Dist. 27, Art. 1, Q. 2
by St. Bonaventure
Source text: Public Domain Mark 1.0. English translation/apparatus/encoding: CC BY-NC 4.0, Wroot Press.
https://bonaventure.wrootpress.com/browse/4/d/27/q/bon-sent-IV-d27-a1-q2
----------------------------------------
### Question II. *What marriage is according to its name.*

Secondly it is asked what it is by name. And that this bond ought to be called *matrimony* is shown:

1. *First*, through the canon and civil laws, which so name it, and the Master so names it in the text, and manifold authority can be brought to bear on this. Hence Augustine, *Against Faustus*, book nineteen: «Matrimony was so called for this reason, that a woman ought not to marry for any other reason than this, that she may become a mother».

2. Likewise, it seems so *by reason*: because in the other Sacraments the denomination is made from the matter or from the material principle, as is evident, since baptism is called a *washing* from the water that washes rather than from the word; but in this joining of male and female the woman is by way of matter: therefore it seems that the denomination ought to be made through her.

3. Likewise, when a relation or comparison is between certain extremes, if it is rightly denominated, it ought to be denominated from that in which there is the greater dependence; but the woman needs more to be joined to the man than the reverse: therefore such a joining ought rather to be denominated from the woman than from the man.

4. Likewise, the relation of equiparance is most of all appropriated to that in which there is the consummation of it, just as equality and likeness are appropriated to the Son, on account of the fact that He gives us to understand beforehand the principle from which [He proceeds], while unity is appropriated to the Father: therefore, if the man was first created as the only one, and afterward the woman was made, that she might be joined to him as a helper, and this through matrimony: therefore this bond ought to be called *matrimony*.

**On the contrary:**
1. In all things the denomination ought to be made from the worthier; but in the carnal or matrimonial joining the worthier extreme is the man rather than the woman, since *the head of the woman is the man*: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, I ask, according to which genus of cause this denomination is. If according to the genus of the *final* cause; but *the woman was made for the sake of the man, not the man for the sake of the woman*: therefore it ought rather to be denominated from the father. — If according to the genus of the *efficient* cause; but the efficient is the active principle, and the active principle in the joining of male and female is the man: therefore it ought rather to be denominated from the man. — If according to the *material* cause; but *the man is not from the woman, but the woman from the rib of the man*. — If according to the *formal* cause; since the man rather holds the character of form, as the Philosopher says, that «matter desires form, as the woman desires the man»: it seems that it ought to be denominated from the man.

3. Likewise, the joining of male and female is a relation of equiparance; but such a relation regards each extreme equally, and such a relation is not denominated more from one than from the other: therefore not more from the father than from the mother.

4. Likewise, the denomination of a thing ought not to be made from that which is accidental and can be absent; but from such a bond or Sacrament offspring is frequently absent, and therefore also motherhood: therefore, since it would be falsely that such a woman be called *mother*, falsely is such a bond called *matrimony*.

### Conclusion.

> Matrimony has four etymologies, among which the chief is *the mother's office* (*matris munium*).

**I respond:** It must be said that some wished to say that this bond or joining is denominated neither from the *father* nor from the *mother*; but since it is one bond, it is denominated from both, insofar as they are united; and since father and mother, or man and woman, are united, that they may be *one matter of the offspring*; therefore this Sacrament is called *matrimonium*, not from *mater* (mother), but from *materia* (matter) and *monos*, which is *one*; whence *matrimonium* [is] as it were *una materia* (one matter). — But although this may seem to be said with probability, nevertheless it is contrary to Isidore, in the ninth book of the *Etymologies*, [who] says that «matrimony is called from the *mother*; whence she who has now married is called a *matron*, and a matron is so called as it were *the mother of one born* (*mater nati*)». Hence, as is gathered from the same place, this Sacrament is called *coniugium* (wedlock), and is called *nuptiae* (nuptials), and is called *matrimonium*. And it has this threefold denomination according to a threefold comparison or consideration. For it can be considered according to *what it is*; and thus it is called *coniugium*, as it were *commune iugum* (a common yoke), because the bond is mutual and the power is mutual; and this Isidore says in the ninth book of the *Etymologies*. Or according to the *sign*, in which it appears; and thus it is called *nuptiae*, as it were from *clouds* (*nubes*), because those marrying were accustomed to be veiled, and their heads were covered; whence the name is transferred. Or according to the *fruit* to which it leads; and since it leads to the good of offspring, it is therefore called *matrimonium*. But the good of offspring is given to be understood rather through the name of the *mother*, because the woman was made for the procreation of children; whence she was made into a helper of the man; and because in the procreation of offspring the labor falls more upon her.

Whence note that matrimony has four etymologies according to the name of the *mother*: for in one way it is called *matrimonium*, as it were *matris nomos*, that is, *the mother's law*; because, as Augustine says *Against Faustus*, «for this a woman ought to marry» etc. — In a second way, because it *admonishes the mother* (*matrem monet*) to keep the covenant against lust; against which it is said in Proverbs, chapter two: *She has forsaken the guide of her youth, and the covenant of her God* etc. — In a third way, because it *protects the mother* (*matrem munit*) and defends her both through the husband and through the offspring, since the woman needs a defender, Isaiah, chapter one: *Defend the widow*. — Fourthly, matrimony is called *matris munium*, that is, the mother's office, for the reason that the nurture and acquisition of offspring pertains most of all to the woman — in conceiving, in carrying, in bearing, in nursing, in suffering-with; whence, just as a possession is called *patrimonium* because it is acquired by paternal care, so the acquisition of offspring is *matrimonium*; and this is the chief among all the etymologies.

*To 1 and 2.* To that, therefore, which is objected, that the denomination ought to be made from the worthier; it must be said that the denomination is made from the *fruit of the womb*, and thus from the worthier. But the denomination is not made from the woman as *woman*, but as *mother*; and through this the following [point] is evident, [namely] from which genus of cause it is taken, since [it is taken] from the final cause, from which the Sacraments ought most of all to be denominated.

*To 3.* To that which is objected concerning the relation of equiparance, it must be said that that bond, considered in itself, regards each extreme equally, but as referred to the effect, [it does] not; and here the denomination is made through comparison to the effect.

*To 4.* To that which is objected, that they do not always have offspring; it must be said that the denomination is not made from the outcome, but from the intention for the sake of which the Sacrament was principally instituted; and therefore there is neither falsity nor vanity in it.

---