Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacrament of Matrimony
Chapter 4: That Matrimony Is a Sacrament Properly So Called Is Proved by Reason
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).
I come now to the reasons. The first reason is drawn from the insolubility of Matrimony and from monogamy, which is the reason St. Augustine uses everywhere. The Matrimony of Christians is of one man only with one woman, and altogether insoluble; therefore it is a sacrament conferring grace, and properly so called. The antecedent is plain from that of Mark 10: “Whosoever shall put away his wife and marry another, committeth adultery against her”; and moreover from many other testimonies, which will be added below in their place. The consequence is proved: for from this, that it is one and insoluble, two things are gathered: first, that it is a sacred sign; second, that it confers grace; which two things make a sacrament properly so called.
The first is plainly gathered. For that complete insolubility in a single marriage cannot be referred, as to its primary and most certain cause, to anything but the sign of the joining of Christ with the Church; to which cause Augustine constantly refers that insolubility, in the book On the Good of Marriage. For if you consider Matrimony as an office of nature for propagating offspring, a reason can hardly be given why, on account of the barrenness of a spouse, it is not lawful to put her away or to take another. If you consider it as it is instituted for a remedy against fornication, why can a wife suffering from a perpetual sickness not be put away, or why can another not be taken? Wherefore Matrimony has indeed from the law of nature a certain insolubility, as St. Thomas teaches, on book 4, distinction 33, question 2, article 1; yet not so great but that reason sometimes dictates that it is expedient that it be dissolved, especially if a divine dispensation is added. Why, then, Matrimony is altogether insoluble, this is the chief cause: because by divine institution it signifies the insoluble joining of Christ and the Church.
And hence it is that the wise men of this world, although they shrank from divorce, yet, because they were ignorant of the chief cause of the firmness of the marriage bond, for certain causes put away their wives, or exchanged them, or took several: as Augustine relates of Cato, in the book On the Good of Marriage, chapter 18, and On Faith and Works, chapter 7. Gellius relates the same of a certain other man, book 4, chapter 3, who thought that a wife whom he loved singularly must yet be put away on account of barrenness. Jerome relates the same of Cicero, book 1 against Jovinian. It is certain that Socrates had two wives at once. Not a few other examples of this kind could be related.
Lastly, from the Apostle, 1 Corinthians 7, it is certain that a lawful and consummated Matrimony, contracted before Baptism, can be dissolved; but that it cannot if it is contracted after Baptism. Of which certainly no cause can be given except that this sacrament is the sign of the indissoluble joining of Christ and the Church, and that one was not; for, the sacrament being removed, the marriages of the faithful and of unbelievers are equal. We have, then, the first thing which we said could be gathered from that insoluble bond.
And the second we gather from this: that to bear an insoluble bond with one woman the grace of God is necessary, and God never fails in necessary things. For truly it is a most difficult thing to be so bound to one woman that for no cause, nor through any dispensation, can the bond be loosed, nor another wife be brought in while the first lives. But who would believe that God instituted so difficult a thing, and did not at the same time bestow the help of grace to overcome that difficulty?
Add that the new law, which is called a sweet yoke and a light burden, compared with the old would be in this part far harder than the old, unless Matrimony had grace joined with it; since the Hebrews were permitted to have many wives at once, and even to put away their wives with impunity by a bill of divorce.
The second reason is taken from the end of Matrimony, which is twofold: the propagation of offspring, and a remedy against the sin of fornication; for each end requires the grace of God in Matrimony.
And concerning the first end, it is to be known that it belongs to Matrimony not only to procreate children, but also to educate and instruct them; for in this the marriage of men differs from the couplings of beasts, which are not properly called marriages, since only to procreate and feed their young, but not to instruct them, belongs to beasts. But besides the office of instructing children according to the rules of reason, which is common to all nations, it belongs to Christian spouses to instruct their children in faith and religion, and to give every effort that they be made true and living members of the Catholic Church. And this is plain, both because the sons of the Church are joined for this, that they may increase and preserve the Church itself; and also because the likeness between Christ and the Church on the one part, and the joining of man and woman on the other, requires it. For Christ and the Church always beget spiritual children through Baptism, nourish them through the Eucharist, strengthen them through Confirmation, and so on. So Christian spouses are bound by the marriage itself to divine offices; but offices which surpass nature are never committed by God unless grace is also given at the same time, through which those offices may be exercised as they ought.
