Bonaventure

Articulus III. De secundis nuptiis.

Consequenter quantum ad tertium articulum quaeritur de secundo foedere nuptiali. Et circa hoc quaeruntur tria: Primo quaeritur, utrum secundae nuptiae sint licitae. Secundo, utrum sint sacramentales. Tertio, utrum sint honorabiles.

Quaestio I. Utrum secundae nuptiae sint licitae.

The numbered footnotes below correspond to markers in both the Latin body above and the English translation. Quaracchi restarts its footer numbering on each printed page; here p.876 carries the edition's notes 4–10 (notes 1–3 belong to the preceding a2-q3) and p.877 carries its notes 1–4. In this chunk they are renumbered sequentially 1–11.

Quantum ergo ad primum ostenditur, quod secundae nuptiae non sint licitae.

1. Chrysostomus¹: « Secundum virum accipere secundum praeceptum Apostoli licitum, secundum veritatem fornicatio est »; sed de unoquoque iudicandum est secundum veritatem: ergo secundae nuptiae non sunt licitae, cum nec fornicatio.

2. Item, Ambrosius²: « A secundo die subtraxit Deus benedictionem, nobis intelligentiam derelinquens, non bonum esse matrimonium duplex, quia ab unitate dividit »; sed ibi « praefigurantur secundarum foedera nuptiarum »: ergo etc.

3. Item, ratione videtur: quia bigamus non potest promoveri ad sacros ordines³; sed poena non infligitur nisi pro culpa: ergo in bigamia est culpa.

4. Item, peccatum est habere plures uxores simul, nisi dispensetur a Deo⁴: ergo pari ratione videtur esse peccatum habere plures successive. Si dicas, quod non est simile, quia, cum sunt simul, fit iniuria primae uxori, non tamen successive; contra: esto quod prima uxor velit, nihilominus est peccatum: ergo etc.

Contra:

1. Abraham secundas contraxit nuptias cum Cethura, Genesis vigesimo quinto⁵; et in hoc non reprehenditur: ergo licitum fuit ei, et sic etc.

2. Item, primae ad Timotheum quinto⁶: Volo iuniores nubere, filios procreare, matresfamilias esse; loquitur de viduis.

3. Item, ratione videtur: quia nuptiae sunt in remedium⁷; sed cum mulier moritur, viro vivente, p. 877 vel e converso, manet morbus, et non adest remedium: ergo licitum est remedium adhibere, ergo et matrimonium secundo contrahere.

4. Item, nuptiae sunt in officium, hoc est in procreationem filiorum ad Dei cultum; sed multi post obitum uxorum sunt idonei filios procreare, similiter multae mulieres post obitum virorum: ergo licet contrahere.

Conclusio.

Conclusio. Non solum secundae, sed etiam aliae ampliores nuptiae sunt licitae.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod non tantum secundae nuptiae, sed etiam tertiae et quartae et ampliores sunt licitae, dum tamen fiant bono fine, scilicet propter prolem generandam, vel propter fornicationem vitandam, vel propter necessitatem suam sustentandam, ut cum contrahit vir cum muliere, ut ipsum foveat, vel e converso. Unde Augustinus⁸ dicit: « Non contemnimus quotaslibet nuptias »; et Hieronymus etiam, quod « Dominus non damnavit mulierem septemviram ».

Ad argumenta:

Ad 1. Ad illud ergo quod dicit Chrysostomus, quod secundum veritatem est fornicatio; dicendum, quod ipse vocat veritatem coniecturam rationis, quae tamen saepe fallitur, licet probabiliter iudicet. — Vel dicendum, quod fornicatio dicitur quaedam immersio⁹ libidinis, quia illud maxime consuevit movere ad secundas nuptias contrahendas.

Ad 2. Ad illud quod dicit Ambrosius, quod duplex matrimonium non est bonum; dicendum, quod illud intelligendum est sic: id est, non est honorabile¹⁰.

Ad 3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod punitur poena irregularitatis; dicendum, quod non posse ascendere ad sacros ordines non est poena, quia etiam nec mutus vel mutilatus naturaliter potest ascendere; nec tamen hoc est ei in poenam, sed quia non est idoneus.

