GENERAL SYNOD.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XII, Issue 35, 9 February 1877, Page 2

GENERAL SYNOD.

The Synod met yesterday at 330 p.m. The l.vv .T.C. Andrew moved, pursuant to notice, " That the names of the division on Archdeacon Maunsell'a Bill (Statute 19 Amendment Bill) be recorded on the minutes." The Rev E. Williams seconded the motion, on which a warm discussion ensued, the result being that an amendment was accepted by the mover and carried nem. con. on the voices to the effect that the names of the voters in all divisions should be printed, on a request to that effect being made in writing by not fewer than six members of the Synod, Reports were laid on the table from the following committees:— Committee on Marriages (Archdeacon Maunsell); Committee on Canons (The Dean); Committee on Theological Studies (Bishop of Nelson). The Bishop of Auckland moved, "That this Synod, recognising the fact of the establishment in England of a Temperance Society on a national scale under the auspices of the Archbishops and Bishops of the Church, earnestly invites the attention of the clergy to the principles and methods of the Society, with a view to the formation of local branches thereof wherever the circumstances of the community shall seem such as to render it desirable." It was needless to enlarge on the terrible moral and social evils produced by drunkenness. These fa_ts were only too familiar. It was, however, well worthy of consideration whether the Church ought, not to make some such effort as that indicated in the resolution, to grapple with this evil. The English Society referred to held its meetings at the Lambeth Palace, with the Archbishop of Canterbury as its president and her Majesty the Queen as its patron. He urged the importance of the subject, and hoped the Synod would bear in mind what had been so well said, that we should "free our souls from the sin of indolently wishing that men would not drink so much." Mr Carletcn seconded the motion, understanding that it pointed to — not what was known as "teetotalism," but temperance. Teetotalism no doubt did some good with a certain class, but had little influence with another class of the community not generally obnoxious to the charge of excess. He wished, however, to have more information as to what it was proposed definitely that the Society should do. The Rev Mr Watkins supported the proposal. Such a Society bad a twofold scope. It embraced those who were willing to bind themselves either to total or partial abstinence. The Rev Mr Dudley was happy to notice that the remarks of the Bishop of Auckland fell somewhat flat here, for the absence of drunkenness in this place was very remarkable, and contrasted most favorably with Auckland. He wished well to the- Good Templars, but their way was not the best way. There waa a tendency in Good Templary to become a religion by itself, and the ritual and decorations formed a strong attraction to many people, as well as the prospect of being able to put half the letters of the alphabet after their names. A Church Society offered none of these attractions, but on the other hand the Good Templars did more than the church, for they shepherded one another, and one of the members could not go wrong without being warned by his fellow members. The total abstainers were too fond of sitting in judgment on their fellow men, but churchmen were too apt to forget that churchmanship meant something more than going to church on Sundays. The Bishop of Dunedin thought tbat although the object of Christ's Church on earth was to attack and overthrow every vice, yet if one particular vice were fouud especially prevalent it was the duty of tbe church to arouse her forces, aud set herself in array against it. It was necessary, however, to have some specific work to be undertaken by the proposed Society, which otherwise soon would fall through. The Bey Mr Penny thought the great drawback of the Good Templars' system was that to avoid giving offence to some persons, they studiously omitted all mention of our Lord iv their prayers. They also were too apt to array themselves in the mantle of self righteousness and to declare that the man who only drinks as much as is good for him is just as bad as one who drinks to excess. We needed moderation, not total abstinence. The kind of Society proposed should aim at offering counter attractions, such as forming working-men's clubs, and providing tea and coffee stalls as widely as possible. Mr Hunter Brown agreed with what had been said by the last speaker as to the Good Templars, who carefully excluded the name of our Saviour from their ritual with the view to conciliate infidels. The Dean of Christchurch fully acknowledged the earnestness of the Good Templars but there was a danger of that system becoming a sort of new religion. He was not very sanguine of such a Society as that proposed being successfnl, and would p-efer to see Church guilds established. They might do good m three ways— lst, by influencing legislation towards removing hindrances to temperance. The present punishment of drunkards was miserably insufficient. A nmu might get drunk, commit damage, insult women and children, yet be let off with a fine of ss. This showed that our civilisation had not yet realised the point it ought to have attained. 2nd. They should endeavor to establish a curative system of drunkards by means of asylums; and, 3rd, they should endeavor to offer counter attractions such as working men's clubs; provide well warmed and lighted rooms, where men could spend pleasant evenings, and if they chose send out for a pint of beer in a quiet way. This would tend to keep them away from public houses. The clergy ought use their influence, not ostentatiously, but with tact and judgment, and try thus to improve the state of society. Mr Hirst thought the proposal a step in the right direction. It would promote reformation on religions principles; therefore, the church should support it. He was a

