Dist. 37, Art. 2, Q. 3
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 37
Quaestio III. Utrum uxoricidium impediat matrimonium.
Tertio quaeritur, utrum uxoricidium impediat matrimonium. Et quod sic, videtur.
1. Causa trigesima tertia, quaestione secunda6: «Interfectores suarum coniugum ad poenitentiam redigendi sunt, quibus penitus denegatur coniugium».
2. Item, eodem titulo7, in poenitentia Arnulfi, qui occiderat uxorem, dicitur: «Uxorem nunquam ducere, concubinam nunquam habere nec adulterium committere audeas».
3. Item, in eo, in quo quis peccat, in eo torquendus est8; sed iste peccavit contra matrimonium, occidendo uxorem: ergo etc.
4. Item, supra, distinctione trigesima quinta dicit Magister in littera9, et tractum est de canone expresse, Extra, de Eo qui duxit in coniugium quam polluit per adulterium, ubi dicitur, quod matrimonium nullum est et dirimendum est: ergo quod impedit, hoc est propter homicidium mariti, quod perpetravit: ergo si hic vir occidit uxorem, patet etc.
Contra: 1. Si quis occideret uxorem alienam, propter homicidium10 non efficitur inhabilis ad matrimonium: ergo si plus potest in uxorem propriam, videtur, quod propter eius occisionem a matrimonio non debeat prohiberi.
2. Item, possibile est, quod vir occidat uxorem zelo, quem habet in detestationem adulterii: ergo videtur, quod stet pro matrimonio: ergo non debet puniri privatione matrimonii.
p. 810 3. Item, omne peccatum potest deleri per poenitentiam: si ergo poena ista est ratione peccati, et haec poena potest esse occasio peccati, maxime iuveni, qui habet incentivum libidinis: ergo videtur, quod non possit impediri, saltem poenitentia facta.
4. Item, magis repugnat bono matrimonii adulterium quam homicidium; sed adulterium simpliciter non impedit1: ergo nec uxoricidium.
Conclusio
Coniugicidium impedit matrimonium, et quidem coniunctum cum adulterio, vel cum promissione matrimonii dirimit respectu complicis, sicut et adulterium cum eadem promissione.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod occidere uxorem potest quis tripliciter: aut persequendo culpam, aut persequendo naturam, aut persequendo matrimonium. Persequendo culpam, ut cum in fornicationis crimine deprehendit et adeo detestatur, quod in ultionem criminis mortem infligit. Persequendo naturam, ut si mulier propter defectum aliquem, quem habet in se, non habet gratiam viri; unde vir eam exosam habet et gravem et propter istam detestationem et odii intensionem, furore accenso, ipsam perimit. Persequendo matrimonium, ut quando moechatur cum aliqua, quam vult ducere in uxorem et non potest, nisi uxore mortua; et ideo ipsam interficit. Primum est grave peccatum propter excessum; secundum est gravius et tertium est gravissimum.
In quolibet horum prohibetur a matrimonio contrahendo, sed magis in secundo et maxime in tertio; et in quolibet horum casuum dispensatur ab Ecclesia, et maxime in iuvenibus; sed in primo de facili, in secundo difficilius, in tertio quodam modo sic, et quodam modo non. Respectu enim illius personae, cum qua moechabatur et propter quam habendam in matrimonio occidit coniugem, nunquam cum eo dispensabitur, immo, si iunctus fuerit, simpliciter separatur; sed respectu aliarum propter periculum dispensatur2. Unde quamvis crimen non faciat omnino illegitimum respectu omnium propter periculum fornicationis; facit tamen simpliciter illegitimum respectu alicuius personae determinatae, scilicet homicidium iunctum cum adulterio, vel adulterium cum fidei datione, vel datio fidei cum uxoricidio3. — Et sic concedendum est, quod tale crimen impedit matrimonium aliquo modo taliter, quia impedit, sed non dirimit; alio modo, quod etiam dirimit, sicut tactum est.
