The Washington times., 1922-09-07

until they were brought under the
influence of Christianity. In the
time of the Christian emperors free.
dom of divorce by mutual consent
was alternately maintained and
abolished. Justinian's prohibitian of
this liberty led to SO much domestic
unhappiness and even crime that
1t was rescinded by his successor.
The early Christian church de.
manded merely that marriage, like
other civil contracts, should be
sanctioned by priestly benediction.
But II did recognize marital unions,
as well, even In the absence of any
religious ceremony. Not until q
thousand years after Christ was II
that ecclesiastical marriage became
established as a holy rite to be
sanctioned only by the church.
A Modern Conception.
Knowing even this much Of the
history Of marriage, one must smile
at such statements as that Of DR..
Kinsolving, who speaks grandil-
oquently OF the old law of the old
church which has come down to us
from the days of our Lord" This,
perhaps 10 equivocation; but when
he says more definitely that "the
attitude Of the church 10 to consider
the consensus OF opinion Of Chris.
tian people throughout twenty cen
turies of the church's history" one
ceases to smile. He is taking ad.
vantage of most peoples ignorance.
Now, II Is because of just such
false statements as these-such
arrogance Of divine authority-and
the religious devotee's implicit &C.
ceptance Of them, instead Of having
real knowledge of the historical
facts, that marriage and other
church ceremonials are not treated
with common sense by the laity.
There 10 no need to question the
church-goer's faith. He may believe
as he chooses with regard to the
orthodox. But certainly he mistakes
the nature of the ritualized church.
1t is q purely artificial ecclesiastica
machine, made by man alone. The
layman accepts II blindly In it's en-.
tirety--the whole polity Of an estab-
lished ghierarchy, with it's synods CT
bishops pretending to possess q
moral authority over mankind--as
something mystical and holy deriv.
ing directly from the days Of Christ.
Ritual 10 Modern.
They assume that the whole net.
work Of rules and canons. sanctifica.
tions and prescriptions all goes back
to the year l. They do not.
Most of these formalizations be.
long to. the second millennium. They
are the product Of astute, far-sight-
ed, practically.political mediacval
bigoted bishops, sacrasanct men who
believed that women were devils, who
encouraged a modification of the
flesh. The church stands convicted
of many errors and hypocrisies. II
has countenanced slavery and perse.
cution. Knowing It's human fallibil.
ity, should not a true Christian
emancipate his own conscience from
such domination?
or DR.. Grants controverters. only
one, II seems to me, speaks with
good sense. Bishop Irving Peaksm
johnson, OF Colorado, is certainly ut
least a good politician, He says:
DIR. Grant can either play the
game according to the rules or not"
Why not, then, IL he is honest,
shouldn't DIR. Grant have the
courage of his convictions and
come out from a church which II
is too evidently hopeless to liber
alize? Why not boldly deny the
authority they have assumed and
obey his own inner law So Luther
did. And 20 have done all great
reformers. .... .-
In defying those sanctimonious
bishops by open rebellion, DR..
Grant could do more In his own
example than by attempting the
immemorially unsuccessful attempt
to eat his religious cake ana have
II too. He could do still more by
exposing the fiction Of an authority
assumed and maintained not chief.
ly, II would seem. to promote tho
inculcation Of Christ's simple teach-
ings, but rather 10 make the out
ward form of the church's intri.
cate legendary organization and
government the more ponderous
and sitting to an ever new con-