When a man and a woman wed, they enter upon a relationship which in its origin and attendant blessings bears the stamp of divine approval. God, having created His living, breathing masterpiece, the first man, laid down this universal truth for all subsequent ages: "It is not good that the man should be alone" (Gen. 2:18); that is, it is not compatible with his highest happiness, his complete usefulness, to remain unmarried. This declaration of divine wisdom was then translated into divine action; God created for man a helpmate who corresponded to him physically, mentally, and spiritually. And when the first bride of all history was presented to the first groom, "the voice that breathed o’er Eden that earliest wedding-day" pronounced its primal blessing. This divine benediction, the majestic "And God blessed them," has become the sacred pledge of happiness in Christian marriage.
Marriage is not merely a civil, economic, or social arrangement and institution; it is, as the first pages of the Bible emphasize, God’s great gift to humanity. To speak disdainfully of married life, to invoke sarcasm upon it, is to exalt the puny errors of pigmy minds over the eternal truth of Heaven — to blaspheme God.
This radiant blessing is so deep-rooted that it shines through the barrage with which sin has beclouded the luster of holy matrimony. In all the hideous array of sins the most degenerate and destructive are those exhibitions of human perversity which cling to sex and marriage. Yet, though marred by these ugly gashes, blasphemed by unnatural sins, and betrayed by the inconsistencies that remain even in a Christ-centered life, marriage can still have much of its divine heritage and reflect part of the Edenic blessings.
The practical benefits of marriage, evident in many aspects of life, are particularly noteworthy in their promotion of personal well-being. The Health Department of the City of Chicago compiled these statistics to show the comparative health and longevity of men who are unmarried, married, or divorced:
Of every 1,000 divorced men in that city between the ages of 25 and 34, 15 died during a twelve-month period. Of a similar number of single men 5 died, and of 1,000 married men in parallel group only 4 died.
Taking the group between the ages of 35 and 44, of 1,000 in each class, 18 divorced, 14 single, and 7 married men died.
Next comes the age between 45 and 54. Whereas 37 divorced and 23 single men died in each 1,000 of this class, only 14 married men succumbed.
After middle age, between 55 and 64, in their respective groups of 1,000, 56 divorced, 49 bachelors, and only 29 married men died.
Of 1,000 men over 65 years old, 116 divorced, 112 single, but only 80 married men passed away.
Remarkable corroboration for these figures is furnished by vital statistics of England and Germany. In Great Britain, Prof. G. M. Robertson, president of the College of Physicians at Edinburgh, shows that married men between 25 and 55 on the average live four years longer than their unmarried brothers. Recent German health records grant a statistical five years more of life to the average married man and woman.
It is part of the professional duty of Dr. Eugene Lyman Fiske, medical director of the Life Extension Institute, New York, to establish the ratios of longevity in different occupations, sexes, and classes. His findings, like the following, are therefore of special significance: “The lives of married women are on the average a good deal longer than the lives of spinsters. The lives of married men are on the average longer than those of bachelors. . . . The death-rate of bachelors in middle life is twice that of married men. In the case of married women and spinsters we have this: The vast majority of married women are mothers. The spinsters represent a class of non-mothers. The function of maternity seems to involve a general bodily quickening, which is a help to health and longevity.”
A 1936 publication of the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company concludes "that the relatively staid and regular course of married life is healthier than the comparatively free and easy ways of the unmarried." This investigation shows that "among males over fifteen years of age the standardized death-rate for bachelors is 1,218.2 per 100,000 as compared with 855.9 for married men. Among females the standardized death-rate for spinsters is 1,039.1, as against 856.6 for the married of all ages.”
In Suicide Problems, Dr. Friedrich Hoffmann summarizes (p. 17): "It would seem that the single are more liable to suicide than the married, while the rate is apparently highest among the divorced."
The well-ordered life in a normal marriage, together with the obvious physical benefits which accrue from regular and carefully prepared meals, the supervision of personal habits, and the physical benefits of home-life give the husband and wife a well-sustained basis for health which the unmarried often forfeit. When the city of Weinsberg was besieged in December of 1140 and the brave women had finally secured permission from Conrad III to leave the city together with their most precious possession, they marched out in one of the strangest parades history has witnessed: each wife carried her husband to life and liberty. In a less dramatic manner many self-effacing wives have borne their husbands out of the siege of prolonged illness and chronic indisposition. Katherine Luther is reported to have said that she was very happy to cook for her distinguished husband herself, because almost every time he left Wittenberg on one of his numerous trips, he took sick.
