Dist. 34, Art. 3, Q. 2
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 34
Quaestio II. Utrum crimen incestus impediat matrimonium et faciat personam illegitimam.
Secundo quaeritur de perversione voluntatis in incestuosis, ut puta cum quis iacet cum uxoris sorore; quaeritur ergo, utrum tale crimen impediat matrimonium et faciat personam illegitimam. Et quod sic, videtur:
1. Per auctoritates, quas adducit Magister in littera2.
2. Item, hoc ipsum probatur ratione: quia, in quo quis peccat, in hoc torquendus est3; sed incestus iste fuit contra bonum matrimonii: ergo in eo debet puniri.
3. Item, affinitas4 contrahitur in copula carnali; sed affinitas impedit matrimonium contrahendum et dirimit iam contractum, sicut et consanguinitas, vel cognatio: ergo si factus est affinis uxori, iam non manet matrimonium.
4. Item, quod saltem non debeat reddere debitum, videtur: quia quicumque coit cum consanguinea, vel affine, peccat mortaliter; sed nullus tenetur peccare mortaliter: ergo non tenetur reddere debitum.
Contra: 1. Uxor non debet puniri in peccato viri, ergo non privatur viro; et si hoc: ergo iste est vir, et potest ab eo petere debitum: ergo si matrimonium est vinculum relationis in utroque extremo5: ergo et ista est uxor, et ille vir.
2. Item, quod mortua uxore, possit contrahere cum alia, videtur, quia omne crimen potest deleri per poenitentiam: ergo si, omnino deleto crimine, non debet durare poena; videtur, quod talis possit contrahere.
3. Item, esto quod contrahat, nunquid Ecclesia separabit? Constat, quod non: ergo incestus non impedit matrimonium.
Conclusio.
Incestuosa copula cum sorore uxoris impedit tantum ius petendi debitum, si fit post contractionem matrimonii; si vero ante eandem, est impedimentum dirimens.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod aliquis potest committere incestum cognoscendo sororem uxoris suae dupliciter: aut antequam contrahat matrimonium cum sorore, aut post contractionem6. Si post contractionem matrimonii; matrimonium illud non solvitur, amittit7 tamen ius petendi debitum, non tamen reddendi, quia non potuit peccatum eius praeiudicare uxori, nisi fuerit conscia sceleris. Interdicitur etiam tali ab Ecclesia, ut non contrahat cum alia, etiam priori mortua; dispensatur tamen cum eo, maxime si timetur de fornicatione, quia est iuvenis. Si vero contrahat sine dispensatione, non debet p. 776 separari omnino, sed ad tempus ad poenitentiam faciendam: peccat tamen contrahendo sine Ecclesiae licentia1. — Si autem cognovit sororem ante matrimonii contractionem, etiam post sponsalia de futuro, nullum est matrimonium contractum ratione affinitatis; unde separandi sunt iudicio Ecclesiae, et mulier potest nubere, vir autem, quantum est de rigore iuris, nubere non potest.
1. Et in hoc casu intelliguntur auctoritates a Magistro inductae.
2. Ad illud quod obiicitur de crimine, dicendum, quod quamvis sit homo puniendus pro crimine, quantum est de rigore2; dispensatur tamen, ubi timetur periculum, et detrahitur severitati.
3. Ad illud quod obiicitur de affinitate, dicendum, quod affinitas superveniens non dissolvit matrimonium iam contractum, quia quod firmum est non potest infirmari aliquo casuali vel accidentali superveniente.
4. Ad illud quod obiicitur de debito, dicendum, quod ipse in petendo cognoscit affinem, sed in reddendo cognoscit uxorem, quia illa petit affectu uxorio et petit ius, quod habet in eo; et ideo tenetur ille reddere3.
---
Question II. Whether the crime of incest impedes marriage and makes the person illegitimate.
In the second place inquiry is made concerning the perversion of the will in the incestuous — as, for instance, when someone lies with his wife's sister; the question therefore is whether such a crime impedes marriage and makes the person illegitimate. And that it does, is shown thus:
1. By the authorities which the Master adduces in the text2.
2. Likewise, this same thing is proved by reason: because, in the matter in which one sins, in that he ought to be tormented3; but that incest was against the good of marriage: therefore he ought to be punished in it.
