SYNOD SKETCHES.

Te Aroha News, Volume VII, Issue 469, 7 May 1890, Page 5

SYNOD SKETCHES.

THE ELECTION OF PRIMATE. A PICTURE OF THE ASSEMBLED DIGNITARIES. The following brief comments are made by one who was privileged to be in Wellington during the special session of the Anglican General Synod, on the 23rd and 24th of April, 1890. The first object that attracts the attention of the spectator is the vacant presidential chair, now no longer to be occupied by the venerated prelate who has for twenty years so well and ably filled it. It is satisfactory to know that, although it is often cast in the teeth of Churchmen that they underpay their clergy, yet in this case an honourable exception obtains, and an adequate pension to the late Primate has been provided by the Diocese of Christchurch. Immediately below the chair is the Bench of Bishops, a quintette who preserve a demeanour of befitting solemnity and gravity. The central figure is he who by virtue of his seniority of consecration has lately for a few brief weeks been Primate. Dr. Suter spent eleven years in parochial work in the heart of London before he came to this colony in 1866 as Bishop of Nelson.- He is an able and fervent preacher, respected by his own flock and by all the Protestant sects in his diocese, and certainly esteemed by the majority of laymen in New Zealand ; bub his views are of too evangelical a tone to suit the majority of the clergy. Of his part in the late controversy, it has been well said that he adopted a wise and law-abiding line of action, to obviate any possible complication in the future. Had any serious contingency arisen (such, for instance, as another Carlyon case), while the election to the Primacy was of even questionable legality, the consequences would have been most disastrous. The misfortune of Bishop Suter’s position a 3 Senior Bishop was, that it made him the next claimant for the Primacy, and herein lies the reason for the somewhat indiscriminating way in which he has been abused.

His conduct in the chair, and the graceful tone of his address to Bishop Hadfield when vacating the chair, were appreciated by all who heard him, but many thought it a pity that at a later stage of the sitting, when returning thanks for a complimentary vote, he spoke as if there had been nothing bub courtesy and good feeling amongst the bishops. On the right of the President sits the Bishop of Dunedin. Brought up in che classic groves of St. Aidan’s Theological College, he afterwards graduated at Cambridge, He did good work in Staffordshire living, and some twenty years ago, when Dr. Abraham resigned the Bishopric of Wellington, Mr Nevill was accredited to this colony by the late Bishop Selwyn as an eligible candidate. On his arrival, however, it was found that the vacancy had been filled. But at that juncture the newly-formed Diocese of Dunedin, having refused to accept Dr. Jenner, opened their arms to Mr Nevill, who graciously accepted the proffered dignity, and assumed the mitre in the Southern city. A man of considerable culture and undoubted ability, he nevertheless appears to have fallen among uncongenial surroundings, and his episcopate has nob been an unqualified success. On his right again sits the Bishop of Waiapu, who succeeded the beloved Bishop Williams, in 1887. After 25 years of missionary service in India, Dr. Stuart has well earned the dignity of a bishopric in this more genial clime, and Waiapu seems to have made a happy choice. Bishop Stuart is not a frequent speaker in Synod, but when he does speak, it is with an object, and to the point. He is an eloquent preacher. If the bishops in New Zealand had bo be classed as High or Low, he would nob be found in the former category.

On the President’s left? is Dr. Cowie, Bishop of Auckland, a man of dignified mien and commanding presence. It may be said of him, that in coming to Auckland he “ succeeded one whom it was not easy to follow,” but he can contemplate with honest satisfaction the increase in the number of his clergy, and it is no mere compliment to say that he is a very Father in God to them. On his left again sits the Bishop of Wellington, so soon to be translated to the Primate’s throne. A man who fifty years ago had to leave Oxford in consequence of what was thought to be a permanent breakdown in health, who ten years later bade a dying farewell to Bishop Selwyn, who ben years ago survived a fall of 20 feet which would have killed an ordinary man, must indeed have some extraordinary powers in him. A prominent trait in his character is that which “his friends call firmness, his enemies obstinacy.” That this characteristic is unimpaired he showed in his first speech as Primate. It is to be hoped that he will always exerciso it in a right direction ; and, if he does, not even the laymen who opposed his election will regret his having received the “ fitting crown to an honourable career.”

