American fiction -- 20th century; Divorce -- Fiction; Married people -- Fiction; Rich people -- Fiction
"I see," said Gordon, "and that presents the real issue. Why should
the Church usurp the functions of the State? Why in this age of the
world should it decide what is best for the human race in a temporal
matter, and substitute an arbitrary and inflexible ethical standard of
its own for the judgment of organized society?"
Mr. Prentiss's nostrils dilated from the intensity of his kindled zeal.
"Why? For two reasons. First, because the Church declines to regard
as a temporal matter an abuse which threatens the existence of the
family, the corner-stone of Christian civilization; and second, because
the State has flagrantly neglected its duty, allowing divorce to run
riot through the nation without uniform system or decent limitations.
Is the Church to remain tongue-tied when the stability of the holy bond
of matrimony has become dependent on the mere whims of either party?"
"I see the force of your position. I will answer you categorically.
As to the first reason, it seems to me untenable. As to the second,
you accused me just now of seeing only my side. Let me retaliate, and
at the same time suggest that, though you may seem to have a strong
case, you do not know the real facts." Gordon, having reached a more
dispassionate stage of the argument, remembered his cigar, which he
proceeded to relight. But the rector, not accustomed to such
colloquial dissent, threw his own in the fireplace and crossed his arms.
"Regarding your first plea in behalf of the Church's interference that
the Church does not look on marriage as a temporal concern, let me
remind you," continued Gordon, "that marriage is the only matter in the
realm of human social affairs where the Church undertakes to nullify by
positive ordinance the law of the State--where there is divided
authority. In all other social affairs the law of the State is
paramount. The Church forbids abstract vices--malice,
uncharitableness, lust, selfishness, intemperance, but it does not
attempt to define these in terms of human conduct, or to substitute
canons for the secular statute book."
"The Church regards marriage as a sacrament."
"The Roman Catholic and the Episcopal. If I may say so, the attitude
of both these churches is a foreign influence."
The clergyman drew himself up. "Foreign?"
"Yes, foreign to native American ideas, and I might add foreign to the
claims of the first followers of Christianity, for the early Christian
Church did not assert the right to perform the marriage ceremony, or to
regulate marriage. Its protectorate dates from a later period. But
what I had in mind was that it is antagonistic to the spirit both of
our forefathers and their descendants. In the early days of New
England the service of marriage was performed not by the minister, but
by the magistrate, and marriages by clergymen were forbidden. It was
the authority of the State, the commonwealth, the considered judgment
of the community which was recognized."
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