CHURCH LEGISLATION

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 184, 25 October 1927, Page 16

CHURCH LEGISLATION

CHANGE DEPLORED Church legislation which makes it possible for u person to claim membership in a parish hall in which he has attended services for 14 months, was deplored by the Rev. G. C. Cruickshank at the Diocesan Synod yesterday. “I feel 1 speak for at least a body of the parish clergy in Auckland when I say that the legislation, which was passed by General Synod with the best of intentions, has been found, at least by some of us, to be quite unworkable,” Mr. Cruickshank said. *‘it was a distinctly retrograde step.” "In the first place, I am certain this legislation has quite unintentionally introduced into every parish a tremendous amount of invidious comparison. It has been altogether differently translated, and the average parishioner is taking an unfair advantage of it. ‘ Under the present system, persons WiM claimed membership of his church could demand that he should administer the sacraments across the harbour in the morning and at Ellerslie in the afternoon. That was never intended by General Synod. The churchman now went to hear the preacher who appealed to .him, and. having once started to hear him, he positively demanded his ministrations. The whole tiling was absolutely absurd.” The Rev. J. Stanton, of Ellerslie, agreed that the non-residential parochial claims had led to invidious comparisons being made. Of all the mountains ever made out <»£ a molehill, I think the difficulty raised over this question must be the classic example,” said the Rev. G. Gordon Bell. He recalled that the Auckland Diocesan Synod had originated the legislation to which exception was now taken. It was not likely that anyone who had listened to a preacher in any one place for 14 months could be classed as a “sermontaster.” The debate was adjourned until today.