The New-Zealander.

New Zealander, Volume 7, Issue 549, 19 July 1851, Page 2

The New-Zealander.

Ue just anci fear not: Let all the ends thou aims't at, l>e thy Country's, Thy God's, and Truth's.

AUCKLAND, SATURDAY, JULY 19, 1851.

The movements amongst the Clergy and Laity of the Church of England in the Province of Australasia, to which the published " Minutes of the Proceedings of the Metropolitan and Suffragan Bishops" at their Conference held in Sydney in October last have given rise, form one of those moral signs of the times to which ' no reflective observer can be inattentive, and which no one interested in the social condition and progress of these colonies can regard lightly or pass by hastily. They evidently spring from" no mere momentary excitement ? but are the lesult of deep-laid principles and convictions which, although they have remained dormant, so far as external manifestations were concerned, in times of real or fancied security, only needed such an occasion as the "Minutes" presented, to develope themselves in full and energetic action, and which, once brought into exercise, cannot fail to operate powerfully and permanently on the ecclesiastical condition and prospects of the colonies. Hence, however freely we may admit that newspapers do not, generally speaking, constitute the most fitting medium for the discussion of questions of religious controversy, we 'have felt it our duty to keep our readers (many of whom we know look with anxious eyes on the movement), so far as our opportunities permitted, abreast of the progress of events in relation to it. On this ground we devote considerable space in this days' paper to a Report of a Meeting held at Hobart Town" on the 23rd of May, which seems to us in various aspects perhaps the most important and in- • fluential 'demonstration yet made on the subject. We had at first intended to copy only the Resolutions adopted by the Meeting ; but on a careful perusal of the proceedings we found so much sterling worth in the speeches that we deemed it expedient to place some of them on record in our columns. Still it is only an abridgement — for the full Report would occupy nearly the whole space at our command for extracts ; but the parts omitted are chiefly those of a comparatively declamatory character, or the expressions of the personal views and feelings of the speakers. We have retained most of the passages which deal with facts and arguments. The Church of England occupies a prominence in Van Diemens' Land which struck us more forcibly than before on an examination of the Census Returns recently issued— far out numbering as its members do, those of all the other denominations collectively. According to the Returns we find that, out of an aggregate population of sixty-eight thousand, six hundred and nine, no less than forty -five thousand and seventy-three belong to that communion. Of these there are nearly fourteen thousand, in the Hobart IWn district alone-

The internal condition of a Body so preponderating in the co'ony, must be a matter of moment, apart from all polemical views of disputed questions, and even on the most meagre grounds of political prudence. Now, the fact stands confessed before the ey es of Australasia and the world that the Church of England Laity in Hobart Town — not by a bare majority, but with an approach to unanimity which in such a case is so unusual as to be really surprising — we will not say are actually up in arms against their Bishop — but undoubtedly so far distrust their Bishop's soundness on certain points of Church of England faith and discipline as to judge it their duty, equally for their own sake and for the sake of the Church to which they are conscientiously and affectionately attached, to assume a position 'in which a deep and broad line of seperation is drawn between them and their Diocesan, and indeed between them and all the Bishops of the Province — (for the Bishop of Melbourne's independent expression of opinion, on the Baptismal Regeneration question leaves untouched the great bulk of the Sydney decisions, on which he concurred with his Right Reverend Brethren). It must surely be some grave and urgent necessity that has led such a number of earnest and enlightened Churchmen to place themselves in an attitude so inconsistent with that to which their ecclesiastical predilections and the prejudices of their education might be expected to tend. They, evidently are aware of this, and the Speeches and Resolutions of the Meeting were mainly directed to the vindication of their position on the ground of the existence of such a necessity. The reader can judge for himself whether they have proved their case. It is worthy of observation that the Meeting was far from being one of polemical disputation. The speakers generally judiciously abstained from discussing controverted points of doctrine. For example, on the question of Baptismal Regeneration, regarded simply in its theological aspect, they scarcely enter at all. On that topic there have been and will be differences which cannot be adjusted in a public meeting ; differences, for the candid and calm consideration of which the atmosphere of such an assembly is evidently unsuited. They take the broad ground that the Church of England has always treated this as an open question; while the Sydney Minutes pronounce a dogmatical decision upon it, and so far, narrow the terms of Church communion. This appears to us a ground impregnable by fair reasoning. Not only have, distinguished Prelates and Clergymen held antagonistic views respecting this Sacrament, but in the recent celebrated Gorham case, the highest judicial authorities known to ecclesiastical law have declared the question open. All that the wiliness of one 6f the subtlest minds on the Episcopal Bench could devise, and all that the perceverance of a pertinacity amounting almost to dogged obstinacy could accomplish was done to exclude from his benefice a Minister to whom no objection lay but that he held views on this doctrine opposed to those entertained by the Bishop of Exeter, and, we may add, by the great majority of the Australasian Bishops. The Privy Council, as the ultimate Court of Appeal, decided — not indeed whether the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration is true or false — but that neither the adoption nor the rejection of it is a sufficient ground of exclusion from the Church of England ; that in short, such a latitude of opinion on the question is allowed by the Church that both Bishop Phillpotts and Mr. Gorham may officiate in in her services, as they are at this day actually doing, with an equal acknowledgement of the orthodoxy of each — so far as the authority of the Church takes cognizance of the matter* When therefore the Australasian Bishops put forward a dogmatical judgment on the question, who does not see t that, so far as the promulgation of that decision goes, they " narrow the terms of communion V The Hobart Town Churchmen maintain, — (as one of their ablest clerical advocates, Dr. Fry, observes in a letter to the Bishop of Tasmania called forth by his lordship's refusal to convene the Meeting to which we are referring) — the Minute of Conference respecting Baptism "by setting forth its view as ' the just interpretation of the Formularies of the Church,' opposes the law of the Church of England as laid down by the Privy Council •• il determines a question which the Church has by law declared to be open and undetermined, introducing a cause of separation between our Church and that iv England; and as far as the weight of its judgment will allow, it condemns those whom the law of the Church of England justifies.'' This is a position from which, we repeat, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to dislodge the Hobart Town or any other Churchmen. We learn that, a day or two before the Meeting, Bishop Nixon delivered a Charge to his Clergy in which this point, as well as the Church movement in his diocese generally, was adverted to in a manner that tended little to quiet the apprehensions of those who feared that, so far as his influence extends, Tractarianism will be fostered in reality, if not in name. We regret that the paper which, we suppose, contains a Report of this Charge is wanting from our own file, and that that we have not been able to procure it from any other quarter ; but we infer its tenour from some of the remarks made at the Meeting, and from a brief reference in one of the other colonial journals ; and that tenour certainly seems to have been such as to more than war-

