Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1913-10-31

where, ought not to be counteBanced
by any minister. A statute is of force
only in the state where it is enacted
and therefore marriage in q state
other than that where the Judgment
was rendered, is, at common law. le-
gally valid. 1t is, however, something
contrary to that spirit of comfy and
mutual respect which should always
characterize the dealings of the
authorities of one jurisdiction with re.
gard TO the orders of those of any
other. To get all the facts, no min
ister ought to marry divorced per-
son, without first reading a cory of
the judgment.
DOES NOT PROHIBIT.
But in most of our American states
divorce for adultery does not en-
tail a prohibition of remarriage. Jesus
Christ accepted the rules of civYl gov
eminent which he found established.
He was a subject OF the Roman en-
pire He was for giving to Caesar
what belonged to Caesar. Rome orig
inally committed the power of divorce
at will to the Roman husband Later
either party could dissolve the mar
rage relation at pleasure. No judicial
decree or action of any public author
fly was required. The Hebrew, in this
respect, if not a Roman citizen, fol-
lowed the Mosaic law. When Jesus
spoke of the husbands putting away
his wife for adultery and nothing less,
he must have had in mind the power
! of the man under the then existing
usages of Hebrew society and re-
ligion. Divorce was a private right.
1t proceeded from 10 public author
ity To the Jewish husband, who
could put away his wife for any cause,
at his own discretion, he said, that he
must to be follower of His, use this
power only in case of adultery. He
/ did not assume TO pass upon what
/ the state might do.
IN modern times, the state denies
/ any right of the husband to divorce
at will. 1t regards marriage as a civil
contract 1t believes 1t to be best
/ to allow the contract 10 be dissolved
/ for certain causes by an impartial
public tribunal. In taking this atti.
tude, it seems to me wholly within its
rights. If so, minister need not
4 scruple, subject to one possible ex'
: ception, to remarry persons. who have
been divorced, where the civil laws dc
not forbid The possible exception is
of course. where adultery occurred dur.
ing the previous marriage The rea
soning OF Christ seems. to me to cover
such cases but the letter of his words
does not.
NOT BOUND TO MARRY.
"a minister is never bound to mar
~ every one who asks ii. Gere he
( does not occupy the position of civil
/ officer of the state chosen as such, for
the discharge of a particular function
A public officer must perform his of
fee. He has assumed that obligation
in accepting the position. He must
act or resign. But a minister is given
the right to celebrate marriage, moi
because he has been chosen a public
an ecclesiastical officer 1t is because
he is an ecclesiastical officer that he
is authorized TO act as a public agen
for this particular purpose. At bottom
it is to satisfy those who regard mar
; riage as a sacred thing or go still
|; further and consider it a sacrament.
mo man can be made another
agent without his consent. No min
= lister is bound to marry people whit
he thinks are not proper subjects o
marriage.
40 just analogy exists in these re
! spects between what is due from tn
= clergy under an established churcl
and that owing by a Protestant min
! lister in this country. The Church o
} England, before and after the era o
the commonwealth, was a part of tn
civil government of England. II wa
not q separate body. 1t had no col
porate organization. II was simply al
, incident of the civil authority. TIL
: bishops and priests celebrated maj
r rage, as pubic officers, and as tn
: only authority by which the ceremon
: could be performed.
:, "This anciently was the general rul
2 throughout all Christendom"