The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1906-06-12

OF n Mohnmrnedan or Hindoo with more than
one wife. applying for baptism, ne should In
all cases, as q condition OF baptism. be
quircd to put nway all his wives but ono
After n very thorough discussion. lasting be
IL was resolved. by q vote OF 36 10 10. TO re-
quest the general assembly ''ln View OF tn"
exceedingly difficult complications which often
occur in tho cases Of poygamists who desire
to be received into tho church, TO leave tho
ultimate decision OF all such cases In India
TO tho synod of india" The momoriallsts add
''It is the almost unanimous opinion OF tho
members OF the synod that under some cir
cumstanccs. converts who have moro than one
wife together with their entire families
should be baptized"
Not only il IL thus tho fact that moro than
four-flfths OF the members Of tho synod OF
India believe that II may sometimes be our
duty. under tho conditions OF society In In
dIn, to baptizo q polygamist without repuir-
Ing him frat TO put away all his wives but
one. but when the missionary ladies present
during the sessions OF synod. dcsrous OF as
oertaining tho state OF opinion among them
selves this subject took a vote there
upon. OF these SO ladies' many OF them inti-
mately familiar with the interior OF zenans
life for years all feeling less hatred of
polygnmous marriage than their sisters in
America, NIL but three sgnIncd their agree
mont with the majority OF synod. OF which
minority OF three two had been only few
DAYS In India and wcrc therefore without any
experience touching the practical questions In
volvcd. Nor Ia this large majority of our mis-
slonarics singular In their belief on this sub
jcct,
When some ycnrs ago tho question do
bated In the PnnJsh missionary conference.
in which large number Of the missionaries
and eminent Christian laymon OF all dcnom-
nations took part ten out of twelve OF tho
speakers expressed the same opinion that
held by moro than four-nfths OF tho synod Of
india today. SO the Rcv. DR.. James J. Lucns
OF Snbarenpur EnSE that the brethren who
maintained the lawfulness OF not requiring
poylGamlst TO put away any OF his wives
a prerequisite to baptism arc not even in
minority In the missionary body In india"
few yenrs ago the Madure mission voted
In favor OF baptising such. provided thoy
had contracted their marriages in ignorance
and there WAS no equitable way of securing
separation. Their action was dlsapproved by
the American board. but II nome tho lees illus
trates again what Is tho Judgment OF n lorgc
part OF those who. living in Inda, are In
who arc thus far better qualified 10 form
right decision than can be the wisest at
home,
Again. bearing on the poIygsmsts duty.
II should be noted that In tho grent majority
OF cases among the Hindus the second mar
having no children. So that when the general
assembly requires tho poyGnraist convert 10
him not only 10 slgnalizo his conversion by
violating a contract held vnlld Mike by his
Christian rulers and large part of his Chris
tan brethren, but to do this In such way
as shall innct tho greatest amount possible OF
cruel injustice and suffering. by turning out
Of his house TINT wife who Is the mother OF
hts children Cwho viii naturally in most cases
have 10 60 with herr and denying 10 her con-
juEnl rights OF protection and conabltatlon
The wrong involved Is aggravated under the
conditions OF life in India, in that II Will COM
monty be practically impossible for tho wife
turned on. whichever she be. TO escape the
suspicion OF being unchaEtc woman. and
shc Will inevitably he placed In position
where. with good name beclouded and no law
ful protector. she win be under tho strongest
temptation 10 live an immoral life. No doubt
polygamy Is wrong; but then, Is not hrench
OF faith and such injustice and cruelty 20 an
innocent woman and her children also wrong ,
II there is a low against polygomy Ia there
explicit and induhitnble? In tho case sup
posed both can not be kept Which shall the
man be Instructed 10 brenk7
The general assembly OF 1875 appears 10 hav.
imagined that the injustice done away by
cnjolning a 20 make suitnble provision
for her support that is put away. and for her
children, II she have any But this utterly
falls 10 meet the case For the breach OF
faith required remains. since the marriage
contract, both according 10 Scripture and the
law OF all Christian lands "a well as OF in
dln, binds the husband not only TO support.
but equally 10 protection and cohabltntion.
But by the dellverancc OF 1875 nll mission
aries in non-Christian lands directed by
the general assembly TO instruct the convert
that. in order 10 baptism. no must keep the
compact as regards tho first particular but
brenk It ns regards the others
Moreover. the moral end sought will. even
80, not be gained. The wife put nwny may
live in sepsrHte house and at a distance
but then poiygamists sometimes keep dlheren,
wives In different homcs-nnd II Will not bo
easy 10 persuade Hindoo or Mohommednn
community, especially II tho man still con-
tinues 20 give her money as required by the
nssembly's law, that eohobitation really
In India and Christian Opportunl-
", book published in 1904 the
author Of which is Harlan P. Beach
With the general subject Of Problems
connected with new converts" the author
at page 222 says:
L PoIygumy.-one dirHculty in the woy ot
receiving a protessed convert Though AFFECT.
ing only small percentage Of candidates 4:
n most perplcSlng one; It is that OF applicants
who have moro than one wife. As Hlndoc
or Mohammedon they have entered in goot
faith into marriage contracts With thes'
| wives. and II man puts away all but one
| jceted, and on what principle eholl he de
| eide as TO the one 10 be Tetained7
While It ls question easily answered in
missionary society councils at home. It is
moro serious problem at the front som,
| good missionaries hold that where the hus
band is living the Christian life In all sin.
| certify II is better TO receive into tho church
| such chndidatc-though not eligible 10 any
| church onhce-than 10 require him 20 give ur
timncy his children by thcm, as well ns oc
| cnsion the wives 90 put away endless re
! proach and cmbnrrnssments.
In Indins Problem, Krishna or Christ
which was published in 1903. the author
southern India. A. b. c. F. NJ. the au
thor. in dealing with this question, says
| on pages go and go:
| things must be taken In mind Mono mort
| important than the claims to a cordial wei
| come from the church OF any man who. n
| true faith and Christian snrnestness, seek I'D
| mittancc. II II bc demanded OF tho mar
| that he put away all but OF those wlve
| taken In heathenism, then We ask whether 4
| is Christian. or even just TO cast away on
| TO whom he Roemnly and religiousl!
| pledged according 10 the laws OF the land anC
| with whom ne haP been linked in lovo nnc
| harmony for years and from whom he hel
! gotten children7 And II he Ia TO put away
| one or moro OF his wives. which ono shall 4
| be Shall II be tho nrst wife7
| Certainly that would not bs Christian. q
| shall IL be the second wife who IL tho moth
| cr hs children and whom he probabl!
| married at the request OF tho nrst who wa
childless, In order that no might mise see,
unto himself II is not ca1y on Christian
| grounds 10 decide sph problem this
| nor is II very Christian to put ban upoi
| any woman who. I'm accordance with thei
| religion and their country's laws. has formc,
| this sncrcd alliance with and has 1.-Two.
| with him for years. Nor II DO right &
brand with illcgitimncy the children born o
| such a wcdlock
| I would not allow such persons. receive,
into the Christian church to become ofricer
| OF the church. But I not why ther
may not be humble place in tho churcl
OF God for such and their families.
Whatever may be our personal Views a
10 tho ~ rho conduct Of RI