secundo quantum ad actum matrimonii iam contracti, ibi uxori vir debitum, et cetera. second, as to the use of the matrimony once contracted, at let the husband render the debt. 316. Circa primum considerandum est, quod actus generativae virtutis ordinatur ad conservationem speciei per generationem filiorum, et quia mulier data est viro in adiutorium generationis, prima necessitas tangendi mulierem est propter procreationem filiorum. Unde Gen. I, 27 s. dicitur: masculum et foeminam creavit eos, et benedixit eis Deus, et ait: crescite et multiplicamini, et replete terram. Sed haec necessitas fuit circa institutionem humani generis, quamdiu oportuit multiplicari populum Dei per successionem carnis. 316. In regard to the first it should be noted that the act of the generative power is ordained to the conservation of the species by the generation of offspring. And because the woman was given to the man as a helper in generation, the first need for touching a woman is for the procreation of children. Hence it is said: male and female he created them. And God blessed them, and God said to them: be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth (Gen 1:27). But this need was directed to the formation of the human race, as long as there was need for the people of God to be multiplied by succession according to the flesh. Sed Apostolus, considerans humanum genus iam multiplicatum et populum Dei iam esse augmentatum, non propagatione carnis, sed generatione quae est ex aqua et Spiritu Sancto, ut dicitur Io. III, 5, praetermisit hanc necessitatem, qua scilicet primitus institutum fuerat matrimonium in officium naturae, et proponit secundam necessitatem secundum quam institutum est in remedium culpae. Quia enim carnalis concupiscentia adhuc post baptismum in fidelibus remanet, licet non Dominetur, instigat homines maxime ad actus venereos propter vehementiam delectationis. Et quia maioris virtutis est totaliter hanc concupiscentiam superare, quam possit hominibus convenire, secundum illud Matth. XIX, v. 11: non omnes capiunt verbum hoc, necessarium est quod in parte concupiscentiae cedatur, et in parte superetur; quod quidem fit dum actus generationis ratione ordinatur, et non totaliter homo concupiscentia ducitur, sed magis concupiscentia subditur rationi. But the Apostle, considering that the human race had now multiplied and that the people of God were now increased not by fleshly propagation but by the generation which is from water the Holy Spirit (John 3:5), he passed over this necessity whereby marriage had been originally instituted as a function of nature, and proposed a second necessity according to which it was instituted as a remedy for sin. For since carnal desire remains alive in believers even after baptism, although it does not rule, it impels men especially toward venereal acts on account of the vehemence of their pleasure. And because it requires greater virtue to conquer this desire entirely than can belong to men, according to Matthew: not all men can receive this saying (Matt 19:11), it is necessary that this desire be in part yielded to and in part mastered. This, indeed, happens when the act of generation is ordained by reason and man is not totally mastered by the desire, but the desire is rather subjected to reason. 317. Habet autem hoc ratio naturalis, quod homo utatur generationis actu, secundum quod convenit generationi et educationi filiorum. Hoc autem in brutis animalibus invenitur, quod in quibuscumque speciebus animalium sola foemina non sufficit ad educationem prolis, masculus simul nutrit prolem cum foemina; et ad hoc exigitur, quod masculus cognoscat propriam prolem. Et ideo in omnibus talibus animalibus, ut patet in columbis, turturibus et huiusmodi, naturaliter indita est sollicitudo de educatione prolis. Et propter hoc in huiusmodi non sunt vagi et indifferentes concubitus, ex quibus sequeretur incertitudo prolis; sed masculus determinatus determinatae foeminae coniungitur, non indifferenter quaelibet cuilibet, sicut accidit in canibus et aliis huiusmodi animalibus, in quibus sola foemina nutrit prolem. 