American fiction -- 20th century; Divorce -- Fiction; Married people -- Fiction; Rich people -- Fiction
"Do you happen to know the causes for which divorce is granted in this
State?"
Mr. Prentiss hesitated. Evidently he had no exact information on the
subject, which at this juncture was disconcerting. "For far too many
causes; I am sure of that," he replied, stoutly.
"I will read them to you. 'Impotence; adultery; desertion for three
years; sentence for felony for two years; confirmed habits of
intoxication; extreme cruelty; grossly and wantonly refusing to support
wife.'"
The rector listened alertly, hoping to be able to pounce on some
conspicuously insufficient provision. Since this did not appear he
made a sweeping assertion. "They are all inadequate in my opinion
except unfaithfulness to the marriage vow, and I often doubt the wisdom
of making an exception there. I am by no means sure that the Roman
Church is not right in its refusal to admit the validity of divorce for
any cause whatever."
"But what has been the course of history since the Roman Church
promulgated its canon at the Council of Trent more than three hundred
years ago? The cause of common sense and justice as represented by the
State has, in spite of the fierce opposition of the clergy, won victory
after victory, until the institution of marriage has been placed under
the control of the secular law on most of the Continent of Europe, and
the right to divorce and the right to remarry widely recognized--for
instance in France, Germany, Switzerland, Norway, Denmark. In France
it's a criminal offence for a priest to perform the religious ceremony
of marriage until after the civil ceremony."
"Yes, and it was France which during the days of the revolution
permitted divorce at the mere option of either party. And there are
signs that we are rapidly imitating that same barbaric laxity in the
United States, and in this community."
"And if it were, would it be so much more barbarous a condition than
the conservatism of the English law of Church and State, which grants
divorce to the man whose wife has been guilty of adultery, but
withholds it from a woman unless her husband has been guilty of cruel
and abusive treatment into the bargain?"
The rector was touched on another sensitive point. He put out the palm
of his hand. "I fail to see the relevancy of your comparison, Mr.
Perry. However, the American Episcopal Church is not responsible for
the flaws in the details of the English establishment. The two are
harmonious and their aims are identical, but we do not follow blindly."
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