Matrimony
(marriage) may be taken to denote the action, contract, or formality by which
the conjugal union is formed (matrimonium in fieri) or the union itself as an
enduring condition (matrimonium in facto esse).
The contract
is the basis of the married state, as ordination is the basis of the
priesthood. Unlike the five other Sacraments, Holy Orders and Matrimony were
instituted for the preservation of the race (in the supernatural and the
physical sense), rather than for the sanctification of the individual.
a) As the
Sacrament of Holy Orders consists in ordination, so the Matrimony consists in
the contract which effects the marital bond. The latter may be regarded both as
res and sacramentum.
Matrimony is
defined by the Roman Catechism as the conjugal union of man and woman between
legitimate persons, which is to last during life.
This
definition comprises three essential elements:
a) Marriage
is a legitimate contract. Persons who have no right to marry cannot enter into
such a contract.
Then, again,
even between parties who are free to marry each other, not every contract is
legitimate. Among baptized Christians the sacramentality of the marriage
contract always depends on its legitimacy, and hence the validity of the one is
conditioned by the validity of the other.
1) Every true
marriage is essentially a maritalis coniunctio, i. e. a union of a man and a
woman, entered into primarily for the purpose of begetting and rearing
children. This object differentiates marriage from every other kind of union
between human beings.
2) Marriage
takes place between rational beings, and hence the conjugal union is crowned
and ennobled by a spiritual companionship ("individua vitae
consuetudo") which connotes the two essential properties of Matrimony, i.
e. unity and indissolubility.
b) The
objects of Matrimony may be deduced from its nature. They are three, to wit:
(1) The
begetting and rearing of offspring in compliance with the divine command to
"increase and multiply."
(2) Mutual
help and assistance, both bodily and spiritual, for God said in creating Eve,
"It is not good for man to be alone : let us make him a help like unto
himself
To these two
objects has been added since the Fall of our first parents a third, namely,
(3) The
regulation of the sexual instinct in accordance with the dictates of reason.
"For fear of fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every
woman have her own husband."
The two
last-mentioned objects are, however, entirely secondary and subordinate to the
first and primary end of marriage.
[pp. 140-142]
….
The blessings
of marriage as a Sacrament are peculiar to Christian Matrimony, which
supernaturally ennobles and perfects both the procreation of children and their
bringing up, as also the mutual fidelity of husband and wife, and imparts all
graces necessary for the prevention of incontinency. At the same time the bonum
sacrctmenti imprints upon the matrimonial contract the supernatural stamp of
Christ's mystic union with His Church, and thereby elevates the two properties
of every ideal marriage—i. e. unity and indissolubility — to the supernatural
sphere.
The existence
of these blessings proves that marriage is morally licit. This conclusion is
confirmed by another consideration. Marriage, being based on the divinely
created difference of sex, is a law of nature. It was confirmed by God Himself,
and hallowed by our Lord Jesus Christ when He participated in the wedding feast
at Cana in Galilee.
The Catholic
Church has an additional reason for regarding marriage as sacred and
supernaturally meritorious: in her eyes every true marriage between Christians
is a Sacrament.
[pp. 143]
….
Thesis II:
Among Christians every legitimately contracted marriage is eo ipso a Sacrament,
and, vice versa, whenever the Sacrament of Matrimony is received, there is a
legitimate nuptial contract.
This
proposition may be qualified as "communis et certa."
Proof. Among
the Old Testament Jews and the gentiles of the pre-Christian epoch, marriage
was not a Sacrament, but merely a contract, as it still is between non-baptized
persons to-day.
Between
Christians, however, Matrimony is always a Sacrament.
How does the
contract become a Sacrament? Is the sacramental sign added to the contract by
the blessing of the priest, or is the contract itself intrinsically raised to
the rank of a grace producing sign? Christ was free to choose either of these
two methods; which one He did adopt can be determined only from Revelation.
If the
marriage contract became a Sacrament by the addition of some external sign, it
would be possible for baptized Christians to make a marital contract without
receiving the Sacrament of Matrimony.
That this is
possible was formerly held by three groups of theologians.
