Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 9.djvu/279

 LIOAMEN

244

LIGHTS

Vitalitmua aJa QewhichU und dU Lehre (Leipzig, 1005); Fostbb. Hiatorji of Phyaiology (Cambridge. 1901); Locr, Bioloffy ana its M<Scer9 (New York. 1908).

8CISNCE AND PmiiOaOPBT OF LlFB. WlNDLW, Wfuit u Lifef

(London, 1008): Driesch. The Science and Philoaophy of the Organim (London, 1007-1008); Wilson, The Cell in Develojy- ment and Inheritance (New York, 1006); Jennings, Contri- btUiona to the Study of the Behaviour of Lower Organiema (Wash- ington, 1004); Gerard, The Old Riddle and the Neweat Answer (London, 1908); Maber, Psychology (New York and London, 1905); Dressel. Der belebte und tier unbelebte Stoff (Freibura:, 1883); GuTBERLET, Der Kampf um die Seele (Mainz, 1800); fDnit, Naturphilosophie (Monster, 1003); KmiifKja, Philosophie der Botanik (Leipzig, 1005); Wasmann, Die Modcme Biologie und die Entwicfclungstheorie (Freiburg, 1006); Mercxer, La difinUion phihsophique de la vie (Lou vain, 1808); Faroes, La vie ei Vivolution des espkces (Paris, 19(X)); Grasbbt, Lea limites de la biologie (Paris, 1906); La Gbiesa, La Biomeccanica^ il n4ovit€UiainOt il vitalismo tradisionale (Rome, 1900); Carazzz, Teorie e critiche neUa modema biologia (Padua, 1906); Gemelu, L* enigma della vita (Florence. 1910).

Limited Mecbanicism. — Tongiorgi, Inslitxdiones Philoso* phiccB (Brussels, 1869); Carbonelle, Les confins de la science et de la philosophic (Paris, 1881); Seccbi, Lunith d€Ua forte fisiche (Rome, 1860); Palmieri, Jnatitutionea Philosophies, II (Rome, 1875); Materiaustio mecbanical views. — Weis- MANN, Evolution T/ieory (Ixtndon and New York, 1004); Le Dantec, The Nature and the Origin of Life (London, 1007); Verworn, General Physiology; (tr. London and New York, 1800); Pearson, Orammar of Science (London, 1900).

Michael Maher.

Ligamen (Lat. for hond)^ the existing marriage tie which constitutes in canon law a public impediment to the contracting of a second marriage. As marriage is monogamous and indissoluble, it follows that one who is still united in valid marriage cannot contract an- other vaUd marriage (Matt., v, 31 sq., xix, 4 sqq.; Mark, x, 11 sq.; Luke, xvi, 18; I Cor., vii, 10 sq.). The existence of a previous valid marriage at the mo- ment of contracting a second entails of itself the in- vahdity of the latter. The Church enforces the law that no one can contract two or more marriages at the same time. Protestantism on the contrary docs not take this stand as is shown, among other cases, by the action of Luther and other reformers in the case of the double marriage of the I^andgrave Philip of Hesse (Janssen, "History of the German People at the close of the Middle Ages", VI (tr. London, 1908), book II, xii, 75 sc^c^.; Rockwell, "Die Doppelehe des Land- grafen Philipp von Hessen" (Marburg, 1904); Paulus, "Cajetan ana Luther (ibcr die Polvgamie" in "His- torisch-pohtische Blatter", CXXXV, 81 sqq.; Kohler "Die Doppelehe des Landgrafen Philipp von Hessen" in " Histonsche Zeitschrift ", XCI V, 385 sqq.). Hence he who has already contracted a marriage, in order to proceed legally with another, must prove that the first marriage tie {ligamen) no longer exists. Since mar- riage, apart from " matrimonium ratum" which is dis- solved for one party by religious profession, is regu- larly dissolved by death alone, proof of this death must be established before the second marriage can validly be contracted (C. 19, X, de spousal., IV, I).

