Omaha daily bee., 1898-06-01
LONG DEBATE ON DIVORCE
United Presbyterians Give the Subject Some
General Consideration.
MEMORIAL FROM ALLEGHENY STARTS IT
Rcaucst for mn uttcrnncc on the
fopic Results In u Compromise
Decision Based ON the
Confession.

The question OF granting to persons d.
eorced for inndelity the privilege OF remar-
riage came up when the United Presbyterian
general assembly began its morning session.
A memorial on this subject and submitting
the question had come from the Allegheny,
Pa. presbytery, and a report on this was
made by the judiciary committee, to which
1t had been referred. The committee rec
commended simply hat the question be an
swered in the affirmative.
1t was thought at first that the subject
was one which would not require discussion,
but DR.. J. g. Boyd of the M~onongahela pres
bytery, In his support Of the committees
recommendation, having branched off onto
the mysteries of infant salvation and damna-
ton. by way of analogous reasoning, 1t
brought Pro. John A. Wilson of the Allie
gheny seminary to his feet with an oppor-
tunity to oppose the report. DIR. Boyd had
refuted the charge against Calvinism that 1t
put in hell infants not a span
long" and DR.. Wilson's answer TO
this was that infants were saved only If
they were among the elect Just such lax
treatment of the question OF marriage and
divorce, said Prof. Wilson, was filling the
land with divorced persons. The law of
the church was the bible, and the West
lie loliltSblbn " Tdllns anu III lib
point of view their position against re-
marriage OF divorced persons was unmis-
taxable.
Still, In the opinion Of DR.. w. H.. McFar-
land of Muskingum, where the offender was
truly penitent, he should be forgiven
and accorded the same standing as others
of the elect. In the same vein Rev. Daniel
Harris of Delaware argued as follows:
Did not David sin most tiagrantly in the
matter OF the wife Of Uriah, the Hittite.
Yet God pardoned that sin, and our Lord,
In His human nature, was a descendant from
David's marriage with Uriah's wife. Are
We not told: IF thy brother sin against
thee and repent, thou shall forgive him not
only seven times, but seventy times seven"
Again: IF we confess our sins He is faith
ful and just TO forgive us our sins and to
cleanse us from all unrighteousness." Fur
Their, The blood of our Lord, Jesus Christ,
cleanseth us from all unrighteousness.'
Would not an offender, upon repentance, be
forgiven as David was?
Not Easily Disposed OF.
The formidable array of scrlptural au-
thorities and quotations contained in Mr..
Harris argument was not without it's eff
feet. DIR. Samuel Martin of India arose TO
propose a compromise, but had to surrender
the floor temporarily to an opponent of the
privilege of remarriage. His compromise,
"'S' M bot ga oppob uilliy vi SldlihS I,
was for the privilege to be granted upon
sufficient evidence of repentance, but Rev.
II. H. Park of the Allegheny presbytery and
DIR. Wilson had some strong contentious left
among their argumentative ammunition
against anything not setting its seal of dis
approval unequivocally upon divorce.
Mr.. Park offered as a substitute for the
committees report a denial point blank of
the question in the memorial, instead of an
affirmative answer. So far as David's sin
and repentance were concerned, and Gods
attitude TOWARD him, Mr.. Park recalled what
the prophet, Nathan, said to the penitent
king: THE sword shall not depart from
thy house forever" Nor did the sword de-
part, said the speaker, until the death of
the Master on Calvary, and it has not yet
left the house of David, for the word is
never" he reasoned further. The conse-
quence of the sin of Moses-the barring of
the great Hebrew leader from the m
Land-was also among the Instances al
luded to by Mr.. Park in his effort to show
hat though the sinner may be forgiven, yet
ne is not saved from logical consequences
Of his transgression.
The substitute offered by Mr.. Park was
entertained by a big vote and found a zeal
BUS advocate in DR.. Wilson. He was some
what cynical in his views Of sorrow for sin.
Said he:
Let us look at a parallel case. A man is
a bigamist, but he says he is sorry" and
the United Presbyterian church says: 1T
Is all right; you can have your two wives"
Why. sorrow is one Of the cheapest of
things. In our civil law no man without
clean hands can have any standing in court,
and surely in the law of the United Presby-
terrain church we should be equally as strict.
Let us insist upon clean hands.
When DR.. Martin found a chance to ex-
plain the compromise he had desired he
replied to DR.. Wilson's sarcastic doubts of
protested penitence by explaining that the
sessions would be the judges of the peni-
tents repentance; and the sessions in turn
are subject to the presbyteries, the presby-
teries to the synods, and finally all are sub
ject to the general assembly. 1t was not
so easy to impose upon the church.
No DeIivernnce necessary.
The last defender of the committees. posi-
tion was DR.. w. l.. Wishart of the Ale.
gheny presbytery. Upon the point that in
fidelity is the only ground upon which there
can be divorce according to the words of
Jesus in the gospel OF st. Matthew, he