Let me answer the last query first. I do not think the union of true
lovers apart from marriage is impure. I believe that such lovers make a
very serious mistake--a mistake that may turn out to have been cruel. I
believe that society is utterly right in condemning such unions, and
that those who really understand will always refuse to enter on them.
But impure is not the word to apply to them. They are clean and
beautiful compared to the bodily intimacies of those who marry without
love. And yet I do not think that even emotionally they can ever be
perfect. Sexual intimacy is not the perfect and sacramental thing which
it is meant to be unless both parties come to it with free and
untroubled minds, feeling that what they do is a right and happy thing.
But in the unions of unmarried persons there generally lurks some
half-hidden sense of shame. Some part of the being of one or the other
really endorses society's standards, and even love cannot dispel the
shadows thus created.

And yet still that does not meet the challenge to show the _reason_ for
society's standard. The reasons are really many. In the first place, if
unmarried lovers take steps to prevent their intimacy from having its
due fruit in a child, they are robbing their experience of its fine
spontaneity, and introducing an element of calculation and caution into
what should be a thing unbound. While, on the other hand, if they do
not prevent the coming of a child they are, in the present state of
society, doing a definite and cruel wrong to their own offspring. To
love a child dearly and to know that by your own act you have
handicapped it in life from the first must be a bitter experience
indeed. I am well aware that law in regard to illegitimate children is
unchristian. Even more is the attitude of society to them unchristian.
But so long as things remain as they are, the parents of an