But as regards the other end, the theologians rightly say that marriage alone, without the grace of God, is not a sufficient remedy against fornication: both because concupiscence is rather kindled than extinguished by the conjugal act, and because it very often happens that, on account of sickness or the absence of a spouse, they are compelled to be continent for a long time; which indeed is usually more difficult for the married than for virgins to live in perpetual celibacy. It belonged, then, to the author of the divine law to provide for the children of the Church a remedy perfect and sufficient on every side.
The third is taken from the rite and ceremonies. For it is certain that from the very beginning of the Church Matrimony was held among sacred things, and was wont to be celebrated among the solemnities of sacred rites through the ministry of priests. But certainly, if it were a human contract only, such as the human contracts of sales and leases are, or a political kind of life, such as are, as Calvin says, agriculture, barbering, the shoemaker's craft and carpentry, the holy Fathers would never have joined Matrimony with the most holy things.
Tertullian, in the second book To His Wife, to show how much difference there is between the marriage which is celebrated in the Church and that which is celebrated among the gentiles: “Whence,” he says, “shall I suffice to tell the happiness of that Matrimony which the Church joins, and the Offering confirms, and, sealed, the angels announce, and the Father holds ratified?” Ambrose, letter 19, to Vigilius: “For since,” he says, “marriage itself must be sanctified by the priestly veil and blessing, how can that be called a marriage where there is no agreement of faith?” We shall bring forward more of this rite below in its place.
The fourth reason is drawn from the consent of the whole Church, Greek and Latin, for these five hundred years. For from the time of the Master of the Sentences all the theologians with the highest consent have taught that there are seven sacraments of the new law, and have always numbered Matrimony among them. See the doctors on book 4, distinction 26.
Lucius III, who sat four hundred years ago, in a council of many patriarchs, archbishops and other prelates and princes held at Verona, pronounced anathema on those who should think otherwise concerning the sacrament of the body of the Lord, Baptism, Matrimony, the confession of sins and the other sacraments of the Church than the faith of the Roman Church holds; where we see Matrimony numbered among those sacraments which are properly called, and are, sacraments of the new law. This decree of Lucius is had in the chapter Ad abolendam, on heretics.
The Council of Florence, with the Greeks and Latins consenting, gave an instruction to the Armenians, in which it numbered Matrimony with Baptism, the Eucharist and the other sacraments of the new law.
And lest perhaps anyone should believe that the Greeks afterward withdrew from that faith and confession, it has happened fittingly that a few years ago, that is, in the year of the Lord 1576, Jeremias, patriarch of Constantinople, in his own name and that of the rest of the prelates of Greece, published a Censure on the Augsburg Confession of the Lutherans; in which Censure, chapter 7, we read that Matrimony is a divine sacrament, and one of those seven which Christ and the apostles handed down to the Church; where chapter 5 to the Ephesians is also alleged.
From this testimony two things can be gathered in passing, against the lies of the adversaries. First: if the Greeks, who have long since withdrawn from the obedience of the Roman pontiff, number Matrimony among the sacraments, then this dogma is not peculiar to the papists. Then: if the Greeks, who read the Apostle only in Greek, gathered the sacrament of Matrimony from chapter 5 to the Ephesians, then the Latins did not fabricate the sacrament of Matrimony out of ignorance of the Greek tongue, or from the word “sacrament” alone found in the Latin Vulgate edition, as Luther, Calvin, Beza and Chemnitz falsely say.
Further, this so great consent of the Churches ought altogether to suffice for pious and modest Christians, even if we had no argument besides. For in the explanation of the Scriptures and the Fathers we can easily slip; but that the Church never fails, and that she cannot err, has been said so openly, so luminously, so expressly by Christ himself and by his Apostle, that nothing more open, nothing clearer, nothing more express can be said.
“Thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it,” Matthew 16. “The church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth,” 1 Timothy 3.
“The truth of the Scriptures,” says Augustine, book 1 against Cresconius, chapter 33, “is held by us when we do what has now pleased the universal Church, which the authority of the Scriptures themselves commends; so that, since holy Scripture cannot deceive, whoever fears to be deceived by the obscurity of this question, let him consult about it the same Church which holy Scripture without any ambiguity points out.”