Ad argumenta: 1. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur, quod qui occidit uxorem alienam; dicendum, quod non est simile; quia enim offendit matrimonium in se, cum uxorem propriam interficit4; ideo in se debet puniri; non sic, cum interficit alienam.
2. Ad illud quod obiicitur de zelo, dicendum, quod zelus non excusat a toto, sed a tanto; unde facilius cum eo dispensatur.
3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod potest per poenitentiam deleri; dicendum, quod enormitas non ita cito deletur, immo in poenam manet diutius, sicut patet in irregularitate.
4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod adulterium magis repugnat; dicendum, quod falsum est, quia uxoricidium est contra substantiam matrimonii, quia perimit subiectum; sed adulterium est contra bonum fidei, sine quo matrimonium esse potest5; et ideo non est simile.
---
Question III. Whether uxoricide impedes marriage.
Thirdly it is asked, whether uxoricide impedes marriage. And that it does, it seems.
1. Cause thirty-three, question two6: «The slayers of their own spouses are to be reduced to penance, to whom marriage is utterly denied».
2. Likewise, under the same title7, in the penance of Arnulf, who had killed his wife, it is said: «Never dare to take a wife, never to keep a concubine, nor to commit adultery».
3. Likewise, in that in which a man sins, in that he must be tormented8; but this man sinned against marriage, by killing his wife: therefore, etc.
4. Likewise, above, in the thirty-fifth distinction the Master says in the text9, and it was treated of the canon expressly, Extra, "Concerning him who took into marriage a woman whom he had defiled by adultery", where it is said that the marriage is null and must be dissolved: therefore that which impedes, this is on account of the homicide of the husband, which he perpetrated: therefore if this man killed his wife, it is plain, etc.
On the contrary: 1. If someone were to kill another man's wife, on account of the homicide10 he is not rendered incapable of marriage: therefore if he has more power over his own wife, it seems that on account of her killing he ought not to be barred from marriage.
2. Likewise, it is possible that a man kill his wife out of zeal, which he has in detestation of adultery: therefore it seems that it stands for marriage: therefore he ought not to be punished by the privation of marriage.
p. 810 3. Likewise, every sin can be blotted out through penance: if therefore this penalty is by reason of the sin, and this penalty can be an occasion of sin, especially for a young man who has the incentive of lust: therefore it seems that he cannot be impeded, at least once penance has been done.
4. Likewise, adultery is more repugnant to the good of marriage than homicide; but adultery simply does not impede1: therefore neither does uxoricide.
Conclusion
Spouse-killing impedes marriage, and indeed, when joined with adultery or with a promise of marriage, it dissolves it with respect to the accomplice, just as adultery too with the same promise.
I respond: It must be said that one can kill his wife in three ways: either by pursuing fault, or by pursuing nature, or by pursuing marriage. By pursuing fault, as when he catches her in the crime of fornication and so detests it that in vengeance of the crime he inflicts death. By pursuing nature, as if a woman, on account of some defect which she has in herself, does not have her husband's favor; whence the husband holds her hateful and burdensome, and on account of that detestation and intensity of hatred, his fury being kindled, he does away with her. By pursuing marriage, as when he commits adultery with some woman whom he wishes to take as wife and cannot, except with his wife dead; and therefore he kills her. The first is a grave sin on account of the excess; the second is graver, and the third is gravest.
In any of these he is prohibited from contracting marriage, but more so in the second and most of all in the third; and in any of these cases dispensation is granted by the Church, and especially in the young; but in the first easily, in the second more difficultly, in the third in a certain way yes and in a certain way no. For with respect to that person with whom he committed adultery and for the sake of having whom in marriage he killed his spouse, dispensation will never be granted with him — nay, if he has been joined [to her], he is simply separated; but with respect to other women dispensation is granted on account of the danger2. Whence, although the crime does not make him wholly illegitimate with respect to all women, on account of the danger of fornication, yet it does make him simply illegitimate with respect to some determinate person — namely, homicide joined with adultery, or adultery with the giving of faith, or the giving of faith together with uxoricide3. — And so it must be conceded that such a crime impedes marriage in one way thus, because it impedes but does not dissolve; in another way, that it even dissolves, as has been touched upon.
