Dist. 39, Art. 1, Q. 2
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 39
Quaestio II. Utrum Sacramentum matrimonii possit contrahi inter infidelem et infidelem.
Secundo quaeritur, utrum Sacramentum matrimonii sit inter infidelem et infidelem. Et quod sic:
1. Innuit Apostolus primae ad Corinthios septimo7: Si quis frater uxorem habet infidelem etc.; vocat uxorem cui cohabitandum; sed non fuit uxor propter contractionem, quae fuit post fidem, sed ante: ergo etc.
2. Item, ratione videtur, quia matrimonium est de dictamine legis naturae; sed lex naturae communis est apud omnes8: ergo etc.
3. Item, matrimonium definitur sic9: «Matrimonium est maris et feminae coniunctio individuam vitae consuetudinem retinens»; sed hoc est inter infideles: ergo etc.
4. Item, infideles haeretici habent vera Sacramenta Ecclesiae1 — quamvis non habeant fidem, habent verborum formam — ergo si matrimonium apud fideles contrahitur per verba exprimentia consensum; et talis forma est apud infideles: ergo et matrimonii Sacramentum.
1. Contra: Causa vigesima octava, quaestione prima2: «Non est ratum coniugium quod sine Deo est»; sed tale est coniugium infidelium: ergo non est ratum, ergo non est matrimonium.
2. Item, Ambrosius ibidem3: «Non est putandum coniugium quod extra Dei decretum est factum»; sed tale est coniugium infidelium: ergo etc.
3. Item, matrimonium est Sacramentum Ecclesiae; sed baptismus est fundamentum Sacramentorum Ecclesiae: ergo non habentes baptismum non habent matrimonium.
4. Item, matrimonium est Sacramentum et signum unionis Dei et animae, sive divinae naturae et humanae4; sed hanc non percipiunt infideles nec credunt: ergo non est eorum Sacramentum.
Conclusio. Matrimonium apud infideles habet tantum semiplene rationem officii, remedii et Sacramenti; unde est legitimum quidem, sed non ratum.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod matrimonium est institutum in officium et in remedium et in Sacramentum5; et ista tria complete habet, secundum quod est apud fideles; apud infideles vero habet ista secundum rationem semiplenam. Nam est in officium, quia est procreatio prolis legitimae, sed non ad cultum Dei, apud fideles autem ad cultum Dei. Est in remedium, quia excusat coitum maritalem a culpa, et rursus, datur ibi gratia remittens concupiscentiam ratione benedictionis adiunctae; apud infideles vero maritali affectu uxores cognoscentes est excusatio a culpa, sed non datur gratia; apud fideles utrumque6. Est et Sacramentum, quia significat unionem Dei et animae, sive unionem divinae naturae et humanae, non tantum aptitudine, sed actu; apud infideles vero aptitudine tantum. Et praeterea, ratio Sacramenti maxime consistit in ratificatione vinculi; apud infideles autem vinculum non habet ratificationem perfectam. — Unde distinguitur Causa vigesima octava, quaestione prima7 quoddam matrimonium ratum et legitimum, ut fidelium; quoddam legitimum, sed non ratum, ut infidelium; quoddam ratum, sed non legitimum, ut matrimonium contractum a fidelibus in occulto.
Si autem quaeratur, quare matrimonium infidelium non est ratum; dicendum, quod hoc est propter defectum Sacramenti fidei, et propter statum; quia in tali statu iunctus est uxori, in quo potest vinciri vinculo fortiori, scilicet suscipiendo Sacramentum baptismi, et Christo alligari, a quo statu nemo potest prohibere8; et ideo potest in casu istud vinculum infirmari. Habet tamen ratitudinem, ut, illo statu in utroque manente, non possit solvi.
1. Et per hoc patet responsio ad illud Augustini9: Non est ratum etc.
2. Ad illud quod obiicitur de Ambrosio, dicendum, quod illud intelligendum est sic: extra decretum, id est contra mandatum divinum10.
