The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1900-12-25
GOOD FAITH
IS PROVED.
Bishop Willis Actions
As to Property.
VERMONT pRELkTE WRITES
An Article in the Churchman on the
Anglican Situation in
Hawaii.


ing of the Synod of the diocese (for
which three months notice is required) !
fer January Z. 1901, in order that steps |
may be taken toward procuring such |
changes in the trust deeds under which
the cathedral and other property is !
held as will enable the trustees to
transfer it to the American church
when arrangements are made for our
taking over the charge of the diocese
and Incorporating it into our ecclesias-
tical organization. 1t seems clear that
while such legal sanction will be read
lily granted, it is certainly necessary,
since the trust deeds distinctly require
the use of the prayer book of the
Church of England.
The bishops action in taking steps
| to gain sanction for such changes be-
| fore the American church has made
any direct overture to the diocese ought
to be regarded as a proof of good faith
on his part and of readiness to carry
out the resolution of the Synod of the
diocese passed year ago:
! THAT the Hawaiian Islands having
been annexed by the United states OF
America, this Synod hereby expresses
Its general agreement with the prlncl-
ple on which the report of the commit
ltee on the increased responsibilities of
1.-The church presented to the general
lconvention of 1898 was based, viz, that
1.-The Hawaiian Islands should ultimately
Icome under the spiritual Jurisdiction
Iof tbe Church of the United States and
Further puts on record it's readiness to
Itake such steps as may be necessary
for bringing the American church in
Hawaii into union with the Church OIL
the United States. whenever an invita-
ltion to that effect proceed from the au-
liberties of that church to the oiocese
jof Honolulu, it being made clear al
1.-The same time that the interests OF the
Ichurch in Hawaii shall be duly and SUI
ficientlv safeguarded and its integrity
maintained and tho. -No support OF the
bishop and clergy now received from
tEngland will be Continued Dy tne
Church in the United States. until the
diocese or missionary jurisdiction OF
Honolulu becomes financially indepen'
dent"
The last clause of the Svnod's resolu
tion makes it plain that nv the in
Itegritv'' of the Church in Hawaii it wa!
not intended to irsist, upon the stat"
lof a diocese (according to our canonS
from that of missionary jurisdiction
the latter position the Synod is pre-
pared to accept, only stipulating as
= lcondition of the independent Hawaiian
: Ichurch (more independent of Englan
- than Haiti is of us) surrendering itsel
~ to our charge that the integrity of tn
~ see should be preserved. i. e.. that ther
~ should be a bishop resident in the Is
% lands, that the mission should not
linked for purposes of episcopal car
with some other jurisdiction. such a
the Philippines or California.
M With regard to the condition concerr
ing financial support. the bishop ne
- explained that "the resolution had n
% intention of imposing a perpetual OF
~ ~ legation in regard to expenditure, b,
nc had regard only to what seemed to I
a simple justice. that in taking over
ne church already organized with tt
u ,three-fold ministry there should be 4
immediate withdrawal of the aid G
d. d. which the ministry depends
III AS a matter of fact. the bishops st
n pend has always been considerably LEI
rs than that paid to our missionary bisl
OF op (s2. $50 in all. against $4,000 plus So
I'LL for travelling expenses), and of tn
M sum about $500 is supplied by an el
dowment fund.- which would be hande
'e- over.
of II seems TO have been assumed I
he some that the American church in ta
of ing charge of the Hawaiian missiC
di- could ignore the existing bishop al
IRE make other provision for episcopal ru
and ministrations in the Islands. B
lit cannot need much consideration
show this to be impossible, either
III. general ecclesiastical principles or a
ID cording to our own canons So long
to there Is bishop of Honolulu we c.
lb- only treat with the diocese and its
OF fetal head or receive the diocese wi
IN its bishop. In our own missionary jl
to ;s,;ct;o,s n ;s on,v In tho casa ~
as. vacancy" in a bishopric that the pl
the slolng plsnop Is empowered 70 I'd
Iew charge of the work or to appoint So
out other bishop to do this as his subs
tute. CTitle l.. Canon 10. vi. 81 n
provision has been stretched perhs
necessarily. to cover the case of
cen Philippine Islands and of Porto Ri
Who but whether lawfully or not In tn
Gus cases it cannot apply to the wholly Q
ap- ferent case of Honolulu.
al Doubtless there are peculiar dlfnc
uMau M ties in the situatio, at Honolulu AZ
-, ing in part from the unhappy poiiti
~ lconnnIicat tiops of the last few yea
had Rut II should also in fairness be kno
that no small share of the bishops