3. Likewise, affinity4 is contracted in carnal union; but affinity impedes marriage from being contracted and dissolves one already contracted, just as consanguinity too, or kinship: therefore if he has become an affine of his wife, the marriage no longer remains.
4. Likewise, that he ought at least not to render the debt is shown: because whoever has intercourse with a kinswoman, or an affine, sins mortally; but no one is bound to sin mortally: therefore he is not bound to render the debt.
On the contrary: 1. A wife ought not to be punished for her husband's sin, therefore she is not deprived of her husband; and if this: therefore he is her husband, and she can demand the debt from him: therefore if marriage is a bond of relation in each extreme5: therefore this woman too is a wife, and he a husband.
2. Likewise, that, his wife being dead, he can contract with another, is shown, because every crime can be blotted out by penance: therefore if, the crime being wholly blotted out, the penalty ought not to last; it seems that such a man can contract.
3. Likewise, granted that he contracts, will the Church perhaps separate them? It is established that it will not: therefore incest does not impede marriage.
Conclusion.
Incestuous union with a wife's sister impedes only the right of demanding the debt, if it takes place after the contracting of the marriage; but if before it, it is a diriment impediment.
I respond: It must be said that someone can commit incest by knowing his wife's sister in two ways: either before he contracts marriage with the sister, or after the contracting6. If after the contracting of the marriage: that marriage is not dissolved, yet he loses7 the right of demanding the debt, but not of rendering it, because his sin could not prejudice the wife, unless she was aware of the crime. Such a man is also forbidden by the Church to contract with another, even the first being dead; yet a dispensation is granted him, especially if there is fear of fornication, because he is young. But if he contracts without a dispensation, he ought not to be p. 776 separated altogether, but for a time, for the doing of penance: he nevertheless sins by contracting without the Church's license1. — But if he knew the sister before the contracting of the marriage, even after a betrothal for the future, no marriage is contracted, by reason of affinity; whence they are to be separated by the judgment of the Church, and the woman can marry, but the man, so far as the rigor of the law is concerned, cannot marry.
1. And in this case are understood the authorities adduced by the Master.
2. To that which is objected concerning the crime, it must be said that, although a man is to be punished for the crime, so far as the rigor is concerned2; yet a dispensation is granted where danger is feared, and something is subtracted from the severity.
3. To that which is objected concerning affinity, it must be said that supervening affinity does not dissolve a marriage already contracted, because what is firm cannot be invalidated by anything casual or accidental supervening.
4. To that which is objected concerning the debt, it must be said that in demanding he knows an affine, but in rendering he knows a wife, because she demands with wifely affection and demands a right which she has in him; and therefore he is bound to render it3.
---
- 2Hic c. 5.Here, c. 5.
- 3Respicitur Sap. 11, 17.Reference is made to Wisdom 11:17.
- 4Non pauci codd. Item, si affinitas.Not a few codices [read] Likewise, if affinity.
- 5Cfr. supra d. 27. a. 1. q. 2. fundam. 4. et pag. 727, nota 2. — Pro matrimonium est edd. manet. Superius voci vir cod. G praemittit suus.Cf. above, d. 27, a. 1, q. 2, argument 4, and p. 727, note 2. — For matrimonium est the editions [read] manet. Above, to the word vir codex G prefixes suus.
- 6Cod. F supplet matrimonii.Codex F supplements matrimonii [yielding post contractionem matrimonii].
- 7Vel supple: incestuosus, vel lege amittitur.Either supply incestuosus [the incestuous man], or read amittitur [it is lost].
- 1Cfr. Qui dormierit (30.), C. 27. q. 2. et Glossa in C. 32. q. 7. (ubi idem canon recurrit); C. Si quis (I.) c. 21. et C. Transmissae (I.), X. de Eo qui cognovit consanguineam etc. (lib. IV. tit. 13.). Vide etiam infra d. 41. q. 1. et 3, ubi de affinitate.Cf. Qui dormierit (30), C. 27, q. 2, and the Gloss on C. 32, q. 7 (where the same canon recurs); C. Si quis (1), c. 21, and C. Transmissae (1), X, On him who has known a kinswoman, etc. (Book IV, tit. 13). See also below, d. 41, q. 1 and 3, where affinity is treated.
- 2Cod. bb supplet iuris. Mox pro ubi cod. E si.Codex bb supplements iuris [yielding de rigore iuris]. Soon, for ubi codex E [reads] si.
- 3Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.See the scholion to the preceding question. ---