# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1878_S49
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

— 49 —

in the second degree of affinity*) from the lines of two lordships, and also the permission to be married from one line, are to be regarded as incestuous . . . and whether such a marriage between the two of them, after they have already begotten a child, can be dissolved according to God's Word, in keeping with Scripture and with right?' and others, as follows: 'To the first question: that this marriage is indeed, as being in the second degree of affinity, forbidden by divine law, and for that reason no dispensation ought to have been granted for it; but since it nevertheless has happened, and the marriage has been consummated by the betrothed with dispensation and consent of the high authorities of the one and the other line, out of error and simplicity: we do not hold that they are to be regarded as incestuous, for not all forbidden marriages (the question is of divine law) are properly so-called incestuous ones, but those in the nearest degree' (between siblings), 'and above all those that occur in the ascending and descending line. To the second question: that these spouses are obliged not only to bear the punishment of the authorities but also to recognize and repent from the heart the terribleness of their offense, that they have celebrated a marriage forbidden by divine law and one for which no man has power to dispense, albeit through error. The congregation may also be reminded of the case, and both on account of the offense forgiveness may be asked of it, and its intercession with God for gracious pardon for these spouses publicly requested. Then the confessional and the Holy Supper shall no longer be denied to them, but gracious forgiveness of sins shall be proclaimed to them and their consciences comforted and set at peace. To the fourth question: since this marriage has once been consummated and has gone so far, it shall by no means be dissolved. For God the Lord, through Moses, forbade entering into marriage in such a degree, but after it has been consummated He has not commanded it to be dissolved.' (Consilia Witebergensia, IV, fol. 76.) So the Altdorf theologian Georg König**) writes further: 'What is then to be done if such marriages were entered into either from inadvertence (imprudentia) or wholly from ignorance, but after the matter became known, and after it has once happened, the couple did not want to annul it? I answer: such marriages, because they have been contracted against the divine commandment, are legally held null and void, and therefore could rightly be annulled with full right, and it would often be best that they be annulled without further ado, so that consciences be freed in good time and not be disquieted and tormented afterward by secret misgivings. But if the authorities should not wish to make

*) The case was a marriage with the wife's brother's daughter.
**) He had previously dealt with the forbidden marriage with a brother's or sister's daughter.