Again, when the Scriptures denounce the willful abstinence from marriage they have the support of sociological research in the field of morals. The investigation of 200,000 arrests in Detroit covering a seven-year period reveals, according to Solon H. Rose of the Detroit Bureau of Governmental Research, that the "rate of arrest of single men for vagrancy is eleven times that of married men; robbery by violence, six times greater; drunkenness, three and a half times greater; gambling, three times greater; disorderly conduct, three times greater; simple larceny, three times greater; immorality, two and a half times greater." Similarly, Prof. William Fielding Ogburn of Columbia University testifies that married men are less liable to commit crimes than bachelors. Prison statistics and the census of penitentiaries have consistently shown a preponderance of unmarried criminals in both sexes.
We need not search far afield for an explanation; the stabilizing influences of Christian marriage are all too evident. The man whose life is blessed with the love of a trusting wife and dependent children, or the woman who is concerned about meeting her duties as wife and mother, will find that marriage offers both a constant check on wrong and a powerful incentive for right. In addition, the moral vigilance of a solicitous husband or wife, the more permanent ties of a home, the more responsible position that marriage commands in society, — these factors inevitably tend to restrict crime.
The French writer and liberalist De Tocqueville confessed to a friend: "I cannot describe to you the happiness yielded in the long run by the habitual society of a woman in whose soul all that is good in your own is reflected naturally and even improved. When I say or do a thing which seems to me to be perfectly right, I read immediately in Marie's countenance an expression of proud satisfaction which elevates me; and so when my conscience reproaches me, her face instantly clouds over. Although I have great power on her mind, I see with pleasure that she awes me; and so long as I love her as I do now, I am sure that I shall never allow myself to be drawn into anything that is wrong."
History shows that every age of national immorality has been marked by a breakdown of marriage ideals. In Greece, with the collapse of decency in the fourth century, marriage was spurned by many as a cumbersome restriction. In the Augustan age of Rome, despite legal enactments designed to lead people into matrimony, devious methods of escape were invented, and it was only with utmost disdain that the upper social castes in the corrupted empire regarded family life. Is it not profoundly significant that the greatest crime wave in American history is inundating our country at a time when marital ideals have dropped to their lowest level? There must be a deep and direct connection between marriage and morality; for as soon as marriage and home-life crumble and collapse, crime rides high.
Count Keyserling, hailed by many as one of the world's greatest thinkers, repeating Cicero's famous maxim that a man cannot devote himself both to a wife and to philosophy, charged that marriage is a check on mental progress. He declared: "The man who aspires to greatness must never marry; for marriage overwhelmingly defeats all individuality in a man, makes his thoughts subservient to those of his wife, and precludes all possibility of the exercise of genius.” "During eight hundred years of the world's history," he told an American audience, "no man of spirit ever married. He entered a monastery instead. Marriage makes man a slave. . . ." When accosted by the paradox of his own life (Count Keyserling married the granddaughter of Germany's Iron Chancellor, Bismarck), he explained: "True, I am married, but I married late in life. I had an opportunity to think, to give vent to my ideas, unhampered by a woman's meager intelligence. Has there ever been a great woman thinker — a really great one? No."
In a similar vein Blanche Colton Williams, Ph.D., of the English Department, Hunter College, New York City, is quoted as asserting: "I am a spinster, and I'm glad of it. All my life I've been dodging love and working my head off, ... I know several famous writers who have deliberately sidestepped motherhood because they wanted to keep their creative energy for mental work."
These claims, attributing a superior ability to the unmarried, are contradicted by decisive facts. Prof. G. M. Robertson has compiled evidence to show that between the ages of 25 and 55 disordered minds are almost three times as common among single people as among the married. He summarizes: "One may conclude from this low incidence of insanity that the condition of marriage is the most favorable mode of existence for both men and women." A 1936 report by Dr. James Paige of Columbia University and Dr. Carney Landis of the New York Psychiatric Institute, based on the records of mental hospitals in New York State and Massachusetts, concludes that the insanity rate among divorced people is four times as high as among the married, among the widowed three times as high, and among the unmarried twice as high as among the married.
