But temporary unions cannot be ended
happily. If they were entered on without love, they are gross things,
as I have already said; and if they were the creation of real love,
there is no happy way out of them. The two have been too close to one
another to part without tearing apart--leaving ragged and it may be
bleeding edges on their personalities. Then again, as I have tried to
show already, love is only made perfect when it is allowed to issue in
responsibilities and labors. Divorced from them it is a selfish thing.
There is a wild and lawless element in passion, which is part of its
glory. But that glory is only sweetened and justified for those who let
their passion carry them through the whole career of experience to
which it summons them.
All this may be accepted as establishing a case for permanent unions as
the only legitimate things, but inasmuch as it claims that the demand
for permanence lies in the very heart of love itself it may still be
asked with some urgency, "Why introduce a marriage ceremony with public
vows?" And here I must follow a somewhat different line of thought
which may at first sight seem contradictory.
Pages:
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93