South Africa: (from a correspondent): Bishop Colenso has held a Court of Citation St. Mary’s Church (nativo), for the purpose of citing the Very Rev. J. Green (Dean), the Ven. Archdeacon Fearne, and the Rev. J. Walton of (Pine Town), to appear before him and his assessors, to show cause why they should not be deprived of their offices, having committed ecclesiastical offences against their lawful Bishop. It is needless to say neither these gentlemen responded to the citation. Bishop Colenso was seated at a table in front of the communion rails, and on either side the assessors, Messrs. S. Pinsent and J. R. Goodricke (advocates of the Supreme Court), and Mr. T. Shepstone, jun., Registrar of the Diocese (a young advocate), sat at another table; while a Mr. Melville (a lawyer’s clerk) acted as the registrar’s clerk. The Revs. Canon Gray and A. Tonnessen were also present, and the spectators numbered, perhaps, some twenty or thirty persons. Dr. Colenso stated that he had instituted these proceedings, as Bishop of the diocese, against three clergymen for certain breaches of discipline; he had been guided by the language of the Lords of the Privy Council, in the case of “Long v. Bishop Gray.” He was not merely in form, but substantially, the prosecutor; some of the offences charged concerned more particularly some of the laity, and he had intended, if the laws of the Church had been obeyed, with regard to them, by the offending clergy, even at the eleventh hour, to stay all further proceedings. He felt it right to take upon himself all the responsibility of the prosecution of these cases, as Bishop of the diocese; he had procured the assistance of two assessors, according to the suggestion of the Privy Council. These gentlemen were unconnected with the matters in dispute, both living in Durban, and had not taken a prominent part in the subject. He would be guided by their judgment and would leave it to them to frame the decision which he should have to pronounce. Dr. Colenso then called upon the Registrar to read the citation and charges against the Very Rev. J. Green. The Dean was called at the door of the church but did not appear. The citation was read. The charges against the Dean amounted to fifteen and included the denial of the Bishop’s authority in a variety of ways, brawling in the Cathedral Church, and taking part in the election of another Bishop. The charges were supported by the Registrar, Mr. Melville, a Mr. Pratt, and Mr. Barfield (Editor of the Times of Natal). The case of the Rev. J. Walton was then gone into. Four charges were preferred and were of similar character to those laid against the Dean, and also for having on Easter day repelled Mr. H. A. Passmore from the Holy Communion, and not giving any account of the same to the Bishop of Natal. … The third case was that of the aged and respected Archdeacon Fearne, a gentleman worn out in the service of the Church, he assists, as far as his remaining strength will allow, at the Cathedral and at St. Andrew’s. The charges against him are of a similar character. The same witnesses were called to prove this case, with the addition of Mr. Tonnessen. One charge was abandoned, but the others were reported to be proved. The Court then broke up, and it was stated that the assessors would consider their judgment and advise the parties when it would be announced.
The next matter the Colenso party has been engaged in is a letter addressed to Mr. Butler, the new Bishop elect. It is very clear that they consider this step one of the most damaging to the characters to themselves, although they profess to think lightly of it. In this letter they state that Mr. Butler cannot come here as Bishop of the United Church of England and Ireland, but that he is welcome to come as Bishop of the South African Church, and as such they will acknowledge him, but in no other way. This letter, as a matter of course, they are anxious to get numerously signed, which they will, no doubt, succeed in doing, simply because they are not at all scrupulous by whom it is signed or how the signatures are procured. They are asked to publish the names here but are not at all anxious to do so. Perhaps they may be appended to the original sent to Mr. Butler; if so, it is hoped the list may come back, so that the curiosity may be examined. That it will be a curiosity there can be no doubt, and nothing would give more satisfaction than to examine and expose it. An application has been made to the Supreme Court against the Rev. Mr. Wills, a gentleman who intended to join Bishop Twells in the Free State, but who has been assisting the Dean and Mr. Robinson by alternately taking part in the services at the Cathedral and St. Andrew’s, both on Sundays and during Lent. This gentleman not being licensed, the bishop, by his legal adviser, made an application for an interdict to prevent him (Mr. Wills) from officiating at St. Andrew’s, or in any church in the diocese, or at the Cathedral. The Court gave judgment on the 7th of April. The Colenso’ partisans felt sure of victory, judging from what fell from two of the judges (who never attend a place of worship) on the previous hearing of the case. Those opposed to Dr. Colenso considered the case almost hopeless. They saw that if this interdict should be granted, another would be applied for against Mr. F. S. Robinson, of St. Andrew’s, and then against the Dean of the Cathedral, so that all would be lost to them. You may easily judge of the palpitating hearts of the true band of orthodox Churchmen who assembled in that Court-house, from which has emanated so many interdicts, granted with a view of crushing out for ever from them their loyalty to the great truths handed down to them for so many centuries, and thereby compel them, if possible, to leave Dr. Colenso to glory in his triumphs. But this is not yet to be. There is a short respite left; and may the Bishops and Clergy of England, in the meantime, come to the rescue! The battle against heresy and unbelief has here been fought nobly, and surely, we ought to expect — we have a right to expect — more than sympathy from our Bishops and clergy in our mother country. The decision of the Court was that a rule nisi should be granted to enable the respondent to show cause why the interdict, or order, applied for should not be granted, the hearing of which should be taken on the first day of next term, which will be on the first day July. Dr. Colenso’s advocate demurred to this and wished the hearing to be had on the last day of the present term. The Rev. Mr. Wills, who was in the court, applied for the extended time, but the opposing party intimated that there would be ample time for the respondent to prepare himself by the end of the present month. The Court, however, granted the extended time. The consequence of this will be that the respondent (Mr. Wills) will be in the Free State long before that time (he intended to be in Natal but six weeks more), and, therefore, there will be no necessity to trouble the Court again about the matter. I suppose also the other applications will be in abeyance till the time allowed to Mr. Wills expires. I may here mention as a significant fact, and one that the Colensoites will not themselves promulgate but which ought to be made known throughout the world, that on Easter Sunday last Dr. Colenso, with all the boasted superiority of numbers forming his followers, and although his hour of service is eleven o’clock in the morning, succeeded in inducing some twenty-three individuals to join him at the holy table; while the Dean, at his nine o’clock service numbered some seventy or more. Let Dr. Colenso’s admirers in England be made acquainted with this fact, and they may form their own judgment as to the sort of congregation he boasts off: …
Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive.
Referenced
GRO0798 Devonport: Savery Pinsent: 1815 – 1886