Dist. 39, Art. 1, Q. 1
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 39
Articulus I. De disparitate cultus quoad matrimonii contractionem.
Quaestio I. Utrum matrimonium possit contrahi inter fidelem et infidelem.
Quantum ergo ad primum sic proceditur et ostenditur, quod matrimonium possit contrahi inter fidelem et infidelem:
1. Et primo exemplo: quoniam Ioseph contraxit cum muliere Aegyptiaca nec reprehenditur, sicut dicitur Genesis quadragesimo primo1; similiter Moyses cum Aethiopissa, sicut innuitur Numerorum duodecimo, nec ipse reprehenditur.
2. Item, hoc videtur auctoritate, Deuteronomii vigesimo primo2: Si egressus ad pugnam videris mulierem pulcram in medio captivorum et adamaveris eam, intrabis ad eam dormiesque cum ea, et erit uxor tua; constat, quod de infidelibus loquitur.
3. Item, primae ad Corinthios septimo3: Sanctificatur mulier infidelis per virum fidelem, et e converso: ergo inter fideles et infideles est coniugium sanctum: ergo et licitum.
4. Item, ratione videtur: quia diversitas sive disparitas morum non impedit matrimonium contrahendum: ergo pari ratione nec diversitas fidei sive cultus divini matrimonium impedit.
5. Item, matrimonium est Sacramentum commune fidelibus et infidelibus: ergo si ad omnes se extendit, disparitas sive talis repugnantia ipsum non tollit.
6. Item, omne impedimentum matrimonii impedit, pro eo quod obsistit alicui bono matrimonii; sed cultus disparitas nec nocet bono prolis, quia potest educari ad cultum Dei, nec fidei nec Sacramenti: ergo nullo modo impedit.
Contra:
1. Probatur exemplo: primi Esdrae ultimo4 dicitur, quod Esdras separavit viros ab uxoribus alienigenis: ergo non erat inter eos matrimonium.
2. Item, auctoritate Legis, Deuteronomii septimo5: Non sociabis cum eis connubia; loquitur de infidelibus et alienigenis.
3. Item, Ambrosius in libro de Patriarchis6: «Cave, Christiane, gentili vel Iudaeo filiam tuam dare».
4. Item, potissima distantia est inter fideles et infideles, sicut Christi ad Belial, et lucis ad tenebras7: si ergo in matrimonio magna est unio, nullum potest esse inter eos matrimonium.
Conclusio. Disparitas, quae est in fide, solummodo impedit matrimonium, sed ea quae est in fidei Sacramento sive baptismo, dirimit illud.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod in veteri testamento distinguendum erat inter infideles: quia quaedam mulieres erant infideles et erant de terra Chanaan, quam Dominus promiserat filiis Israel — propter illius gentis obstinationem in infidelitate mandaverat eas occidendas — et de talibus prohibitum erat8. Unde si quis de populo Israel cum illis contraheret, cum esset contra Domini praeceptum, non erat matrimonium. — Quaedam erant infideles de aliis nationibus; et de talibus non erat prohibitum,
sed permissum et concessum, ubi non timebatur lapsus in idololatriam, sicut in Ioseph et Moyse.
Ratio autem, quare prohibuit gentes illas et non alias, fuit duplex: una, quia iudicaverat omnes reos mortis; alia, quia obstinatae erant in malo.
In novo testamento alio modo est, quia infidelis est dupliciter: aut quia caret fide, aut quia caret fidei Sacramento. Si quia fide tantum, sic talis disparitas, ubi nota est, impedit matrimonium, sed non dirimit iam contractum, ut si catholicus contrahat cum haeretica baptizata. Si autem sit infidelis, quia caret fidei Sacramento, utputa baptismo; quia Sacramentorum ecclesiasticorum et fidelium ianua et fundamentum est baptismus, fidelis, qui contrahere habet secundum Sacramenta Ecclesiae, si cum tali contrahat, nihil facit, etiam si sit fidelis, dum tamen non habeat baptismum; unde1 dirimit iam contractum.
