Is the civil law, then, superfluous and should we return to marriages according to nature? Certainly not. The civil law is meant to regulate social relationships and family interests in accordance with the requirements of civilization; this is why it is useful and necessary, but variable. It must be provident because civilized human beings cannot live like primitives; but nothing – absolutely nothing – prevents it from being a corollary of the divine law. Obstacles to the fulfillment of the divine law arise from social prejudices, and not from the civil law. These prejudices, although still alive, have already lost much of their influence among enlightened cultures, and they will disappear altogether with moral progress, which will finally open people’s eyes to the countless ills, wrongs and crimes that result from unions entered into solely out of material interests. And someday we will ask ourselves if it is more humane, more charitable, more moral to chain to one another two individuals who cannot live together than to restore them their freedom, or if the perspective of an indissoluble chain does not increase the number of irregular unions.