Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1904-07-09
ERRORS ABOUT DIVORCE.


oussed for some time by theoogians
philosophers, statesmen and journalists
and is stu IN active controversy. II Is
OF great Importance to society, as II
affects the integrity Of the family and
the home and therefore reaches to the
very foundations OF the state. To con-
denim divorce unreservedly after the
fashion OF the pulpit In modern times. IA
TO take an extreme step, unwarranted
by sound reason and a proper under
standing OF the scriptures which are
commonly supposed TO Furnish n posi-.
tive Inhibition against divorce We viii
endeayor in this article to correct a
very widespread error, arising from n
mlsconceptlon Of the teachings Of the
Founder Of the Christian faith on this
question.
The popular notion in Chrlstendom Is
that Christ forbade divorce except for
the one great offence--inrdelIty to the
nuptlal vow, the deiement Of the mar
riage bed. But this Is not substantated
by the scripture that Is cited in It's
support Read carefully Matthew xix.
1-l2, which gives an account OF the
Masters instructions, ELECTED by a
question from the Pharlsees. The CUB
Ject was not divorce on general prin-
clples the right or wrong Of II as might
be determined Judlcialy, but simply
whether the usage under the Mosaic
code was lawful, that n man might put
away his wife "for every cause" by
giving her "a bill Of enforcement" The
provision is found in Deuteronomy
xxlv. 1. The answer OF Jesus was SIM
ply In reply to that query OF the Pharl-
sees. He limited that right 10 the one
capital cause. A man was not to put
away his wife IN that peremptory and
arbitrary fashion unless she was guilty
OF the great offense.
There Ia nothing In the entire nara.
ton Of the Saylors remarks which Jus
tl1es the conclusion, that he declared
against divorce for reasons that de-
manded separation when so decided,
upon evidence, by proper tribunal,
All the DEGREES OF modern churches
founded upon the notion that Christ
forbade divorce except for the one
crime. are fallacIous and absurd, It Is
true that the great Teacher showed
the Divine purpose In giving the wo-
man to the man as his wife I'm the
beginning" That was the ideal mar
~lo he los otN To n
by Deity were to be zone flesh" The
first pair were immortal beings when
they were so united, according to the
account In Genesis /. Man was not TO
who had Joined them together
But their eternal union was predicat-
ed on their compliance with the condi-
lions Of holy wedlock. and 1t Is unreason-
able 10 believe that the Eternal Father
wishes to force that which is prac-
tically imposslble--a fusion of incom-
patible elements I'm state Of repul-
sion.
II Is nowhere stated In Scripture that
God cannot or win not decree the sep
aration OF that which was Joined under
His authority. Christ. In giving His
Apostles power TO bind on earth and
II should be bound In heaven gave
with It authority to loose on earth"
and 1t should be "loosed in heaven"
(Matth xviii, 49,. Persons married UNI
der the Divine law by divine authority
were made ono under conditions agreed
upon. II these were violated, the same
authority could loose the bonds, and
It would be God who put them asunder
as much as II was God who Joined them
together and not man,
The old custom Of the times In which
the Mosaic law was observed, that was
discussed by Jesus and the Pharlsees,
IL and has been for centuries obsolete,
Men are not permitted to put away
their wives" In that fashion nowadays,
even for the offence named. A divorce
has TO be obtained by legal procedure
and decree Of court, Ecclesiastical |
law regulated this matter for centuries. |
Marriages were performed under the |
ceremonies OF the church. which |
claimed to exercise divine authority,
and divorces were given under very |
rigid restrictions by ecclesiastical |
courts. In this country and In these
times, marriage is regarded as a civil |
contract, and therefore the civil law
regulates divorce, II Is man that
Joins, II Is man that puts asunder
As TO the grounds on which divorce
may be properly granted there win be,
doubtless, some differences Of opinion,
If the matter Is regulated by Divine
authority II is likely to be wisely,
Justly and properly adiudlcated. The
marriage ceremony Is then divlnely or.
dained and performed by Gods minis.
ters II the covenants and condi.
tons thus entered into are violated, the
same authority can determine whether
the contract may be annuled. because
OF the hardness Of heart" or culpable
conduct OF either OF the parties render.
ing the union insufferable or wrong 10
be continued, II civil courts are 10
pass on the question, statutory grounds
for divorce viii be decided upon as a
basis for DEGREES, and they ought not