Great Britain -- Social conditions; Moral conditions; Social problems
Moralists, lay and clerical, have a preposterous way of representing
this as a surging of selfish passion against the barriers which human
experience or superhuman wisdom has erected. There is, it is true,
much in our rebellious literature itself which misrepresents the
movement. You get the impression that, as the eighteenth century
questioned the divine right of kings and the nineteenth century that
of priests, the twentieth century is challenging the divine right of
moralists. But this is due to the common practice of giving a narrow
meaning to the word "immorality." Goethe and Swinburne became
zealous for "morality," but they never altered their opinions on
"free love." Sudermann and Anatole France and Pérez Galdós and
d'Annunzio, G. B. Shaw and T. Hardy and E. Carpenter and H. G.
Wells, are sincere moralists: they inculcate honour, truthfulness,
kindliness, and justice as firmly as our bishops, and more effectively
than most of our clergy. It is not morality that stands at the bar.
The real question is whether any sound moral principle implies that
marriage alone sanctions sex-union: whether social good or social evil
would result from an alteration of our standards.
This is a quite natural and legitimate question, and any
healthy-minded person ought to be able to discuss it without hysteria
or vituperation. Christian moralists have made some very grave
mistakes during the last thousand years. Humility and disdain of the
flesh were for centuries extolled by them as the supreme virtues:
cruelty was classified as a venial offence. Already the bulk of our
divines reject the virtue of asceticism, and they forbear to press on
the modern world the kind of humility which turns the other cheek, or
the other pocket, to the hooligan. They discover that social justice
has been singularly neglected by their predecessors, and they begin to
suspect that war or sweating may be worse than unbelief or
Sabbath-breaking. It is not at all unnatural to inquire whether there
may not also be some element of error in their sex-ethic.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account