A BIGOTED PARSON.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXIV, Issue 8562, 6 January 1890, Page 4

A BIGOTED PARSON.

i f t . Althongh it has been decided that the ill*w Courts of this colony nave no jurisi diction over a clergyman who refuses — £ ijith or without reason— to administer the f f '"iwrament to a parishioner, it is far other- ;; inaf) vx England. A somewhat remarkV able case of the kind came before Lord •-Penzanco as the Dean of Arches the other ■^ "day. The facts of the case Swayne v. i;.-: .Benson (clerk), as reported in a Homo ;2 £ . paper, were as follows :— The respondent, the Key. Percy George Benson, M.A., i : , vjcarof Hoo, St. Werbnrgh, in the diocese q pf Kocheeter, had, in May, 1888. refused ,y to administer the sacrament of the Holy :'•• Communion fco one of his parishioners, , the- promoter, Mrs Amy Emily Swayne, 'i}?-.\ the wife of Dr. Swayne. Anticipating such -- i refaeol, Mrs Swayne had given proper : > n6tice to present herself. Mrs Swayne was ■£' :* member of the Church of England, duly ,>y l»prised, confirmed, and married.accord- > - -mr to its ceremonies. The alleged ground y , of the refusal was that Mrs Swayne was ■;.; in the habit of attending a Wesleyan , ... glace of wor,hip. At the instance of Mr <^Swayue proceedings under the Church ;';,< Discipline Act were accordingly com- ..' menced against the respondent. ACom- <■"... mission was dnly appointed by the Lord ■;■ ,- Bishop of Rochester to inquire into the ~i\ charge. The offence was allested to be y ' oueagainat the Statute 1 Edward VI., c. ;; 1: The Commission unanimously reported ' '„ .that there' was good ground for instituting .; .'. further proceedings. Subsequently the '•..jespondent wrote a letter, which was V^ published on the 9th February last ■./ - In the Rochester and Chatham, Journal, -..-. entitled "Schism at Hoo," which Setter "\ contained the following statement :—" I •:-:. am' prepared to receive Mrs Swayne to ; Holy Coramunion any day on condition that she acknowledges her error and ■ . promises amendment. But I firmly ' . believe that wilful schism (I am not now . considering the many cases where it is - unintentional) is a sin none the less sinful ..;'* because spiritual," and not 'carnal.' "■- . . . . . It is worse than idle non- ' sense to pretend that 'schism' and its mischievous frnits are something Quite ,' - nvisible, intangible, or undefinable. They ■' ureas 'open and notorious' as the fruits , - : of any fleshly sin, ' gross as a monntain, '■■ open, palpable.' And nothing will induce me with my eyes open to give the Holy Communion to one who expresses no Borrow for these sins, and gives no promise ; ; of abandoning them." Preliminary proceedings against the reverend gentleman were taken in the Court of : Arches, but there was no appearance : on . his . part, and no notice had been taken by him of any subsequent proceedings. An pfter to compromise the patter •wsa made by the solicitors acting on behalf of Mrs Swayne, the terms being that Mrs Swayne should be admitted to the Sacrament of the Holy Communion, and that an apology by and at the cost of the respondent should be inserted in certain newspapers ; and further, that the - respondent should pay the costs of the -- , proceedings. To these terms the respondent would not agree. Mr S. O. Buckmaster, as counsel for Mrs Swayne, now applied that his client's right to be ad- ' mitted to the sacrament might be restored - to her, and that an appropriate punish- . ment should be inflicted upon the respon- . dent. The respondent ' was called, but - did not appear, nor was he represented. — Lord Fenzance, in delivering judgment, said that Mrs Swayne had a right to be admitted to the sacrament, and the refusal by the respondent of that light was an offence against the ecclesias- . tical law. Under ordinary circumstances , the practice was firsj, to admonish a respondent in such a tase as the present. : But here there were circumstances which induced the Court to take a different conrse. His Lordship then read an ext tract from the above-mentioned letter, ■which had been written by_ the respondent, in which he questioned the jurisdiction of the Court of Arches to determine the matter, on the ground ' ' ihat tbe Court tv.is a temporal Conrt, and therefore had n^ more power than a County Court or a court-martial .to deal .with spiritual oases . It appeared to his Lordship that that letter showed that the respondent did not intend to obey an admonition if it were issned, and that therefore to issne it would only be a cause of delay and additional expense. The Order wonld be that the respondent "he suspended ab offieio tt a bemfieio for one year, and pay the costs of the proceedings. That order wonld not, however, preclude the Court from considering ' any application that the respondent might make if he shonld, in the interval, admit Mrs Swayne to the sacrament." The judgment of the Conrt is certainly one ■which will commend itself to the mind of any person not absolutely blinded by a spirit of bigotry and intolerance. It Is to be hoped that there are not many clergymen of the Church of England who take the same view of their functions and xesponsibilities as the Key. Percy George Benson, Sector of Hoo.