described they cannot seriously consider proposals for the legislation of the so-called noncontroversial parts of the Measure. At present all of us are, more or less, lawbreakers. The Bishops hold that the law ought to be so altered as to bring within if certain practices- which now lie outside it. To ask them to legalize three-quarters of their proposals because they cannot legalize the whole, is to urge them to do very obvious injustice to those whose special concern is with the remaining quarter. How can we leave under the stigma of law-breaking men whose deviations

from the existing law we have adjudged and declared to be as loyal to Anglican; tradition and as desirable as thoso which are (practised' or desired by the men who would, by the action suggested, be freed from lhat stiglna, "There seems to be ah impressioh abroad that the. Church ia acting m defiance of Parliament. Such- is not the case. The Bishops are not asking Convocation to authorize t*he . Prayer Book of 1928. That would be a defiance of Parliament. The position is rather this — the Bishops are confronted with disorder and irregularities so great that they threaten the peace of the Church, and with irregularities which may grow. There is no new law to fall back upon, for no new law has: been passed. Action has to be taken m this interim. It is most desirable that the mind of the Church should be sought so that each Diocese acting through its Bishops can come to some common agreement, whereby irregularities may cease, order be maintained,, and the recovery over its own offico bearers be accomplished." I have dealt with this at length because I would further what is beginningj I believe, to take hold of the minds of people at first opposed to the Revised Prayer Book, namely } that there was no desire to attempt to introduce any new Doctrine, but an earn est attempt to enrich the Prayer Book, to meet The spiritual necessities of to-day, and to bring law and order out of irregularities and disorder. With the present Prayer Book as our Use, we are all la-w-breakers, and that is not a pleasant position either for a priest or layman. We would be law abiding. We would have legalized what' would meet the spiritual needs of to-day, which, at the same time, is nob contrary to the Word of God and the teaching of the Primitive Church. To this may the Holy Spirit guide and direct our Church. Reservation. — It is impossible to roview the Prayer Book Revision without reference to Reservation, because this was a stumbling block, if not the stumbling block, m the way of its passage through Parliament, and is a difficulty to those who might otherwise accept the Revised Book. Resez-vation has been objected to by some m authority on the ground thai it is forbidden by the Church, and that the priest is under an obligation not to reserve on the ground of the Oath of. Allegiance and Declaration of Assent, viz., "that m the administration of the 1 Sacraments he will use the form m the said Book prescribed and none other, except so far as shall be ordered by lawful authority." The late Bishop

Gibson of Gloucester, writing, m .1927,, admits that it is by no ; means ; as* simple as it might at first sight appear, ;•• what the lawful .authority ;is by which; exceptions to the form prescribed -may: be allowed; but Bishop :.Gib,son L m&inr tamed that; "necessity overrides such rules and that the plea of ; necessity, can, m some cases, be substantiated," He considered that the line adopted by the Bisfiops m Convocation, .which at that date was- much more restricted than it afterwards became, giv.es/ to the individual Bishop "a guidance. of which it is hard to exaggerate; the weight and importance." Therefore,, acting on this guidance, and on . the. fact that there are cases where neces-: sity overrules, he was prepared to take the responsibility of sanctioning Reservation. Such was the judgment of one of the best recognized modern exponents of the Declaration of Assent. The question is: — Is the Church to fee tied and bound by rubrics of three hundred years ago, rubrics which the Church herself framed and which cannot, for they are of human origin, meet the needs of all time ; or, realizing her responsibility and her day of opportunity, is the Church to go out to meeb the spiritual necessities of the age, provided always that she remains the true guardian of the Faith, and does nothing contrary to the Doctrine of the Church. Reservation is not contrary to the Doctrine of the Church. No doctrine is involved. It is a matter of expediency, often of necessity, if the 'Church is to do her duty to the sick, suffering, and the dying. The point is, priests are reserving the Sacrament by hundreds. This practical side of Reservation for the sink does concern us here m New Zealand. I would sanction it, I have sanctioned it } where circumstances call for it : and m so doing J am at one with the mind of the Church at Home almost unanimously expressed by the Bishops themselves, by both Houses of Convocation, as well as by the Church Assembly. Then there are those who did not vote for the Prayer Book of IR2B, not ■because they were opposed to Reservation for the Sick, but were afraid lest Reservation might lead to "Devotions" ; and it is just here there is some confusion of thought. It is true that there was a minority both m the Houses of Convocation and m the Church Assembly who voted against the 1928 Prayer Book because it did not go far enough. They would have "Devotions" and they would have them legalised. But they are m a small minority. The majority are for law and order and are satisfied with Reservation. The question is — Is the Church to

