THE NE TEMERE DECREE

Southland Times, Issue 16786, 14 July 1911, Page 5

THE NE TEMERE DECREE

SB. GIBB’S PROTEST, AUCKLAND PRESBYTERIAN VIEW. (Special to the Times.) AUCKLAND, July 13. Auckland Presbyterian Ministers appear to agree with Dr Gibb’s motion to come before the General Assembly protesting against the papal ne temere decree relating to mixed marriages in which members of the Roman Catholic Church are involved. Asked by a Star reporter for the opinion of ministers generally in the Auckland Presbytery, the Rev. A. Miller, INI.A. (Moderator of the Presbytery) said that they thought it outrageous that any one church should attempt to legislate in such a fashion as to make marriages contracted by ministers of other churches of no avail. It seemed a most extraordinary thing and would open up the way to serious trouble. The particular case which had come into jirominence was a marriage in Ireland between a Roman Catholic husband and a Protestant wife, in which, he understood, very serious hardship was inflicted upon tiic wife, who was practically disowned by the husband she had married. If such a consequence should be possible as a result of (he decree it must bo obvious to all citizens that it was a very wrong tiling. All outside the Roman Catholic Church would clearly hold that, and he thought that many inside in the church would rocogm.se that such a policy would be a very wrong policy. Of course Protestants, too. did not believe in mixed marriages. They believed, as a general rule, that those who were married should be of the same faith, or nearly the same faith, because when mixed marriages took place trouble very often followed. But whore It had taken place it certainly should not bo disowned. That, he thought, was the general view of members of the Auckland Presbytery. The overture of which Dr Gibb bad given notice in Wellington was one which, ho had no doubt, would pass the Assembly. Continuing on the matter of the decree, Mr Miller said that it was one thing for a church to advise its people not to contract marriages of a certain typo; it was a totally different thing for it to say that such a marriage was invalid. To declare, as the decree appeared to do, that no marriage was valid unless contracted in the presence of a Roman Catholic priest was a monstrous thing. The logical meaning of the decree was to make invalid all marriages not contracted under a Catholic priest. It was an insult to the whole Protestant community, which was justified, hj« thought, in protesting against any such decree. Tie did not suppose that the decree would receive any political recognition. It was only an intimation from the Roman Catholic Church to Its own people; but it was an intimation to those people raising very serious class differences between them and the people of different communions, and he did not think it was right that such animosities should be inflamed. A Roman Catholic dignitary who was interviewed on the matter stated Hint lie could not see what reason Dr Glhh had for again raising a matter which had been threshed out three years ago, when the Rev, C. W. Carrington, Principal of Christ’s College, raised It on the very ground stated by Dr Gibb, that the decroc upset the very foundation of social morality. Then the discussion was taken up by Father Cleary (editor of the N. Z. Tablet), now Bishop Cleary of Auckland, and a very fine controversy ensued. Bishop Cleary was at present on a visit to Melbourne; hut the speaker fell sure that on his return ho would bo quite willing to take the matter up heartily on behalf of Ins church. The speaker also pointed out that Bishop Cleary had issued a pamphlet (entitled “Catholic Marriages’’) giving the text of the decree, and the controversy, and an exposition of tlie Catholic teaching in regard to impediments invalidating marriage.