"Nevertheless, most medieval marriages were at least partially arranged, with the choice of spouse being more of a joint decision between parents and children, and with financial or political calculations also coming into play." Such a statement indirectly speaks about two absolutely opposed types of "love:" (the Medieval, i.e. true Catholic) one who was wisely oriented by the intellects (enlightened by the Supernatural Faith) of those involved in a matrimonial decision, and one - "passional," "carnal" love - based on the ephemeral impulses of the flesh without any implication of the intellect (i.e., reason).
Like most things in life marriage depends on the application of effort to make it fruitful. The best part of that is that the effort itself produces benefits to all three parts: each of the two spouses and the entity of the marriage itself.
A lovely article - quite uplifting! I am enjoying the escape from the stereotypical portrayal of medieval life which has been handed down to us by those who would have us believe that the medieval period was one of superstition and ignorance. Just looking at the cathedrals should put an end to that stupid propaganda- thank goodness for the access we have today to an alternative view of history. But even more importantly, your gentle understanding of nuance and ability to communicate the complexities in the practices and rules implemented is such a refreshing break from the simplistic sweeping statements that grew to pass for ‘scholarship’ and which serve to smugly place thoughtful rules and practices within an ideological framework that completely distorts -disapproving anything that contravenes the modern sexual revolution (not so modern now though…)
I like this series. I especially also like the illustrations showing how God (Adam and Eve) or the priest (Mary and Joseph) joins the hands of each couple. Really thought-provoking.
Loved reading this thanks! I had assumed that simply cohabiting would be a dominant option given cost of weddings. This piece shed much more light on it for me….
You're welcome, and I'm glad you enjoyed the article! In medieval culture, generally speaking, cohabitation before marriage was not socially acceptable and would have been ruinous for the woman's reputation. And actually, weddings did not need to be expensive, especially since a private exchange of vows (no priest, no witnesses) was considered adequate for a valid and licit marriage (though clandestine marriage was not permitted). Later in the Middle Ages, banns and witnesses were required for a licit marriage, but private exchange of vows was still adequate for a valid marriage.
The valid vs licit issue is an interesting distinction I hadn’t thought about in terms of marriage, but makes sense. Similar to Catholics marrying each other in areas where priests only rolled through infrequently, and would thus later bless/legitimize their valid marriage?
Yes, it's really quite astonishing to think of the Church's willingness to entrust the Sacrament of Matrimony to the private actions of the spouses. As you pointed out, there are practical benefits to this, and it also makes sense given that Christian marriage transitioned gradually from a primarily secular, civil institution to an experience that was more thoroughly interwoven with the Church's laws and liturgies.
The idea of marriage between two people of the same sex would have been utterly unimaginable and utterly incomprehensible to the minds of medieval Europeans.
This is a really good write up. I think marriage in the early centuries needs to be studied as a course for our times.
Though I would like to correct your reference to canon law. The minimal age for marriage was 14-16, for boys and girls respectively (Canon Law 1917). But I can understand how it would be 12 and 14, as Canon Law in those times weren't "canonical". It differed from country to country.
St. Pope Pius X seemed to make one universal with the 1917 code... which is by and large really for the Western/Roman Church.
Hello, and thank you for the comment. Canon Law developed gradually in the Church beginning as early as the second century. Extensive canonical regulations, based on promulgations of Church councils and decisions made by bishops, were present during the medieval period; they governed birth, marriage, burial, financial practices, labor, holidays, and much more. A comprehensive collection of Canon Law, which applied to everyone under the authority of the Roman Catholic Church, was available in the twelfth century: the Concordia Discordantium Canonum (or simply the Decretum of Gratian) appeared in 1140. An official collection of Canon Law was then promulgated by Pope Gregory IX in 1234 (the Decretals of Gregory IX). Thus, Canon Law in the Middle Ages certainly was "canonical," and as I said in the article, medieval Canon Law specified the minimum age for marriage as 12 for females and 14 for males.
Hmmm, wow! Thank you for your response. This puts things into perspective. Thank you so much. You are really knowledgeable. I wish I had time to read like you. Im sure yiur friends are blessed to have you. God bless you.
"Nevertheless, most medieval marriages were at least partially arranged, with the choice of spouse being more of a joint decision between parents and children, and with financial or political calculations also coming into play." Such a statement indirectly speaks about two absolutely opposed types of "love:" (the Medieval, i.e. true Catholic) one who was wisely oriented by the intellects (enlightened by the Supernatural Faith) of those involved in a matrimonial decision, and one - "passional," "carnal" love - based on the ephemeral impulses of the flesh without any implication of the intellect (i.e., reason).
