CHURCH CRISIS

Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 103, 3 May 1934, Page 12

CHURCH CRISIS

CAMBRIDGE PAEISH

VICAR DEFIES BISHOP

DISMISSAL CHALLENGED

A dispute between tho Bishop Of Waikato and the Rev. G. G. Bell has produced a crisis in the affairs of the Cambridge Anglican parish.

A gazette published by the Bishop in the last issue of the Diocesan Magazine declared the living, of Garnbridge vacant, and the Bishop intimated his intention of taking charge of the parish as from last Tuesday. The-legality of the Bishop's action is being challenged by the vicar (Mr. Bell), who maintains his right to retain his position and carry on the services as usual, declaring his determination to do so unless forcibly prevented. CHURCH DOOR LOCKS REMOVED. The position was discussed at a meeting of parishioners of St. Andrew's oil Tuesday night, and a Press Association messages states that yesterday, following the vicar's refusal-to hand over the keys, the doors of the church were found locked. The Bishop's Warden, Mr. C. W. Boyce, and the newlyelected church officers, visited the church yesterday, removed the locks, and opened tho church doors under the Bishop's instructions. Last evening a wedding was held in tho church, the police being in attendance. The Rev. Mr. Bell maintains his attitude that he will stay on in the parish. The Bishop has already advertised the services for next Sunday. VICAR'S ATTITUDE. The deposed vicar has outlined the position from his point of view in a statement distributed- to the parishioners. "I havo failed to get the General Synod even to pass such legislation as would have made investigation of the Bishop's actions possible,' ' says the statement in part. "By letter, received by me-this morning, the Bishop tells me that it is his intention to go right on with his declaration of making my living vacant. This, in spite of the fact that the committee of the General Synod, which considered my petitio-* to •the Synod las^ week, has declared plainly that the recent actions of the Bishop have gone beyond the provisions of the Canon.Law." " He contends that the Bishop's action in declaring his living vacant is plainly illegal, and. that being the case, he will still be vicar, and so far as v possible will continue to act in that capacity as if the Bishop had taken no action at all. He condemns as also illegal the Bishop's action in himself becoming vicar, his threatened'cancellation of Mr. Bell's licence, and his calling of the meeting on Tuesday. "Any services held in the parish without my authority," Mr. Bell adds, "will be acts of schism, and both those conducting such services, and any who may attend such services; will be guilty of the sin of schism. I shall myself hold services according to my usual plan, unless I am forcibly prevented from doing so." LONG-STANDING TROUBLE. The dispute is a sequel of long-stand-ing trouble in the parish. A committee of the General Synod, set up to consider a petition "from the vicar of Cambridge, which Synod had received and heard, reported recently that it was the opinion of the committee that tho General Synod was not a body competent to investigate and:'adjudicate upon general questions of complaint by a vicar against his bishop. The action of the Bishop (in depriving the vicar of his office) "does not in all respects accord with the • technical provisions of the canon." It recommended to tho bench of bishops the question of giving consideration to the matter of providing some legislation such as might give to vicars aggrieved by actions' of their bishops some means of redress, with a view to the possible introduction of some such legislation before a future Synod.

No action was taken on this report.