Divorced M.P.’s Wedding Bishop and Rector Disagree

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 738, 10 August 1929, Page 22

Divorced M.P.’s Wedding Bishop and Rector Disagree

OHARPLY-WORDED communications O have passed between the Bishop of London and Dr. Geikie-Cobb, rector of St. Ethelburga’s, Bishopsgate, following the marriage there on June 3 of Sir William Davison. Sir William’s first marriage was dissolved in October last, following divorce proceedings brought by Lady Davison. For some years Sir Wm. Davison has been Conservative M.P. for South Kensington, and the proceedings led to a split in the local Conservative Association, those claiming that Sir William should have retired supporting the candidature of Mr. Rayner Goddard, K.C., as an Independent Conservative. Sir William was returned by a majority of 20,000. It appears that the Church ceremony has been brought to the attention of the Bishop, for recently the following communication was issued from Fulham Palace: The Bishop of London has received so many inquiries concerning the marriage of Sir William Davison, M.P., that he desires to make the following statement: The Bishop finds on inquiry that the official ceremony took place in a register office. This was followed by a service in the Church of St. Ethelburga, Bishopsgate, in which the Rev. Dr. Geikie-Cobb gave the blessing of the Church. He did not consult the Bishop of London, and acted with out either his knowledge or. sanction. The Bishop informed Dr. Geikie-

Cobbe of his intention to issue this announcement, and the Rector of St. Ethelburga’s sent the following reply:— My dear Lord, —I am obliged by your courtesy in informing me of your intention to dissociate yourself from my action in the matter of the marriage of Sir William Davison on the ground that that action had not your sanction.

It had not occurred to me that what the law sanctions requires the further sanction of a Bishop. My chief regret, however, is that the officials of the Church of England should show no sympathy with the demand for a higher conception of marriage.

It will be distasteful to me to be compelled to express in public my inability to accept your judgment in this matter. “Under the Divorce Act of 1557, an incumbent is not obliged to marry a divorced person in his church, but he is compelled to allow any other incumbent who is willing to do so, to act for him,” says Dr. Geikie-Cobb. “Sir William Davison was a candidate in the division in which I live; I supported him, and when the election was over he asked me to marry him in my own ehurcn. “I consented, and I was glad to do so. It is time that a protest was made against the action of a section of the clergy setting themselves up against the law of the land. “Marriage under the English law is not indissoluble, and I for one shall continue to respect the law, not only because it is the law, but because I do not believe it would tend to increase morality if marriage were made ldissoluble.”