The New York herald., 1870-04-25
WASHINGTON CHURCHES.
MGTaGP oaigAN METHODIST CnU8cu.

Docs the Bible Sanction P0Iygnmy S~-The
Law Of Bfnrrings and Divorce Inter-
prcIed from the Old and New Tcstnmcnla--
Discourse by Rev. Dr. Newman.
WASHINGTON. April "a, 1870.
To-day at the Metropolitan Methodist church. Of
which President Grant is trustee and member, the
congregation WAS large and highly fashionable.
Among those present were the President ana Mrs.
Grant Vice President Colfax, Chief Justice Chase,
Speaker Blaine ahd numerous other high officials.
Rev. DR.. Newman, pastor OF the church, preached
an attractive and instructive sermon on the sub
ject OF polygamy, taking his text as foll0ws:--
DOES THE BIBLE SANCTION PoLYaANYP
sHave ye not read, that he which made them at
the BEGINNING, made tlon male and femaic s''-Mat.
thew XIX, a.
Tho reverend gentleman saia:-Tae relation Of
the text to tine subject under consideration Ia ap-
parent to oil. Those words are quotation from the
book OF Genesis, and In their origin and application
relate TO marriage. They are the solemn announce
ment OF fact which has never been
called In question; which contains the intcn-
ton OF the Divine Creator, and Is here referred
70 IN condemnation OF p0lygamy and in approval OF
monogamy. They are part Of our Lords reply to
certain Pharisees who had pr0pounded the question
OF divorce for his decision. At tnat time the Jews
divided to che Interpretation Of the law OF
Moses, touching divorce, recorded In Deuteronomy
XIV, 1--''Wten man hath taken q wife and mar
rea her. and 1t come to pass that she find no favor
in his eyes, because he hath found some unclean.
moss in ner then let him write her bill Of divorce.
ment, and give It 10 her hand and send her out OF
his house, According to that law Moses demanded
Of man who should put away his wife "bill OF
divorcement," which should be for her protection.
The justification or the separation, stated In tho
law Is ''SoLo ulceanncS5 in herr Upon the nean-
lug OF the word ''unceanness''
THE JEWS HELD DIFFERENT OPINIONS.
TIE school OF Rabbi Hlliel held the opinion
thot man might dismiss his wife for the slightest
oiYence-icr no offence at all II he found another
woman tnat pleased lin more. But the school OF
Rabbi Shammai hold thas the term "uncleanness''
means moral delinquency, and assumed this to be
The only lawful for separation. As partisans
the Pharisees came to Christ and hoped TO Involve
Him IN the pending controversy. For wise reasons
He declined To accede 10 their wishes. But taking
advantage OF the occasion He delivered discourse
on marriage, In which lie affirmed three propost-
HORST
F,st-Thas marriage is divine institution.
SsCo1d-That marriage is homogeneous, as tndi.
cated by tho facts that III the beginning God ed
but one man and one woman; that IN the marriage
union the man and the woman became one person;
that the man IL to leave his father and his mother
ana cIeaye to his wife.
Tipd-Tbas marriage is indissoluble except for
one cause.
In thls reply CHRIST conceded With neither party
on
The QUESTION or INTERPRETATION
but DID coincide With the school OF Shammai far
as their Interpretation was founded in absolute right
IN maintaining the StTicter view Of the marriage
obligation. Shammai may or may not be correct ii,
his exposition OF this particular law but the general
plincipe that there is but one justifable cause tor
conJnpal separation and second marriage il pre-.
emnently correct But the Pharisees were not sats-
fed with this answer and attempted TO bring Christ
and Moses into collision. They SAID unto HIM. "Why
and to put her 10 wa9 tns NE y Mas a
ter made areply, consisting OF three parts:--
.. fSrssmMoses ana not command, but suffered you
$egond-Ths be d,d because OF the 'hardness
twickedness OF your hearts tnat Is, without when
Ihtrd-'But from the beginning it vas not So"
and do here and now revoke even that indulgence
and say unto you, whatsoever shall put away his
wife. except It be Tor fOrncation, ana snail marry
another, cOnlnlttteth adultery, ana whose marrietn
her which Is put away doth commit adultery" In
considering the biblical side of the question OF poly
gauy snail consider two points
THE LAW AND THE PRACTICR
Under tine mead OF law Snail examine those Scrip.
ture passages which are aoduced 10 sanction poly
gamy. shall then adduCe those which condemn it.
Unoer the head OF practice shall comment upon tue
who are charged with the practice OF poiygamoas
marriage And In this division OF the subject as
sumo that there Is difference between the law and
the practice The iaw Is one ng and the practice is
anotner. The practice may favor polygamy but fhe
!sw condemns IL. The Inference between Chris
tianity and the Church IL quito similar 10 tnis
The latter is not now and been the perfect
exponent Of tho former. The lives OF many Chris
tduo-Vl IulnAStGiss Va uinuupS huu Vi pOpeS-naVS
been scandalous. In the personal character In the
daily life, OF the best oil tnen there serious imper-
Iecuons. Perfection belongs to heaven-is not pre-
dicable OF earth. Under the divine name or Chris
raity the greatest enormtes been committed
the wars Of the Crusaders the the nqui.
sltiOn ana the martyrd0m OF the best men. But
Christianity neither sanctioned these evils nor is sne
responsible for them. With this distinction stated
aid accepted shall now proceed to prove that
Gods law condemns the union In marriage Of moro
than two persons.
1.-THE LAW.
Vi,fr tha 10,
gainy Ine advocates OF polygamous marriages
quote with much confidence Exodus 2I: 7-lI-..And
u man sell his daughter to be maid servant, she
shall not 90 out as the men servants do II she
please NOT her master who hath betrothed her to
himself, then shall no let ner be redecmed TO sell
her unto strange nation nc snail nave no power,
seeing no hath dealt deceitluy with her. And
n ne hath betrOthed her unto hrs son, he shall deal