Cultus ergo disparitas praestabat impedimentum in lege veteri non simpliciter, sed ubi metuebatur periculum, et divinum aderat iudicium, et super hoc additum erat mandatum. Sic et in nova impedit non simpliciter sive de se, sed ob vitationem periculi et diversitatem Sacramenti baptismi et inhibitionem2 ecclesiastici statuti, quae ortum habet a duobus praedictis.
1. 2. Et sic patent duo prima obiecta.
3. Ad illud autem quod obiicitur, quod sanctificatur mulier; dicendum, quod loquitur Apostolus de matrimonio contracto ante cultus disparitatem, quod dicit manere, quia fides viri plerumque salvat occasionaliter sive sanctificat mulierem, sicut fides parturit filios3.
4. Ad illud quod obiicitur de disparitate morum etc.; dicendum, quod non est simile, quia disparitas fidei facit disparitatem Sacramentorum, non sic disparitas morum, quia boni et mali conveniunt in Sacramentis. Non tamen disparitas fidei semper facit disparitatem in Sacramentis, sed eatenus, qua facit, impedit. Praeterea4 periculosior est.
5. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod est commune utrisque5; dicendum, quod eatenus est commune, qua est legis naturae, sed non in quantum Ecclesiae; et quia, si fidelis contrahit, Sacramentum eius iam est Ecclesiae: ideo in hoc non communicat cum infideli, immo multum distat.
6. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod non est contra aliquod bonum matrimonii; dicendum, quod falsum est, immo est contra bonum prolis, quia alter coniugum de facili potest impedire, ne proles Domino dedicetur; est etiam contra bonum fidei propter periculum fidei; est etiam contra bonum Sacramenti, quia ex parte fidelis matrimonium natum est esse ratum et insolubile, cum sit fundatum super Sacramentum fidei; ex alia parte est contritum, quia non habet fundamentum6. Et sic patet illud.
I. Quoad tres huius articuli quaestiones solvendas vix alia est differentia inter magistros, nisi quod pauci posteriores contra communem sententiam, cui subscribit S. Bonav. (cfr. q. 1. corollar.), falso opinantur, matrimonium inter fidelem et infidelem non posse contrahi valide ipso iure divino, non tantum ecclesiastico, quod bene confutat Scot. (hic q. unica n. 5.); qui etiam aliquem modum loquendi, vel potius argumenta a Richardo a Med. in 2. quaestione adhibita improbat. — De 1. quaestione: Scot., hic q. unica n. 1-4. ubi et de 2 seqq. qq. — S. Thom., hic q. unica a. 1; Suppl. q. 59. a. 1. — B. Albert., hic a. 1-4. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 1. a. 1. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 1. q. 1. — Durand., de hac et seq. q. hic q. 1. — Dionys. Carth., de tota hac dist. hic q. unica.
II. De 2. quaestione praeter citt. locos: S. Thom., locc. citt. a. 2. — B. Albert., hic a. 10. — Petr. a Tar., loc. cit. a. 2. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 1. q. 2.
III. In 3. quaestione tanguntur principia catholica circa vitam infidelium, utrum sit semper peccatum, et utrum habeat virtutes naturales; de quo cfr. II. Sent. d. 28. a. 2. q. 2. 3. et scholion. — De ipsa quaestione: S. Thom., locc. citt. a. 2. ad 5. — Petr. a Tar., loc. cit. a. 3. — Richard. a Med., a. 1. q. 3. In aliis vacat.
IV. De 4. quaest. alii agunt supra d. 27. (S. Thom., q. 3. a. 2.).
---
Article I. On disparity of worship as regards the contracting of marriage.
Question I. Whether marriage can be contracted between a believer and an infidel.
As to the first, then, one proceeds thus, and it is shown that marriage can be contracted between a believer and an infidel:
1. And first by example: for Joseph contracted with an Egyptian woman and is not reproved, as is said in Genesis forty-one1; likewise Moses with an Ethiopian woman, as is intimated in Numbers twelve, nor is he himself reproved.
2. Likewise, this is seen by authority, Deuteronomy twenty-one2: If, going out to battle, you see among the captives a beautiful woman and desire her, you shall go in to her and sleep with her, and she shall be your wife; it is evident that it speaks of infidels.
3. Likewise, First Corinthians seven3: The unbelieving woman is sanctified through the believing husband, and conversely: therefore between believers and infidels there is a holy union: therefore also a licit one.