That important-looking divine sitting just below the Bishop’s Bench, with the patriarchal appearance, and more than patriarchal name, is Dr. Jacobs, the Dean of Christchurch. It is true that he has a somewhat dictatorial manner, and jumps on young members, but that arises from the fact that for many years he was a head master. At this Synod .he will not speak much, as he has lately overworked himself in the Primacy controversy. No longer the only dean, he now enjoys the distinction of. being the only historian of the Church in New Zealand, and he is on the eve of a visit to England in connection with a further edition of that work. - The decarial honours are now divided between Dean Jacobs and that remarkably correctly - dressed gentleman opposite, whose face, hair, demeanour, and attitude are so suggestive of one of the figures in a painted window. One gazes fascinated at his brow, almost expecting to see a nimbus encircling it, bub when he rises to speak one loses all sense of the peculiarity of his appearance, for his speeches are as thoughtful and pregnant as those of any member of the Synod. There must be something in the atmosphere of St. Michael’s parish, Christchurch, which is favourable to the production of deans, for both our deans were for some time in that parish. Dean Hovell was educated at St. Augustine’s, Canterbury, which College contributes two other Synodsmen, Archdeacon Fancourb, of Wellington, and Rev. J. Hobbs. The latter was for some years in the Otago Diocese, where he threatened at one time to develop ultra-ritualistic propensities, bub with age he has learned moderation, and his future career in the Diocese of Waiapu, whither he has lately been transferred, is likely to be a useful ' one. He may be considered a coming man.

■v. Although bherankof archdeacon is nob an indispensable qualification for a Synodsman, it would appear at any rate to give its owner a prior claim, for there are no less than eleven archdeacons on fchie Synod. Most prominent and the senior amongst them is Archdeacon Leonard Williams, of Waiapu, whose particular province it is to watch over the legislation of the Synod. A few years, ago he undertook the almost

herculean task of reviewing all the existing statutes, and compiling a code of canons, and his work, though well begun, is by no means yet complete. Most recent accession to the archidiaconal ranks is the Venerable T. B. Maclean, the youthful Archdeacon of Mawhera, and the exponent of the latesb developments in the archidiaconal costume. Short of stature, but by no means insignificant, he a powerful extempore preacher, and physically well adapted for the country in which his duties lie.

Foremost among the locally produced archdeaconsis Archdeacon Dudley, of Auckland, who can now boast of, with one exception, the longest continuous tenure of a New Zealand incumbency. During the quarter century for which he has ministered to the spiritual wants of St. Sepulehre’e, Auckland, he has gained the esteem of his flock, as a faithful parish priest. He seldom speaks in Synod, but is none the less a thoughtful and useful member.

Archdeacon Mules has only spoken once this session, but he has on occasions favoured the Synod with a specimen of his oratory, and one of his carefully-prepared speeches is an interesting study. They can only be described as oratorical mazes, .and the marvel of the listener is that from the premiseslaid down,the deductions therefrom the collateral illustrations, the parallels adduced, and the consequences arising thereout, the thread of the argument can be followed, and the conclusion logically summarised in a manner intelligible to an ordinary comprehension. Leaving the archdeacons, we see among the other clerical representatives one or two who are more prominent in the Synod than their fellows. As a clerical secretary the Rev. C. M. Nelson is facile, princeps, and none has yet surpassed him in so writing the minutes as to give prominence to the salient matter and avoid surplusage. He is not looking so well as when last here, but he has suffered a cruel loss in the demolition of his old church in Auckland.

The Rev. A. R. Fitchett, of Dunedin, whom the New Zealand University owns as one of its alumni, was for many years a Wesleyan minister, but is one of Bishop Nevill’s “contributions to the unification of Christendom.” He is now incumbent of All Saints’ Church, Dunedin, and it is a strange fact that his predecessor has forsaken the ranks of the clergy, and joined those of law and journalism. Mr Fitchett ranks among the most fluent preachers in the colony, and in his choice of subjects is always abreast of the topics of the day. He is perspicacious and incisive. In Synod he is a frequeno speaker and a keen debater. Amongst his other accomplishments he numbers that of music. A rising member of Synod, who in another session or two will develop into a very useful one, is the Rev. A. Twogood, of Marton, who with a considerable amount of oratorical ability combines a quickness of perception and power of retort which will strengthen any movement with which he allies himself. The lay representatives of this Synod are, on the whole, well selected, but business engagements have prevented many from attending. At no time was the lay vote of so much importance, as the election of Bishop Hadfield has depended upon one layman’s vote. In view of all the surrounding circumstances, it is possibly the best solution of the difficulty that that small balance of power was used to confirm the action of the last Synod.