THE DIOCESAN SYNOD OF DUNEDIN.

Tuapeka Times, Volume II, Issue 61, 10 April 1869, Page 3

THE DIOCESAN SYNOD OF DUNEDIN.

The first Synod of this Diocese met on the 7th instant, in the Oddfellows 1 Hall, Dunedin.

The Synod was constituted as follows— President i His Lordship the Primate of New Zealand. Clergy : The Revs. E. G. Edwards, Rural Dean, Dunedin ; E. H. Grainger, Dunedin ; A. Dasent, Waikouaiti; M. H. Martin, Lawrence ; G. Gifford, Oamaru ; R. Coffey, Queenstown ; R. L. Stanford, Tokomairiro ; and W. F. Oldham, Riverton. Laity : Mr. J. Ashcroft and Dr. Webster, Oamaru and Waitaki; Mr. W. Mason, Otepopo, Hampden, and Moeraki ; Mr. James Smith, Maniototo ; Messrs. McCulloch and Baker, Invercargill ; Mr. G. Whittingham, Campbelltown; Messrs. B. Fullarton and 0. F. Black) Waikouaiti ; Messrs. J, Fetchell and I. N. Watt, Rivefcton ; Lieut.»Col. Rutherford and Mr. Johnston, Tuapeka ; Messrs. R. Beetham and A. D. Lubecki, Queenstown ; Messrs. J. Dewe and B. Hibbard, Tokomairiro ; Messrs. R. B. Martin and W. C. Young, St. Paul's, Dunedin ; Messrs. T. Hill and Herbert, All Saint's, Dunedin ; Mr. R. Toms, Port Chalmers} Messrs. J. T. Thomson and A> F. Oswin, Caversham ; Mr. W. M. Hodgkins, Duhstan ; the Hon. Major Richardson, Clutha.

Proceedings were opened by an inaugural address from the President, who, after having described the constitution and powers of the Synod, proceeded to state that the most important question they would have to decide was in reference to the appointment of a Bishop for the diocese. Their decision would not, however, be final, as it could be revised by tlie General Synod. There was every reason to believe that if the Synod of Dunedin decided that Bishop Jenner could enter upon office without endangering the welfare of the church, the general Synod would reconsider the decision they had arrived at some time ago. Still, said he, I do not presume to point out what should be the conduct of the General Synod in such a case ; whether or not it will be satisfied with the assent of the Clergy and Laity of this Diocese as expressed by its Synod. Great deference, no doubt, is due to the opinion of that portion of the Church over which a Bishop may be invited to preside, but we cannot separate any Diocese from the other portions of the Provincial Church, and, in the appointment of a Bishop, the whole Church is especially interested, and its sanction must be obtained through its general representative body. It may be as well, perhaps, that I should explain that, when the question of the confirmation of Bishop Jenner's appointment to the See of Dunedin waa brought in October last before the General Synod, no discussion was raised in direct reference to those points which have so unhappily disturbed the peace of the Church in these Provinces — viz., the alleged unconstitutional character of his appointment, .or the charge of what is called Ritualism. The Synod contented itself with endeavouring to ascertain whether the Church in Otago and Southland would be willing to receive Mm as their Bishop, and could be induced to make tlie necessary exertions for the completion of the endowment of the See ; and could it have been satisfied on these p«irticu]ars, it might perhaps have condoned the alleged irregularities of the appointment, and dismissed the charges of Ritualism, not indeed as matters of indifference, but as charges with which, with the evidence then before it, it was not competent to deal. This, at least, might have been the result, and I can well believe that the statement of Bishop Jenner, which set forth the circumstances under which he was consecrated, and the active part taken in that behalf by the Church authorities here and in England, would have had considerable influence in the decision of the Synod. But as it Avas clearly shown that the Church members of Otago and Southland had made no adequate preparation for his reception, and were not likely to make it in their then divided state of feeling, it was evident that the Synod could not limit its consideration to what, if Bishop Jenner alone were concerned^ might have been a matter ©f simple justice, but was bound to decide in accordance with what seemed to be most for the welfare of the Church, and therefore it resolved to request him to withdraw his claims to the Bishopric of Dunedin. This, then, at the present time, is the decision of the Church, so far as she has expressed herself by the body which represents the Anglican communion in New Zealand ; and the ground on which her decision is founded is, that it is " for tlie peace of the Church" —that is to say, as I understand the resolution, the peace of the Church in the Diocese of Dunedin. It may not, indeed, necessarily be taken with this limitation alone ; but inasmuch as the attention of the General Synod, when it passed the resolution, was chiefly directed to the interests of the Church in these parts, and certainly had in view the allaying of strife and division here, this ground will certainly be removed to a very great extent, if this Synod, which represents the Diocesan Church, and which, I may say, has been elected chiefly for the purpose of nominating its Bishop, should declare its willingness to accept the appointment of Bishop Jenner. His Lordship then proceeded to explain that he had aot officially prohibited Bishop Jenner from officiating in the Diocese, but had out of respect to the decision of the General Synod, declined to repogniae him. He concluded by urging the necessity of all accepting the decisions of the Synod, whatever might be their private opinions, and thus preserving the unity of the Church. On ths motion of Major Richardson, a vote of thanks was accorded to the President for his address.

