San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1893-06-24
The Daily Eight.
SATURDAY, JUNE a, 1898
Divorce and Remarriage.

complaint of desertion by a Dakota
court, were married in New York
city on Tuesday in Dutch Re
formed Church by the pastor, the
Rev. DIR. Terry. The bride was
born and reared a Catholic. That
church regards marriage as indis-
soluble, although it sanctions legal
separation when not followed by
remarriage before the death of one
or the other cOntractant. The an
nouncement is put forth that by
this marriage Mrs. Bull has made
forfeitable her membership Of the
Catholic church. Her heart or her
head, or both, however, apparently
settled that question for herself,
and in a way in which outsiders
have no right, and should have no
wish, to interfere.
To the Eagle the significant fact
is not that the woman placed her
relation to the old church in a
severable condition, but that her
remarriage without question &C.
Cured in an orthodox Protestant
meeting house and by the OrthO-
doX Protestant clergyman who
performed the ceremony. The doc
trine of evangelical Professionalism
on marriage has been founded
upon the language touching the
subject laid down in King James
version of the scriptures. That
doctrine is that divorces granted
for adultery only entitle the iDno-
cent party to remarry or be remar-
ried by the clergy in the lifetime
of the offending party.
This view has been until recently
adhered to by all evangelical Pro-
testant preachers and by Presby-
terrain and reformed clergymen as
stoutly as by the clergy of the
Episcopal community in the Unit
ed States, Unitarian and Univer-
salist clergymen, who do not pre-
tend to be evangelical, have readily
married parties divorced for any
cause. The Anglican Episcopal
church, or the Church of England,
being church of law, creation of
parliament, has, of course, had to
marry any whose marriageability
is recognized by the laws of Parlia-
ment. Those laws do not recog-
nize adultery as an offense olsen
titling sucn as are guilty of it to
remarriage. The Episcopal church
in the United States differs from
the Church of England in this re-
spect, as this article has already
shown.
been, perhaps, more careful to OBJ
serve the restrictions laid down in
the Protestant version of the Scrip
lures than any other evangelical
denomination. The Rev. DR.. Terry
did not observe these restrictions,
because Mrs. Blaine was not di-
VOrced from James G.. Blaine, Jr.,
on scriptural grounds, those alleg-
ing infidelity, but on civil law
grounds of desertiOn and nOn-sup-
port. She was not remarriage-
able woman within the rules which
the Dutch Reformed Church has
heretofore regarded and which DR..
Terry ignored. The civil law has
nothing to do with these eccleSias-
tical refinements. The marriage
of Tuesday is good in law every
where in the United States, how
ever disputable it may be on theo-
logical grounds. This establishes
alike the morality and the legality
of the relation formed yesterday.
The event, however, indicates a
growing disposition in all Prot
estantism TO be more stringent on
divorces than the civil law is, and
to permit any clergyman to per-
form a marriage, which no civil
magistrate would, by law, be per-
mitted to decline to sOlemniZe. A
somewhat similar case was that of
the marriage of the late Duke of
Marlborough to Mrs. Hammers
ley, of New York. Both were Epis-
copalians. The dukes first wife
had obtained divorce from him,
for cruelty and adultery, both
causes being necessary in Great
Britain. This made him the Of
Tending party. No Episcopal min
ister in New York would perform
the ceremony. Mayor Hewitt, as
a magistrate, had to perform it
and did so with dignity and will
lingness, browning the occasion
and the bride with a superfluous,
resounding, pardonable and envi-
able kiss. After the ceremony, the
Rev. ID. c. Potter, Baptist clergy
man, just now to nobody's sur
prised in very hot water with his
congregation, performed the cere-