He went on to speak of the missionary obligations of the New Zealand Church, and said that New Zealand must become a missionary centre:
“We cannot consider our work accomplished till every dialect in the South Seas has its representative members in our Missionary Colleges ... however inadequate a Church may be to its own internal wants, it must on no account suspend its missionary duties.”
He expressed his horror of controversy:
“Of controversy in general I would say that it is the bane of the Gospel among a heathen people.... I can never forget the pointed illustration of the old chief of Taupo, when I asked him why he still refused to believe. ‘Show me the way,’ he said, ‘I have come to the cross road. Three ways branch out before me. Each teacher says his own way is the best. I am sitting down and doubting which guide I shall follow.’ He remained in doubt till a landslip burst from the mountain under which he lived, and overwhelmed him with all his house.... The course seems to be to teach truth rather by what it is than by what it is not. Let us give our converts the true standard and they will apply it themselves to the discovery and contradiction of error.... Much of what has been said applies also to our relations with our own countrymen. We cannot expect unanimity, let us at least seek peace. Much has been written upon unity, but as yet little has been done towards a union of all religious bodies in one. This at least seems clear, that such a union, however highly desirable, must not be effected by a compromise of truth. When all shall have thoroughly examined the grounds of their own belief, and rejected such errors as they may find, then it is certain that all must come to unity of doctrine, because all will have been conformed to the same unalterable standard of truth.”
Of his own episcopal authority he said:
“I believe the monarchical idea of the Episcopate to be as foreign to the true mind of the Church, as it is adverse to the Gospel doctrine of humility. Let it never be thought that I alone am interested in the good government of our Church, and that you are merely subjects to obey. Whatever interest I have in the work you have also.... I would rather resign my office, than be reduced to act as a single and isolated being. It remains then to define, by some general principles, the terms of our co-operation. They are simply these: that neither will I act without you, nor can you act without me. The source of all diocesan action is in the Bishop; and therefore it behoves him so much the more to take care that he act with a mind informed and re-inforced by conference with his clergy.”
The desire of the laity to take part in the work of the Church was shown by a letter addressed to the Bishop in 1850, signed by both clergy and laity, amongst whom were Sir George Grey and Chief Justice Martin. In this they spoke of the responsibilities of the New Zealand Church as being the most advanced and remote outpost of the Church of England, of the call to them to aid in the foundation of a great nation and in moulding its institutions as well as of their duties to the heathen peoples in their neighbourhood. They stated their sense of the necessity for some speedy establishment of Church government amongst them which “by assigning to each order in the Church its appropriate duties, might call forth the energies of all, and thus enable the whole Church most efficiently to perform its functions.” To this letter an outline Constitution was appended, which had been drawn up by Sir George Grey during the enforced leisure of a sick bed. It proposed that a General Convention should be summoned, resembling “that which has proved so beneficial to our brethren in America.”
Selwyn had the advantage of discussing this matter at the Conference of Bishops in Sydney which he attended the same year. In a Pastoral Letter sent out in 1852, he explained further the objects he was aiming at. A Constitution was needed because the Church in New Zealand was not established by law, and therefore a large portion of the Ecclesiastical law of England did not apply to it. If they were to have laws to guide them, they must apply for the power granted to all incorporated bodies to frame their own bye-laws. He added a list of the general principles which should guide the framing of such bye-laws. During the two following years, meetings were called in all the settlements in New Zealand to discuss these principles. He wished the constitution to have the full approval of the people and not to be imposed upon them by authority from above. The delight of the laity at realising that they were once more part of a living church is illustrated by the words of a farmer who said:
“When I heard the church bell ring this evening and summon me to the first vestry meeting I had attended for twelve years, and for the first time in this country, I was quite overcome and affected to tears.”
At these meetings the Bishop called the attention of the people amongst other things to the fact of their dependence for their religious ministrations on money sent from England, often from the savings of the poor. His plan was to endow every minister to the extent of half his income, and to leave the rest to be supplied by his own people. In this way the minister would be partially dependent on, and partially independent of his flock. The principles of the proposed constitution were thoroughly discussed at these various meetings, often by men who had little knowledge or experience to bring to the consideration of the matter. The Bishop bore patiently with questions and interruptions not always of the most courteous kind. In a letter written by one who was present at these meetings it is said: