CHAPTER XXIV. MARRIAGE. §1. OF CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE. THE laws of Christian marriage seem, at first view, to be derived from the Mosaic regulations on this subject, and yet it is remarkable that, until the sixth or seventh century, the marriages of the early Christians were regulated rather by the Roman than by the Mosaic laws. But all this was only the natural result of the peculiar circumstances under which the Christian community was formed. Converts from the Jews might be expected to adhere to the Jewish rites, while those from the Gentiles would conform to the Roman laws and customs. For this reason the marriage rites of the Christian church were of a mixed character, in which the influence of the Roman law was, at first, predominant. By this law, as well as by the law of Christ, polygamy was strictly forbidden.' In many other respects, it was also so far conformed to the law of God, that many of the early fathers scrupled not to borrow from it some of the most important marriage ceremonies. They objected to the adoption of heathen customs, in this respect, only so far as they militated against the spirit of Christianity.2 Much controversy prevailed in the ancient church on the subject of second marriages, particularly with the Novatians and Montanists, who denounced such marriages as unlawful. This opinion was also upheld by many councils. A concession in favour of second marriages was afterward made to the laity, but refused to the clergy. The law of celibacy finally rendered this rule nugatory with respect to the priesthood. The state claimed the right of regulating the laws of marriage; the church at the same time possessing a subordinate or concurrent jurisdiction. This concurrence, however, was chiefly of a negative and passive character, and was the occasion of continual discord between church and state. For the first five centuries the church had no further concern with the laws of marriage than to censure them, as occasion required, and to restrict the observance of them, by her discipline and authority. The laws of the state and the regulations of the church, on this subject, were first made to harmonize under the emperor Justinian. By making the sacerdotal benediction an essential part of the marriage covenant, and by exalting this covenant to the dignity of a sacrament, the clergy found the means of magnifying their office and increasing their authority over the people. Under the dynasty of Charles, the sanction of the church was fully established, while the law still originated with the state. In the Middle Ages, from the tenth to the sixteenth centuries, the church possessed a preponderating influence in these matters; but even then, her claim to an exclusive jurisdiction was neither asserted nor allowed. To assert this prerogative was regarded as a direct attack upon the state." In Protestant states it is regarded as a civil institution, established in conformity with the law of God, and appropriately solemnized by the rites of religion. The regulations in relation to prohibited marriages were, in the lapse of time, gradually assimilated to the law of Moses; but these have never been strictly observed in the Christian church. The canonists have very carefully specified the several degrees of consanguinity and affinity within which marriage could not lawfully be contracted. They were thirteen in number, while under the Mosaic economy they were seventeen, or, according to others, nineThe prohibited grades, in the ancient church, are comprised in the following lines: teen. Nata, soror, neptis, matertera fratris et uxor Whether it is lawful to marry a brother's wife, or a wife's sister, was a question much controverted in the church. The general sense of the church was against such connections, as appears from the dispensation which was made in such cases in favour of the clergy. This point has been discussed at length by Schlegel." Mixed marriages between the Jews and Gentiles were strictly prohibited by the law of Moses. This prohibition is not repeated in the New Testament in regard to the marriage of Christians with idolaters. The apostle Paul, however, decidedly objects to such connections, as inexpedient. 1 Cor. vii; 2 Cor. vi. 14-18. The early fathers denounced them as dangerous and immoral; and they were, at a later period, positively prohibited by the decrees of councils and the laws of the empire. By these regulations it was unlawful for Christians to marry either Jews, pagans, Mohammedans, or heretics.10 If, however, such marriages had already been contracted, they appear not to have been annulled upon the conversion of either party to Christianity. There are, indeed, examples of the violation of these rules, as in the case of Monica, the mother of Augustin, and Clotildis, the wife of Clovis, both of whom were instrumental in the conversion of their husbands." § 2. OF DIVORCE. On this subject it is sufficient to say that the church, with few exceptions, has uniformly adhered to the rules laid down by our Lord and his apostles. Mark x. 2, 12; Luke xvi. 18; Matt. v. 31, 32; xix. 2, 10; 1 Cor. vii. 10, 11; Rom. vii. 2, 3. But under the term adultery the primitive church included idolatry and apostasy from the Christian faith,' to which may be added witchcraft and other magical arts. The laws of Constantine, Honorius, Theodosius the Younger, Valentinian the Third, Anastasius, and Justinian, also favour this construction. The canonists enumerated twelve causes of divorce, including those which were also regarded as suitable reasons for not assuming the marriage vow. The same causes which are a bar to assuming the marriage covenant dissolve it. These causes are set forth in the following lines: Error, conditio, votum, cognatio, crimen, Cultus disparitas, vis, ordo, ligamen, honestas, Si sis adfinis; si forte coire nequibis (al negabis). The error relates to a mistake in regard to the parties, as in the case of Leah and