OCR Text |
Show THE CHURCH AND DIVORCE. To the Editor of the New York Times: The Times is in general so accurate in its statements that I was very much sur-yriscd sur-yriscd to read on Saturday last, in the editorial headed "The Church and Divorce," Di-vorce," the following remarkable assertion: asser-tion: '-Roth it he church and the state laws admit divorce for the offense of adultery and for wilful desertion, and contemplate con-template as free from blame the remar-rm remar-rm of the innocent party to such a divorce." In the Digest of 'the Canons of the Protestant Prot-estant Kniscrmsi 1 ehnr,h ,uvu v.i . ' ' vfvuio me Al lowing statement: "No minister, knowingly, after due inquiry, in-quiry, shall solemnize the marriage of anywreon who has u divorced husband or wife still living, if such husband or wife has been put awav for miv cause arising after marriage: but this canon j shall not be held to annlv lo the innocent . party in a divorce for the cause of adult- cry, or to parties once riivYirced seeking to l united again." Title II, Canon 13 Section Sec-tion 2. Ths question in debate todav is whether the canon shall be amended so as to aree with "the words in the marriage office, "tid death us do part," ond vour editorial is calculated to produce so wrong an impression im-pression that I trust vou will give the correction as prominent a place as the assertion. PRESBYTER. New ork, Oct. 1, 1S!P. We gladly give space to the above communication. Ir. will be noted from the language of the canon as quoted that 1he prohibition does not apply to the solemnization of the marriage of the innocent party to a divorce for the cause of adultery, which was the more important of the two clauses, referred to in our article. It would have been interesting if our well-informed correspondent corre-spondent had discussed the ma-in subject sub-ject of the article, namely, the policy that the church can or ought to pursue with reference to the laxity of the conduct con-duct of "society" we quote the word from Dr. Dix as to the sanctity of the marriage relation. The impression of the lay mind is- that making a rule more stringent may not conduce to a stricter observance for it than was obtained ob-tained for the milder one. New York Times. We print the above for the purpose of showing1 our readers the utter absence ab-sence of all fixed principles regarding marriage in the Protestant Episcopal church, as well as to show the gross ignorance of a great metropolitan japer regarding the professed tenets of the most prominent and influential religious relig-ious body in the metropolis. The manner in which the Episcopal church of New York, under the leadership leader-ship of Bishop Potter, is striving to stem the torrent of marital infidelity is amusing to all who know how carefully care-fully Bishop Potter and ha-s clergy avoid touching on the real cause of the growing divorce evil in the United States. The canons may be amended so as to forbid marriage to the innocent inno-cent party, but what effect will that have on the question of divorce and conjugal infidelity? None whatever. Both Bishop Potter and Bishop Dudley, Dud-ley, in assuming that the prevalence of aivorce snouia oe attriDuted to faulty-civil faulty-civil marriage laws, must know that they speak nonsense. Either marriage is a sacrament or it is not. That both Bishops Potter, and Dudley and many of their clergy are inclined to the latter view if they do not fully entertain it, is a painful evidence of the degeneracy j of the faith which they profess. If j marriage be considered solely as a civil contract, it is absurd to suppose that it can be elevated to sacramental dignity by civil law. In this case the church, j as has been pointed out, wxuld have no authority, exrept such as it could exercise exer-cise over the consciences of the contracting con-tracting parties, and this, as experience shows, would be a most doubtful jurisdiction. juris-diction. As we pointed out last week, there is one and only one remedy that can. check the growing divorce evil in the Protestant ' churches of the land; that remedy is spiritual, religious and moral, and not civil or legal. There is no divorce evil in the Catholic church, whose. members are thoroughly imbued with the knowledge and faith that mar. riage is a sacrament; . that it is contracted con-tracted not fgr time, but for eternity. . What a commentary, indeed, it is on Bishop Potter, that secular agtncies have called his attention to the real causes of divorce and the only remedy therefor. Even the New York World, not noted for its high moral aspirations, aspira-tions, reads the following lesson to the Protestant Episcopal bishop of New York. The Episcopal church in adopting its new canon may simplify the situation. But the clergy and the bishops will not prevent divorces in the future, or prevent pre-vent the marriage of divorced persons, unless they shall begin at the beginning; begin-ning; shall gather the young men and i the young women into their churches J and preach to them the religion of Jesus: shall show them the beaut its of a perfect home life; shall explain to them the sanctity of the marriage vow; shall make them understand that marriage mar-riage is indeed, sanctioned in heaven, and that thotse who would wed must consider carefully, conscientiously, faithfully and fearlessly the step they are about to take be sure that they are right and thus make a happy and contented home and remove all chance of divorce or separation That is the right way to begin the w ork. . A |