Support of the Clerqy.

I have already alluded to this. Now I desire to return to it. The present position is intolerable: it cripples the work and it cripples the worker; it puts the Laity into an unfair position. I know it will take time to remedy, and I hope you will discuss what I now lay before you, in general terms, this Synod; consider it in your Archidiaconal or Ruri-Decanal Conferences; bring it up next Synod and, if necessary, reconsider it in your local gatherings again before taking final action.

page 23

There are some things to be remembered at the outset: (i.) According to the Canons of the Church of this Province, the Bishop's influence in the appointment of Incumbents of Parishes is shadowy. The real responsibility rests on the shoulders of the Nominators. Therefore, when the wrong man is appointed, the blame is not entirely to be laid at the door of the Bishop, (ii.) The Bishop alone is responsible for the appointment of a Priest to a Parochial District. Therefore, if "the round peg be put in the square hole," the proper course to pursue is: convince the Bishop be has committed an error of judgment, (iii.) One of two things sometimes happens:—(a) The parishioners "starve a man out." (b) The man "starves himself out." There is a real difference. The producing causes may be various. The Nominators or the Bishop may be primarily responsible, (iv.) There is a good side to the plan of the people paying the man and the man being dependent on the people. There is a bad side also. It is possible to keep the good and eliminate the bad. (v.) The present average payment of our Clergy is wrong, considering what is expected of the man both before and after his ordination. Bearing these things in mind, the prime necessity is, the creation of a Sustentation Fund.

My ideas of a Sustentation Fund are large. Unless you keep the scheme large you had better not attempt it: its whole success depends on its universal adoption in the Diocese, on its bigness.

Here is my idea in outline:—(a) Every penny arising from particular endowment or from parochial annual sources of every sort, for support of Clergy, is paid into the Central Fund. (b) Every Clergyman in the Diocese is paid from that Fund regularly. (c) Where there are Endowments and particular sources of revenue they go to the particular clergyman: no interference can take place with past (or prospective) endowments for particular parishes. (d) The aims of a Sustentation Fund are:—(1.) Separation of the spiritual person from the financial matters. (2.) Payment of Clergy being regular. (3.) Levelling up of incomes, not levelling down. (4.) In consequence, the gradual rising of "tone" regarding the payment of the Clergy, (e) Annually, I would have each Parish and District assessed, and that amount paid into the page 24 Fund. (f) I would press upon every Churchman and Churchwoman through the length and breadth of the Diocese, the absolute claim upon them to be annual subscribers to the Sustentation Fund. As a Clergyman, I would have no hesitation in pressing the Sustentation Fund on my people: it is very different from asking for my own stipend—a thing no Clergyman ought ever be expected to do. (g) It might be wise even to suppress the Home Mission and Country Clergy Funds and replace them by monthly collections in every church in the Diocese for the Sustentation Fund.

Let me repeat: I here only give outlines. Of the spiritual and moral advantages of the scheme I am convinced. Upon the financial aspect of it I am not trained to pronounce a judgment: minds trained to finance must be brought to bear upon the scheme. Before we are much older, you will find the scheme possible of adoption; that is to say, if you go in for a big enough scheme and keep the big idea before you in all your local discussions and, above all, pray that the conclusion may redound to the increase of the spiritual efficiency and force of our work for God.

At this present moment there is a Sustentation Fund for the Diocese of Auckland in existence. It stands in the joint names of myself and the Diocesan Registrar. It has been begun with a cheque for £5 that one of my former Sidesmen in London sent me unasked a few weeks ago for the Diocesan work. To-day the Sustentation Fund of the Diocese of Auckland exists. Therefore, the opportunity is now offered to the people of the Diocese to make "the little one a thousand"; to lawyers to suggest the Fund to their clients when making their wills; and to the wealthy, who want to enjoy their wealth in their lifetime, for the speedy creation of a working capital, without which the scheme is impossible. The Sustentation Fund will enable us to do pioneer missionary work among the scattered settlers in new settlements, to really make an effort at gripping our problems both in towns and the country. At present we are hampered at every turn, either by want of funds or by regulations limiting the use of those funds we have. Whilst maintaining necessary legal forms, let us keep the Sustentation Fund as big as possible. I suggest these words for a Trust Deed, when you do make one: "This Fund is for the page 25 support of living agents acting on the licence of the Bishop of Auckland."

