The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1882-07-16
CHRISTIANITY AND DIVORCE.

To THE EDITOR OF The SUN-yir fear
that your advice in last Sundays Sun to a
young man Of Boston concerning his right. as
Christian. to marry the young woman who
has been divorced. whom he dearly loves. may
do harm. DIR. Woolsey thinks that Jesus did
not intend to establish q law on this subject at
all. Paul II Cor viii. 15D certainly admitted
OF divorce. and subsequent marriage where
the separation was for other cause than adul-
terry. as Luther has clearly shown. As early as
1885 IN opinion signed by Cruciger. Mayor
Melancthon. and Luther allowed a deserted
wife to marry again. according to the decis-
ion Of Paul and the former practice OF Christ
endom." while Zuingl went rs far as
tho omnibus" provisions Of some OF our
state laws. Even tho fiery Calvin did not
hesitate to concur in the ecclesiastical ordi-
nances Of Geneva in 1871. which expressly
allowed absolute divorce for causes not specified
by Jesus. think 1t clear that the divorce dis
approved by Jesus was n very different thing
from our modern civil divorce. Tho law Of
was an individual act, arbitrarily and ire
sponsibly exercised by the man only. and was
no analogy to a modern divorce as a judicial
proceeding by court OF competent jurisdic-
ton in dne form Of law for Just cause. upon
alleged utterances Of Jesus concerning divorce
III literal sense. we are bound to accept his
Obvious idea of what constitutes marriage as
70 its inner nature. and thus determine what
Is and Is not true marriage. IL man Is not to
b11wS s s5dT whom God hath joined together
man ana woman together. so that they arc to
De deemed ono flesh" nearer and dearer than
has Joined man and woman together. they
VIII not desire to be put asunder, and no hui
man man power can PIT them qsunder Are all
minister, so really made by God that neither
the parties themselves nor any. other
b Ss eR ra have right to question the
God when formed In mutual deception,
prompted by low and base animal passions :
God Join such together? Children are some.
times beetr9thed before birth; Are such Joined
ton merely legal mar 4egS pT0p4rd
by prejudice. money. ambition, sordid selfish
ness; and all sorts of evil influences. and can.
We admit that there may be. some legally
united persons. not joined together by God. the
not cM Do y RS rsap hnf the p pOes
young woman was really married to that
brute who SO abused her within SIX months q
the loving, Prophet OF Nazareth would deem
n nef snq the neF laws 9ver guilty OF adultery IL
should come together in holy matrimony?
Ask your distressed correspondent to read the
Greeley on this subject. and especially tho doc
trine and discipline of divorce in the prose
himself; and think you will soon hear OF his
marriage to the woman he loves even though
she has been divorced from q brute for no fault
OF hers Respect for the Bible is fast being de-
stroyod by claiming for 1t what it is not. and 1t
seems to me that the stability OF the mar
claims as are urged by eccles astics in
its support. Better and more effective ar
gumesnts against a free or frequent divorce
attributed to Jesus. in rebuking the injustice
and abuse OF the loose Hebrew and Roman
laws: If we accept literally His words regard
ing divorce are we not bound to so accept His
definition OF what constitutes adultery? l
know how the preachers explain these things
away but tho illustrations used. the lilies and
the birds show what Jesus meant. II your cor
respondent cannot marry that worthy and inno-
cent divorced woman and at the same time be a
Christian. how can he be Il Christian without
becomnga Communist in all matters relating
to property. according to the teachings OF Je-
sus and the practice Of his early followers
PHILADELPHIA. July 10. II. Is. w.