Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacrament of Matrimony
Chapter 3: That Matrimony Is a Sacrament Is Proved from the Fathers
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. III, De Sacramento Matrimonii, the fifth general controversy on the sacraments. The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
Let now the testimonies of the ancient Fathers be added, which convict the adversaries of manifest lying. For Calvin, book 4 of the Institutes, chapter 19, section 34, writes that no one before Gregory saw Matrimony given for a sacrament. Beza, in the annotations on chapter 5 to the Ephesians, says that Matrimony is nowhere called a sacrament by Jerome or Augustine. Chemnitz, in the second part of the Examination, page 1223, affirms that before the age of Augustine it cannot be shown that even the general name of sacrament was attributed to Matrimony. But these are either most impudent lies or the confession of a notable ignorance.
St. Leo I preceded St. Gregory by a hundred and fifty years, and yet in letter 92, to Rusticus bishop of Narbonne, chapter 4, he calls Matrimony a sacrament and a mystery: “Hence,” he says, “since the fellowship of marriage was so constituted from the beginning that, besides the joining of the sexes, it had in itself the sacrament of Christ and the Church, there is no doubt that that woman does not belong to Matrimony in whom it is shown that the nuptial mystery was not.”
St. John Chrysostom, who preceded Augustine in age, in homily 20 on the letter to the Ephesians, as we cited above, affirms that there is a great mystery in the insoluble marriage of man and woman. Nor must the word “sacrament” be demanded of Chrysostom, since the word “sacrament” is Latin and he wrote in Greek.
Ambrose, who is older than both Augustine and Jerome, besides the place noted above from the commentary on chapter 5 to the Ephesians, in book 1 On Abraham, chapter 7, speaking of him who desires to take another's bride to wife: “He who does so,” he says, “sins against God, whose law he violates, whose grace he dissolves; and therefore, because he sins against God, he loses the fellowship of the heavenly sacrament”; where he teaches that the heavenly sacrament cannot be found where marriage is celebrated against the law of God.
Pope Siricius, a contemporary of Ambrose, in letter 1, chapter 4, does not indeed call Matrimony a sacrament; but, what is of greater moment, he writes that sacrilege is committed when one of the spouses, the other spouse living, passes to another marriage. But if Matrimony were only a civil contract, and not also a sacrament of religion, how, I ask, would sacrilege be committed in its violation?
So also Innocent I, in letter 9, which is to Probus, asserts that Matrimony is founded by divine grace while it is celebrated. Cyril, book 2 on John, chapter 22, says that Christ sanctified marriage and prepared grace for weddings, that the entrance of men into this life might be blessed.
But let us come to Augustine, and show that by Augustine both the name of sacrament is attributed to Matrimony, against the lie of Calvin and Beza, and the notion of a sacrament, against the rashness of Chemnitz.
Augustine, then, attributes the name of sacrament to Matrimony in all these places: in book 9 On Genesis according to the Letter, chapter 7; the book On Faith and Works, chapter 7; the book On the Good of Marriage, chapters 7, 8, 15, 17, 18, 24 and 25; the book On Holy Virginity, chapter 12; book 5 against Julian, chapter 9; book 2 On Original Sin, chapter 34; book 1 On Marriage and Concupiscence, chapters 10, 17 and 21.
And that the notion of a sacrament also is attributed to Matrimony in these places is proved by these arguments. First, because Augustine uses this word absolutely and ordinarily in the disputation on Matrimony; for things which are sacraments improperly and in a certain broad way are not usually called sacraments except rarely and with something added. An example can be that sanctified bread which was given to catechumens in place of the Eucharist; for Augustine calls that bread a sacrament, in the book On the Merits and Remission of Sins, chapter 26; but he did this only once, and in the same place warned that that bread is not the body of Christ and is not enough for the salvation of the catechumens.
Second: because in most of these places Augustine says that Matrimony is not a sacrament except in the Church; and by this he distinguishes the Matrimony of Christians from the marriages of the gentiles. The book On the Good of Marriage, chapter 18: “For in our marriages the sanctity of the sacrament is worth more than the fruitfulness of the womb.” And chapter 24: “The good of marriage,” he says, “through all nations and all men is in the cause of begetting and in the faithfulness of chastity; but as regards the people of God, also in the sanctity of the sacrament.” And the book On Faith and Works, chapter 7: “In the city of the Lord,” he says, “in his holy mountain, that is, in the Church, not only the bond of marriage but also the sacrament is commended.” But the marriages of the gentiles are true, lawful, and sacraments in a broad way. For Innocent too, in the chapter Gaudemus, on divorces, calls the Matrimony of unbelievers a sacrament; and Chemnitz himself, page 1217, at the end, approves the opinion of Brenz, who thinks that Matrimony can be called a sacrament in a broad way, because it is a holy kind of life instituted and commended by God. Therefore Augustine, when he distinguishes the marriages of the faithful from the marriages of unbelievers in this, that those are sacraments and these are not, treats of a sacrament properly so called, not of a sacrament taken in a broad way.
