For the 18^th century archival project, my group edited a piece titled “A Discourse on Fornication: Showing the Greatness of that Sin; and Examining the Excuses pleased for it, from the Examples of Ancient Times” by J. Turner. According to the title page, J. Turner was a Church lecturer, and this pamphlet was printed at the request of the churchgoers. It is likely that this was a  sermon that J. Turner gave, and afterwards the members of the parish wanted a copy of it for further study. The printing press would be the only efficient way to distribute this lecture. This information also suggests that Turner is writing for a very small audience that he knows well and shares religious beliefs with. This text explores the roles of concubines in the Bible and has a conservative approach to marriage, divorce, and sexuality. According to Turner, only first marriages are legitimate. If a person were to divorce and remarry, they would be committing adultery. However, “they mention of Abraham, and Jacob, and Solomon, and Jephtha that had Concubines and yet they are Characterized in Scripture for Good Men, and highly favour’d of God” (Turner 15). The inclusion of concubines and second wives in the Bible complicate Turner’s assertion that only first marriages are legitimate, since these sins did not diminish the greatness of ancient kings and prophets. While concubines exist in the Bible, Turner’s final assertion is that people should abstain from fornication, that marriage should be upheld, and God will deal with the adulterers and prostitutes (Turner 33). These three claims reaffirms the beliefs on marriage that would have been held by his audience at the church he was reading this to.

According to Roy Porter’s work English Society in the 18^th Century, double standards for wives regarding adultery and divorce were both socially acceptable and part of the legal institution. A man could have an affair without it tarnishing his reputation while a woman could be ruined for being adulterous. For legal purposes, it was extremely important that women remain loyal to their husbands because their infidelity could create a false heir (Porter 25). Porter also points out that this double standard was also supported in divorce laws because “a wife’s adultery was ground enough in law for divorce, but not vice versa” (Porter 25). Turner pushes against this by emphasizing the spiritual importance of both husbands and wife remaining loyal in their marriage.  For Turner, the inclusion of concubines and second wives in the Bible do not support Christian men having extramarital sexual relations. While this argument does suggest a kind of equality, it also eliminates any possibility for divorce which could be disastrous for men and women alike. Divorce already was seldom granted and only under extreme circumstances which did not include abuse, and Turner’s argument takes it this even further.

After reading Turner’s speech, I was wondering what his alternatives to divorce were. It is overly optimistic to assume that everyone will have a loving or even mutually respectful marriage, especially during the eighteenth century when women were regarded as property. As a twenty-first century, largely secular individual, it seems overly cruel to mandate that a person must stay in an awful marriage out of fear of offending God. If an individual were to get divorced and live a life of celibacy, would that be a suitable solution since there would be no “adulterous” fornication? This would be extremely hard to enforce, and would probably only work under if the divorced individuals entered a community like a monastery. Turner also does not explore annulment as an option for ending marriage, though it may be more suitable since this decision comes from a church figure rather than a legal entity. Annulment could also be suitable because it erases a marriage rather than legally separating the couple. Turner uses many Biblical examples to build and defend his argument against divorce, and knows how to appeal to his religious audience. However, his argument is not practical enough to have an impact on the larger society who may not share the same religious beliefs. While it took many years for it to become more equal and accessible to men and women, divorce laws were eventually reformed to reflect the societal need to get out of marriages. Turner makes a sound argument, but an ultimately impossible one because he does not consider the reality of the state of 18^th-century marriages.

Works Cited:

Porter, Roy. English Society in the Eighteenth Century. Second Ed. New York: Penguin. 1990. Print.

Turner, J. “A Discourse on Fornication: Showing the Greatness of that Sin; and Examining the Excuses pleaded for it, from the Examples of Ancient Times”.  London. 1698. 18thConnect. Web. Accessed April 2016.