The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1915-09-04
Would that we were half as faithful
to our trust!"
Remarriaae Of Divorces.

Would that we were half as faithful
to our trust!"
Remarriage Of Divorces.
Another contributor Grew. Gusts P.
Jones) in the same issue rebukes q
co-religion!st who had east few
stones at our Roman brethren" be-
cause Rome, forsooth, refuses to re-
marry persons who have gone through
the form Of obtaining a divorce. THE
law of the land, pronounces these re.
marriages all right, and we (Episco-
palians) pronounce them all wrong,
and utterly immoral; and hope we
won't have to go to prison for doing
so. If we must fling something at the
Roman Church, please give us some
thing other than a boomerang"
Mr.. Jones wish is father to the
thought rather than actual fact; the
Episcopal church has not, unfortun-
ately, condemned unreservedly re-
marriage Of divorced persons, but only
Of the guilty" party. However, the
1913 General Convention put upon
the calendar for future action" q
resolution that Canon 80, No. III, be
amended so that the section shall
hereafter read as follows: mo min
lister, knowingly after due inquiry,
shall solemnize the marriage of any
person who has been or is the hus-
band or the wife of any other person
then living, from whom he or she has
been divorced for any cause arising
after marriage"
1t will be interesting to watch the
subsequent history of this resolution,
and may God grant its adoption!
Why? Because, as Prof. Austin
Phelps tells us in pamphlet issued
by the New England Divorce Reform
League: I'VE (American Protest
ants) are not half awake to the fact
that by our laws of divorce and our
federation of the social evil we are
doing more to corrupt the nations
heart than Mormonism ten-fold."
oId.Fashioned Views.
In an issue Of the Christian Advo-
cate (Methodist), we find:
For our part we confess to very
old-fashioned views concerning this
matter of divorce. Why should there
be any divorce at all? At any
rate, we have, as a people, reacted so
far from the strictness of Roman
Catholicism, and our Protestant in.
dividualism has so run to seed, that
it is time to apply some pretty dras.
tic remedies"
Rev. A. X. Blois, of the First Bap.
tist Church, Chicago: e-
"The attitude of the Roman Cath.
Ollie Church is admirable. 1t is better
to be too strict than too loose in all
questions of morals, and especially in
this (divorce) question, which so vi.
tally affects both public and private
welfare
Rev. DR.. Morgan Dix, Episcopalian
rejoices that Roman Catholics-all
honor to them!-allow no divorce 9
vinculo, following literally the com
mand of our Lord Jesus Christ"
Thus is our platform defended; and
| with these fuori tributes ringing In
| the air, Mother Church blesses hel
united faithful, and the twain go forth
smiling into the future-the future
with its dawn of a new soul. and the
souls of future brothers and sisters
all the babies, born and waiting tc
be born, Of the typical Catholic fam
lily.
And, perhaps, therein lies, added
to the vital reality, necessity and all
mall of their faith, the Catholics hor
ror-when, indeed, the thought occurs
to him-of divorce. As ]. M. Bur
we'll says in Physical Culture:
There are all kinds of causes fol
divorce and domestic infelicity, but
there has never been preventive
like the work of rearing large fam
lily."-Benjamin F. Musser.