The Globe. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 1876.

Globe, Volume VII, Issue 732, 24 October 1876, Page 2

The Globe. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 1876.

The ninth Synod of the Diocese of Christchurch commenced its Second Annual Session this afternoon in the College Library. Very little, beyond the delivery of the President’s address, and the giving of notices of motion, was done. But there is abundance of work in reserve for this Ecclesiastical Council. There are several subjects which press for settlement, and are of interest to the general public. The first of these is the uusavoury one of .Ritualism. After being free for many years of this fungus growth, the Diocese has at last experienced its introduction. The evidence of this may be seen in the correspondence columns of our contemporary the Press, during the latter portion of last and the first few months of the present year. And we doubt not the waste paper basket of our other morning contemporary would tell the same tale. We shall watch with interest the action of the Synod in regard to this subject. For although it may be true that the Synod, having no legal status cannot legislate for the members of the Church of England here, yet as an educated body of representatives even its resolutions will have due weight with the general community as well as with its own constituencies.

Another subject, if not of equal, yet of great interest, is the behaviour of the vestry and congregation of St. Michael’s towards their late clergyman. That conduct was a public scandal, and was so regarded by the citizens outside the congregation. In other congregations, if a clergyman is not liked, he is left to suffer the consequence of that dislike. This course usually brings him to his senses: so that he either resigns or amends his conduct. There is an illustration of this among the Presbyterians in the case of the Lyttelton Church, which is fresh in the minds of our readers. But the people of St. Michael’s chose to act differently. They were not content with such tardy measures, but determined to hasten the departure of its Minister by “ starving him out and they succeeded. When the question comes before the Synod, we hope those who took an active part in the expulsion of Mr Edwards will be able, for the sake of the Church and their own credit, to make a satisfactory explanation. In the meantime, we refrain from commenting further on the question. Another subject of some interest to the public is the management of the Church Property Estate. Our readers may remember that a Commission, consisting of three eminent business men, was appointed to examine into the condition and management of the Church property. The Commissioners—Messrs. W. D. Wood, H. Matson, and E. C. J. Stevens—after an exhaustive examination of the subject, reported, and pointed out many instances of serious mismanagement. On the receipt of this report, the Church Property Trustees appointed a sub - committee to examine and report upon the Commissioners’ report. Subsequently both the original report, and its commentary, which had the effect of drawing its teeth, were printed and circulated together. Whether this mode of treatment will be acceptable to the Synod remains to be seen. But an earnest discussion of the whole subject cannot fail to be evoked. A glance at these subjects will show that there is a good deal of inflammable material in the Synod, and that a good flare-up may be the result of a want of temper or tact; or of inadvertence on the part of those engaged in the business of the Synod. There are other subjects, which, if not so exciting, are nevertheless of great interest and importance, such as the Pension Fund, the Alteration of the Formularies Bill, and the Very Rev. the Dean’s notice of motion relative to a conference of clergymen and laymen.