The proof of death required is either an official death certificate, issued by the parish priest or other authorized ecclesiastic, or by the proper civil official, the directors of hospitals, the military commanding officer, or satisfactory evidence from other public records and reports. The decision of a secular judge supported by a death certificate cannot ipso facto decide the question for the ecclesiastical authorities; they may, however, utilize the same. Death may be proved by two credible witnesses on their oath; by one witness of such rank or character that he is above sus- picion; by hearsay witnesses, if their statements orig- mate from unsuspected sources. Should such credible evidence be unattainable directlv, and from eccle- siastical sources, the bishop should try as far as possi- ble to obtain at least a moral certainty regarding the position of the contracting parties. He ought also to consider the previous marital relations of the missing

eirty, his religious attitude, age, health, property re- tions with the surviving spouse, etc. Should the bishop be unable to obtain moral cer- tainty or should the case be extraordinary, appeal

must be made to the Apostolic See (C. 8, X, qui filii sint legit., IV, 17; Cong. S. Off., 13, Mai, 1868, L e. the Sac. CJong. Inq., 18 Juli, 1900). Whoever, in spite of the certaintv of an existing marriage, attempts to contract a second, conmiits an act juridical]^ null and void, is guilty of the sin of bigamy, mcurs the ecclesiastical pen- alty of infamy, and is exconmiimicated with a conse- quent refusal of the sacraments and Christian burial. Should it prove, however, that in fact the first marriage at the time of contracting the second, was really dis- solved, then the second, despite bad faith, would be valid. Should the second marriage have been con- tracted in good faith, if only by one party, and it sub- sequently appear that the first spouse still lived, then the second marriage would not only be invalid but the parties to it must be separated by the ecclesiasti- cal authorities, and the first marriage re-established. However, the second and invalid marriage would en- joy the advantage of being putative marriage (C. 8, 5C, qui filii sint legit., IV, 17). This second marriage, thouffh illegal during the lifetime of the first spouse, may be validly contracted after his or her death; in- deed, should the party who acted bona fide demand it, the guilty one is then bound to contract marriage validly with the petitioner.
 * Instructio ad probanaum obitum alicuius coniugis";

Since monogamy and the indissolubihty of marriage arc founded on the natural law, this impediment of ligamen is binding also on non-Catholics and on the unbaptized. If an unbaptizcd person hving in polyg- amy become a Christian, he must keep the wife he had first married and release the second, in case the first wife is converted with him. Otherwise, by virtue of the "Pauline privilege", the converted husband may choose that one of his wives who allows herself to l>e baptized (C. 8, X, de divort., IV, 19, Pius V, "Ro- mani Pontificis ", 2 Aug., 1571; Gregory XIII, " Popu- lis ac nationibus'*, 25 Jan., 1585). Polygamy is like- wise forbidden by the civil law, though it is much more indulgent tnan the Church in the dissolving of marriages and granting divorces, and often permita a new marriage where the first marriage still exists. In this matter Catholics must not follow the civil law where it confficts with the law of the Church.

WerKz, Jus decretaliumt IV iRomc, 1904 <, 520 saq.; Lau- RENTius, Institutiones juris ccclesiastiei (Freiburg, 1908)^. 626 sqq.; Pauu, Archiv far kaiholisches Kirchenrecht^ LXXXVIIIr 273 BQQ-; Smith, Elements of Ecclesiastical Law (New York*

1877-89). Johannes Baptist SaqmCllek.

Lights. — Upon the subject of the litureical use of lights, as an adjunct of the services of the Church, something has already been said under such head- ings as Altar (in Liturgy), sub-title Altar-Candles; Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament; Candles; Candlesticks; Lamps and Lampadarii. The present article will be concerned only with the more ^ncrai aspect of the Question, and in particular with the charge so often levelled against Catholicism of adopting wholesale the ceremonial practices of the pagan world.

How far the use of lights in the daytime as an ad- junct of the Liturgy can be traced back to the second or third century a. d. is not quite easy to decide. On tlic one hand, there seems to be some evidence that the Christians themselves repudiated the practice. Although Tertullian ("Apol.'S xlvi and xxxv; "De Idololat.'', xv) does not make any direct reference to the use of lights in religious worsnip, still he speaks in strong terms of the uselessness of burning lamps in the daytime as an act of piety towards the emper- ors. This would be somewhat inconsistent, if the Christians themselves had Ixjen open to the same re- proach. Moreover, several of the Fathers of the fourth century might seem to be more explicit in their condemnation of a display of lamps. For ex- ample, about the year 303, Lactantius writes: '* Tney [the pagans] bum lights as to one dwelling in