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT IV. Probalur ratione, .llalrimonmm esse sav.ramentiim proprie diclum. Venio nunc ad raliones. Prim.T rntio duciliir iih insolubilitale 3Iiilrimonii et monognmia, quae csl ralio, qun passim ulilur s. Augustinus. Matrimu- nium Cliristianorum est unius lanlum cum una et omnino iusolubile; igilur esl sacramentum confe- rens gratiam ac propric diclum. Antccedens pa- lcl c\ ilio Marci 10. Qui dimiseril uxorem suam el aliam duxerit , adullcriuni commillil super eam: et praeterea cx aliis multis testimoniis, quac infrn suo loco addcrcnlur. Conseqnenlia probatur; nam ex co. quod est unum et insolubilc , colli- guntur duo. Primo esse signum sacrnm. Secundo confcrrc ?raliam; quae duo sacramentum propric dictum eniciuni. Prinnim aperle culligitur. l\am illn omnimoda insolubililas in unis nupliis. non potest reCcrri in caussam primariam el certissimam, nisi in signum conjunclionis Christi cum Ecclesia, in quam caus- sam perpetuo Augustinus cam insolubililatcm re- fert, in libro de bono conjugali. Nam si consideres Matrimoniuui, ut oiricium nalurae ad propagandam sobolem, aegrc polest reddi ratio, cur ob stcrilila- lem conjugis non liceal cam dimittcre, aut aliam duccrc. Si consideres, ut est in remedium conlra , fornicationcm inslitutum.cur non poterit uxor pcr- petuo morbo laborans, dimilli? aul cur non pole- ril alia duci.Quare habet quidem Matrimonium ex jurc naturae quandam insolubilitatcm, ut sanctus Tliomas docel in 4. dist. S.^i. quaesl. 2. artic. 1. non lamen tanlam, quin aliquando ratio diclct, expcdirc ut solvatur acccdente pracscrlim dispcn- salionc divina. Cur igilur 3Ialrimonium sit omnino insolubile, illa estpotissima caussa,quia significat divina instilutionc insolubilem conjunctioncm Cliristi cl Ecdesiac. Et hinc est, quod sapienlcs hujus mundi licct a divortio abhorrerenl , tamcn quia polissimam caussam ignorabuiit firmilatis vinculi conjug,ih's; cerlis de caussis conjiigcs dimitlcbant. V(d C(un- mulabaut, vcl piuris ducebant: utdc Catonc rcfi-rt Augustinus lib. de bono conjugali, cap. 1S. ct de fide et operibus , cap. 7. Quod idcm de alio (|ii()- dam refcrt Gellius lib. i. cap. li. qiii uxorem, (|uam unice diligebal , tamen ol> sterililalcm dimiltcn- dam pula\it. Idcm rtiferl Ilicronyimus lib. I. in .lo- vinianiim de Ciccronc. vSocralem constat diias si- mul habuisse uxorcs. Alia id genus excmpla non pauca posscnl refcrri. Deniquo ev Aposlolo 1. Corinlh. 7. conslal Ma- Irimonium higitimum cl consummatum, ;.'nte Ha- ptismum contractum, possc dissolvi ; non autcm posse si post Baplismum conlrahalur. Cujiis ccrle nulla caussa rcddi polcst. nisi quia hoc sacramcn- tum signum est indissoliibilis conjuiiclionis Chrisli o.l Ecclesiacillud uun cral:nain rcn)Olo sacramcn- to, paria sunt conjugiii rKlclium cl infi(lcIiu:u.H;i- bemus igitur Piiinum, quod cx insolubili illo viii- culo colligi possc diximus. KLLAR)ll^l Vlil. lll Secundum aiilem inde colligimu.