Dist. 31, 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/31/q/bon-sent-IV-d31-a1-q2
----------------------------------------
### Question II. *Whether the goods of matrimony are three.*

Secondly, inquiry is made concerning the number and sufficiency of the goods of matrimony; and three are assigned by Augustine in the book On the Good of Marriage, namely « faith, offspring, and Sacrament ». First it seems that here there is a *defect*.

1. For besides these there is in wedlock *mutual service*; and this indeed is some good, as it is said in the fourth [chapter] of Ecclesiastes: *It is better that two be than one*, and this is none of those [three]: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, these three belong to matrimony insofar as it is in [the character of] a *duty*; but matrimony is not only in a *duty*, but also in a *remedy*: therefore there seem to be more.

3. Likewise, the good of *peace* is some good, indeed the greatest good, as Augustine says; but this is a good which wedlock frequently brings about: therefore it enumerates insufficiently. *If you say* that it enumerates those things which are goods of matrimony, not as [occurring] frequently but as [occurring] always; *it is objected*: because neither faith nor offspring is always in matrimony.

*But on the contrary*, it seems that [it enumerates] superfluously:

4. Because of one thing there is one single end: therefore if the Sacrament of matrimony is one, therefore it ought to have one principal end: therefore its good is one, since *good* and *end* are the same.

5. Likewise, nothing is said to be a good of its very self; but matrimony is a Sacrament: therefore the Sacrament is not a good of matrimony.

6. Likewise, nothing ought to be numbered together with its own properties; but faith and offspring are conditions and properties of matrimony, therefore of the Sacrament: therefore they ought not to be distinguished nor numbered together with the good of the Sacrament. — *If you say* that Sacrament is taken otherwise, namely for a *property* of matrimony; *it is asked* what that property is, and why it has rather appropriated to itself the name of Sacrament.

### Conclusion.

> *The sufficiency of the three goods of matrimony is shown by a threefold way.*

**I respond:** It must be said that the number and sufficiency of the goods of matrimony can be taken on the part of the *instituting* or *efficient* cause, and thus from a threefold principle: namely from the dictate of *nature*, that a man should lie with a woman for the conservation of nature itself, and thus the good of *offspring*; from the dictate of *right reason*, that a man should lie with his own and not with another woman, and thus the good of *faith*; from the dictate of *grace*, that the union of the divine and human nature be signified, and thus the good of the *Sacrament*.

It can be taken on the part of the *constituting* principle, and this in three ways: because, in order that matrimony have *complete* being, three things are necessary, namely *institution*, *use*, and *fruit*. By reason of *institution* there is the good of the Sacrament, by reason of the due *use* there is the good of faith, by reason of the *fruit* conferring use there is the good of offspring. And thus it is clear that there is a threefold good.

It can also be taken on the part of the *moving* or *terminating end*, and this either because it is *toward the good*, or because it is *against evil*. Because *toward the good*: since the good to be chosen is threefold, namely the *honorable*, the *beneficial*, and the *pleasant*, by reason of the *honorable* good there is faith, by reason of the *beneficial* [good] offspring, by reason of the *pleasant* [good] there is the Sacrament, according to what was shown above. — Or otherwise: because it is *against the evil* of concupiscence, which has in itself a threefold evil, namely *flux*, *disorder*, and *loathing*; against *flux* there is in matrimony a *singular* union, against *disorder* a *useful* union, against *loathing* an *inseparable* union. By reason of *singularity* in the union there is faith, by reason of *usefulness* offspring, by reason of *inseparability* the Sacrament. — And these three signify the threefold property of the union of Christ with the Church, namely because He is united to one, and because *from her He generates sons*, and because He is never separated.

From these things the objections are made clear, because there are numbered together not any goods whatever, but those which are *common* to the state of corrupt and standing nature; therefore neither peace nor service nor the good which is taken insofar as it is a *remedy* are numbered among these goods, but these three goods alone.

4. To that which is objected, that they are *superfluous*, since of one thing there is one end; it must be said that there is one *principal* and *inseparable* good, namely the sacra-  mental bond; and the others are annexed to it, and nothing prevents that a thing should have one principal end and several adjoined uses.

5. 6. The response is also clear to that which is objected concerning the good of the Sacrament: for the union itself is called the Sacrament of matrimony, but the inseparability of the union is called the *good* of the Sacrament, or the Sacrament which is the good of matrimony.

But the reason why the condition of inseparability has claimed this name for itself is that it is consubstantial with matrimony and follows it inseparably, not so the other conditions. And thus the objections are made clear.

---