Appendix II
Authorities for the History of the Church in New Zealand
The student of New Zealand Church History needs to glean his information, bit by bit, from many quarters, but there are certain outstanding authorities to which he will go at the outset. These are not all of equal value, and they need to be used with discrimination.
For the life and work of Samuel Marsden, the promised volume by the late Dr. Hocken should take the first place. Meanwhile, the “Memoirs” published by the Religious Tract Society in 1858 are of primary importance. The book has been reprinted in modified form by Messrs. Whitcombe and Tombs (1913). The editor, Mr. Drummond, has been able to correct a few mistakes, and has supplied some additional information. The original author, the Rev. J. B. Marsden, had no personal knowledge of his hero nor of the scenes of his labours. He consequently falls into error here and there, but his book gives a faithful and interesting picture of the religious side of the great missionary’s life and work. Another side is presented in the “Narrative of a Voyage to New Zealand” (1817) by John Liddiard Nicholas, whose book has the high authority of an eye-witness. Much useful information on the work of Marsden and his helpers has been collected in Brett’s “Early History of New Zealand” (Auckland, 1890).
For the subsequent history of the mission, the chief available authority is “Christianity among the New Zealanders,” by the first Bishop of Waiapu (London, 1867). Living on the spot, and being one of the principal actors in the events which he describes, the bishop is able to give a detailed account whose value is only marred by the mistakes made by the English printers in the spelling of Maori names.
For the Selwynian period, the “Life and Episcopate” of the great bishop by Prebendary Tucker (two vols., London, 1879) is a primary authority. Its value is seriously diminished by the author’s want of acquaintance with New Zealand geography, and still more by his studied disparagement of the Church Missionary Society, but his book remains indispensable for its collection of letters. A useful corrective to Tucker may be found in Dr. Eugene Stock’s History of the C.M.S.—a book which, in spite of some startling inaccuracies, throws a welcome light on many obscure passages of our history.
More reliable than either of these varying presentations of the bishop’s policy and work is the small volume of “Annals of the Colonial Church. Diocese of New Zealand” (London, 1857), which contains the bishop’s journals for the first years of his episcopate. Lady Martin’s unpretending little book on “Our Maoris” is extremely valuable as coming from one who was a devoted member of the Selwyn circle.
The unhappy controversy between Bishop Selwyn and Archdeacon Henry Williams had at least this good result, that it led to the compilation of a full and authoritative life of the latter by his son-in-law, Mr. Hugh Carleton (two vols., Auckland, 1874 and 1877). When allowance is made for the personal bias of the talented author who fights both governor and bishop “with the gloves off,” the book remains an authority of the first rank.
The Rev. J. King Davis’ “History of St. John’s College” (Auckland); Bishop Cowie’s “Our Last Year in New Zealand” (London, 1888); and Canon Mason’s “Round the Round World on a Church Mission” (London, 1892), may also be mentioned as supplying interesting details of church work, especially in the mother diocese of Auckland.
On the whole, it must be said that in contrast with the Melanesian Mission, which possesses its biographies of Bishop Patteson and Bishop J. R. Selwyn, its detailed history by Mrs. Armstrong, and several other books of a descriptive and historical character, the New Zealand Church is meagrely provided. The early missionaries themselves published little. Yate’s “Account of New Zealand” (1835), and Taylor’s “Te Ika a Maui” (London, 1855), and his “Past and Present of New Zealand” (1868), stand almost alone. Some journals have been printed for private circulation; others are only available in MS.; others again have been destroyed. No biography exists of any of our bishops except those of Selwyn by Tucker and Curteis, and that of Bishop Harper by the present writer. Yet where could be found a better subject for a memoir than Bishop Hadfield? Bishop William Williams also should surely have his biography, but the materials for such a book seem to have been used as fuel by the British soldiers during the siege of Waerenga-a-hika in 1868. Archdeacons Brown and Maunsell also deserve that their life histories should be told. The founders of Canterbury should not be allowed to pass into oblivion. Altogether there remains much work to be done by the historical student of the future.
Notes
1 The missionaries generally used the terms Te Puna and Rangihoua indiscriminately.
2 Marsden’s routes of travel during this time have been thoroughly traced and elucidated by Dr. Hocken. In a biography or in a work on the exploration of New Zealand a full account of these interesting journeys should be given. But, for reasons which will presently appear, they have hardly any importance for the history of the Church. One Rembrandtesque passage may be quoted in which Marsden narrates his visit to the pa of Pataua, near Whangarei. This pa was built high above the sea, upon rocks which had “the appearance of an old abbey in ruins.... I was conducted up the narrow pass [writes Marsden] which I could not ascend without assistance, the path was so steep and narrow. When I had reached the top, I found a number of men, women, and children sitting round their fires roasting snappers, crawfish, and fern root. It was now quite dark. The roaring of the sea at the foot of the pa, as the waves rolled into the deep caverns beneath the high precipice upon which we stood, whose top and sides were covered with huts, and the groups of natives conversing round their fires, all tended to excite new and strange ideas for reflection.”
3 I have ventured to substitute this term for the “Mercury Bay” of the original. It is clear that Marsden thought himself much further north than he really was. Dr. Hocken proposes to read “Towranga,” which, of course, means the same as my own emendation.
