THE MACKONOCHIE CASE.
To those who think that religion can be regulated by Act of Parliament (says the Manchester Times), tbe latest phase of Mr Mackonochie's case must be peculiarly discouraging. Mr Jeune apnlied to Lord Penzsnee as Dean of Arches, on Saturday, for permission to institute a new suit against Mr Mackonochie, and to abandon the old one, or do something which only an ecclesiastical mind can distinguish from abandonment. His lordship reluctantly granted tbe application, but took 1 great painss to explain to counsel that the new suit for depriva* tion was not likely to prosper much better thaD the old one for suspension. Tbe defendant would probably obey the decree of the court just as well as, and no better than, he had obeyed former decrees. He suggested that, it was more than probable that the right of the "curt lo pronounce a decree of deprivation would be challenged, and upon fbat right he himself declined to give an opinion. The citation, however, was issued in due form, and tbe reverend defendant will probably persevere in the old attitude of ' masterly inactivity,' which has proved so useful to him in the past. What good is likely to ensure either to the promoters of the suit or to the Church of England from the renewal of litigation it is impossible to say. The law cannot be more boldly defied nor its impotence more clearly demonstrated than it is now ; but publio attention will be more plainly directed to cumbrous machinery which refuses to do its work when wanted. Acfs for re^ulatin^ men's creerls and methods of worship may have suited an age when 8 despot's will coincided with a nations 'heological ignorance. But men have been tauglit by circumstances and the temper of the age to think for themselves, and they are not likoly to forego the luxury to which they have hecome accustomed. It is not possible to say anything in defence of a clergyman who refuses either lo conform to the laws which govern his Church ov to retire from an impossible position ; but Mr Mackonochie enjoys tbe enormous advantage of that religious liberty and eolight« ened toleration which are not generail' I;'.,!!. ! < !■ coi (•'■-p.j.iv;- win *]\(> creed I rt • '■•(> i ■■>•>;■ p «./■••., >\\\ i if> i- rot ai'Oi'p j ■<•■■<'• ■>(;_' t''i' !'■•.'() '.v! I'll <-v.-w -'iasl U\S Hw . ■ '. ' .■- <>:-\ ; v '<-■ ■• -nut. 'V r." wn !
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/IT18800507.2.10
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Inangahua Times, Volume II, Issue II, 7 May 1880, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
393THE MACKONOCHIE CASE. Inangahua Times, Volume II, Issue II, 7 May 1880, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.