In imposing array, men of eminence have acknowledged the mental stimulation of marriage. Thomas Hood, the English poet, wrote these words of tribute to his wife: "I never was anything, Dearest, till I knew you, and I have been a better, happier, and more prosperous man ever since. Lay by that truth in lavender, Sweetest, and remind me of it when I fail. I am writing warmly and fondly, but not without good cause. . . . Perhaps there is an afterthought that, whatever may befall me, the wife of my bosom will have the acknowledgment of her tenderness, worth, excellence, — all that is wifely or womanly, — from my pen." Huber, the Swiss naturalist, blinded from his early youth, conducted his observations on the study of bees through the eyes of his wife. Dr. Edwin Brant Frost, director of Yerkes Observatory for twenty-seven years when he retired in 1932, was known as the "blind astronomer." For fifteen years after he lost his eyesight he continued to sweep the heavens and survey celestial bodies with an exactness that attracted wide attention. His wife assisted him in these studies, and it was largely through her eyes that he could continue to observe the stars and the planets. In many more instances than the world knows, a devoted, far-sighted wife has brought out latent talents, released and promoted the progress of her husband.
In short, take any list of human greatness, the Hall of Fame in New York City, Who's Who in America, a list of the preeminent American statesmen, patriots, inventors, authors, scientists, and others who have contributed to the physical, moral, or intellectual progress of the nation, and the overwhelming preponderance of those who are married will utterly refute any theory of special genius development outside wedded life.
If it were possible to make a roster of the converts brought into the Church through the prayers and the example of a Christian husband or wife, the total would be amazing. This guidance is one of the most helpful missionary agencies. Frequently of course a Christian husband does not influence his unbelieving wife in this way, and St. Paul warns explicitly against any overconfidence in post marital conversions: "For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? Or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?" (1 Cor. 7:16.) But St. Peter recognizes the importance of Christian conduct in marital relations and explicitly instructs believing wives throughout the Church to walk in humility and obedience, so that unbelieving husbands may "be won by the conversation of the wives while they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear." (1 Pet. 3:1, 2.)
Typical of those who have been shown the mercies of Heaven through the devotion of a Christian wife is John Bunyan. To his life-mate he pays this tribute: "My mercy was to light upon a wife whose father and mother were accounted godly. This woman and I, though we came together as poor as poor might be (not having so much household stuff as a dish or a spoon betwixt us both), yet she had for her part The Plain Man's Pathway to Heaven and The Practice of Piety, which her father had left her when he died."
Spurgeon wrote to his wife: "I have served the Lord for more and never less for your sweet companionship! ... You are as an angel of God to me.... Bravest of women, strong in the faith, you have ministered unto me. . . . God bless thee out of the seventh heaven!"
Once when George Whitefield was preaching in the open air, he was attacked by a gang of ruffians, who approached him with threats and began to pick up stones. "Then," so Whitefield himself describes the scene, "my wife, who was standing beside me, pulled my coat and said, ‘George, play the man for your God!’ My confidence returned. I again spoke to the multitude with boldness and affection. They became still, and many were affected."
Alexander Maclaren, illustrious British preacher, who died in 1910 at the age of eighty-four, enshrined his wife in this glorious memorial: "In 1856 Marion Maclaren became my wife. God allowed us to be together till 1884. Others could speak of her charm, her beauty, her gifts, and her goodness. Most of what she was to me is forever locked in my heart. But I would fain that it should be told that the best part of what I have been able to do all came and comes from her."
Every assault on marriage is a direct arraignment of the Christian religion, just as any assault on Christianity stretches the line of attack to the home sector. The immediate consequence of the atheistic revolt in Russia against God and His Anointed was the attempt to demolish Christian home-life. Not one of the anti-marriage agitators is distinguished for Christian faith.
On the other hand, it can be shown that the conservative principles of marriage make for deeper spirituality. It is not the childless family that forms the backbone of the Church, nor are men and women who have been divorced for reasons not recognized by the Scriptures distinguished for their sense of religious responsibility.
Marriage has also served as a stimulus to progress and advancement in business. The second edition of America's Young Men, published in 1936, may be cited as authority for this statement. From a list of more than 20,000 young men under forty-five years, 6,010 distinguished biographies were selected for inclusion in that volume. The publishers' statement declares: “Those whose biographies appear were chosen because their records were ones of achievement and deserving of national recognition. Our established policy, rigidly adhered to, makes it impossible for any one to purchase a listing."
