Dist. 39, Art. 2, Q. 1
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 39
Articulus II. De disparitate cultus quoad matrimonii solutionem.
Consequenter quantum ad secundum articulum quaeritur de disparitate cultus per comparationem ad matrimonii solutionem; et circa hoc quaeruntur quatuor.
Primo quaeritur, utrum, altero veniente ad fidem, altero remanente in infidelitate, solvatur matrimonium quantum ad fidelem.
Secundo, utrum solvatur quantum ad infidelem.
Tertio, utrum solvatur, cum alter coniugum fit infidelis.
Quarto, utrum, utroque veniente ad fidem, solvatur matrimonium propter personarum illegitimitatem.
Quaestio I. Utrum, altero infidelium veniente ad fidem, altero remanente in infidelitate, solvatur matrimonium quoad fidelem.
Quantum ergo ad primum sic proceditur et ostenditur, quod matrimonium solvatur quantum ad permanentem in fide.
1. Primae ad Corinthios septimo1: Quodsi infidelis discedit, discedat, non enim est servituti subiectus frater aut soror in huiusmodi. Super quem locum dicit Ambrosius: «Contumelia Creatoris solvit matrimonium in eo qui relinquitur, ne accusetur alii copulatus».
2. Item, matrimonium non est ratum sine Sacramento baptismi; sed quod non est ratum solvitur per fornicationem corporalem: ergo et per fornicationem spiritualem. Quod autem ratum sit per baptismum, patet per Innocentium, Extra, de Divortiis2, Quanto te novimus: «Sacramentum, inquit, baptismi, quod semel est admissum, ratum efficit coniugii Sacramentum».
3. Item, mulier non potest prohibere virum, ut non convertatur ad fidem: ergo si non vult sequi vel cohabitare, non potest prohibere, ut non contrahat, cum vir ad continentiam non teneatur.
4. Item, fortius vinculum solvit minus, ubi minus repugnat; sed fortiori vinculo tenetur baptizatus Deo quam uxori infideli: ergo ubi mulier non concordat ei3, solvitur vinculum ab ipsa.
Contra: 1. Primae ad Corinthios septimo4: Si quis vir habet infidelem uxorem, non dimittat eam, si consentit cohabitare: ergo matrimonium est adhuc inter eos: ergo nec vinculum solvitur, nec cohabitatio dividitur, altero converso.
2. Item, matrimonium consummatum per carnis commixtionem significat unionem naturarum in Christo5; sed illa est omnino insolubilis: ergo et tale matrimonium: ergo si carnaliter sunt commixti, tale vinculum non potest solvi.
3. Item, quod rectum est per fidei Sacramentum non infirmatur, sed confirmatur; sed inter duos infideles recte contractum est matrimonium: ergo si nunquam infirmatur, si persistant in infidelitate, nec6 si alter veniat ad fidem.
4. Item, si alter coniugum transeat ad frugem melioris vitae, utpote ad religionem, non solvitur matrimonium consummatum7: ergo nec si transit ad fidem.
Conclusio
Si in matrimonio infidelium una tantum pars convertitur ad fidem, haec liberatur ab officio cohabitationis et debiti solvendi, immo tunc ab ipso vinculo matrimonii, quando infidelis non vult cohabitare sine contumelia Creatoris.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod loquendo de solutione quantum ad cohabitationem et mutuam servitutem, hoc est in potestate fidelis; sed loquendo de solutione quantum ad ruptionem vinculi, distinguendum est: quoniam infidelis aut vult cohabitare, aut non. Si vult cohabitare, aut cum blasphemia nominis Christi, aut sine; si sine, aut ut pertrahat ad infidelitatem, aut non. — Si vult cohabitare sine blasphemia nominis Christi, et ita quod non pertrahat p. 839 ad peccatum; non solvitur matrimonium, quia nec iniuriatur nec facit contumeliam Deo nec matrimonio nec marito. — Si autem discedit, vel non vult cohabitare sine contumelia Creatoris, vel sine impulsione ad infidelitatem; in his tribus casibus potest a fideli dimitti, et per contumeliam factam matrimonio et Creatori vinculum potest frangi; et potest cum alia contrahere, ut dicit Ambrosius, et Extra, de Divortiis, Quanto te novimus, et: Gaudemus1.
