The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1901-10-17
The Episcopal Marriage and Divorce
CAnons.

CAnons.
The rejection Of tho proposed
rage and divorce csnons by the House
OF Deputies. or the clerical and lay dele
gates OF the Episcopal General Conven-
ton. after they had been adopted by
the Bishops. was a logical step dictated
by sound principle.
The gist OF these new canons was their
prohibition Of marriage after any di-
vorce for cause arising after marriage,
and their accommodation Of people
who married after divorce, but with an
exception in favor Of the innocent party
in a suit for adultery, which practically
nullifed the rect, 30 far as concerns
any foundation OF religious principle.
That Is. the change made was a change
Of policy onlv; and 1t was advocated
as a method Of expressing the Episco-
pal Church's disapproval OF free d.
vorce." Whether IL would have had
any such effect was questionable eason
ably; during the debate the opinion
was expressed that It would rather be
damaging 10 the Church, in driving
people from the communion.
From the very beginning, Protestant
marriage is not n sacrament, but by
the law Of CHRIST Is made dissoluble
for adultery. In accordance with that
theory the General Convention OF the
Protestant Episcopal Church adopted,
in 1868, tho canon which. In substance,
still prevails, though in 1877 IL was put
In the present precise shape, thus:
No minister. hnouinsiy srg du. inquiry. sAaD
solsnnlre ths marriage OF any person Who has q
divorced husband OF wife stl living. n such husband
OF vile has been pu, away TOT any cause arising after
marriage. but this canon shAi not Be held 70 apply
70 the :asoe.n, parry 70 . divorce for the cause Of
sdulisry. OF " parties once divorced SEEING W b
united again
Under this canon. therefore, In opera
ton for a whole generation, Episco-
palians have obtained divorces for
adultery and subsequent marriages OF
the innocent have taken place; vet at
this General Convention IL was pro-
posed to cast a stigma on such CON-
munioants by putting their marriages
under q ban. II the new canons had
gone 10 the extreme Of declaring matri-
mony 20 be . sacrament and therefore
indissoluble a. q religious obligation
the hardship would not have been les
sened. but IL would have been inflicted
In obedience to principle. When no such
declaration was made In them their
adoption by the General Convention
never seemed probable. The halfway
measures proposed in the rejected
canons were no Improvement.
A We have explained before. the
divorce scandal" which led TO the
appointment Of the commission that
framed the rejected oanons In not due
In any way TO the present practice Of
the Church in allowing the dissolution
Of marriage for a single cause. IL has
arisen from the frequency Of divorces
among ~Episoopalians Of social prom
inence for causes never allowed by that
Church. and. more especially, for de-
sertion. These people have gone 20
States under whose laws marriages may
be dissolved for that cause and after
obtaining such divorces, usually imme-
diately, they have married new mates
and returned TO their place. in society.
without ccnsure from IL, and TO patron
age OF Episcopal services. They pay no
heed to the law of their Church when
Il interferes with their in~clinations,
whatever the law may be. That is
the scandal.
How, then, could IL be expected that
a mere prohibition Of Episcopal mar
riage 20 the divorced for any cause would
have any terrors for such people, Hav-
ing fouted the old canon. why should
they not flout the new? When their
divorces for desertlon, or what not,
excluded them from remarriage by an
Episcopal clergyman they were content
with marriage performed by some other
minister or by a civil Magistrate. They
rendered themselves liable TO eIcom-
municaiion, but what did they care for
that?
In view of such considerations a.
these. the rejection OF the new canons
by the clerical and lay deputies To the
General Convention at San Francisco
seems 20 be completely justified. The
new policy Proposed would not have been
ercctual as a measure Of reform and II
might have proved injurious to the
Church. as a departure from long-estab-
lishod principle. based on the Protestant
interpretation Of the law OF marriage
laid down by CHRIST.
Regimentai Histories and "Honors."