Newspaper Page Text
May 29, 1912]
1(K 1*0BT OF AD INTERIM COMMITTEE
ON MARRIAGES AND DIVORCE.
(The Minority Reiwrt.)
The Presbyteries of Knoxville, Missouri,
Charleston and Chesapeake predated
overtures to the General Assembly
of 1909 concerning marriage and
divorce. These overtures, were, by that
Assembly referred to an ad interim
committee, which submitted majority
and minority reports to the Assembly of
1 : 10. The whole matter was, by that
Assembly, re-committed to the Bame
committee, with new members added,
with instructions to report to the Assembly
of 1911, and the request was
granted, and the committee was instructed
to report to the Assembly of
1912.
The overtures referred to raise two
questions for the consideration of the
committee: (1) Does Chapter XXIV of
the Confession of Faith on Marriage
need revision? and (2) What policy
ought the church to pursue with respect
to polygamist8 who apply for
membership in our churches in those
lands?
1. Theories of Marriage.
There are four theories as to the
nature of marriage: (1) The Sacra
nientarian, or Ecclesiastical; (2) The
Contracture!, or Civil; (3) The Ecelesiastico-civil,
or Mixed; (4) The 'Natural,
or Divine.
1. According to the first, or Sacranientarian
theory, marriage is a relilgious
ordinance, and the family is an ecclesiastical
institution. Consequently,
its making and unmaking fall exclusively
within the jurisdiction of the
church, as do the sacraments of baptism
and the Lord's Supper; its whole regulation
is a matter of ecclesiastical prescription;
we must go to the Church
creeds and canons to learn what is right
and lawful concerning it.
2. According to the second, or Contractual
theory, marriage is a civil ordinance,
and the family is a social institute.
Consequently, its making and
unmaking fall exclusively within the
jurisdiction of the state; its entire regulation
is a matter for the civil law; we
must go to civil constitutions and
statutes to learn what is right and lawful
concerning It.
3. According to the third, or Ecclesiastico-civil
theory, marriage is both
ecclesiastical and civil in Its nature.
Consequently, it falls within the joint
jurisdiction of the church and state; Its
regulation is a matter of both ecclesiastical
and civil law; we must go to bojh
to learn what is sight and lawful co?cerning
it.
4. According to the fourth, or Natural
theory, marriage is an ordinance of God,
:iri/l ? .. .....
-- h me lainiiy is a divine institute. Consequently,
It falls within the exclusive
jurisdiction of the Deity; its regulation
is a matter of divine regulation only;
we must go to Revelation to learn what
is right and lawful concerning it.
That the fourth, or Divine theory, is
the correct one is proved by the following
considerations:
i') God created the race male and
female that the relation of husband and
wife .night be possible.
(2) He created Adam and Eve and related
them to each other as husband and
wife.. .
(3) The Scriptures teach us that It
was God who "set the solitary In mamIliea."
14) In his word God has specifically
legislated concerning marriage and the
formation of the family.
As the family Is thus an original and
natural Institute of divine constitution.
It Is related to both the church and the
Ktate; neither can lawfully originate
legislation concerning it; each must
take the responsibility of interpreting
pnd applying God's marriage laws; each
"tfst protect itself by the power of
THE PRESBYTERI,
discipline lodged in its hand; their
spheres and purposes are different.
2. The Divine Murringe Law.
There have been five statements, or restatements,
or interpretations of God's
Marriage Law in the Scriptures: (1)
The Edenic; (2) The Mosaic; (3) The
ChriBtic; (4) The Pharisaic; (5) The
Pauline.
1. Edenic Law: The Primal Marriage
Law was promulgated in Eden, in this
language:
"Therefore shall a man leave his
father and his mother, and shall cleave
unto his wife; and they shall be one
flesh."?Gen. 2:24.
This was the statute for the race in
innocency. It prescribes two things:
(1) monogany, and (2) the "indissolubility
of the marriage tie. It makes no
provision for divorce on any ground. In
a sinless and paradisaical state there
could never be any occasion for a divorce.
