MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE

Taranaki Central Press, Volume IV, Issue 403, 9 April 1937, Page 6

MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE

CHURCH’S ATTITUDE Primate’s Statement at Synod. Press Association —Copyright. Hamilton, April 8. No bishop or priest of the Church of England is at liberty to celebrate the re marriage of a divorced person during the lifetime of the other party, according to a statement made by the Primate of New Zealand. Archbishop A. W. Averill, at the general synod of the church, which opened at Hamllton tord-ay. Judging by the experience of every bishop ani parish priest, said his Grace,’it would seem as if -the Church’s pronouncements on important questions concerning marriage and divorce were absolutely unknown to the great majority of people. Many chinch people seemed to be hopelessly cotffus-ed because ecclesiastical law and civil law on the question of divorce and remarriage expressed different and divergent, points of view. Whereas the sanctions of civil law were fairly generally known, how many people AVere acquainted witii the real reasons for tlie Church.’!' attitude to dive rce and remarriage and principles tn which that attitude were based? “We wish it to be known,” said '.he Archbishop, “that the remarriage of a divorced person during the lifetime of the other party is, therefore, contrary to the Jaw of the Church of this province, and that no bishop or priest, of the Church is at liberty to celebrate such a marriage." The State, added Achbishop Averill, was at liberty to make its own Laws and had 10 legislate for all sorts and conditions of men, but human laws could not alter or suppress or 'water down God’s laws. Christian men and women were in honour bound to obey God rather than man. The Church was not d subservient department of ihe State, but a. body of Christ sent out and commissioned to teach and uphold in the 'World the will of God and Hie teaching of Chris:.