“COMPANIONATE”

Evening Star, Issue 19658, 10 September 1927, Page 13

“COMPANIONATE”

, TRIAL MARRIAGE SHAMEFUL AND DAMHABLE " PRELATES CONDEMN. In America,. the land of extremes, there has been of Jato much commotion over a problem that has troubled philosophers since the world began—the problem of marriage. Judge Lindsay, whoso _ work at the Juvenile Court in Denver has brought him world fame, started tho trouble when he advocated “companionate marriages.” Thereupon the Anglican and Roman Catholic Churches, tho Ku Ivlux Klan, under the leadership of its Grand Dragon (in private life a rather mild Baptist minister), the Episcopal Church, and a host of others set out, metaphorically, to tear tho judge to shreds. Mr H. G. Wells, who has the greatest difficulty in keeping out of any scrap of this nature, thundered ilis defence of Judge Lindsay across the Atlantic. Others took up the cry, and soon there was a great hullabaloo. _What is companionate marriage? Will it undermine the foundations of society, and bring our social system l to the dust? Or will it make for a freer and happier race of people? One of the most tragic occurrences, an unhappy marriage, lias been made the subject of countless jokes,' ranging from squalling babies to ascetic mothers-in-law. _ In some quarters complete, happiness in married life is looked upon as impossible. Certainly,' the congested business at the Divorce Courts makes sorry reading. Yet, in spite of all its shortcomings, the institution of marriage has survived, and youth and maid still enter tho holy bonds in as great numbers as over. The furniture shops, tho house agents, the sellers of player pianos do a bigger trade than ever before. The clergy, even in these days of registry offices, aro still sure of *one avenue of | business. I Tho urge for the companionship of tho opposite sex is as natural as the urge to eat and sleep and work. Marriage, with all its possibilities for unhappiness, offers at least the chanco of this companionship, and, either blinded by the love of tho moment, or else encouraged by a sporting instinct that the odds are about even, most 'couples take tho plunge, often after long hesitation. It is a plunge that is all but irretrievable. It spells either lifelong joy, eternal strife, or an unsatisfactory existence for both. The young couple are totally inexperienced in what is before them, and in many cases the cry of “ If only we’d known,” rings out in anguish—too late. MARRIAGE ON PROBATION. It is here that Judge Lindsay offers hiy solution in tho lonn of tho compaiiionafo marriage. ft is really a legalised form of marriage-on-proba-tion for a period of twelve months. In that time, ho argues, tho parties should know whether they are mutually adapted. If they are then a legal marriage should follow as a natural thing. If they are not, thou they are free to part, and, he argues, the life--1 Jong unhappiness of tiro people will have been averted, hi is system, ho claims, would obviate the evils of toolong delayed marriages. The churches, however, have presented an almost united front to the judge’s proposal, and, making common cause, Catholics, Episcopalians, and Baptists have ranged themselves against What Mr Wells calls the courageous revision of the marital tie. Father M'Menamin, who is one of the leading clergy in Denver, was formerly a staunch supporter of Judge Lindsay’s work in the Juvenile Court, in the face of hostility from the Ku Klux Klan. Now lie is a bitter opponent of tho judge. Father M'Menamin bedeves that marriage, in its true sense, .makes ior the highest social and personal good. It is something holy,, never to he broken, never to be" trifled with. There must be no half-way measures. There must bo no faltering. It is all or nothing. Tile practice of birth control, he claims, minimises fidelity. He and his friends think that companionate marriages- will load to loose living, to a lowering of ethical' standards, to a general social debasement. NEW YORK BISHOP SPEAKS. Further away from Denver another bitter and outspoken antagonist of the now idea has come forth, and his denunciations have been cabled to alt parts of tho world. This is Dr William T. Manning, Episcopal Bishop ol New York. On the eve of his departure last Juno for England and Hie Continent, ho characterised the suggestion of companionate marriages as “shameful and damnable.” “ There seems to be,” lie said, “a group in tho church itself which holds that tho church may consider with open mind sanctioning fornication ; among our young people with tho use of birth control to guard against tho coming of children. This is, in plain words, what the high-sounding ’ companionate marriage ’ means.” Then, referring to the' building of a new cathedral in New York, the Bishop said: “If i thought that the church would listen with ‘open mind’ to such a proposal as this I would not lilt another linger for the building of the cathedral, or for any other cause in the church.” Recently Bishop Manning, in a sermon at the American Church in Paris, again referred to the subject. He vigorously condemned trial marriage as nothing but “ a perfectly brazen proposal to sanction prostitution and legalise free love, having its headquarters in Russia, whose avowed purpose is to destroy morality and religion.” Before leaving the subject, one may remark that tho device is not new, and that in a modified form it was practised in ancient Rome, where persons who bad lived together for a year, without having been absent for three continuous nights, wore considered married.—-Sydney ‘Sun.’