2. Mosaic Law: But the race did not
continue in innocency, but fell and became
sinful. Its sinfulness, even In illustrious
patriarchs, manifested itself in
polygamy and concubinage. So God,
through Moses, promulgated tots Marriage
Law for a fallen and sinful race, in
the following language:
"When a man hath taken a wife, and
married her, and it come to pass that
she find no favour in his eyes, because
he hath found some uncleanness in her;
then let 'him write her a bill of divorcement,
and give it in her hand, and send
her out of his house."?Deut. 24:1.
This law prescribes: (1) monogamy;
-(2) divorce u.pon the ground of uncleanness;
(3) and prohibits the re-marriage
of the guilty partner.
3. Christie Law: When our Ixird
came he re-stated, 1n the Sermon on the
Mount, the marriage law of God in these
words:
"But I say unto you. That whosoever
shall put away his wife, saving for the
cause of fornication, causeth lier to
commit adultery; and whosoever marrieth
her that Is divorced committeth
adultry."?Matt. 5:32.
"Whosoever putteth away his wife,
and marrieth another, committeth adultery;
and whosoever marrieth her
that is put away from her husband
committeth adultery."?Luke 16:18.
This statement of our Lord exactly
coincides with that of Moses. (1) He
approves monogamy; (2) authorizes divorce
upon the ground of uncleanness;
(3) denies the right of re-marriage to
the guilty party.
4. Pharisaic Law: But the Pharisees
and ecclesiastics, perverting that clause
in the Mosaic law, which reads. "If it
comes to pass that she finds no favour
In his eyes," allowed a plurality of wives
and divorce for any reason whatsoever.
In the nineteenth chapter of Matthew
our Lord denied this Pharisaic interpretation.
'He (1) reaffirmed the original
Edenic law as Clod's primal marriage
law for the race in innocency; (2) he
declared that. \fnsen "hofaimo >???
hardness of your hearts " that is,
because of the race's sinfulness, allowed
divorce; (3) he then reaffirmed that
"whosoever shall put away 'his wife, except
it be for fornication, and shall
marry another committeth adultery; and
whosoever marrleth her that is put away
doth commit adultry." We get these
three conclusions: (1) Ideally, there
ought not to be any divorce at all; (2)
but because cf the Bin of uncleanness
divorce is permissible; (3) but the right
of re-marriage Is denied to the guilty
party.
ft. Pauline Law: Paul gave an interpretation
of the mariage law which is
thought by some to be inconsistent with
that promulgated by Moses and Christ.
"Let not the wife depart from her
husband, but and if she depart, let her
remain unmarried, or be reconciled to
her husband; and let not the husband
put away his wife . . . But if the un
A. N OF THE SOUTH
believing depart, left him depart. A
brother or a slater is not under bondage
In such cases."?1 Cor. 7:11-15.
But there is no Inconsistency. Moses
spake of a man "Bending his wife out of
his house," and said no man could lawfully
dismiss her except for "uncleannesB."
Our Lord spake of a man "putting
away" his wife, and declared that thai
could be lawfully done for the cause of
"fornication." Paul spake of the brother
or sister who "departs"?goes out of
the house of his own choice?milt Mr
partner (>f his own volition. When a
brother or a sister thus wilfully and incurably
abandons his mate, the deserted
is freed from the marriage bonds, but
the deserter is not permitted to remarry;
"if she depart, let her remain
unmarried."
3. Twenty-fourth Chapter of the Confession.
The Confession of Faith forbids three
classes of marriages: (1) all polygamous
marriages; (2) all marriages between
persons not "able with judgment
to give their consent"?infants, minors,
idiots, lunatics, and all other mental incompetents;
(3) all Incestuous marriages.
The Confession allows divorce upon
two grounds only: (1) upon the ground
tu auuuery or social unciennTtess; (T>
upon the ground of wilful and irremediable
desertion.
Of revisionists, there are two classes:
(1) those who think the Confession is
already too lax, and (2) those who think
the Confession is already too strict.
1. The firrft class would change it in
two particulars: (1) either strike out
desertion altogether as a ground of divorce,
or (2) restrict its applicability to
heathen and mixed marriages.
2. The second olass would alter the
Confession in one or more of the following
particulars: (1) authorize the
re-marriage of all guilty divorcees; (2)
authorize the re-marriage of all penitent
divorcees; (3) add marital wretchedness
as a third ground of divorce; (41
and mutual consent as a fourth ground
of divorce.
