THE GENERAL SYNOD.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 817, 3 February 1877, Page 3

THE GENERAL SYNOD.

[Bt Telegraph.] {Per Press Agency.) Nelson,' February 2, At the General Synod on Wednesday evening a Bill was introduced to amend the Ecclesiastical Offences Statute, which was read a first time. On the motion of Archdeacon Maunsell a committee was appointed to consider why the marriages performed in New Zealand by the Church of England are so few, and to consider whether any or what alterations should be made in the present arrangements. In 1851 the marriages by the English Church amounted to four-fifths of the whole number; in 1861 they decreased to three-fourths; in 1874 to two-thirds. The Dean of Christchurch introduced a Bill to the effect that no person be entitled to vote at any parish meeting unless ho shall have signed a declaration of church membership a month previously; churchwardens to be resident in the parish for which they are appointed. The Bill was read a first time. Archdeacon Stock introduced a Bill to authorise curates to call extra meetings when asked to do so by one churchwarden and three vestrymen. Archdeacon Harper then moved for leave to bring in his Bill re alterations of service, formularies, Thirty-nine Articles, and the authorised version of the Bible. He said the Bill ten ed solely towards preserving the faith of the Church. The Bishop of Dunedin seconded. Archdeacon Maunsell strongly opposed, and said the preamble grossly misrepresented the historical facts end that for laxity of language and falsehood of assertion the Bill was a disgrace to the ••yuod. Mr .Pitt said the Bill \v--.s ultra vires. The Bishop of Auckland said the Bill was not contrary to the constitution, but thought it better to omit the preamble. Mr Carleton opposed the Bill. The Laity wanted absolute identity with the Church at home. The Bishop of Wellington spoke long and ably in support. The Dean of Christchurch would vote against it. The debate was adjourned until 7.30 p.m, on Thursday. In the General Synod yesterday, the whole day was occupied with a debate on the Formularies Bill or in reality on the whole status and constitution of the Anglican Church in New Zealand. Archdeacons Stock and Williams, Revs T. Fancoart, and B Williams, Messrs Barnicoat, Oliver and Brown supported the bill ; Revs B. Dudley, E. A. Lingard and A Penny, Messrs Adams, Lusk and Quick opposed it. The main arguments in favor of the measure were that the Church of New Zealand was an independent, with power to make all laws, and that it is desirable to legislate while men’s minds are quiet, to prevent the possibility in the future of changes being made without due care The chief arguments against the bill are that it is ultra vires, as altering the consti tution unnecessarily as no changes are desired, and inexpedient as calculated to unsettle people’s minds and endanger the tenure of Church property. The debate wiil bo resumed at half-past seven this evening. This afternoon the business was wholly formal. A discussion on Rous Marten’s motion, that the petition from St Peter’s parish, Wellington, be acceded to, took place, and after a lengthy debate mainly on a point of order, the petition was referred to the trust committee. February 3. Last night the great constitutional debate on the Formularies Bill was concluded, after lasting three whole days. Thirty five members spoke to the question. The House divided at midnight, when the votes on the question that leave be given to introduce the Bdl were— Ayes Bishops, 5 ; clergy, laity, 5, Noes : Clergy, 12 ; laity, 14, 1 |ie motion was therefore lost,