4. Likewise, it is seen by reason: because diversity or disparity of morals does not impede marriage from being contracted: therefore by parity of reasoning neither does diversity of faith or of divine worship impede marriage.
5. Likewise, marriage is a Sacrament common to believers and infidels: therefore if it extends to all, disparity or such repugnance does not take it away.
6. Likewise, every impediment of marriage impedes for this reason, that it stands against some good of marriage; but disparity of worship neither harms the good of offspring, since [the child] can be brought up to the worship of God, nor [that] of faith nor of the Sacrament: therefore in no way does it impede.
On the contrary:
1. It is proved by example: in the last [chapter] of First Esdras4 it is said that Esdras separated husbands from foreign wives: therefore there was no marriage among them.
2. Likewise, by the authority of the Law, Deuteronomy seven5: You shall not join marriages with them; it speaks of infidels and foreigners.
3. Likewise, Ambrose in the book On the Patriarchs6: «Beware, Christian, of giving your daughter to a gentile or a Jew».
4. Likewise, the greatest distance is between believers and infidels, as of Christ to Belial, and of light to darkness7: if therefore in marriage there is a great union, no marriage can exist between them.
Conclusion. Disparity which is in faith only impedes marriage, but that which is in the Sacrament of faith or in baptism dissolves it.
I respond: It must be said that in the Old Testament a distinction had to be made among infidels: for certain women were infidels and were from the land of Canaan, which the Lord had promised to the sons of Israel — on account of the obstinacy of that nation in infidelity He had commanded that they be slain — and concerning such [women marriage] was forbidden8. Hence if anyone of the people of Israel contracted with them, since it was against the Lord's command, it was no marriage. — Certain [women] were infidels of other nations; and concerning such it was not forbidden,
but permitted and conceded, where a lapse into idolatry was not feared, as in Joseph and Moses.
Now the reason why He forbade those nations and not others was twofold: one, because He had judged them all guilty of death; the other, because they were obstinate in evil.
In the New Testament it is otherwise, because an infidel is [such] in two ways: either because he lacks faith, or because he lacks the Sacrament of faith. If [it be] by faith only, then such disparity, where it is known, impedes marriage, but does not dissolve one already contracted, as if a Catholic contracts with a baptized heretic. But if he be an infidel because he lacks the Sacrament of faith, namely baptism — since the door and foundation of the ecclesiastical Sacraments and of the faithful is baptism — the believer, who must contract according to the Sacraments of the Church, if he contracts with such a one, does nothing, even if he be a believer, provided that [the other] does not have baptism; whence1 it dissolves one already contracted.
Therefore disparity of worship furnished an impediment in the Old Law not simply, but where danger was feared, and divine judgment was present, and upon this a command had been added. So too in the New it impedes not simply or of itself, but for the avoidance of danger and [because of] the diversity of the Sacrament of baptism and the prohibition2 of ecclesiastical statute, which takes its origin from the two aforesaid.
1, 2. And thus the first two objections are clear.
3. To that which is objected, that the woman is sanctified; it must be said that the Apostle speaks of a marriage contracted before the disparity of worship, which he says remains, because the faith of the husband for the most part saves occasionally or sanctifies the wife, as faith brings forth children3.
4. To that which is objected concerning disparity of morals, etc.; it must be said that it is not alike, because disparity of faith produces disparity of the Sacraments, not so disparity of morals, since good and evil agree in the Sacraments. Yet disparity of faith does not always produce disparity in the Sacraments, but only to the extent that it does, does it impede. Moreover4 it is more dangerous.
5. To that which is objected, that it is common to both5; it must be said that it is common to the extent that it is of the law of nature, but not insofar as [it is] of the Church; and because, if a believer contracts, his Sacrament is now of the Church: therefore in this he does not communicate with the infidel, nay he differs greatly.
6. To that which is objected, that it is not against any good of marriage; it must be said that this is false, nay it is against the good of offspring, since one of the spouses can easily impede the offspring from being dedicated to the Lord; it is also against the good of faith on account of danger to faith; it is also against the good of the Sacrament, because on the part of the believer the marriage is born to be ratified and indissoluble, since it is founded upon the Sacrament of faith; on the other part it is broken, because it does not have a foundation6. And thus that is clear.
