Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1927-03-17
SPEAKING OF DIVORCE
Authorised RIGHT REV VILLA MANNING
Bishop OF York Protestant Episcopal ChHFch
ZOE BE(KI.EY
BY ZOE BECKLEY

let me say at once that separation
or man and wife, in case Of necessity
Is not forbidden by the Church. The
Church admits. and in some cases
even advises this II is divorce and
remarriage which the Church opposes
ana which is bringing such disastrous
consequences upon us"
The tones of Bishop Manning S
voice as he says this leave no doubt
whatever in the visitors mind that he
views the increase of divorce As a
curse upon this country. Women
adds the bishop, are the greatest SUI
ferers. He bases this upon more than
80 years of active experience as a
clergyman, living in many States and
working among all sorts and condl'
tons OF human beings.
incidentally, Bishop Manning has
small respect for Judge Ben r. Lind
sey's offering TO society in the form
OF the "companionate marriage
with which the veteran jurist of Den
YER has just startled the public. As a
matter of fact. Bishop Manning made
Judge Iindsey's suggestion the sub
Ject OF an address few weeks ago.
The Judge promptly challenged the
bishop by telegraph to a public debate
on marriage and divorce with view
to establishing the merits or other
wise of the "compa nionate marriage"
Bishop Manning's reply TO the
Judge of Denver's Juvenile and
Domestic Relations Courts was both
emphatic and final. 1t follows:
New York. February 8. 1927.
"The Honorable Ben r. Lindsey,
Denver, Colorado.
I'm reply to your telegram, | beg to
say that for Christians the moral
standards given to the world by
Christ are not open to debate. In
spite of your assertions to the con
trary, the temporary SO-called COM
panionate marriage advocated by
yourself and others is not marriage
but only another name for free love.
Your teachings would lead not for
ward but backward TO those condi-
lions which destroyed the old pagan
world. In your writings, you reject
and hold up TO contempt the
Christian ideal of morality and
purity. Such teaching is a sin
against God, an insult to the woman
hood and manhood of our land. and
should be condemned by all good citi-
gems"
We pointed out the sentiment Of
many good and sincere citizens in
favor Of divorce rather than against
1t, and Bishop Manning readily ad
Ahilo lhiS W tIuSy dituOuSn bittVtiy
deploring 1t.
1T Isl. said he, "a fact that as
Nation we are rapidly abandoning the
ideal OF monogamic marriage. The
proportion of divorces to marriages in
our country has reached appalling
figures.
I'VE all know that In a vast number
OF cases the real reason for divorce is
the desire to marry some one else. The
next so-called marriage is definitely
arranged for before the divorce is OBJ.
tanned. The moral degradation of this
situation needs no comment. If this
Is not legalized concubinage, what is
it,"
rs not" we asked Dr. Manning, "a
marriage where love has ceased to
exist Just as much legal concubinage?"
No" ne said ITO say that mar
riage should last only while love lasts,
in the sense in which that word is
commonly used, is not to hold up a
high ideal q marriage but to degrade
1t to q rsiAtsan terminable at the will
or at the ucfm of either party to it,
What of the wives" he went on,
who married in their youth men
whose fortunes they have helped build
and whose character they have tried
to develop and ennoble, whose children
they have borne and whose homes
they have made? Perhaps these wives
have lost their youthful freshness and
charm in the difficult battle of the
years. Perhaps the husband prefers
some younger, more attractive woman.
Shall the wife then be abandoned, that
the man may be free to form new
alliance?"
1t is obvious that often injustice is
done and misery created in such cases.
But we asked Bishop Manning If more
good might not come from divorce in
general than from a few cases In par
ticular? OF course, he would not agree
with that point of view, but we asked
the question just as we asked many
more, merely for the sake of expand
ing his arguments and for the sake
of having his answers to questions
which would naturally occur to those
who oppose his viewpoint.
only in the permanence of mar
riage," said he, '1ies the security of
woman. Her elevation and advance
ment have been synchronous with the
development OF monogamy. Upon this
the dignity and honor of womanhood
and wffehood depend"
How can this point be reconciled,"
we asked. with the opinion held by