And hence also you will gather how far John Calvin is from the opinion of Augustine, who compared Matrimony with agriculture and the shoemaker's craft and barbering, because it is nothing else than a good kind of life, instituted by God. For by this reason there would be no difference between the marriages of the faithful and of unbelievers.
Third, it is proved because Augustine does not say in passing that Matrimony is a sacrament, but assumes it as something granted, to prove the ecclesiastical dogma that the bond of Matrimony is altogether insoluble, as is plain from the whole book On the Good of Marriage. But certainly this argument of Augustine would be worth nothing if he spoke of a sacrament taken in a broad way; of which argument we shall say more in the following chapter.
Fourth, it is proved because St. Augustine speaks in the same way of Matrimony and of Baptism when he disputes about the notion of a sacrament. For in book 1 On Marriage and Concupiscence, chapter 10, when he had said that the sacrament of Matrimony remains even in those who in fact separate from one another and enter other marriages (for the first bond is still in force, and therefore each commits adultery, because each is not the spouse of the one to whom he cleaves but of the one whom he deserts), he adds that the same happens in the sacrament of Baptism, which can never be lost, even if someone, having lost the faith, falls away from Christ. This comparison certainly declares manifestly that Matrimony was for Augustine a most true sacrament.
But Chemnitz objects, page 1223, one place of Augustine, the book On the Good of Marriage, chapter 18, where Augustine writes that the marriages of the patriarchs with many women were a sacrament of the joining of Christ with the multitude of the nations of the whole world which are converted to the faith; but that the marriages of Christians with one wife only are a sacrament of the unity of the Church subject to Christ. From which place it seems to be gathered that Matrimony was not a sacrament for Augustine except in a broad way, inasmuch, namely, as it signifies something mystically in Christ and in the Church.
I answer: Augustine did not take the name of sacrament in the same way everywhere; which we can prove even from Chemnitz himself. For on the page before, which is 1224, Chemnitz teaches that the marriages of Christians are a sacrament according to Augustine because they signify the joining of Christ with the Church, and because they are a sacrament they in no way suffer polygamy, of several wives at once. Therefore, when Augustine says that the polygamy of the patriarchs was a sacrament, he does not take sacrament in the same way as he took it when he gave the same name to the marriages of Christians, which do not admit polygamy for the very reason that they are a sacrament.
Add that the polygamy of the patriarchs can be said to have been a sacrament of Christ and the Church only improperly and materially; for the many nations converted to Christ are not many Churches or many brides except materially and improperly; for formally and properly there is only one Church, one bride, one body. Wherefore Augustine took sacrament in a broad way when he wrote that of the polygamy of the ancient Fathers; but that he took it far otherwise when he treated of the Matrimony of Christians can easily be perceived from the arguments brought above.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT III.
Matrimonium sacramenlum esse, probatur
ex Palribus.
Accodanl nunc velerum Palrum leslimonia,quae
mendacii manifesli arguanl adversarios. Calvinus
enim lib. 4. Inslilut. cap. 19. § 24. scribil, nemi-
nem ante Gregorium vidisse Matrimonium pro sa-
cramenlo datum.Beza in annot. ad cap. 5. ad E-
phesios, dicit.nusquam Malrimonium appellari sa-
crainentum a Ilieronymo, aut Auguslino. Remni-
tius in 2. par. examinis pag. 1223. afTirmat anlc
Augustini aetatem, ostendi non posse, Malrimonio
allributam vel ipsam generalem sacramenli appel-
lationcm. Sed baec vel impudenlissima mendacia
sunt, vel insignis imperiliae confessio esl.
S. Lco I. s. Gregorium annis centum et quin-
quaginta praecessit. el tamen in cpislola 1)2. ad
Riislicum episcopum narbonensem . cap. 4. vocat
Malrimoiiium sacramciilum et inysleriuin: Inde,
inquil, cum socieias nuptiarum iia ab inilio con-
stiiuia sit, ui praeler sexuum conjunctionem,Jia-
beret in se Christi et Ecclesiae sacramcntum, du-
bium non est, eam mulierem non pertinere ad
Mairimonium, in qua docetur nuptiale non fuis-
se myslerium.
S. Joannes chrysoslomus , qui Auguslinum ae-
tale j)raec(!ssil, homil. 20. in episl. ad Ephesios,
ul supra citavimus, mysterium magiuiin esse afiir-
raal. in conjugio insolubili viri et focminae.Neciue
oporlel a Clirysoslomo vocabiihim sacrnmenli cxi-
gere, cum sacramenli vox lalina sil et ille graece
scripserit.