^, qund ad inso- hibile vinculum lolcrandum cum una . gratia Dei necessaria est. et Deus in nccessariis numquam deest. Nam profecto res dimcillima est,ita uni mu- licri alligari. ut nulla dc caussa, nec pcr ullam di- spensalioneiu po.ssit vinculum solvi , ncc alia uxor superinriuci, vivenle prima. Ouis aulom credat , Deuni rem tiun difTicilem insliluissc, et non simul gratiac auxilium ad cam superandam diiricultalcm cuntulisse? Adde; Quod lex nova,quae jugum siiave et onus lcv(! dicitur, comparata cum vclcri , csscl in hac parle longe durior vcteri, nisi graliam conjunctam Matriraonium habcret: siquidcm Ilcbracisliccbat, multas simul uxores habere,et impuiie etiam con- juges per libellum repudii diinillerc. Secunda ratio sumilura finc xMatrimonii, qui est duplex, propagatio sobolis, et remcdium contra peccalum fornicalionis: nani ulcrque finis requirit in Matrimonio gratiam Dei. Ac dc Primo quidem fine sciendum cst, non per- linere ad Matrimonium solum prucrcarc libcros , sed etiam educare et instiluere: in hoc enim dilTcrt conjugium hominum a conjunclionibus bclluarum, quae proprie Matrimonia non dicunlur, cum solum procreare et alerc. non autem instituerc prolcs, ad bcstias pertineat. Sed praeter otricium instilucndi liberns, juxla regulas ralionis, quod csl commune omnibus gentibus, ad Christianos conjugcs perti- nel, filios inslilucre in fide et religione, cl dare o- mnem operam ul Ecclesiae calholicae, vera et viva mcmbra efficiantur. Et hoc palcl, lum quia ad hoe conjungunlur Ecclesiae filii . ut Ecclesiam ipsam augeani et conservent; tum eti;im, quia lioc reqtii- rit similitudo intcr Chrislum et Ecclesiain ex uiiii parte,et viri ac foeminao conjunctio ex allera.Chri- slus enim et Ecclesia sempcr filios spiriliiiilcs per liaptismum gignunl. per Eucharistiam nulriiinl.pcr Confirmiilionem roborant elc. Tlaque obligaulur conjugcs chrisliani ex ipso conjugio, ad onici;i di- viuii: numquam aulem commitlunlur a Dco olTicia, (|uac naturam supcranl , nisi etiiim simul gratia detiir, pcr quam illa olTicia cxcrccantur , ul o- portet. Qiiorl vcro altincl ad altcriim fincm, reclc dicunt lhcologi,solum conjugium siiic gratia Dei non esse sulficiens remcdium contrii h)rnicationcm . lum <H!i;i concupisccntia cx iiclu conjugali acccnditur ])otius, qinun cxtinguitur, tum quiii sacpissime ;ic- cidit. nt ol) morhiim, vcl absentiam conjugis , co- gantiir ad longum tcmpus se conlincrc: (piod qui- dcm difliciliiis conjugalis cssc solcl. quiim in pcr- pctuo coclihiiiu virginihus vivcri!, pcrliiiuit igitur ad auclorcm divinac lcgis. ut rcmcdium pcrfeclum clomni cx partc suniciens Ecclesiac liliis provi- dcrcl. Tcrtia siimitur a rilu cl cacrcmoniis. Nam jam indc' :ii) cxordio Ecclesiac. .Malrimoniu-n iiitcr rcs sacriis hahiliim cssc conslal, ct iiitcr sacrorum so- lcmiiia pcr siiccnlolum miiiislcritiin cclchr;iii soli- lum. Al ccrh; si cssct coiitriiclus hiimaiius l;inluin, (pi;dcs siiiit coiilr;ic[us vcnditionum ct lor;itionuin htimanariim,vcl politicnm vihic gcnus.titnilia sniil. iit C;ilvinu ■; IiKpiilur. ;igricultura. lonstriiiii. nrs su- 99 iS2 L)E SACUVMKMO MATillMOMl loria elcenicnlaria. nmnquam sanoli Palrcs cuiii rebiis sanclissimis MalriniOMinm conjnnxisscnl. TorUilIi;uuis in 2. liltro ail uxortMn. nl oslonilal. iiuanlnm inlorsil inlcr C(Mijnt,Mun). (luoil in Kcclcsia el conjni;inm,qnotl apmi fllinlcos cclcL)ralur:rn(/^! sufficiam. in(|nil, ad fdirilalcm c/(/s Malvimanii cnarrandam, (juod Kcclcsia conciliat c( conjir- mal Ohlalio, cl obsiijnalnm anijcH rciiuncianl. Patcr ratuni hahcL .Vmhrosius opisl. H). ail Vi<,'i- lium: .Vin/i. inqnil. cum conjuiiiuui