317. Natural reason teaches that man use the act of generation according as it is suitable for generation and education of children. But in brute animals it is found that in certain species the female alone is not sufficient for the training of the offspring, but the male takes care of the offspring with the female. For this it is required that the male recognize its offspring. Therefore, in all such animals, as doves, pigeons and the like, solicitude for the training of offspring is inspired by nature. Wherefore, in such animals coition is not random and indiscriminate, but a definite male is joined to a definite female, not one to another promiscuously, as happens in dogs and such animals, in which the female alone takes care of the offspring. Maxime autem in specie humana masculus requiritur ad prolis educationem, quae non solum attenditur secundum corporis nutrimentum, sed magis secundum nutrimentum animae, secundum illud Hebr. XII, 9: patres quidem carnis nostrae habuimus eruditores et reverebamur eos; et ideo ratio naturalis dictat quod in specie humana non sint vagi et incerti concubitus, quales sunt concubitus fornicarii, sed sint determinati viri ad determinatam foeminam, quae quidem determinatio fit per legem matrimonii. But above all in the human species, the male is required for the education of the offspring, which are attended to not only regarding bodily nourishment, but to a greater degree regarding the nourishment of the soul, as it says in Hebrews: we have had earthly fathers to discipline us and we respected them (Heb 12:9). And consequently, natural reason dictates that in the human species coition is not random and uncertain, but is by a definite man to a definite female, who in fact made the arrangement through the law of matrimony. 318. Sic igitur triplex bonum habet matrimonium, primum quidem quod est in officium naturae, prout scilicet ordinatur ad generationem et educationem prolis, et hoc bonum est bonum prolis. 318. Thus, therefore, matrimony has three goods. The first is that it is a function of nature in the sense that it is ordered to the production and education of offspring; and this good is the good of offspring. Secundum bonum habet prout est in remedium concupiscentiae, quae scilicet coarctatur ad determinatam personam, et hoc bonum dicitur fides, quam scilicet vir servat uxori suae, non accedens ad aliam, et similiter uxor viro. The second good is that it is a remedy for desire, which is restricted to a definite person; and this good is called fidelity, which a man preserves toward his wife, by not going to another woman, and similarly the wife toward the husband. Tertium bonum habet, prout in fide contrahitur Christi, quod quidem bonum dicitur sacramentum, inquantum significat coniunctionem Christi et Ecclesiae, secundum illud Eph. V, 32: sacramentum hoc magnum est, ego autem dico in Christo, et Ecclesia. The third good, insofar as the marriage is contracted in the faith of Christ, is called the sacrament, inasmuch as it signifies the union of Christ and the Church, as it is said: this mystery is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the Church (Eph 5:32). 319. Hoc est ergo quod dicit: dictum est quod bonum est homini mulierem non tangere, sed quia ad hoc bonum non sunt omnes homines idonei, unusquisque vir, propter fornicationem, scilicet vitandam, suam uxorem habeat, id est, sibi determinatam, ut tollantur vagi et incerti concubitus, quod pertinet ad fornicationem. Unde et Prov. V, 18: laetare cum muliere adolescentiae tuae, et postea subditur: quare seduceris, fili mi, ab aliena? 319. This therefore is what he says: it has been stated that, it is good for a man not to touch a woman. But because all men are not equipped for this good, for fear of fornication, which must be shunned, let every man have his own wife, that is, determined by himself, so as to avoid uncertain and promiscuous concubinage, which pertains to fornication: rejoice in the wife of your youth (Prov 5:18); why should you be infatuated, my son, with a loose woman? (Prov 5:20) 320. Deinde cum dicit uxori vir debitum reddat, etc., agit de usu matrimonii contracti. Et 320. Then when he says, let the husband render, he deals with the use of the marriage contract. primo agit de debito reddendo; First, about rendering the conjugal debt; secundo de debiti intermissione, ibi nolite fraudare, et cetera. second, about postponing the debt, at do not defraud one another. 