kind, namely, one of the seven sacraments. Although Luther declared that marriage was not a sacrament but "a worldly thing", all the Protestant sects have continued to regard it as religious in the sense that it ought normally to be contracted in the presence of a clergyman. Owing to the influence of the Lutheran view and of the French Revolution, civil marriage has been instituted in almost all the countries of Europe and North America, as well as in some of the states of South America. In some countries it is essential to the validity of the union before the civil law, while in others, e. g., in the United States, it is merely one of the ways in which marriage may be contracted. Civil marriage is not, however, a post-Reformation institution, for it existed among the ancient Peruvians, and among the Aborigines of North America.
Whether as a state or as a contract, whether from the viewpoint of religion and morals or from that of social welfare, marriage appears in its highest form in the teaching and practice of the Catholic Church. The fact that the contract is a sacrament impresses the popular mind with the importance and sacredness of the relation thus begun. The fact that the union is in- dissoluble and monogamous promotes in the highest degree the welfare of parents and children, and stimu- lates in the whole community the practice of those qualities of self-restraint and altruism which are essen- tial to social well-being, physical, mental, and moral (see FAMILY; DIVORCE; CELIBACY).
DEVAL, Studies in Family Life (London, 1886); WESTER MARCE, The History of Human Marriage (London, 1891); TOORNEAU, The Evolution of Marriage and of the Family (New York, 1891): Mongan, Ancient Society (London, 1877); Mc LENNAN, Studies in Ancient History (London, 1886); United States Censur, Marriage and Dworce (Washington, 1909); HOWARD, History of Matrimonial Institutions (Chicago, 1904); IDEM (and others) in American Journal of Sociology, Vol. XIV: Buss, New Encyclopedia of Social Reform, s.x. Marriage, Family; BACKOFEN, Das Mudierich (Stuttgart, 1861): GIRAUD-TU LON, Les origines du mariage de la famille (Paris, 1884): CATHREIN, Moralphilosophis (Freiburg, 1904); VBUILLOT, L4 Drint du Seigneur du Moyen Age (Paris, 1854; 3rd ed, 1878); PERRONE, De Matrimonio Christiano (Liége, 1862); Leo XIII. Encyclical, Arcanum Divina' (1880).
JOHN A. RYAN.
Marriage, MIXED (Lat. Matrimonia mixta), tech- nically marriages between Catholics and non-Catho- lics, when the latter have been baptized in some Chris- tian sect. The term is also frequently employed to designats unions between Catholics and infidels. From the very beginning of its existence the Church of Christ has been opposed to such unions. As Christ raised wedlock to the dignity of a Sacrament, a marriage be- tween a Catholic and a non-Catholic was rightly looked upon as degrading the holy character of matri- mony, involving as it did a communion in sacred things with those outside the fold. The Apostle St. Paul in- sists strongly on Christian marriage being a symbol of the union between Christ and His Church, and hence sacred. The very intimacy of the union necessarily established between those joined in wedlock requires a concordance above all in their religious sentiments. Holding this doctrine, it was but natural and logical for the Church to do all in her power to hinder her chil- dren from contracting marriage with those outside her pale, who did not recognize the sacramental character of the union on which they were entering (see MAR- RIAGE). Hence arose the impediments to a marriage with a heretic (mixta religio) and with an infidel (dis- paritas cultus). As regards marriage with an infidel, the early Church did not consider such unions invalid, especially when a person had been converted to the faith after such marriage. It was hoped that the con- verted wife or husband would be the means of bring- ing the other party to the knowledge of the true faith, or at least of safeguarding the Catholic upbringing of the children of the union. This held even for Jews, though the Church was naturally more opposed to wedlock between them and Christians, even than with pagans, owing to the intense Jewish hatred for the sacred name of Christ. By degrees, however, the objection to a marriage between a Catholic and an infidel grew stronger as the necessity for such unions decreased, and so in the course of time, more by custom than by positive enactment, the impediment disparitas cultus making such marriages null and void began to have force. When the Decretum of Gratian was published in the twelfth century, this impediment was recognized as a diriment one and it became part of the canon law of the Church. (Decretum Graf., c. 28, q. 1.) From that time forward, all marriages contracted between Catholics and infidels were held to be invalid unless a dispensation for such union had been ob- tained from the ecclesiastical authority. Marriages, however, between Catholics and heretics were not sub- ject to the same impediment. They were held as valid, though illicit if a dispensation mixtæ religionis had not been obtained. The opposition of the Church to such unions is, however, very ancient, and early councils legislated against marriages of this char acter. Such enactments are found in the fourth cen- tury Counciis of Elvira (can. 16) and of Laodicea (can. 10, 31.). The General Council of Chalcedon (can. 14) prohibits such unions especially between members of the lower ecclesiastical grades and heretical women. While the Western Church forbade them marriages, it did not declare them invalid. In the Eastern Church, however, the seventh century Council in Trullo, declared marriages between Catholics and heretics null and void (can. 72), and this discipline has since been maintained in the Greek Schismatical Church. The latter has also shown itself opposed to marriages between members of the Orthodox Church and Catholics, and in Russia various laws were passed ordering that such marriages he not permitted unless the children of the union are to be brought up as schismatics.
The advent of Protestantism in the sixteenth cen- tury renewed the problem of mixed marriages in heightened degree. The danger of perversion for the Catholic party or for the children, and the almost cer- tain unhappiness awaiting the members of such unions caused more stringent legislation on the part of the Church. This was emphasized by the impediment of clandestinity enacted by the Council of Trent. We say enacted by the Council of Trent, because from the twelfth century the validity of clandestine marriages had been recognized by the Church. This was not, however, the original discipline, for it had anciently been looked on as proper for Christians to contract marriages only in facie Ecclesia (Tertullian, De Pudic. c. 4). Marriages contracted otherwise were held as null and void by various decroes of the Roman Em- perors of the East and capitularies of French Kings, and the same is evident from the False Decretals. The Council of Trent therefore in declaring !! matrimonial unions between Catholics and non-Catholics null and void, unless entered into before the eccledastical au- thority, was rather inaugurating a return to the old discipline existent before the twelfth century than making an entirely new law. By its decree the Coun- cil requires the contract to be entered into before the parish priest or some other priest delegated by him, and in the presence of two or three witnesses under penalty of invalidity. Marriages otherwise contracted are called clandestine marriages. The Church did not find it possible, however, to insist on the rigour of this legislation in all countries owing to strong Protestant opposition. Indeed, in many countries, it was not found advisable to promulgate the decrees of the Council of Trent at all, and in such countries the im pediment of clandestinity did not obtain. Even it countries where the Tamelsi (q. v.) decree had been published, seriousdifficulties arose. As a consequence Pope Benedict XIV, choosing the lesser of two evils, issued a declaration concerning marriages in Holland and Belgium (Nov. 4, 1741), in which he declared