Ad 4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod non licet plures habere simul; dicendum, quod non est simile, quia, viro vivente, mulier non habet potestatem sui corporis, nec e converso vir, vivente muliere¹¹; et ideo non potest alteri dare, et si dat, contra ius facit. Sed mortua uxore, solutus est, et ideo alteri potest dare; et ideo licet, et non peccat.

Article III. On second marriages.

Next, as to the third article, inquiry is made concerning the second marriage-covenant. And concerning this three questions are raised: First it is asked, whether second marriages are licit. Secondly, whether they are sacramental. Thirdly, whether they are honorable.

Question I. Whether second marriages are licit.

As to the first, then, it is shown that second marriages are not licit.

1. Chrysostom¹: "To take a second husband is, according to the precept of the Apostle, licit; according to truth it is fornication"; but concerning each thing one must judge according to truth: therefore second marriages are not licit, since neither is fornication.

2. Likewise, Ambrose²: "From the second day God withdrew his blessing, leaving us to understand that a double marriage is not good, because it divides from unity"; but there "are prefigured the covenants of second marriages": therefore etc.

3. Likewise, by reason it seems: because a bigamist cannot be promoted to sacred orders³; but a penalty is not inflicted except for fault: therefore in bigamy there is fault.

4. Likewise, it is a sin to have several wives at the same time, unless one be dispensed by God⁴: therefore by parity of reasoning it seems to be a sin to have several successively. If you say that it is not similar, because, when they are at the same time, injury is done to the first wife, but not [when] successively; on the contrary: granted that the first wife should be willing, nevertheless it is a sin: therefore etc.

On the contrary:

1. Abraham contracted a second marriage with Keturah, Genesis twenty-five⁵; and in this he is not reproved: therefore it was licit for him, and so etc.

2. Likewise, First to Timothy, chapter five⁶: I will that the younger [women] marry, bear children, be mothers of families; he speaks of widows.

3. Likewise, by reason it seems: because marriage is for a remedy⁷; but when the woman dies, the husband living, p. 877 or the reverse, the disease remains, and there is no remedy at hand: therefore it is licit to apply a remedy, therefore also to contract a second marriage.

4. Likewise, marriage is for a duty (officium), that is, for the procreation of children unto the worship of God; but many after the death of their wives are fit to procreate children, likewise many women after the death of their husbands: therefore it is licit to contract.

Conclusion.

Conclusion. Not only second, but also other further marriages are licit.

I respond: It must be said that not only second marriages, but also third and fourth and further ones are licit, provided however that they be done for a good end, namely for the sake of begetting offspring, or for the sake of avoiding fornication, or for the sake of sustaining one's own need, as when a man contracts with a woman, that he may cherish her, or the reverse. Hence Augustine⁸ says: "We do not despise marriages of whatever number"; and Jerome also, that "the Lord did not condemn the woman [wed] to seven men."

To the arguments:

To 1. To that which Chrysostom says, that according to truth it is fornication; it must be said that he calls truth a conjecture of reason, which nevertheless is often deceived, although it judges probably. — Or it must be said that fornication is called a certain immersion⁹ in lust, because that most of all is wont to move [one] to contracting second marriages.

To 2. To that which Ambrose says, that a double marriage is not good; it must be said that this is to be understood thus: that is, it is not honorable¹⁰.

To 3. To that which is objected, that he is punished with the penalty of irregularity; it must be said that not being able to ascend to sacred orders is not a penalty, because even one who is mute or maimed is naturally unable to ascend; nor yet is this to him a penalty, but because he is not fit.

To 4. To that which is objected, that it is not licit to have several at the same time; it must be said that it is not similar, because, the husband living, the woman does not have power over her own body, nor the reverse the husband, the woman living¹¹; and therefore she cannot give [it] to another, and if she gives, she acts against the law. But the wife being dead, he is loosed, and therefore can give [himself] to another; and therefore it is licit, and he does not sin.