Original Correspondence. PROCEEDINGS of the BISHOPS in SYDNEY Letter III.

New Zealander, Volume 7, Issue 533, 24 May 1851, Page 3

Original Correspondence. PROCEEDINGS of the BISHOPS in SYDNEY Letter 111.

To the Editor of the New Zealander. Sir,— Considering the dependent position in which a large proportion of the clergy in these colonies stand towards their Bishops, it is to be regretted that their Lordships in recording their sentiments on a controverted point of doctrine, did not denote the exact persons to whom that portion of their minute* was addressed, and how far each clergyman it bound to observe it. They have stated their views on Infant Baptismal Regeneration pretty decidedly ; it will now be an anxious question with many who reflect upon the character of those who maintain this doctrine at home, what course of action do their Lordships intend to found upon these minutes. On this point there is a total silence. Not the smallest hint ii offered thnt the Evangelical view will be even tolerated. The object of ihe Bishops no doubt was to neutralize, as far as they coulil, the effects of the decision of the Judicial Comtnirtee in re Gorham. They have done so in woids; what do they intend now doing in practice? Their Lordships seem to have felt themselves hampered by two difficulties in this matter, — Ist by the said decision of the Judicial Committee, in the fuce of which they could not well if so disposed, proscribe the Evangelical doctrine ;— .2nd hy (he Queen's supremacy by which they were prevented from giving an authoiitative form to their decision. On this latter point they observe in their first minute— •» In consequence of doubts existing how far we are inhibited by the Queen's supremacy from exercising the powers of our Ecclesiastical Synod, we resolve not to exercise such powers on the present occasion." They adop'ed therefore the only course that was open to them. They threw their decisions into the form of lUßnestions and opinions, anil left the parties concerned to attach to them as much importance »s they pleased, on the same principle perhaps a- that of Clmrle* I, who, when applying for the loan which he dare not demand left the imagination or the merchant to add that weight to the application which he himself could n<>t venture to record. Not that I would affirm that such was their Lordships' precise and full intention. Their «ilence may perhaps have arisen from an unwillingness to cramp the action of each individual bishop. This is certain that if their Lordships had only been as careful to disclaim the intolerance, as they were to maintain the views of their party, they would have relieved the mind of many a worthy man, whose family and whose labors are almost entirely dependent upon their will ; and would have gathered around themselves a large measure of support in their efforts to build up our Church in the.se Colonies. The preamble to their eighth minute is a specimen of the cautiout and rounded phraseology of those who desire to exercise an act of authority ; but feel that there are certain difficulties by which they are obstruct* cd. They were aware that they were walking on dangerous grouud, and felt that it behoved them to tread with care. They say, " As Bishops engaged in the charge Jof extensive Diocese* tnd debarred from frequent opportunities of conference, we do not presume to think that we can inform or guide the judgment of the Church at large ; but at a time when the mmdi of pious and thoughtful men are in perplexity we cannot remain altogether silent nor refrain from stating what we believe to be the jutt interpretation of the Creed, article*, and Liturgy ef the Church of England respecting the regeneration of Infants in Holy Baptism." It will be observed that they speak of "guiding the judgment. 1 ' and in the next clause of •'stating what they believe to he the just interpretation." In their first minute they propose " to consider such questions a* affect the progress of true religion." All theie expressions have no doubt but one meaning ; which, I fear to be nothing more or less than this,— That they mean to give an exposition of the view which ibey at leait are determined to maintain in their dioceses. The Evangelical clergyman will now be placed in an ambiguous and very unsatisfactory position It he complains that anew article of fun h is presented fir his .-uhscripuon, the answer i& ready— "We only staled our views for the satisfaction of certain pious and thoughtful men" : if he pieauha-t an opposite doctrine, he may then be informed,—" You will recollect that we have itated what we consider to be the just interpretntion on the subject, and that we cannot consistently witu our position, omit to maintain that interpretation." In their first Minute their Lordships intimate that the.r respect for the statute of prasmunire deters them from exercaitig Synodical poweri. A different reason

Beems to be assigned in this preamble for their not deciding this question of Baptismal Regeneration lor the benefit of the whole Church ; viz.— the extent of the i f Dioceses, and the difficulty of conferring" together. Tins seems to be certain, — lit, that they did intend thai part of the Church at least should be guided by their views — though what part of it they do not point out ;— 2ndly, that they imply in pretty clear ie r ms that they have residing in themselves the power of forming an Ecclesiastical Synod for the purpose of deciding questions of doctrine and discipline, without any reference whatever to the great body of the Church, Cierical, or Lny ; and that the only obstruction at pre■ent to the exercise of their righti is, the Royal Supremacy. With such high preteiuiona thus not obscurely put forward, and with such an unfortunate specimen of legislation as this now before us, we need not wonder at the energy with which the people of Adelaide protested in favor of the Royal Supremacy at their beit secu ity against an usurpation, which, whether we rrgaid the precedent that would thereby be established, or calculate its effects upon our present Scriptural and comprehensive system of Faith, and upon the energies and peace of our members, clerical and lay, would be a subject of deep regret to every enlightened Protestant. 1 remain, Sir, your obedient servant, A Clergyman

To the Editor of the New Zealander, Sir,— l have read the letter of " A Minister of one of Ihe Denominations" in reference to a baptism performed by Bishop Pompalliei 1 at this Hospital, which appeared in your paper of Saturday last. Although well acquainted with the facts, it ii not ray intention to give any opinion regarding the state* ments generally, »s I have at all times carefully avoided any inteiference with the Ministers of religion in the discharge of their duties towards the patients of this establishment, but simply to contradict what has been »nd concerning myself. It is not true that " the lady of the assistantsurgeon" brought a tumbler of water (as the patient " Ruka" is willing to testify). She merely ffave a tumbler of water and a napkin, at her parlour door, to BishopPnmpallier, or the clergyman vho accompanied him, without any inquiry, ju*t as she would have done to Bishop Selwyn and Mr. Churton under similar circumstances. It is true the lady of the Rev. Mr. Churton and she were in the female ward during the performance of the ceremony by Bishop Pompallier. There is one sentence in your correspondents letter which I cannot but think was dictated with some degree of malice, which ill becomes one calling himlelf " A Minister of one of the Denominations." He states that, " One individual connected with the management of the Institution was, at least, accessory to thii act of religious persecution." Such is utterly false, since no one connected with the manage* ruent of this Institution was, either directly or indirectly, acceiiofy to the performance of this ceremony. Perhaps " A Minister of one of the Denominations" may be so ignorant as to suppose, that Mrs. M'G'iuran is connected with the management of an hospital, and has deduced his remark from the falie statement concerning her. The name of your correipondent is of no consequence tome; indeed I think it is.ncuch better, for his onn reputation, thai he had not the moral courage to publish it.— l Bin, &c, T. P. M'Gauran, Assistant Surgeon, 22nd May, 1851. Auckland Col. Hospital.