< Previous |
Index |
Next > |
In the works of early ecclesiastical writers, especially in those of Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Augustine, Jerome, Basil, and Chrysostom, we find many allusions to particular rites and ceremonies, but no entire, or general account of them. In the former part of the seventh century, a writer attempted to enumerate the marriage ceremonies which the church had recognized as innocent and convenient, or symbolical. We possess also an official account of the ceremonies used in the Roman church, A. D. 860, from the pen of the pope Nicolas I.
To proceed however with our general remarks.
Both the bride, and the bridegroom were crowned in this manner, together with the grooms-man, and the brides-maid. The bride frequently appeared in church thus attired on the day when proclamation of the banns was made.
Chaplets were not worn by the parties in case of second marriage, nor by those who had been guilty of impropriety before marriage.
In the Greek church the chaplets were imposed by the officiating minister at the altar. In the Western church it was customary for the parties to present themselves thus attired.
From this marriage rite arose the custom o( taking the veil in the Catholic church. By this act, the nun devotes herself to perpetual virginity as the spouse of Christ, the bridegroom of the church.
Isidorus Hispalensis, De eccleslasticis officiis. lib. ii. c. 19.
Du Cange, Glossa s. v. Arra nuptialis: Mariene, De Antiq. eccl. rit. P. 2. p. 606-8: Cone. Carthag. iv. c. 13: Capitul. Caroli. M. lib. vii. c. 363: Hildebrand De Nuptiis vet. Christian, p. 86.
Apologet. c. 6: De Idol. c. 16. vgl. Plinius, Hist. nat. xxxiii. c. 1.
Paedag. lib. iii. c. 11: Comp. Ambros. Ep. 34.
De Eccl. Off. lib. iL c. 19.
De Corona milit. c. 13–15.
Hildebrand. De nupt. p. 78: Steinberg, Abhaudl. von den Hochzeit-Kranzen. 1764. 4: p. 17seq.
Hildebrand, De Nuptiis, p. 76, 77: Calvoer. p. 106.
Chrysost. Hom. iv. in ep. in Hebr.: Nicephor. h. e. lib. xviii. c. 8.
Ambrose, serm. 25: Chrysostom. Hom. 41. in Act. Apost.: Niceph. h. e. lib. 13. c. 8.
Hom. 12 in Ep. ad Coloss. Opp. tom. vi. p. 247–62: Hom. 48 in Gen. p. 549 seq.: 56. p. 605 seq.
Concil. Laodic. c. 53.
Concil. Antissidor. c. 34: Agath. c. 39: Neo-Caesar. c. 7.
Morem quein sancta Romana suscepit antiquitus et hactenus in hujusmodi conjunctionibus tenet ecclesia, vobis monstrare studeBimus. Nostrates siquidein tam mares qnam teininae non ligaturam auream, vel argenteam, aut ex quolibet metallo compositam, quando riuplialia foedera contrahunt, in capite deferunt. Sed post sponsalia, quae futuraruni sunt nuptiarum promissa foedera, quaecunque consensu eorum, qui haec contrahunt, et eorum, in quorum poteslate sunt, celebrantur, et postquam arrhis sponsam sibi sponsus per digitum fidei a se annulo insignitum desponderit, dotemque utrique placitam sponsus ei cum scripto pactum hoc continente coram invitatis ab utroque parte tradiderit; aut reox, aut apto tempore, ne videlicet ante tempus lege definitura tale quid fieri praesumatur, ambo ad nuptialia foedera perducuntur. Et priinum in ecclesia Domini cum oblationibus, quas offerre debent Deo per sacerdotis manum, statuuntur, sicque demum benedictionem et velamen coeleste suscipiunt. . . . Verumtamen velamen illud non suscipit, qui ad secundas nuptias migrat. Post haec autem de ecclesia egressi coronas in capitibus gestant quae in ecclesia ipsa sunt solitae reservari: Et ita festis nuptialibus celebratis ad ducendam individuam vitam Domino disponente de cetero diriguntur. . . . Tanta solet arctare quosdam rerum inopia, ut ad haec praeparanda nullum his suffragetur auxilium: ac per hoc sufficiat, secundum leges, solus eorum consensus, de quorum conjunctionibus agitur. Qui consensus, si solus in nuptiis forte defuerit, cetera omnia etiam cum ipso coitu celebratafrustantur. . . . Haec sunt praeter alia, quae ad memoriam non occurrunt, pacta conjugiorum solemnia. Peccatum autem esse, si haec cuncta in nuptial! foedere non interveniant, non dicimus, quemadmodum Graecos vos adstruere dicitis. – Nicol. I. Respons. ad Consulta Bulgar. c. 3.
Tertull. De Veland. Virg. lib. xvii. c. 11. – The velamen nuptiale, of which Ambrose (Ep. 70) says, "Conjugium velamine sacerdotali sanctificari oportet," is usually regarded as "signum pudoris et verecundiae." According to Isidor. Hispal. (De Off. Eccl. ii. c. 19) it is rather "signum humilitatis et subjectionis erga maritum." He says, Feminae, dum niaritantur, velantur, ut noverint per hoc se viris esse subjectas et hu miles.
Qoud nubentes post benedictionem vitta invicem quasi uno vinculo copulantur, videlicet ideo fit, ne compagera conjugalis unitatis disrumpant. Ac eadem vitta candido purpureoque colore permiscetur; candor quippe est ad munditiem vitae, purpura ad sanguinis posteritatem adhibetur, ut hoc signo et continentia et lex continendi ab utrisque ad tempus admoneantur, et post hoc reddendum debitum non negetur. – Isidor. Hispal. de Off. Eccl. lib. ii.c. 19.
Presbyteri, diaconi, sub-diaconia vel deinceps, qnibus ducendi uxores licentia modo non est etiam aliarum nuptiarum evitent convivia, nee his coetibus miscantur ubi amatoria canuntur et turpia, aut obsceni motus corporum choreis et saltationibus efFeruntur, ne auditus etobtuitus sacris ministeriis deputati turpium spectaculorum atque verborum contagione polluantur. – Conil. Agath. c. 39.
(* denotes Greek text in Rev. Lyman Coleman's translation.)
privacy policy | © seiyaku |