PRIMACY QUESTION.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2006, 11 February 1890, Page 2

PRIMACY QUESTION.

TO THE EDITOS. Sir, —Permit me to correct a misappreuhension into which you have fallen ia your paper of this day, February Bth, respecting the Primacy,' now bo much talked about.

First, the present Bishop of Christchurch did not resign the office of Primate at the General tSynod. He stated that it was his intention to resign after the Synod was over, and certain business connected therewith was concluded; and that the Synod would have to elect some other bishop to succeed him, which the Synod, on the motion of Bishop Selwyn, proceeded to do on a subsequent day. The Bishop of Chriatchurch, being still Primate, had as such to certify to all the proceedings of the Synod, and send to the Archbishop of Canterbury and several other dignitaries. It was a long time before he was able to get the papers ready for signature and dispatch; but when this was done he then wrote to the Bishop of Nelson, as bishop " next in order and seniority"' to himself, formally resigning the Primacy.

Then it was that some Nelson lawyers said that the Synod kad not power under their Canons to elect or name a bishop for the office of Primate before that office was actually vacant. This view was upheld by the Standing Commission, who decided that the election was void, and that the Bishop of Nelson,as senior Bishop next in order of seniority to the Primate resigning, became Primate until the General Synod shall make other provision in that behalf. The resignation of the Primacy by the Bishop was perfectly legal. It is the election of a new Primate previous to the resignation of the former one which the Standing Commission have pronounced illegal.

Next, the Bishop has not resigned the Bishopric of Christchurch ; he is Bishop of Christchurch at the present moment. The Canon expressly provides that any bishop wishing to resign may give notice to the Primate or senior Bishop of his intention to do so ; such notice to fix a day on which he desires to retire. Then all the steps which are necessary for the election of a successor may be taken. This has been dene. I believe that the 31st March has been fixed as the day for the actual resignation, and that on some convenient day after that date Archdeacon Julius will be consecrated and installed as Bishop of Christchurch.

ISTow to look back more than 20 years. The present Bishop of Christchurch was elected Primate previous to the resignation of Bishop Felwyo, but a special statute was passed directing this to be done, and providing that such should be done, but that the Bishop so elected should be Primate upon the resignation or death of the Bishop of New Zealand. A similar statute or caaon ought to have been passed at Dunedin, but, alas! no one thought of it.—l am, etc.,

A Lax Stkodsmak, One of those who ought to have thought of it.

[We are much obliged for the information contained in this letter. It puts the matter in a clearer light than anything we have hitherto read. Evidently the Bishop of Nelson is right, but he ought to call the Synod together at once.—Ed.]