Church News.

Papers Read at General Meeting of the Church of England.

At the close of the Synod just held in Christchurch there was a general meeting of members of the Church of England, at which four papers were read and submitted to discussion. We have read three of these papers with unusual satisfaction. Mr. C. C. Bowen, R.M., had for his subject "The Secularisation of Education." We cannot endorse his approval of Mr. Forster's Education Act, of which we shall have more to say at another time. But we most cordially welcome his statement of the objection to denominational education at the expense of the State, He says, referring to the fact that undenominational schools are established in the country districts in connection with a system of local rating, while Christchurch depends on the efforts of the denominations, expecting them to be aided by State money:—

"It is out of the question to expect that the State will grant as large assistance proportionally to communities that do not tax themselves as to those that do. Such a distribution of the public funds would be obviously unfair; and it is practically out of the question to suppose that the Legislature will authorise the levying of a direct tax upon all ratepayers with a view of distributing the proceeds among a few denominations."

We should go a little beyond this, and say that the unfairness does not depend upon the way in which the money is raised, whether by direct taxation, or by land sales, or by other means, so long as public money is applied to denominational uses.

The Dean of Christchurch read an admirable paper on "Pastoral Visiting." We should like all our readers to give it a careful perusal. He asks the members of the Church to lay themselves out to make a good and spiritual use of a visit from their pastor, and to cast off some of that reticence which so often prevents any real contact of minds and hearts on spiritual subjects. He shows the comparative uselessness of mere hasty calls, and the necessity of staying long enough at each house to feel one's way to some profitable conversation. He invites those who know of cases that call for pastoral attention to inform the minister, and recommends all whose leisure and ability are sufficient for it, to give page 13 themselves to the work of visiting the sick, the needy, and the ignorant. Sunday-school-teachers are especially advised to become acquainted with the parents of their scholars.

The Archdeacon of Christchurch followed with a paper "On the Action of the Laity in the Church." It is too often assumed that the clergy are the Church, but in this paper it is shown that they are but a part of the body, and that the co-operation of members who are not ministers is now possible in a higher degree than ever before, in the work of teaching, and in the work of government. The Archdeacon says:—

"We stand simply in the position of the first converts to Christianity, voluntary members of a voluntary body. Each of us, if our profession means anything, has received a treasure of Divine knowledge and blessing—the one treasure which beyond all others grows by distribution. Men and women we are called on to see and try how much we can do by our own personal efforts to evangelise the world, and well will it be for us if the progress of our Church shows a constantly increasing company of lay fellow-helpers in the work of the ministry such as gladdened the hearts of the first preachers of the Gospel, and received in Scripture their living commemoration."

These are wholesome words, whether considered as exhortation to those who agree with them, or as a protest against that false doctrine of priestly prerogative, which, in some quarters, is openly advocated, and among many who are taught better is practically believed, and expressed in their abstinence from all Christian work.

We believe that the "element of central authority," on which we do well to depend, is the Headship of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the presence of the Holy Spirit in the Church. We see neither in the reason of page 14 the case, nor in the lessons of history, reason to hope that any other "central authority" will be always "wise and well controlled." We can understand an advocate of Diocesan Episcopacy seeking on the one hand for a foundation for his system in the Scriptures, or on the other maintaining that he has sufficient ground in the necessities of the case and in the historical development of the Church; but we do not see how the two bases can co-exist. We believe that no trace of Diocesan Episcopacy is to be found in the New Testament. The bishops were the elders, the pastors of the Churches. Such control as was exercised by the apostles differs in many important particulars from the control of a Diocesan Bishop. It is easy enough to trace the development of the system in the history of the Church from about the year 150 or 170 to the Council of Nice in 325. But we neither recognise the authority of the precedent thus found, nor approve of the principles by which the development was produced and guided. We shall perhaps revert to this subject, and treat it more fully, at another time.

Where the "selfish principle" referred to lurks, and how it operates, we are at a loss to guess. Any system may admit of selfish action in detail. Even Diocesan Episcopacy knows something of nepotism. Does the Archdeacon mean that a small Church may wish to keep a man who ought to fill a wider sphere? It cannot keep him against his will. Or does he mean that a large Church may seek to secure the services of one who is pastor of a smaller Church? There is nothing in this that does not exactly fall under the idea of that "promotion" which he wishes to see in the hands of Bishops. We do not understand the charge of selfishness, which he introduces by the phrase "without doubt."

Archdeacon Wilson's paper "On the Action of the Laity in the Church," reads in many parts almost like a reply to that of Archdeacon Harper. Practically it may serve as an antidote. An anonymous writer, calling himself "Plain Truth," criticises Mr Harper's paper with some severity; he has evidently been misled in one place by a typographical error, and perhaps his letters suffer a little from a similar cause. "Plain Truth" does not positively state whether he is in the strict sense a Congregationalist.

Presbyterian.—Our limited space will only allow a brief reference to the active operations of the Church Extension Society. Already it has been the means of securing the services of the Rev. J. W. Cree for Southbridge, Leeston, and Brookside; of the Rev. W. McGregor for Kaiapoi, Rangiora, and the Cust; and of the Rev.—Ewen for a large district between the Selwyn and the Waimakariri.

Wesleyan Church Durham Street.—At the performance, on the 20th of June, of the "Dettingen Te Deum" and selections from "The Messiah," the collection amounted to £132 18s. 9d.

Parramatta, N.S.W.—The Rev. T. S. Forsaith, whom many of our readers will remember, settled two years ago at Parramatta, with the design of forming a Congregational Church in that place, which was page 15 then without one. In this he has been very successful. We understand that his services have been gratuitously rendered. On the 19th May last a beautiful Church was opened for worship, the cost (including land) being £2663. The whole sum has been raised, except about £300, Mr Forsaith himself being a large contributor. Mr John Fairfax, of Sydney, has promised to give the last £100 required.