Dist. 29, Divisio Textus
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/29/q/bon-sent-IV-d29-divisio
----------------------------------------
### Commentary on Distinction XXIX.
### *On consent as regards the interior defect, through coercion.*

> *It behooves, moreover, that conjugal consent be free from coercion,* etc.

### Division of the text.

Above, the Master treated of consent that is lacking on the exterior side. Here he treats of consent that is lacking through an interior defect, namely from the standpoint of the voluntary; yet this defect, as well as the preceding one, fails both interiorly and exteriorly — but this is to be understood as said by way of restriction.

Consent, moreover, fails in a twofold way: either on the part of the will, through coercion, or on the part of reason, through error. Therefore he first asks whether coerced consent makes a marriage. Second, whether erroneous [consent does] — below, in the thirtieth distinction: *"Not only does coercion impede or exclude consent,"* etc.

The first part has three parts. In the first he determines the truth. In the second he explains, at the point: *"From this it appears that marriages come about,"* etc. In the third, however, he applies what he had determined concerning marriage to betrothals, at the point: *"That one consents is proven who does not evidently gainsay it."*

### Treatment of the questions.

For the understanding of the present distinction three things are asked.

First it is asked whether coerced consent makes a marriage.

Second, whether one who consents in the face of a resisting party thereby brings prejudice upon himself.

Third, whether anyone can be compelled, by a father's command, to contract marriage.

### The sole article.
### *On coerced consent.*

---