321. Circa primum duo facit. 321. In regard to the first he does two things. Primo proponit quod intendit, dicens: dictum est quod vir habeat uxorem, et uxor virum; habendi autem haec est ratio, ut vir reddat debitum uxori, scilicet de suo corpore per carnalem commixtionem, similiter autem et uxor viro, quia quantum ad hoc ad paria iudicantur. Unde mulier non est formata de pedibus viri tamquam ancilla, nec de capite tamquam domina, sed de latere tamquam socia, ut legitur Gen. II, 21. Unde et mutuo debent sibi debitum reddere, secundum illud Rom. XIII, 7: reddite omnibus debita. First, he states his proposition, saying: it has been stated that a man should have a wife and a wife her husband. The reason for the ‘having’ is that the husband render the debt to his wife, namely, with his own body through carnal union, and the wife also in like manner to the husband, because in this matter they are judged equal. Hence the woman was not formed from the feet of the man as a servant, nor from the head as lording it over her husband, but from the side as a companion (Gen 2:21). Hence, they must pay the debt to one another: pay all of them their dues (Rom 13:7). 322. Secundo assignat debiti rationem, dicens mulier non habet potestatem sui corporis, scilicet ad actum generationis, ut scilicet possit proprio arbitrio vel continere, scilicet vel alteri se tradere; sed vir, scilicet habet potestatem sui corporis, quantum scilicet ad usum carnalis copulae, et ideo uxor debet viro proprii corporis officium offerre. Similiter autem et vir sui corporis potestatem non habet, sed mulier, et cetera. Unde et ipse debet sui corporis officium offerre uxori, legitimo impedimento cessante. Unde et Gen. c. II, 24 dicitur: adhaerebit uxori suae, et erunt duo in carne una. 322. Second, he assigns the reason for the debt saying, the wife has not power of her own body, namely, in regard to the act of generation as though she could by her own choice be continent or give herself to someone else; but the husband, that is, has power over her body as to the use of carnal union. Therefore the wife must offer the husband the use of her body. And in like manner the husband also has not power of his own body: but the wife. Hence he must offer the use of his body to the wife, when any lawful impediment ceases. Hence it is said: therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh (Gen 2:24). 323. Deinde cum dicit nolite fraudare invicem, etc., agit de intermissione debiti reddendi. Et primo ostendit qualiter intermitti debeat actus coniugalis. 323. Then when he says, do not defraud one another, he deals with postponing the debt to be rendered. First, he shows how the conjugal act should be postponed. Circa quod docet unum esse cavendum, ne scilicet hoc per fraudem fiat, dicens nolite fraudare invicem, ut scilicet velit vir continere, invita uxore, aut etiam e converso. Quod Apostolus fraudem nominat, quia unus subtrahit alteri quod ei debetur, quod ad fraudem pertinet, non minus in actu matrimonii, quam in aliis rebus. Unde et Prov. c. XII, 27 dicitur: non inveniet fraudulentus lucrum, quia scilicet ille, qui tali fraude continentiam Deo offert, non lucratur meritum vitae aeternae. Sicut enim dicit Augustinus non vult Deus tale lucrum tali damno compensari, ut dum unus coniugum continet, altero invito, ille incidat in damnabiles corruptelas. In regard to this he teaches that one thing must be avoided, saying, do not defraud one another, as, for example, the husband might wish to abstain when the wife is unwilling, or even conversely. The Apostle calls this fraud, because one is taking away what belongs to another—and this pertains to fraud no less in marriage than in other affairs (Prov 12:27): the fraudulent man will not catch his prey, namely, because one who offers God his continence accompanied by that fraud does not gain merit for eternal life. For as Augustine says, God does not want such gain compensated with such harm, so that while one of the spouses is continent against the will of the other, the former falls into dangerous temptations. 