3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod est Sacramentum Ecclesiae; dicendum, quod verum est; sed non tantum Ecclesiae, sed etiam legis naturae.
4. Ad illud quod obiicitur de significatione, dicendum, quod etsi non actu repraesentet, tamen habitu; et hoc sufficit ad hoc, quod sit Sacramentum. — Vel dic, quod actu repraesentat, licet nemo percipiat11.
---
Question II. Whether the sacrament of marriage can be contracted between an infidel and an infidel.
Secondly it is asked whether the sacrament of marriage exists between an infidel and an infidel. And that it does [is shown]:
1. The Apostle implies it, First Corinthians chapter seven7: If any brother has an unbelieving wife, etc.; he calls wife the woman with whom he is to cohabit; but she was not a wife by reason of a contract that took place after the faith, but before: therefore etc.
2. Likewise, by reason it seems [so], because marriage is [something] from the dictate of the law of nature; but the law of nature is common to all8: therefore etc.
3. Likewise, marriage is defined thus9: «Marriage is the union of a man and a woman maintaining an undivided manner of life»; but this exists among infidels: therefore etc.
4. Likewise, unbelieving heretics have true sacraments of the Church1 — although they do not have the faith, they have the form of the words — therefore if marriage among the faithful is contracted through words expressing consent; and such a form exists among infidels: therefore also the sacrament of marriage [exists among them].
1. On the contrary: Cause twenty-eight, question one2: «A marriage which is without God is not ratified»; but such is the marriage of infidels: therefore it is not ratified, therefore it is not a marriage.
2. Likewise, Ambrose in the same place3: «A marriage which is made outside God's decree is not to be considered [a marriage]»; but such is the marriage of infidels: therefore etc.
3. Likewise, marriage is a sacrament of the Church; but baptism is the foundation of the sacraments of the Church: therefore those not having baptism do not have marriage.
4. Likewise, marriage is a sacrament and a sign of the union of God and the soul, or of the divine and human nature4; but infidels do not perceive this nor believe it: therefore it is not their sacrament.
Conclusion. Marriage among infidels has only in a half-full way the character of an office, a remedy, and a sacrament; whence it is indeed legitimate, but not ratified.
I respond: It must be said that marriage was instituted as an office, as a remedy, and as a sacrament5; and it has these three completely according as it is among the faithful; but among infidels it has these according to a half-full character. For it is an office, because it is the procreation of legitimate offspring, but not for the worship of God, whereas among the faithful [it is] for the worship of God. It is a remedy, because it excuses marital intercourse from fault, and again, grace is there given remitting concupiscence by reason of the blessing attached [to it]; but among infidels, [those] knowing their wives with marital affection, there is an excusing from fault, but grace is not given; among the faithful, both6. It is also a sacrament, because it signifies the union of God and the soul, or the union of the divine and human nature, not only in aptitude, but in act; but among infidels [only] in aptitude. And besides, the essence of a sacrament consists chiefly in the ratification of the bond; but among infidels the bond does not have perfect ratification. — Whence there is distinguished, [in] Cause twenty-eight, question one7, a certain marriage [that is] ratified and legitimate, as [that] of the faithful; a certain [marriage that is] legitimate, but not ratified, as [that] of infidels; a certain [marriage that is] ratified, but not legitimate, as a marriage contracted by the faithful in secret.
If, however, it be asked why the marriage of infidels is not ratified; it must be said that this is on account of the defect of the sacrament of faith, and on account of the state; because in such a state he is joined to a wife in a condition in which he can be bound by a stronger bond, namely by receiving the sacrament of baptism, and being bound to Christ, from which state no one can prevent [him]8; and therefore in [such] a case this bond can be weakened. It has, nevertheless, [a kind of] ratification, so that, while both remain in that state, it cannot be dissolved.
