# Lehre und Wehre_St. Louis Missouri_August 1855_S253
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Excerpts as Contributions to Pastoral Casuistry. 253

“Clandestine betrothals are those contracted in complete secrecy and in the presence of no one at all; generally, however, and in the broader sense, those are called clandestine which were indeed contracted in the presence of witnesses, but without the consent of the parents. For since these lack the public authority of the parents, which is required for the marriage of children by an explicit divine law, they are therefore not wrongly counted among clandestine betrothals, the basis of this designation being taken not so much from the place as from the manner in which they were contracted—contrary to the laws and to the public law that requires parental consent.”

“The question arises: If someone confesses that he secretly promised marriage, and yet says that he is not bound to fulfill his promise because he made it secretly and now regrets it, should such a person be heard? Answer: If he is independent, that is, not under parental authority, this excuse must not be accepted; rather, his own confession must be taken into account. For just as the jurists rightly say of the first kind of clandestine betrothal, ‘Mere secrecy takes nothing away from the marriage,’ so with respect to the other kind of clandestine betrothal, namely, those contracted without parental consent, the opposite must be maintained.”

“The question is asked: Is a clandestine betrothal of the other kind, that is, one contracted by independent persons without witnesses, if sexual intercourse has also taken place, to be preferred to a public betrothal? Answer: Nearly everyone answers in the affirmative, because a greater wrong has been done to the woman who, in addition to the promise of marriage, has been robbed of her most precious endowment than to the woman who has merely been promised marriage, though publicly; therefore, greater consideration must be given to the former. See Luther, Tom. Jen. V, 244. A different judgment must, however, be made in two cases: first, if the guilty party neither admits the promise of marriage nor can lawfully be proved to have made it; second, if the public betrothal has been followed by the church blessing, the taking of the bride to her home, and marital cohabitation. For then the public betrothal, consummated by the marriage ceremony, is to be preferred to the clandestine betrothal, even if the latter was confirmed by sexual intercourse.”

“Here the difficult question comes up for discussion: Whether betrothals contracted without the parents’ knowledge and consent and confirmed by an oath can be dissolved by them by virtue of parental authority? Answer: Just as above, in the question concerning the necessity of parental consent, we distinguished between the strictness of the law and a certain mitigating relaxation of it, so we apply the same distinction here to clandestine betrothals confirmed by oath. We concede that sometimes, in view of the circumstances, parents should be advised to”