For instance, Confirmation is called _The Anointing_,[9] and _The Sealing_, and in some parts of the Church, the Priest dips his finger in oil blessed by the Bishop, and signs or seals the child upon the forehead with the sign of the Cross, thus symbolizing the meaning of such names. But neither the sealing, nor the anointing, is necessary for a valid Sacrament.
Confirmation, then, "rightly and duly" administered, completes the grace given to a child at the outset of its Christian career. It admits the child to full membership and to full privileges in the Christian Church. It is the ordained Channel by which the Bishop is commissioned to convey and guarantee the special grace attached {105} to, and only to, the Lesser Sacrament of Confirmation.[10]
[1] "Ratifying and _confirming_ the same in your own persons."
[2] The word was "confess" in 1549.
[3] The Greek Catechism of Plato, Metropolitan of Moscow, puts it very clearly: "Through this holy Ordinance _the Holy Ghost descendeth upon the person Baptized_, and confirmeth him in the grace which he received in his Baptism according to the example of His descending upon the disciples of Jesus Christ, and in imitation of the disciples themselves, who after Baptism laid their hands upon the believers; by which laying on of hands the Holy Ghost was conferred".
[4] 1 St. Peter ii. 9.
[5] Minutes of Wesleyan Conference, 1889, p. 412.
[6] In the first ages, and, indeed, until the fifteenth century, Confirmation followed immediately after Baptism, both in East and West, as it still does in the East.
[7] Is. vii. 16.
[8] Acts viii. 12-17; Acts xix. 5, 6.
[9] In an old seventh century Service, used in the Church of England down to the Reformation, the Priest is directed: "Here he is to put the Chrism (oil) on the forehead of the man, and say, "Receive the sign of the Holy Cross, by the Chrism of Salvation in Jesus Christ unto Eternal Life. Amen.""
[10] The teaching of our Church of England, pa.s.sing on the teaching of the Church Universal, is very happily summed up in an ancient Homily of the Church of England. It runs thus: "In Baptism the Christian was born again spiritually, to live; in Confirmation he is made bold to fight. There he received remission of sin; here he receiveth increase of grace.... In Baptism he was chosen to be G.o.d"s son; in Confirmation G.o.d shall give him His Holy Spirit to ... perfect him. In Baptism he was called and chosen to be one of G.o.d"s soldiers, and had his white coat of innocency given him, and also his badge, which was the red cross set upon his forehead...; in Confirmation he is encouraged to fight, and to take the armour of G.o.d put upon him, which be able to bear off the fiery darts of the devil."
{106}
CHAPTER IX.
HOLY MATRIMONY.
We have called Holy Matrimony the "_Sacrament of Perpetuation_," for it is the ordained way in which the human race is to be perpetuated.
Matrimony is the legal union between two persons,--a union which is created by mutual consent: Holy Matrimony is that union sanctioned and sanctified by the Church.
There are three familiar names given to this union: Matrimony, Marriage, Wedlock.
Matrimony, derived from _mater_, a mother, tells of the woman"s (i.e.
wife-man"s) "joy that a man is born into the world". Marriage, derived from _maritus_, a husband (or house-dweller[1]), tells of the man"s place in the "hus" or house. Wedlock, derived from _weddian_, a pledge, reminds both man and woman of the life-long pledge which each has made "either to other".
{107}
It is this Sacrament of Matrimony, Marriage, or Wedlock, that we are now to consider. We will think of it under four headings:--
(I) What is it for?
(II) What is its essence?
(III) Whom is it for?
(IV) What are its safeguards?
(I) WHAT IS IT FOR?
Marriage is, as we have seen, G.o.d"s method of propagating the human race. It does this in two ways--by expansion, and by limitation. This is seen in the New Testament ordinance, "one man for one woman". It expands the race, but within due and disciplined limitations.
Expansion, without limitation, would produce quant.i.ty without quality, and would wreck the human race; limitation without expansion might produce quality without quant.i.ty, but would extinguish the human race.
Like every other gift of G.o.d, marriage is to be treated "soberly, wisely, discretely," and, like every other gift, it must be used with a due combination of freedom and restraint.