1. And by this the response to that [saying] of Augustine9 is clear: It is not ratified, etc.
2. To that which is objected concerning Ambrose, it must be said that it is to be understood thus: outside the decree, that is, contrary to the divine command10.
3. To that which is objected, that it is a sacrament of the Church; it must be said that it is true; but not only of the Church, but also of the law of nature.
4. To that which is objected concerning signification, it must be said that although it does not represent in act, yet [it does] in habit; and this suffices for this, that it be a sacrament. — Or say that it does represent in act, although no one perceives [it]11.
---
- 7Vers. 12.Verse 12 [1 Cor. 7:12].
- 8Cfr. supra pag. 436, nota 2. et pag. 748, nota 5.Cf. above p. 436, note 2, and p. 748, note 5.
- 9Vide supra pag. 683, nota 2. et pag. 684, nota 4.See above p. 683, note 2, and p. 684, note 4.
- 1Ut dictum est supra d. 25. a. 1. q. 2. — Mox verbo habeant praemittunt edd. tamen.As was said above, d. 25, a. 1, q. 2. — Shortly, before the word habeant the editions place tamen.
- 2In principio, ubi haec verba a Gratiano attribuuntur quidem Augustino, in nota tamen adiecta dicitur: Hoc non est inventum apud B. Augustinum. Verum apud Ambrosium in idem c. 7. primae ad Cor. [v. 15.] haec leguntur: «Non enim ratum est matrimonium, quod sine Dei devotione est»; et similia in Glossa ordinaria ibidem ex B. Ambrosio.At the beginning, where these words are indeed attributed by Gratian to Augustine, yet in an added note it is said: This is not found in blessed Augustine. But in Ambrose, on the same chapter 7 of First Corinthians [v. 15], these words are read: «For a marriage is not ratified which is without devotion to God»; and similar things in the Ordinary Gloss there from blessed Ambrose.
- 3Tam apud Gratian. nota praeced. allegatum, quam in Comment. (olim Ambrosio tributo) super 1. Cor. 7, 15. Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 2.Both in Gratian, cited in the preceding note, and in the Commentary (once attributed to Ambrose) on 1 Cor. 7:15. Cf. here the text of the Master, c. 2.
- 4Vide supra lit. Magistri, d. XXVI. c. 6, et Comment. a. 2. q. 1. — Inferius pro eorum cod. M inter eos matrimonii.See above the text of the Master, d. XXVI, c. 6, and Commentary a. 2, q. 1. — Below, for eorum codex M reads inter eos matrimonii.
- 5Cfr. supra lit. Magistri, d. XXVI. c. 1. seq. — Inferius verbis quia est nonnulli codd. interserunt ibi. Subinde post a culpa edd. addunt mortali, omisso maritalem (cfr. supra d. 31. a. 2. q. 1.).Cf. above the text of the Master, d. XXVI, c. 1 f. — Below, at the words quia est several codices insert ibi. Then after a culpa the editions add mortali, omitting maritalem (cf. above d. 31, a. 2, q. 1).
- 6Vide supra d. 26. a. 2. q. 2. seq.See above d. 26, a. 2, q. 2 f.
- 7A Gratiano super C. Si quis Iudaicae pravitati (17.). Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 6. seq.By Gratian on the canon Si quis Iudaicae pravitati (17). Cf. here the text of the Master, c. 6 f.
- 8Cod. U prohiberi. Pro suscipiendo plures codd. sustinendo. Finem corp. cod. K exhibet sic: ut, in illo statu utroque manente, non possit solvi.Codex U reads prohiberi. For suscipiendo several codices read sustinendo. Codex K gives the end of the body [of the article] thus: so that, while both remain in that state, it cannot be dissolved.
- 9Vide supra nota 2.See above, note 2.
- 10Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 2.Cf. here the text of the Master, c. 2.
- 11Cfr. supra d. 1. p. 1. q. 2. ad 3. — Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.Cf. above d. 1, p. 1, q. 2, ad 3. — See the scholion on the preceding question. ---