PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER

Hokitika Guardian, 5 February 1929, Page 7

PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER

“UNWORTHY AND UNFIT.” THE ROBERTSON ORR CASE. VANCOUVER, December HO. The Rev. S. Robert son. On- was re leased in Vancouver Following a hear ing before a Canadian immigration hoard of enquiry. Mr Orr had been taken into custody by immigration olfi cers on a. warrant charging breach of regulations of the Canadian Immigration Act. The charges were not revealed. Mr Orr came to Canada from New Zealand in 192(5. lie was taken into custody outside the Central Presbyterian Church after he had spoken before the congregation of the Presbyterian Church of Canada, which met to consider his present status in that Church. In his statement before the Church Commission, as given out by him, Mr Orr said: “I can look you and every man in the 'face, knowing in my heart that I am not defiled, and that I have not consciously wronged any man or woman.” Mr Orr questioned the jurisdiction of tlio commission, inasmuch as he had withdrawn his name from the list or ministers of the Presbyterian Church. He further contended that a judgement of a civil court was m\t admissible before the commission. “Your commission,” he said, “cannot delegate its functions and authority to the civif court, but must in justice, if you claim jurisdiction, grant me a trial by libel on any new charge to be made. “It must he apparent to every member that f cannot regard this commission as an unbiased tribunal,” Mr Orr said. “Our relations have revealed an animus inconsistent with Christian justice.” he alleged, and asserted that the commission “has kept me or tried to keep me in an inhumane situation since .July, and this cannot he called in any sense Christian or just. The commission acted with prejudice in withholding from me for use in the civil trial a transcript of its evidence. 1 was placed at a great disadvantage on that account.” Mr Orris statement went very fully into the Church's and the coiuiii'ssion’s- jurisdiction and his civil trial, lie had already spent 7000 dollars on the trial, he said, lmt his lawyers were considering the matter of taking the ease to the Privy Council, which was Iho only Court to which he could appeal. The Rev. M.r MaeEaeherii, chairman oif the commission, said subsequently: “The Commission has lull power to determine the condition of the connection of Mr Orr with the Presbyterian Church, as it possesses all Hie delegated authority of the Oeneral Assembly of the Clmreh, which m tluU body’s highest author'!’ tion will he unnecessary Tor the commission’s decision which will be limil and ini mediate.” .TUIXiEM ENT DELIVER ED. On the following day the judgement (d the Commission of the t>eiiera! Assemby of the Presbyterian f 'burob in Canada investigating I lie ease oT U'<New Zealand minister was issued, and it removed Mr Orr from the office t>r minister of the Presbyterian Church t» ' 'auada, and termed him “wholly unworthy and unfit to be a minister of the Oospcl.” The commission’s judgement probm its Mr Orr from the exercise of the functions of a Christian ministry or any part thereof, and states that the new congregation which lias been lormcd around the censured pastor has no relation or standing in the Presbyterian Church. In reciting the facts which preceded Mr Orris deposition, the commission state that it was satifised that the judgement ol the Sup V-mo Court ill a recent divorce volition was wh.ollv warranted. In the petition mentioned Mr Orr was named corespondent, and the judgement ffan<ed the divorce and assessed cosls against Mr Orr. yy I 'Walker, an elder ol Central C'lmrch. who was suspended Irom oliice by the commission judgement of .Tillv |‘ when Mr Orr was also suspended, was reinstated. The judgement staled that 1 lie commission did not condone the methods employed by Mr 'Walker in bringing to light the infm '.nation which had led to the deposition of Mr Orr.