This new biographical record of outstanding young men in America embraces such public figures as Robert M. Hutchins, president of the University of Chicago; Milton E. Lord, librarian, Boston Public Library; Robert La Follette, Jr., U. S. Senator from Wisconsin; Philip La Follette, ex-governor of Wisconsin; Henry Morgenthau, Jr., Secretary of the Treasury; Henry R. Luce, president and editor of Time and Fortune.
A statistical investigation of the names found in this Who’s Who of the younger generation shows that 87 per cent (or 5,229) of the men listed are married, — a remarkable preponderance, in view of the large number of younger men among the 781 unmarried who, we may reasonably expect, will sooner or later establish their own homes.
Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain does not hesitate to acknowledge the indebtedness which he owed to his wife for his successful diplomatic career. Back in 1933, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, he said of Mrs. Chamberlain, at whose urgent request he had left his business in Birmingham to enter the diplomatic service of his country: "She has shared all my plans; she has been privy to all my secrets; she has never divulged one, she never will. She has rejoiced in my success. She has encouraged me in my disappointments. She has warned me of dangerous courses, and she has never allowed me to forget that humanity underlies all of politics."
The help on the pathway of achievement which comes through the love of a far-sighted wife is acknowledged by the tribute which the late President Ripley of the Santa Fe Railroad paid to Mrs. Ripley at a testimonial dinner on his seventieth birthday. "It was a notable gathering of men," an eye-witness tells us; "I think every large railroad in the United States was represented, and it was evident that the praise bestowed upon Mr. Ripley, although well deserved, was causing him much embarrassment, as he was essentially a modest man. I was sitting next to his son, Robert M. Ripley, and he was about as much embarrassed as his father. ‘Father will break down under this; he cannot stand much praise,’ he remarked to me several times during the dinner.
"When it came time for Mr. Ripley to respond, — and he was not given to public speaking, — much concern was felt for him; but instead of breaking down, referring to his own work or to the compliments which had been paid to him, he began his remarks as follows:
" 'Before proceeding, I desire here to pay tribute to her who forty-four years ago joined her fortunes to mine and who ever since has provided the comforts and rest of a quiet home; who twice has accompanied me through the valley of the shadow of death; who has watched over me mentally, morally, and physically; and who is mainly responsible for such success as I have had in conserving mind and body. I ask you, friends, to join in drinking the health of my wife.’
"The effect on his hearers was electric. You could have heard a pin drop in the room. Up to that time nobody had noticed Mrs. Ripley, who was sitting alone in a box, evidently more concerned with her husband’s health than anything else. All eyes of course were turned upon her, and at the close of his tribute the audience rose and drank to her health and happiness."
By the general consent of men of all races, colors, and climes, marriage is normally regarded as an effective pledge for human happiness. Many have affected a superior sophistication, it is true, and have confidently boasted that their independence would never be marred by family duties. The Greeks told of Stratocles, that bitter misogynist, who hated all women with such a perfect hatred that, "if thou hadst heard him, thou wouldst have loathed thine own mother and sister." Yet along came Myrilla, the daughter of Anticles, the gardener, and Stratocles shaved off his patriarchal beard and donned a laurel crown to camouflage a hairless head.
"Pagan history!" some one objects. Yet Livingstone, at the outset of his Odyssey into equatorial Africa, was firm in his resolution to remain a celibate. He insisted: "Although I was at first inclined to be foolish, there is nobody worth taking off one's hat to. Daughters of missionaries have miserably contracted minds. Colonial ladies are worse and worse." However, he changed his verdict on missionaries' girls when he met Mary, daughter of Dr. Moffat, the great South African missionary. She was only "a matter-of-fact lady, a little thick, black-haired girl, yet," he added, "one that I want."
"But," it is argued, "modern marriage does not bring happiness.” And there are many unhappy unions; for wherever the ennobling power of the Savior's faith is neglected, the selfishness of sin can provoke friction and invite discord. Yet entirely apart from the religious issues involved, it can be demonstrated that there is normally much human happiness in marriage. Dr. Katherine B. Davis (Factors in the Sex Life of 2,200 Women) tells us that among 1,000 married women questioned, 876 classified themselves as happy. Studies among the 1,200 unmarried women showed that a considerable portion felt the desire for marriage and its happiness.
History is replete with notable examples of the happiness that marriage has brought. The statesman Burke declared: "Every care vanishes the moment I enter under my own roof,” while Washington Irving, a bachelor, admitted that he regarded himself as less fitted to bear the ills of life's misfortunes.