Concedo igitur, quod solutionem matrimonii contracti in infidelitate tria faciunt: primum est ipsius imbecillitas; secundum est cultus disparitas; tertium, Creatoris vel matrimonii iniuria. Primum reddit possibile ad dissolutionem, secundum disponit, et tertium dissolvit. — Matrimonii imbecillitas est ratione significationis imperfectae, quam habet apud infideles, et ratione defectus baptismi. Unde dicitur, quod illud matrimonium est legitimum, sed non ratum, quia, ut dicit Innocentius, «Sacramentum fidei, id est baptismi, quod semel admissum est ratum efficit Sacramentum coniugii», ex parte scilicet suscipientis est intelligendum; et hoc est, quia infideles non possunt ita ligari in «individuam vitae consuetudinem2», quin alter possit transire ad fidem; et ita, si non vult commutari, potest simpliciter separari, cum perfecta fides advenit suscipiendo Sacramentum fidei. — Cultus disparitas est secunda ratio, quia tunc advenit alteri personae fortius vinculum. — Iniuria matrimonii sive Dei est, cum non vult cohabitare, aut non sine contumelia Creatoris3; et tunc vinculum illud solvitur, quia repugnat vinculo, quo fidelis alligatur Deo. — Concedendae sunt ergo rationes probantes, quod solvitur matrimonium, his concurrentibus; et patent rationes ad oppositum.
1. Quod enim dicit Apostolus, hoc verum est, quando mulier vult habitare in pace sine contumelia Dei.
2. Aliud patet, quia, etsi sit consummatum, non tamen est ratum nec habet apud infideles plenam significationem nec stabile fundamentum.
3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod fides non infirmat rectum; dicendum, quod verum est eatenus, qua rectum est; sed eatenus, qua est via ad obliquitatem, ut si mulier nolit cohabitare, nisi vir protrahatur ad malum, tunc solvit.
4. Ultimum patet, quia illae tres causae non concurrunt, cum aliquis transit ad frugem melioris vitae.
I. Bene notandae sunt distinctiones in principio responsionis ad 1. quaest. positae. Aliud est enim absolutio coniugis conversi ab officio cohabitationis et debiti solvendi, remanente altera parte in infidelitate; aliud est solutio ipsius vinculi matrimonialis, ita ut coniux conversus ad aliud matrimonium possit transire. Primum per se semper evenit, quamvis sub conditionibus hic tactis liceat, immo ab Apostolo suadeatur, ut fidelis non discedat a parte infideli. Sed secundum fit solummodo tunc, quando infidelis cum alio non vult cohabitare nisi cum contumelia Creatoris. Ratio huius et egregia explicatio istius locutionis cum contumelia Creatoris in responsione auctoris invenitur. — Divisio materiae et status quaestionis quoad 1. et 2. quaest. diverso modo sumitur a diversis; unde auctores de utraque loquentes simul laudamus. De 1. et 2. quaestione: Scot. loc. cit. n. 5. seqq. — S. Thom., hic a. 3-5; Suppl. q. 59. a. 3-5. — B. Albert., hic a. 7. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 2. a. 1-3. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 2. q. 1. 2. — Durand., hic q. 2.
II. De 3. quaestione: S. Thom., locis citt. a. 6. — B. Albert., hic a. 5. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 2. a. 4. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 2. q. 3.
III. De 4. quaestione: S. Thom., utroque loco q. 3. ad 3. 4. — B. Albert., hic a. 6. — Petr. a Tar., locis citt.
---
Article II. On disparity of cult with respect to the dissolution of marriage.
Next, with regard to the second article, inquiry is made concerning disparity of cult in comparison to the dissolution of marriage; and concerning this four things are asked.
First it is asked whether, when one comes to the faith and the other remains in unbelief, the marriage is dissolved with respect to the believer.
Second, whether it is dissolved with respect to the unbeliever.
Third, whether it is dissolved when one of the spouses becomes an unbeliever.
Fourth, whether, when both come to the faith, the marriage is dissolved on account of the illegitimacy of the persons.
Question I. Whether, when one of two unbelievers comes to the faith while the other remains in unbelief, the marriage is dissolved with respect to the believer.
With regard, then, to the first, the argument proceeds thus, and it is shown that the marriage is dissolved with respect to the one who remains in the faith.
