"This bishop did not want to know about restoring this cathedral. She clearly has no love, or affection or desire to restore the cathedral, and she has turned her back on all the offers that have been made to her.''
Proponents of saving the building believe it can be saved for $20-30 million - while the church has argued it will cost more than $100 million.
Mr Key said the focus now should be on building a suitable replacement cathedral.
"There's always an enormous amount of emotion when it comes to a building as iconic as that, so I understand people's concerns - it's had a great part in the history of Christchurch and I know people will want to make sure that there is a future cathedral that can encompass that,'' he said.
In a statement released last night, the Cathedral Project Group confirmed the iconic building will not be restored, and instead be brought down, as announced in March.
"The section 38 notice has not been suspended or withdrawn and the plans still have to meet the safety requirements of this notice," the statement said. "The plans to deconstruct the Cathedral will continue with all care and respect as already announced. Having listened to the feedback, we have decided that a peer review engineer will be sought to assist and support our engineers with any difficult technical or safety matters throughout the deconstruction."
Opponents had hoped the demolition could be halted while discussions take place on the possible conservation of the historic building. Representatives from the church, including Bishop Victoria Matthews, meet with members of the Restore Christchurch Cathedral two weeks ago to discuss the future of the building.
"The meetings were amicable and respectful and many different views were expressed and listened to very carefully," the church said in the statement. "After looking at the ideas and information provided, there have been a number of further discussions within the various decision making groups of the Diocese. After carefully considering the information, it was determined there were no new considerations that had not already been thoroughly reviewed prior to the decision announced on March 2."
The church said a website will set up soon to allow people to express their opinions on the future design of the cathedral.
The announcement follows months of protest and public backlash with many groups fighting for the Cathedral to be saved. Last week a English businessman pledged $4m to the restoration of the church, while seismic engineer Kit Miyamoto earlier this month reiterated an offer to pay for international engineering experts to access the building. Proponents of saving the building believe it can be saved for $20-30 million - while the church has argued it will cost more than $100 million.
Mr Belton said church had been "disrespectful" towards those who have made offers to help restore the church.
"This bishop did not want to know about restoring this cathedral. She clearly has no love, or affection or desire to restore the cathedral, and she has turned her back on all the offers that have been made to her."
Mr Belton, himself an Anglican, said the issue had divided the Anglican community.
He said the group had been hopeful following the meeting with the church, as he felt their case provided an opportunity for the church to "recover its reputation in ChristChurch and take the lead in a positive project".
Mr Belton said it was time the Government got involved.
"It depends on the level of anger and frustration in the community. If the anger and frustration is deep enough, I would think the Government would see fit to get involved, because the church has proven it is not a capable guardian or custodian of this building. It has failed in its duty of care for this building which is of national significance."
He said the group would continue to lobby to have the church restored.
Demolition of the church's badly damaged tower has already been completed. The church said the methods used to deconstruct the remainder of the building - down to 2-3m - has not yet been finalised, but will differ from what was used on the tower.
"A controlled demolition method was used on the tower because it was extremely unstable and unsafe," the statement read.
"Once a preferred contractor has been selected and CERA have approved the methodology, we will release this on our website for information purposes. We will provide regular updates on the site works and will also set up access to time-lapse cameras, so that anyone interested may view images of the progress."
