The Superstition of DivorceChesterton, G. K. (Gilbert Keith)
Religion
The Superstition of Divorce
Chesterton, G. K. (Gilbert Keith)
Divorce
One word should be added to this hasty sketch of the elements of the
case. I have deliberately left out the loftiest aspect and argument,
that which sees marriage as a divine institution; and that for the
logical reason that those who believe in this would not believe in
divorce; and I am arguing with those who do believe in divorce. I do
not ask them to assume the worth of my creed or any creed; and I could
wish they did not so often ask me to assume the worth of their
worthless, poisonous plutocratic modern society. But if it could be
shown, as I think it can, that a long historical view and a patient
political experience can at last accumulate solid scientific evidence of
the vital need of such a vow, then I can conceive no more tremendous
tribute than this, to any faith, which made a flaming affirmation from
the darkest beginnings, of what the latest enlightenment can only slowly
discover in the end.
THE STORY OF THE FAMILY
_V.--The Story of the Family_
The most ancient of human institutions has an authority that may seem as
wild as anarchy. Alone among all such institutions it begins with a
spontaneous attraction; and may be said strictly and not sentimentally
to be founded on love instead of fear. The attempt to compare it with
coercive institutions complicating later history has led to infinite
illogicality in later times. It is as unique as it is universal. There
is nothing in any other social relations in any way parallel to the
mutual attraction of the sexes. By missing this simple point, the modern
world has fallen into a hundred follies. The idea of a general revolt of
women against men has been proclaimed with flags and processions, like a
revolt of vassals against their lords, of niggers against
nigger-drivers, of Poles against Prussians or Irishmen against
Englishmen; for all the world as if we really believed in the fabulous
nation of the Amazons. The equally philosophical idea of a general
revolt of men against women has been put into a romance by Sir Walter
Besant, and into a sociological book by Mr. Belfort Bax. But at the
first touch of this truth of an aboriginal attraction, all such
comparisons collapse and are seen to be comic. A Prussian does not feel
from the first that he can only be happy if he spends his days and
nights with a Pole. An Englishman does not think his house empty and
cheerless unless it happens to contain an Irishman. A white man does not
in his romantic youth dream of the perfect beauty of a black man. A
railway magnate seldom writes poems about the personal fascination of a
railway porter. All the other revolts against all the other relations
are reasonable and even inevitable, because those relations are
originally only founded upon force or self-interest. Force can abolish
what force can establish; self-interest can terminate a contract when
self-interest has dictated the contract. But the love of man and woman
is not an institution that can be abolished, or a contract that can be
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account