The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1900-12-03
NEW DIVORCE CANYONS FOR
EPISCOPRLIANS.
fKansas City star.)


(Kansas City STARE
The Rev. Cameron Mann, rector of
Grace church, Broadway and Thir-
teenth street, is a member of the COM
mittee of twelve appointed by the
Episcopal general convention which
met in the city of Washington in 1898,
to consider the questions of marriage
and divorce. In that committee there
are six ciergymen and six laymen, all
of the latter being lawyers. The com
mittee OF which Dr. Dix of Trinity
church, New York. is chairman, met a
year ago and after spending consider
able time in discussion was unable TO
agree upon any recommendation and
therefore adjourned. Another meeting
was held in New York City last week
and after an aii-day session three
canOns were adopted which viii be
recommended to the general cOnVen-
ton in San Francisco. in October, 1901.
The first of these caDonS is devoted to
a strict definition of cOnsanguinity and
other physical impediments. The sec
ond canon is nearly Identical with the
present law of the church as to the
duties of ministers. Paragraph " Of
this canon is as follows:
M minister shall SoIemnize a mar
rage between any two persons unless
nor until by inquiry he shall have sat
isfied himself that neither person has
been, or is, the husband or the wife OF
any other person then living; unless
the former marriage was annuiled by
decree of some civil court OF COM
petent Jurisdiction for cause existing
before such former marriage.
The third canon deals with the dici-
piine Of divorced persons III the follow
ing language:
No person divorced for cause arts
ing after marriage, and marrying
again during the lifetime Of the other
party TO the divorce, shall be admit
ted to baptism or confirmation, or re-
ceived to the holy communiOn--exCept
when Denitent and separated from the
other party TO the subsequent mar
riage; or when penitent and in imme-
diate danger Of death, but this canon
shall not apply to the innocent party
to a divorce for the cause of adultery.
No person shall be denfed baptism
or confirmation or the holy communion
under this canon until after the minis
ter shall have given to the person due
and sufficient notice of such intended
denial, and of the right of appeal there
from as hereinafter permitted.
Any person repealed from baptism OF
confirmation or the holy communion
under section 1 of this canon, may APP
the missionary district, and if, in the
opinion of the bishop, further proceed
ings should be had under the appeal
he shall call to his assistance any two
bishops of diOCeses or missionary dis
triCts adjoining his own, and if, after
hearing the appeal as they may deem
proper, they shall agree with him that
there is sufficient reason to dispense
with any of the provisions of section 1
of this canon, the bishop to whom the
appeal was taken shall have power
to grant the dispensation and such 9th
er relief as may be appropriate.
There were nine mem bers of the COM
mittee present at the meeting at which
these canOns were adopted and the ac-
ton taken was made unanimous. In
. New York City most Of the Clergymeu
approve the proposed canons. but many
doubted that they would be adopted
by the general convention in 1901
The committee which prepared the
three canons," said DR.. Mann re-
{ Gently. lis required to have them
printed at least nine months previous
to the general convention in order that
/ they may be fully and freely discussed
by the church people and the church
papers. So far as actual legislation is
! concerned there has been really very
/ little change. because the church has
/ always recognized that a divorce for
/ the cause of adultery dissolves tbs
/ bond of marriage, and so, the innocent
J party is free to marry again. The
! church has always held, too, that a Gi-
vOrce for any other cause arising after
marriage does not dissolve the bond
/ and therefore neither party is free tC
/ remarrv. l saw after marriage be
Z cause the church recognizes that a di-
Vorce for causes existing before mar
+ riage is not divorce at all. but {
/ statement that the marriage is and
! has ever been null and void. The OBJ.
/ Ject of the canOnS as drawn by this
committee is mainly to put clearly anC
( forcibly before the public what ha,
| been and is the law of the church.
/ The two great changes that have
! been made are: First the forbiddins
/ Of the clergy to OfffCiate at the mar
riage of any divorced person. no mat
I ter what the cause. This is not TO de
/ clare such a marriage unlawful bu
( simply because of the difficulty Of ar
/ irving at the fact in the case on tn.
part of the ordinary clergyman. ant
/ to emphasize the general hostility o
/ the church Of divorce. Second. the en-
/ acting of a canon which provides foi
Z a court of appeal. which court car
/ grant general dispensations for thos,
! exceptional cases which no general Law
/ can reach. This is analogous to tn,
I power Of pardon which obtains in al
J civil governments.
! Besides these two special change.
/ the church has declared its position il
J reg; relationship. The line haa
! bee too finely drawn. l be
/ fteVe. IONS, you understand
! are Oh .s ort of the COMMITTEES
( of the hOuyv "a oepIties. The house. o
/ bishops has it's own committee on tn,
same subject. That committee viii
l meet next month in New York. me
/ Bishop Doane of Albany, who is pres
I ident of the house Of bishops. a shor
/ time since and he said he approved o
( the canons offered by our commits,
! and believed he should try to have tn
| committee of the house of bishop
I adopt them"