Hence, among other reasons, the marriage union between one man and one woman is {108} indissoluble. For marriage is not a mere union of sentiment; it is not a mere terminable contract between two persons, who have agreed to live together as long as they suit each other. It is an _organic_ not an emotional union; "They twain shall be one flesh," which nothing but death can divide. No law in Church or State can unmarry the legally married. A State may _declare_ the non-existence of the marriage union, just as it may _declare_ the non-existence of G.o.d: but such a declaration does not affect the fact, either in one case or the other.
In England the State does, in certain cases, declare that the life-long union is a temporary contract, and does permit "this man" or "this woman" to live with another man, or with another woman, and, if they choose, even to exchange husbands or wives. This is allowed by the Divorce Act of 1857,[2] "when," writes Bishop Stubbs, "the calamitous legislation of 1857 inflicted on English Society and English morals {109} the most cruel blow that any conjunction of unrighteous influence could possibly have contrived".[3]
The Church has made no such declaration. It rigidly forbids a husband or wife to marry again during the lifetime of either party. The Law of the Church remains the Law of the Church, overridden--but not repealed.
This has led to a conflict between Church and State in a country where they are, in theory though not in fact, united. But this is the fault of the State, not of the Church. It is a case in which a junior partner has acted without the consent of, or rather in direct opposition to, the senior partner. Historically and chronologically speaking, the Church (the senior partner) took the State (the junior partner) into partnership, and the State, in spite of all the benefits it has received from the Church, has taken all it could get, and has thrown the Church over to legalize sin. It has ignored its senior partner, and loosened the old historical bond between the two. This the Church cannot help, and this the State fully admits, legally absolving the Church from taking any part in its mock re-marriages.
{110}
(II) WHAT IS ITS ESSENCE?
The essence of matrimony is "mutual consent". The essential part of the Sacrament consists in the words: "I, M., take thee, N.," etc.
Nothing else is essential, though much else is desirable. Thus, marriage in a church, however historical and desirable, is not _essential_ to the validity of a marriage. Marriage at a Registry Office (i.e. mutual consent in the presence of the Registrar) is every bit as legally indissoluble as marriage in a church. The not uncommon argument: "I was only married in a Registry Office, and can therefore take advantage of the Divorce Act," is fallacious _ab initio_.[4]
Why, then, be married in, and by the Church? Apart from the history and sentiment, for this reason. The Church is the ordained channel through which grace to keep the marriage vow is bestowed. A special and _guaranteed_ grace is {111} attached to a marriage sanctioned and blest by the Church. The Church, in the name of G.o.d, "consecrates matrimony," and from the earliest times has given its sanction and blessing to the mutual consent. We are reminded of this in the question: "Who _giveth_ this woman to be married to this man?" In answer to the question, the Parent, or Guardian, presents the Bride to the Priest (the Church"s representative), who, in turn, presents her to the Bridegroom, and blesses their union. In the Primitive Church, notice of marriage had to be given to the Bishop of the Diocese, or his representative,[5] in order that due inquiries might be made as to the fitness of the persons, and the Church"s sanction given or withheld.
After this notice, a special service of _Betrothal_ (as well as the actual marriage service) was solemnized.
These two separate services are still marked off from each other in (though both forming a part of) our present marriage service. The first part of the service is held outside the chancel gates, and corresponds to the old service of _Betrothal_. Here, too, the actual ceremony of "mutual consent" now takes place--that part of {112} the ceremony which would be equally valid in a Registry Office. Then follows the second part of the service, in which the Church gives her blessing upon the marriage. And because this part is, properly speaking, part of the Eucharistic Office, the Bride and Bridegroom now go to the Altar with the Priest, and there receive the Church"s Benediction, and--ideally--their first Communion after marriage. So does the Church provide grace for her children that they may "perform the vows they have made unto the King". The late hour for modern weddings, and the consequent postponement[6] of Communion, has obscured much of the meaning of the service; but a nine o"clock wedding, in which the married couple receive the Holy Communion, followed by the wedding breakfast, is, happily, becoming more common, and is restoring to us one of the best of old English customs. It is easy enough to slight old religious forms and ceremonies; but is anyone one atom better, or happier for having neglected them?
{113}
(III) WHOM IS IT FOR?
Marriage is for three cla.s.ses:--
(1) The unmarried--i.e. those who have never been married, or whose marriage is (legally) dissolved by death.
(2) The non-related--i.e. either by consanguinity (by blood), or affinity (by marriage).
(3) The full-aged.
(1) _The Unmarried_.