1. First to the Corinthians, chapter seven1: But if the unbeliever depart, let him depart, for a brother or sister is not made subject to servitude in such cases. Upon which passage Ambrose says: «Contempt of the Creator dissolves the marriage in the case of the one who is abandoned, so that he not be accused for being joined to another».
2. Likewise, a marriage is not ratified without the Sacrament of baptism; but what is not ratified is dissolved by bodily fornication: therefore also by spiritual fornication. That it is ratified through baptism is clear from Innocent, in the Extra, on Divorce2, Quanto te novimus: «The Sacrament of baptism», he says, «once it has been admitted, makes the Sacrament of marriage ratified».
3. Likewise, a woman cannot prevent her husband from being converted to the faith: therefore if she does not wish to follow or cohabit, she cannot prevent him from contracting [another marriage], since the husband is not bound to continence.
4. Likewise, a stronger bond dissolves a weaker one where it is less opposed to it; but a baptized person is held by a stronger bond to God than to an unbelieving wife: therefore where the woman is not in accord with him3, the bond is dissolved on her side.
Contra: 1. First to the Corinthians, chapter seven4: If any man has an unbelieving wife, let him not put her away, if she consents to cohabit: therefore the marriage is still between them: therefore neither is the bond dissolved, nor is cohabitation divided, when one is converted.
2. Likewise, a marriage consummated by the commingling of the flesh signifies the union of the natures in Christ5; but that union is altogether indissoluble: therefore so too such a marriage: therefore if they have been carnally commingled, such a bond cannot be dissolved.
3. Likewise, what is right through the Sacrament of the faith is not weakened but confirmed; but between two unbelievers a marriage was rightly contracted: therefore if it is never weakened, if they persist in unbelief, neither is it6 weakened if one comes to the faith.
4. Likewise, if one of the spouses passes over to a better manner of life, as to religion, a consummated marriage is not dissolved7: therefore neither if he passes over to the faith.
Conclusio
If in a marriage of unbelievers one party only is converted to the faith, this party is freed from the office of cohabitation and of paying the debt, indeed then from the very bond of marriage, when the unbeliever is unwilling to cohabit without contempt of the Creator.
Respondeo: It must be said that, speaking of dissolution with respect to cohabitation and mutual servitude, this is within the power of the believer; but speaking of dissolution with respect to the rupture of the bond, a distinction must be drawn: for the unbeliever either wishes to cohabit, or does not. If he wishes to cohabit, it is either with blasphemy of the name of Christ, or without; if without, either so as to draw [the believer] to unbelief, or not. — If he wishes to cohabit without blasphemy of the name of Christ, and in such a way that he does not draw [the believer] p. 839 to sin; the marriage is not dissolved, because he neither does injury nor offers contempt to God nor to the marriage nor to the husband. — But if he departs, or is unwilling to cohabit without contempt of the Creator, or without impulsion to unbelief; in these three cases she can be dismissed by the believer, and through the contempt done to the marriage and to the Creator the bond can be broken; and she can contract with another, as Ambrose says, and the Extra, on Divorce, Quanto te novimus, and: Gaudemus1.
I concede therefore that three things bring about the dissolution of a marriage contracted in unbelief: the first is its own weakness; the second is disparity of cult; the third, injury to the Creator or to the marriage. The first renders it possible for dissolution, the second disposes it, and the third dissolves it. — The weakness of the marriage is by reason of the imperfect signification which it has among unbelievers, and by reason of the defect of baptism. Hence it is said that such a marriage is legitimate, but not ratified; because, as Innocent says, «The Sacrament of the faith, that is of baptism, which once admitted makes the Sacrament of marriage ratified», is to be understood, namely, on the part of the recipient; and this is because unbelievers cannot be so bound into «the individual companionship of life2» that the other may not pass over to the faith; and thus, if the unbeliever does not wish to be changed, the [believer] can be simply separated, when perfect faith comes by receiving the Sacrament of the faith. — Disparity of cult is the second reason, because then a stronger bond comes upon the other person. — Injury to the marriage or to God occurs when the unbeliever does not wish to cohabit, or not without contempt of the Creator3; and then that bond is dissolved, because it is opposed to the bond by which the believer is bound to God. — The reasons proving that the marriage is dissolved when these concur are therefore to be granted; and the reasons to the opposite are plain.
