THE DUNEDIN BISHOPRIC.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2694, 5 October 1871, Page 2

THE DUNEDIN BISHOPRIC.

The London correspondent of the Neis Zealand Church News writes upon the above subject as follows: —The Dunedin Bishopric case has excited a good deal of attention in England and the action of your last General Synod has been severely com*

•mented on by mahy church and other papers. Bishop Jenner protested most strongly against the appointment of another Bishop, and at first declared his intention of taking legal proceedings to enforce his claim; this would have been the source of a grave scandal, and would have been most prejudicial to the interests of the Church. The Bishop of Lichfield and Bishop Abraham have written to the Guardian giving their views on the subject; both are in favor of Bishop Jenner, and he has the sympathy of a very largo number of Churchmen. Bishop Abraham; lately Bishop- of Wellington, and now in England, filling the post of a coadjutor to the Bishop of Lichfield, ends his letter on the subject with the following words : “ To sum up what I have said, 1 hold that Bishop Jenner was as duly elected and nominated for the See of Dunedin as Bishops Hobhouse. Williams, and myself were for our several sees ; that the General Synod encouraged the Bishop of Itew Zealand toproceed in the same way as he had iu our cases ; that there was no other authorised mode of proceeding ; that Bishop Jenner made the declaration required by the General Synod, and that his declaration and appointment were accepted by the Standing Commission of the General Synod; that the Rural Deanery of Otago (or Dunedin) accepted the appointment; that the Bishop of Mew Zealand collected funds for the endowment, mentioning the name of Dr Jenner as the first Bishop : that no objection was raised to the appointment at that time, nor until a cry was raised againct him for ritualistic pi actices ; that the General Synod had pledged itself not to remove any officer from his post without the intervention of a judicial tribunal ; and that Dr Jenner was never offered an opportunity of submitting his case to such a court of arbitrators as is promised by the Church Constitution and the General Synod. ” Asa sample of the strong language, used by some papers on this subject, the JohnßuM says, “ there can be no doubt that the whole transaction proclaims in an unmistakeable manner what little reliance can be placed bn a Synod constituted as is that in New Zealand.”