THE KAIAPOI CASE.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XII, Issue 228, 26 September 1877, Page 2

THE KAIAPOI CASE.

We have been favored with the following iuformation on the above case, the final judgment in which has just been decided by the Beach of Bishops of New Zealand. The Rev. Hubert E. Carlyon, incumbent of Kaiapoi, was charged iu 1875-6 by several of the parishioners, with the adoption of many of those practices known as " ritualistic" in connection with "Confession," and with teachings and practices in the Holy Communion which were alleged to be contrary to the doctrine and practice of the Church of England. The Bishop of Christchurch's Court, consisting of Mr Hanmer, the Chancellor, Ven. Archdeacon Harper, Dr. Donald, Canon Cotterill, and Mr Walker, considered the evidence to support the charges and found with slight modification that they were proved, and forthwith submitted the question to the Bench of Bishops whether upon the facts so ascertained and proved, the acts and teachings of the llev. H. E. Carlyon were contrary to the authorised practice and tcachiug of the Church, and whether therefore he was guilty of the offences charged. The unanimous judgment of the Bench of Bishops, after several months' careful enquiry, has been transmitted to the Church Advocate, and is to the effect that the defendant is guilty in eight out of the twelve charges, and that with regard to the remainiug four, the language used by Mr Carlyon is so indefinite, and the arguments adopted by him are so invalid, and the assumptions so unwarrantable that the Bishops do not consider it necessary to founda judgment thereon. £&The result of the judgment then is that Mr Carlyou in saying " Confession is the divinely appointed moans for the forgiveness of sin after Baptism " is found guilty of

teaching that which is contrary to the authorised doctrine of the Church. He is condemned also for the teaching that the word3 « This is nay Body," « This is my Blood," are to be understood in a literal sense; for using wafers made of such bread as ia not usually eatfen; for elevating the consecrated elements; and for so standing in the Communion Service with his back to the people that tbey cauuot see him break the bread and take the cup into his hands. This is a final decision, and there ia no appeal from it. The next proceeding is for the Bishop in whose diocese the offence occurred, which iu this case is the Primate, to pass seutence, which consists of suspension from all and every act and function appertaining to the Ministry of the Church for such term as to the Bishop shall seem fit, not exceeding three years in case of erroneous doctrine, and one year in case of unlawful practices, and further until such time as he shall retract Ids error, or declare that he will conform himself for the future to the practice and teaching laid down in the Prayer Book. The judgment will be given in extenso in the various Church and other papers in the colony.