← Back to Distinction 39

Dist. 39, Art. 2, Q. 3

Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 39

Textus Latinus
p. 840

Quaestio III. Utrum matrimonium solvatur, si alter coniugum fit infidelis, specialiter quoad fidelem.

Tertio quaeritur, utrum matrimonium solvatur, si alter coniugum fit infidelis, specialiter quoad fidelem. Et quod non solvatur, videtur:

1. Quia per fornicationem corporalem non fit solutio, maxime quoad substantiam matrimonii, ut supra6 visum est; et tamen illa plus obviat bono matrimonii: ergo nec per fornicationem spiritualem.

2. Item, matrimonium est vinculum insolubile; sed contingens est, aliquem labi in infidelitatem; sed insolubile non dirimitur aliquo casu accidentali: ergo etc.

3. Item, si solveretur per lapsum in haeresim, posset quilibet, volens uxorem dimittere, haeresim simulare, et ita semper praeiudicaretur matrimonio.

Contra: 1. Ambrosius7 dicit, et habetur in Glossa super septimum ad Corinthios: «Contumelia Creatoris solvit ius matrimonii in eo qui relinquitur, ut non accusetur alteri copulatus»: ergo si lapsus in haeresim non vult cohabitare sine contumelia Creatoris, licet alteri copulari.

2. Item, fides est fundamentum totius spiritualis aedificii8; sed sublato fundamento, destruitur p. 841 quidquid superaedificatum est: ergo sublata fide, pereunt omnia Sacramenta, ergo et matrimonium.

3. Item, si alter veniat ad fidem, solvitur matrimonium, si alter remanet in infidelitate1; sed peior est conditio labentis quam remanentis et magis elongatur a fide: multo fortius ergo solvitur matrimonium.

Conclusio

Matrimonium non solvitur, altero coniugum labente in infidelitatem.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod altero coniugum labente in infidelitatem, non solvitur matrimonii Sacramentum. — Et ratio huius duplex est: una, ut praecludatur malis via simulationis et deceptionis; alia est secundum veritatem, quia Sacramentum coniugii in fidelibus, propter hoc quod perfectam habet significationem et significat unionem insolubilem, ipsum est insolubile2. Rursus, quia fundatum est super Sacramentum baptismi, quod imprimit characterem indelebilem, ipsum est insolubile. Unde Innocentius dicit in decretali, Quanto te novimus, quod «Sacramentum fidei, quod semel admissum est, ratum efficit coniugii Sacramentum», ut dictum est prius3.

Ad argumenta: Ad 1. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur in contrarium, quod contumelia Creatoris solvit; dicendum, quod auctoritas Ambrosii intelligitur de matrimonio contracto in infidelitate, quod non est ratum, quia non est fundatum super fidei Sacramentum; et ideo non est simile de conversione et lapsu4.

Ad 2. Ad illud quod obiicitur de fundamento, dicendum, quod fides est fundamentum virtutum, non Sacramentorum; sed Sacramentum fidei est fundamentum Sacramentorum, et hoc est Sacramentum5 stabile, quod manet semper.

Ad 3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod peior est conditio labentis; dicendum, quod solutionem matrimonii non tam facit contumelia Creatoris et disparitas cultus, quam etiam facit imbecillitas ipsius matrimonii contracti in infidelitate6 et disparitas cultus non solum quoad fidem, sed etiam quoad Sacramentum fidei, in quo cultu quoad Sacramentum qui baptizati sunt dispares esse non possunt7.

---

English Translation
p. 840

Question III. Whether the marriage is dissolved if one of the spouses becomes an infidel, specifically with respect to the believer.

Thirdly it is asked whether the marriage is dissolved if one of the spouses becomes an infidel, specifically with respect to the believer. And that it is not dissolved seems [to be the case]:

1. Because through bodily fornication no dissolution occurs, especially with respect to the substance of the marriage, as was seen above6; and yet that [bodily fornication] runs more counter to the good of marriage: therefore neither [is it dissolved] through spiritual fornication.

2. Likewise, marriage is an indissoluble bond; but it is contingent that someone should lapse into infidelity; but the indissoluble is not dissolved by any accidental circumstance: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, if it were dissolved through a lapse into heresy, then anyone wishing to dismiss his wife could feign heresy, and thus the marriage would always be prejudiced.