member of such a society forty years ago, which was supported by many dignitaries of the church. But when the teetotallers came, they advocated their principles in a most intemperate manner that did a great deal of mischief. -„ The Rev Mr Walking remarked that the object of the Good Templars in excluding our Lord's name from their pjayers was to bave a broad platform on which all might meet. The Bishop of Auckland hoped it would not go forth that members were struck with astonishment at the temperance ofNelsou as compared with Auckland! It should be remembered that Auckland was a much larger place than Nelson, and had many visitors from other places, who probably were the drunkards Mr Dudley had noticed. The motion was carried nem. con. :'■ The second reading of the Ecclesiastical Tribunals Statute was made an order of the day for Friday. . The Hon. Mr Acland moved and Mr Han,mer seconded, " That the purpose for which Statute No. 12 was passed having been accomplished, it is no longer necessary to keep such Statute printed in the Report, and that the Priuting Committee be instructed to omit the said Statute in the next Report." Agreed to. The Rev Mr Tanner moved, "That this Synod desires that the several Diocesan Synods should consider and report 'to the next meeting whether, they think it desirable that the parochial designation of an Incumshould be Vicar." The Rev E. Williams seconded pro Xforma. The motion was lost. '. Mr Quick moved, *<That application be made to the General Assembly, at its next session, for an Act to Incorporate Diocesan Trusts Boards." "- At this stage the Synod rose, and on resuming at 730 p.m. the orders Of the*day were proceeded with. _* •' The suspended debate oh Archdeacon Stock's motion that it is inexpedient to proceed further with the attempt to establish a General Pension Fund was resumed. Archdeacon Stock explained that his reason was that the clergy had not entered into the scheme generally with sufficient cordiality to give it any chance of proving a success. In the Wellington diocese on the other hand the pension fund which, when that diocese separated from the general scheme, amounted to £8.10, now was over £2000, and yielded an income of £300 per annum. After much discussion the Synod divided, with the following result:— Ayes: Clergy 10, Laity 8. Noes: Bishops 4, Clergy 9, Laity 6. The motion was therefore lost. : Archdeacon Stock then moved: — "That the General Synod divide the capital of the fire insurance branch of the General Pension Fund among the dioceses that have contributed to it." After a very lengthy debate the motion was negatived. The debate on the Dean of Christchurch's amendment to the Rev Mr Leighton's resolutions relative to public education and reli- [ gious instruction was then resumed. The Bishop of Nelson held that the Government schoolmasters ought to be such men as were fit to give religious instruction in the schools. We in New Zealand might be content with what satisfied the great religious public at Home and we now hear that religious instruction never was given ih the English schools so efficiently. as at present. The Nelson system puts the matter into the hands of the Local Committees, and they should endeavor to raise the tone of those committees by oniy electing men who would take care that religious instruction was given in their schools and who w'ould-n'ot select any master who wa3 not competent to" give such instruction. It was utterly "impo'si sible for the clergy to undertake the task. V" Mr Lusk thought it certain that the Go^ vernment would not provide masters' with : the view of their being Qualified to give religious instruction, although they might permit their schoolmasters to give it in the/ Government schools. The Rev Mr Lingard. would not: have the Bible read in schools in the .way it was usually done, for he thought that positively injurious to the cause of religion. He agreed' with the Bishop of Nelson that the question was one for the Local Committees, and not for the Government. They should return on the Local Committee only such men as would allow the masters to give religious instruction! By the Canterbury Act masters were absolutely prohibited from giving it at all. What was wanted was that daily undertone of religious feeling running through the school, which would result by religious teaching being given by the clergy or by suitable persons authorised by them. He advocated throwing out both the motion and the amendment, and biding our time. The Key Mr Dudley also agreed with the Bishop of Nelson, but should like to combine his Lordship's ideas with those of the Dean. If the master only read portions of Scripture for one quarter of an hour without the slightest comment, and repeated the Lord's Prayer with his pupils much good would be done. He would not have dogma inculcated, but would like to see Hebrew and Christian history taught as fully as Greek and Roman and other heathen histories. The Rev Mr Penny was surprised to hear the remarks of the Bishop of Nelson. A great revolution of feeling bad taken place in England. The general feeling in reference to the Government Board schools was that of war to the knife against them and in favor of voluntary schools. The English clergy were ready to make every possible sacrifice to keep the Board schools out of their parishes. The 'Bishop of "Nelson remarked that a further change had taken place in the Erig- - ' lish feeling during the last two years, since Mr Penny left Home. The apprehensions entertained of the evils of the Board Schools had proved quite groundless. The guild system of religious instruction had wholly failed. Mr Hunter Brown was astounded to hear the Nelson system spoken of as a success in respect to religious instruction. He considered it an utter failu.e. The local Committee theory had been worked by the clergy and others for years, and the result was almost total failure, checquered only with a very few successes. . They ought not to fritter away their religious instruction, in little dabs here and there over the country, but get the Government to legislate, for. the. whole. They should oppose that. abominable modern system of toleration, so much in vogue in the present day, a toleration which was all on one side, and which meant toleration only for infidels and not "for christians, for it compelled christians to be silent in order that infidels might talk. The Rev Mr Jackson thought the Synod should state most strongly and emphatically its opinion tbat religious instruction should be given in the public schools. Then at any rate it would remain recorded in the annals of the country that they had made their protest. Mr Barnicoat considered it impracticable here for the clergy to give religious instruction in the schools, and even if they could do it there would be the risk that children's minds would be completely puzzled by the opposite doctrines taught one day by one sect and rext day by another. The master was the proper person to give religious teaching. He could not agree with those who held that the mere reading of the Bible without any comment was not calculated to foster religion. The Bible could not be listened to\ daily without some religious feeling being fostered. ' The Rev Mr Fancourt agreed with those who demurred to the mere perfunctory read-

