DANCING A SIN.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVI, Issue 186, 8 August 1935, Page 7

DANCING A SIN.

PRESBYTERIAN EDICT.

Highland Provost Suspended For Six Months. SEQUEL TO DAUGHTER'S PARTY (United r.A.—Electric Telegraph—Copyright) (Received 11 a.m.) LONDON, August 7. Scathing criticism of dancing has been expressed by the Northern Presbytery of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland in its judgment in the case of John Murray, Provost at Dornoeh, Sutherlandshire, who has been suspended for six months for allowing dancing at his daughter's party.

"We prayerfully and lovingly warn against promiscuous dancing and the giving of countenance to such Romanist practice as the observance of Christmas," says the judgment.

"Promiscuous dancing is a means of fostering lust of the flesh and of the eye, and. the pride of life. We deeply regret how misguided Mr. Murray is and how he is misleading his family."

NOT BANNED.

Freedom of Action Allowed in

New Zealand

EXCESSES DEPLORED

The attitude of the Presbyterian Church in Auckland in regard to dancing was outlined this morning by several of the Presbyterian Church leaders. "As a general practice dancing is not encouraged, and it is not carried on in Presbyterian Church halls," was one statement. "At the same time the church tak°s quite a tolerant view on the subject."

The Rev. ,T. A. Thomson, an exModerator of the Church, said that dancing was not 'banned, but the Assembly discouraged it as a means of raising funds. He said that the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland was comparatively a small church, and was inclined to take a very conservative view on the subject.

The ,Rev. E. J. Tipler, of Mount Eden, said that in Scotland the general practice was that dancing was permissible, but there was no uniformity of practice. The opinion in New Zealand was that although dancing was not condemned, the General ssembly had made a request to the church courts to refrain from allowing dancing at church functions or for the raising of church funds. This applied to all forms of dancing. Mr. Tipler said that at the General Assembly in 1925 a resolution had been pi.ssed dealing with the subject. The resolution determined the right of the individual to determine the course of conduct according to conscience, and said that dancing was a matter where there was full liberty of conscience. The Assembly disclaimed any right or power to dictate to its people on the subject. The resolution went on to say that in view of the popularity of danc-: ing as an amusement the Assembly considered it right to call attention to certain aspects of the question.

It deplored the excesses and abuses of the present dancing crr.ze, regretted that many modern dances were unworthy of the present civilisation or culture, and grieved exceedingly that the open and social use of liquor at private and public dances was productive of bad results in not a few lives. The Assembly warned parents and guardians of the dangers that threatened young lives, and finally, while acknowledging the privileges and rights of the church co- rts and governing bodies of church institutions, pointed out that the holding of dances for the raising of funds was unbecoming, as direct giving was the method most consistent with the dignity and spirituality of the church.