Dist. 32, Art. 1, Q. 2
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 32
Quaestio II. Utrum vir ante carnalem commixtionem possit continere, uxore nolente.
Secundo quaeritur, utrum vir ante carnalem commixtionem possit continere, uxore nolente. Et quod non, videtur.
1. Primae ad Corinthios septimo1: Uxori vir debitum reddat, similiter et uxor viro; sed ante commixtionem sunt vir et uxor: ergo ante commixtionem tenentur: ergo etc.
2. Item, uxor viro obligatur voluntarie et per mutuum consensum: si ergo ante commixtionem est mutuus consensus, ergo et obligatio ad redditionem debiti.
3. Item, mulier non tenetur continere et non potest cum altero contrahere: ergo potest iuste debitum exigere; sed iuste exigenti iniustum est negare: ergo etc.
4. Item, esto quod vir post consensum de praesenti violenter extorqueat copulam carnis, est matrimonium consummatum: ergo tenetur ad solvendum debitum omnino ipsa uxor ei; sed violentia non inducit novam obligationem: ergo prius obligabatur.
Contra:
1. Decretalis, de Conversione coniugatorum2, concedit viro potestatem intrandi religionem, uxore nolente; sed plus est religionem intrare quam continere: ergo concedit licentiam continendi.
2. Item, per consensum contrahitur matrimonium, esto etiam quod non sit in copulam carnalem, ut supra3 ostensum est: ergo si non obligatur nisi ad illud, in quod consentit, patet etc.
3. Item, si omnis vir esset obligatus ad solvendum debitum ante carnalem copulam: ergo nihil adderet carnalis commixtio ad consummationem4 matrimonii.
Item, quaeritur iuxta hoc: unde hoc est, quod copula coniugalis, violenter extorta, matrimonium consummat, et consensus coactus matrimonium non ratificat5? Et utrum huic liceat post copulam mulieris vovere continentiam. — Et quod sic, videtur: quia, si prius licebat, et nullus potest ei ius suum violenter auferre, patet etc.
Conclusio. Ante consummationem matrimonii utraque persona continere potest per duos menses, sed post vel tenetur reddere debitum, vel per solemne votum se manifestare mortuum mundo.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod ante consummationem matrimonii utraque persona nec omnino obligatur, nec omnino est libera.
Non omnino obligatur, quia potest mori mundo; et sic matrimonium solvitur, ipso vivente in carne, et tunc, cum hoc facit, omnino est absolutus. Nec omnino libera1, quia, si vult huic mundo vivere, necesse habet petenti debitum reddere. Et quia in medio est inter vitam huius saeculi et vitam religiosam sive spiritualem; ideo sacri canones2 terminum praefixerunt, ut possit deliberare, videlicet terminum duorum mensium, vel circa illud. Et ideo dicendum, quod uxore petente, continere potest per duos menses, sed post vel tenetur reddere debitum, vel manifestare se mundo mortuum per solemne votum ad3 religionis ingressum; quod si non faciat, tenetur ad debitum solvendum, sicut primae rationes ostendunt.
Ad argumenta ad oppositum:
Ad 1. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur in contrarium, quod potest intrare religionem, ergo in saeculo continere; dicendum, quod non valet, quia introitus in religionem facit mori mundo et solvi vinculum; unde in nullo fit sponsae praeiudicium; non sic est, cum manet in saeculo.
Ad 2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod non oportet consentire in carnalem copulam; dicendum, quod quamvis non oporteat in eam consentire, oportet tamen consentire in copulam coniugalem, quae necessario ordinat ad illam, nisi interveniat mors spiritualis4.
Ad 3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod nihil addit; dicendum, quod falsum est, immo addit quantum ad significationem5 et quantum ad obligationem. Quia enim fiunt unum corpus et una caro, ideo non potest unus transire de hoc mundo, reliquo remanente; et ideo non potest vovere continentiam, nisi coniux pariter voveat. Praeterea, tenetur ad statim reddendum post carnalem copulam, sed ante datur ei spatium duorum mensium; et ideo addit.
Ad quaestionem incidentalem. Ad illud quod quaeritur de ea quae corrupta est violenter a viro, dicendum, quod quia matrimonium est consummatum, non potest sine assensu viri religionem intrare nec votum vovere.
Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod matrimonium debet esse liberum; dicendum, quod verum est quantum ad consensum, in quo est matrimonii fundamentum; ista tamen copula, quamvis sit violenta, quia tamen maritalis est et fundata super consensum voluntarium, ideo voluntaria iudicatur; et ideo matrimonium ratum6 consummat. Praeterea, consensus de sui ratione importat libertatem, non sic coniunctio corporalis7.
---
Question II. Whether before carnal union a man may be continent, the wife being unwilling.
Secondly it is asked whether before carnal union a man may be continent, the wife being unwilling. And that he may not, it seems.
1. First to the Corinthians, chapter seven1: Let the husband render the debt to his wife, and likewise the wife to the husband; but before union they are husband and wife: therefore before union they are bound: therefore, etc.
2. Likewise, the wife is bound to the husband voluntarily and by mutual consent: if therefore before union there is mutual consent, then also the obligation to the rendering of the debt.
3. Likewise, the woman is not bound to be continent and cannot contract with another: therefore she can justly demand the debt; but to refuse one who demands justly is unjust: therefore, etc.
4. Likewise, suppose that a man, after consent given for the present, should by force extort carnal union, the marriage is consummated: therefore the wife herself is wholly bound to render the debt to him; but violence does not induce a new obligation: therefore she was bound beforehand.