J. Ramsay MacDonald, former British Premier, penned this glowing tribute to his wife: "To turn to her in stress and storm was, like going into a sheltered haven where waters were at rest. . . . Weary and worn, buffeted and discouraged, thinking of giving up the thankless strife, ... I would flee with her to my Buckinghamshire home, and my lady would heal and soothe me with her cheery faith and steady conviction and send me forth to smite and be smitten. No one, not even I, can tell with accuracy how much of the steadiness there is in the labor movement in this country is due to her."
While the outcome of an election was pending, Theodore Roosevelt wrote to his sister these lines (quoted in Dahlberg: Youth and the Homes of Tomorrow), which portray the source of happiness he found in his home and family: "As I went up the White House steps, Edith came to meet me at the door, and I suddenly realized that, after all, no matter what the outcome of the election was, that, even though my ambition to have the seal of approval put upon my administration might not be gratified, my happiness was assured; for my life with Edith and my children constitutes my happiness."
When David Lloyd George and his wife returned to Wales after celebrating their golden wedding in the south of France, Welsh friends gathered to honor their distinguished countryman. At this time the noted statesman said, first humorously, but then in all seriousness:
"Marriage is the greatest and oldest partnership in the world. It is the best and truest friendship in the world; it carries one through the troubles, bothers, and worries of the world, and it is one of the very few institutions which enable people whose dispositions or temperaments are exactly the opposite to live in perfect harmony for fifty years.
"I need hardly say that my wife and I are of different temperaments. One of us is contentious, combative, and stormy. [Laughter.] That is my wife. Then there is the other partner, placid, calm, peaceful, and patient. That is I. [Laughter.]
"But in spite of the fundamental differences in our dispositions we have lived in perfect harmony for fifty years."
The Evangelical Christian of Toronto, Canada, explaining that the fundamental basis of this union is Christian faith, states: "During the hectic days of the war, when the responsibility rested on this man, he was never unduly perturbed by the course of events but found strength and comfort in divine things and in the singing of old Gospel hymns. His home-life was happy, and in the Christian fellowship and help of his wife he could bear such burdens as few men are ever called upon to carry."
"Her price is far above rubies," is the Scriptural estimate of a virtuous wife (Prov. 31:10), and as an understandable pride comes with the possession of precious rubies, so the joy of marriage, "honorable in all," reaches to incomparable heights.
With all these multiplied blessings it comes as a distinct shock to realize that the Roman Catholic Church and certain groups within the Church of England, still insist that the deeper spiritual life and the higher happiness is found in the unmarried state. The Roman Church, by misinterpretation of Eph. 5:32, has given matrimony the dignity of a sacrament; but in misinterpretation of other passages it permits the Council of Trent to anathematize all who insist "that it is not better and more blessed to remain in virginity or in celibacy than to be united in matrimony" (Sess. 14, c. 10).
In support of these claims, reference is constantly made to certain statements of St. Paul, notably this advice given "by permission and not of commandment": "I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I." (1 Cor. 7:8.) To find in these words a general endorsement of the unmarried state as a superior holiness is entirely unfounded; for the apostle's general, normal rule has already been stated: "Let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband." (1 Cor. 7:2.) Now, "by permission," he added a personal, qualifying remark, in which, because of the extraordinary dangers of his day, he expressed the wish that those who had not entered wedlock remain unmarried, so that they could engage wholly in the work of the Church. But the apostle realized that this complete dedication was possible only in exceptional individuals, and he hastened to add for the benefit of those who do not share this continence, "Let them marry.” {L.c., 9.) To distort the personal opinion of the apostle, permitted by the Spirit (words which he regards as applicable only to the restricted class of humanity capable of the same forbearance), into a sweeping endorsement of the unmarried state is to do violence to the plain meaning of the text. Today, too, we may repeat the apostle’s suggestion as our opinion and say that it is good for those who have this degree of continence to sacrifice the pleasures of home-life in complete dedication to the higher interests of the Church. But we must also ask, How many can qualify under these requirements? It takes the all-consuming heroism of a spiritual Titan like St. Paul. Remember the pronouncement of our Lord in Matt. 19:11.