On the contrary: 1. Ambrose7 says, and it is contained in the Gloss on the seventh [chapter] to the Corinthians: «The insult to the Creator dissolves the right of marriage in the one who is abandoned, so that he may not be accused as joined to another»: therefore if one who has lapsed into heresy is unwilling to cohabit without insult to the Creator, it is permitted [to the other] to be joined to another.

2. Likewise, faith is the foundation of the whole spiritual edifice8; but when the foundation is removed, whatever p. 841 has been built upon it is destroyed: therefore, faith being removed, all the Sacraments perish, and therefore marriage also.

3. Likewise, if one [spouse] comes to the faith, the marriage is dissolved, if the other remains in infidelity1; but the condition of the one lapsing is worse than that of the one remaining, and he is more distanced from the faith: therefore all the more strongly is the marriage dissolved.

Conclusion

The marriage is not dissolved when one of the spouses lapses into infidelity.

I respond: It must be said that, when one of the spouses lapses into infidelity, the Sacrament of marriage is not dissolved. — And the reason for this is twofold: one, that the way of simulation and deception may be foreclosed to evil persons; the other is according to truth, because the Sacrament of marriage among the faithful, on account of the fact that it has a perfect signification and signifies an indissoluble union, is itself indissoluble2. Again, because it is founded upon the Sacrament of baptism, which imprints an indelible character, it is itself indissoluble. Hence Innocent says in the decretal Quanto te novimus that «the Sacrament of faith, which has once been admitted, renders the Sacrament of marriage ratified», as was said before3.

To the arguments: To 1. To that, then, which is objected to the contrary, that the insult to the Creator dissolves [it]; it must be said that the authority of Ambrose is understood of a marriage contracted in infidelity, which is not ratified, because it is not founded upon the Sacrament of faith; and therefore the case is not similar concerning conversion and lapse4.

To 2. To that which is objected concerning the foundation, it must be said that faith is the foundation of the virtues, not of the Sacraments; but the Sacrament of faith is the foundation of the Sacraments, and this is the stable Sacrament5, which remains always.

To 3. To that which is objected, that the condition of the one lapsing is worse; it must be said that the dissolution of marriage is brought about not so much by the insult to the Creator and the disparity of worship, as it is also brought about by the weakness of the marriage itself contracted in infidelity6 and by the disparity of worship not only with respect to faith, but also with respect to the Sacrament of faith, in which worship, with respect to the Sacrament, those who are baptized cannot be unequal7.

---

Apparatus Criticus
  1. 6
    Dist. 35. q. 4.
    Distinction 35, q. 4.
  2. 7
    Iam supra pag. 838, nota 1. allegatus.
    Already cited above on p. 838, note 1.
  3. 8
    Cfr. supra pag. 327, nota 10. et pag. 582, nota 5.
    Cf. above, p. 327, note 10, and p. 582, note 5.
  4. 1
    Vide supra q. 1. et 2. — Servavimus cum Vat. hunc ordinem argg., qui respondet solutioni eorum; codd. et ed. 1 ultima duo argg. invertunt.
    See above, q. 1 and 2. — We have preserved, with the Vatican [edition], this order of the arguments, which corresponds to their solution; the codices and edition 1 invert the last two arguments.
  5. 2
    Ut dictum est supra a. 1. q. 2. — Superius pro duplex edd. triplex.
    As was said above, a. 1, q. 2. — Above, for duplex (twofold) the editions read triplex (threefold).
  6. 3
    Supra q. 1. fundam. 2.
    Above, q. 1, fundamentum 2.
  7. 4
    Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 5.
    Cf. here the text of the Master [Lombard], c. 5.
  8. 5
    Cod. E fundamentum.
    Codex E [reads] fundamentum.
  9. 6
    Ut ostensum est supra q. 1. in corp.
    As was shown above, q. 1, in the body [of the article].
  10. 7
    Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest.
    See the scholion to the first question of this article. ---
Cited by

4 further references address the article or printed page this question belongs to, rather than the question itself.

← Dist. 39, Art. 2, Q. 2Dist. 39, Art. 2, Q. 4→