The above protest against the Scottish Divorce Bill sponsored by Lord Alness has been sent us for publication in the Magazine by the Convener of the Church Interests Committee.—Editor.
THE Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland views with alarm the changes contemplated in the “Divorce (Scotland) Act.” The Bill as drafted manifests a serious departure from the Word of God. In our considered opinion, instead of releasing the solemn obligations contracted by married parties, as suggested in the Memorandum, the national recognition of marriage should conform more closely to the Word of God, to the injunctions, obligations, and the enactments instituted by the Creator of man. We are cognisant of the modern tendency to flout the marriage bond, as if it had no higher authority than a mere civil contract. We deplore that marriage should be elastically considered by the State, that married parties should dissolve it at the caprice of either parties at will. We most seriously warn our civil legislators not to countenance this modern evil tendency for if, once acknowledged, by state authority, the disastrous results can be easily imagined, but, may God prevent their realisation.
The opinion submitted in the “Memorandum” from continental nations re marriage can never be standardised above the divine directions and injunctions of our Lord Jesus Christ. The “Memorandum” says: “The provisions of this Bill are merely permissive.” May we ask, who can be the author or authors of this “permission” contemplated in the said Bill now before Parliament? We must not forget that we are a professed Christian State. The Lord Jesus Christ said to the Pharisees: “That He which made them at the beginning, made them male, and female . . . and they twain shall be one flesh . . . what therefore God hath joined together let not man put asunder.” The Pharisees contended: “Why did Moses then command to give her a writing of divorcement and to put her away?” The Lord Jesus said to them: “Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives, but from the beginning it was not so . . . and I say unto you, whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication and shall marry another committeth adultery; and who so marrieth her which is put away committeth adultery.” “Although marriage is no sacrament, nor peculiar to the Church of God, but common to man-kind and of public interest in every common-wealth,” yet being a divine institution we believe that it is the duty of the legislators of the commonwealth to adhere strictly to the re-assertions of the origin, motive, and end of the marriage institution as declared by the Lord Jesus, vide Matthew, xix. 3-9. Marriage was instituted before the existence of civil society, and therefore cannot in its essential nature be a mere civil institution. It is founded on the nature of man as constituted by God. The mutual fidelity vow is not made exclusively each to the other, but by each to God. Among semi-civilized nations, and pagans, marriage is a mere matter of selfishness, and convenience. Are we to treat the solemn institution of marriage as if it were a mere business engagement?
Our state legislators should always remember that they can no more annul the laws of God than the laws of nature. If they pass, and enact laws, that warrant those to separate whom God has joined together (except for adultery, and wilful desertion) their laws are absolute nullities at the bar of conscience, and in the sight of God. The civil power of the State re marriage is limited by the revealed mind of God in His own Word, and specifically mentioned in the gospels according to Matthew, Mark, and Luke. If a man arbitrarily puts away his wife, and marries another he commits adultery. And who so marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery, vide Matthew, v. 31, 32; Mark, x. 11, 12. The Reformed Churches on the Continent and in Britain acted on the assumption that wilful desertion of either of the married parties annulled the marriage bond; but to limit the period of desertion to three years is in our opinion a dangerous precedent because of the modern tendency to consider marriage as a mere expediency or conventionalism. We would submit that at least five years should elapse from the date of desertion before the marriage could be dissolved.
“Incompatibility of temper, cruelty, disease, crime, insanity, or drunkenness” are not inconsistent with the marriage relation, however painful such troubles, and conduct might be to either party. We must submit to the Word of God and so must the State if her laws are to be governed by God’s Word. If, therefore, a human tribunal annuls a marriage for any other cause or reason than those warranted by the Word of God, the marriage is not dissolved. If on the other hand the State pronounces a marriage valid which the Lord Jesus declares invalid, in the judgment of all true Christians, it is invalid. For a body of men to legalise adultery shall never justify the immoral act. They may (to their own satisfaction) contravene the law of God, but human laws cannot supersede the law of marriage as stated by our Saviour Jesus Christ.
In the “Memorandum” Section L. (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f), is contrary to the Word of God, and as “righteousness alone exalteth a nation,” we pray that our civil legislators will not deviate from the divine Law of marriage as instituted by God in the case of our first parents and as already noticed, promulgated by our Lord Jesus Christ.