The following office-bearers were then app/jjute^ :— Clerical Secretary, lley. Mr. D. asent ; Lay Secretary, Mr. Watt ; Chairman of Committees, with a deliberative and casting- vote, Mr. Devre. Mr. Smith objected to the return of Messrs. Ilodgkins, Lubecki, and Whittingham, #s they were not regular communicants. , It wag agreed that those gentlemen should abstain from voting on important questions, until the matter had been investigated.

Major Richardson tabled a protest against the return of $he Invercargill representatives'. ' '

BISHOP JENNER'S LETTER.

The President said he desired to lay before the Synod a letter wliich he had received from Bishop Jenner. The letter was read as follows .—. —

" Dunedin, April 5, 1869. "My Lord— l beg leave to address your Lordship in your two-fold capacity, as Metropolitan of the New Zealand Church, and Bishop, for the present, of the Diocese of Dunedin. I trust that your Lordship will communicate the few words that follow to the Standing Commission of the General Synod, and to the Diocesan Synod of Dunedin.

"1. Referring first to the resolution passed by the General Synod last October, in which I am requested, for the sake of the peace of the Church, to resign my claim to the position of Bishop of Dunedin, I beg to state that, having, by careful inquiry, ' and by experience gained during a tour through the Diocese, satisfied myself that the peace of the Church will in no wise be secured by such resignation, I respectfully decline to comply with the request.

" 2. In the second place, to approach a most painful subject," I am reluctantly constrained to advert to the disgraceful and humiliating position which, by an arbitrary exercise — not to call it stretch — of your Lordship's authority, I have been forced to occupy during the last two months. My Lord, 1 beg to record, in the face of the Church, my most solemn protest against the insult offered to me, and to the office which we bear in common, and renewed, be it observed, again and again, on every occasion on which I have participated in the public worship of the Church. And to avoid misunderstanding as to the extent of the indignity and my own acquiesenco in the sentence passed by your Lordship, I beg to say that it is not only to the private letter wheiein your Lordslu'p urged me to "abstain from all attempts to officiate, or in any way to exercise my office as a Bishop or as a Minister of our Church in Otago and Southland," that I allude. For, having myself resolved before I heard from your Lordship not to officiate in New Zealand until my status should be more clearly defined, I should have had no reason to complain had you contented yourself with a private intimation of your wishes. But I refer also to the telegram — (" Bishop Jenner lavs come out without authority from me ; nor do I propose I giving him authority to officiate in Otago or Southland . 1 1. J. C. , Chratehurch " ) — sent by your Lordship to a gentleman at Dunedin applying to you in the avowed character of spokesman of my opponents, and requesting an answer for the satisfaction of those with whom he was acting ; and to your letter to your commissary the Rev. E. G. Edwards, requiring him to communicate to the clergy of the diocese your refusal to allow me to officiate. And I say that these three utterances taken together, can bear but one interpretation, namely, that it was your Lordship's intention, deliberately and publicly, to inhibit me from ministering even as an ordinary clergyman in that diocese, for the oversight of which I received consecration. The natural effect of this degrading inhibition (whatever ita intention) has been not only to place me under a very serious disadvantage in my character of aspirant to the See of Dunedin ; but also to give great encouragement to those who are banded together in opposition to my aims. For it is to be borne in mind, that the measures adopted by your Lordship were those suggested, not^to say dictated, by the opponents themselves. Once more, my Lord, I protest against the attitude thus assumed by you. "3. In conclusion, I beg leave to remind your Lordship, and through you the Church in Now Zealand, of a circumstance whicij I cannot but think has been unjustifiably k&pi out of sight — the existence, namely, of an engagement of the strongest moral, if not legal, obligation between this branch of the Church and myself, in virtue of which alone I am in possession of the Episcopal character. Thus, my Lord, I present myself, not for the first time, before the New Zealand Church, as a party to this solemn contract, the fulfilment of which I claim as due to me on the commonest principles of justice, honour, and morality. And unless it can be shown that the contract has been nullified by any act of mine, I respectfully call upon your Lordship, as head of the New Zealand Church, to take such measures as the law of the Church prescribes for its fulfilment, that is to say, for placing me in actual and formal possession of the See, for the occupation of which, and for no other purpose, I was consecrated a Bishop. — I have the honour to be, &c, Henry Lascelles Jenner, D.D., 'A Bishop of the United Churcli of England and Ireland, in the Colony of New Zealand.'"