Well said!
Thank you for both your excellent essay and encouraging words! Related to the mentioned two types of "love", look what I have found in some ancient pagan authors: https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/7568-the-number-of-the-beast-and-ancient-wisdom-can-pagan-sages-help-us-decipher-the-mystery
Very interesting.
Fascinating article, as ever we can learn a great deal from the medieval times. 😊
Like most things in life marriage depends on the application of effort to make it fruitful. The best part of that is that the effort itself produces benefits to all three parts: each of the two spouses and the entity of the marriage itself.
This is well said. Thank you for commenting.
A lovely article - quite uplifting! I am enjoying the escape from the stereotypical portrayal of medieval life which has been handed down to us by those who would have us believe that the medieval period was one of superstition and ignorance. Just looking at the cathedrals should put an end to that stupid propaganda- thank goodness for the access we have today to an alternative view of history. But even more importantly, your gentle understanding of nuance and ability to communicate the complexities in the practices and rules implemented is such a refreshing break from the simplistic sweeping statements that grew to pass for ‘scholarship’ and which serve to smugly place thoughtful rules and practices within an ideological framework that completely distorts -disapproving anything that contravenes the modern sexual revolution (not so modern now though…)
Thank you for your kind words, Kate, and for this interesting and well-written comment!
Very much appreciated this piece!
Thank you for letting me know, Kerri!
I like this series. I especially also like the illustrations showing how God (Adam and Eve) or the priest (Mary and Joseph) joins the hands of each couple. Really thought-provoking.
Yes, the images in this post show how central the joining of the hands was in medieval (or at least later-medieval) wedding ceremonies.
Loved reading this thanks! I had assumed that simply cohabiting would be a dominant option given cost of weddings. This piece shed much more light on it for me….
You're welcome, and I'm glad you enjoyed the article! In medieval culture, generally speaking, cohabitation before marriage was not socially acceptable and would have been ruinous for the woman's reputation. And actually, weddings did not need to be expensive, especially since a private exchange of vows (no priest, no witnesses) was considered adequate for a valid and licit marriage (though clandestine marriage was not permitted). Later in the Middle Ages, banns and witnesses were required for a licit marriage, but private exchange of vows was still adequate for a valid marriage.
The valid vs licit issue is an interesting distinction I hadn’t thought about in terms of marriage, but makes sense. Similar to Catholics marrying each other in areas where priests only rolled through infrequently, and would thus later bless/legitimize their valid marriage?
Yes, it's really quite astonishing to think of the Church's willingness to entrust the Sacrament of Matrimony to the private actions of the spouses. As you pointed out, there are practical benefits to this, and it also makes sense given that Christian marriage transitioned gradually from a primarily secular, civil institution to an experience that was more thoroughly interwoven with the Church's laws and liturgies.
thank you for the extra info! out of interest any ideas about same sex marriage back then?
The idea of marriage between two people of the same sex would have been utterly unimaginable and utterly incomprehensible to the minds of medieval Europeans.
This is a really good write up. I think marriage in the early centuries needs to be studied as a course for our times.
Though I would like to correct your reference to canon law. The minimal age for marriage was 14-16, for boys and girls respectively (Canon Law 1917). But I can understand how it would be 12 and 14, as Canon Law in those times weren't "canonical". It differed from country to country.
St. Pope Pius X seemed to make one universal with the 1917 code... which is by and large really for the Western/Roman Church.
Thank you so much once again.
Hello, and thank you for the comment. Canon Law developed gradually in the Church beginning as early as the second century. Extensive canonical regulations, based on promulgations of Church councils and decisions made by bishops, were present during the medieval period; they governed birth, marriage, burial, financial practices, labor, holidays, and much more. A comprehensive collection of Canon Law, which applied to everyone under the authority of the Roman Catholic Church, was available in the twelfth century: the Concordia Discordantium Canonum (or simply the Decretum of Gratian) appeared in 1140. An official collection of Canon Law was then promulgated by Pope Gregory IX in 1234 (the Decretals of Gregory IX). Thus, Canon Law in the Middle Ages certainly was "canonical," and as I said in the article, medieval Canon Law specified the minimum age for marriage as 12 for females and 14 for males.
Hmmm, wow! Thank you for your response. This puts things into perspective. Thank you so much. You are really knowledgeable. I wish I had time to read like you. Im sure yiur friends are blessed to have you. God bless you.
You're welcome, thanks for commenting! The caricatures are truly awful, but fortunately there is also a lot of good medieval scholarship out there.