CHURCH DISPUTE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXI, Issue 21807, 23 May 1934, Page 12

CHURCH DISPUTE

POSITION AT CAMBRIDGE DEMAND MADE FOR KEYS REPLY BY MR. G. G. BELL [FIIOM OUR OWN COItUKSI'ONDENT] CAMBRIDGE, Tuesday Further developments in the Cambridge Parish Church dispute include tho demand by the chancellor of the diocese on behalf of the church authorities for tlio Rev. G. CJ. Hell to vacate the vicarage within seven days, failing which a summons will bo issued for possession. In reply, Mr. Bell has issued a protest to tho Priniato, Archbishop Avorill, as Metropolitan, to restrain tho authorities from such action until points raised bv him as to the legality of tho action of tho bishop of the dioccso in declaring vacant the living of St. Andrew's has been settled. The chancellor, Mr. H. C. M. Norris, of Hamilton, has written Mr. Bell as follows: —"I have been asked by tho authorities at present in charge of tho parish of Cambridge to demand from you the keys of the churches and hall, the sacred vessels and the books of the parish. I am instructed to sue for possession of these articles unless they are delivered either to me or to tho church wardens or to tho bishop within seven days from date (May 17). "I am also instructed to ascertain from you definitely whether you are prepared to give up possession of the vicarage and the keys thereof by Juno 11. Unless I receive within seven days an answer from you stating that you are prepared to give up possession, I shall issue a summons for possession of the property." In reply, Mr. Bell has written stating that ho is willing to hand over all property, including tho vicarage, as soon as the bishop has satisfied him that his (the bishop's) actions in declaring his living vacant and in assuming control of the living are in accordance with the canons of the General Synod. Mr. Bell says that in view of opinions recently expressed by the select committee of the General Synod which was appointed to consider a petition addressed by him to synod relative to actions of tho bishop, to tho effect that the bishop had gone beyond the technical provisions of the canon in so declaring his living vacant;? in view also of the fact that, since that opinion was given, tho bishop had failed to correct tho error of procedure made by him which gavo rise to that opinion; in view, further, of tho efforts now being made by him to secure investigation of tho circumstances by the Metropolitan of the Province, ho hopes ho may be forgiven for not accepting the mere ipse dixit of the bishop on the matter. Mr. 801 l has written to the archbishop on this development as follows: —"Your Grace will realise that there is at least room for legal argument as to whether or not any civil Court has jurisdiction in the matter. If I am still legally vicar of Cambridge, then my retention of tlio property concerned is in order and my right to do so cannot bo questioned. "I am advised that the civil Courts will bo very chary of accepting or claiming jurisdiction in the matter which is, plainly,, one of the interpretation of tho canons of the Church. In fact, if the civil Court should bo found presuming to give judgment, it will surely be incumbent upon Your Grare, as Metropolitan, to protest against any such invasion of the Church's rights and privileges by tho civil Courts."