A CHURCH has split over a gay-sex row vicar's plan to remove it from its parish.
The congregation of St John the Baptist Church, Kidderminster, divided over the controversial issue at a "charged" meeting on Tuesday.
Rev Charles Raven, the vicar who favours a parish break in opposition to the Bishop of Worcester's support of homosexuals, claimed voting at the district church council meeting showed substantial support for his stance.
However, congregation member Luke Coates claimed there was an even divide between supporters and opponents among more than 130 people at the meeting.
The parish break-up, while not an agenda item, formed the backdrop to voting for key church positions.
Two members of a controversial church trust, set up by Mr Raven and which some parishioners feel is the start of an independence push, were narrowly elected for church warden positions over two opponents.
However, parishioner Mr Coates revealed the two deputy church warden and deanery synod positions were split between supporters and opponents of the vicar.
Mr Coates also claimed there was an even split in the district church council election.
He said: "At the start of the meeting Rev Raven said he would find it difficult to maintain a working relationship with those with a different view.
"These figures show Rev Raven does not have the overwhelming support of his congregation on his stance of intolerance towards homosexuals within the Christian faith.
"People must realise all organisations have power bases and unfortunately many are controlled by good orators - one of whom is Charles Raven.
"The voting has shown in spite of protestations from more vociferous Christians there is an encouraging maintenance of common sense."
Mr Raven refused to comment on the details of the meeting but said the church wardens' election showed "substantial" support for his stance.
About the move to dissolve the Kidderminster West parish and return St John's to its former parish status held in 1990, he said: "This is something that has to be done step by step but the voting at the meeting indicates substantial support."
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article