The Sun.
London, England, 1851-05-03 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 2
THE PROPOSED SYNOD IN EXETER.
Mr. CHILDERS said he rose, pursuant to notice, to
ask the First Lord of the Trea`ury what the Govern-
ment were prepared to do with respect to the dio-
cesan synod contemplated by the Bishop of Exeter ?
I❑ order to put the House in possession of the facts
of that case he would read a letter from the Bishop
of Exeter to the archdeacons of his diocese, which
had appeared in the public journals of the preceding
day, and which he believed expressed the intentions
of the Bishop upon the subject. The letter was as
follows :

"South Molten, April 28, P5l.
" Dear Mr. Archdeacon,— Having announced to my clergy
my purpose of holding, with God's permission, a synod of the
diocese soon after the conclusion of my present visitation, I
now request you to desire the deans rural to inform the pres-
byteries, whether beneficed or licensed, in their several dean-
eries, that I have fixed on Wednesday, the 25th of June next
for the meeting of the synod, to be continued on the two fol-
lowing days.
" We shall assemble first in the chapter-room, and pro-
ceed thence to the cat' eclral, at the usual hour of morning
prayer, and after having received together the Holy Eucha-
rist, will return to the chapter-room, which the dean and
chapte- have permitted us to use for that purp•,se.
" The one great question which only I shall submit to the
synod on the first day will be the fitness of our making a
declaration of our firm adherence to the great article of the
Creed—' I acknowledge one bap, isin for the remission of sins,'
as well as to the doctrine of our Church on the grace of that
sacrament, as set forth in the Catechism.
-
"On the two other days we will discuss such matters of
practical interest as shall seem best calculated, with God's
blessing, to promote the great ends of our ministry—avoiding
all questions of controversial theology.
"It is manifest that so numerous a body cannot usefully
be brought together except by representation. I therefore
invite the clergy of every deanery to elect two of their own
number, together with their deans rural, to meet me, the
dean and the greater chapter, my chaplains, and the officials
of the archdeacons.
" This election, however, it may be better to defer till
within a short time before the proposed meeting. In the
meanwhile the questions to be proposed for consideration will
be fixed. For this purpose I would desire the deans rural to
call together, or otherwise to invite their clergy, to transmit
to me any questions which they may recommend for the
consideration of the synod.
"It is •desirable that such questions be proposed six
weeks before the 25th of June, in order that I may select
such as shall seem fittest, and submit them to the delibera-
tion of the clergy of the several deaneries a month before
that day.
"This will give sufficient time for their deliberation, and
for electing their representatives.
"As it is important that these representatives should
have the full confidence of those from whom they are
sent, I would wish that no one be considered as elected
who has not an actual majority of the votes of those who
are present, and the holders of the proxies of those who
are absent. This would be best secured by electing each
separately.
"The clergy of every deanery may send their opinions
on the different questions to be proposed through
their representatives, who will, however, be free to give
their own judgment on those questions in the synod.
"We m.y humbly hope that this and future similar
meetings may be a means of giving, both to the bishop and
to the clergy at large, the benefit of mutual consultation on
various matters which shall from time to time arise of im-
portant consequence to our ministerial usefulness, and there-
fore to the edification of out people.
" I am, dear Mr. Archdeacon. your affectionate
friend and brother in Christ,
"H. EXETER."
That letter afforded so good an explanation of what the
Bishop of Exeter meant to do, that it was only necessary
for him to add that there were 800 cl,rgynien in that
diocese, and that the Bishop proposed they should be re-
presented by 60 of their number, and by two members
from each rural deanery. With regard to the animus
in which ecclesiastical questions were likely to be dis-
cussed in the proposed synod, he would say nothing
more than merely to read one or two extracts from the
pastoral of the Bishop of Exeter, which had just been
published. These extracts related principally to the
questions involved in the Gorham case, which were the
great questions the synod would have to consider. The
Bishop of Exeter said:—
"I grieved to read the statement of the Archbishop, in
answer to an address from a portion of you, my clergy, in
which he declared, that in Issuing the fiat for institution in
Mr. Gorham's case, he hadVeted not judicially, but mini-
sterially. To affect to act ministerially in such a case, to
give mission and authority over souls, as the minister of
man, is to renounce the Divine authority of the office in
which the power of mission'is lodged—to fling the commis-
sion of Christ under the roottitOol of an earthly throne! And
this, too, when the Crown itself had too just and true a sense
of its own duty, as well as of the duty of the Archbishop, to
require to accept, or even to be prepared for such a sur-
render! That surrender can be regarded only as the volun-
tary betraying of a high and roost sacred trust. Traditor
potestatis quam Sancta Mate)! .Ectiesia a Sponso sun acce=
perat.' It could not but ba Manifest to me, that if I was
wrong—if the Archbishop had not, by instituting Mr. Gor-
ham, become a fautor of the heretical tenets held by him—
and if he had not, as such, forfeited his rights to Catholic
communion, any one of his comprovincial bishops who there-
upon derenounced communion with him, would himself, by
so doing, have deserved to be put out of The pale of the
Church."