324. Tria autem docet observanda in tali intermissione: quorum primum est ut fiat ex communi consensu. Unde dicit nisi forte ex consensu. Unde dicitur Eccli. XXV, 1 s.: in tribus beneplacitum est spiritui meo, quae sunt probata coram Deo et hominibus: concordia fratrum, et amor proximorum, vir et mulier bene sibi consentientes. Secundum est, ut sit ad certum tempus. Unde subdit nisi forte ad tempus, secundum illud Eccle. c. III, 5: tempus amplexandi, et tempus longe fieri ab amplexibus. Tertium est, ut hoc fiat propter debitum finem, scilicet causa spiritualium actuum, ad quos continentia reddit magis aptos. Unde subdit ut vacetis orationi, secundum illud Ioel. II, 14: sacrificium et libamen Domino Deo nostro, et postea subdit: egrediatur sponsus de cubili suo, et sponsa de thalamo suo. 324. Three things must be observed in such postponement. The first is that it be done with mutual consent. Hence he says, except, perhaps, by consent. Hence it is said: my soul takes pleasure in three things, and they are beautiful in the sight of the Lord and of men; agreement between brothers, friendship between neighbors, and a wife and a husband who live in harmony (Sir 25:1). The second is that it be for a definite time. Hence he says, except perhaps for a time: a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing (Eccl 3:5). The third is that it be done for a suitable purpose, that is, for the sake of spiritual acts, for which continence renders one more suitable. Hence he adds, that you may give yourselves to prayer: a cereal offering and a drink offering for the Lord, your God (Joel 2:14), and later he adds, let the bridegroom leave his room, and the bride her chamber (Joel 2:16). 325. Secundo agit de reiteratione coniugalis actus; et primo ponit documentum, dicens iterum revertimini in idipsum, ut scilicet vobis invicem debitum reddatis, finito tempore orationis. Unde et III Reg. VIII, 66 dicitur, quod celebratis dedicationis solemniis, profecti sunt in tabernacula sua laetantes. 325. Then he deals with the resumption of the conjugal act. First he presents the teaching, saying, and return together again, that is, in order that you may render to each other the debt, now that the time of prayer is finished. Hence it is said that after celebrating the dedication of the feast: they went to their homes joyful and glad of heart (1 Kgs 8:66). Secundo assignat rationem documenti. Non enim hoc dicit, quasi sit necessarium ad salutem, sed ad periculum vitandum. Unde subdit ne tentet vos Satanas, id est, ne sua tentatione vos prosternat; sicut etiam dicitur I Thess. III, 5: ne forte vos tentaverit is qui tentat, et inanis sit labor noster. Tentatio autem Satanae non est fortibus timenda, de quibus dicitur I Io. II, 14: scribo vobis, iuvenes, quoniam fortes estis, et verbum Dei manet in vobis, et vicistis malignum. Est autem timenda debilibus, unde subdit propter incontinentiam vestram, id est, propter pronitatem ad incontinentiam, ex quo contingit, quod diabolus hominem tentando prosternit, et provocatur ad tentandum, secundum illud I Petr. ult.: circuit quaerens quem devoret. Second he assigns a reason for the teaching. For he does not say this as though it were necessary for salvation, but to avoid danger. Hence he adds, lest Satan tempt you, that is, lest he subvert you with his temptation: for fear that somehow the tempter had tempted you and that our labor would be in vain (1 Thess 3:5). Satan’s temptation should not be feared by the strong, about whom it is said: I write to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abides in you, and you have overcome the evil one (1 John 2:14). But he should be feared by the weak. Hence he says, through lack of self-control, that is, for your incontinency, as a result of which the devil overcomes man by tempting, and he is inclined to tempt: the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking some one to devour (1 Pet 5:8). 326. Deinde cum dicit hoc autem dico, etc., manifestat quo sensu praedicta sunt accipienda, et 326. Then when he says, but I speak this, he tells in what sense the above doctrine should be taken. primo facit quod dictum est; First, he does what has been said; secundo, rationem assignat, ibi volo autem, etc.; second, he assigns a reason, at for I would that all; tertio, exponit quod dixerat, ibi dico autem, et cetera. third, he explains what he had said, at but I say to the unmarried. 