Ambrosius, qui ct Auguslino cl Ilieronynio aii-
li(luior esl, praeler locum supra notatum ex com-
mcnlar. in cap. 5. ad Ephcs. lib. 1. de Ahraham.
c. 7. loquens de eo, qut alterius nui)lam ducere
ciipit in uxorem: Qui sic egcrii, inquil. jieccat in
Deum, cujus legcm violal, gratiam solril: el idco
quia in Dcum poccat.sncramcnli coc/c.s/j>s amittit
consorlium; ubi docct , non posse sacramcfiliim
coeleste inveniri, ubi conlia Dei legcm conjiigiuin
celebralur.
Siriciiis papa Ambrosii aeqiinlis in epist.1. cap.
4.11011 appcllat (|ui(h;m Malrimoiiitiiii sacrameiilum;
sed qiiod est majoris momenti, scribil sacrilegium
commilli, cura allcr conjugum , vivcnlc conjuge ,
780
l)E SACllVMKMO MATRIMOM
ad iiliud cuiijiigiuiii Iransil.Al si Miilriinuniuin coii-
Iraclus laiiluin civilis essel, non eliam sacrainon-
luiii rclij^ioiiis, quo paiio. quaeso, sacrilej,'iuni in
ejus \iolalioiie coinniillerehir?
Sic eliam Iiiiiocenlius I. in episi. 9. quae esl ad
Probum. M.ilrimoninm diviiia j^ralia 1'uiidaii asse-
ril, diiin ('elcl)iaUir. Cyrilhis lib. 2. iii Joiin. cap.
22. dicil, Clirislum sanclilicasse C(miM;,Mum,('l j^ra-
liam nupUis praeparassc, ut adilus liouiinum in
liaiic vilam bciuHliccrcUir.
Scd vcniamus ;id Au^Misliiuim.ac oslcndamus ab
Auj^uslino, el iiomen sacramenli MaU'iinonio aUri-
buluni, conlra meiidacium Calvini el Bczae; el sa-
crameiUi riitionem, conlra KiMimilii lemerilalftin.
Nomcn i^'ilur sacramcnU Iribuil Auguslinus Ma-
irimonio, iii lusomnibus locis. In lib.9. de Gcncs.
;id lileram. ciip.7. lib. de lidc el operibus, ciip.
7. lib. de bono conjugali , cap. 7. 8. Mi. 17. 18.
24. el2j. lib. de sancla Virginilate , cap. 12. lib.
5. conlra Julianusn, cap. 9. lib. 2. dc pcccalo ori-
giiiali. cap. 3t. lib. 1. dc nupliis el concupisc.
I-ap. 10. 17. el2l.
Quod aulein ralio eliam sacramenli tribuatur Ma-
triinonio in his locis. probalur his argumenlis.Pri-
1110, quia absolulu et ordiuarie Augustinus hac vo-
ce in dispulatiouc de Malrinionio ulilur; nani quae
sunt sacramenla improprie el largo quodam mo-
do, non soienl iiisi raro el cum addilo sacramcnla
nomiuiiri. E.xeraplum essc polesl in eo panc san-
ctilicalo, qui dabatur calecliumenis loco Euchari-
stiae;nam eum panem vocal Auguslinus sacramen-
tum, lib. de pecc;\lorum ment. el rcmiss. cap.2(),
Sed id semel lanluin fecil, el in eoderu loco adino-
nuit, eum panem non esse corpus Chrisli et calc-
chumenis iion suHicere ad salulem.
Secundo: Quia in plerisque horuin locorum,Au-
gusUnus dicil, Malrimonium non esse sacramen-
tum, nisi in Ecclesia; et per hoc distinguit Matri-
moniuin Chrisiianorum a Malrimoniis genlilium.
Lib. de bono conjugali, cap. 18. In nostraluni
quippe nupliis. plus valel sanclilas sacramenti ,
quam toecundilas lUeri. El cap. 24. Bonum, in-
quil, nupliarum per omnes qenles, alque omnes
homincs in caussa generaiidi est, el in jide casti-
lalis: quod aulem ad populum Dei periinet,eliam
in sanclilate sacramenli. El lib. de lide operibus,
cap. 7. In civiLale. inqnit, Domini, inmonle san-
clo ejus, hoc est, in Ecclesia. nupliarum nonso-
luvi vinculum.sed etiamsacramentum commen-
dalur. Al Malrimoniagonlilium suni vcra, Icgilima
el largo modo sacramenUi. Nam el Innocenlius ,
cap. Gaudemus , de divorl. vocat sacraraenlum ,
.MaUimonium infidelium, et ipsc eliam Kemnitius
pag. 1217. in fiiie, approbat senlcntiam Brenlii ,
(jui .Matriraonium largo modo sacramenlum appcl-
lari posse exislimat, quia est sanctum vitae genus
a Deo inslilulum el commcndatum. Ergo Augu-
stinus, cura dislinguil Malrimonia fidelium a Ma-
Irimoniis infidelium, quod illa sacramenta sint ,
liaec non sinl; dc sacramenlo proprie dicto agit ,
non de sacraraenlo largo raodo sumpto.
