The Washington times., 1922-09-03

At the coming triennial conven-
ton, which opens at Portland, Ore.
September 8, there will be an at
tempt made, so 1t is supposed. 10
narrow still further the attitude OF
the church. The object 10 to forbid
remarriage OF all persons, innocent
or guilty. who have been divorced for
any cause.
The hardship of this situation
falls upon good people whose tragic
experiences require divorce: but who
out Of the kindness OF their hearts,
or what might be called Christian
teaching, mention In their complaints
as mild causes as the law will permit
them to and yet grant a divorce. A
mother of children land remember
two-thirds Of the divorces are grant
ed to women, will generally choose
the cause Of divorce that Is not scan
dalous and that will not blacken the
name of her children. Having done
what seems to her an entirely reason
able and Christian thing. she finds
that her kindness and consideration
have ruled her out Of her own
church. s.E
90. The Real Question.
The real question is whether the
ology or science is to frame our So
cial institutions, an ascetic concep-
tion. or the experience and needs OF
humanity; the dead or the living.
Narrow.minded ecclesiastics say
that divorce has brought chaos to
American homes. Business, educa-
tion. legislation, are also chaotic,
and homes where there have been
no divorces. No, all our institutions
are in a period Of transition and
will improve not at the hands of a
monastic theology but by the illImi.
nation Of modern knowledge.
The opinion ! hold In this matter
Is not OF recent date or merely per-
sonal. In 1902 was asked to write
an article for Ainslie's Magazine on
the subject Of Marriage and Di-
vorce." / consulted several times
the Rev. DIR. william r. Huntington,
of Grace Church, and all the books I
used were from his library or from
that of the General Theological
Seminary. where he gave me a letter
to the librarian. DR.. Huntington at
that time was the leader Of the
Episcopal Church. My views now
are better founded, but are the same
as they were twenty years ago-in
April. 1902. They are opposed to the
present medieval law OF the church
and to the proposed prohibitory leg
islation.
THE FOLLOWING ARE THE SEC.
TIONS OF CANON 42 WHICH
APPLY TO THE QUESTIONS IN
HAND:
"III-No minister, know whgly after
due inquiry, shall solemnize the mar
riage Of any person who has been or
is the husband or the wife Of any
other person then living, from whom
he or she has been divorced for any
cause arising after marriage. But
this canon shall not be held to apply
to the innocent party In a divorce for
adultery; provided, that before the
application for such remarriage
a period of not less than one year
shall have elapsed, after the grant
ing OF such divorce; and that salts
factory evidence touching the facts
in the case, including a copy of the
courts decree, and record.i IL prac.
ticable. with proof that the defend
ant was personally served or appear
Gu III Tue dCtIOn, Uc ltiu DclOIc tIS
ecclesiastical authority, and such
ecclesiastical authority, having
taken legal advice thereon. shall
have declared in writing that in his
Judgment the case Of the applicant
conforms to the requirements of this
canon; and provided, further, that
II shall be within the discretion OF
any minister to decline to sosrnnize
any marriage.
nv. II any minister of this church
shall have reasonable cause to doubt
whether a person desirous OF being
admitted to holy baptism, or to con.
firmation, or to the holy communion,
has been married otherwise than Us
the word Of God and discipline Of this
church allow, such minister, before
receiving such person to these ordi-
nances. shall refer the case to the
bishop for his godly judgment there
upon; provided, however. that no
minister shall in any case refuse
these ordinances to a penitent person
In imminent danger OF death"