Untitled

Clutha Leader, Volume III, Issue 139, 9 March 1877, Page 6

TO THE EDITOR. 'Sir, — In a conversation Avith Mr Bannerman, the conA-ener of the Presbyterian Church Mission Committee, I learned that it Avas not his intention personally to do anything in the Kaik Church affair, but to leave the matter to the Mission Committee, Avhich would shortly meet. At the same time I learned from him much that 'confirms the acciiracj- of the history given "in your last issue (from the Guardian) of "the mission at the Heads. Only in one particular does that history come short in doing justice to the Mission Committee of the Presbyterian Church, whose courteous xsoaduut contrasts so markedly with that

of Dr Nevill. Tlie latter in no way put ' himself ii\ communication with those who I were in actual possession and oven statedly ■ using the mission premises, on which they '■ had expended milch money and were ready to spend more. But the Mission Com- • niittee, before taking any steps towards entering upon mission work at the Heads, put themselves into communication with Mr Vohlcr, of Ruapuke, the representative of the Bremen Society here, desiring to know if the Society intended to continue the mission at the Heads, and intimating that if the Society did not, the Presbyterian Church was prepared to undertake it. Mr Voider replied that he had not received any instructions from the parent Society, but that it was his I firm belief that the Society would not appoint a successor to their deceased missionary. So jealous were the Committee of the interests of the Bremen Society, that though they might have been warranted to enter upon the tvork at the Heads on the strength of Mi- Voider' s strongly expressed belief that the Society would withdraw from this portion of its field of missionary operation, they preferred to wait till the Society should itself declare its intentions. And not till then did the Mission Committee break ground at the Heads, undertaking at the same time tho monetary obligations noticed in the history above referred to. Thus courteously did the Mission Committee act. This courtesy on then- part stands in manifest contrast with the discourtesy on the part of Dr Nevill, communicating with the Maoris at the Heads, but ignoring those who, while the Church of England had done nothing in the way of mission work then, were actually engaged attending to the spiritual wants of the natives there. In the face of that neglect on the part of tlie Church of England, it does seem bordering on the impertinent when Dr Nevill, in his letter to Dr Stuart, seeks for an excuse for his conduct, that no communication had been made to the authorities of the Church of England when the Presbyterian Church took up the mission at the Heads. What connection had the Church of England with ' the Heads ? What had she been doing there that she should be communicated with on the subjetc 1 The Presbyterian Church communi cated with the Bremen Society because it had been working there and had interests there. As such they and thej r only were entitled to be regarded and communicated with by the Presbyterian Church, which the circumstances of the mission fully en : titled that Church to do. And surely common courtesy, to say the least, demanded of Dr Nevill that he should have regard to and communicate with the Presbyterian Church before stepping into her shoes, just because that Church had . interests in and had been working among the Maoris at the Heads. But as you say, accounting for his conduct, Dr Nevill counts the Presbyterian Church no church, her ministers no ministers, her ordinances vanity of vanities, and the man who shews so little acquaintance with the truth and spirit of the sacred volume as to do so is not to be wondered at if he come short in fulfilling the Bible command, "Be courteous." It is reported of James VI. , that - in a fit of ill humour on finding the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church of Scotland too much for him, he expressed himself to the effect that Presbyterianism was no fit religion for a gentleman. This saying will aptly apply to the Church of England in Otago. If Dr Nevill's lack of courtesy (so essential an element in the gentleman) be homologated by his Church at large, and he be regaaded, as I suppose he must be, as the model of what an Otago Anglican is, then Otago Anglicanism is no fit religion for a gentleman who desires to be Courteous.