I. As to solving the three questions of this article there is scarcely any difference among the masters, except that a few later ones, against the common opinion — to which S. Bonaventure subscribes (cf. q. 1, corollary) — falsely think that marriage between a believer and an infidel cannot be validly contracted by divine law itself, not only by ecclesiastical [law]; which Scotus well refutes (here, sole q., n. 5); who also disapproves a certain manner of speaking, or rather the arguments employed by Richard of Mediavilla in the second question. — On the first question: Scotus, here sole q., nn. 1-4, where also on the 2nd and following qq. — S. Thomas, here sole q., a. 1; Suppl. q. 59, a. 1. — B. Albert, here aa. 1-4. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 1, a. 1. — Richard of Mediavilla, here a. 1, q. 1. — Durandus, on this and the following q., here q. 1. — Dionysius the Carthusian, on this whole distinction, here sole q.
II. On the second question, besides the cited places: S. Thomas, cited places, a. 2. — B. Albert, here a. 10. — Peter of Tarentaise, cited place, a. 2. — Richard of Mediavilla, here a. 1, q. 2.
III. In the third question the catholic principles concerning the life of infidels are touched upon — whether it is always sin, and whether it has natural virtues; on which cf. II Sent. d. 28, a. 2, q. 2. 3, and the scholion. — On the question itself: S. Thomas, cited places, a. 2, ad 5. — Peter of Tarentaise, cited place, a. 3. — Richard of Mediavilla, a. 1, q. 3. In others it is lacking.
IV. On the fourth question others treat above, d. 27 (S. Thomas, q. 3, a. 2).
---
- 1Vers. 45. — Seq. locus est Num. 12, 1.[Gen. 41,] v. 45. — The following passage is Num. 12, 1.
- 2Vers. 10. seqq., plura tamen in Vulgata interiiciuntur.[Deut. 21,] vv. 10 ff., though much is inserted in between in the Vulgate.
- 3Vers. 14: Sanctificata est mulier etc.[1 Cor. 7,] v. 14: The woman is sanctified, etc.
- 4Vers. 10. seqq. Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 1. 2.[1 Esdras (Ezra) 10,] vv. 10 ff. Cf. here the text of the Master, cc. 1-2.
- 5Vers. 3: Neque sociabis cum eis coniugia.[Deut. 7,] v. 3: Neither shall you join marriages with them.
- 6Pressius in l. de Abraham, c. 9. n. 84; refertur a Gratiano, C. 28. q. 1. c. 13, et a Magistro, hic c. 1.More precisely in the book On Abraham, c. 9, n. 84; it is cited by Gratian, C. 28, q. 1, c. 13, and by the Master, here c. 1.
- 7Respicitur II. Cor. 6, 14. seq.Reference is made to II Cor. 6, 14 f.
- 8Exod. 34, 16. Cfr. supra pag. 703, nota 3.Exod. 34, 16. Cf. above, p. 703, note 3.
- 1Cod. K (l a secunda manu) addit impedit contrahendum et. Pro etiam si sit codd. R S T perperam nisi sit.Codex K (the l by a second hand) adds impedit contrahendum et. For etiam si sit codices R S T wrongly [read] nisi sit.
- 2Cod. K (l a secunda manu) irritationem.Codex K (the l by a second hand) [reads] irritationem.
- 3Cfr. August., l. de Serm. Domini in monte, c. 16. n. 45. — Superius post contracto cod. U addit in infidelitate.Cf. Augustine, book On the Lord's Sermon on the Mount, c. 16, n. 45. — Above, after contracto, codex U adds in infidelitate.
- 4Ita cod. L, cod. E a secunda manu Et praeterea, cod. A quia; multi codd. omittunt Praeterea, et edd. impedit. Praeterea.Thus codex L; codex E by a second hand [reads] Et praeterea; codex A, quia; many codices omit Praeterea, and the editions [read] impedit. Praeterea.
- 5Edd. ratione utriusque.The editions [read] ratione utriusque.
- 6Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 6. seq.Cf. here the text of the Master, c. 6 f. ---