In some sense I have already been preparing the way for some such big scheme as I now propose. In every country district I have visited I have urged the formation of a Central Vestry upon which seats are allocated for representatives of the out-stations. To the Treasurer of the Central Vestry are paid all contributions towards the Clergyman's stipend; the Treasurer opens an account for the stipend fund at the bank; the stipend is paid by the Treasurer to the Clergyman regularly each month or quarter; if the various contributions are in arrear the overdraft is on the bank and not on the Clergyman, his wife and children; at the Annual Parish Meeting the Vicar leaves the chair while the stipend account is discussed and, if there be at that date a bank overdraft, the Central Vestry brings pressure to bear on the defaulting local Vestries or Committees to discharge their moral obligations. Two things further: (a) I have urged every Vestry to secure annual subscribers to the stipend fund; but the Vicar is not to know either the name of any subscriber or the amount of any subscription. (b) The Standing Committee has already taken in hand the question of arrears of stipends of Clergy receiving grants from the Country Clergy Fund. The action of the Standing Committee has been, even at this early stage, productive of good results.

As a whole, we are lamentably weak in teaching about direct alms-giving in annual subscriptions. We pride ourselves upon the fact that a Priest of our Church is at everyone's call in cases of sickness, sorrow, joy. It is a noble fact of our Imperial history and, thank God! our clergy, as a rule, live up to it. But many of our Laity do not live up to it. They will send for the Clergyman to minister to them in sickness, to baptize their children, to bury their dead, to do all those things that, in one way or another, the Britisher thinks he was born unto as a right; but the said Britisher does not always think of the parson's railway fare, wear and tear of his horse or buggy, and so forth. He would think of it—for he is an honest man—if anyone reminded him of it. The parson does not, cannot, and—please God!—never will. Only two sorts of persons can state the facts:—the Bishop and the Layman on the Vestry or Committee. page 26 I have stated the facts wherever I have gone. Now I lay it upon the Laity occupying any Church position to let the facts be known and to get the thing on to right lines. In every Parish and District I urge, as earnestly as I can, the Churchwardens, Vestry, and Committee, to get annual subscribers to the Stipend Fund. Immediately, there will be benefit all round. Ultimately, the Sustentation Fund will come to our people quite naturally, and its claim will be expressed "in a tongue under standed of the people."

I have definitely told both Priest and People, where-ever I have Instituted a Vicar, that his duty is not to be "popular" and not to "tout for his stipend." His duty is, to teach The Faith, minister the Sacraments, and be among his people as "him that serveth." The duty of the Laity is, to attend to the carrying out of the teaching that "they who preach the Gospel shall live of the Gospel."

In some cases I have found that a Clergyman is exposed to this sort of thing:—The alms are collected, placed on the altar, conveyed to the vestry, counted and entered in the book by a Layman, handed across the table to the Clergyman as his pay, and the Clergyman, having taken whatever is thus handed to him, goes away on his 10 or 15 miles drive or ride home again. Well, the continuance of that practice I have absolutely forbidden, and I am determined to withdraw the services of any Clergyman holding my License from any district content to go on in this method; also to withdraw my Licence from any Clergyman countenancing such methods.

[The pioneer work of the Home Missioner necessitates methods not permissible where there is a resident Clergyman.]

But I am persuaded that I shall have the support of every right-thinking man in the community in taking a general line which, no matter what amount of present criticism and unpopularity it may produce, will finally be of lasting good to the cause of true Religion in this our country.

It is for the real welfare of our country to keep the spiritual person attendant upon spiritual things. It is absolutely against the welfare of our country, and it page 27 tends to lower the dignity and honour of God in the minds of men to try to discharge financial responsibilities for spiritual services by ping-pong tournaments, progressive euchre socials, dances, and the like—innocent and right as such means may be to attain other ends. God's service means self-sacrifice or it means nothing. In the Name of God let us keep the whole idea high. For the sake of our country let us be thorough in our Religion.