On the contrary, celibacy is condemned by that sweeping, all-comprehensive verdict which the divine Creator immortalized in the opening records of human history: “It is not good that the man should be alone.” (Gen. 2:18.) No limitations, no qualifications, no restrictions, in this all-embracing statement of divine wisdom! Even more specifically, as though the Holy Spirit had anticipated the belittling of marriage, does St. Paul declare (1 Tim. 3:2): “A bishop . . . must be blameless, the husband of one wife.” And to brand contrary teachings with divine disapproval, St. Paul tells us "that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, ... having their conscience seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry and commanding to abstain from meats" (1 Tim. 4:1), — two Roman and High Church doctrines.
In harmony with these plain Scriptural statements we find that Peter, hailed as the first Pope, was married (Matt. 8:14). Early bishops were likewise married; early church councils refused to demand or even endorse celibacy; and before the admixture of paganized survivals, in which nuns were to take the place of vestal virgins and monks the position of the celibate priests of Apollo, Christianity, with the exception of some heretical teachers, upheld with one voice the sanctity and the blessing of marriage.
On moral grounds likewise celibacy deserves condemnation. This glorification of the unmarried life has been responsible for more misery, bodily and spiritual suffering, and clerical obscenity than can be estimated. It submerged the clergy under a flood of unspeakable sins, so that a careful historian, whose technical accuracy is commended even by the Encyclopedia Britannica, writes: "The records of the Middle Ages are accordingly full of the evidences that indiscriminate license of the worst kind prevailed throughout every rank of the hierarchy." (Henry Chase Lea, History of Sacerdotal Celibacy, V:I, 423.)
The clerical rejection of marriage spread its destructive influences among the laity. The judgment of careful historical investigation is this: "In thus reviewing the influences which a nominally celibate clergy exercised over those entrusted to their care, it is perhaps scarcely too much to conclude that they were largely responsible for the laxity of morals which is a characteristic of medieval society. No one who has attentively examined the records left to us of that society can call in question the extreme prevalence of the licentiousness which everywhere infected it." (Lea, l.c p. 440.)
In addition to weakening the morals of both the clergy and the laity, this vilification of marriage explains much of the retardation of the Dark Ages. The repression of natural impulses and the glorification of asceticism, the repudiation of the blessings of family life, and the corresponding tolerance of brazen vileness, — all these combined to establish a code of conduct which of necessity blasted away the benefits of progress and intellectual development. Celibacy helped to mold a philosophy expressed in the life of a monk in the Carthusian order in Normandy who cultivated lice and maggots in the filth of his hairy garments and who, in priding himself on his unmarried holiness, often permitted the vermin to crawl over his face.
No wonder that all clear-thinking men agree with sentiments like those expressed by Theodore Roosevelt in his American Ideals (p.320): "All religions and all forms of religion in which the principle of asceticism receives any marked development are positively antagonistic to the development of the social organism." No wonder that from time to time enlightened minds within the Catholic Church have risen up to petition the abolition of compulsory celibacy. For long periods the Uniat churches of the Greek rite enjoyed the privilege of having a married clergy. The Uniat congregations recognize the papacy and subscribe to all Roman Catholic doctrines and are an integral part of that Church; but by the Treaty of Unghvar, 1646, its clergy was accorded the right to marry before ordination.
A modern contrast instructively emphasizes the blessings of a married clergy. From facts secured by the publishers of Who's Who in America it appears that of all the distinguished Americans listed in this roster of contemporaneous distinction one out of every nine is the son of a clergyman. This does not include those cases — and they were not inconsiderable in number — in which the father was described as "farmer and preacher” or "teacher and preacher.” Applying this ratio to the general population and to specific groups, it is seen that "clergymen fathered fully twenty-eight times the average number of notables,” as Who's Who computes notability. Clergymen of the last generation contributed proportionately 2,400 times as many eminent sons as did unskilled laborers, thirty-five times as many as farmers, four times as many as business men, and over twice as many as the average of other professional men.
Dr. Clarence G. Campbell, president of the Eugenics Research Association, in his address at the 1930 annual meeting in New York City, declared: "We know from reliable, factual data that the best quality of leaders rises, and rises in the greatest frequency, from the progeny of the clergy.” The Boston Herald, upholding this claim, brings the following compilation: "Three of the Presidents of the United States came from the homes of clergymen, and seven daughters of clergymen have held the proud position of mistress of the White House. Of Senators and Representatives the parsonage has fathered a multitude. John Hancock and eight other 'signers’ were born of clergymen fathers. More sons of ministers than any other class have become the heads of colleges and schools in America. The Wright brothers of airplane fame were sons of a United Brethren bishop. Charles Evans Hughes, Cyrus W. Field, Henry James, the novelist, and William James, the psychologist, Lyman Abbott, Edward Everett Hale, Stephen J. Field, and David J. Brewer of the Supreme Court Bench, all were sons of clergymen.
