Arizona republican., 1900-12-24
Bishop FalIows Says Christ
 Advised DisSOIubiIity.
Declares Separation of Unhappy Persons is Upheld by the Bible. Cites Christian History in Support of His Position.

opinion, Christ himself was an advo- cate of the dissolubility of the wedding tie. Bishop Fallows's subject was Marriage and Divorce He spoke as follows:
 ''The three states in which marriage has been found, are, first marriage in itIhe state of innocence and before the fall; second, marriage after thd faI and outside Christianity: third, holy of Christian matrimony. Marriage before the fall was that of one man with one woman and it was indissoluble. Po- lygamy and divorce were necessarily excluded. Marriage after the fall and outside Christianity was not as God in tended but as perverted man main tained it. God did not alter the insti- tuition, but permitted pclygamy and di- vorce on account of the hardness of mems hearts.
 Holy or Christian matrimony-the moral law is revived in it's strictness when man becomes a member of the body of Christ. If he shall contract any union except this union of para disc he commits sin and falls back into a condition of alienation from God. The union must be exclusive and indisso- luble except by death.
 Marriage in a state of innocence the objects of marriage, as stated n scripture, are: That man shall not be alone, but should have a helpmeet for him; that sin may be avoided. SANCTIONS MORE THAN ONE.
 "In marriage. after the fall. We find p-lygamy generally prevailing among the heather peoples, in many instances unions with near relatives not only being permitted but enjoined. The patriarch Abraham married his pater- nal half-sister Sarah. Express provis- ion is made in Exodus for mord than one wife.
 Tn the practice of the Hebrew peo- pie. Gideon had two wiv-s, Saul had several; David also took more wives out of Jerusalem after he had come from Hebron. Solomon had zoo wives. At the time of our Lord and after the Jewish doctors p5Iygamy was recog- nized as a permissible practice.
 Permission for divorce was given under the Mosaic law. The Savior ad- mits the permission and gives the forms for it. It was held that a man might divorce his wife if he found an
 
 law, however. never originated the practice of divorce nor made it more easy. A woman migtc f-- certain req sons put away her husband and was then free ito marry again. bud the priests were forbidden to take divorced women for wives.
 ''The high view of the Christian marriage is that nCthing sk0rt of the ', ~,Fr. the relation, no matter how aggravat- ing the circumstances may be.
 Those holding this view appeal to the scriptures, to the church in history and to reason. The most important, as it is the most difficult. text on the sub ject of divorce, is that found in Mat thew, xix:9 The endeavor of those contesting for the absolute indissolubil- ity of the marriage tie is to show that the savior did net intend to teach that even if a man did put away his wife for wrong-GOing. he was permitted to marry again. But the readings of the texts in the vari-us manuscripts are SO various and the interpretations so di- verse that TO conclusive argument in this position can be furnished. The concessive view, as it is termed, would appear to be that our Lord did concede to the Christians the right of divorce for wrong-doing, coupled with the right of marriaga after such divorce.
 CONFERENCES DIVORCE.
 ''The passage in Matthews appears to countenance remarriage in the case of infidelity. but this is doubtful from the various readings. None of the writers of the first threa centuries quote the passage as having any bear ing on the question of remarriage after divorce. But even against this conces- sive visw there are repeated assertions during the first three centuries of the principle that such marriages are un- lawful. In the period from Constan- tine to Justinian the churches of the west are more decided in their prohi- bition of remarriage than the churches of the east. In the west the council of Aries and the Afreian code, with Am prose, Jerome and Augustine, refuse to recognize marriage after divorce for unfaithfulness even in the case of the unoffending husband.
 Tn the eastern churches at the pres ent time divorce is admitted on the grounds of high treason. designs by ei- ther party upon the life of the other, infidelity. circumstances affordinG pre- sumption of bad faith or it's equiva- lent, difference of religion, the mar riage of a father to a gOddaughter.
 "The grounds for divorce with no penalty attached are: Captivity and slavery, insanity, leprosy. the under taking of monastic obligations, Episco- pal conservation. The Lambeth con- ference of 1888 took the concessive view and by resolution affirmed that the Christian church cannot recognize di- vorce in any ether than the excepted case of infidelity or give sanction to the marriage of any person who has been divorced contrary to the law dur ing the life of the other party.
 CASE OF DISSOLUBLE BOND.
 With regard to the statement of St. Paul in Corinthians, vii, F, the advo-