THE DUTY OF PARENTHOOD

Taranaki Daily News, 14 February 1931, Page 14 (Supplement)

THE DUTY OF PARENTHOOD

RESPONSIBILITIES OF MARRIAGE. VIEWS OF LAMBETH CONFERENCE. Part of the presidential address to the Anglican General Synod at Christchurch last week given by Archbishop Averill touched on the vexed question of “Marriage and Sex.” He alluded to the resolution regarding these which was passed at the Lambeth Conference last year, and said that it had been misunderstood to a great extent. The matter had been treated with the greatest care and reverence and a declaration made, which, however, bad been opposed by a strong minority, fearing that the effects might be far otherwise than the majority anticipated or desired. “The conference,” said the Archbishop, “emphasised the points that before a child’s emotional reaction to sex was awakened, definite information should be given in an atmosphere of simplicity and beauty; that boys and girls should be prepared for the responsibilities, of adult life, and that further preparation should be given to the members of the Church before marriage. It was with .this end in view that the conference reminded parents of their solemn responsibility and urged that steps should b? taken to secure for the clergy a better education in moral theology. “It insisted that the duty of parenthood was the glory of married life, and thoughtful self-control and governing consideration in marital relationship. It condemned all artificial means of restricting families from motives of selfishness, luxury or mere convenience; it expressed its abhorrence of tb’ sinful practice of abortion, and its utter condemnation of the use of contraceptives and of all illicit and irregular unions by the unmarried. “The conference, however, was of the opinion that it was possible to conceive of exceptional cases where there was a moral obligation to limit or avoid parenthood, and a morally sound reason for avoiding complete abstinence, and sought to point out that such limitation or avoidance of parenthood could not be divorced from personal responsibility, sincere motive and enlightened conscience in the light of Christian principle.” Each couple, as the report states, must decide for themselves, as in the sight of God, after the most careful and conscientious thought, and, if perplexed in mind, after taking competent advice, both medical and spiritual. Touching on the question of marriage and divorce, the Archbishop drew attention to a previous decision of the Lambeth Conference that was reaffirmed. This was that “it affirms as our Lord’s principle and standard of marriage a lifelong and indissoluble union, for better or worse, of one man with one woman, to the exclusion of all others on either side, and calls on all Christian people to maintain and bear witness to this standard.”- The conference <so said that “while’ passing no judgment on the practice of regional or national churches within our Communion, recommends that the marriage of one whose former partner is still living should not» be pele-

brated according to the rites of the Church.” It further recommended that where an innocent person has remarried under civil sanction and desires to receive Holy Communion, the case should be referred to the Bishop, subject to provincial regulations. “It may be,” said the Archbishop, “that the time has come for the Church of this province to make provincial regulations in respect of discipline and the dispensing power of the bishops, so that there may be unity of action throughout, the province.”