327. Dicit ergo primo: dixi, quod unusquisque suam uxorem habeat, et unaquaeque mulier virum suum, et iterum quod post continentiam determinati temporis, iterum revertamini in idipsum. Hoc autem dico secundum indulgentiam, id est, parcens infirmitati vestrae, non secundum imperium, quasi scilicet vobis necessarium ad salutem. Subditis enim sunt quaedam eorum infirmitati indulgenda, et non ad bona imperio cogendi. Unde contra quosdam praelatos dicitur Ez. XXXIV, 4 s.: cum austeritate imperabatis eis, et cum potentia, et dispersi sunt greges mei. 327. First, therefore, he says: I have said that each one should have his own wife and each woman her own husband; furthermore, after practicing continence for a time, they should return once more to each other. But I speak this by indulgence, that is, to spare your weakness, not by commandment, namely as though necessary for your salvation. For certain things must be conceded to subjects on account of their weakness, and they should not be compelled by commanding what is good. Hence it is said against some prelates: with force and harshness you have ruled them, so they were scattered (Ezek 24:4). 328. Sed videtur Apostolus inconvenienter loqui; indulgentia enim non est nisi de peccato. Per hoc ergo quod Apostolus, secundum indulgentiam se dicit matrimonium concessisse, videtur exprimere quod matrimonium sit peccatum. 328. But the Apostle seems to be speaking in an unsuitable manner, for concessions are concerned only with sin. Therefore, by the fact that the Apostle says he is speaking by way of concession, he seems to express that marriage is a sin. Sed ad hoc potest responderi dupliciter. Uno modo ut indulgentia sumatur hic pro permissione. Est autem duplex permissio: una quidem de minus malo, sicut dicitur Matth. c. XIX, 8, quod Moyses permisit Iudaeis dare libellum repudii propter duritiam cordis eorum, scilicet ad vitandum uxoricidium, ad quod erant proni. Talis enim permissio non fit in Novo Testamento propter sui perfectionem, secundum illud Hebr. VI, 1: ad perfectum feramur. Alia autem est permissio de minus bono, cum scilicet homo praecepto non cogitur ad maius bonum; et hoc modo Apostolus hic indulget, id est, permittit matrimonium, quod est minus bonum quam virginitas, quae non praecipitur, quae est maius bonum. But this can be answered in two ways. In one way so that the concession is taken for permission. But there are two kinds of permission: one is concerned with a lesser evil: for your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives (Matt 19:8), that is, to avoid the murder of one’s wife, to which they were prone. Such a permission is not found in the New Testament on account of its perfection: let us go on to perfection (Heb 6:1). Another permission is about the lesser good, namely, when a man is not compelled by precept to a greater good. This is the sense in which the Apostle makes a concession here, that is, permits matrimony, which is a lesser good than virginity, which is not commanded and is a greater good. Alio modo potest accipi indulgentia prout respicit culpam, secundum illud Is. XXVI, 15: indulsisti, Domine, indulsisti genti. Et secundum hoc indulgentia refertur ad actum coniugalem secundum quod habet annexam culpam venialem, tamen propter bona matrimonii sine quibus esset mortalis. In another way, concession can be taken as regarding guilt: but you have increased the nation, O Lord, you have increased the nation (Isa 26:15). In this sense, concession refers to the conjugal act, accordingly as it has venial guilt attached to it along with the good of matrimony, without which it would be mortal. 329. Unde considerandum est quod actus coniugalis quandoque quidem est meritorius, et absque omni culpa mortali vel veniali, puta cum ordinatur ad bonum prolis procreandae et educandae ad cultum Dei: sic enim est actus religionis; vel cum fit causa reddendi debitum: sic enim est actus iustitiae. Omnis autem actus virtutis est meritorius, si sit cum caritate. Quandoque vero est cum culpa veniali, scilicet cum quis ad actum matrimonialem ex concupiscentia excitatur, quae tamen infra limites matrimonii sistit, ut scilicet cum sola uxore sit contentus. Quandoque vero est culpa mortalis, puta cum concupiscentia fertur extra limites matrimonii, scilicet cum aliquis accedit ad uxorem, aeque libenter vel libentius ad aliam accessurus. 