rant the stand made by the Laity, if they would be loyal either to their own convictions of truth, or to the judgment, of the Church of England as declared by the highest judicial authority to which her internal disputes are amenable. Bishop Nixon it appears went so far as to avow that he would make the reception of the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration as set forth in the '* Minutes," a condition of his granting ordination to a candidate. The light of the Laity to form and express their views on such topics is essential to the very genius of the Reformation. If the people are blindly to believe whatever thenPriests tell them, and if the famous Tractarian maxim — " Obey Your Bishop"—is to have uncontrolled sway, then there is an end to the right of private judgment, and as an inevitable consequence, an end to all genuine Protestanism. We have long been of those who are convinced that if the Chinch of England, whether at home or in the colonies, is to he saved from the Romanizing influence diffused within her borders by those clergymen whom Lord John Russell (in his memorable letter on the Papal Aggression) characterised as " the unworthy sons of the Church of England herself," it must mainly be by the vigilance and energy of the Laity. Many, very many, of the clergy are earnest and devoted in their resistance to Tractarianism ; but some, even of this class are embarrassed by their conscientious views of ecclesiastical order and canonical obedience — not to speak of any other considerations — when taking an open stand would bring them into collision with their Bishops. We have known instances in which there was a strong and painful conflict thus produced in sincere, honourable, and devout minds; and we do not envy the stoicism of t he man who would not sympathise in the difficulties of such a position. But the Laity are free from such embarrassment, and on them it especially devolves to strengthen the hands of the anti-Tractarian clergy, and to make it plain to the Tractarianised that they understand for themselves the fundamental principles of their Church, and are determined to uphold them. The Australasian Bishops generally admit the right of the Laity to have a voice in the management of Church affairs; but it would have been well if they had practically recognised that right at the Sydney Conference. It may be computed at a rough calculation that there are about eighty thousand adult Members of the Church of England in the six Australasian dioceses ; but all these Church-members had not even a single representative in the Conference, — nor • indeed had the clergy themselves, the " decisions and opinions" being formed and promulgated exclusively by the six Bishops. We observe with gratification that a Conference of members of the Church of England in the diocese of Melbourne was to be held under the Presidency of the Bishop, on the 24th of June, for the purpose of discussing a variety of matters affecting the interest of the Church in Victoria ; but we cannot withhold our assent fiom the justice of the remark which the Melbourne Morning Herald appends to the announcement; — "This is unquestionably an important step in 'the right direction ; but we think that, both in this and the other colonies, it ought to have been taken before, instead of after, the Meeting of the Bishops in Sydney." On the whole, however, the movement ex- [ cited by the '• Minutes" will, we anticipate, he productive of benefit, by leading the Members of the Church of England to examine and judge for themselves, and stimulating them to guard against whatever has even a remote tendency to Tractarianiee their Church. We are far from saying that the Bishops from whom those «' Minutes" emanated are Tractarians in the strict sense of that term. We are satisfied, that they would every one, (not excepting Bishop Nixon himself,) repudiate with greater or les s earnestness some of the dogmata of the Oxford Tracls. But it is well to guard against the introduction of the thin end of the wedge. Other Bishops may come to these colonies, who would go on from an assertion of Baptismal Regeneration as " the just interpretation" of the Church formularies, and the denial of the services of the Church to " Dissenters," to farther advances in the same direction ; and the best friends of the Church are those who, warned betimes, strive to avert a danger which afterwards it might be more difficult work to grapple with.