MARRIAGE. — Historically considered, it can be defined as the union of man and woman for the purpose of propagating and educating the human race. And since this purpose could not be rightly achieved if the relations between the two sexes were not subject to discipline, from the earliest times, by a necessity of nature itself, one observes, among all peoples, the establishment of a juridical-social institution which is precisely marriage.
The word marriage comes from the Latin *matris munus* or *munium*, which indicates the significant role of the woman in the family. Other names: *coniugium* (Lat. *coniugium*), which the Catechism of Trent (part 2, ch. 6, 8) explains: «because the woman is joined to the man as if by a single yoke»; *conubium* (Lat. *conubium*, from *nubere*, to veil, from the custom of placing the *flammeum* on the bride’s head); from the same root comes the word *nozze* (Lat. *nuptiae*).
SUMMARY:
I. Marriage as a Sacrament
II. Marriage among primitives
III. History of Marriage
IV. Law and moral theology
V. Liturgy of Marriage.MARRIAGE AS A SACRAMENT.
It is the sacrament that prepares new candidates for the kingdom of God. It originates (*matrimonium in fieri*) from the mutual and free consent of two persons of the opposite sex, who unite in perpetuity for the purpose of procreating and educating offspring in the worship of God. From this mutual consent arises the indissoluble bond between the spouses (*matrimonium in facto esse*).
SUMMARY: I. Marriage in dogmatic theology. Sacramental nature of marriage. —
II. Nature of the sacrament of marriage
III. Ends of marriage.MARRIAGE IN DOGMATIC THEOLOGY. SACRAMENTAL NATURE OF MARRIAGE. — The sacraments of the New Law are sensible signs that produce grace, instituted by Jesus Christ (v. SACRAMENT). Since marriage is a natural institution, existing from the origins of humanity, it is necessary to examine the sources of Revelation to determine whether it was positively elevated to the supernatural order as an effective sign of grace.
I. Scripture
In the first pages of the Bible, the structure of marriage as a natural institution is outlined (Gen. 1:27–28; 2:18–24), and its constitutive elements are clearly indicated: a) it is instituted as a *natural officium* resulting from the nature of the sexes and their mutual attraction; God added a positive confirmation: «And God created man in his own image; in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. And God blessed them, and God said to them: ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth’» (Gen. 1:27–28); b) it is characterized by two fundamental qualities: unity and indissolubility: «Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall become one flesh» (Gen. 2:24); c) it is oriented toward the primary end of procreation: «Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth» (Gen. 1:28; cf. *Tob. 8:9*) and the secondary end of mutual assistance: «And the Lord God said: ‘It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him’» (Gen. 2:18); d) from its origins, it bears a sacred character (cf. *Prov. 2:17; Tob. 8:9*; P. Heinisch, *Teologia del Vecchio Testamento*, Italian trans., Rome 1950, p. 217), which all peoples recognized in the religious ceremonies with which they surrounded weddings.From the old Adam to the new, the primitive unity and indissolubility were not always observed, not even among the chosen people, who, because of their hardness of heart, obtained from God Himself a temporary dispensation (cf. Heinisch, *op. cit.*, pp. 220–22), nor, much less, among pagans, who, giving themselves over to divorce and polygamy, soon sank to a low moral level from which Jesus Christ came to free the world. He, in fact, first restored marriage to its primitive purity, reaffirming the law of unity (Matt. 19:9; Mark 10:11; Luke 16:18) and indissolubility: «What God has joined together, let not man separate» (Matt. 19:6), and then elevated it to the dignity of a sacrament.
This elevation is foreshadowed in the manner of Christ’s action (cf. Leo XIII, encyclical *Arcanum divinae sapientiae*, Feb. 10, 1880) and is more clearly suggested by St. Paul in the famous passage of *Eph. 5:22–28*, where, after saying that the man must love his wife as Christ loved the Church, he adds: «For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh (καὶ ἔσονται οἱ δύο εἰς σάρκα μίαν). This mystery is great, but I speak in reference to Christ and the Church (τὸ μυστήριον τοῦτο μέγα ἐστίν, ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω εἰς Χριστὸν καὶ εἰς τὴν Ἐκκλησίαν). Let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.»
