[1068] Pollock and Maitland, op. cit., II, 366.
[1069] Peter Lombard (d. 1164) was a professor in the University of Paris, and later was ordained a bishop: cf. Sohm, Eheschliessung, 121 ff.; Esmein, op. cit., I, 119 ff. His theory is set forth in the Sententiae, lib. iv, dist. 27, 28: "Efficiens autem causa matrimonii est consensus, non quilibet, sed per verba expressus: nec de futuro sed de praesenti. Si enim consentiunt in futurum, dicentes, Accipiam te in virum, et ego te in uxorem, non est iste consensus efficax causa matrimonii": dist. 27, § 3. "Consensus, id est pactio conjugalis, matrimonium facit, et extunc est conjugium etiamsi non praecessit, vel secuta est copula carnalis": dist. 27, § 4. The consensus, if expressed by a verb of the present tense, accipio te, constitutes a valid marriage without copula. Opposed to this is a promise, expressed by a verb in the future tense, accipiam te, which is binding only when followed by copula. Compare Tancred, Summa de mat., 3 ff.; and see the masterly discussion of the history of the distinction, in Sohm, op. cit., chap, iv, and his Trauung und Verlobung, 73-109. Cf. Scheurl, Kirch. Eheschliessungsrecht, 76 ff.; Dieckhoff, Die kirchl. Trauung, 115 ff.; Sehling, Unterscheidung der Verlöbnisse, 72 ff., 115 ff.; Freisen, Geschichte des can. Eherechts, 179 ff., 205 ff.; Kent, Commentaries, II, 87; Bishop, Marriage, Divorce, and Separation, I, §§ 313 ff., 353 ff.; Friedberg, Eheschliessung, 203, 206; Stephens, Laws of the Clergy, I, 672 ff.; especially Pollock and Maitland, Hist. of Eng. Law, II, 366 ff.; Esmein, op. cit., I, 119-37; Salis, Die Publikation des trid. Rechts, 2, 3.
[1070] Sohm, Eheschliessung, 124 ff.
[1071] This is proved by Sohm, op. cit., chap, iv; idem, Trauung und Verlobung, chap, iii; and by Esmein, op. cit., I, 119-37.
Magister Vacarius, who lived in England ca. 1148-98 and probably taught law at Oxford, has a theory differing from that of Gratian or Lombard. According to him, the "true act of marriage, the act which marks the moment at which the marriage takes place, is the mutual delivery (traditio) of man and woman each to each. Of course as a condition there must exist a pact of the appropriate kind.... Again, as a condition there must be the natural power of effecting a carnal union; but the carnalis copula is unessential." The marriage is made by the tradition: Maitland, "Magistri Vacarii summa de matrimonio," Law Quart. Rev., XIII, 136-38. In the same volume, 270-87, Maitland publishes the text of the Summa.
On the two kinds of canonical sponsalia see the dissertations described in Bibliographical Note VIII.
[1072] Pollock and Maitland, op. cit., II, 366.
[1073] This doctrine was already sanctioned by Innocent III. (1130-43): Esmein, op. cit., I, 126.
[1074] Esmein, op. cit., I, 85. Cf. Pollock and Maitland, op. cit., II, 366.
[1075] The effect of this neglect on clandestine marriage is forcibly described by Luther, Tischreden, foll. 355, 356. "Dass aber die Juristen fürgeben und anziehen den Canon, und sagen: Dass der Eltern Autoritet, Rath, und Will wol Ehren halben möge dabey sein, aber nicht auss not, dass es also sein müsste, denn die Bewilligung derer, die mit einander wollen Ehelich werden, ist die Substantz, die nötig ist. Der Eltern will aber ist ein accidens, ein zufellig ding, das nur Erbarkeit und Ehrenhalben geschieht, macht aber noch hindert nicht die Ehe.