The St. Mary banner. (Franklin, Parish of St. Mary, La.) 1889-1931, 1907-09-14
BISHOPS DIVORCE CURE.
SOCIETY AND
CHURCH MUST ACT TO-
\ GETHER.

Recent Congress in Philadelphia
Dissected by Bishop Doane. Head
Of Protestant Episcopal Diocese OF
Albany
At the thirty-eighth annual conven-
ton CT the Protestant Episcopal do
cese of Albany IN All Saints
Cathedral, the feature Of principal
public interest was the address or
Right Rev. William Crosweli Doane,
who from the foundation of the do
cese has been its bishop. His widely
known interest in the subject OF mar
riage and divorce was again displayed
in his earnest references to that SUBJ
ject, in the course of which, after
allulinS with approval to the meet
ing at Philadelphia Of the congress
on uniform divorce laws, at when
he was present, he said in part:
1t was satisfaction for us to feel
that the calling Of this congress on
uniform divorce laws was really trace
able through the Governor of Penn
sylvania and the President of the
United States, to the representations
made to the President by members
of the interchurch conference in jan
uary. 1905. The resolutions, which II
adopted related naturally and most
wisely to methods Of procedure rather
than to the questions of causes, and
the final form which the action took
is to be embodied in the proposed
statute. which, while it enumerates
several causes for divorce as existing
in different States, will express the
opinion of the conference that de-
string to see the number of causes
reduced rather than increased, this
congress recommends that no addi-
tiOnal causes be recognized in any
State, and in those States where
causes are restricted no change is
called for.
Whatever result is to be attained
In dealing with this most important
question depends upon three things.
In the first place, what legislative &C.
ton can be secured to correct the
OF procedure. In the next
place what pressure can be brought
to bear by people who really control
and govern what is called society,
and in the next place by the positive
and definite outspokenness OF the
churches. And l am increasingly
hopeful and anxious that this
church shall take the lead in
a strong and definite pc
sition as to our relation at any rate
to the question Of the remaEriase
Of any divorced persons.
Until six years ago cur canons |
quietly treated as possible the reEar-
.iage of the so-called innocent party |
20 divorce, with much confusion in |
the details Of its language. Three |
iears ago the church made 1t diff
,ult. But this is really not dealing,
t seems to me- either frankly or fair
y with the demand for relief.
Weary Of the discussion and con- !
ent to feel that the new canon makes
more difficult, there is a
tendency and temptation to let the
sleeping dog lie, but the trouble is
hat this dog is not asleep. l can
lot believe that the church ought to
oe content with canon that really |
expresses nobody's honest convictions.
t casts a slur and a shadow upon a
marriage which some people think
distinctly permitted by our Lord, and
t forces the hand, to a degree, of
hose of us who think otherwise.
If it is right, it ought not to be
ledged in with the difficulties If it
S wrong, it ought to be impossible.
let us wash our hands of the whole
business. Let the State which separ-
ties unite. And without Celebrations
# detail or definitions Of discipline.
ct us simply forbid the clergy to give
he church benediction to any such
marriage
All the while some statement is ar
fearing in the newspaper reports o!
he wholesale manufacture of divorces
and every now and then,
ut from the comparative Obscurity
t many of the cases, one lifts up its
lgly head into conspicuous disgrace,
ecause Of the social position or the
wealth of the parties. When such a
ase comes to present itself to what
5 called society what will society do?
n season and out OF season, the
'hristian pulpit ought to call
his thing by it's right name,
ntil the people who hold some
loral standards shall recognize the
7rong, and refuse to recognize the
IRON cdners fauntino their sin before |