211
haye paved tbe way to a clearer reyelation, but they have not been cast aside."
18. — [^]Vho8oever puttetk away his wife, <Bc.] Tbe connection of this verse with the preceding is again somewhat abrupt. The chain of thought seems as follows : — " So far from comiug to destroy the law, 0 ye Pharisees, I would have you know that 1 am come to magnify it, and reassert its righteous demands. With all your boasted reverence for the law, you are yourselves breakers of it in the law of marriage. You have lowei^d the standard of the law of divorce. You have allowed divorce for trivial and insuf- ficient causes. And hence while you make your boast of the law, you are by your unfair dealing with it, encouraging adultery."
We must take care that we do not misinterpret the language used about divorce and re-marriage in this verse. It is peifectly clear from another passage that our Lord allowed divorce in cases of adultery. (Matt. v. 33.) The act of adultery dissolves the marriage tie, and makes those who were one, become again two. Neither here nor elsewhere can I see that our Lord regards the re-marriage of one who has been divorced for the cause of forni- cation, as adultery. It is divorce for frivolous causes which He denounces, and marriage after such frivolous divorce which He pronounces to be adultery.