The Intermountain Catholic. (Salt Lake City [Utah] ;) 1899-1920, 1899-10-12
THE CHURCH AND DIVORCE.

To the Editor of the New York Times:
Inc Times is in general so accurate in
lls statements that | was very much sur
p7sed 10 read on Saturday last, in the
editorial headed THE Church and Di-
YOrce, the following remarkable asser-
lloh; Both 1.-the church and the state
IaWSl admit divorce for the offense of
adultery and for Wilful desertfon. and con-
template as free from blame the remar-
rage Of the innocent party TO such a
divorce
In the Digest of the Canons of the Prot
estant Episcopal Church occurs the fol-
lowing statement:
No minister knowingly, after due in
curry shah sOlemnize the marriage Of
any person who has a divorced husband
or wife still living, if such husband or
wire mas been put away for any cause
arising after marriage; but this canon
Shall not be held 10 apply to the innocent
party in a divorce for the cause of adult
cry, or TO parties once divorced seeking, 10
be united again. Title II, Canon 10. Sec
ton ..
The question in debate today is whether
the canon shall be amended so as to agree
with the words in the marriage office
TIL death US do part, and your editorial
Is cdIculated TO produce 50 wrong an i'm
preston that l trust you will give the
correction as prominent a place as the
assertion PRESRYTER
New York, Oct. 1, 1899
We gladly give space to the above
communication. II will be noted from
the language of the canon as quoted
that the prohibition does not apply to
the solemnization Of the marriage of
the innocent party to a divorce for the
cause of adultery. which was the more
important of the two clauses referred
to in our article. 1t would have been
if our well-informed CORE
spondent had discussed the main sub
Ject of the article namely. the policy
that the church can or ought to pursue
with reference to the laXity of the con-
duct of 'society''-we quote the word !
from DR.. DiX-as to the sanctdty of the !
relation. The impression of !
the lay mind is. that making a rule !
more stringent may not conduce to d |
stricter observance for it than was OBJ |
tanned for the milder one.-New York |
Times.
We print the above for the purpose
Of showing our readers the utter alb
sence of all fixed principles regarding
marriage in the Protestant Episcopal |
church, as well as to show the gross
ignorance Of a great metropolitan paper
the protested tenets of the
most prominent and influential relig-
Gus body in the metropolis
The manner in which the Episcopal
church of New York, under the leader
ship of Bishop Potter is striving to
stem the torrent of marital infidelity
$ amusing to all who know how care
ully Bishop Potter and his clergy
void touching on the real cause of the
growing divorce evil in the United ,
states. The canons may be amended
o as to forbid marriage to the limo |
emit party, but what effect will that .
ave on the question of divorce and
onjugal infidelity? None whatever.
Both Bishop Potter and Bishop Dud- .
~, in assuming that the prevalence of
ivorce should be attributed to faulty
ivil marriage laws, must know that
hey speak nonsense. Either marriage
; a sacrament or it is not. That both
bishops Potter and Dudley and MANY :
their clergy are inclined to the latter :.
lew if they do not fully entertain it, :
painful evidence of the degeneracy :.
the faith which they profess. If :,
larriage be considered solely as a civil :
ontract, it is absurd to suppose that it ;,
IN be elevated to sacramento dignity >
Y civil law. In this case the church,
; has been pointed out, would have no g
except such as it could eXer- a
Sc over the consciences of the con- G.
acting parties, and this. as experience O
lows, would be most doubtful juris-
elton. AS we pointed out last week, II
ere is one and only one remedy that | b