1. For what the Apostle says is true when the woman wishes to dwell in peace without contempt of God.
2. The other is clear, because, even though the marriage be consummated, nevertheless it is not ratified, nor does it have among unbelievers full signification nor a stable foundation.
3. To that which is objected, that faith does not weaken what is right; it must be said that this is true insofar as it is right; but insofar as it is a way to obliquity, as when the woman is unwilling to cohabit unless the husband be drawn to evil, then it does dissolve.
4. The last is clear, because those three causes do not concur when someone passes over to a better manner of life.
I. The distinctions set down at the beginning of the response to the first question are well to be noted. For it is one thing to absolve the converted spouse from the office of cohabitation and of paying the debt, the other party remaining in unbelief; it is another thing the dissolution of the bond of marriage itself, so that the converted spouse may pass over to another marriage. The first always happens of itself, although it is lawful under the conditions here touched upon — nay, is urged by the Apostle — that the believer not depart from the unbelieving party. But the second occurs only then, when the unbeliever is unwilling to cohabit with the other except with contempt of the Creator. The ground of this and an excellent explanation of that expression with contempt of the Creator is found in the response of the author. — The division of the matter and the state of the question with respect to the first and second questions is taken in a different way by different authors; whence we cite together the authors who speak of both. On the first and second question: Scotus, in the place cited, n. 5 and following. — St. Thomas, here a. 3-5; Suppl. q. 59. a. 3-5. — Bl. Albert, here a. 7. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 2. a. 1-3. — Richard of Middleton, here a. 2. q. 1. 2. — Durandus, here q. 2.
II. On the third question: St. Thomas, in the places cited, a. 6. — Bl. Albert, here a. 5. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 2. a. 4. — Richard of Middleton, here a. 2. q. 3.
III. On the fourth question: St. Thomas, in both places q. 3. ad 3. 4. — Bl. Albert, here a. 6. — Peter of Tarentaise, in the places cited.
---
- 1Vers. 15. — Verba Ambrosii sumta sunt ex Comment. in hunc loc. olim Ambrosio tributo. Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 5.Verse 15. — The words of Ambrose are taken from the Commentary on this passage formerly attributed to Ambrose. Cf. here the text of the Master, c. 5.
- 2Libr. IV. tit. 19. c. 7: Quia Sacramentum fidei, quod semel est admissum, nunquam amittitur, sed ratum etc.Book IV, tit. 19, c. 7: Because the Sacrament of the faith, which once has been admitted, is never lost, but ratified, etc.
- 3Cod. L (E a secunda manu) fidei.Codex L (E, by a second hand) reads fidei.
- 4Vers. 12: Si quis frater uxorem habet infidelem, et haec consentit habitare cum illo, non dimittat illam.Verse 12: If any brother has an unbelieving wife, and she consents to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
- 5Cfr. supra d. 26. a. 2. q. 1. et 3.Cf. above, d. 26, a. 2, q. 1 and 3.
- 6Cod. K (1 a secunda manu) videtur similiter, edd. superius post ergo omisso si, hic legunt ergo nec; et paulo superius Vat. omittit sed confirmatur.Codex K (1, by a second hand) seems to read similarly; the editions, having above omitted si after ergo, here read ergo nec; and a little above the Vatican edition omits sed confirmatur.
- 7Vide supra d. 27. a. 3. q. 1. — Permulti codd. et ed. 1 confirmatum.See above, d. 27, a. 3, q. 1. — Very many codices and the first edition read confirmatum.
- 1Loco superius pag. 839, nota 2. allegato, c. 8. — Post Ambrosius, et edd. addunt Innocentius.In the passage cited above on page 839, note 2, c. 8. — After Ambrose, the editions add and Innocent.
- 2Respicitur definitio matrimonii supra d. 27. dub. 1. explicata. Cfr. de hac ratione supra a. 1. q. 2.The definition of marriage explained above at d. 27, dub. 1, is here referred to. Cf. concerning this reason above, a. 1, q. 2.
- 3Cod. U, omisso aut non, hic addit: vel nisi trahat ad infidelitatem.Codex U, omitting aut non, here adds: or unless he draw [the believer] to unbelief. ---