CHURCH OF ENGLAND GENERAL SYNOD.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 4950, 2 February 1877, Page 2

CHURCH OF ENGLAND GENERAL SYNOD.

, - • (prom our special reporter.) 1 , Nelson, Thursday. . In the General Synod lust night Mr. Aoland moved for leave to.bring in a Bill to amend the Ecclesiastical Offences Statute. — Agreed to, and the Bill was read a first time. Archdeacon Maonsbll moved, —Thatacommittee be appointed to consider why marriage performed in this - colony by’ the Church of England are so few in proportion to the numbers, and whether any alterations can be made in present arrangements. He said in 1851 the marriages celebrated in the. Church of England amounted to.four-fifths of, the whole number ; in 1874, to two-thirds. From'lß67 jto 1875 the marriages celebrated were—Church of England, 67 ; ,Roman Catholic, 111; Wesleyan, 120 ; Presbyterian, 133. He thought some principle was involved in the question. • " The motion was agreed to. . ; The Dean of Christchurch .obtained leaveto bring in a Bill to amend the statute by a provision to the effect that no person;should be entitled to vote at any parish meeting unless he or she have;subscribed; a declaration} of membership one month previously ; also,; to lay down more distinctly that churchwardens must be resident in the-parish for which they are appointed. ..; . Archdeaoop STOCK', seconded , the motiqnr which was agreed to, and the Bill read a, first time. ■■■ - ■

Archdeacon Stock obtained leave to bring in a Bill to add a proviso to Statute IV., that a parish meeting, besides that required for the purpose pf the. statute, shall be-called by the curate when required by one churchwarden and three vestry men r,:Mr, Rous; Marten :;seconded; the; motion, which was agreed to,' and the Bill read a first time; A "'V,; .. i •

Archdeacon Harper moved for leave to ;bringin a Bill .to, limit and define the pqwers of the General’:Synod with .reference to the alterations of services, fprmularjes, and articles of the Church-and the authorised version: of the Scriptures, and to settle the mode of procedure in reference thereto. The proposed Bill was not in the direction of any change, but’ tended’ solely towards preserving the' faith of , the Church a? at .present.’ . If, they ought - to, make provision .'for! possible alterations, better do it now. There was no bar to tte quietness of ’ men's minds in the shape of those burning questions which excite the minds of. men at Home. Let them take the , Bill and 'shape and alter it as they, liked, and do as they wished. They should legislate in time to prevent undue alt erations in the - prayer-book; His inteptions, as he had said before, ! were m every’ respect: conservative, and non-revolutionary. '-V; j • ; The Bishop of Dunedin seconded.' !

• Archdeacon Maunsell contetided that the Bill was grossly inaccurate > in, its’ recitals; l abd disgracefully loose in'the language.’ He agreed it’-was known- from the: first that the New Zealand Church was independentof the mother Church, ■ and anly : bound by voluntary compact, which they had-no right, to tamper with. The..proposed Bill was wholly uttrd vifet, be-: ■cause ;contrary, to-, clauses 1 and 6 of the, constitution; . and //based . on the assumption’ that - certain facts -had happened, whereas they hod not'happened, j The Synod had W power to alter the constitution. ■ If not satisfied with it they must make a new one, but. it would be better to leave things as they were.’ : The Bishop; of Auckland would prefer: to see the preamble omitted, but othewise he supported the Bilh r; V-' f /i 1.-’,' ' 'j' I-• The Eev; Mt/Tanner opposed the Bill, as a, breach of "faith and dishonest, contending! it would' be dapgerous, to assume that churchmen were governed only bylaw courts instead of by honor, which was the chief power upbn which they must depend. ; Mr, Carleton declined, to accept the .Bill even if the ‘ preamble" were omitted,’which would.only mean that they ,were to do wrong 1 but, not give their reasons. The Bill was simply'the thin edge of the wede. Laymen, desired no change. • —The’ Bishop of- Wellington made-Triopg ahcT powerful - speech'" in favor-of the 'BUI, which Ke'‘m’aihtmhefl was .not to make but to prevent changes. The Judges had ruled that ' the chief ‘ council of V-any religiciuß body was in the*'.same position* as "the Government’ 'of a State, ,’ therefore no canon they passed would -be ultra \>ires, aiid the Synod covdd not deprive itself of any powers or bind successors any’more than Parliament could.’ ■' i - ’ - The/DiAN of-Christchurch expressed his ■intention to vote against the Bill. ; Archdeacon .Stock at 11.15 p.m.. moved an adjournment. f . j - .... i