[Sca-cooks] Marriage (was Six and counting)

[Gwynydd Of Culloden]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: 'Lainie
> on behalf of Father Abelard the Lesser

> 1. It didn't _have_ to be in front of witnesses- that is a fairly late
> development designed to avoid the "He said/She said" litiagtion that
> makes up most of the case law we have to look at >>>

This is a post I wrote in response to someone saying that gays were trying
to destroy something sacred and religious in wanting legal marriage rights.
It looks, briefly (and based only on one, online, source) at the history of
religion in marriage in Western Christendom.

Contrary to popular opinion, marriage has not always been a religious
sacrament even in Western Christendom.

The truth is that marriage has been for much of its history either a legal
contract or a personal commitment in which religion played no part (except
to demand it so that sexual intercourse could be approved and legitimacy of
children could be assured).

In fact, there has been a clear progression from clergy not being essential
(or even permitted) at a wedding in the 9th century;

'...ninth-century religious texts of Northern France make no mention of
nuptial benedictions other than as part of joint wedding-coronation
ceremonies where a queen simultaneously married the king and was crowned. '

'[in the 9th century] the Bishop of Bourge forbade the priests in his
diocese to even take part in wedding ceremonies mainly due to the bawdy
nature of what was a celebration of the couple’s physical union (The Knight
33-34).'

To there being more debate about the role of the Church in marriages in the
12th century;

'...twelfth-century Camaldolese monk, Gratian said "When the man says, ‘I
receive you as mine, so that you become my wife and I your husband,’ and
when the woman makes the same declaration ... when they do and say this
according to existing custom and are in agreement, it is then that I say
they are married ... whether by chance they have made it, as they should
not, alone, apart, in secret, and with no witnesses present, yet ... they
are well and truly married" (qtd. in Duby, The Knight 181).'

'The Fourth Lateran Council of 1215 declared it obligatory for a marriage to
be blessed and witnessed by a priest...At the same time ... the Church
continued to recognize marriages entered into without a priest in
attendance. '

To the absolute requirement (on pain of excommunication) for a priest to be
present at a marriage in the 15th century;

'in 1403, the Bishop of Magdeburg [threatened to] excommunicate those who
married without clergy in attendance (Cohen and Horowitz 235).'

However, during the time of the Reformation, Martin Luther was opposed to
the presence of the clergy in what he saw as a civil not a religious matter;

'..."worldly business [where] we clergy ought not to meddle or direct
things" (qtd. in Roper 106). Luther did agree that the Church should bless
those who married and even presented a basic marriage rite in 1529, but
maintained that "the regulation of marriage was a proper matter for the
civil authority rather than the Church" (qtd. in Searle and Stevenson 210).'

The situation caused much confusion and;

'The Tametsi decree, issued in 1563, stated that for a marriage to be
recognized by the Church: a) the partners must give their consent, and b)
the priest must say a formula (such as "I join you together in matrimony")
ratifying the marriage (Searle and Stevenson 14).'

However, the Church of England continued to accept so-called "clandestine
marriages" ('"any contract of marriage made other than in the approved
manner at the church door" (Goldberg 241).') up until the 18th century and
in Scotland it was possible to marry in front of witnesses but without legal
or religious paperwork up until 1904.

This information comes from http://www.drizzle.com/~celyn/mrwp/mrwed.html

Gwynydd