On the contrary:
1. The Decretal, On the Conversion of the Married2, grants a man the power of entering religion, the wife being unwilling; but to enter religion is more than to be continent: therefore it grants the license of being continent.
2. Likewise, by consent marriage is contracted, even though there be no [consent] to carnal union, as was shown above3: therefore, if he is bound only to that to which he consents, it is clear, etc.
3. Likewise, if every man were bound to render the debt before carnal union: therefore carnal union would add nothing to the consummation4 of the marriage.
Likewise, it is asked in connection with this: whence is it that conjugal union, violently extorted, consummates the marriage, whereas coerced consent does not ratify5 the marriage? And whether it be lawful for such a one, after the woman's [carnal] union, to vow continence. — And that it is so, it seems: because, if it was lawful before, and no one can violently take her right from her, it is clear, etc.
Conclusion. Before the consummation of the marriage either person may be continent for two months, but afterward is either bound to render the debt, or by a solemn vow to show himself dead to the world.
I respond: It must be said that before the consummation of the marriage either person is neither wholly bound nor wholly free.
He is not wholly bound, because he can die to the world; and thus the marriage is dissolved, while he yet lives in the flesh, and then, when he does this, he is wholly absolved. Nor is he wholly free1, because, if he wishes to live to this world, he must render the debt to the one who demands it. And because he is midway between the life of this age and the religious or spiritual life, therefore the sacred canons2 have set a fixed term, that he may deliberate, namely the term of two months, or thereabouts. And therefore it must be said that, at the wife's request, he may be continent for two months, but afterward is either bound to render the debt, or to show himself dead to the world by a solemn vow unto3 entrance into religion; and if he does not do this, he is bound to render the debt, as the first arguments show.
To the arguments on the contrary:
To 1. To that, then, which is objected on the contrary, that he can enter religion, therefore [he can] be continent in the world; it must be said that it does not hold, because entrance into religion makes one die to the world and looses the bond; whence no prejudice is done to the betrothed; it is not so when he remains in the world.
To 2. To that which is objected, that it is not necessary to consent to carnal union; it must be said that, although it is not necessary to consent to it, it is nevertheless necessary to consent to conjugal union, which is necessarily ordered to it, unless spiritual death4 intervene.
To 3. To that which is objected, that it adds nothing; it must be said that this is false, nay rather it adds both as to signification5 and as to obligation. For because they become one body and one flesh, therefore one cannot pass out of this world while the other remains; and therefore he cannot vow continence unless the spouse vow likewise. Moreover, one is bound to render at once after carnal union, but beforehand a space of two months is given him; and therefore it adds [something].
To the incidental question. To that which is asked concerning her who has been violently corrupted by her husband, it must be said that, because the marriage is consummated, she cannot without her husband's assent enter religion nor vow a vow.
To that which is objected, that marriage ought to be free; it must be said that this is true as to the consent, in which is the foundation of the marriage; yet this union, although it be violent, because it is nevertheless marital and founded upon voluntary consent, is therefore judged voluntary; and therefore it consummates a ratified6 marriage. Moreover, consent of its very nature implies liberty, but not so bodily conjunction7.
---
- 1Vers. 3. Post similiter Vulgata addit autem.[1 Cor. 7,] verse 3. After similiter ("likewise") the Vulgate adds autem ("moreover").
- 2Extra lib. III. tit. 32. C. Verum post (2.), ubi talis concessio datur, dummodo matrimonium non sit consummatum. Cfr. supra d. 27. dub. 5.Decretals (Extra), Book III, tit. 32, ch. Verum post (2.), where such a concession is granted, provided the marriage has not been consummated. Cf. above, d. 27, dub. 5.
- 3Dist. 28. q. 6. — Pro non sit cod. Z non consensit.[Gratian,] Dist. 28, q. 6. — For non sit ("there be no [consent]") codex Z reads non consensit ("he did not consent").
- 4[consummationem] Ita codd. Aaa, in aliis et edd. perperam, ut videtur, conservationem.[consummationem, "consummation"] So codices A, a, a; in the others and in the editions, wrongly (as it seems), conservationem ("preservation").
- 5Vide supra d. 29. q. 1.See above, d. 29, q. 1.
- 1Codd. communiter liber; quae lectio incongrua explicatur ex falsa lectione plurium codd., in qua haec propositio cum praecedente coniungitur: hoc facit, nec omnino est absolutus nec omnino liber.The codices commonly read liber ("free," masculine); this incongruous reading is explained by the false reading of many codices, in which this proposition is joined to the preceding: hoc facit, nec omnino est absolutus nec omnino liber ("he does this, and is neither wholly absolved nor wholly free").
- 2Cfr. supra pag. 684, nota 1.Cf. above, p. 684, note 1.
- 3Codd. 1 K per, cod. bb vel, cod. L vel per, cod. aa et, plures codd. in.Codices 1, K read per ("through"), codex bb vel ("or"), codex L vel per ("or through"), codex aa et ("and"), several codices in ("in").
- 4Vat. addit vel civilis.The Vatican [edition] adds vel civilis ("or civil [death]").
- 5Vide supra d. 26. a. 2. q. 1. et q. 3. — In seqq. respicitur ratio addita in C. Verum post, supra d. 27. dub. 5. allegato.See above, d. 26, a. 2, q. 1 and q. 3. — In what follows, reference is made to the reasoning added in the chapter Verum post, cited above at d. 27, dub. 5.
- 6Codd. B P Q R S U bb ratificatum, codd. cum pluribus radicatum.Codices B, P, Q, R, S, U, bb read ratificatum ("ratified"); the [remaining] codices, with the majority [of witnesses], radicatum ("rooted").
- 7Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.See the scholion to the preceding question. ---