The clause «This mystery is great, but I speak in reference to Christ and the Church» (v. 32) has been widely debated. Cajetan, J. Estius, B. Giustiniani, and especially L. Godefroy (*Mariage dans l'Écriture*, in DThC, IX, cols. 2066–71), I. Vosté (*Commentarius in epist. ad Eph.*, 2nd ed., Rome 1932, pp. 272–88), and F. Amiot (*L'enseignement de St Paul*, II, Paris 1938, p. 8) hold that no proof can be drawn from this text in favor of the sacramental nature of marriage, since the verse refers to the mystery of the union of Christ with the Church, of which the primitive institution of marriage was a symbol (figure, *typus*). But, as F. Prat observes (*La teologia di s. Paolo*, Italian trans., II, Turin 1937, p. 270), this hypothesis does not seem admissible, as it supposes an intolerable tautology: this mystery, namely the union of Christ with the Church, is great, in reference to Christ and the Church. Therefore, most interpreters refer μυστήριον to marriage and see in it the foundation of a biblical proof of its sacramental nature. The demonstrative process, which varies widely, can be reduced to three types of argument:
a) *Ex analogia fidei*. — Sacred signs follow the nature of the supernatural economy to which they belong; in the Old Testament they had no sanctifying efficacy (Gal. 4:9: «weak and beggarly elements»), but were only images and figures of future goods; in the New Testament, on the contrary, they have, by God’s will and through the merits of the Redeemer, a supernatural power by which they penetrate the conscience, sanctifying it (cf. Heb. 9–10). In Eph. 5:32, a sacred sign is in question, which originated in creation and endures in redemption (St. Paul is speaking to Christians and extolling the moral greatness of their marriage considered as a sacred sign); it must therefore be held that in the Old Testament marriage was a symbol ordained by God to signify the future union of Christ with the Church (a prognostic sign, without any sanctifying efficacy), and that in the New Testament it remains, by divine will, as a sign of a reality already accomplished on the Cross, the mystical marriage of Christ with the Church; it is therefore a commemorative sign (*signum rememorativum*), which, belonging to the New Law, possesses the prerogative of interiorly sanctifying (*signum demonstrativum Gratiae*). Nor should one be surprised by the different orientation that marriage acquires in the successive states of Law and Grace. If marriage had been preserved by Jesus Christ as a sign of His covenant with humanity, one would have reason to think that it would have become a sacrament in the strict sense. Turned toward the past and no longer toward the future, it would have changed meaning and direction, becoming capable of effectively producing the grace of the interior covenant between God and souls, whereas, abandoned as a natural element, it would have lost all value at the death of Christ. Thus, marriage, which under the Law was the type and figure of the future union of Christ with the Church, changed meaning (because God preserved it in relation to men) when this union was consummated on Golgotha; from prophetic it became commemorative, from speculative it became practical, from inert it became efficacious.
This line of argumentation, passionately developed by D. Palmieri (De Matrimonio christiano, Rome 1880, pp. 62-70), was adopted by H. Hurter (Theologia dogmatica compendium, III, Innsbruck 1900, p. 592), L. Billot (De Sacramentis, II, 7th ed., Rome 1930, pp. 346-50), L. Lercher-F. Dander (Institutiones theologiae dogmaticae, IV, II, Innsbruck 1949, pp. 336-39), and many others.
b) Ex oneribus. — Christian spouses, in their mutual relations, must be guided by the relationship that exists between Christ and the Church: on the one hand, respectful submission even to the point of sacrifice (Eph. 5:22-24), and on the other, love and devotion even to the point of death (ibid., 25-29). The gravity of these supernatural obligations (cf. Mt. 19:10) implies a corresponding source of grace and divine assistance. St. Paul indeed supposes that the souls of Christian spouses are immersed in an atmosphere of heavenly aid when he exhorts them so fervently to imitate the relationship between Christ and the Church, of which their marriage is the living symbol. This argument is common to all theologians (cf., e.g., M. Cordovani, Il Santificatore, 2nd ed., Rome 1946, p. 364 ff.).
c) Ex parallelismo. — The Christian marriage receives its character from the mystery of the union of Christ with the Church, of which, according to St. Paul, it is the living image. It is not merely an exemplar standing outside, on the margins of the mystical marriage of Christ, but a copy, a reproduction springing from that union, imbued with the same essence, which not only portrays but actively and efficaciously reproduces within itself the mystery of the relationship between Christ and the Church. The two Christian spouses, already members of the Mystical Body, strengthen in their supernatural union the bonds existing between Christ and the Church, of whose mystical union they become an extension and prolongation. For the living expression and concrete realization of the union of Christ with the Church to fulfill perfectly what it signifies, it must necessarily reproduce and embody the fundamental lines and distinctive features, namely, unity, indissolubility, and holiness.