by the Archbishop of Canterbury to the
The Bishop of Exeter then went on to remark upon the
charge delivered
clergy of the diocese of Chester in 1841, and he said :
"After all this, is it possible for any minister of the Eng-
lish Church who could speak 'the words of truth and sober-
ness,' to hesitate what he must say of the statements which
we have read from this unhappy charge? I declare solemnly,
and with a deep sense of the responsibility which attaches
to such a declaration concerning a document proceeding from
hope
such a quarter, that I could not name any work of any
minister in our Church, which, though of double the bulk.
contains half so many heretical statements as are contained
The Archbishop, in his
charge,
or
rt the
Protestant
in this one charge."
clergy would never be wanting in resistance to any attempts
which might be made "to weaken
faith," and upon this the Bishop of Exeter said :
"Now it is not with anything like a wish to carp at
expressediu bve a
words, that I avow my ignoranca of what is meant by the
phrase ' the Protestant ' Protestant' and 'Faith' are
terms which do not seem to tabli to accord together; the ob-
ject of ' Faith' is Divine truth, the object of 'Protestant' is
human error. How, therefor*can one be an attribute of the
other ?"
In conclusion, be (Mr. Childers) had only to ask her Ma-
jesty's Governnaeat how they intended to deal with a propo-
sal to hold in the diocese of Exeter a synod, which would be
presided over by a. prelate who had used such language as
that which he-had just quoted?—(Hear, hear.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, as the Honourabi
Member hacL• given notice of his question, he bad
thought it necessary to take the opinions of the
law officers of . the Crown with regard to dio

cesan synods. The Honoutable Gentleman had
correctly stated that the Bishop of Exeter proposed to
call together a certain assembly .of clergymen of the
diocese, elected after a certain manner, to confer on
subjects to which the Bishop. of Exeter referred in his
letter. It did not appear to hiss (Lord John Russell)
that that assembly, though called by the Bishop of
Exeter, bore in any respect the character of a
synod, either as to the mode of assembling, or the sub-
Jects which were proposed to be brought before it. The
25th of Henry VIII. had reference to provincial and
diocesan synods—provincial synods could not be
called except by the King's writ,• or pass any
canons without the consent of the Crown, and ii
any person offended against this law he was liable
to imprisonment during the pleasure of the Crown. Dio-
cesan synods, however, could be called by the bishop.
The restriction as to passing tenons might certainly
be held to apply to diocesan synods; but whether
that was so or not it did not,affect the question, 85
the Bishop of Exeter had expressly declared that the
assembly which he
proposed to call should not declare
any canons. It was, therefore, very clear, whatever
purpose the Bishop had in view, be did not intend
to contravene the Act of Henry VIII., or, as it was
called, the Act of Submission. The Attorney-
General and Solicitor. General did not think such
an assembly of clergymen would 'be unlawful;
but the bishop had given a term, and he (Lord J. Rus-
sell) thought very unfortunately, to the assembly which
was calculated to give rise to the appearance that it was
contrary to law. It was most unfortunate, to use no
harsher term, that the bishop had given the
name of synod to an assembly framed in a different
way, and called together for a different purpose.
The Bishop of Exeter had called into question the
judgrant of the Archbishops of Canterbury and York,
and it was to impugn that flenision that he had called
toE
athBr the *llea- ,With regard to Ile Laguna
which be Lad und trivet& Om Ard.l-4;4p vl cv.L.