ncerning Divorce.--In relation to the different
opinions upon this subject among Jewish authorities in the time of
Christ, Geikie (vol. ii, p. 347-8) says: "Among the questions of the day
fiercely debated between the great rival schools of Hillel and Shammai,
no one was more so than that of divorce. The school of Hillel contended
that a man had a right to divorce his wife for any cause he might
assign, if it were no more than his having ceased to love her, or his
having seen one he liked better, or her having cooked a dinner badly.
The school of Shammai, on the contrary, held that divorce could be
issued only for the crime of adultery, and offences against chastity. If
it were possible to get Jesus to pronounce in favor of either school,
the hostility of the other would be roused, and hence, it seemed a
favorable chance for compromising Him." The following from Dummelow's
_Commentary_, dealing with Matt. 5:32, is further illustrative: "Rabbi
Akiba (Hillelite) said, 'If a man sees a woman handsomer than his own
wife he may put her [his wife] away, because it is said, If she find not
favor in his eyes.' The school of Hillel said 'If the wife cook her
husband's food ill, by over-salting or over-roasting it, she is to be
put away.' On the other hand Rabbi Jochanan (a Shammaite) said 'The
putting away of a wife is odious.' Both schools agreed that a divorced
wife could not be taken back.... Rabbi Chananiah said 'God has not
subscribed His name to divorces, except among Israelites, as if He had
said: I have conceded to the Israelites the right of dismissing their
wives; but to the Gentiles I have not conceded it.' Jesus retorts that
it is not the privilege but the infamy and reproach of Israel, that
Moses found it necessary to tolerate divorce."

5. Jesus the Ennobler of Woman.--Geikie thus paraphrases part of
Christ's reply to the Pharisee's question concerning divorce, and
comments thereon. "'I say, therefore, that whoever puts away his wife,
except for fornication, which destroys the very essence of marriage by
dissolving the oneness it had formed, and shall marry another, commits
adultery; and whoever marries her who is put away for any other cause
commits adultery, because the woman is still, in God's sight, wife of
him who had divorced her.' This statement was of far deeper moment than
the mere silencing of malignant spies. It was designed to set forth for
all ages the law of His New Kingdom in the supreme matter of fami