This proof, touched upon with customary depth by M.-G. Scheeben (I misteri del cristianesimo, Italian trans., Brescia 1949, pp. 445-46), has been developed by J. Fischer (Ehe und Jungfräulichkeit im Neuen Test., Münster 1919, p. 44), I. B. Colon (Paul [saint], in DTHC, XI, cols. 2421-22), C. Adam (La dignità sacramentale del Matrimonio, Italian trans., Milan 1935, p. 16), B. Bartmann (Manuale di teologia dogmatica, Italian trans., III, Alba 1950, p. 350), J. Huby (Les Epîtres de la captivité, 13th ed., Paris 1947, pp. 246-248). These arguments, though not decisive and so regarded by their authors, possess a character of marked probability, which fully justifies the well-known phrase of the Council of Trent: “Paulus innuit” (Denz.-U. 969).
2. The Holy Fathers
The Church lived the doctrine of St. Paul before explaining it scientifically. In practice, she regarded marriage as a *negotium sanctum*, shrouded in the mystery of Christ. St. Ignatius of Antioch, at the beginning of the 2nd century, attests that the marriage of the faithful was celebrated with the authorization of the bishop: “Decret ut sponsi et sponsae de sententia episcopi coniugium faciant, ut nuptiae secundum Dominum sint, non secundum cupiditatem. Omnia ad honorem Dei fiant” (Ad Polyc., 5, 1). Tertullian, reporting what was already customary in the 2nd century, precisely enumerates the interventions of the Church in the celebration of marriage: “Unde sufficiamus ad enarrandam felicitatem eius Matrimonii, quod Ecclesia conciliat et confirmat oblatio et obsignat benedictio, Angeli renuntiunt, Pater rato habet?” (Ad uxorem, 2, 9: PL 1, 1415). From this text it emerges that marriage was not only solemnized *coram Ecclesia* (and *de sententia episcopi*, “Ecclesia conciliat”), but was already surrounded by the most august rites: the offering of the Eucharistic sacrifice (*oblatio*) and the priestly blessing (*benedictio*), of which an explicit testimony is found in the *Praedestinatus*, 3, 31: “Sacerdotes nuptiarum initia consecrantes et in Dei mysteriis sociantes” (cf. St. Ambrose, *Ep.* 19, 7: PL 16, 98). The original integration of the nuptial solemnities into the liturgical action was demanded by the conviction, later explicitly manifested by the Church in its Sacramentaries and Eucharistic Prayers, in which it placed marriage among the true Sacraments and formulated prayers that expressly attribute to Christian marriage the efficacy of grace (cf. D. Palmieri, *De Matrimonio christiano*, Rome 1880, pp. 54-55; L. Duchesne, *Origines du culte chrétien*, 2nd ed., Paris 1898, pp. 413-19; A. Villien, *Les Sacrements. Histoire et liturgie*, 2nd ed., 1913, pp. 335-402).
The same idea is developed in archaeological monuments. In these, Christian spouses are commonly depicted in the act of joining hands; between them is placed as a sign of their mutual union (always conceived within the sphere of grace) either the hand of the Lord encircled by Constantinian monograms, sometimes accompanied by an inscription (e.g., in the sarcophagus of Tolentino: “Quos paribus meritis iunxit Matrimonium dulci Omnipotens Dominus”), or the jeweled column symbolizing the Church, or Christ standing between the spouses with the inscription: “ΓΕΩΧ ΧΑΡΙΣ, O Christ,” considered as the *pronubus* of the marriages of His faithful, e.g., in the Albani fragment, according to the explanation of St. Paulinus of Nola: “Absit ab his thalamis vani lascivia vulgi / Iuno, Cupido, Venus, nomina luxuriae. / Sancta sacerdotis veneranda pignora pacto / iunguntur; coeunt pax, pudor et pietas... / Tali lege suis nubentibus adstat Iesus Pronubos” (*Carm.*, XXV, 9-12, 151; PL 51, 633-636; cf. O. Marucchi, *La santità del Matrimonio confermata dagli antichi monumenti cristiani*, Rome 1902; G. Wilpert, *La fede della Chiesa nascente secondo i monumenti dell’arte funeraria antica*, Vatican City 1928, pp. 249-255).
