The Standard. (PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY, AND SATURDAY.) TUESDAY, MARCH 31, 1874.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume II, Issue 154, 31 March 1874, Page 2

The Standard. (PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY, AND SATURDAY.)

TUESDAY, MARCH 31, 1874.

■“ We shall sell to no man justice or right: We shall deny to no man justice or right: We shall defer to no man justice or right.”

Cebtes, our church matters, taken as a whole, are, putting it negatively, not a credit to us as a Christian community. The apathy, bordering on positive indifference, universally displayed upon the subjects which should claim our first care and consideration, is astonishing. Speaking locally, our schools, European and Native, and the means provided for the administration of Secular Education, are a disgrace ; but our churches, as a rule, the palm away in triumph, for oint-blank callousness, as to 'revision be made or not for conduct of public worship, n exception at all, it is nd to be manifested in •e claimed by the great ioneer J 9) to be the s in tha D enominatioual ■re. however, generally and in as in ~ , the ChuKj vard grand, and contented .mission is unieao. As with our nysn .diugs, so aithoqr dergy--ae Rev. Mr. Root yas long since called to this cure oa behalf of the Presbyterian body, which call, doubtless, but served’ to defer the question of Episcopalian supply for an indefinite period ; and his prospects of a church is nearer than ours. The f Jfoiuan Catholics, haw, with a number of worshippers whose strength (or veakness) should cause us to blush

for our otra short - comings, also entered the field ; they, too, have a zealous pastor in the Rev. Father Simpson, and are far ahead of us in the direction of a church building and parsonage. We cannot help noticing these things, in the face of the supineness, and want of practical action exhibited by the members of that Anglican body with which we are more particularly identified. The Committee, to'whom was intrusted the consideration of tenders for the Episcopalian building, after certain deductions and alterations were made, with power to accept one that might be within reasonable scope, have refused to entertain any, but have referred the plans back to the Architect for alteration. This was clearly not within the pale of authority given to them by the meeting, and, we think, it would have been far more satisfactory had the members of that church been first consulted on the matter.

The Committee acted quite right in declining the second batch of tenders, which were comparatively more costly than the original ones; but it is a question whether it is undesirable to take up the work as at first presented. At any rate the meeting did not say so, neither did it grant to the Committee, discretion to act as it has done, the sequel to which may be equally unacceptable to the general body. We entirely concur in Archdeacon Williams’ views. It would, in the face of a continued influx of Church of England members, be very short-sighted to erect a building only so large as will accommodate the worshippers of the present day, the proportions of which, from the completeness of its design, and internal arrangement, cannot be materially lessened without spoiling it altogether. “ Sufficient unto the day is the evil “ thereof.” But we go farther than this. We hold that those who, hereafter, come to settle here, should be called on to share in the responsibilities, as well as the enjoyment of the benefits of the provision which we make for them to-day. Why should we, because we are the pioneers, take the brunt of Church expenditure on our own shoulders, to the relief of all comers for some time to come? If we erect a building, for which we have only sufficient money in hand, we do this, but, if, by borrowing the balance of capital required at a moderate rate of interest, we open a Dr. and Cr. account with the building fund, we shall he able to shew good cause why future residents should contribute towards the liquidation of the debt. And that the money can be borrowed there is no question. It only wants the will. Is a Music Hall wanted ? The wherewithal to build it is soon forthcoming. Three or four gentlemen came forth with alacrity, and accepted an amount of responsibility (far in excess of what is now required for a far nobler purpose) with a glee that was equalled only by the benefit they have conferred on the community. Those who —without any prospective advantage, or pecuniary benefit to be derived from the burden thus voluntarily taken upon themselves —undertook that patriotic work, are benefactors to the community ; and shall it be said that we cannot find a few zealous, self-sacrificing members in the “ Church militant,” willing and able to follow so good an example in another and better direction? We refuse to believe it.