Deissmann suggests that the stigmata were pro- phylactic against trouble and evil [Bibelstudien, Marburg, 1895, p. 266 f.), but this view is not in harmony with the spirit of the Galatian Epistle in general, and the closing passage in particular. To understand Gal 6" it is necessary to note Gal 18-12. 151. 21M. 412-2", and compare 2 Co 4'". Possibly the scars caused Lysias to conclude that St. Paul was the Egyptian bandit (Ac 2P*; cf. J. H. Moulton, Eci-pTxxi. [1009-10] 283-284).
Not only did the Apostle bear the physical stig- mata, but he displayed also the spiritual 'marks of Jesus' — love, gentleness, humility, unselfishness (Jn 13"^ Ph 2', 2 Ti 2=").
In the 'Age of Faith,' in reality the 'Dark Age,' many believed that tlie body of the Apostle bore marks resembling the wound-prints on the body of the Crucified Jesus. A similar belief prevailed
MARRIAGE
MARRIAGE
11
with regard to St. Francis of Assisi, upon whose body the marks were impressed on 15th Sejit. 1224 by a seraph with six wings. Bonaventnra says, 'Jam enim propter stigmata Domini Jesu qua? in corpore tuo portas, nemo debet tibi esse molestus' {Life of Ht. Francin, 13. 4). These words were paraphrased afterwards by Aquinas as follows: 'portahat insignia passionis Christi,' but what he says subsequently proves that he did not accept the view of Bonaventura. Another verj' famous instance is that of St. Catherine of Siena. Altogether there are about ninety cases of stigmatizatiion on record. It is alleged that in some cases all the marks were present ; in others some were visible and the rest caused pain but produced no outward sign : in others, again, there was no visible mark at all, but local pains were felt. Occasionally the marks became visible after death. Tliere are fewer cases of stigmatization recorded amongst men than amongst women.
Investigation has proved that some instances were fraudulent, others the result of self-mutila- tion (cf. Mt 19'-), and some owing to a kind of hysteria. But all cannot be explained, or ex- plained away, in these ways. The influence of the mind upon the body is great and mysterious. Beaunis states that rubefaction and vesication have been produced by suggestion in the hypnotic state (Becherches expirimcntale.s sur les conditions de Vactiviti cir(brale). In certain varieties of re- ligious ecstasy a bloody sweat may leave a red mark upon the skin, and such marks are caused also by capillary congestion. It has been main- tained that transudation of blood through an unbroken skin is an unknown and impossible phenomenon. Pathological facts probably gave rise to the belief that the stigmata of the crucified body of Jesus were seen upon some of His followers.
LrreRATURE. — Artt. 'Cuttings in the Flesh' and 'Mark' in HDB, ' Stigmata' in DCG ; Commentaries on Gal 0'", bv H. A. W. Meyer (n8C,2), H. Alfoid (51871), J. A. Beet (188.^), J. B. Lightfoot ('-1890), W. M. Rarasay (1S99) ; ' Stigmatization ' in KBr^i and 'Stigmatisation ' in PJiK^ ; Lives of SL Francis of Assist by Thomas de Celano (ed. Rosedale, London, 190-1) and St. Bonaventura (ed. Anioni, Rome, 1388), Mrs. Ohphant (■•yo., 1871). Paul Sabatier (Fr. ed.2-', Paris, 1899, Eng. tr., London, 1901, etc.) ; H. Beaunis, Recherchesexftirimentales sur tes conditions de I'activiti cdribtale, Paris, 1886 ; P. Dearmer, Body and SotU : An Inquiry into the Effects of Religion vpon Health, London, 1909 ; JSxpT Kx. [190S-09] 485-86.
H. CARISS J. SiDNELL.
MARRIAGE. — 1. ChriBtian conception of mar- riage.— During the Apostolic Age the Church was both Jewish and Gentile, and its ideas on mar- riage had a double background in those of the OT and the heathen. The gravest danger was tliat the laxity of heathenism with regard to marriage should remain among the Gentile converts. In tlie heathen world, though the marriage ceremony was in some sort a sacred act, the marriage itself was looked on as an easily-broken contract which either partj' might dissolve at will. It is not sur- prising, therefore, that one of the earliest questions which the Corinthians put to St. Paul should be on the subject of marriage (1 Co 7')- The Apostle, writing as he does to Gentiles, dwells on the fact that marriage is a remedy against sin {v.^ ; cf. also 1 Th 4^'-, whether with most modern commentators we interpret ri iavrou ffiteCos in that passage of a man's wife, or, with G. Milligan, of the liuman body, for the context implies marriage), .and gives many warnings against heathen impurities (Ko jM 28 [idolatry and impurity inseparable] 6'-'- 13''',
1 Co 5''»-" 6"-2o, 2 Co 12-', Gal 5^<'--\ Ejih 2-''- 4"-"i ['as the Gentiles also walk'] 5^, Col S"", 2 Ti 2-). Other NT writers give like warnings (1 P l" 2" 4='',
2 P 2'8, Jude '"■ '»).
The Jews luad a much higher conception of mar- riage than the heatlien. Almost all of them were married, as is tlie case at the present day with
practically the whole of the Christian, Jewish, and Muslim populations of the Near East— the excep- tions are very few. They looked on the saving ' Be j'e fruitful and mulliiily ' (Gn l'") as a univer- sal command. Marriage wjis a sacred duty and was considered most holy. ' The pious fasted before it, confessing their sins. It was regarded almost as a Sacrament. Entrance into the mar- ried state was thought to carry the forgiveness of sins ' (Edersheim, /,'/■' i. 352 f.). Yet the Jews h.ad not escaped from heathen contamination ; not only was divorce extremely common (below, 7), but, as frequent passages in the OT show, impurities of all kinds had to be strongly repressed. In Eph 2'-''" St. Paul does not acijuit his own nation in this respect, contrasting the jironouns 'ye' (Gentiles) and ' we also' (Jews).