Atlanta Georgian. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1912-1939, 1913-10-12

according to the Catholic Church, and once
married to her unfaithful husband she is his
wife for life Then her own nature as a woman
awakes and she meets the man she can IoveA
She struggles against her love. believing it to
be sinful. At length nature conquers her In.
herited religious instinct, and becoming com
WINGED that her marriage, which had never had
the concurrence Of her soul, was no marriage,
she glides with conscientious steps into the
arms of her lover firmly convinced that he Is
her true husband according to the law of nature
and in the eyes of God.
Then after experiences which illustrate an.
other part of my theme eliminating in a
rescue which to my personal knowledge though
condemned as a wild fight of melodramattc
imagination, took place exactly as It is de-
scribed in Flccadilly, in October OF last year,
her unfaithful husband, whom her Church for.
babe her to divorce divorces her. She thinks
this leaves her free to marry the man whom
she looks upon her true husband. In the
eyes of the law it does, but in the eyes of her
church it does not. According to the Catholic
doctrine of indissolubility she is still bound
although the man she married Is free; she is
still his wife, although he has married another
woman. Therefore she cannot marry her lover
according to the law Of the land without cast
ing herself out of her Church. This is the
most tragic situation into which the false
morality of the world on the relations OF the
sexes can bring any human being.
There is great struggle between her re-
ligion and her love, in which first the one and
then the other has temporary triumph At
one moment her heart wins, at the next her
faith conquers. She is tempted to hy away
from the conflict by taking the vows as a nun
the only kind of vows (being vows to God)
which, according to Catholic theology, can
fba to har
a child which calls to her mother-heart. and
she cannot leave 1t to the mercy of the world.
On the other hand she cannot remain in the
world without the certainty. that the woman
In her VIII compel her to go, sooner or later,
to the man she loves. Finally, under the fierce
strain OF emotion, death comes to cut the knot.
and she dies
What then is my moral? The first part Of IL
concerns the conditions under which MARRIAGES
are made l hold that Mary ONeills marriage
is no marriage at all, but a grossly immoral
union, with which 1t is blasphemous to think
that God had anything to do. Therefore nv
conclusion is that where such marriages have(
been made-either In ignorance or under the
tyranny OF parental authority, or the economic
pressure or life-it is the duty of the law tn
md some quicker means than now exist for
dissolying them, and the duty Of the Church
TO ind some way Of cancelling the penalties
which pertain to the breach of them without
exposing the victims to suffering and death.
the second and more important part of INV
moral Is that 1t is our duty to set I'D a higher
IDEAL or marriage so as to make such false and
disastrous marriages less frequent, and, in the
hnal result, impossible This is only to be done
Dy returning to the laws Of nature, by recognize
Ing the right OF woman to be an euuAl hartman.
never 10 be Dealt with In marriage as II she be-
longed either to her parent or her husband
=, IN oroer TO do this we have to go back to the
iGeai OF marriage promulgated by Christ. That
IDEAL Is very clearly defined. It is a return to
the law OF nature from the practise tolerated
by Moses out Of submission to the selfshness
and brute force of man. Mosaic law recognized
man right to property in his daughter and
his wife. Christ entirely denied It. From the
beginning 1t was not So" And when we look at
the strangely anachroniStio words which the
author OF Genesis puts into the mouth OF the
nrst man, Adam, we find the law of nature,
"nlch gives equality to the sexes, defined in
terms almost as clear and full as those OF our
Lord. Man in marriage is to put away father
and mother and cleave to his wife, and they two
are to be one flesh No question Of giving or
taxing, or separating, or buying and selling, no
suggestion of bill Of enforcement, OF sending
woman out OF the house and never taking her
back again after she has been deiled. And
Wnen our Lord has to answer an objection OF
HIS disciples, which is based on the old per-
nlclous humbug that man is the master, the
owner, the superior creature, who can take and
dismiss his wife according to his lordly will Il
she ceases to find favor In his sight, Christ's
words leave no room for uncertainty that in
true marriage he can do nothing of the kind
because the law Of God forbids 1t. Wherefore
they are no more twain but one fesh-what
therefore God hath Joined together let no man
put asunder"
Or course, shall be reminded Of the imita'
uon as to inhdelity but what troubles me very
Httle without being a Biblical scholar, and
having no idea of how that clause came to be
IN the text, reject It on grounds OF logic, OF
common sense and Of reverence for the mani.
TEST motive OF Christ. It reduces to absurdity
our Lords argument of a return TO the law OF
COO as 1t was at the beginning. It Furnishes tbs
SIN OF the unfaithtu woman, and leaves thS
same sin In the man unpublished. It Is cruel
because 1t makes the guilty wife suffer to the
END, no matter how bitterly she may have re-
pented, and 1t is tyrannical, because It inficts
nfe-iong penalties upon the innocent woman
Tor The crime Of the husband in divorcins her
IN word, 1t is folly in the place in when
II appears. whatever may be said for It IN an
other connection
therefore, | think the Catholic Church has
TAKEN the ooldest, 1rmest most logical vie"
OF the marriage bond, namely that It was In
tended by the founder of our faith to be iDdls'
soluble and that the efforts Of some Of the free
churches to square the needs of the modern
times with the ideal OF Christ fails, not only IN
logic and straightforwardness, but in compFe
hension Of the spirit Of mercy and justice 70
woman which inspired the Divine CommanG