The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1917-03-15
kENOSHA CLERGY
|. MARRY DIVORCED?
Mr.. Fayille Takes a Firm
Stand - He VIII Not
Marry any Divorced
Person.
OTHERS ARE LESS RIGID
Catholic Clergy Will Not Re-Marry
Those Who Have Had Marriage
Sacrament Methodists Re-
Marry Innocent One.
OTHERS ARE LESS RIGID

Is it right for clergyman to re-
marry divorced person?
Is it wrong for him to refuse the
innocent party to a divorce, under GER
tain circumstances, remarriage? IF a
divorced person is remarked at ALL
should it be by judge or justice instead
of minister?
These questions have been discussed
spiritedly in the past few days, the
Immediate cause being sermon
preached by the Rev. Theodore R. Fa-
vile of the Congregational Church in
which he stated that he could not con-
scientiously remarry any divorced per-
son, no matter what the circumstances,
and that he would not do so.
His firm stand is taken without re-
lation to the Congregational church at
large, as in this sect, each congrega-
ton decides questions of this sort for
| itself. Mr.. Faville gave an interview
on the subject today.
Jesus opposed Divorce.
| EfWhat about divorces and remar-
riages9" said Mr.. Faville when asked
to state his position. "Jesus declared
again it, absolutely. The words in
Matthew, making one exception, are
certainly a later addition, and not
from Jesus. His attitude is plainly
set forth in the older gospel of Mark,
and in Luke: whatsoever shall put
away his wife, and marry another,
committeth adultery There is the
! same law for the woman. And as
Prof. B. w. Bacon says, 'The general
principle still more emphatically ex-
cludes this exception \ y Jesus re-
fuses to occupy the seat of aw-giver
in the imperfect conditions of the
world. No fault is found with Moses
for the enactment necessitated by the
hardness of mems hearts--wrong So
cial and moral conditions. Only, this
! legislation must not be COMPOUNDED
/ with the ideal standard of the king
dom of God, with which alone Jesus
concerns himself.
Moses Believed in Divorce.
"In word, Jesus is not making
laws about divorce; he is stating
principle of the Kingdom. Any one
who makes the saying of Jesus the
basis for a law against divorce sins
against his real meaning and spirit.
But now the question rises, Should
| he oh nd 10 Oh FOL fho
! place of Moses or of Jesus? IF of
Moses, then it will grant divorces and
remarry people, having regard to i'm
/ perfect social conditions, rather than
insisting upon the principle of the
Kingdom. But if of Jesus, then it will
| say, For this cause shall man leave
his father and mother, and shall cleave
to his wife; and the two shall become
one flesh. What, therefore, God hath
joined together, let not man put
asunder' The church will be no more
concerned with granting divorces than
Jesus was; all that will be left to the
. civil authority. And to marry people
a second time, once joined by the or
dinance of God, will be an impossi-
bility.
Personally Against Divorced Marrying.
''Some time ago I came to the de-
cision that the church did not stand
for anything worth while in this mat
ter unless it stood for Jesus and His
principle. / determined that thereaf-
ter I would not knowingly perform the
religious ceremony for divorced per-
sons. The church assumes that those
it marries are Christians; no others
have any right to ask this service Of
a Christian church. If one of those
married proves not TO be Christian,
anG divorce becomes, necessary, the
state takes care Of that. The church
will often heartily approve such &C
tion. But it is outside the Kingdom
of God. There is no provision in
Kingdom marriage for divorce because
none is needed by Christians. This in
no sense passes Judgment upon the re-
marriage of divorced people; it only
says they should go to Judge or justice
| for it; it is not function of the king
dom of Christ"
Innocent May Remarry.
"In the Episcopal church, the fol
lowing stand is taken in regard to di-
.voree,' said the Rev. Fred Ingley,
pastor of st. Matthew's Church;
/ eff a divorce is secured for the
canonical cause, the only one which
the Episcopal church recognizes as
cause for divorce, the innocent party
may be remarked by a priest of the
Episcopal church. But the remarriage
cannot take place until the court rec
ords showing that the divorce was
asked and granted for the one specific
L cal1se are 1resenfnd 70 tho h;cho,n -