Parallel to the liturgical and archaeological tradition, which is predominantly practical in character, is the rhetorical reconsideration of the evangelical and Pauline motifs concerning marriage. From the 3rd to the 5th century, three concepts are constantly repeated:
a) Christian marriage is the symbol of the union of Christ with the Church (Clement of Alexandria, *Strom.*, 3, 12; PG 8, 1186; Origen, *Fragm. in Io.*, 3, 29; CB, IV, 520; id., *Hom. 11 in Num.*: PG 12, 643; Chrysostom, *Hom. 40 in Eph.* ibid., 62, 140; St. Hilary of Poitiers, *Tractatus de mysteriis*, 3; CSEL, 65, 4-5; St. Ambrose, *Ep.*, 76; PL 16, 399; Ambrosiaster, *In Eph.*, 5, 31; ibid., 17, 399);
b) to which is connected the infusion of grace: “Si ruttum est apud Deum Matrimonium... habens iam ex parte divinae Gratiae patrocinium” (Tertullian, *Ad uxorem*, 2, 7; PL 1, 1229); “Deus quidem est, qui duo in unum compagit... et quoniam coniunctionis auctor est Deus, propterea iis inest Gratia, qui a Deo coniuncti sunt; quod non ignorans Paulus coniunxium Verbo Dei consentaneum gratiam esse pronuntiat” (Origen, *In Mt.*, 14, 16; PG 13, 1229; cf. St. Epiphanius, *Haeres.*, 51, 30; ibid., 41, 941; St. Innocent I, *Ep.*, 36; PL 20, 602; St. Cyril of Alexandria, *In Io.*, 2, 1; PG 73, 224);
c) whose elevation to the order of grace took place at Cana in Galilee, where the Redeemer perfected the work of the Creator: “In Cana Galileae externae sunt celebrare nuptiae... ut quod deerat emendaret ac iucundissimi vini suavitate mulceret et Gratia” (St. Epiphanius, *Haeres.*, 51, 30; PG 41, 941); “Cum nuptiae celebrarentur... adest quidam Mater Salvatoris, sed et ipse cum discipulis suis invitatam venit... ut generationis humanae principium sanctificaret” (St. Cyril of Alexandria, *In Io.*, 2, 1; PG 73, 224); “Vadit ad nuptias Dei Filius ut, quas dudum potestate constituit, tunc praesentiae suae benedictione sanctificaret” (St. Maximus of Turin, *Hom.*, 23; PL 57, 274; cf. Theodoret of Cyrus, *Haeret. fabularum compendium*, 5, 25; PG 83, 537; St. John Damascene, *De fide orthodox.*, 4, 24; ibid., 94, 1209).
BIBL.:
D. Palmieri, *De Matrimonio christiano*, Rome 1880.
H. Hurter, *Theologia dogmatica compendium*, III, Innsbruck 1900.
L. Billot, *De Sacramentis*, II, 7th ed., Rome 1930.
L. Lercher-F. Dander, *Institutiones theologiae dogmaticae*, IV, II, Innsbruck 1949.
M.-G. Scheeben, *I misteri del cristianesimo*, Italian trans., Brescia 1949.
