The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1901-10-12
FAvoRs THE AMENDMENT.

The Rev. DR.. McKim of Washington, who
MIR President and gentlemen of the commit
tee: L rise to speak upon this subject uhder
very solemn sense of responsibility. 1t mas
been truly said that no question that is to
come before u.s. that can come before u.s.
is more important.
Il desire at the outset to express my deepest
sympathy with the motive that lies behind the
canon 1naf o mas 8een Pre- os 80 Of Us Bsop
sympa thize profoundly with the motive which
is intended to guard the purity OF the family I
which is intended to- check the vast and grow
ing evils of divorce in our land But, MI
President. 1 differ in toto from the committee
in regard to the measure which they propose,
as l do not believe it will accomplish the ends
that they propose L believe so strongly that
il is a measure fraught with evil to this
church, not only in itself but in it's relation
ship to the people of the land, and if there were
oppose it, mine should be that voice
Nov, sir 1 beg to call your attention; nrst'
to the fact that this proposed legislation is
privilege of the clergy of this church to Off
ciate at the marriage of an innocent party
tice the principles, the usage Of the church,
lsfor 100 years. is now proposed to be over
turned ana IN oIni to ION the isng1age used
by member of the committee himself.
II mean the Rev. DR.. Fulton who said that
this legislation is along the lines OF discipline
of the Western church; that is to say. the
church of Rome. object again TO TINS pc
cause 1t brings into this church the doctrine
upon the subject of marriage which belonged
distinctively to the church Of Rome. We had
Yesterday the Bishop of Rome upon our
floor. That was something to laugh at be
! cause of mistake, but to-day. in this propo-
sition, we have the spirit and the teachings
| and the discipline of the Church of Rome in
very deed and truth.
! 1.-THE Church of Rome teaches that marriage
is absolutely indissoluble This church has
| never taught it. Now this is a proposition that
we shall change position upon that point
/ so that marriage is absolute and under no Cir
! II would like at once then to come to the
question What is the teaching of divine
Lord? The reason why object TO this legis-
! lation the reason why l feel so profoundly
upon it. the reason why | would not dare to
| vote for such a proposition as this, is because
| in my opinion. this is in direct contravention
authority of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ
! and Of the authenticity of the records Of the
! hoIv Gospel. | believe that 1t would be one
of the gravest possible errors that this church
LET me first, briefly and hastily as possible
| direct your attention to what the real evil
| dence of holy Scripture is upon this subject.
Our Lord spoke about this upon three occasions.
Two of them are mentioned in Matthew and
| one in ST. Luke. st. Mark mentions one which
is one of those mentioned by st. Matthew
''In two of the cases upon which our Lord
| spoke he made that one exception to the indis-
| solubility of marriage Now 1t is said that
St Paul has spoken in the seventh chapter of
Romans and seventh chapter of First Corin-
thians and says nothing about an exception,
but it did to pass that a statement
OF our Lord was to be subjected to the exten-
uation of an exception Our Lord in St Mat
thew in those two places states the law and the
exception. st. Paul states the law without
mentioning the exception
Now. Mr.. President. my opinion, OF course
will not weigh much upon this subject but
venture to direct attention to the opinion
of one whose authority will 1 think be recog.
nized. | hold in my hand the clerical confirm.
atoms for July. 1898. In the of tbs