"Inscribed in the Hall of Fame in New York are now sixty-five names, and of these ten are the names of sons of the clergy, and one was a daughter of the manse. Ralph Waldo Emerson came from a long line of clergymen; Jonathan Edwards was the founder of one of the most remarkable families in the history of the United States; Henry Clay was the son of a Baptist clergyman; James Russell Lowell was the son of the Rev. Charles Lowell; the father of Samuel F. B. Morse was a minister in Charlestown; the father of George Bancroft was the son of the Rev. Aaron Bancroft; Henry Ward Beecher was the son, and Harriet Beecher Stowe the daughter, of ‘old Lyman Beecher’; Francis Parkman's father was a Boston clergyman; Oliver Wendell Holmes was the son of the Rev. Abiel Holmes; and Louis Agassiz was the son of a Protestant pastor of a parish in Switzerland. Eleven in sixty-five is 17 per cent. Can scions of any other occupation surpass it?”
The English roster of distinguished children of the parsonage includes in the British literary circles Ben Jonson, Oliver Goldsmith, Joseph Addison, William Cowper, Samuel Coleridge, Henry Hallam, James A. Froude, William Hazlitt, Alfred Lord Tennyson, Matthew Arnold, and the three Bronte sisters. Other notable Englishmen who are the offspring of clergymen are Sir Christopher Wren, Sir Joshua Reynolds, Cecil Rhodes, Dr. Edward Jenner, Sir Wilfred Grenfell.
When Rudyard Kipling died on January 17, 1936, press biographers took front-page space to tell us that both of his grandfathers were ministers and to furnish this account of the close association of this clerical: family with the cultural life of England: "His mother was one of four daughters of the Rev. George B. Macdonald, all destined to marriages which brought them roles in the cultural history of England. Georgiana married Sir Edward Burne-Jones when that noted painter's possessions totaled about $150; Agnes became the wife of Edward Poynter, just as impecunious then as Bume-Jones, but who later achieved the presidency of the Royal Academy and became a baronet; Louise, herself an etcher, married Alfred Baldwin, ironmaster, and her son, Stanley Baldwin, became the second man in British history to hold the prime ministership four times. The fourth sister, Alice, fell in love with John Lockwood Kipling, a designer of terra-cotta and a student in the art schools at Kensington."
No lengthy comment is thus required to emphasize the sound home influences radiated from Christian parsonages. The contributions to human advancement made by the children of clergymen are telling blows against celibacy.
Suppose for a moment that the ideals of celibacy were carried through to their logical extremes, that a program of matrimonial anarchism could be enforced and that in revolt against Bible standards Christian marriage were utterly obliterated. The resultant picture would be hideous beyond imagination. The ties of patriotism that have always bound men and women to their native land would be broken; for the adoption of theories tending toward laxity in private life are frequently accompanied by agitations for internationalism, pacifism, and parallel flare-ups. (Witness Bertrand Russell's repeated invectives against pure patriotism.) In the temple of national ideals marital purity is fundamental. Tear it down, and the whole structure, with all its healthy emotions, topples into ruins; for when selfish materialism becomes the dominating factor in any philosophy of life, it immediately bans all benevolent or patriotic aspirations. ,
The further recoil from the paganized pursuit of lust, which would eliminate marriage, is the stifling of the emotions of true love. If God has rested His blessings on the ordinance of holy matrimony, His vindictive judgment has placed its stabbing curse on those who in word and deed assail its holiness. The scavenger who paws about in the sewage loses his capacity for the appreciation of the clean and the beautiful. Ears that have been perpetually tuned to foul-mouthed blasphemies and profanity will fail to respond to the melodies of dulcet harmony. The sensualist, whose norm is not the Law of God, but the pandering to animal impulses, may speak glibly of his new freedom and the happiness which gratification affords; in truth his jaded outlook on life is so saturated by lust that he is utterly incapable of experiencing the thrill of purity, truth, and beauty.
As we survey this nightmare of lust conjured up by the picture of a world arrayed against the Scriptural family ethics, we turn with grateful relief to the divine benediction embodied in Christian marriage. "And He blessed them!" Let this truth guide the Church's youth as it looks at marriage in a confused day.