vclamim: sa- ccrdolali. ct bcncdiclionc aancliticari oportcal . qnomodo polesl conjur)ium dicl.ubi non est fidci concordia? Plura de lioc rilu infra suo loco iidrorc- mus. Quarla ralio dnciUir a conscnsn lolins EccUisiao graecae el laUnae. ab annissaiUMn quinjjfcnUs. i\am a lempore nia<iislri spnleiUiarnm. omncs Iheolojri summo consensu docuerunl, sfplom cssc novae le- pis sacramenla.elin eis semperMalrimoninmannu- merarnnt. Vide doclorcs in 4. disl. 2(>. Lucius III. qui ante annos 100. sedil in concilio muilorura palriarcharum , arciiicpiscoporum el a- liornm praelalorum ac principum Veronae liabito, analhcma dixil iis, qni de sacrnmento corporis l)o- mini, de Baptismo. de Malrimonio, de contessione peccalorum, aliisque Ecclesiae sacramenlis aliler sentirent.quam romanae Ecclesiae lldes !inbeat;ubi videmus Malrimonium numerari inlcrea sacramen- ta. quae proprie novaelegis sacramenla dicuntur et sunt. Habelur hoc decrelum Lucii cap. Ad abolen- dam, de haereticis. Concilium florenlinum.Graccisel Latinis consen- licntibus, instruclionem Armenis dedil, in qua Ma- trimonium cum Baptismo et Eucharislia , aliisque novae logis sacramenlis enumeravil. Ac ne forte aliqnis crederel. Graecos ab ea fide, et confessione poslea recessisse, cornmode accidit, nl paucis anle annis. idcst.anno Domini 1370. Ilie- remias patriarcha constantinopolitanus.nomine suo et reliquorum Graeciae praesulum, censnrum ede- ret ad confessionem .Vuguslanam iulheranornm,in qua Censura cap. 7. legimus,Malrimonium divinum sacramenlum esse, alque unum ex illis scplem, quae Chrislns el aposloli Ecclesiae tradiderunt,ubi eliam allegatur cap. 3. ad Ephes. Ex quo loslimonio duo quaedam nbiler colligi possunl, conlra mendacia advcrsariorum. Priinum, si Graeci, qui a romani ponlificis obedientia longo jam lempore recesserunl.Malrimonium inler s;icra- meiila num«M-anl: non igitur cst hoc dogma pro- priiim ponlificiorum. Deinde, si Graeci, qui Apo- slolnin non nisi graece legunl, ex cap.3.ad Ephes. sacranienlum Malrimonii collegerunl; non igilnr Lalini ex ignoranlia graecae linguae , vel ex sola vocuhisac?*ame/i(wm. in editione vulgala lalina re- [lerla, sacramenUim Malrimonii fabricati sunl. ut Lulherus, Calvinus. Beza, Remnilins menUuntur. Porro hic tanlus Ecclesiarum consensus, piis ac «nodestis Chrislianis sufTicere omnino deberel, et- ifimsi argumeutum praeterea nullum haberemus. Nam in Scriplurarum et Patrum explicalione facile labl possumus;al quod Ecclesia numquam deficiat, quodque errare nequeat. tam aperle, tam luculen- ter, lara diserte ab ipso Chrislo, el ab ejus Aposlo- lo dicliim csl. iit nihil aperlins, niliil clarius. nihil cxpressins dici [lossil. Tu. cs Pclriis, c.l supcr hanc pclram acdificabo /iCf/cs/ru/i nic(ini. el pnriac infcri non prucnale- bunl advcrsus eam. .Mallh. 10. Ecclcsia Dei vivi csi coiumna cl firmamc.nl.um veritalis , 1. Ti- molh. ',\. ScripliLrarum, in(]nil Aujruslinns lib. 1. conlra Cresconiuin. cap. 'J.\\. a nobis lcnclur verilas.cum hoc faci}nus. (luod univcrsac jam jducuil Eccle- siac, quii)n jpsa ScripUiraruni comnicndat au- clorilasiui qu.oniam. sancia Scriplura faUcre non potcsl. quisquis falli mciuil hujus obscurilale quacslionis, candcm Ecclcsiajn dc illa considat, q}iam. siuc ulla aml)i(juilale sancta Scriptura, dc- monstrut.