DIVORCE GROUNDS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 23191, 10 November 1938, Page 13

DIVORCE GROUNDS

SEPARATION PROBLEM PRESBYTERIAN ATTITUDE INSTRUCTIONS TO MINISTERS [by teleghath—OWN correspondent] DUNEDIN, Wednesday The attitude of the Presbyterian Church toward the remarrying of divorced persons was defined at yesterday's session of the General Assembly by a special committee which was set up to consider a remit presented to the 1937 assembly. The committee asked the assembly to state its opinions clearly in the matter by approving a statement containing instructions to ministers. The statement contained the following recommendation: — "In view of tho serious situation in the community arising from the growing indifference to the sanctity of the marriage bond as a lifelong tie, and in view of the fact that the marriage service constitutes the chief part of the Church's public witness to the sanctity of marriage, the assembly considers that the Church ought not to solemnise the remarriage of any persons the grounds of whose divorce she cannot approve, except if such cases, after careful scrutiny, exhibit repentance and purpose of amendment based on genuine Christian conviction."

Committee's Recommendations The committee suggested recognition of divorce on grounds of sexual vice, habitual cruelty, habitual drunkenness and desertion, but not of refusal to comply with an order for restitution of conjugal rights or three years' separation, judicial or by agreement. The Rev. D. C. Francis moved as an amendment:—"That we adopt the proposal of the Christchurch Presbytery, which desires the deletion of the words 'except if such cases, after careful scrutiny, exhibit repentance and purpose of amendment based on genuine Christian conviction.' "

Mr. Francis said he considered that they should be consistent in the matter, but if the words ho had mentioned were retained, a person desiring to remarry could exhibit the required repentance. They should either be uniform or leave the matter to the conscience of the individual minister. Problem of Guilt Dr. Dickie said it was not in accordance with the spirit of the Christian Church to rake up the past when two peoplo came to be married. In his opinion, there was very seldom a guilty or an innocent party to divorce. Guilt and innocence were generally pretty evenly divided, so that the question of distinguishing between the parties for the purpose of remarriage was a difficult one.

. At.the present time the whole question of the relationship between the sexes was in the melting pot, added Dr. Dickie, and he was convinced that the Church would be making a mistake if it' tried to tie the hands of its people or its ministers with any rigidly legalistic bonds. Professor J. A. Allan said that it was simply because the moral obligations and relationships were in the melting pot—and a \ r erv dreadful melting potthat the Church should take a stand and bear witness to its attitude to the problem. Personally, ho thought the Church should refuse to remarry divorced persons in any circumstances, but he hoped that in the meantime the assembly would adopt the committee's recommendation, which was at least a step in the right direction. Mr. Francis' amendment for alteration to the instructions was lost, the report being adopted. The assembly concluded its sittings late to-night.