The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1870-03-24
The Marriage Bond.


eu W HceiA ono 1SoF. III. CHdpii4 pfeaCn on
, the subject of the Marriage Bond" The
preacher took his text from Mark, 10th
chapter, 9th verse: "What therefore God
hath joined together let no man put asun-
der" He said:
These words are a declaration by the
highest authority in regard to the nature
and strength of the marriage bond these
words declare the Christian doctrine on
the subject of the vital Institution of so
ciety; therefore, whoever IN any way at
tacks marriage must admit that hisground
of assault is outside of the New Tesla
ment. Into the origin of those theories,
which are sometimes set up with the view
Of attacking the sanctlty of the marriage
bond, do not propose to enter, though |
shall probably touch upon most OF them
in the course of this address Certainly,
do not depreoate discussion it is u mat
| ter for discussion all things are But
in one view of 5his matter there are some
practical topics that are of far more i'm
portance than any mere abstract talk up
an the subject The matters of iratnedi-
ate consequences are not simply what we
say. but how we habitually think; and
while we profess to believe in sacred
pect to speak fully upon all the topics
which arise-soane are foreign, indeed, to
the present tine and place and some OF
them my own repugnance and proper
lsense of delicaey forbid me to toGeh on
i shall divide the subject into three heads:
First, the Significance of the marriage
Ebond; secondly its blessedness; thirdly,
its sanctity. Let us then in the first place
consider the significance of the marriage
bond; "What, therefore, God hath Joined |
together let no raGnpWt asunder.' Now, it is |
possible to consider a divine ordinance
apart from any grounds of reason that
may exist for it.. We may regard it as an
arbitrary decree or appointment of God
and while " could NOT question It's bind |.
ing effect, we might not at the same time |
be able to detect its significance. 1t might
be that God had joined together man
AMI woman because he saw fit to do so,
without any appareRt reason fos action |
In that case we could only fall back upon
Eour general belief in the excellence of the |
ldivine DEGREES For while there is much |
lin the universe. that is mysterious, we
know that thepe is nothing without a |
purpose But In the marriage bond there |
is something. that has high signif- |
canoe for we have not only the divine
hordinance, buS the divine declaration of
important fact. s'The Lord God said, it is
mot good for. man to be alone" NV
| friends here is the significance of this
marriage relaSion. 1t is the making of
a perfect life by the law of dissimilarity
Mind, don't say antagoDism--but by
the law of dlssimilarity I refer to the
ordinance By which one being finds itself
complete onkyin another. Therein springs
j up the condition of reciprocal need and
reciprocal help. This law is seen even in
the lower order of existence--in the plant.
the flower, in chemical laws, in earth, In
air. By this law of dissimilarity no one.
being is complete or perfect IN itself; but
finds it's perfection in Something else ;;
and thus all nature at last composes a
single life, unity. Now, it is true that
man mighh have been formed so as to
|combine In himself all the elements of
happiness apd perfection. But it is not
So We have complete humanity only
in the union of the moral and physical
qualities of man and woman. Consider
how much of that which is best elected
by social contact. What would this
earth have been with all its splendors had
the first man remained alone? What
would have been. his work, what bis en-
ioyments? What man required was not
another like himself, but one dlssimilar-
not antagon1stic doubt If dissimilarity
is so productive Of antagonism as simil-
arity. Out OF dissimilarity ~pring mutu-
al need and mutual help. 1t was not only
good that man should be alone, but he
needed society, and dissimilar society.
7 | II, w. NOT hn oto1 L1,
the man alone Here, then, is the signifi-
canoe of the marriage bond. Mutual need
and mutual notwithstanding the great
law of the universe, unity by diversity
Whatever else, then, that is said in re-
gard to this subject is an inference from,
the main proposition. Marriage is div
inc institution. / know that it has been
, asserted that marriage is mere creation
: of human society-a something which
laws make or modify. But l say it is no
/, more human institution than the rela-
ton between the eye and the hand, or be-
tween the hand and the heart Marriage
IS not human expedient; but a divine
4 institution, as perfect and as clear as that
divine institution which has knit -ogether
: the bodily organization But from the
premises laid down l infer not only the
sacredness of marriage, but It's perpetuity.
| don't mean in all stages of civilization !;
; but I mean its perpetulty in individual
, instanccs-- the common rela-
ton of husband and wife.
1t is not an impulsiye or transcient rela
ton, which may be created at will, and
; dissol we'd at pleasure. 1t is bond of
lifelong continuance. And perhaps it
NAV be expected that should here stop
and expose the nonsense OF that doctrine
5 of "affinities," which we may be more
e justified in considering as profigate than