To the arguments: 1. To that then which is objected, that one who kills another man's wife [is not disqualified]; it must be said that it is not similar; for because he offends against marriage in itself when he kills his own wife4, therefore he must be punished in itself; not so, when he kills another's.
2. To that which is objected concerning zeal, it must be said that zeal does not excuse from the whole, but from so much; whence dispensation is more easily granted with him.
3. To that which is objected, that it can be blotted out through penance; it must be said that an enormity is not so quickly blotted out — nay, it remains longer as a penalty, as is plain in the case of irregularity.
4. To that which is objected, that adultery is more repugnant; it must be said that it is false, because uxoricide is against the substance of marriage, since it destroys the subject; but adultery is against the good of faith, without which marriage can exist5; and therefore it is not similar.
---
- 6Can. 5. Vide hic lit. Magistri, c. 2.Canon 5. See here the Master's text, c. 2.
- 7Can. Admonere (8.), ubi textus originalis utitur nomine Hastulphi pro Arnulphi (cfr. supra nota 4.).The canon Admonere (8.), where the original text uses the name Hastulphus for Arnulphus (cf. above, note 4).
- 8Respicitur Sap. XI, 17. Cfr. supra pag. 781, nota 8.The reference is to Wisdom XI, 17. Cf. above, p. 781, note 8.
- 9Cap. 4. — Idem dicitur Extra, loc. cit. (lib. IV. tit. 7.), C. Propositum (I.), C. Super hoc (3.) et C. Significasti (6.) seq. — Superius pro et tractum est, quod habent plures codd. et ed. I, codd. L R T et tractatum est, Vat. falso retractatum est, codd. M O U X legunt et tactum est in canone.Chapter 4. — The same is said in the Decretals, loc. cit. (bk. IV, tit. 7), C. Propositum (I.), C. Super hoc (3.) and C. Significasti (6.) and following. — Above, for et tractum est (and it was treated), which several codices and ed. I have, codices L R T [read] et tractatum est, the Vatican edition wrongly retractatum est, codices M O U X read et tactum est in canone.
- 10Cod. U addit quod fecerat.Codex U adds quod fecerat (which he had done).
- 1Cod. K supplet matrimonium.Codex K supplies matrimonium.
- 2In C. Interfectores (5.), C. 33. q. 2. dicitur: Quibus [qui coniuges occidunt] penitus coniugium denegatur, exceptis adolescentibus, de quibus est B. Leonis papae XXV. regula decretalium [cfr. ibid. C. In adolescentia (14.) et C. Antiqui (19.)], immo indulgentia observanda.In the canon Interfectores (5.), C. 33 q. 2, it is said: To whom [i.e. those who kill their spouses] marriage is utterly denied, excepting adolescents, concerning whom there is the decretal rule XXV of blessed Pope Leo [cf. ibid. C. In adolescentia (14.) and C. Antiqui (19.)]; nay, indulgence is to be observed.
- 3Cfr. C. Propositum (I.), et C. Super hoc (3.) ac C. Significasti (6.), seq., X. de Eo qui duxit in matrim. etc. (lib. IV. tit. 7.). — Inferius voci taliter cod. aa praemittit et.Cf. C. Propositum (I.), and C. Super hoc (3.) and C. Significasti (6.), and following, X (Decretals), "On him who took into marriage," etc. (bk. IV, tit. 7). — Below, to the word taliter codex aa prefixes et.
- 4Vide supra pag. 782, nota 2. — Plures codd. hic et paulo inferius interfecit.See above, p. 782, note 2. — Several codices [read] here and a little below interfecit (he killed).
- 5Cfr. supra d. 31. a. 1. q. 3. — In fine Vat. addit hinc et inde. — Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest.Cf. above, d. 31, a. 1, q. 3. — At the end the Vatican edition adds hinc et inde (on this side and that). — See the scholion to the first question of this article. ---