J. Fischer, *Ehe und Jungfräulichkeit im Neuen Test.*, Münster 1919.
I. B. Colon, “Paul [saint],” in *Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique*, XI, cols. 2421-22.
C. Adam, *La dignità sacramentale del Matrimonio*, Italian trans., Milan 1935.
B. Bartmann, *Manuale di teologia dogmatica*, Italian trans., III, Alba 1950.
J. Huby, *Les Epîtres de la captivité*, 13th ed., Paris 1947.
L. Duchesne, *Origines du culte chrétien*, 2nd ed., Paris 1898.
A. Villien, *Les Sacrements. Histoire et liturgie*, 2nd ed., 1913.
O. Marucchi, *La santità del Matrimonio confermata dagli antichi monumenti cristiani*, Rome 1902.
G. Wilpert, *La fede della Chiesa nascente secondo i monumenti dell’arte funeraria antica*, Vatican City 1928.
ST. AUGUSTINE, a staunch defender of the liceity of marriage against the Manicheans and Jovinian, was concerned to highlight the tripartite good: faith, offspring, sacrament (De nuptiis et concupiscentia, 11; PL 44, 421; De bono coniugali, 24, 32; ibid., 40, 394). Focusing his attention on the last point of the trilogy (sacrament), St. Augustine develops at length the nuptial symbolism (cf. B. Alves Pereira, La doctrine du Mariage selon saint Augustin, Paris 1930, pp. 184-223) and consistently concludes that the res sacramenti is the indissolubility of marriage, which perfectly imitates the indissolubility of the mystical union of Christ with the Church: “Without doubt, the res of this sacrament is that the man and woman, once joined to us in consecration, remain inseparably bound as long as they live” (De nuptiis et concupiscentia, 1, 10; PL 44, 420); “The good of marriage, which pertains to the people of God, also lies in the sanctity of the sacrament, by which it is unlawful even for one who has been divorced to marry another” (De bono coniugali, 24, 31; ibid., 40, 394). The bond of Christian spouses (res sacramenti) is so profound that it can be compared to the indelible character of Baptism and Holy Orders (ibid.). In this perspective, grace is seen in marriage only obliquely, as the ultimate end (to which sanctitas perhaps alludes) of the spousal bond, the perfect image of the union of Christ with the Church. Yet St. Augustine must not be isolated from the other Fathers, whose teaching he accepted, nor from the African writers, above all Tertullian, whose doctrinal tradition he continued.
1950. Scholastics
The teaching of the Fathers, in the particular Augustinian formulation, became common. Transmitted to the Middle Ages in the concise synthesis of St. Isidore of Seville (De ecclesiasticis officiis, 2, 20; PL 83, 812), it resurfaced timidly in the 9th–11th centuries, only to flourish vigorously, despite modifications and expansions, in the theological and canonical works of the 12th century: Hugh of Amiens (Contra haereticos, 3, 4; PL 192, 1289), Abelard (Epitome theologiae, 31; ibid., 178, 1747), Hugh of St. Victor (De Sacramentis: ibid., 176, 481-82, 494; with a singular distinction between sacramentum maius and minus), Honorius of Autun (Elucidarium, 2, 16; ibid., 172, 1147), Peter Lombard (IV Sent., 4, 26, c. 6), in whose work a full systematic treatment of marriage is already laid out, which, perfected by St. Bonaventure and St. Thomas, became the classical doctrine of Catholic theology.Once the speculation on the intimate meaning of the sacrament of the New Law—implying the inseparable concept of sign and cause (id efficit quod significat)—had matured by the mid-12th century, it was applied to marriage. This provided the opportunity to affirm, in a scientific manner, what the tradition of the Fathers, drawn from biblical sources, had taught in a simple and popular way. The application did not occur without controversy: in the 12th century, Abelard, while acknowledging in marriage the dignity of a sacrament of a great thing, nevertheless considered it a sacrament that is not spiritual and therefore “not granted for the sake of salvation but conceded on account of inconvenience” (Epitome theologiae, 28; PL 178, 1738); whereas Hugh of St. Victor regarded it as a true source of grace (De Sacramentis, II, 2, c. 8; ibid., 186, 496).
This doctrinal oscillation continued for a century (from 1150 to 1250) among canonists and theologians and was definitively resolved by the clear teaching of St. Thomas (IV Sent., 4, 26, q. 2, a. 3), whose authority was not diminished by the persistent resistance of Olivi and Durandus, since, having been incorporated into the Decretum pro Armenis (Denz-U, 695 and 702), it became the authentic doctrine of the Church.
For centuries the Roman pontiffs had already counted marriage among the true sacraments of the New Law: at the Second Lateran Council (1139) and the Council of Verona under Lucius III (1184), in the Epistola ad Umbertum (1190) and the Professio fidei prescribed for the Waldensians (1208) by Innocent III, in the Professio fidei proposed by Michael Paleologus (1274) under Gregory X, and in the condemnation of the Fraticelli (1318) by John XXII (Denz-U, 367, 402, 406, 424, 465, 490).