3440. Overhead a little to the left, behind, those were exhibited who desire promiscuous marriage due to the persuasion that all good should be shared property, thus marriages too, and that matrimonies are entered into only so that [the parties] may live together and so that the offspring may be brought up as theirs, even if they belonged to others.
On being asked what he felt about that life-style, by which good is thus common property, he replied just as had been expected, that he did not reject it, saying of course neither did he approve of it, but still that he did not condemn it, because all good is common property.
That he was of this opinion, as well as the other who had been his disciple or former medium, was due to the fact that they had had their own wives, to whom they did not want this to happen then also for fear of scandal. But others who may think and act in this manner he did not condemn.
But he was told that this thing is wicked, and that marriage love is the only love from which not only the love of offspring, but (as is now being said) all other loves are derived. Thus when free rein is given in this way against marriage love, it is abominable, and now, that there is nothing of life - which is death because there is no life of love. 1748, 2 Oct.
3440. Above the head a little to the left in the rear stood those who favor promiscuous marriage, from the persuasion that every good ought to be common, thus also marriages, and [who hold] that the reason why matrimonies are contracted is solely with a view to cohabitation, and that thus the offspring may be reared as belonging to one party, while at the same time they really belong to others. Upon being asked what he thought of that kind of life, in which the good was thus common, he replied, as it was given to perceive, that he did not reject it, saying indeed that he did not approve it, yet still did not condemn it because every good is common. That both he and the other, who was his disciple, or former subject, thought so, was owing to the fact, that they had their own wives, with whom, on account of the scandal, they did not wish to have the concession take effect, but that others should think and act thus he had not the least objection. But it was told him that this was abominable, and that conjugial love was unique, from which not only the love of offspring, but (:as now:) all other loves were derived; that when this is relaxed, the most enormous license grows strong against all conjugial love, and nothing of life remains, which is [spiritual] death because there is no life of love. - 1748, October 2.
3440. Supra caput paulum sinistrorsum retrorsum sistebantur ii, qui promiscuum conjugium volunt, ex persuasione quod omne bonum commune esse debeat, ita quoque conjugia, et quod contrahantur matrimonia, sit unice, ut cohabitent, ut sit cohabitatio, et sic educentur proles ut eorum, tametsi forent aliorum; interrogabatur, quid sentiret de ea vita, quia sic bonum est commune; respondebat, sicut etiam percipere dabatur, quod non rejiceret, dicens quidem quod non approbaret, sed usque quod non damnaret, quia omne bonum est commune; quod is ita sentiebat, tum alter qui fuit ejus discipulus, seu prius subjectum, ex causa fuit, quia suas uxores habuerunt, cum quibus ita fieri non volebant, tum quoque ob scandalum; sed quod ita putarent alii, et ita facerent, non damnabat: sed ei dictum, quod hoc nefandum sit, et quod amor conjugialis sit unicus ex quo non solum amor erga prolem, sed (ut nunc) caeteri omnes amores derivantur, ita quando relaxatur ita licentia contra amorem conjugialem, quod sic nefandum, et nunc, quod nihil sit de vita, quae est mors, quia nulla vita amoris. 1748, 2 Oct.