329. Hence it should be noted that the conjugal act is sometimes meritorious and without any mortal or venial sin, as when it is directed to the good of procreation and education of a child for the worship of God; for then it is an act of religion; or when it is performed for the sake of rendering the debt, it is an act of justice. But every virtuous act is meritorious, if it is performed with charity. But sometimes it is accompanied with venial sin, namely, when one is excited to the matrimonial act by concupiscence, which nevertheless stays within the limits of the marriage, namely, that he is content with his wife only. But sometimes it is performed with mortal sin, as when concupiscence is carried beyond the limits of the marriage; for example, when the husband approaches the wife with the idea that he would just as gladly or more gladly approach another woman. Primo ergo modo actus matrimonii non requirit indulgentiam; secundo modo habet indulgentiam inquantum aliquis consentiens concupiscentiae in uxorem, non fit reus peccati mortalis; tertio modo omnino indulgentiam non habet. In the first way, therefore, the act of marriage requires no concession; in the second way it obtains a concession, inasmuch as someone consenting to concupiscence toward the wife is not guilty of mortal sin; in the third way there is absolutely no concession. 330. Deinde cum dicit volo autem etc., assignat rationem eius quod dixerat, et 330. Then when it says, for I would that all, he assigns the reason for what he has said. primo quare non loquatur secundum imperium; First, why he does not speak as commanding; secundo quare loquatur secundum indulgentiam, ibi sed unusquisque, et cetera. second, why he speaks according to a concession, at but every one has his proper gift. 331. Circa primum considerandum est quod nullus sapiens praecipit illud cuius contrarium magis vult fieri. Ideo Apostolus non praecipit quod homines matrimonium contrahant, vel matrimonio contracto utantur, quia magis vult quod homines contineant. Et hoc est quod dicit volo autem omnes, homines, esse sicut meipsum, ut scilicet contineant, sicut ego contineo. Et similiter dicit Act. XXVI, 29: opto apud Deum omnes qui audiunt, fieri tales qualis ego sum. 331. In regard to the first it should be noted that no wise man commands that whose opposite he would rather have done. Therefore, the Apostle does not command that men contract marriage or make use of a marriage already contracted, because he wishes rather that men be continent. And this is what he says: for I would that all men were even as myself, that is, continent as I am. He says likewise: I would to God that not only you but also all who hear me this day might become such as I am (Acts 26:29). 332. Sed contra hoc videtur esse, quia si omnes homines continerent, sicut Apostolus continebat, cessasset generatio, et sic non fuisset impletus numerus electorum, quod erat contra dispositionem divinam. 332. But there seems to be something against this, because if all men practiced continence, as the Apostle did, generation would cease and, as a result, the number of the elect would never be fulfilled, and this is against God’s arrangement. Dicunt quidam quod Apostolo revelatum erat, quod si omnes homines salvarentur in continentia viventes, sicut ipse vivebat, sufficiebat ad implendum numerum electorum. Sed hoc nulla auctoritate fulcitur; et ideo potest dici, quod Apostolus volebat omnes esse continentes, quia scilicet volebat hoc de singulis, non tamen volebat quod omnes simul continerent. Some say that it had been revealed to the Apostle that if all men were saved practicing continence, as he practiced it, it would suffice to fill up the number of the elect. But this rests on no authority; consequently, it can be said that the Apostle wished all men to be continent, because he wished this for certain individuals, but he did not wish that all would be continent at the same time.