4 This account is taken from the Nelson Church Messenger, of some years ago. Bishop Williams thinks the surveyor must have been misled to some extent.
5 For the right understanding of the subsequent history, the following extract from a letter of Gibbon Wakefield to Mr. J. R. Godley (Dec. 21st, 1847) is of the utmost importance: “I really cannot tell you what the Bishop of New Zealand is. His see was created by us in spite of many obstacles put in our way by the Church and the Government. Indeed, we forced the measure on the Melbourne Government; and in that measure originated all the new Colonial bishoprics. If our views had been taken up by the Church, great results would have been obtained both for the Church and colonisation. I will not say that Dr. Selwyn turned round upon us, and joined our foes, the anti-colonising ‘Church Missionary Society’; but I am sure he is not a wise man.”
6 Selwyn had an Englishman’s love for a stone building, and always spoke of the wooden churches of the country as “chapels.” Yet some of these despised buildings (e.g., those at Kaitaia and at Russell), which had been built before his arrival, are still in existence and in regular use; whereas his “solid” church, at Tamaki, which he looked upon with so much pride, very soon proved dangerous, and is now a picturesque ruin.
7 In the negotiations which followed the war, Heke addressed the British commissioner as “King of Babylon,” much to the embarrassment of Henry Williams, who was acting as interpreter!
8 It is strange to find the good Lady Martin recording this action without a word of disapproval. Carleton’s defence of it is extraordinary. If the Maoris had been given the Apocrypha (which they had not) they might have read of Jonathan the Maccabee fighting a defensive battle on the Sabbath. The amusing part is that Carleton himself could not at the moment lay his hand on a copy of the Apocrypha, and had to fall back on Josephus! A more consoling comment is given by Lieut.-Col. Mundy: “Who shall say that this neglect of man’s ordinances and observance of God’s in the time of their trouble, did not bring with them a providential and merciful result? It led, doubtless, to their almost instantaneous defeat; but it saved them and the English from the tenfold carnage which a more vigilant and disciplined resistance, from within their walls, would have infallibly caused.”
9 Archdeacon Williams’ son-in-law, Mr. Hugh Carleton, has left it on record that the archdeacon and his family would at any time have given up the lands, if only the bishop had shown them some sympathy and publicly disavowed his concurrence with the governor’s charges.
10 Even as late as the year 1866 the Secretary of the C.M.S. (the Rev. Henry Venn) could write out to New Zealand: “If all the colonial churches are to be made free, the Church of England would be ruined as a missionary church. The people of England would never send out missionaries to be under Free Bishops.”
11 It is a matter for regret that the scene of this first episcopal consecration in New Zealand can no longer be pointed out. The church stood, opposite the Museum, on government land which now forms part of the grounds surrounding the Parliament buildings. But portions of the structure were removed to the Bolton-street cemetery, and still form part of the mortuary chapel there.
12 The professor evidently means the Roman and Anglican churches.
13 I have kept out of the text all mention of the burning of women and children in a whare at this place, because one clings to the belief that it was accidental. Englishmen don’t do things like that intentionally. But there can be no doubt that it made a deep impression upon the Maori mind. The English general had told them (they said) to send their women and children to Rangiaohia for safety. They did so, and then the troops, instead of attacking their men, attacked and burnt their women. The Maoris seem to have had a peculiar horror of fire. In their most savage days they always killed their enemies before they cooked them.
14 This is generally admitted; but Bishop Williams, who had exceptional opportunities for studying Hauhauism, thinks that the element of Judaism was very slight.
15 The grave is now “before the altar” of the new chancel, which extends further eastwards than the old one.
16 It is to be hoped that such histories may soon be taken in hand. That of the diocese of Waiapu has already been compiled by J. B. Fielder, Esq., and I would wish to express my obligations to him for lending me the manuscript of his work.
17 This was the Hon. A. G. Tollemache, who afterwards added another section of city land for an episcopal endowment.
18 From “The Christian Year Beneath the Southern Cross,” by the Rev. F. R. Inwood.
‘her ministerial activities; but for vestries and church com- earth. Nor can I forget that loving and gentle yet firm and mittees the work is harder, demanding, as it does, so much’
Page xvi, ‘Korarareka’ changed to ‘Kororareka’
Page 8, ‘Paramatta’ changed to ‘Parramatta’
Page 30, ‘Kendal’ changed to ‘Kendall’
Page 34, ‘Paramatta’ changed to ‘Parramatta’
Page 72, ‘Ruaparaha’ changed to ‘Rauparaha’
Page 83, ‘Wiliams’ changed to ‘Williams’
Page 112, ‘Hawkes Bay’ changed to ‘Hawke’s Bay’
Page 158, ‘deliberrate’ changed to ‘deliberate’
Page 159, ‘Lyttleton’ changed to ‘Lyttelton’
Page 164, ‘Wiliams’ changed to ‘Williams’
Page 183, ‘difficuly’ changed to ‘difficulty’
Page 194, ‘Wiliams’ changed to ‘Williams’
Page 203, ‘Waeranga’ changed to ‘Waerenga’
Page 242, ‘Da Gama’ changed to ‘da Gama’
Page 249, ‘Marumarua’ changed to ‘Maramarua’
Page 249, Duplicate index entries for Timaru and Napier under heading ‘Churches’ deleted.