This post is not going to go with the flow of my usual blog postings, but yet, I find this to be a long time coming post.
The History of Marriage
The history of marriage has been a long and complicated one. The history of Christian marriage is less long, but still complicated. It was never black and white. Christian marriage was only begun to be developed in the early 11th century.
For a long time, Christians could not marry within 5 degrees of affinity. Meaning that if they were 5th cousins, they were ineligible to marry each other. How were the many nobles able to marry? They simply applied for dispensations from the Pope, which were usually granted. In the case of the Spanish Hapsburg family, there were few marriages between double first cousins, first cousins, uncle and nieces, not allowed within the Christian marriage, but yet, ultimately allowed.
It is hard to believe that many peasants that lived in rural villages would be bothered to make sure that their spouses would not be within five degrees of affinity. Given that most people rarely ventured far out of their village, conclusions could be drawn that many married within their own communities and families. Today, the Catholic Church does not prohibit marriage between distant cousins, and I know of a few people personally that are products of 1st and 2nd cousins.
Henry VIII also used the degree of affinity to annul his marriage to Catherine of Aragon (his brother’s widow). His excuse was that the papal dispensation that was granted to Catherine and Henry was not the word of God.
Translation: It was not the word of God, because it did not suit my selfish needs. It was Henry’s desire for a male heir, and Anne Boleyn that caused the detachment from Henry and Rome. Henry changed the definition of marriage, by marrying his former mistresses’ sister (also not accepted using degree of affinity). Pope refused to grant the annulment, so Henry broke with the Church completely, and thus the Church of England (and new marriage definitions were born).
So the five degrees of affinity was a decent idea (though genetics weren’t known then), but completely impractical.
And many Christians, could not afford the privilege of weddings and officiants either. They could however afford to make solemn promises in the presence of two witnesses that they should be married.In the 15th-16th century, a betrothal and solemn promise was seen as the same as marriage, given that Henry VIII used Anne of Cleve’s pre-contract to the Duke of Lorraine’s son as a valid reason for their annulment. But the Bible differentiates between the betrothal and the marriage itself, but no distinction was made between these two in these centuries. (http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?letter=M&artid=213).
According the Old Testament, the betrothal was a price paid by the groom for his bride, to the father. These later come in forms of bride prices and dowries (there are differences between the two) practiced by royalty and nobility to a great extent, and peasantry to a lesser extent. Peasant women may simply have a few dresses and some household items, while wealthier women would have many dresses, gold, jewels, etc.
Nowadays, do we accept bride prices? Or are dowries necessary for a Christian marriage? Perhaps in some cultures so, but not in most of “Christian” world (for lack of a better term, if someone has something better please inform me, and I am not making derisive commentary about the dowry system as a whole). There may be some men that ask their future father in law for their permission to marry their daughter, but I have yet to hear of a man paying the bride’s father for her hand.
Dowries and bride prices: Not in today’s world. So that has changed.
The Old Testament also talks of bigamy (only men marrying multiple women), with the exception of some sects (some extreme Mormon sects and I don’t know of others, please let me know), it is not legal or even acceptable in most Christian divisions.
The New Testament says that one must be monogamous with one another, both the man and the wife. So Jesus changed the definition of marriage. It goes without saying that the idea of monogamy was flouted by the Christian world for several centuries henceforth. Many kings had mistresses, and flings, it was however, unacceptable for women to be adulterous.
Bigamy: Not in today’s world. So that has changed.
So basically, this post is a long winded explanation of saying that the Christian marriage has changed from it’s inception to today’s world. People’s ideas and sensibilities change all the time, so basically, deeming homosexual marriage unacceptable because it ruins Christian marriage is pure hogwash.
So dearest NOW (National Organization for Marriage), Concerned Women, Bigots, and the lot of you, you have no fucking clue what you are talking about.
The History of Marriage
The history of marriage has been a long and complicated one. The history of Christian marriage is less long, but still complicated. It was never black and white. Christian marriage was only begun to be developed in the early 11th century.
For a long time, Christians could not marry within 5 degrees of affinity. Meaning that if they were 5th cousins, they were ineligible to marry each other. How were the many nobles able to marry? They simply applied for dispensations from the Pope, which were usually granted. In the case of the Spanish Hapsburg family, there were few marriages between double first cousins, first cousins, uncle and nieces, not allowed within the Christian marriage, but yet, ultimately allowed.
It is hard to believe that many peasants that lived in rural villages would be bothered to make sure that their spouses would not be within five degrees of affinity. Given that most people rarely ventured far out of their village, conclusions could be drawn that many married within their own communities and families. Today, the Catholic Church does not prohibit marriage between distant cousins, and I know of a few people personally that are products of 1st and 2nd cousins.
Henry VIII also used the degree of affinity to annul his marriage to Catherine of Aragon (his brother’s widow). His excuse was that the papal dispensation that was granted to Catherine and Henry was not the word of God.
Translation: It was not the word of God, because it did not suit my selfish needs. It was Henry’s desire for a male heir, and Anne Boleyn that caused the detachment from Henry and Rome. Henry changed the definition of marriage, by marrying his former mistresses’ sister (also not accepted using degree of affinity). Pope refused to grant the annulment, so Henry broke with the Church completely, and thus the Church of England (and new marriage definitions were born).
So the five degrees of affinity was a decent idea (though genetics weren’t known then), but completely impractical.
And many Christians, could not afford the privilege of weddings and officiants either. They could however afford to make solemn promises in the presence of two witnesses that they should be married.In the 15th-16th century, a betrothal and solemn promise was seen as the same as marriage, given that Henry VIII used Anne of Cleve’s pre-contract to the Duke of Lorraine’s son as a valid reason for their annulment. But the Bible differentiates between the betrothal and the marriage itself, but no distinction was made between these two in these centuries. (http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?letter=M&artid=213).
According the Old Testament, the betrothal was a price paid by the groom for his bride, to the father. These later come in forms of bride prices and dowries (there are differences between the two) practiced by royalty and nobility to a great extent, and peasantry to a lesser extent. Peasant women may simply have a few dresses and some household items, while wealthier women would have many dresses, gold, jewels, etc.
Nowadays, do we accept bride prices? Or are dowries necessary for a Christian marriage? Perhaps in some cultures so, but not in most of “Christian” world (for lack of a better term, if someone has something better please inform me, and I am not making derisive commentary about the dowry system as a whole). There may be some men that ask their future father in law for their permission to marry their daughter, but I have yet to hear of a man paying the bride’s father for her hand.
Dowries and bride prices: Not in today’s world. So that has changed.
The Old Testament also talks of bigamy (only men marrying multiple women), with the exception of some sects (some extreme Mormon sects and I don’t know of others, please let me know), it is not legal or even acceptable in most Christian divisions.
The New Testament says that one must be monogamous with one another, both the man and the wife. So Jesus changed the definition of marriage. It goes without saying that the idea of monogamy was flouted by the Christian world for several centuries henceforth. Many kings had mistresses, and flings, it was however, unacceptable for women to be adulterous.
Bigamy: Not in today’s world. So that has changed.
So basically, this post is a long winded explanation of saying that the Christian marriage has changed from it’s inception to today’s world. People’s ideas and sensibilities change all the time, so basically, deeming homosexual marriage unacceptable because it ruins Christian marriage is pure hogwash.
So dearest NOW (National Organization for Marriage), Concerned Women, Bigots, and the lot of you, you have no fucking clue what you are talking about.
No comments:
Post a Comment