(1) The
so-called "court theologians of the Gallican and Josephinist school
(Antonio de Dominis, Launoy, J. N. Nuytz, J. A. Petzek, M. M. Tabaraud, J. A.
Theiner, and Th. Ziegler) held that the Sacrament is constituted by the
blessing of the priest and that the contract is merely a necessary requisite.
This theory was avowedly contrived for the purpose of withdrawing matrimonial
causes from the jurisdiction of the Church and handing them over to the State.
(2) Cano,
Sylvius, Estius, and Tournely regarded the contract as the matter and the
sacerdotal blessing as the form of the Sacrament. The contract itself, if
legitimately concluded, is valid, they said; but it is not a Sacrament until
completed by the nuptial blessing of the priest.
(3) Vasquez,
Hurtado, Platel, Billuart, Gonet, Holtzclau (of the Wirceburgenses) and other
writers denied that the priestly blessing constitutes the sacramental form of
Matrimony. They held that the sacramentality of the marriage contract depends
on the presence or absence, in the souls of the contracting parties, of the
intention of doing what the Church does. According to this school it is
optional with the contracting parties whether, in giving the matrimonial
consent, they receive a Sacrament or not.
All these
theories are untenable because a marriage contract between baptized persons is
eo ipso a Sacrament.
[pp. 157-158]
….
The Council
of Trent recognized the validity of clandestine marriages contracted in places
where the "Tametsi" had not been promulgated. By a clandestine
marriage we understand one contracted secretly without the cooperation of the
pastor and the required witnesses. The Council says that all such marriages,
when freely contracted where the "Tametsi" is not published, are
"rata et vera" unless formally nullified by the Church. Note that,
according to Tridentine as well as present-day usage, a legitimate marriage
among Christians is always a Sacrament, whether blessed by a priest or not.
[pp. 164-165]
...
The
contracting parties to a marriage administer the Sacrament to each other. The
priest is merely the minister of the (accidental) celebration and the
representative and chief official witness of the Church. This explains why his
presence is prescribed by ecclesiastical law.
a) That the
contracting parties administer the Sacrament to each other is evident from the
fact that contract and Sacrament coincide and that both the matter and the form
of Matrimony are contained in the contract.
Contract and
Sacrament being identical, he who makes the contract eo ipso administers the
Sacrament. Again, as matter and form of the Sacrament are contained in the
contract, whoever furnishes the matter and form, effects the Sacrament. It is
the express teaching of the Church that the Sacrament of Matrimony is effected
solely by the mutual consent of the contracting parties. Consequently the
contracting parties are the sole ministers of the Sacrament. It is on this
assumption that the Tridentine Council declared clandestine marriages (i.e.
marriages performed without a priest and the required witnesses) to be vera et
sacra, provided the Church does not enjoin a special form of celebration as a
condition of validity.
Berlage's
opinion that the priest is the ordinary, whilst the contracting parties are the
extraordinary ministers of the Sacrament, is untenable, (1) because the form of
a Sacrament cannot be arbitrarily changed, and (2) because Nicholas I and
Innocent III have expressly declared that the only thing required for the
validity of marriage, and hence of the Sacrament, is the consent of the
contracting parties. Very properly, therefore, is Matrimony called "the
lay Sacrament."
b) If, as we
have seen, the sacramental form of marriage does not consist in the benediction
given by the priest, the priest cannot be the minister of the Sacrament.
How, then,
are we to regard the part which he takes in the celebration of marriage?
(1) The
priest is the official representative of the Church, to whose external forum
Christian marriage belongs on account of its juridical effects;
(2) He is the
official chief witness (testis autoriza- bilis), upon whose presence, since the
Council of Trent, both the licitness and the validity of marriage ordinarily
depend;
(3) He is the
(sole) minister of the solemn ceremonies with which the Church surrounds
marriage, not only the ecclesiastical recognition (solemnizatio matrimonii),
which he expresses in saying, "I join you together in Matrimony but also
the nuptial blessing, which is one of the Church's most beautiful and
significant sacramentals.
[pp. 214-216]
No comments:
Post a Comment