withhold! Reserya^on, which is. a. spiritual necessity :for ■:' many, -leist, ;by so doing, Reservation should lead, on the part ■of the f <a jv; ; to Devotions? The service: known as "Devotions" is modern, .; cannot lay, claim to .ancient use. or .custom, -and does not- represent the. mind of the: Church. .For these reasons ; I could not . sanction it. While a. \Bishop has 1 , a right.; to exercise his "jus liturgicumj". he should refrain, at least 1 should' refrain, from exercising any such right if such an act were not. m .accord ; with the mind of the Bishops of the Province. . A Diocese should, as far as possible, act. m unison with. J>he Dioceses of the Province and with i- the mind of th& whole Church. When the Church of this Province comes to deal with its own Prayer Book Revision, which, by the passage of the Enabling Act through Parliament, it' is now at liberty to do, General Synod will, doubtless, hold before it these two main principles,r— to preserve the Faith once delivered to the Saints and to act m accord with the mind of the Mother Church. Church Life To-day. — While we can thank God to-day for signs of life m the Church, for a growing number of Communicants, for intenser life among Christian attendants, we cannot but be filled with sadness, little short of dismay, when we think of those who can ibe counted by hundred's who are attached to no organised religion, to whom Sunday is a day of pleasure and sport, and who apparently' are living without God. The problem that confronts the leaders of our Church is no easy one —How jk> create a hunger for God m man, who doesn't want God ; how to draw into the fellowship of the Church those who live outside and are content to live so. Our Church has forgotten its starohiness and gone mto the streets to prooiaim its message, but with small response as far as the man m the street is' concerned. Reform must come from within. The life must make its own appeal. It can speak when methods fail. May I quote some words spoken by the Bishop of Ohelmsford at (his enthronement: — "The judgment of to-day may be sharp but it is absolutely fair ; men and women to-day know a Christian when they see him; and if there be seen m us .the slightest likeness to the Lord we serve, then we shad afford the one great conclusive argument of the value of our Faith ; that it is the living religion, which can beautify and shape . the raw material of humanity into the likeness of Christ. „ . . We must aim at turning out a better type of Christian from our Churches. Christianity is the per-

fecfc-social religion. But all too ofteni the devout Olutrch goer is by no means an easy person to get on with. The world outside expects quite rightly that those who profess the religion of the Divine Friend of all men will be people distinguished for their sympathy and generosity of heart, people who are both loving and lovable like the Lord whom .they serve I pray for the time when we re-dedicate ourselves to what is surely our paramount duty, the sacred duty of making our Churches the spiritual factories, where men and women uxe converted-, not/ into people who hold ecclesiastical opinions, but into people who m life and character remind the circles m which they move of the Divine Man of Galileo." Such is the function of the Church. The Lambeth Conference. — This Conference of Bishops of the Anglican and American Church, which meets every ten years, meets next year at Lambeth. The Conference of 1920 faced the question of the "Unity of the Churches." with a large sympathy. In its "Appeal to all Christian people" it stated how far m its judgment the Church, m its deep desire for unity, was prepared to go to further this great end. It was an appeal to men of good will to join issue with the Church- in its high endeavour. The Conference of 1930 will be faced' with practical issues, to some extent, at least, the outcome of its appeal of 1920, of which the proposed Union of the Ghux'dhes of Southern India is one. We are lookiug anxiously for some pronouncement. Though the Lambeth Conference has no legislative power, the voice of the Church, speaking through its Bishops, carries its own weight. It might be said that the question of Southern India is a matter of local concern, and should be dealt with by the Church of its own Province, but here principles are involved which are of vital importance to the whole Church, the. disregarding of which might lead to schism. It is not my purpose to go into the matter, of which jflie broad facts are known to most of us, or attempt to weigh the merits of the case. 1 give it you, rather, as one example of the momentous questions which face the Conference on this great subject of Unity alone. I want you to realize the great need of the Prayers of the Church for the guidance and help of the Holy Spirit. We shall need) days set apart for Prayer before, and during the Conference, especially for the Archbishop of Canterbury, upon whom the burden of responsibility must press so heavily,

and upon whose guidance and leadership so much depends. It is with feelings of sadness that 1 preside over this Synod for the last time. When I placed my resignation m the hands of our Archbishop, 1 gave, at the same time, my reasons for taking this step. The Diocese, with its large area and its many claims, needs a younger man .to carry forward the work. There are great opportunities for a man of vision, of strength, and of courage. The work of the Church i-» so vast that it can only be done by diversity of gifts. So it is with a Diocese. A Bishop gives his own individual touch and passes on. In giving my touch to the work I am conscious of many failures. These, with the brotherly kindness you have ever shown me, will perhaps be forgotten, and you will remember me as one who tried to serve. I, for my part, will hold m happy memory the unity that has bound us together m fellowship and 'brotherhood, m kindly relationship and friendship. This, while it makes for 'happy memories, makes also the official severance from my Diocese hard to face.