Rachel, conditio to the marriage of freemen with those who are in bondage, cognatio to prohibit degrees of consanguinity, votum and ordo relate to the marriage of monastics, ligamen to cases of bigamy, honestas to prohibited connections between persons already related by marriage. § 3. OF THE CELIBACY OF THE CLERGY. THE celibacy of the clergy was not required in the first three centuries of the Christian era. Objections were indeed early made to those who had married a second wife, based on a misconstruction of the qualification required by Paul, "the husband of one wife," as though it related to several marriages, and not to polygamy. But it appears from the instance of Novatus in the church of Africa, and from other authorities, that the clergy of these provinces, in the middle of the third century, were not bound by the law of celibacy; and Socrates had known many bishops in the East who had had children by their lawful wives during their episcopate.2" Such instances, however, after the fourth century, are to be regarded rather as exceptions to the general rule, which was that of celibacy, or of abstinence from the rights of the marriage relation if the bishop had entered into these bonds previous to his consecration. The duty of such abstinence was urged in the Council of Nice, A. D. 325, in regard to bishops, presbyters, and deacons, but, through the influence of Paphnutius, was finally left to the discretion of each.3 Down to the close of the seventh century the law of celibacy was not fully established, nor indeed until the age of the famous Hildebrand, in the eleventh century, though it had been for several centuries a prevailing usage, when Hildebrand, A. D. 1074, made it obligatory upon the clergy throughout the papal dominions. § 4. OF MARRIAGE RITES AND CEREMONIES. It was a rule of the primitive church that the parties who were about to be united in marriage, both male and female, should signify their intentions to their pastor, that the connection might be formed with his approbation. The church were expected, in this manner, not only to take cognisance of the proposed marriage, but to determine whether it was duly authorized by the principles of the Christian religion. The marriage was indeed valid in law without this ecclesiastical sanction; but it was open to censure from the church, and was followed by the imposition of penance or the sentence of excommunication. * Quot digami præsident apud vos, insultantis utique apostolo.-TERTULL. De Monogam. c. iii. Comp. Apost. Const. iii. 2. † Placuit in totum prohibere episcopis, presbyteris et diaconibus, vel omnibus clericis positis in ministerio, abstinere se a conjugibus suis et non generare filios; quicunque vero fecerit ab honore clericatus exterminatur.-Conc. Elib. c. iii. A. D. 306. † Πρέπει δὲ τοῖς γαμοῦσι καὶ ταῖς γαμούσαις μετὰ γνώμης τοῦ ἐπισκόπου τὴν ἕνωσιν ποιεῖσθαι, ἵνα ὁ γάμος ᾖ κατα Κύριον, καὶ μὴ κατ ̓ ἐπιθυμίαν.—IGNAT. Ep. ad Polycarp. ii. 5. Unde sufficiamus ad enarrandam felicitatem ejus matrimonii, quod ecclesia conciliat, et confirmat oblatio, et obsignat benedictio, Angeli renuntiant, pater rato habet? Nam nec in terris filii sine consensu patrum rite et juste nubent.-TERTULL. ad. Uxor. lib. ii. c. 8, 9. Occultæ conjunctiones, id est, non prius apud ecclesiam professæ, juxta mochiam et fornicationem judicari perìclitantur.-TERTULL. De Pudicit. c. 4. This notice originally answered the purpose of a public proclamation in the church. No satisfactory indication of the modern custom of publishing the banns appears in the history of the church until the twelfth century, when it was required by the authority of ecclesiastical councils. According to the rules of the Romish church, this publishment should be made on three market-days. In some countries, the banns were published three times; in others, twice; and in others, once. The intentions of marriage were sometimes posted upon the doors or other parts of the church; sometimes published at the close of the sermon or before singing. The word banns, according to Du Cange, means a public notice or proclamation. It is worthy of notice that no distinct account of the mode of solemnizing marriage, nor any prescribed form for this purpose, is found in any of the early ecclesiastical writers, although they have many allusions to particular marriage rites and ceremonies. It appears that the propriety or necessity of religious exercises in solemnizing the marriage covenant was not recognised by the civil law until the ninth century; but that such religious rites were required by the church as early as the second century.* The rites of marriage in the ancient Greek church were essentially three the sponsalia-the espousals, the investing with a crown, and the laying off of the crown. 1. The ceremony of the espousals was as follows:-The priest, after crossing himself three times upon the breast, presents the bridal pair, standing in the body of the house, each with a lighted wax candle, and then proceeds to the altar, where he offers incense from a cruciformed censer, after which the larger collect is sung with the responses and doxologies. Then follows the ceremony of presenting the ring. With a golden ring the priest makes a sign of the cross upon the head of the bridegroom, and then places it upon a finger of his right hand, thrice repeating these words: "This servant of the Lord espouses this handmaid of the Lord, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, both now and for ever, world without end, Amen." In like manner, and with the same form of words, * Cum ipsum conjugium velamine sacerdotali et benedictione sanctificari oporteat, quomodo potest conjugium dici ubi non est fidei concordia?-AMBROS. Ep. 70. Etiamsi nostræ absolutæ sit potestatis quamlibet puellam in conjugium tradere, tradi a nobis Christianam nisi Christiano non posse.-AUGUST. Ep. 234, ad Rusticum. Δέον—ἱερέας καλεῖν, καὶ δι ̓ εὐχῶν εὐλογιῶν τὴν ὁμόνοιαν τοῦ συνοικεσίου συσφίγγειν κ. τ. λ. |