But there is nothing Biblical in support
of any of these suggested changes.
The re-marriage of all guilty divocees
is categorically forbidden "whosoever
marrleth her that Is divorctd committeth
adultery," said our Lord, and Paul
said the guilty deserter must "remain
unmarried." "Marital wretchedness" is
often tragic, and the State in exercise
of its police and Judicial powers ought
to grant all relief short of the actual dissolution
of the marriage bond. And the
proposition to make "mutual consent" a
ground of divorce is founded upon two
fallacies: (1) It is predicated upon the
contractual theory of marriage, and (21
no two persons can make anything right
by agreeing to do wrong.
4. Recommendations.
1. We recommend that the Assembly
answer the overtures asking a revision
of the Twenty-fourth Chapter of the
ConfeSSiOTl of FVHfh in tVus nnfrntiirn
the reason that it is a sufficiently accurate
and full exposition of the Bible
doctrine of marriage and divorce.
2. We recommend that the Assembly
answer the overtures on polygamy as
follows: Polygamy is both unscriptural
and unconfessional, and the practice of
the Church must conform to this doctrine.
Signed:
R. A. Webb.
Russell Cecil,
Henry Alexander White,
R. A. Fleming.
ASSEMBLY NOTES.
Bristol has four Presbyterian churches.
the First apd Windsor Avenue, on
t*e Tennessee side; and the Central and
King Memorial on the Virginia side.
The Assembly found itself too busy to
(597) 17
accept an invitation to go on a short excursion.
There seems to be more hospitality to
the square foot in Bristol than any place
we have struck in a long time.
The Sunday appointments covered the 1
city and reached out twenty-five miles
north and Bouth.
Bristol is a very busy little city, and
prosperous. But it 1b not too large to
appreciate the Assembly and enjoy it
and make it a feature.
Dr. Boggs asked everybody to bring
Greek Testaments to church Monday, to
study Marriage and Divorce. We wonder
how many of the brethren thoug>ht
to 'bring them along!
There's not a high hat in the entire
crowd, and only two or three clerical
collars. Presbyterian preachers have
got into tbe way of dressdng like other
folks.
In the Sunday services each congregation
said it had the best. Many notable
Bermons were preached, and from the
reports they were all rich in Gospel
truth and not pretentious, ambitious,
afTected efforts.
A most venerable figure in Bristol is
that of the widow of the late Dr. George
A. Caldwell, for so many years pastor
of the First church. She is in the
eighties, but holding her years finely.
iHer home was a kind of Mecca for the
preachers. Everyone delights to pay her
tributes of affection and veneration.
Another home that many must needs
see, for affection's and love's sake, is
that of the venerable mother of Drs.
James I. and Josenh A- Vanco
husband, Col. Vance, was for years a
ruling elder in the First church. Mrs.
Vance is a regular attendant upon the
Assembly's day sessions, and her home
and table are always thronged with
visitors.
The overture of a South Carolina
Presbytery that one of our Committees
be removed to South Carolina or Georgia,
so that it may be located where
investments may secure eight per cent,
interest, was answered in the negative.
The Narrative on the State of Religion
was very much less optimistic than
usual. The special trouble, as shown by
the reports from eighty Presbyteries, is
in respect to Pamily worship, Sabbath
observance, worldliness and evidences
of the Spirit's presence in special manner.
In adopting the narrative the Assembly
calls upon the entire Ohurch to observe
a day of fasting and prayer, October
2, 1912, and asks that that day
witness the inauguration of an active
effort on the part of Presbyteries looking
to the Improvement of the church
.in those respects in which practical religion
seems to (be at a low ebb.
The ruling elders took much part in
the discussion of the "rotary office"
question, and their speeches were fine.
They were listened to with intense interest.
The Assembly showed that It regarded
the churches as of as much importance
as the preachers, and after thiis year an
alDhabetical list of the ohiire.hen will ho
published In the Minutes.
The Moderator very kindly but emphatically
and justly pronounced condemnation
upon those who are careless
and inattentive when reports are read,
and who then take the time of all the
rest of the Assembly t>y asking that long
papers be read again.