and barbarism which succeeded, the rites which wanted the authority of civil law gradually fell into disuse, until the more zealous emperors undertook to reform the abuses which had crept into the discipline of the Church, and especially in the contract of marriage without sacerdotal benediction. It was Charlemagne who enacted in the West, that marriage should not be celebrated without sacerdotal benediction, accompanied with prayers and oblations; and Leo the Wise revived the ancient practice in the East, which has never been superseded. Selden and Gothofred are agreed, that from this period the necessity of the sacerdotal benediction was established by law. The point on which they differ is, that Selden affirms that this was the primary and original establishment; Gothofred maintains that it was the revival of the ancient practice". The evidence which has been alleged, proves that there was nothing new in the. constitution of Leo: it agrees with the rules of the bishops of France and Germany, of the pope, and of the king of France, in the ninth century: it agrees with the papal and imperial law of the sixth century, and the usual practice of the imperial court: it agrees with the very numerous testimonies of the fourth century; and with the doctrines of Tertullian in the third, of Athenagoras in the second, and of Ignatius in the first and apostolic age.

If there is any value in the authorities which have been recited, the religious ratification of marriage has the most ancient and the most continuous evidence of tradition in its favour, and is authenticated by the

use of all men, in all ages, and in all places. In the patriarchal age, among the barbarous and polished nations of antiquity, among Greeks and Romans, Jews and Christians, marriage has been always ratified by ceremonies, more or less distinct, of religious reverence: and while this general concurrence proves the assent of man's reason to the propriety of the practice, there is nothing in the whole volume of the Scriptures, by which it is opposed; there is much by which it is authorized and approved. The appeal to the Deity, which is implied in the religious ratification, agrees with the doctrine of the divine institution of marriage; and it is the most convenient form of securing in practice the public and irrevocable consent of the parties. The reasons which Gerhard assigns for retaining the practice, are worthy of all attention. These reasons are, 1. the example of God in the institution of marriage : 2. the apostolical precepts, both general, to do all things decently and in order, in the name of Christ, and to the glory of God; and particular, to marry only in the Lord: 3. the opportunity of instructing the parties in the dignity and the duties of marriage: 4. the advantages resulting from the ratification of the marriage, in the presence of God and of his Church, and from public prayer, in hope of the divine benediction: 5. the antiquity of the institution, and the practice of all ages, without excepting, 6, the suffrages of the heathen. The first of these reasons, the divine example in the primary institution of marriage, is a point, upon which ancient

and Lutheran writers frequently insist; and it is reasonably supposed to be the original of a tradition, than which none is more ancient; of a practice, than which none can be more properly called universal; of a tradition so coextensive with the reason of man, and with his natural sense and feeling of propriety, as to have no exception but in nations the most barbarous, and as can be traced to no source but the Author of our being, our affections, and our understanding, who hath formed our hearts in correspondence with his will, that there shall be a religious ratification of marriage, a public acknowledgment of his benevolent provision for the good of mankind.

Comber, Off. of Matr. Introd.

VOL. I.

K

SECTION II.

The Religious Ratification of Marriage in England. IT has been the common error of writers who maintain, that marriage is a civil contract and nothing more, to misrepresent the true origin of its religious ratification; asserting that marriage was originally a civil contract, and that a sacred character and a religious solemnization were surreptitiously engrafted upon this civil contract, by an ascendant hierarchy, but not universally or authoritatively prescribed before the fourth council of Lateran, held under Innocent III. A.D. 1213. In opposition to this assertion, it has been shewn, that marriage originated in the divine institution, and not a civil contract; that it is called in the Scriptures of the Old Testament, a covenant of God; that certain of the Psalms, and the Song of Solomon, were in fact nuptial songs; and that marriage was celebrated with sacrifices among the Jews; that rites of marriage were common among the heathens; that the New Testament attaches a peculiar sanctity to marriage, and delivers rules, which do not oppose, if they do not command, its religious celebration; and that, from the earliest ages of Christianity, as far as a just judgment can be formed from the scanty records of those ages, marriage has been always solemnized in the Christian Church with sacerdotal benediction. There is such a perpetual and catholic tradition of its religious character, as may justify the conclusion that it is agreeable to the natural sense

and reason and religion of mankind, to acknowledge a certain holiness and dignity in the state of marriage, and not to enter upon it without public and solemn prayer for the aid and blessing of God.

The opinion has, from time immemorial, been established in England, that the civil contract requires to be ratified and made effectual by a religious ceremony. On this principle deeds of settlement are valid, not in themselves, but in contemplation of a marriage to be celebrated, without which they are void and of no effect: the contracts of a former age per verba de præsenti, were not only liable, to the compulsory celebration, but derived in many respects their chief validity from the actual celebration in the face of the Church and in the time when espousals were distinct from marriage, they also were a religious act; and it was customary to receive the dower", in the presence of the priest, at the door of the Church, as is plain from Chaucer's relation of the Wife of Bath, that

Husbands at the church door she had five.

The minds of men have thus been trained into a voluntary and habitual conformity with these provisions of religion and of law; and the practical use of a merely civil contract has been almost or alto

* Ux. Ebr. l. ii. c. 27. Although the espousals and marriage are now combined in one office, is there not a vestige of the ancient custom retained in the neglected direction of the rubric, requiring that part of the service which relates to the mutual stipulation or espousals to be celebrated in the body of the Church, from which the parties are to proceed to the Lord's Table, reciting the nuptial Psalm?