ing of the. Bible, which Would be productive of but,little good, formnless the reading were conducted with duereveren&j for- the Sacred Word it would do more harm than good. They ; did not -want to makekthe children merely good Bible, scholars but go®d Christians- 'What wasjnroposed to be sought by the original motion was* unworthy of such an assembly as that Synod, and they would be lowering the church to the level of the mere Protestant sects around them if they agreed to it. The least that the Synod could ask for in the ,way of religious education was .^teaching based on the Creed, the lord's Prayer, and the ten commandments— in fact, on the Church Catechism. He should support the amendment. They ought to ask for aid to denominational schools which should reach the prescribed standard in secular education. The General Government had not yet grappled with the question of education, which.had been dealt with only by Provincial Governments. Buton the only occasion .that a Ministry introduced an Education Bill the measure proposed to aid denominational schools. The clergy ought, to have liberty' " to ..?H ter schools and give religious instruction. This power was withheld in Wellington: . Religious education by Sunday Schools and Bible classes was and must be a complete failure. _ \. • Archdeacon Maunsell contended that the clergy should seek for the power of teaching in schools themselves. The masters were not the fittest persons to give religious instruction. They were chosen only for their educational abilities and attainments. Some speakers had pictured hosts of dissenting ministers rushing into the schools and insisting on teaching. Nothing could be more unlike the real state. of the case. The apathy shownby the ministers of other denominations was absolutely wonderful. He went once to a schoolmaster and said, " I want to teach." The schoolmaster said, " Well, teach! " He (the speaker) accordingly taught. But then the board got frightened, and said, "O, we must give the other churches and sects a chance." So it waa settled that the other bodies shold get one day and the Church of England two. And what was the result? Why, one-; Presbyterian minister came once and never came again. So we got our two days and they took none. . The Rev Mr Watkins , thought the only way to prevent the clashing of different teachings which some speakers had feared was to have the one system which could not clash— the simple reading of the Bible. The Rev Mr Harvey agreed with Archdeacon Maunsell. In Wellington the two largest schools had been established for 20 years hy the Church of England. Three yea,., ago an arrangement was made with the Education Board to hand over the management of the school, to that body on certain conditions, one being that the Church of England clergy should have a right to claim the first half hour for religious instruction, ministers of other bodies having an equal right to instruct pupils of their own denomination. Yet not one of these latter had even shown hia.face in the schools, although they had pupils of every shades of belief— Roman Catholics, Wesleyans, Presbyterians, and even Jews— and there were never auy complaints. He did not approve of leaving the question to local boards, which were mixed up intrade with members of various religious bodies, and dared not act independently. * Mr Carleton thought that a petition signed by: the members individually would have more weight with Parliament than one from the Synod as a body. The number of Nonconformists in the House was very large and they would be more influenced by the fear of the next election— the tenderest point in the House of Representativea—than anything else. "' The Rev Mr Tanner:held that if they went to phe Government at all on this "question they should take the; widest possible ground. Archdeacon Harper thought they should ask for all they could, for at the worst the Government could only refuse They should get the Government ;to lay down a rule that there was nothing to prevent the clergy from entering any school to give religious instruction. In one Canterbury school the Local Committee allowed a clergyman to go in, and he went with a staff of lady assistants, and very efficient religious instruction was given. The Legislature should lay down some rule to prevent Local Committees throwing difficulties in the way. . The Bishop of Auckland had no hope of Governor ent making, the provision suggested by the Bishop of Nelson, by finding suitable masters. He thought the course suggested in the Dean's amendment quite practicable. He quite agreed with what, had been said aa to the difference between the school viaiting done by the Church of England clergy and any others. Even iri the hospitals the Church of England clergy paid 20 visits for every one of the others. The Dean's amendment was then put and carried; the resolution as thus amended was agreed to. The Dean of Christchurch moved, and the Rev Mr Leighton seconded, the second readling of a Bill to amend Statute 10, by making it an offence for a clergyman to use any service, vestment, &c, not prescribed in the Prayer Book. * An animated discussion followed, the majorityof the speakers holding that the present statute contained ample provision for such contingencies. On a division the Bill was thrown out, the votes being ias follows:— Ayes: Bishop, 1; Clergy, 10; Laity, 3. Noes: Bishops, 3; Cleigy, 9; Laity, 8. The Synod then adjourned at midnight.