Atque hinc eliam colliges, quam procul absit ab
Augustini senteotia Joannes Calvinus , qui Matri-
uioniura cum agricullura et suloria arle,alque ton-
slrina coiii|)aravil. quia nihil sit aliud , nisi genus
vilae boiium, el a Deo institulum. Ilac eniin ratio-
ne niliil interesscl inter Malrimonia lidelium et in-
lideliuiii.
Terlio [irobalur: Quia Auguslimis non obitcrdi-
cil, Miilrimonium siicrameiilum csse , sed id Jissu-
mil t;iin(]ii;iin (•(mUuii ad probandimi dogina eccle-
siaslicum, (]uod videlicet MiiUimonii vinculum sit
l)rorsus insolubile, ut patet cx lolo libro de bono
conjiigiili. Al cerle hoc iirgiimenlmn Augiisliiii ni-
hil Viileret, si lo(]iierelur de Siicramcnlo hirgo ino-
do acccpto: de quo argumenlo in sequenti capile
plurft dicemus.
Qu;irto probalur: Quia s. Augustinus codcm mo-
do loquilur dc Malrimonio et de BiipUsmo, cum
de sacramcnli ralione dispulat. Nam lib. 1. de nu-
pliis et concupisc. cap. 10. cum dixissel: Sacr;i-
menlum M;ilriraonii mauere eliain in cis , qui re
ipsa a se inuluo separanlur,et alia conjugia ineuiil.
(Adhuc cniin primum vinculum vigel, et ideo uter-
quc moechatur; quia non est illius conjux, cui ad-
haerct, sed illius, qucm deserit) subjungil, idem
accidere in sacrarnenlo Baptismi, quod numquam
amitti pnlest.eliamsi quis aniissa fidea Chrislo dc-
ficiat. lliiec cerle comparalio manifesle declaral,
Matrimonium Augustino vcrissimum sacramenturn
fuisse.
Sed objicit Remnilius pag. 1223. unura locum
Auguslini lib. de bono coiijugali, cap. 18. ubi Au-
gusUnus scribii, nupUas palriarcharum cum mullis
foeminis, sacramenlum 1'uisse conjunctionis Chrisli
cum muUiludine nalioiium lolius mundi.quae con-
verlunlur a(l fidem: nupUas aulem Christianorum
cum una lanluin uxorc, sacramenlum esse unila-
tis Ecclesiae Christo subjcclac. Ex quo loco colli-
gi vidclur , Mulriinonium apud Auguslinum non
fuisse sacramenlura, nisi largo modo, prout vide-
licet aliquid mystice significal in Chrislo et iii
Ecclesia.
Respondeo: Non accepit Augustinus noraen sa-
cramcRti eodem modo ubique: id quod vel ox ipso
Remnilio probare possumus. Nam pagina superio-
rc, quae esl 1224. docet Reranilius nuplias Chri-
sliauorum apud Augustinum esse sacramenlum,
quiasignificaut conjuncUonem Chrisli cum Eccle-
sia, et quia sacramenlum sunt, non pati ullo mo-
do polyga'!>iani plurimum uxorum simul. Ergo cum
AugusUnus dicil,polygamiam patriarcharum fuisse
sacramenlum , non accipit sacramcnlum eodein
raodo quo accipiebal, cura idem nomen tribuerel
nupUis ChrisUanorum , quae polygamiam non ad-
initlunl ex eo, quod sacramenlura sunt.
Adde: Quod polygamiiiin palriarcharura sacra-
menlum Ciirisli et Ecclesiae fuisse, non nisi impro-
prie et maleri;ililcr dici polesl: non enim mullae
naliones ad Chrislum conversae.sunt mullae Eccle-
siae aul muUae sponsae,nisi materialiter cl impro-
prie; formalitcr eoim ac proprie, una lantum est
Ecclesia, una sponsa, unum corpus. Quare Augu-
sUnus largo raodo sacrarnentura accepit, com illud
scripsit de Patrum vetcrum polygamia: longe auteni
aliler eum accepisse, cum de Malrimonio Chrislia-
norura ageret, ex argumenlis supra allatis facile
perspici polesl.
LIIER PniMUS
781